In response to her being mentioned in an article in the Globe & Mail (major Canadian newspaper), Green Party leader Elizabeth May submitted the following letter, published February 14:
Acts of renunciation
Re Citizenship For Sale (letters – Feb. 12):
I am not a dual citizen. I am a Canadian citizen and have been since 1978. Any doubt about citizenship is resolved in swearing the oath to Her Majesty the Queen in becoming a Member of Parliament. The U.S. accepts such acts as renunciation, lest there be any doubt.
Elizabeth May, O.C., M.P., Sidney, B.C.
I have no idea why she cites the oath she made on taking her seat as an MP. The wording of that oath is substantially the same as the citizenship oath.
Oath on taking office as MP:
I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.
Citizenship oath:
I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
If she doesn’t have a CLN, this may her her ‘back-up’ relinquishment for the bank, just in case she can’t make a convincing argument for her 1978 relinquishment.
I’d work harder to have the first one stick, Elizabeth. It comes with a tax-filing pass.
Does she have her CLN?
US law to this day recognizes that you “shall” lose your US citizenship if you swear an oath of allegiance to any foreign government OR ANY POLITICAL SUBDIVISION THEREOF for any reason, including becoming a foreign citizen or the member of the armed forces or public service of a foreign country, as long as you did so voluntarily AND WITH THE INTENT TO RELINQUISH YOUR US CITIZENSHIP. That final proviso was only added in, I believe, 1985 or 1986 following a Supreme Court ruling. Prior to that year, it was PRESUMED your action was voluntary and intentional, and you lost your US citizenship on swearing that oath, unless you could convince the US State Department the oath was not voluntary and not done with the intention of relinquishing. And before 1985 it was difficult to convince them of the latter, from what I recall reading.
After 1986, you have to demonstrate to the State Department that the “preponderance of evidence” does not refute your claim to have intended to lose your US citizenship when you swore the oath. Hence the intrusive questions listed on State Department Form 4079. There is no written definition or formula for “preponderance of evidence,” but the real deal-breaker seems to be voting in a US election after allegedly relinquishing your USC. Getting and even using a US passport does not seem to be a deal-breaker, if you can swear that you only did so because a US border guard told you that you wouldn’t be admitted to the US again with a non-US passport showing a US birthplace (unless you have a CLN, which they don’t generally seem to mention), and especially if the visa stamps on the passport are US-only, showing that you haven’t used your US passport to travel to countries other than the US (and have only used your Canadian or other passport for such purposes). But this is hearsay, I’m not a lawyer, and the State Department probably has a lot of leeway in deciding what is meant by “preponderance of evidence.”
And no, I don’t see any meaningful difference between the MPs’ oath of allegiance and the one the rest of us swore on becoming Canadian citizens, except our oath if anything is more extensive and firmer, IMO.
Yes, it would be harder to explain how you were forced to vote, in spite of how much as a Canadian you hated George Bush 😉
Sound to me like she hasn’t applied for a CLN otherwise she would have mentioned it. It’s pretty bold of her to say publicly that she is not a dual citizen when so many others like her who are deemed dual citizens have to hide.
… I should add to my previous comment, substantiated by a conversation I’ve had with a cross-border immigration lawyer as well as with a couple of people who have gone through the relinquishment process at a US consulate, that it probably would also be a deal-breaker for your relinquishment claim if, AFTER your potentially-relinquishing action, you applied to register a child of yours as a US citizen. Making such an application BEFORE your relinquishing action, along with any of the other listed actions (including filing tax returns to the IRS!), definitely does NOT count against your claim. But making such an application AFTERWARDS would be a clear indication you still were exercising rights of a US citizen, and in that case I think your only option would be renunciation (but again, I’m not a lawyer nor a US State Department official so don’t take my word for it).
How old is Elizabeth May? She said she’s been a Canadian since 1978. Was she a minor when she became Canadian?
Is this the opinion Elizabeth May responded to?
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/feb-12-citizenship-for-sale-and-other-letters-to-the-editor/article16809350/
@OMGhe’sstillanamerican,
According to Wikipedia: Elizabeth was born in 1954. Came to Canada in 1972. Citizen since 1978.
@pacifica777 thanks. So she has a solid case for relinquishment unless she did something between 1978 and now which caused her to reclaim her US citizenship. I don’t know why she didn’t claim simple relinquishment instead of complicating it with how she’s an MP etc.
So, according to Ms. May, giving her oath to Canada (the Queen actually) is all it takes for her to be Canadian only (and I agreed with that) but even though I (Canadian since birth) gave no oath whatsoever to the USA I am still, according to IRS-think, some sort of weird hybrid called a Canadian/USPerson (with EMphasis on the USPerson part) and expected to serve two tax masters — IRS first and CRA/IRS second. All of this because of a kryptonite card snafu. Cripes! I want a retroactive oath-out too. Let it be my first wail as a baby born on Canadian soil to my Canadian parents. I distinctly remember that wail meaning I was swearing my allegiance to the King and Canada.
BTW, Ms. May is Elizabeth not Elisabeth. Could someone correct the post title?
@em,
I think I heard that first wail as your allegiance to the King and Canada — and I wasn’t even here yet. I heard my son’s first wail of allegiance to the Queen as well.
Elizabeth May is exactly right. The right to change citizenship belongs to the person and is an unalienable and fundamental right. She doesn’t need a CLN to maintain her Canadian only citizenship, only to prove to the US and its minions (i.e, the US banks and the CRA). But she is not a dual citizen. Bravo!!!
@ calgary411
With you as my witness, I am a Canadian only too — just like Ms. May. Good to know my wail reached all the way to the USA. Likewise I will happily testify for your son. As I was living in Calgary at that time, his wail came through loud and clear. 🙂
And to reinforce Petros’ point that Ms. May is NOT a dual citizen, even though she doesn’t have a CLN —
The ONLY one of the seven listed expatriating acts in 8USC1241 in which there is ANY mention by Congress’ law regarding State Department forms and procedures, is renunciation (which has always required an oath taken before a US consular officer outside the US). There is NO mention of CLNs or forms or anything for the other six actions listed, including a foreign naturalization oath. Obviously, to GET a CLN as a document to present to your FFI under FATCA, or at the US border to get in with a foreign passport showing US birthplace (if they ever start enforcing that as a requirement), you’ll have to go through forms and hoops TO GET THE CERTIFICATE. But that doesn’t change the legal fact that under US law, if you committed any of the other six acts voluntarily and intending to relinquish your US citizenship, you DID in fact AT THAT MOMENT lose your US citizenship. The rest is paperwork to “certify” reality.
That’s the legal theory. Whether that enables you to avoid having your Canadian bank and then CRA forward all your private financial account info to IRS, is another story sadly … but that issue arises because of the craven submission by our banks and our own government to an unjust tax law which arguably (and IMO unquestionably) contravenes or illegally tries to super-cede US citizenship law.
Lots of potentially lucrative fun for squads of lawyers, here …
Ms. May:
A million of us took the Citizenship Oath but not the MP oath. Does the first one count?
Acts of renunciation
Re Citizenship For Sale (letters – Feb. 12):
I am not a dual citizen. I am a Canadian citizen and have been since 1978. Any doubt about citizenship is resolved in swearing the oath to Her Majesty the Queen in becoming a Member of Parliament. The U.S. accepts such acts as renunciation, lest there be any doubt.
Elizabeth May, O.C., M.P., Sidney, B.C.
—————————————————————-
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/02/15/elisabeth-may-citizenship/
I have no idea why she cites the oath she made on taking her seat as an MP. The wording of that oath is substantially the same as the citizenship oath.
Oath on taking office as MP:
I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth the Second, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors. So help me God.
Citizenship oath:
I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.
I left this out
Sent to Elizabeth.May@parl.gc.ca
@ Joe Smith
The only relevant difference I can see between the two oaths is the “So help me God.” Maybe Ms. May cites this one for its greater presumed talismanic powers. Since God is constantly ordered by US Presidents to bless the United States of America I guess she figures she needs all the help she can get. It’s painfully obvious that the Queen is not about to wade-in to save us so one needs to choose their figureheads wisely.
On a side note, it is also interesting that naturalized Canadian citizens bear these additional responsibilities which MP’s apparently get a free-pass on:
“…and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen.”
This might explain how the Conservatives figure they can get away with their FATCA IGA since they are already held to a much lower law-abiding and patriotic standard than the naturalized citizens they theoretically still represent.
One more case of personal wishes vs US policy. (Let the two fight it out to the death in the colosseum – and guess which wins.) Rant till kingdom come, wish yourself silly, all that counts is how the US government views you. Direct evidence seen today from bowel of beast (sorry, no sources) indicates that US policy is hardening into this: If you entered the world on US soil and you do not have a CLN, you are a US person. Period. What you think, wish, feel, hope, fear, dread, cannot stand … does not matter. Sauve qui peut. Of course, the core issue is extent of US jurisdiction, not what they decide to think. For them to attempt to take action beyond their own borders is both ridiculous and traditional realpolitik offensive.
The bank will still want to see a CLN to cover its own ass.
Joe Blow – Sorry. CLN is not enough.
The biggest word in the Canada-US FATCA agreement section II.B.4 is and. See it below brought out with capitalization and bolding (not in original).
4. Notwithstanding a finding of U.S. indicia under subparagraph B(1) of this section, a Reporting Canadian Financial Institution is not required to treat an account as a U.S. Reportable Account if:
a) Where the Account Holder information unambiguously indicates a U.S. place of birth, the Reporting Canadian Financial Institution obtains, or has previously reviewed and maintains a record of:
(1) A self-certification that the Account Holder is neither a U.S. citizen nor a U.S. resident for tax purposes (which may be on an IRS Form W-8 or other similar agreed form);
(2) A non-U.S. passport or other government-issued identification evidencing the Account Holder’s citizenship or nationality in a country other than the United States; AND
(3) A copy of the Account Holder’s Certificate of Loss of Nationality of the United States or a reasonable explanation of:
(a) The reason the Account Holder does not have such a certificate despite relinquishing U.S. citizenship; or
(b) The reason the Account Holder did not obtain U.S. citizenship at birth.
I wonder what excuses the bank will accept for not having a CLN? It’s in the mail? The dog ate it?
It appears you (Elizabeth May) are a US Citizen unless the USA tells you different. Then you need a CLN to prove it. The USA is calling the shots here now.
http://www.americanlaw.com/dualcit.html
If being an MP is the same as “a policy level position in a foreign state” then she might have lost her citizenship when she became an MP.