In May last year, I wrote:
Incidentally, while looking at an earlier Federal Register list I came across a name matching that of another famous tech guy — one who is well known to have started a new venture outside of the U.S. recently after a number of years living abroad … I’m reasonably sure the renunciant listed is him and not another guy by the same name: a name matching his wife’s name is listed in the same quarter, and neither name is very common. I don’t think I’ll mention his name publicly right now; it may be better just to leave him and his kids in peace.
The man in question, Lee Kai-fu, has decided to discuss his renunciation publicly for the first time, and wrote a post about it on Chinese micro-blogging site Sina Weibo over the weekend, which I’ve translated after the jump. His name appeared in the Federal Register “published expatriates” list for Q3 2011, as does someone with the same name as his wife; alongside them are the names of a number of other public figures who gave up U.S. citizenship around the same time, such as Tsinghua University School of Life Sciences dean Shi Yigong and Jamaican politicians Shahine Fakhourie Robinson and Everald Warmington. Indeed, the whole reason I noticed Lee’s name was because I was browsing the list when doing research to write Robinson’s Wikipedia article.
The background to Lee’s announcement was a flame war between him and Dai Xu of the People’s Liberation Army Air Force Academy in which Dai accused him of being anti-Chinese; it’s discussed in further detail here for those who are interested. Lee’s post was in the form of an image, which non-Chinese speaking readers will find cannot be handled by Google Translate, so I’ve transcribed and translated it below:
| 最近有些人对我的国籍很有兴趣，我觉得很有意思。我又不是官员，也不是官员的家属，为什么要问我的国籍呢？不过既然要问，那就请看长微博吧！ | Recently some people have been curious about my citizenship, which I find rather interesting. I’m not a government official, nor the family member of an official, so why are you asking about my citizenship? But since you’re asking, have a look at my Weibo! |
| 有关我的国籍 | Regarding my citizenship |
| 我少年时代在美国接受教育，取得美国身份。但是随着年龄增长，阅历增加，尤其在1998年回到大陆工作后，越发深深感触中国才是属于华人真正的土壤。有其人在不同年龄段，有不同思考的问题。越是增长，越是希望落叶归根。这是人之常情。于是，在2011年，我做出放弃美国身份的决定，现在仅有台湾唯一身份。 | When I was young, I received my education in the U.S. and took up a U.S. identity. But as I got on in years, and gained more experience, especially in 1998 after I returned to the mainland for work, I began to feel more and more deeply that that China is the land that really belongs to ethnic Chinese. People think about different things at different ages. As I aged, I wanted to get back to my roots. This is human nature. So, in 2011, I made the decision to give up my U.S. identity, and now I only have a Taiwan identity. |
Since I don’t actually have time to puzzle over the best way to translate certain parts, I’ll take the lazy way out and supplement this with a long translation note.
Lee’s word choice here is interesting: he uses the word “身份” — which I translated somewhat awkwardly as “identity” — to describe what he acquired by naturalisation and what he gave up. One possible reason for his choice: this word allows him to re-use it to describe his connection to Taiwan without calling it “citizenship”. In other contexts I’d normally translate this word as “status”, as in “immigration status”; “认同” is probably a closer equivalent of all the connotations that the English word “identity” brings up. Anyway, citizenship is rarely equivalent to identity; most of us overseas know that you only tend to change your citizenship in recognition of how your identity has already changed, and if you’re forced to do it before then it can be a gut-wrenching step.
“Giving up U.S. citizenship” is occasionally expressed in Chinese as “放弃美国公民身份” (literally, “giving up U.S. citizenship status”), but normally people just say “放弃美国国籍” (“giving up U.S. nationality”). In general, Chinese is not as rigid and essentialist about the distinction between “status”, “citizenship” and “nationality” categories as, say, Korean, where Korean Americans who turn in their U.S. passports are without exception described as “giving up their U.S. citizens’ rights” (미국시민권을 포기, 美國市民權을 抛棄) and “restoring Korean nationality” (한국국적을 회복, 韓國國籍을 恢復).
| 美国的顶尖科技教育可谓我的老师，很多价值观也是我认可的。台湾是我出生的地方，也有我熟悉的家人和浓郁的人情味。入籍是个人选择，只要不是官员，完全没有必要追问，更不需要问责。不过，既然有人好奇，我也愿意分享我的真实想法。 | The U.S.’ world-class technology education was my teacher, and i applaud many of its values. Taiwan is the place where I was born, and also the place of my family and deep human connections. Naturalisation is a personal choice, and except in the case of a government official, there’s absolutely no need to question more, let alone to demand an explanation. But since some people were curious, I’m happy to share my real thoughts. |
| 最后，从小父母不断地告诉我要记住：“你是个中国人，要学好中文，要娶中国妻子”。现在，我可以自豪的说，这三点我都做到了。 | Finally, since I was little, my parents would constantly remind me: “You’re Chinese, you have to learn the Chinese language well, and you have to marry a Chinese wife”. Now I can say with pride that I’ve fulfilled all three of those points. |
Lee is part of what we usually call the “1.5 generation” of Asian Americans; for those who are interested, you can refer to Lee’s 2009 book Making a World of Difference, where he wrote in greater depth about his childhood and in particular his immigration from Taiwan to the United States, leaving his parents behind to go live with his elder brother in Tennessee, and the issues of culture and identity that brought up. Anyway, Asian American community media don’t want to touch renunciation issues with a ten-foot pole — they’re understandably worried it’ll fuel stereotypes about Asian Americans as unassimilable “perpetual foreigners”.
Another angle on Lee’s renunciation, which I wrote about last May:
[A]nti-emigrant sentiment is especially strong in the tech sector, where U.S. venture capitalists — who have significant trouble investing in non-U.S. ventures — try to make up for their U.S.-imposed tax handicap by instead convincing every ambitious techie that Silicon Valley is the only place in the world you could possibly want to do a startup, and if you don’t move there then clearly there’s something wrong with you … his story is another strong counterexample to the pervasive American myth that the only land of opportunity for technology entrepreneurs is the Bay Area.
One last interesting aspect of Lee’s choice is what it says about the “protection of the U.S. embassy” which Homelanders are so quick to cite as the primary benefit of U.S. citizenship. Lee is a frequent victim of censorship on Weibo and was even “invited to tea” by police earlier this year in response to something he posted. He feels secure enough in his situation that he is happy to live in Beijing with just a green Taiwan passport that affords him no consular protection whatsoever — but it took him six years to come to that decision, and wasn’t a response to any one event (least of all any political event in the United States).
Most likely, the U.S. media will ignore these three angles entirely. Instead, they’ll simply slot Lee’s story into the pre-existing narrative about “bankers and CEOs fleeing the country to avoid a new tax hike” that they’ve been talking up ever since 1995 — the year when the Joint Committee on Taxation released that execrable report about “tax-related expatriation” which revealed that despicable tax evaders like TC Lin had renounced U.S. citizenship and were living the high life abroad in Republic of China Army boot camp with a salary of not just hundreds nor thousands but tens of thousands of (New Taiwan) dollars.
There is no real consular protection provided by the US anyways.
At best, they provide a list of overpriced lawyers who will do more harm than good. There’s kickback involved in that list. If the embassy makes a mistake that jeopardizes your legal status, they will never admit to it, leaving you to hold the bag. Any paperwork you may need from the embassy is costly and their exchange rates are the absolute worst.
Now, lets say you are ethnic Chinese. If you were born in China, or have spent a considerable time in China. Sorry, the Chinese government is going to consider you Chinese. End of story. The US embassy has flat out admitted that it has no power to stop this. So having a child in China, and jumping through the hoops to exit and return on a US passport and Chinese visa… provides zero protection. You’re just paying for the US passports, Chinese visas, excluded from social health insurance, excluded from subsidized schooling, and there’s simply zero benefit. For our second child, we considered swapping both of them to US citizenship and using that as a basis to claim the EITC and other credits. Didn’t come close to adding up. So we just paid the $1600 to get a hukou and claim all the benefits of it.
In a SHTF situation, the embassy won’t rush to your aid either. At best, you get an evacuation package, which will be billed to you at EXTORTIONATE amounts (you’re probably better off using a smuggler), and even then, if the country is on lockdown, sorry, you’re not going anywhere anyways.
So, in summary here’s what the US (maybe) offers in China if you get into trouble:
We’ll help you find a shitty lawyer who will hurt you more than help.
Maybe a visit now and again, even though you can always just make a phone call on your own
If you are a hyped up dissident in a time when the US is looking to score some political hay, the embassy will love for you to run inside and cry about all the evil things in China… real or imagined, doesn’t matter honestly.
Actually, if you want help from the US when you get into trouble in China, you’re far more likely to get that help as a Chinese citizen.
Something else to bear in mind is that there is no consular protection at all for duals.
I think this just highlights how difficult it is to be “foreign” in some countries – the US in particular. It also is a reminder that the US only tolerates dual citizenship b/c it really only considers anyone who is a USC/other a USC. It doesn’t matter if you were born and raised elsewhere or came from somewhere with a pre-existing citizenship. Once the US has claim on you, it ignores all other claims. I think that is the heart of the real problem. The whole ownership mentality disguised as nationalism and tied up in the myth of America as the only place on the planet worth living.
Yep, they really really really hate the idea of dual citizens entering the US on a foreign passport. Why? Because it provides for things like protection from the bullshit the US loves to pull. It vastly complicates matters when suddenly a foreign embassy gets involved and provides people with actual citizen services and legal help. It also messes up their record keeping, you know, the one they claim they don’t do, but everyone with a brain knows that they absolutely do do.
I say, screw it, you’re safer in the US on a foreign passport. They claim it’s illegal, but there is no fine stated, there is no punishment stated, it’s a scare tactic that’s been blasted out there to keep people from exercising their rights.
@Broken Man “Something else to bear in mind is that there is no consular protection at all for duals.”
Yes, correct in general, but not necessarily in this specific case. Taiwanese are regarded by the PRC as their own nationals, but the usual PRC consular instructions to Taiwanese with foreign passports (such as Lee) who want to come to the mainland is to tell them to apply for a visa, not a taibaozheng “internal passport”. In theory this is legally significant because of the exchange of memoranda after the US & the PRC signed their consular convention in 1980:
Of course as Fred points out, if push had ever come to shove, Beijing would simply have ignored all that and done whatever they wanted. And the U.S. would not have had the power to do a thing about it, even if some consular officer could have been bothered to get off his ass and issue a weak letter of protest. If it was more advantageous to treat him as a foreigner (e.g. to deport him), they would have done so. If it was more advantageous to treat him as a Chinese national (e.g. to hold him without consular access or to ignore an investment treaty that would have applied to him as a foreigner), they also would have done so.
(But then, the US does the same in analogous situations with much lower stakes. At least Chinese immigration doesn’t hassle random Taiwanese American kids who just wanna go on holiday to see the Great Wall or their uncle working in Shanghai, the way the U.S. does at the border to foreign passport holders with U.S. birthplaces).
Yep. That’s the way it is, plain and simple. 999,999 times out of a million, if you screw up, you’ll just get deported. However every now and again, when someone has violated some rather serious laws, they will just be treated as Chinese and that’s the end of it.
Let’s see:
You were born here
You went to school here
You work here
And for some reason you have a foreign passport based on a handful of years spent abroad? Nope, sorry, you’re still Chinese. And the irony of that, is that it is advantageous to be treated as such. Foreign criminals involved in serious crimes, found guilty or not, will just get blacklisted and that’s the end of their China-life. If treated as Chinese however, worst case they do a few years, and still have a life to go back to. If I got into a tussle here and was given the choice of 3 months in the click and some compensation… or, 15 days, compensation and deportation. Gimmie the 3 months, PLEASE.
Law in China is interesting, in that it ignores the idiotic mess of “precedent”. And loopholes are frowned upon greatly. Just because one case 4 years back similar to yours was decided in one way, means virtually nothing. You can introduce it for consideration, but that’s it. It’s also one of those rare places on earth where being honest with the cops and cooperating fully WILL result in less severe penalties.
If you murder someone, deny it regardless of evidence, and kick and fight the whole way? Yes, you will be executed. If you fess up once caught, you’ll end up with a suspended death sentence, and after showing remorse, commuted to life… which can be reduced at a later time based on compensation you make to the victims and their ability to forgive it.
The law here HATES the loophole concept. Chinese holding a foreign passport is essentially seen as nothing more than a loophole, and it will be ignored.
@Fred, I have checked the State Dept site and I have googled all over in addition. I have yet to find the “law” that prohibits dual citizens from entering the US on their home country passport. Unless I missed something, you are correct. It’s a scare tactic and no actual law exists.
What I did find stated that duals have to enter with a valid, legitimate passport. I think it’s time duals begin to challenge that “enter on a US passport rule” and start pointing out that it’s perfectly legal to use you home country passport. It’s bs that we have to carry two passports to travel.
The primary purpose of this attempt to make something that’s not a law look like a law is to assert ownership. “We own you and we can do what we want with you.” It’s frankly dangerous for a dual to enter the US on a US passport because as you point out, you now don’t have access to your own consulate services anymore.
Oh, the law most certainly exists.
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/8/1185
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-29/0-0-0-4140.html
(b) Except as otherwise provided by the President and subject to such limitations and exceptions as the President may authorize and prescribe, it shall be unlawful for any citizen of the United States to depart from or enter, or attempt to depart from or enter, the United States unless he bears a valid United States passport.
No civil or criminal penalty is provided, however, for failure to comply with this statute. So it’s entirely toothless. It’s honestly just a scare tactic and they don’t like it because it complicates legal matters when you have things like consular support.
I have a really difficult time believing that USCs who cross the border into Canada by car for a quick trip to Whistler, Niagara Falls, etc not only posses a US passport, but also bring it with them for the trip.
@tdott,
Here is what many of them would have: Passport Card & Enhanced Driver License
tdott They better bring it (or equivalent ) with them. Otherwise they will have a real hassle getting home.
Less than twenty years ago that law only said that you had to have a “valid passport”, not a “valid United States passport”. They amended it to its present form in 1994, in what they described as a “technical correction”. I haven’t been able to find any Congressional debate on that:
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/PUBLAW/HTML/PUBLAW/0-0-0-7752.html
The original restriction about having a “valid passport” goes all the way back to the Immigration & Nationality Act of 1952. Of course, back in those days it only applied in time of war or national emergency when specifically ordered by the president. But then again we have always been at war with
EurasiaEastasia.Turns out the “valid United States passport” thing wasn’t even in the original bill. Ted Kennedy & Alan Simpson added it in an amendment:
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d103:SP01229:
You see… this is why I just cannot stand the US at all anymore. The small faction of congress left remaining which might be deemed progressive does nothing but fuck over expats again and again. While the regressives who are so utterly stupid it makes you want to cry are at best, strange bed fellows who, acting on behalf of moneyed interests unwittingly help us now and again.
So, basically, as it is right now, supporting those few who do not demonize us, only helps make the US an even worse place, thus further removing any chance of me ever wanting to live there again as well as making life harder for all those who still do.
Why oh why can’t they just make life a tiny, modest bit easier? Rather than seemingly going out of their way to fuck us.
Interesting thoughts on citizenship/identity. As a child I was naturalized in the US because my parents decided to to it. However my identity never changed and I never felt the US to be my “identity-home”. As a young adult I moved back to the EU. Unfortunately I didn’t renounce the US identity officially – based on pa
sorry the rest of it was “based on parental pressure”…so that is that
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society
@allou, it was only because of my family – split between the US and Canada, and sentimental reasons, that I kept my US status. Little did they or I know that those family and sentimental ties (with no economic ones, and no US residency as an adult) would end up creating a significant lifetime financial and administrative/legal burden and threaten to destroy the well-being of myself and my non-US family.
@YogaGirl, America doesn’t tolerate dual citizenship. Rather, it views such as a desirable means of taxing income earned on other nations and thus it attempts to prevent duals from renouncing. .
Incidentally, Chinese media is mostly not covering Lee’s announcement. Only report I’ve seen is this one (talks about a subsequent Weibo flame war where an IBM exec accused him of evading taxes)
http://news.cecb2b.com/info/20130428/569388.shtml