27 thoughts on “My Thoughts on U.S. Citizenship for Young People”
@recalcitrantexpat:
It’s your post but I strongly disagree with addressing young people under 18. In my opinion, until then the issue of renunciation should be for their parents to deal with.
Like I said, it’s your blog. But I feel compelled to communicate my disagreement with your first sentence.
It could certainly be a topic of discussion at family meetings where everyone is heard and everyone makes informed decisions. Good practice for many responsibilities taken at age 18 and older.
@Col, Kurtz
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
It’s too soon in the FATCA game for that kind of advice.
The US Government’s final version of this is still very much work in progress. At the end of the day, if foreign governments want to stick their heels in, what is the US government to do about it? if the EU for example slaps an EU tax on US banks or China or Brazil and we end up with a world where everyone is withholding everyone else’s money, how is that going to benefit the world economy?
Already the “final FATCA version” has sparked off political opposition in the US with American banks now being told to start compiling databases of foreign clients so the IRS has the data bargaining chip to use in with other countries. I’m sure the lobbying machine that got 1099 reporting repeaed is starting that process as we speak – watch this space. The 1099 repeal process didn’t spring into action until after the Health Care Act was signed into law. This time they haven’t had the benefit of a lag in time over this issue because I believe the foreign reporting requirement was done as an IRS regulation – please correct me if I’m wrong.
Other questions haven’t been answered, how long will the IRS hold withheld money and how long will it take for a refund? Hours, days, weeks, months? If they don’t refund investor money wrongly withheld pretty damn quick, go bye investors. Foreign banks or individuals will be bitten once by the US, but I doubt they’re allow that to happen too many times before they invest their money in the non FATCA world where they don’t have withholding worries. Investors don’t have to keep playing this shell game with the IRS if they choose not too. So I’m not sure if even a snappy refund response will be enough for investors – why invest in the US when in Canada, Europe or the Far East you don’t have to play this shell game and continuously have to worry about always winning. This is where Carl Levin hasn’t thought this whole business through. He’s betting foreign investors always will come up the the table and keeping playing his game – we’ll see whose right when money starts being withheld and the IRS falls behind on refunds that will be in millions not a few hundred or thousands in percieved loss tax revenue. Refunds on that scale could be some scam artist’s dream!
If investors don’t come to the US where is that going to leave US companies for money? It would be pretty easy for a major US corporation to de-list on the NYSE, and re-list on Toronto or London and blame that FATCA is starving them of much need capital. Then Ottawa or London sees their treasuries filled up with much need revenue by taxing those new HQs or worse re-list in the Far East and give them a bump.
Going back to kids renouncing at such a young age…
My kids are dual citizens, however, they fall into a category where FATCA and all the rest of the bulls**t won’t affect them. It’s going to be a hard nut for the US Government to crack.
US citizens with a non-US place of birth, can simply keep the truth to themselves. Don’t tell an employer, don’t tell the bank, don’t tell anyone.
They have EU passports with a non-US place of birth as well.
Unless the US Government is suddenly going to provide the world wutg a US Citizen certification website to use, they’re stuffed. And even this wouldn’t be foolproof.
With the privacy problems that would pose, this is one group of individuals they won’t be able to use apppointed world agents to identify. I have already told them if any form or anyone ask if they’re US citizens, say NO.
You see this is where I think if someone is a dual citizen, and if a bank or the government wants to report their information to the IRS, this is discrimination by “place of birth.” There is legal jusitification to go after the offending party in your local court on discrimination grounds.
One group of citizens gets away with, another gets reported – where’s the fairness in that.
I agree with Col. Kurtz. We should not be counseling young people about renouncing US citizenship … they’re too impressionable and that’s a topic that should be left up to their parents. Everybody’s situation is different and renunciation may seem like the perfect solution for most of us and our children but it could be a horrific thing for someone else to do.
There’s alot of young people out there who might be reading this blog and we should not be offering this kind of advice to them directly.
Imagine the negative publicity we would get if someone decided to run a story about this without covering all the nuances.
Also, if the US government were to completely change their taxation policies, having US citizenship could once again be a valuable thing. I know everybody here thinks that won’t happen but I have a strong hunch that it will.
Q. What is the single most important investment a young person could make in his/her future?
A. If the person intends to live outside the United States – Renounce U.S. Citizenship and be free.
@omghesstillanamerican
Parents can not legally decide for their minor children.
—
FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT WEBSITE:
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
@renounceuscitizenship: I understand the frustration and anger towards factor, but I think if a young person has a non-US place of birth and a US citizen, the responsible thing to do is wait. The US has left open this loophole they can’t close – use it. Score foreign born US citizens 1 – 0 US govenment.
@recalcitrantexpat & Rick
Uncle Sam thinks he owns everyone’s children. One of the reasons I renounced when I did was because my non-US wife was pregnant and I didn’t want my children growing up as expat US citizens.
Nevertheless, I think citizenship renunciation is a family affair and third parties should respect that. In other words, if I were to catch my expat neighbor talking to my kids about renunciation (even though I’m a proud renunciant myself) I would tell him to butt out. If he were to continue, I would probably punch him in the nose.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the post is great for anyone over 18, particularly for college students. I just believe renunciation is purely a family issue until the children are old enough to make decisions this large on their own.
As far as US law on children renunciations goes, they can stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
Kurtz
PS. I’m an ex-soldier. I would also punch an Army recruiter in the nose if he were to try to recruit my son before he was 18. And that goes for the Army of my new country as well.
Don’t forget about the Selective Service System:
ALIENS AND DUAL NATIONALS
U.S. non-citizens and dual nationals are required by law to register with the Selective Service System.* Most are also liable for induction into the U.S. Armed Forces if there is a draft. They would also be eligible for any deferments, postponements, and exemptions available to all other registrants.
However, some aliens and dual nationals would be exempt from induction into the military if there is a draft, depending on their country of origin and other factors. Some of these exemptions are shown below:
An alien who has lived in the U.S. for less than one year is exempt from induction.
A dual national whose other country of nationality has an agreement with the U.S. which specifically provides for an exemption is exempt from induction.
[Some countries have agreements with the U.S. which exempt an alien national who is a citizen of both that country and the U.S. from military service in the U.S. Armed Forces.] An alien who requests and is exempt under an agreement or bilateral treaty can never become a U.S. citizen, and may have trouble reentering the U.S. if he leaves.
An alien who served at least a year in the military of a country with which the U.S. is involved in mutual defense activities will be exempt from military service if he is a national of a country that grants reciprocal privileges to citizens of the U.S.
During a draft, any claims for exemptions based on any of the above categories would be granted or denied by a man’s Local Board.
Military examiners make the final decision about who will be accepted into the military.
Obviously the Selective Service issue only applies to males.
@John
When I refer to “young people” I mean young adults who are over the age of majority. Furthermore, I agree and believe very strongly that this is a decision that you needs to be made carefully and and as objectively as possible. The decision should be based on what other citizenship options are available.
That said, unless there are major changes in U.S. policy, I do think that “young adults” should understand what the obligations of U.S. citizenship are. Following that, they should take a suitable amount of time to consider whether they want to remain U.S. citizens.
I have seen instances where U.S. citizenship has been the single most costly circumstance in people’s lives. This was true in the 1970s. It is true again in 2012.
What is important is that people are:
1. Educated about the obligations of U.S. citizenship;
2. Educated about the extreme liabilities of U.S. citizenship if one is living outside the U.S.;
3. Makes an objective decision going forward.
It’s a big problem – a problem that “young people” over the age of majority should understand. Those who were born outside the U.S. have more breathing space.
@col.kurtz, omghesstillanamerican- In my post I am pointing out that the U.S. tax system and its policy on dual citizenship offers no future for our young people. I have five children who I now regret having ever registered them as Americans. At the time when I did it I thought that they would be allowed to chose their country of citizenship once they were 21, but that was under the old law. I had no idea that the law had been changed.
Now instead of being able to devote their financial resources to their studies, their new families and homes they are being required to waste their resources on filing paper work that will net them nothing.
Then when you toss into this mess the fact that I have a disabled son who the U.S. government says cannot renounce because he can’t comprehend what he is doing. U.S. law prevents me, his parent/ guarding from renouncing on his behalf because they say that giving up citizenship is like marriage and must be done by the individual. Yet this same government expects him to abide by the law of the land even though he cannot comprehend what the law is.
Add to this the fact that IRS investment rules disallow my son’s involvement in Canada’s Registered Disability Savings Plan by using the tax code to nullify the benefit and it is evident that U.S. citizenship is a liability.
The only child I have left who has a chance to get out of this mess without a lot of pain is my youngest. He will turn 16 this year and will finally be able to renounce if he so choses.
It must also be stated that the U.S. tax system has already hurt our children and plans on continuing to hurt them by hurting us. The money and time that we have to spend on comliance is money and time that we don’t have to spend on our families. The investment restrictions that bar us form investing in RESP’s and Canadian mutual funds prevent us from building family wealth in a tax efficient way. U.S. investment laws have absolutely no relevance outside of the U.S.
For me to state the obvious is not the same thing as counselling children to renounce. It is not my purpose to take the place of parents. I am merely lamenting the fact that our children are starting out life with a burden that they don’t deserve. I have no intention that my children should have to live their lives hoping that they aren’t “found” out. To have to sneak around in your own country is denigrating. Is this what we want for our children. Don’t ask dont tell isn’t the way to go.
I have no faith that the U.S. Congress, the IRS or the Treasury will do the right thing. All of the evidence points to the contrary. From what I can see everything is full steam ahead and getting worse all the time.
In the end there is a small window wherein our children can exercise the right to free themselves from nothing less than what I characterize as an abusive relationship.
I don’t believe that I have said anything that hasn’t already been said on this blog in one way or another and which therefore hasn’t already possibly been read by any member of the family who is old enough to understand.
@Co.l Kurtz:
Don’t get me wrong, I think the post is great for anyone over 18, particularly for college students. I just believe renunciation is purely a family issue until the children are old enough to make decisions this large on their own.
The thing is, there’s citizenship decisions that need to be made before turning 18. Young people deserve to have the resources to make an informed decision on their own about this matter, rather than relying on their parents’ thinking. And pretty much by necessity they have to start thinking about it before they’ve reached legal adulthood, rather than rushing into the decision-making process with a deadline looming a few months away.
On one hand, if a kid is born a dual citizen and this fact somehow becomes known to the US government (either the parent registered thie kid against his will, the kid lets the cat out of the bag on some form or at a border crossing, or the US government starts seriously trying to track down overseas-born children of Americans), under current law as long as the kid did not live in the U.S. for more than 10 years, he can renounce before age 18-and-a-half without penalty even if he has never filed an IRS form in his life. (Question 4 on Form 8854). Otherwise if he renounces later under the same circumstances he becomes a “covered expatriate”, which could put future restrictions on his ability to travel to (or even fly through the airspace of) the US if they start enforcing the Reed Amendment.
On the flip side, if a kid is born a non-US citizen (because his US parent did not live long enough in the US, renounced before he was born, or failed to register him), but the kid has a US citizen grandparent, there’s a decision they need to make before 18: it’s the cutoff age for them to be naturalised under INA § 322.
Sorry folks. I closed the comment stream for a time because I wanted to transfer this to an actual post, not a reblogged post. But now that it has 14 comments, I realized its inconvenient to do that, because in copying the comments over they would lose their permalinks. So I’ve decided to leave this one alone and let it stand as is. However, we still have a “no reblog” policy. Posts should be cross-posted, not reblogged: this means copying the contents of the post from your personal blog into a full post at Isaac Brock. Thanks for your understanding. Cheers.
As most of the readers of this site may know, my adult son is developmentally delayed. He was born in Canada of parents born in the US so an “accidental American” by US definition. He has lived in Canada all his life, never lived in the US; never received a benefit from the US, but has received so many benefits from Canada, including his fortune to fall under Canada’s health care system and having grown up as a fine young man in a country to has ensured rights for their disabled members.
I and others are told that we cannot renounce on their behalf a US citizenship of our developmentally delayed adult children — even though we make day-by-day decisions for their lives. Although it doesn’t make a difference as the US still has their brand on my son, I am glad that I never registered either of my born-in-children with the US. If the US will not extend a right for parents, guardians, trustees to renounce the US citizenship of their family member — if they think that is in the best interest of that child — I will in good conscience (for myself only) adopt a “don’t ask / don’t tell” stance for my son. In my mind, he is Canadian, as his Canadian passport shows.
I apologize once again for the length of this comment, especially to those who have read my words over and over. I have contacted government representatives on both sides of the border. I have no assurance from anyone that anything will be able to be accomplished for my family’s situation (and, by extension, to many, many other families in this situation) — so this is how I resolve my problem in my own mind. In the meantime, my hope is that something is happening in the background for this issue. Progress is being made for me to ask for my renunciation and I know resolution may never come for my family member. My decision is the only way that I can continue to live my life in retirement in any kind of renewed joy and peace of mind that my son will be OK when I am no here.
It is unfortunate that he and his family have less rights as designated ‘US persons’ than any other Canadian, including negation of the benefit of the Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan, which their parents, guardians, trustees may set up to help with their future, including retirement. I feel it is discrimination, economically, and give my reasoning from my submission to the TAS Office of Systemic Advocacy and my comments (in CAPS) to what the US Congress set out in the “Americans with Disability Act”.
As I submitted to TAS Office of Systemic Advocacy, February 26, 2012:
Parents/guardians/trustees of developmentally delayed dependent adult children cannot renounce US citizenship on their family member’s behalf. That dependent adult does not have the capacity to understand either the benefits of US citizenship or consequences of its renunciation.
Parents/guardians/trustees make all day-to-day decisions, some of life or death, for their family member’s well-being. They need to live in the same country as their family, without the prohibitive stress and monetary cost of yearly US tax and reporting compliance.
Most countries have better rights for developmentally disabled persons, better health care benefits, better tax-assisted savings plans for retirement. They are discriminated against by the persons looking after their well-being not being able to renounce their US citizenship on their behalf to end unnecessary administrative costs (by their government funding) for US tax returns with $0.00 owing and possible prohibitive penalties resulting regarding FBARs.
Because of additional health problems most of these developmentally delayed persons have, it makes no sense for them to live in the US where they would not have the health care insurance or benefits they have in their family’s country.
Who will administer the responsibilities of their US citizenship when the US parent is either incapacitated or deceased? To have an executor carry on this pointless yearly exercise is a further expense charged to their government disability benefits.
This is discrimination on the basis of citizenship, i.e. our dependent children have additional compliance requirements, additional expense of administration, all for $0.00 owing to the US, because they are considered US citizens in addition to the citizenship of their birthplace.
These dependent individuals are denied health care assistance from the US in the country where they live. It appears they are denied access to benefit of legal tax laws provided by their country to save for retirement in their resident country.
Let those of us who look out for our developmentally delayed dependent family member’s well-being EVERY DAY be allowed to renounce that US citizenship on their behalf and continue in the important things like ensuring the quality of life for our sons, our daughters.
This is from the ‘Americans with Disability Act’ which doesn’t address a lot of the discrimination for Registered Disability Savings Plans (RDSPs), etc. for Canadians with developmental disabilities (and the like).
But I did glean the following portion, which talks about discrimination ‘economically’. (My comments are in CAPITALS.)
The US Congress finds that:
(1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination; others who have a record of a disability or are regarded as having a disability also have been subjected to discrimination;
(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem;
(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services;
THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION, EDUCATION, TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, RECREATION, HEALTH SERVICES!!!!!, VOTING, ACCESS TO PUBLIC SERVICES IN CANADA — THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE FOR THEM IN THE US (WITHOUT THEIR FAMILIES WHO ARE ALSO LIVING IN CANADA).
(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;
(5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright intentional exclusion, the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers, overprotective rules and policies, failure to make modifications to existing facilities and practices, exclusionary qualification standards and criteria, segregation, and relegation to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities;
(6) census data, national polls, and other studies have documented that people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in our society, and are severely disadvantaged socially, vocationally, economically, and educationally;
THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ECONOMICALLY; I.E. THEIR CANADIAN BENEFITS ARE DIMINISHED IF THEIR PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE A DECISION FOR THEIR BEST INTERESTS TO RENOUNCE THEIR US CITIZENSHIP, WHICH THEN BECOMES A SEVERE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR THEM LIVING IN CANADA OR ANOTHER COUNTRY. IF THEY HAVE IN THEIR NAME A CANADIAN REGISTERED DISABILITY SAVINGS ACCOUNT OR A TAX-FREE SAVINGS ACCOUNT, IT DOES NOT GIVE THEM THE SAME VALUE FOR THOSE LEGAL TAX-SAVINGS PLANS AS A CANADIAN WITH A DEVELOPMENTAL OR OTHER DISABILITY COMPARED TO THE SAME CANADIAN WITHOUT AN ADDITIONAL US CITIZENSHIP AND ITS RESPONSIBILITIES.
(7) the Nation’s proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for such individuals; and
THESE INDIVIDUALS CANNOT HAVE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY — IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH AN EXTRANEOUS (TO THEIR CANADIAN OR OTHER COUNTRY CITIZENSHIP) US CITIZENSHIP.
(8) the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous, and costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity.
THIS IS, FURTHER, UNFAIR AND UNNECESSARY DISCRIMINATION BY NOT LETTING THE PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES OF DEVELOPMENTALLY OR OTHERWISE DISABLED CANADIANS RENOUNCE US CITIZENSHIP ON THEIR BEHALF, WHICH DENIES THESE INDIVIDUALS THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE ON AN EQUAL BASIS (IN THE COUNTRY WHERE THEY RESIDE AND HOLD CITIZENSHIP), THEREBY CREATING MORE DEPENDENCY AND MORE RESULTING EXPENSES. THE COST OF ADMINISTRATION OF THEIR EXTRANEOUS US CITIZENSHIP IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) CREATES LITTLE, OR IN MOST CASES $0.00, FOR THE US. IT DOES GIVE MONEY TO CROSS-BORDER ACCOUNTANTS AND US TAX LAWYERS IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) — NOTHING FOR ANY SERVICES IN THE US.
WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS FOR WHICH THE US IS JUSTIFIABLY FAMOUS THAT IS BETTER THAN WHAT CANADA, IN THIS CASE, PROVIDES?
I am wondering really if the best solution isn’t to just have the kids abroad, but not register them at the local US Consulate until they are almost 16 or 18, or at least until the last possible moment. If we don’t tell the consulate, the US Government will never know. Since nobody knows how this is going to play out (in so many ways), I think it best to just wait it all out with registration.
There’s really no need to register your kids at USCs. If they want to assert a claim to US citizenship later, all they have to do is present a properly documented claim by showing that they had a USC parent who met the residency requirements. That’s what I did in the early 90s (and came to regret it later – ouch!)
When the “name and shame” list is published each quarter, this is one group that will never be counted in any official statistics. The citizens who “informally renounce” by never admitting to the US government that they are a citizen in the first place.
I’ll second that, Roberto!
@recalcitrantexpat,
I think omghesstillanamerican is right about this particular post:
“We should not be counseling young people about renouncing US citizenship … they’re too impressionable and that’s a topic that should be left up to their parents……”
“There’s alot of young people out there who might be reading this blog and we should not be offering this kind of advice to them directly.”
“Imagine the negative publicity we would get if someone decided to run a story about this without covering all the nuances.”
Citizenship and marriage are two of the most important decisions anyone can make in life. Such decisions are not for adolescents. The norm in most societies for being considered a young adult is 18. Less than that is an adolescent.
Needless to say, advocating renunciation to adolescents will perturb a lot of parents (myself included), regardless of how much they want for their children to be free from this “US person” mess.
I have really enjoyed reading your posts up to this point in time. But I’m afraid this one misses the mark in good judgment.
@expat4ever- I understand what everyone is wanting to say but we need to remember that when it comes to the issue of whether or not to influence the decision of a young person on this matter that the U.S. Consular has no such qualms. Their job, as I over heard the Consular state it, is to discourage all people from renunciation.
Last year my 18 yr. old son went to renunciate his citizenship and ended up being persuaded not to do it. This caused him to miss his 18 1/2 yr. old window, which he just would have made had he done it that month.
I hold no delusions about who it is who holds the best interest of my child in mind. I have no personal benefit to be gained by any of my children continuing to hold U.S. citizenship. The U.S. is not in the same situation. They have a lot to gain and therefore they are not unbiased. Telling my children the truth is not the exercising of undue influence and at 16 they are capable of seeing the truth.
@recalcitrantexpat
Telling your children, yes of course.
The problem I have (along with other parents) is directly telling the children of others.
It is up to the parents to do that themselves.
I understand your good intentions, but many people won’t take it that way.
This is information I have received from the US Embassy in Ottawa as to whether or not my children are considered US citizens. Has anyone
else received similar advice?
This information applies only to children that were born outside of the US to one US citizen parent and who have not made any claim to US citizenship (such as requesting a Report of Birth Abroad or US passport).
I was told that they are a special situation because in order to claim their citizenship, they need to show that their US parent has lived in the US for a requisite number of years. They need to documentarily establish (her wording) that they are US citizens. Until that point, they do not have any of the rights or responsibilities of US citizens: specifically they do not need to file taxes, use US passports to enter or exit the country, or sign up for selective services.
If they decide to claim their US citizenship in the future, they may be able to do so depending on what the law is at that time.
They also told me that getting an ITIN number (which you need if you want to claim your Canadian child as your dependant on your tax forms) is not considered a claim to citizenship.
This is great news for me: my kids get the best of both worlds (they don’t have to worry about obligations to the US, yet for the time being anyway a door has been left open for them to become full US citizens if they want/need to). However, I am nervous to rely on this because it is different from what I have read other places. I’d appreciate hearing any informed comments on it. Thanks.
@recalcitrantexpat:
It’s your post but I strongly disagree with addressing young people under 18. In my opinion, until then the issue of renunciation should be for their parents to deal with.
Like I said, it’s your blog. But I feel compelled to communicate my disagreement with your first sentence.
It could certainly be a topic of discussion at family meetings where everyone is heard and everyone makes informed decisions. Good practice for many responsibilities taken at age 18 and older.
@Col, Kurtz
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
It’s too soon in the FATCA game for that kind of advice.
The US Government’s final version of this is still very much work in progress. At the end of the day, if foreign governments want to stick their heels in, what is the US government to do about it? if the EU for example slaps an EU tax on US banks or China or Brazil and we end up with a world where everyone is withholding everyone else’s money, how is that going to benefit the world economy?
Already the “final FATCA version” has sparked off political opposition in the US with American banks now being told to start compiling databases of foreign clients so the IRS has the data bargaining chip to use in with other countries. I’m sure the lobbying machine that got 1099 reporting repeaed is starting that process as we speak – watch this space. The 1099 repeal process didn’t spring into action until after the Health Care Act was signed into law. This time they haven’t had the benefit of a lag in time over this issue because I believe the foreign reporting requirement was done as an IRS regulation – please correct me if I’m wrong.
Other questions haven’t been answered, how long will the IRS hold withheld money and how long will it take for a refund? Hours, days, weeks, months? If they don’t refund investor money wrongly withheld pretty damn quick, go bye investors. Foreign banks or individuals will be bitten once by the US, but I doubt they’re allow that to happen too many times before they invest their money in the non FATCA world where they don’t have withholding worries. Investors don’t have to keep playing this shell game with the IRS if they choose not too. So I’m not sure if even a snappy refund response will be enough for investors – why invest in the US when in Canada, Europe or the Far East you don’t have to play this shell game and continuously have to worry about always winning. This is where Carl Levin hasn’t thought this whole business through. He’s betting foreign investors always will come up the the table and keeping playing his game – we’ll see whose right when money starts being withheld and the IRS falls behind on refunds that will be in millions not a few hundred or thousands in percieved loss tax revenue. Refunds on that scale could be some scam artist’s dream!
If investors don’t come to the US where is that going to leave US companies for money? It would be pretty easy for a major US corporation to de-list on the NYSE, and re-list on Toronto or London and blame that FATCA is starving them of much need capital. Then Ottawa or London sees their treasuries filled up with much need revenue by taxing those new HQs or worse re-list in the Far East and give them a bump.
Going back to kids renouncing at such a young age…
My kids are dual citizens, however, they fall into a category where FATCA and all the rest of the bulls**t won’t affect them. It’s going to be a hard nut for the US Government to crack.
US citizens with a non-US place of birth, can simply keep the truth to themselves. Don’t tell an employer, don’t tell the bank, don’t tell anyone.
They have EU passports with a non-US place of birth as well.
Unless the US Government is suddenly going to provide the world wutg a US Citizen certification website to use, they’re stuffed. And even this wouldn’t be foolproof.
With the privacy problems that would pose, this is one group of individuals they won’t be able to use apppointed world agents to identify. I have already told them if any form or anyone ask if they’re US citizens, say NO.
You see this is where I think if someone is a dual citizen, and if a bank or the government wants to report their information to the IRS, this is discrimination by “place of birth.” There is legal jusitification to go after the offending party in your local court on discrimination grounds.
One group of citizens gets away with, another gets reported – where’s the fairness in that.
I agree with Col. Kurtz. We should not be counseling young people about renouncing US citizenship … they’re too impressionable and that’s a topic that should be left up to their parents. Everybody’s situation is different and renunciation may seem like the perfect solution for most of us and our children but it could be a horrific thing for someone else to do.
There’s alot of young people out there who might be reading this blog and we should not be offering this kind of advice to them directly.
Imagine the negative publicity we would get if someone decided to run a story about this without covering all the nuances.
Also, if the US government were to completely change their taxation policies, having US citizenship could once again be a valuable thing. I know everybody here thinks that won’t happen but I have a strong hunch that it will.
Reblogged this on Renounce U.S. Citizenship – Be Free and commented:
Q. What is the single most important investment a young person could make in his/her future?
A. If the person intends to live outside the United States – Renounce U.S. Citizenship and be free.
@omghesstillanamerican
Parents can not legally decide for their minor children.
—
FROM THE STATE DEPARTMENT WEBSITE:
F. RENUNCIATION FOR MINOR CHILDREN
Parents cannot renounce U.S. citizenship on behalf of their minor children. Before an oath of renunciation will be administered under Section 349(a)(5) of the INA, a person under the age of eighteen must convince a U.S. diplomatic or consular officer that he/she fully understands the nature and consequences of the oath of renunciation, is not subject to duress or undue influence, and is voluntarily seeking to renounce his/her U.S. citizenship.
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
@renounceuscitizenship: I understand the frustration and anger towards factor, but I think if a young person has a non-US place of birth and a US citizen, the responsible thing to do is wait. The US has left open this loophole they can’t close – use it. Score foreign born US citizens 1 – 0 US govenment.
@recalcitrantexpat & Rick
Uncle Sam thinks he owns everyone’s children. One of the reasons I renounced when I did was because my non-US wife was pregnant and I didn’t want my children growing up as expat US citizens.
Nevertheless, I think citizenship renunciation is a family affair and third parties should respect that. In other words, if I were to catch my expat neighbor talking to my kids about renunciation (even though I’m a proud renunciant myself) I would tell him to butt out. If he were to continue, I would probably punch him in the nose.
Don’t get me wrong, I think the post is great for anyone over 18, particularly for college students. I just believe renunciation is purely a family issue until the children are old enough to make decisions this large on their own.
As far as US law on children renunciations goes, they can stick it where the sun doesn’t shine.
Kurtz
PS. I’m an ex-soldier. I would also punch an Army recruiter in the nose if he were to try to recruit my son before he was 18. And that goes for the Army of my new country as well.
Don’t forget about the Selective Service System:
ALIENS AND DUAL NATIONALS
U.S. non-citizens and dual nationals are required by law to register with the Selective Service System.* Most are also liable for induction into the U.S. Armed Forces if there is a draft. They would also be eligible for any deferments, postponements, and exemptions available to all other registrants.
However, some aliens and dual nationals would be exempt from induction into the military if there is a draft, depending on their country of origin and other factors. Some of these exemptions are shown below:
An alien who has lived in the U.S. for less than one year is exempt from induction.
A dual national whose other country of nationality has an agreement with the U.S. which specifically provides for an exemption is exempt from induction.
[Some countries have agreements with the U.S. which exempt an alien national who is a citizen of both that country and the U.S. from military service in the U.S. Armed Forces.] An alien who requests and is exempt under an agreement or bilateral treaty can never become a U.S. citizen, and may have trouble reentering the U.S. if he leaves.
An alien who served at least a year in the military of a country with which the U.S. is involved in mutual defense activities will be exempt from military service if he is a national of a country that grants reciprocal privileges to citizens of the U.S.
During a draft, any claims for exemptions based on any of the above categories would be granted or denied by a man’s Local Board.
Military examiners make the final decision about who will be accepted into the military.
http://www.sss.gov/FSaliens.htm
Obviously the Selective Service issue only applies to males.
@John
When I refer to “young people” I mean young adults who are over the age of majority. Furthermore, I agree and believe very strongly that this is a decision that you needs to be made carefully and and as objectively as possible. The decision should be based on what other citizenship options are available.
That said, unless there are major changes in U.S. policy, I do think that “young adults” should understand what the obligations of U.S. citizenship are. Following that, they should take a suitable amount of time to consider whether they want to remain U.S. citizens.
I have seen instances where U.S. citizenship has been the single most costly circumstance in people’s lives. This was true in the 1970s. It is true again in 2012.
What is important is that people are:
1. Educated about the obligations of U.S. citizenship;
2. Educated about the extreme liabilities of U.S. citizenship if one is living outside the U.S.;
3. Makes an objective decision going forward.
It’s a big problem – a problem that “young people” over the age of majority should understand. Those who were born outside the U.S. have more breathing space.
@col.kurtz, omghesstillanamerican- In my post I am pointing out that the U.S. tax system and its policy on dual citizenship offers no future for our young people. I have five children who I now regret having ever registered them as Americans. At the time when I did it I thought that they would be allowed to chose their country of citizenship once they were 21, but that was under the old law. I had no idea that the law had been changed.
Now instead of being able to devote their financial resources to their studies, their new families and homes they are being required to waste their resources on filing paper work that will net them nothing.
Then when you toss into this mess the fact that I have a disabled son who the U.S. government says cannot renounce because he can’t comprehend what he is doing. U.S. law prevents me, his parent/ guarding from renouncing on his behalf because they say that giving up citizenship is like marriage and must be done by the individual. Yet this same government expects him to abide by the law of the land even though he cannot comprehend what the law is.
Add to this the fact that IRS investment rules disallow my son’s involvement in Canada’s Registered Disability Savings Plan by using the tax code to nullify the benefit and it is evident that U.S. citizenship is a liability.
The only child I have left who has a chance to get out of this mess without a lot of pain is my youngest. He will turn 16 this year and will finally be able to renounce if he so choses.
It must also be stated that the U.S. tax system has already hurt our children and plans on continuing to hurt them by hurting us. The money and time that we have to spend on comliance is money and time that we don’t have to spend on our families. The investment restrictions that bar us form investing in RESP’s and Canadian mutual funds prevent us from building family wealth in a tax efficient way. U.S. investment laws have absolutely no relevance outside of the U.S.
For me to state the obvious is not the same thing as counselling children to renounce. It is not my purpose to take the place of parents. I am merely lamenting the fact that our children are starting out life with a burden that they don’t deserve. I have no intention that my children should have to live their lives hoping that they aren’t “found” out. To have to sneak around in your own country is denigrating. Is this what we want for our children. Don’t ask dont tell isn’t the way to go.
I have no faith that the U.S. Congress, the IRS or the Treasury will do the right thing. All of the evidence points to the contrary. From what I can see everything is full steam ahead and getting worse all the time.
In the end there is a small window wherein our children can exercise the right to free themselves from nothing less than what I characterize as an abusive relationship.
I don’t believe that I have said anything that hasn’t already been said on this blog in one way or another and which therefore hasn’t already possibly been read by any member of the family who is old enough to understand.
@Co.l Kurtz:
The thing is, there’s citizenship decisions that need to be made before turning 18. Young people deserve to have the resources to make an informed decision on their own about this matter, rather than relying on their parents’ thinking. And pretty much by necessity they have to start thinking about it before they’ve reached legal adulthood, rather than rushing into the decision-making process with a deadline looming a few months away.
On one hand, if a kid is born a dual citizen and this fact somehow becomes known to the US government (either the parent registered thie kid against his will, the kid lets the cat out of the bag on some form or at a border crossing, or the US government starts seriously trying to track down overseas-born children of Americans), under current law as long as the kid did not live in the U.S. for more than 10 years, he can renounce before age 18-and-a-half without penalty even if he has never filed an IRS form in his life. (Question 4 on Form 8854). Otherwise if he renounces later under the same circumstances he becomes a “covered expatriate”, which could put future restrictions on his ability to travel to (or even fly through the airspace of) the US if they start enforcing the Reed Amendment.
On the flip side, if a kid is born a non-US citizen (because his US parent did not live long enough in the US, renounced before he was born, or failed to register him), but the kid has a US citizen grandparent, there’s a decision they need to make before 18: it’s the cutoff age for them to be naturalised under INA § 322.
Sorry folks. I closed the comment stream for a time because I wanted to transfer this to an actual post, not a reblogged post. But now that it has 14 comments, I realized its inconvenient to do that, because in copying the comments over they would lose their permalinks. So I’ve decided to leave this one alone and let it stand as is. However, we still have a “no reblog” policy. Posts should be cross-posted, not reblogged: this means copying the contents of the post from your personal blog into a full post at Isaac Brock. Thanks for your understanding. Cheers.
Pingback: U.S. citizens “born free” renounce U.S. citizenship to “live free” « Renounce U.S. Citizenship – Be Free
As most of the readers of this site may know, my adult son is developmentally delayed. He was born in Canada of parents born in the US so an “accidental American” by US definition. He has lived in Canada all his life, never lived in the US; never received a benefit from the US, but has received so many benefits from Canada, including his fortune to fall under Canada’s health care system and having grown up as a fine young man in a country to has ensured rights for their disabled members.
I and others are told that we cannot renounce on their behalf a US citizenship of our developmentally delayed adult children — even though we make day-by-day decisions for their lives. Although it doesn’t make a difference as the US still has their brand on my son, I am glad that I never registered either of my born-in-children with the US. If the US will not extend a right for parents, guardians, trustees to renounce the US citizenship of their family member — if they think that is in the best interest of that child — I will in good conscience (for myself only) adopt a “don’t ask / don’t tell” stance for my son. In my mind, he is Canadian, as his Canadian passport shows.
I apologize once again for the length of this comment, especially to those who have read my words over and over. I have contacted government representatives on both sides of the border. I have no assurance from anyone that anything will be able to be accomplished for my family’s situation (and, by extension, to many, many other families in this situation) — so this is how I resolve my problem in my own mind. In the meantime, my hope is that something is happening in the background for this issue. Progress is being made for me to ask for my renunciation and I know resolution may never come for my family member. My decision is the only way that I can continue to live my life in retirement in any kind of renewed joy and peace of mind that my son will be OK when I am no here.
It is unfortunate that he and his family have less rights as designated ‘US persons’ than any other Canadian, including negation of the benefit of the Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan, which their parents, guardians, trustees may set up to help with their future, including retirement. I feel it is discrimination, economically, and give my reasoning from my submission to the TAS Office of Systemic Advocacy and my comments (in CAPS) to what the US Congress set out in the “Americans with Disability Act”.
As I submitted to TAS Office of Systemic Advocacy, February 26, 2012:
Parents/guardians/trustees of developmentally delayed dependent adult children cannot renounce US citizenship on their family member’s behalf. That dependent adult does not have the capacity to understand either the benefits of US citizenship or consequences of its renunciation.
Parents/guardians/trustees make all day-to-day decisions, some of life or death, for their family member’s well-being. They need to live in the same country as their family, without the prohibitive stress and monetary cost of yearly US tax and reporting compliance.
Most countries have better rights for developmentally disabled persons, better health care benefits, better tax-assisted savings plans for retirement. They are discriminated against by the persons looking after their well-being not being able to renounce their US citizenship on their behalf to end unnecessary administrative costs (by their government funding) for US tax returns with $0.00 owing and possible prohibitive penalties resulting regarding FBARs.
Because of additional health problems most of these developmentally delayed persons have, it makes no sense for them to live in the US where they would not have the health care insurance or benefits they have in their family’s country.
Who will administer the responsibilities of their US citizenship when the US parent is either incapacitated or deceased? To have an executor carry on this pointless yearly exercise is a further expense charged to their government disability benefits.
This is discrimination on the basis of citizenship, i.e. our dependent children have additional compliance requirements, additional expense of administration, all for $0.00 owing to the US, because they are considered US citizens in addition to the citizenship of their birthplace.
These dependent individuals are denied health care assistance from the US in the country where they live. It appears they are denied access to benefit of legal tax laws provided by their country to save for retirement in their resident country.
Let those of us who look out for our developmentally delayed dependent family member’s well-being EVERY DAY be allowed to renounce that US citizenship on their behalf and continue in the important things like ensuring the quality of life for our sons, our daughters.
This is from the ‘Americans with Disability Act’ which doesn’t address a lot of the discrimination for Registered Disability Savings Plans (RDSPs), etc. for Canadians with developmental disabilities (and the like).
But I did glean the following portion, which talks about discrimination ‘economically’. (My comments are in CAPITALS.)
The US Congress finds that:
(1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination; others who have a record of a disability or are regarded as having a disability also have been subjected to discrimination;
(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem;
(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services;
THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION, EDUCATION, TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, RECREATION, HEALTH SERVICES!!!!!, VOTING, ACCESS TO PUBLIC SERVICES IN CANADA — THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE FOR THEM IN THE US (WITHOUT THEIR FAMILIES WHO ARE ALSO LIVING IN CANADA).
(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;
(5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright intentional exclusion, the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers, overprotective rules and policies, failure to make modifications to existing facilities and practices, exclusionary qualification standards and criteria, segregation, and relegation to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities;
(6) census data, national polls, and other studies have documented that people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in our society, and are severely disadvantaged socially, vocationally, economically, and educationally;
THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ECONOMICALLY; I.E. THEIR CANADIAN BENEFITS ARE DIMINISHED IF THEIR PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE A DECISION FOR THEIR BEST INTERESTS TO RENOUNCE THEIR US CITIZENSHIP, WHICH THEN BECOMES A SEVERE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR THEM LIVING IN CANADA OR ANOTHER COUNTRY. IF THEY HAVE IN THEIR NAME A CANADIAN REGISTERED DISABILITY SAVINGS ACCOUNT OR A TAX-FREE SAVINGS ACCOUNT, IT DOES NOT GIVE THEM THE SAME VALUE FOR THOSE LEGAL TAX-SAVINGS PLANS AS A CANADIAN WITH A DEVELOPMENTAL OR OTHER DISABILITY COMPARED TO THE SAME CANADIAN WITHOUT AN ADDITIONAL US CITIZENSHIP AND ITS RESPONSIBILITIES.
(7) the Nation’s proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for such individuals; and
THESE INDIVIDUALS CANNOT HAVE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY — IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH AN EXTRANEOUS (TO THEIR CANADIAN OR OTHER COUNTRY CITIZENSHIP) US CITIZENSHIP.
(8) the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous, and costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity.
THIS IS, FURTHER, UNFAIR AND UNNECESSARY DISCRIMINATION BY NOT LETTING THE PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES OF DEVELOPMENTALLY OR OTHERWISE DISABLED CANADIANS RENOUNCE US CITIZENSHIP ON THEIR BEHALF, WHICH DENIES THESE INDIVIDUALS THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE ON AN EQUAL BASIS (IN THE COUNTRY WHERE THEY RESIDE AND HOLD CITIZENSHIP), THEREBY CREATING MORE DEPENDENCY AND MORE RESULTING EXPENSES. THE COST OF ADMINISTRATION OF THEIR EXTRANEOUS US CITIZENSHIP IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) CREATES LITTLE, OR IN MOST CASES $0.00, FOR THE US. IT DOES GIVE MONEY TO CROSS-BORDER ACCOUNTANTS AND US TAX LAWYERS IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) — NOTHING FOR ANY SERVICES IN THE US.
WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS FOR WHICH THE US IS JUSTIFIABLY FAMOUS THAT IS BETTER THAN WHAT CANADA, IN THIS CASE, PROVIDES?
I am wondering really if the best solution isn’t to just have the kids abroad, but not register them at the local US Consulate until they are almost 16 or 18, or at least until the last possible moment. If we don’t tell the consulate, the US Government will never know. Since nobody knows how this is going to play out (in so many ways), I think it best to just wait it all out with registration.
There’s really no need to register your kids at USCs. If they want to assert a claim to US citizenship later, all they have to do is present a properly documented claim by showing that they had a USC parent who met the residency requirements. That’s what I did in the early 90s (and came to regret it later – ouch!)
When the “name and shame” list is published each quarter, this is one group that will never be counted in any official statistics. The citizens who “informally renounce” by never admitting to the US government that they are a citizen in the first place.
I’ll second that, Roberto!
@recalcitrantexpat,
I think omghesstillanamerican is right about this particular post:
“We should not be counseling young people about renouncing US citizenship … they’re too impressionable and that’s a topic that should be left up to their parents……”
“There’s alot of young people out there who might be reading this blog and we should not be offering this kind of advice to them directly.”
“Imagine the negative publicity we would get if someone decided to run a story about this without covering all the nuances.”
Citizenship and marriage are two of the most important decisions anyone can make in life. Such decisions are not for adolescents. The norm in most societies for being considered a young adult is 18. Less than that is an adolescent.
Needless to say, advocating renunciation to adolescents will perturb a lot of parents (myself included), regardless of how much they want for their children to be free from this “US person” mess.
I have really enjoyed reading your posts up to this point in time. But I’m afraid this one misses the mark in good judgment.
@expat4ever- I understand what everyone is wanting to say but we need to remember that when it comes to the issue of whether or not to influence the decision of a young person on this matter that the U.S. Consular has no such qualms. Their job, as I over heard the Consular state it, is to discourage all people from renunciation.
Last year my 18 yr. old son went to renunciate his citizenship and ended up being persuaded not to do it. This caused him to miss his 18 1/2 yr. old window, which he just would have made had he done it that month.
I hold no delusions about who it is who holds the best interest of my child in mind. I have no personal benefit to be gained by any of my children continuing to hold U.S. citizenship. The U.S. is not in the same situation. They have a lot to gain and therefore they are not unbiased. Telling my children the truth is not the exercising of undue influence and at 16 they are capable of seeing the truth.
@recalcitrantexpat
Telling your children, yes of course.
The problem I have (along with other parents) is directly telling the children of others.
It is up to the parents to do that themselves.
I understand your good intentions, but many people won’t take it that way.
This is information I have received from the US Embassy in Ottawa as to whether or not my children are considered US citizens. Has anyone
else received similar advice?
This information applies only to children that were born outside of the US to one US citizen parent and who have not made any claim to US citizenship (such as requesting a Report of Birth Abroad or US passport).
I was told that they are a special situation because in order to claim their citizenship, they need to show that their US parent has lived in the US for a requisite number of years. They need to documentarily establish (her wording) that they are US citizens. Until that point, they do not have any of the rights or responsibilities of US citizens: specifically they do not need to file taxes, use US passports to enter or exit the country, or sign up for selective services.
If they decide to claim their US citizenship in the future, they may be able to do so depending on what the law is at that time.
They also told me that getting an ITIN number (which you need if you want to claim your Canadian child as your dependant on your tax forms) is not considered a claim to citizenship.
This is great news for me: my kids get the best of both worlds (they don’t have to worry about obligations to the US, yet for the time being anyway a door has been left open for them to become full US citizens if they want/need to). However, I am nervous to rely on this because it is different from what I have read other places. I’d appreciate hearing any informed comments on it. Thanks.