#americansabroad can’t even get empathy from “homelander” parents isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/12/27/fat… – How can the #FATCA attack be better explained?
— 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
- Canada
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
– shareholders
– employees
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
- Chicago
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.
http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/International-Businesses/United-States-Inc…
Tom Storm
______________________________________________
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.
@CHF forever, Thank you for calming me down.
@Shadow Raider
I don’t think early 1930s Germany and 2010s America have parallels for many reasons, but two stand out:
1) The Nazi party relied heavily on and capitalized on the desire to restore national pride and prestige to gain absolute power following a humiliating armistice imposed by neigbours in 1918 which severely reduced Germany’s economic, political and military might. The economic situation in the early 1930s did raise the party’s profile, but it is unlikely they would have been able to seize (and keep) power to the extent they did had it not been for the harshness of the Versailles Armistice. In 2010s America, the upcoming demise of American power has basically been self-inflicted; overexpansionism is forcing a scaledown.
2) Germany’s political system and culture was heavily unitary, with a powerful Reich President that resembled an “elected Kaiser” (who by the way appointed Hitler as Chancellor and signed many decrees in early 1933 which eventually granted HItler dictatorial powers). Although nominally a Federal Republic, power in the Weimar Republic was heavily centered on the Free State of Prussia with Berlin being the main center (Prussia accounted for over 2/3rds of Weimar Germany’s landmass and population). If you look at Germany’s post-war Constitution, it was created to remedy many of the shortcomings of the Weimar system and culture: the Presidency was transformed into a weak figurehead, the Chancellor was elected by the Bundestag and requires support from the majority of its members to exercise power and govern (thus the need for negotiating and maintaining parliamentary coalitions with multiple political parties) and Prussia was broken up into smaller Federal states, leading to a decentralization of power. Contemporary German political culture is also, as a result, very averse and suspicious to the idea of strong central governments. Given the political system and culture in America, you would definitely see many states (e.g. Texas for sure) severing ties with the Union if things evolved in the US as in 1930s Germany.
Google this article title from 1 Jan 2013 WSJ:
Chinese Fly Cash West, by the Suitcase
Money on the run.
@ geeez
Spanish naturalization was the third most popular in the EU according to 2010 Eurostat data (latest available), following naturalizations in the UK and France. As you are likely aware, EU country citizenship conveys certain rights irrespective in which EU country the EU citizen lives. It would make probably good sense to obtain the EU citizenship with the fewest hurdles although where one also intends to live will likely be a factor. EU country citizenships which do not allow for dual citizenship for naturalizing citizens would likely be less popular, e.g., Germany, which is suggested by the data.
http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/cache/ITY_OFFPUB/KS-SF-12-045/EN/KS-SF-12-045-EN.PDF
According to the data, US citizens naturalizing in the EU are vastly outnumbered by Moroccans, Turks and other nationalities, although US citizens made the top 5 for Greece (189), Malta (50) and Latvia (6) for 2010.
http://appsso.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/nui/show.do
(if necessary, select on “United States” at “Citizen” filter)
*@Bubblebustin, I suspect that Florida real estate agents know a lot more about US taxation of foreigners who are present in the US for more than the minimum number of days than they volunteer to tell perspective clients. There objective is to sell real estate rather than to answer questions that have not been asked in a way would would kill a sale.
I don’t know, but I sincerely doubt that the state examination to become a real estate broker include anything on the subject of US income tax liabilities for foreign non-resident citizens who are present in the US for more than 183 days per year. I suspect that prospective prospective purchasers of property would be referred by a real estate agent to a tax expert. It is somewhat like a medical question – I am sure they would refer you to a medical physician rather than giving you advice on treating a medical condition.
Just a guess. I have a neighbor who is a real estate agent. I will try to remember to question her about this the next time I see her.
*@Bubblebustin, I don’t own a gun and in fact have only shot one once after I was honorably discharged from the US Army after 2 years of obliglitory military service. That was when I borrowed a pistol to put down our family dog after my father died and I had moved away and my mother was living alone with a dog for which she could no longer take care of. He was 16 years old and in terrible pain. It was a painful thing for me to do, but I knew I had to do it.
But I recognize we are living in an era when today’s generation is being brought up with an almost total absence of respect for human life. I am sure that it does not happen in Catholic schools (yet) but in public schoools teachers had out condoms to middle-school students and smile as they tell them “go ahead and have fun.” And if you forget to use it, don’t worry the school nurse will arrange for an abortion and nobody will tell your mom or dad. Or if you forget to do that you can just suff the baby that is born in a waste can in a public bathroom where nobody will ever find it, and the court will rule, should you be arrested, that it wasn’t really murder, let alone manslaughter, so you will be found innocent of all charges and won’t even be put on probation. And we didn’t have competetion among school girls to see who could get pregnant like we do in some schools today, and we never heard about married female school teachers engaging in sex with their male students and rewarding those that consented with better grades. Perhaps it went on, but it certainly was not considered the norm or brushed off as a tempest in a teapot.
Faced with this kind of upbrining and being raised by a single mother with no real idea who your dad is, or if you do know who he is he is probably living with another girl friend rather than your mother, is it any wonder why children growing up in the US today have no more respect for human life of others than they do for a bunch of mosquitos? And kids who attend Catholic schools today, and the nuns who teach them, are no more immune to these risks of being shot or knifed or being run down by a teenager behind the wheel or being pushed off a subway platform to certain death in front of an oncoming train. The thought of pistol-packing school teachers is pretty frightning to me as well. When I grew up in a rural area many of my classmates had rifles and shotguns they used to hunt deer and shoot squirrels and rabbits, but never did they shoot each other. There was a respect for human life that kids don’t have today.
@Roger,
Interesting story on NPRs All thing Considered. I generally stay away from the gun subject, as I have never owned one, so that would assumingly show my bias. However, thought this was worth some consideration. Cause and effect stuff. Do we really know the links between one and the other? You being in Florida might find this interesting.
‘Stand Your Ground’ Linked To Increase In Homicides
*@JustMe, the answer to your question is no, we don’t know. Ask for a study and you can find one that proves which ever point of view you chose to embrace. Washington, DC has had, since 1976, gun control laws that are among the strictest anywhere in the US, yet the murder rate in Washington is 8 times greater than Nanional average. Here’s the study that contains substantion of this fact.
http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp.
Like you I have never owned a gun of my own nor any desire to own one. I have my home alarmed and I rember to arm it, and I have sitckers and signs to inform those who might be thinking of breaking in of this fact. And I park my car inside of the garage rather than in the driveway. So far I have been been fortunate. Some of our neighbors have not been so fortunate – wheels stolen of their outdoor parked cars, neighbors followed home and beaten to pulp and robbed when the got home, a murder of an unarmed neighbor just 2 blocks away in a break-in by an armed robber, etc.
I admit I don’t have the answer.
OECD crime statistics per 100,000 for various major crime items, homicide not the only item.
In Sweden, I have had my car stolen twice, so car theft figures can be connected to real Life. Also not interested in getting too Deep into any particular discussions.
Pingback: Does Cook v. Tait really mean that citizenship-based taxation is constitutional in all cases? « Freedom from the tyranny of U.S. citizenship-based taxation for U.S. and dual citizens outside the U.S.
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society - Cook v. Tait 1: Does Cook v. Tait really mean that citizenship-based taxation is constitutional in all cases?