A contradiction exists in United States law. On the one hand, the IRS requires former citizens to follow an exit procedure and the State Department requires a $450 fee. On the other hand, earlier law establishes and protects expatriation as a fundamental right.
See also:
Freedom of Emmigration in East-West Trade, USC 19 § 2432 (expatriation is a fundamental right)
Is the taxation of US persons abroad constitutional?
The stalker: divorce from the United States is a messy process
Civil Disobedience, FBAR and Forms 8854 and 8938
The right of expatriation II: The Ninth Amendment
The right of expatriation
In the 19th century, the Old World denied the individual the right to renounce one’s citizenship of birth and to obtain the citizenship of another country. The main issues seem to have been taxes and military service. The United States Congress asserted in the Expatriation Acts of 1868 that these individuals who were born abroad had an absolute right to severe their ties with their former nations and to be treated, when they travel back to their nations of birth, with the same protection accorded to native-born US citizens:
And be it further enacted, That all naturalized citizens of the United States, while in foreign states, shall be entitled to, and shall receive from this government, the same protection of persons and property that is accorded to native-born citizens in like situations and circumstances.
It is my intention to exercise my right of expatriation. This may or may not also mean a denial of the IRS’s request to complete certain kinds of paper work that later legislation requires in contradiction to the Expatriation Act of 1868 which Congress has never repealed and so still stands as law in the United States.
Whereas the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; …
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officers of this government which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government.
Later laws against expatriation such as HEART Act (2008) or the Reed Amendment (1996) therefore stand in contradiction to this earlier law, and I would argue further, that the Expatriation Act of 1868 employs the language of the Declaration of Indepence to defend the right of expatriation. Thus, the Expatriation Act of 1868 depends on a founding document and defends a fundamental right. Congress passed HEART and the Reed Amendment, not on the basis of a fundamental right, but upon the desire to punish the wealthy who would leave the tax system, so that the United States takes a similar posture in these laws that the old countries took in the 19th century towards their former citizens who had become naturalized Americans. I would argue that when two or more laws contradict, the proximity of one law to the freedoms established by the founding documents must trump and invalidate any law which abridges, restricts, or puts conditions and obstacles in front of the fundamental rights, in this case, the right of expatriation.
Now the intent of this 1868 law is to make it clear that the United States recognized the citizenship of naturalized persons that had severed their ties permanently with their former countries, which in turn had no right to assert any claim whatsoever upon these new citizens of the United States.
Now be it known to all, I hereby claim my right of expatriation under the Declaration of Independence, under the Ninth Amendment and under the Expatriation Act of 1868, and I demand that no officer of the United States government deny, restrict, impair, or question my right of expatriation. I am a citizen of Canada and I owe the United States no military service, no allegiance, and no taxes. Under Expatriation Act of 1868, I hereby assert my right not to be bothered with the expatriation processes that are established in the HEART Act (form 8854) and I demand that the United States treat me in a manner that is consistent with its treatment of other citizens of Canada, my country of naturalization.
Resource: See this post by Daniel Rice, which gives a short historical explanation of the Expatriation Act of 1868 with colour photos of the draft documents.
The irony is that:
In 1812, because of grievances against Great Britain, the United States attacked the British Colonies north of the 49th parallel. These colonies were to become Canada. The reasons for the attack included:
“Impressment
During the Napoleonic Wars, the Royal Navy expanded to 175 ships of the line and 600 ships overall, requiring 140,000 sailors.[7] While the Royal Navy could man its ships with volunteers in peacetime, in war, it competed with merchant shipping and privateers for a small pool of experienced sailors and turned to impressment when it could not operate ships with volunteers alone. It was estimated that there were 11,000 naturalized sailors on U.S. ships in 1805 and U.S. Secretary of the Treasury Albert Gallatin stated that 9,000 were born in Britain.[8] The Royal Navy went after them by intercepting and searching U.S. merchant ships for deserters. Such actions, such as the Leander Affair and especially the Chesapeake–Leopard Affair, incensed the Americans. Americans were outraged by the practice because it infringed on national sovereignty and denied America’s ability to naturalize foreigners.[9] The United States believed that British deserters had a right to become United States citizens. Britain did not recognize naturalized United States citizenship, so in addition to recovering deserters, it considered United States citizens born British liable for impressment. Aggravating the situation was the widespread use of forged identity papers by sailors. This made it all the more difficult for the Royal Navy to distinguish Americans from non-Americans and led it to impress some Americans who had never been British. (Some gained freedom on appeal.)[10] American anger at impressment grew when British frigates stationed themselves just outside U.S. harbors in U.S. territorial waters and searched ships for contraband and impressed men in view of U.S. shores.[11] “Free trade and sailors’ rights” was a rallying cry for the United States throughout the conflict. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812#Impressment
For the complete post see:
http://renounceuscitizenship.wordpress.com/2011/10/24/you-may-not-be-u-s-citizen/
We can complain all we want to how US policy on expatriation is against the Constitution, Bill of Rights, UN Declaration of Human Rights, or even previous American laws, but they don’t care.
Without a doubt, the US is the most expat-unfriendly country in the world. The only thing to do is to renounce. I tell my parents “Thanks” all the time for my being born in the US
Our only recourse is to renounce… I’m just glad it’s available because I’m sure there’ll come a day when renunciation is impossible.
Well, this is how I am approaching the situation as you know. I am no longer a US citizen and they can try to tax me all they want, I’m not spending any more money on them.
I remember reading about people leaving Germany illegally during WWII. I bet the Germans wished they could ‘take back’ defectors back then, too. Same with the East half after the war. LOL, imagine them trying to get Einstein to go back.
@ Joe: Please have a look at this post too: http://isaacbrocksociety.com/2012/01/31/freedom-of-emmigration-in-east-west-trade-usc-title-19-%C2%A7-2432/
I’ve been having problems posting… I keep forgetting to work only on the PC off of the VPN (proxy), but I’ve read most of the posts here, especially the last 3 months.
Thanks for link, though.
@ Joe: Thanks for reading for the last three months. That should about do it, since we’ve only been here since Dec 12, 2011.
D’oh! Thinking because of layout that is is DropDC!
Excellent blog post by Victoria : Diaspora Taxes: The Exit Tax
http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/2012/08/diaspora-taxes-exit-tax.html
I stuck this here because of the consistently excellent quality, and of Victoria’s blog, and wanted readers to see this specific post. It may belong elsewhere as well.
*Two Egypt’s recently elected president Mohammed Marci’s children are US citizens, born in California in the ’80s where he obtained his PhD and was a professor for several years. I trust the IRS is making sure they are current in their US tax obligations, FBAR and FATCA reports. If not, there are tax dollars to collect.