I received my Certificate of Loss of Nationality via Canada post (regular mail). It came with an accompanying letter from the Toronto Consulate. It asks me to sign and return the letter acknowledging my receipt of the CLN. The envelope also included my cancelled US passport.
I have some notes:
- The Consulate seems to have made an error on the CLN: I lived in the United States from birth to August, 16, 1986, the day I left to study in Vancouver, Canada.
- The CLN states that my date of self-expatriation was 02-28-2011. The accompanying letter says that it was on April 7, 2011, the day I informed the Toronto Consulate. The letter is wrong. Section 349(a) (1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952 says nothing about the date that I inform the consulate, but concerns itself with potentially expatriating acts such as taking on foreign citizenship with intent to relinquish. This shows the utter confusion of officials the United States government and how the United States puts its former citizens through several stages of neither a citizen nor a non-citizen. I have maintained that I am not a citizen of the United States since February 28, 2011. This CLN only confirms that the State Department also recognizes my expatriating act. The letter indicates that my “file” says I expatriated on April 7, 2011, but the CLN makes it clear that the expatriating act took place on February 28, 2011: “That: he thereby expatriated himself on 02-28-2011 under provisions of Section INA 349 (a) (1) … ” How could it be clearer?
- The stamp on the right hand corner of the CLN shows that the Department of State approved my CLN February 29, 2012 (as also confirmed by the letter). I assume this means that there is a huge backlog of cases, since it took them nearly 11 months to approve my case. Today, is 16 April. So the full process to receive a CLN took one year and nine days from the day I informed them of my expatriating act.
- Now that I am no longer a citizen, I do not understand how the IRS thinks that it can continue to harass me. Yet there is an expatriation for tax purposes according to them, which creates an impediment to a fundamental right. These exit tax laws, in my opinion, could not withstand a court challenge. US expatriation laws contain too many contradictions.
@Rick
I knew New Zealand didn’t have a capital gains tax so that’s why I was curious.
@ Rick That is the law as it stands today. But that law is recent compared to the expatriations of a lot of people here. It cannot count against them ex post facto.
@Petros I’m going to follow the law right up to the day I renounced.
June seems to be the month they change the tax rules on expatriation, but they grandfather the rules, doesn’t mean they will do it this time as I can’t imagine the number of people renouncing now, likely if it becomes a real problem congress will just defund the department that stamps & sends the certification of loss of nationality.
Expatriation on or after June 16, 2008
Expatriation after June 3, 2004 and before June 16, 2008
Expatriation on or before June 3, 2004
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=97245,00.html
I just noticed my previous links are broken, this one will work.
http://tiny.cc/expat-tax
Congratulations Petros! How fitting that you are the first one of us to receive it!! Your news has made my day!!!
Very happy for you, Petros! You must feel relieved now to have physical proof.
Hopefully someone who is renouncing as opposed to relinquishing can share news with us as well, so we can compare the processes.
Congratulations Peter!
Just to reinforce the point — CLNs for relinquishment have always (as far as I know) been dated effective the date of the expatriating act. My own CLN was approved in Washington 14 months after my expatriating act (becoming a Canadian citizen) but the date of my expatriation given on the form is the day I became a Canadian. (Both dates were more than 30 years ago.)
I heard from first-hand conversations with several people who have gone forward with relinquishment applications in the past few months that their consular officers told them verbally at the meeting that the CLN would be dated effective the date of Canadian citizenship, even though the citizenship date was years ago. I haven’t seen a CLN like that yet, but there hasn’t been time for these cases to work through the system. I’m sure once a years-ago relinquishment CLN gets issued, we’ll hear about it on this forum, whichever way the dating appears on the actual forms.
Please note that the inconsistency Peter has mentioned is in the cover letter and not on the actual form itself. It’s the date on the form that matters. Whether you should or shouldn’t correct the error or point it out in the acknowledgement letter is another issue, I wouldn’t care to offer an opinion on that …
Interesting they now want a written acknowledgement of receipt. They didn’t 30 some years ago, but this probably is an improvement, especially if the documents aren’t being sent registered receipted mail.
@ Schubert
I am not planning to point out any inaccuracies. They are not my fault, as I am sure that I filled my forms correctly, and I did not fill out this form DS-4083 (the CLN), but it was filled out by the consular officer Joan H. Flynn, on 12 April 2011 (whose signature I’ve obscured).
The inaccuracy in the letter represents concerns of 877a not 349a. I really do think that these laws are completely contradictory and incompatible–and there is no doubt in my mind which way the court would (or should, at least) go if it came down to it. The date on the CLN, the date of effective expatriation, not the date that you tell them, is the day I ceased to be a US citizen. My tax filings, when and if I do them, will reflect that very significant fact.
@Petros
‘I really do think that these laws are completely contradictory and incompatiable’ – I could not agree more. What I do not understand and will never understand is how the American lawmakers can not see the absurdity of two different ‘laws of nationality’. Perhaps they all suffer from bi-polarism.
@ tiger Actually the lawmakers are suffering from a desire to punish expats. They are angry that expats can leave the tax base and therefore want them to pay. Unfortunately, they must confront laws made in freer more noble past, when the lofty principles of individual freedom and rights still made a difference to Americans.
Just noticed the cover letter is dated March 13. It takes four weeks to get a letter from 360 University to your address (which I think is Toronto, ne c’est pas)? Must have been sitting in someone’s inbasket for a while, it’s good that you called and asked about status.
Given what I’ve been hearing (consular officers saying CLNs can take up to 6 months, most recent info I’ve heard), I think folks should start rattling the cage if they don’t have their CLN six months after the meeting date.
@tiger, what they suffer from is electionitis, that is the fear of doing anything that might cause them to lose an election. Since overseas Americans have such a small and totally insignificant part in their re-election they don’t pay hardly any attention to them . I so well remeber the case of Bill Alexander, a US congressman from Arkansas from 1969 to 1993. He took it upon himself to introduce legislation that would relieve Americans abroad of this nightmarish double taxation. It went nowhere, but as a result his opponent in the next election used this against him by accusing him of caring more for the Americans who had left the country than he did for his own constituents. Result? He was soundly defeated for re-election. It cost him his job.
That is why I feel so strongly that until foreign governments, including that of Canada, rise up with one voice and protest this extraterritorial taxation and violation of their national sovereignty which obligates US citizens, including but not not limited to those with dual citizenship, to “take” money out of their own countries and send it abroad to the IRS, that little is likelely to happen to things around in the Congress of the US. There are a few countries today, like Venezuala, which abrsoloutely do not allow their residents to exchange their local currency into dollars to remove from the country for paying taxes to a foreign power, but not very many are like this today. Fortunately for most things and in most countries there is freedom to buy and sell foreign currency.
Further comment on the dating of expatriation —
IRS says on the instructions for Form 8854 that “for tax purposes” your expatriation is when you tell State not when you committed the act (and which is the date on the CLN).
Raises an interesting logical, moral and legal question — how can anyone keep a straight face when claiming that you are not a citizen for some purposes on X date but are a citizen for other purposes on that same date? Seems to me, either you’re a citizen for all purposes, or you’re not a citizen for any purposes, on any given date. Wonder what a judge would say about that one … even in the US. Maybe a tinpot country like Eritrea can keep a straight face if making an argument for that, but I’d hope that at least some judges in the US would have a lot of trouble with this concept. I sure do.
@ schubert The letter hadn’t left the door before April 10, when I contacted them. Thus, we can’t blame Canada Post for the slowness. I live in the City above Toronto, Vaughan (Concord).
@Petros –
I think the laws were made in a period when (a) they were less broke and (b) large numbers of renunciations seemed unthinkable.
@ Schubert There are actually three expatriations: date of expatriating event, date of expatriation for tax purposes, and date of tax expatriation. Your summary is actually spot on. This is a legal absurdity. It could not withstand an actual court case. A person has no legal obligation to pay US taxes if they are not a “US person” for tax purposes. Such a person is defined in the Internal Revenue Code as resident or a citizen of the United States. I am neither. I have therefore no obligation to file a 8854, whcih is required after expatriation. The exit tax law has a thus created a legal conundrum, a paradox, something that cannot exist.
@ broken man: The most important document for the purpose of expatriation is the Declaration of Independence. This stated that the right to expatriate is unalienable right given by the Creator. See http://righteousinvestor.com/2011/02/25/the-right-of-renunciation-of-citizenship/
http://righteousinvestor.com/2011/07/29/the-right-of-expatriation-ii-the-ninth-amendment/
http://isaacbrocksociety.com/2011/12/19/forget-about-form-8854-filing-last-5-years-of-tax-etc-usa-law-establishes-a-right-to-unilateral-expatriation/
So not in a period when expatriations were unthinkable, but when a mass expatriation from King George was taking place.
First and foremost, congratulations Petros! Now a question … if a former U.S. citizen receives a CLN when he/she informs the USCIS of their relinquishment or renunciation, what does a never-been a U.S. citizen, living outside the USA, receive when he/she returns a green card along with form I-407? It can’t be a CLN because U.S. citizenship is something he/she never had to begin with … only a “resident alien” status for a certain length of time. The whole 3 dates thing is confusing, arbitrary and contradictory and it also appears that over time they dealt with the dates inconsistently too. It should be simply I gave up my connection to the USA when I say I did … period.
@Petros, I forwarded your comments to a friend of mine who is much more conversant in the items you highlighted in your last post. I am taking the liberty of pasting his response to me. He seems to think it is more complicated. His comments are as follows:
“There is actually no fundamental right to expatriate either explicit or implied in the Bill of Rights. It simply would never have occurred to our Founding Fathers that our country, founded as the beacon of freedom and liberty, would ever have sunk to such a low place. The Declaration of Independence states that if government gets to this point it is our right and duty to abolish a tyrannical regime. Not likely is it? It is a right under the UN Declaration of Human Rights, however, and in so far as treaty law trumps Constitutional law, this is what makes it so. Again, though, it isn’t un-Constitutional until or unless either Congress makes it so, or the Supreme Court judges it so. Since we simply have no power in Congress, forget that avenue. The courts have always been our best bet, but that requires someone being willing to step up and be the test case and spend the money to challenge – AND, of course, the Supremes have to be willing to accept the challenge. In practical terms, if someone has a second nationality, he/she doesn’t really need a formal renouncement of US citizenship; they simply ignore the US government’s right, and chooses to have their rights protected under the other nationality. That person, of course, can never set foot on US soil again, but that’s the point.
Remember there are a great many people who believe that the South should have been allowed to secede from the USA in 1860. But nothing in the Constitution gives them that right either. On the contrary, the signing of the Constitution by the representatives of ALL states admitted to the Union has been deemed a one-way contract.
Again, it was because none of our Founding Fathers could have ever imagined why our union, governed by the Constitution and the subsequent Bill of Rights, wouldn’t have provided adequate safeguards and guarantees for the individual – and states – that they would ever want anything else.
The extra-territoriality of the imposition of taxes on expat Americans HAS been determined by several Supreme decisions. Hence the Solicitor General’s position should something ever come up would undoubtedly be that it has the right – and indeed duty – to treat all Americans the same with respect to taxation no matter where they live. It could be argued that the IRS is not, in fact, treating expats in the same manner but more harshly, and therefore has exceeded its authority. They would say, they are only following legislation passed by Congress.
The 16th Amendment authorizing income tax is decidedly open: “The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.”
There are points on which to argue certain aspects:
1. The 5th amendment protects a person from self-incrimination and provides for due process. It can be argues that many of the documents demanded by the IRS constitute self-incrimination, and that the system does not provide due process except at unfair costs and hardships on any who challenges.
2. The 8th amendment: ” Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.” It can be argued that paying any fine whatsoever to the IRS simply for lack of correctly filling out the forms when no taxes are due is indeed “excessive” AND “cruel and unusual punishments” particularly since expats have no effective due process available, no representation, and indeed, are judged guilty by the IRS without due process.
3. The 10th amendment: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Since expats are effectively outside of the governance of a state, and since nothing whatsoever in the Constitution makes extraterritoriality a Federal power, one could argue that ALL issues of extraterritoriality are outside of the perview of the Federal government, and therefore, it should be left to “the people” themselves how to behave. It would be an enormous legal somersault to argue, but there are connections here. Since the Constitution grants the President to enter into treaties with foreign entities which must be approved by the Senate, it ipso facto creates an acknowledgement of territorial limitation of the powers of Congress and Constitution. Indeed, ALL subsequent acts acknowledge a respect for territorial limitations of the state except taxation and citizenship.
4. The 13th amendment: “Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude except as punishment for a crime whereby the party shall have been duly convicted shall exist within the United States or any place subject to their jurisdiction.” [my emphasis]. This has two pieces of interest: (a) It could be argued that the process for expatriation is “involuntary servitude”; and (b) again the IRS fines being imposed is guilty without being convicted; and the phrase “any place subject to their jurisdiction” would actually in this case definitely include expatriates.
But, as I said, all of this is great in theory, but unless or until someone is willing to undergo the expense to prove these issues, and the Supreme Court agrees to hear it, the Federal government is free to harass anyone they want! Knowing one’s “rights” or assumed rights isn’t the same as being able to implement and enforce them.”
I found the answer to my question above. They apparently just stamp their approval and mail back the I-407 form to you. So you simply get an ALPRS certificate not a CLN.
I received the following email reply from the U.S. Consulate in Toronto regarding the date on my yet-to-arrive CLN:
“Thank you for your inquiry.
Our office has not yet received the approved Certificate of Loss of Nationality from the Department of State, however, our records show you became a Canadian citizen on February 12, 1969, and that you became a Canadian citizen with the intention of relinquishing your US citizenship; therefore, you ceased to be a US citizen on February 12, 1969.”
I asked about the date for two reasons:
1. My friend who relinquished her citizenship two months ago was told by the consul that her CLN would be backdated to the date she became a Canadian citizen.
2. The “legal department” at the IRS suggested I get this information. The scenario went as follows:
I submitted my five years of tax forms to the IRS and received notice that I owe about $85.00. I called the IRS and the agent checked my files and confirmed the amount. She said it was going to collections in two days, so she changed the due date to the end of May so I could pay “on time”. She was very sympathetic to my situation and put me through to the “legal” department to speak to someone to get their advice. The fellow who answered told me he had never heard of a U.S. born person losing their U.S. citizenship. I told him about the way it used to be especially if one were to work for a foreign government (teaching in Ontario), or joining a foreign military. He suggested I contact the U.S. Consulate in Toronto to find out what the date will appear on my CLN. So I emailed the Toronto consulate and they replied that my CLN, according to their files, will be dated February 12, 1969. I then called the legal department again, and this time a lady took my call. I reviewed my situation and read her the consulate’s email reply. She was silent on the line. I told her I was willing to pay the IRS $85.00, but I wanted to know if I should just file a 1040NR for 2011, along with copies of my CLN application and a copy of the email correspondence from the consulate. She replied that she is not authorized to answer that question. She said that the previous “legal agent” had no right to talk to me about contacting the consulate. She made it clear that I needed to go to the government website. I told her I had been to the website and there is nothing that addresses this issue. She repeated her statement -(I’m sure it was either written or memorized). I then emailed my accountant to ask his advice and his reply was, “I’ll have to think about this one.”
@baird68. Stand firm! Don’t let them take you to the cleaners!
Sounds like a really good example of the egregious, and potentially illegal approach the IRS is taking – I think that is one for the Taxpayer Advocate to hear about.
@baird68, here is the contact information for the Taxpayer Advocate if you are interested: http://www.irs.gov/advocate/article/0,,id=148099,00.html
@baird68
I am a bit confused. When did you file your five years of tax returns – was it after you applied for your CLN or prior to applying for the CLN.
Is it any wonder most of us are at a loss, when one department of government (DOS) has one rule (they say you relinquished in 1969) and another department (IRS) wants you to file tax returns for the last five or six years.