— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 28, 2012
I am either a fool or an optimist but I believe that 2013 will be the year that the plight of U.S. persons abroad will begin to be heard. In anticipation of that, it is time to think carefully about and to sharpen the message. What is clear is that:
- Homelanders don’t seem to be able to understand how “US citizenship abroad” is next to impossible;
- the Democrats which have the power to do something about this don’t seem to be willing to do so. The recent “form letter” from Democrats Abroad is proof of the way that the Democrats have betrayed U.S. citizens abroad (and I am not sure why). No doubt some of you reading this will default into “The Republicans are just as bad” mode. We don’t know that. What we do know is that the Democrats are a big big problem. It may be as simple as the following mindless reasoning:
Homelanders can’t understand Americans Abroad.
Democrats are Homelanders.
Therefore, Democrats don’t understand Americans Abroad
Hell, Geez comments that he can’t even get this parents to take an interest in his plight (they might even have voted for Obama). I think the problem is captured in the following comment exchange to a recent New York Times article:
- Ex-patriot soon to expatriate
In addition to paying taxes, residents of other countries who were born in the U.S. are required to file mountains of “information returns” at great cost. Failure to file will subject the person to huge penalties – generally $10,000 per return.
Furthermore, these “US persons” are disabled from normal retirement planning and investing (including mutual funds and some pension plans). It is a huge problem which has led to an acceleration of renouncing U.S. citizenship.
For these reasons, US born children are not good candidates for adoption to non-U.S.parents.
In addition. people born in the U.S. are not desirable as:
- business partners
– marriage partners
The US is the ONLY country that behaves in this way. It is absurd and dangerous.
Search on google: “citizenship-based taxation” “FATCA” “FBAR” “PFIC” “renounce citizenship”
- Mark Thompson
Those born in the U.S. are automatically U.S. citizens and therefore should be obligated to comply with U.S. laws regardless of country of residency.
Of course, one could renounce your U.S. citizenship & relinquish your passport.
However, I don’t see why a non-resident U.S. citizen would think they shouldn’t have to comply with U.S. laws regardless of how other countries handle the same situation.
- Tom Storm
- Coolangatta, QLD. Australia
While I understand the plight The Russian Government faces with orphans, the tragedy really lies with the children themselves and I hope the Russians act in the best interests of their kids. Most American adoptive parents treasure their children and offer love, security and a life of opportunity. A Russian orphan could do a whole lot worse than be adopted by an American family.
On your other point about taxing Foreign residents – the US and Australia (for example) have a taxation treaty which avoids double taxation. If Australia taxes a US Citizen or resident the double tax agreement kicks in and no tax is due in the US on the Australian income. And vice-versa.
The US has these arrangements with numerous countries – the following IRS link is a starting point.
What can one make of this comment exchange? I believe these three comments tell us a lot about the dialogue between US persons abroad and Homelanders.
Comment 1: Ex-patriot soon to expatriate could be found on this site. It explains the problems of US persons abroad. But, by focusing on the result it avoids discussing the foundations of citizenship-based taxtation.
Comment 2: Mark from Chicago is a bit like “Brave Jim in Houston”. He believes that US citizens should obey US law not matter where they are. His reason: you are a US citizen. This reasoning assumes that citizenship is a form of ownership.
Comment 3: Tom Storm is the Professor Ackerman of Australia. There is no problem because there is a tax treaty that prevents double taxation. This comment assumes that citizenship-based taxation is okay, but then avoids the issue by saying that because of a tax treaty there really is no problem.
Since Mark and Tom clearly assume that citizenship-based taxation is justifiable our educational endeavors need to focus on citizenship-based taxation. We need to work on how this is described. The focus needs to be on the fact that citizenship-based taxation is really code for “taxing the residents of other countries and forcing them to pay tribute to the U.S.”
I encourage comments on what should be the correct language to educate Homelanders.