On Maple Sandbox, Lynne Swanson (Blaze) wrote “Ted Cruz has ‘nothing against Canada.’ … Likewise, many Canadians born in US have ‘Nothing against United States (until now).'”
Lynne “tells Senator Ted Cruz he has nothing to fear from Canada for renouncing Canadian citizenship–unlike what happens in reverse” and explains why in:
Nothing Against the United States, (Until Now)” in the Hill’s Congress Blog,
Keep buzzing, mosquitoes! Nice work, Lynne.
@ Blaze
That is an excellent article!!! Clear, concise, articulate, and loaded with specific factual information. Lots of excellent examples, especially the stark injustice of the cross-border maternity ward “border-baby” situation.
Equally important, it has a relevant news “hook” into the Cruz story. And its published on a very credible site. I will be forwarding the link to others.
I think I shood go back to English class and relearn how to right English. Maybe I could better help the coz.
There’s a new place to comment on the Ted Cruz story, Canada’s Globe and Mail: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/why-canadian-citizenship-is-a-scourge-for-ted-cruz/article13903186/ It is unfortunate that commenters most places focus on “who” this man is instead of definition of citizenship aspect. Most are missing what we are highlighting — we have to continue to swarm.
Again, thanks Blaze!!
One disappointing aspect to the recent spate of favorable articles is the lack of any coherent opposition. The negative comments rarely rise above doors hitting rears. At most you may see someone say I lived in country X for a few years and I didn’t find the US tax issue too troubling. But I don’t think I’ve seen anyone make an intellectually respectable defence in the comments for the current US tax regime for expats. You have to delve into obscure tax journals to find anything coherent in favor of CBT.
US officials have almost never made any defence of their policy. You get a few platitudes about fighting tax evasion, paying fair shares and not going after grandma, but mostly they just stonewall. Shulman felt no need to defend his actions to Nina Olson. It’s very frustrating.
Excellent piece.
Am I wrong, however, or is there an error when she writes, “Yet accounting and legal costs are prohibitive due to the complexity of the U.S. tax code, especially for non-resident aliens.”
Shouldn’t it be “non-resident citizens”, rather than “non-resident aliens”?
I have thought quite a bit about the statement I’ll make when the day finally comes that I renounce. I had settled on something like this:
“Canada is my home. Canada is my country. My allegiance is to Canada.”
Now I think I may just add:
“And to paraphrase Ted Cruz: “Nothing against the US, but I’m a Canadian by birth and as a proud Canadian, I believe I should be only a Canadian.”
🙂
@Calgary411
Thanks for the link to the Globe piece. If you read the comments, you’ll see that Teleology has evidence that The Studly Adventurer is actually a comedy writer for the Colbert Report. I suggested to the Studly Adventurer that Mr Colbert would appreciate the irony should the tables had been turned for Mr Cruz and the IRS was threatening to confiscate 50% of his bank accounts in Canada and directed him to “The saga of Canada Cruz”, by Roth & Co.
I would LOVE for Stephen Colbert to grab on to this.
They of course miss the worst case. Ted could have been saving over time into a TFSA.
I assume this is quite common. A similar vehicle in the UK called the ISA has a 37% participation rate among residents.
He won’t have paid any tax on his TFSA because he doesn’t have to but the IRS would expect him to do a calculation that he won’t be able to find an accountant to actually do. The taxation will likely take away all his gains + interest on them. They will expect a non-payment penalty and interest on that penalty. Since he didn’t declare it they will also want 27.5% of the maximal balance of this account when he joins the OVDP.
He will easily pay out 75% of the account value especially if he is forced into the mark to market penalties with their fake gains.
Sounds like a ready-made script for Stephen Colbert, bubblebustin. I wish readers / commenters were cluing into the citizenship / renunciation comparisons made. Not many really catch the absurdity of what has to be either sheer stupidity on Mr. Cruz’ part or blatant lying. I do think it is the former.
@Neill
Cruz might qualify for the reduced 5% penalty under the OVD program because he didn’t know that he was an American citizen. Interestingly, the OVD FAQ 52 states that someone who didn’t know they were a US citizen may qualify for the 5% penalty but list only one example of how they might. It doesn’t apply to Cruz’s case:
“Taxpayers who are foreign residents and who were unaware they were U.S. citizens.
Example 1: The taxpayer was born in the U.S. to parents of foreign citizenship. She grew up in a foreign jurisdiction, unaware that she had been born in the U.S. She has a $60,000 account in the foreign jurisdiction. She has never filed U.S. returns or FBARs. She became aware she was a U.S. citizen when she had to get a birth certificate in order to obtain a passport from the foreign jurisdiction where she resides. Unless she decides to opt out, she is entitled to the reduced 5% offshore penalty. Subsequent to learning of her U.S. citizenship, taxpayer took no action with respect to her foreign accounts that would disqualify a U.S. taxpayer…”
If the IRS can’t be convinced that someone of his education wouldn’t know about his status as a US citizen, he might qualify for the 5% on other grounds:
“Taxpayers who are foreign residents and who meet all three of the following conditions for all of the years of their voluntary disclosure: (a) taxpayer resides in a foreign country; (b) taxpayer has made a good faith showing that he or she has timely complied with all tax reporting and payment requirements in the country of residency; and (c) taxpayer has $10,000 or less of U.S. source income each year. For these taxpayers only, the offshore penalty will not apply to non-financial assets, such as real property, business interests, or artworks, purchased with funds for which the taxpayer can establish that all applicable taxes have been paid, either in the U.S. or in the country of residence. This exception only applies if the income tax returns filed with the foreign tax authority included the offshore-related taxable income that was not reported on the U.S. tax return.”
http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Offshore-Voluntary-Disclosure-Program-Frequently-Asked-Questions-and-Answers
Neill…
TFSA’s (Canada) and ISA’s (UK) are RESIDENT based…so that scenario is highly unlikely…TED CRUZ is a US Resident…
Now if you want to argue that CANADA should extract an Canadian version of the OVDI penalty for his investments in the USA while holding Canadian Citizenship…now that would be ironic and so UN-Canadian… 😉
‘The Hill’ Most Read by Congress on Twitter
The Washington, D.C.-based news outlet The Hill is the source most followed on Twitter by members of Congress — Democrat and Republican alike.
New York Magazine’s Daily Intelligencer, noting that 97 percent of members of Congress now have an official twitter presence, worked with Twiangulate to identify every congressional Twitter account, then analyzed which other accounts they follow most often.
At the head of the list of most followed news accounts are four Washington-based political outlets. The Hill’s Twitter account leads the pack — 62.7 percent of members of Congress follow The Hill. Next most popular is Politico, at 61.2 percent, followed by CSPAN (61 percent), and Roll Call (59.9 percent)
The Hill is tops among both Democrats (55.4 percent) and Republicans (70.1 percent), and Politico, CSPAN, and Roll Call are in the top four among members of both parties. For Democrats, The New York Times’ Twitter account is fifth (51.2 percent), and for Republicans, it’s The Wall Street Journal (63.9 percent).
In addition to leading among news organizations, The Hill is the most followed Twitter account overall, outpacing all politicians including the president.