If you look on Tax Analysts there is currently a pay walled article with this title under the Today’s News/International Tab. It is no joke.
If this is what I think it is it means WAR.
See also Jack Townsend, IRS CI Is Looking at Renunciations of Citizenship Just in Case (3/1/13)
Here’s Jack Townsend’s less than helpful comment:
http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.ca/2014/03/irs-ci-is-looking-at-renunciations-of.html
FWIW, the fe(de)ral government isn’t tooting their horn about this on the usual press release pages:
http://www.irs.gov/uac/IRS-Criminal-Investigation-Press-Releases-Calendar-Year-2014
http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/2014/February/
http://www.irs.gov/News-&-Events
So maybe for now we can hope this is a small-scale thing aimed at a few known targets whom the IRS already had their eyes on, rather than some giant shock-and-awe campaign pour encourager les autres
Badger wrote this on the renunciation thread:
“I’m not sure what the portent might be. If anyone here has access to the full text of the article they could read it and give us a precis, but Townsend already said it was non-specific, so there may be nothing useful there. And since the US government policy towards expats is dedicated to the adversarial and punitive, it could be that they are just using their usual threat and scare tactics, or that they are mortally offended by anyone who exercises our Universal Human Right http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/ to CHOOSE where to award our allegiance, and to cut away the last vestige of any externally imposed US relationship, or they think that somehow schools of millionaires and billionaires are renouncing rather than minnows and krill and amoebas.”
People ditching Murca in droves doesn’t look to good. Maybe the plan is to scare people out of renouncing and get those numbers down. I can hear the consulate officers now, “Sir, you do realize if you do this you’ll be put under scrutiny and a full investigation?.. this could lead to extradition, fines and imprisonment… are you sure you still want to sign?”. Or maybe so many are renouncing they can’t handle the back log or staffing, so the plan is a fear campaign to scare em away.
I am not going to worry about this and I don’t think anyone else should either, if possible. We are all too familiar with their persistence in trying to mislead in so many ways, to scare the daylights out of us with threats of fines, penalties, prosecution. It gets more and more ridiculous all the time.
It is still a fact that one can renounce and the only requirement to do so, is to do it with intent and acknowledgement of the consequences. You do your best at compliance (or not) and then dump it. They simply do not have the money or resources to come after everyone. The more they push, the more pushback they’ll get, guaranteed.
Classic American view. If the beatings aren’t working, the solution is more beatings.
Given the timing of this, I’d suspect that my US step-mother filed a complaint against me since she is seeking to disinherit her step children. If that’s the case, then I’d suggest that the Criminal Investigation Division contacts me directly so that we can clarify the matter and enable them to focus on real issues.
@Tim : I am curious to read the article mentioned by you at http://www.taxanalysts.com/. However,to read it I must be subscribed to the site and I see only log-in with user name+password,no way I know how to subscribe.Odd.
Maybe renouncing because of FATCA is a crime now?
I’m just wondering when I’ll come to this website in the near future and get one of those FBI notices that the site has been taken down. “This Site Has Been Seized”
You’re doing better than me then J.N. I can’t even get the link to work.
Simply sounds like scare tactics to me. Given that no one has to give a reason for renouncing they’re not going to find much. And anyway it’s not difficult to find one – after all the 8854 instructions say you’ve expatriated for tax purposes.
“Who Must File
You must file Form 8854 to:
Establish that you have expatriated for tax purposes;
or Comply with the annual information reporting requirements of section 6039G, if you are subject to tax under section 877.”
Sounds like Nazis to me. I can believe it if I want. That way I’m not going to be surprised. Seen it all before.
Lets not forget this juicy piece of history re Brown Harriman and Prescott Bush
How Bush’s grandfather helped Hitler’s rise to power
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar
Of course for the Canadian government to allow the US to destroy its tax base, let its honest citizens be terrorized by a criminal bankrupt bunch of brown shirted thugs from down south and also rights of Canadians and Americans is simply laughable. Is Harper 100% drugged up insane?
If any of this comes true Canada will cease functioning …..hmmmm how would I personally think about that? Not much, Canadians pretty much, as a whole, deserve to lose their freedoms as we are because they are too busy in the malls and talking about real estate at parties. Well try to tell them the whole system is about to come crashing down in a rehash of Hitlers Europe and let them laugh. We actually win even if we lose simply because we are informed. The only shock and awe is going to be the look on their faces as they too face a future of sheer terrorism by the US. It will take time but people will soon realize that their lives will never be the same.
‘First they ignore you. Then they laugh at you. Then they attack you. Then you win.’ – Mohandas Gandhi (actually he never said this but it sounds cool)
Required reading: And they Thought they were Free
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
10 Reasons America Will Be Judged as the Most Brutal Empire in History
http://www.infowars.com/10-reasons-america-will-be-judged-as-the-most-brutal-empire-in-history/
These blowhard US Senators didn’t count on people on people’s determination to commit citizenship suicide and renounce. What’s going to happen when farewell f*ck offs to the US leaps to 10,00+ in 2014? The trickle starts looking more like a flood?
REPEAT; PLEASE READ
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/511928.html
I agree with Tricia, I’m not going to worry about it. In a way I’m glad they are looking at these and then they can see it’s mostly minnows they put in an impossible situation. Mostly long term expat families.
They left most people little choice and do not care about us. Let them “look” I’m moving on with my life. I am not American anymore and I had a right to relinquish my citizenship. I did it legally and owed them nothing. I did it to protect my family. It’s as simple as that.
All I can say is “ditto atticusincanada”. Those are exactly my thoughts.
Could somebody (Just Me are you reading) email the author Jaime Arora and ask:
1. The reason for that specific title to the article; and
2. For a bit more information.
If this is true, it is wonderful news because it represents the next stop toward reaching the final result:
That is the fall of CBT.
The USG government reminds of a five year old in a playground that is so obnoxious that he/she can’t find a playmate. The solution: call the school principal and try to get the other kids to play with me. (They don’t want to play with the particular five year old because the other kids bring toys to the playground and she brings forms.)
As Nina Olsen has said, tax compliance for U.S. citizens abroad is pretty much impossible. At the moment some are trying to be compliant (haven’t yet figured out they won’t be able to do it) and some are not. With FATCA more will try to be compliant and realize they can’t. Once people have resigned themselves to the fact that compliance is impossible two things will accelerate:
First, the renunciations will go off the charts.
Second, people will give up trying to comply.
That’s where we are going. It’s too bad that the US Gov can’t understand this.
I guess there is:
Dumb, dumber and guess who …
The IRS is a rogue agency and a criminal organization. It is not surprising that they would start “criminal” investigations into people exercising their fundamental right to expatriate. But to put it in terms that can express the level of atrocity of human rights: What would you say if the Bush administration had launched an criminal investigation of black people who were planning to vote for Obama? Voting is a fundamental right. So investigating people who vote would be a human rights breech. It is no less with renunciation/relinquishment of citizenship.
Ditto, @Atticus! Very confusing and bittersweet, all that I have had to give up in order to lead a normal life…
I’ll still admittedly be scared until all my statutes of limitations have closed though…who’s to say they won’t want to use reprisals even on a few token minnows to put the fear of God into people to put them off renouncing?? I suspect that many will no longer bother and that those who’ve never filed May choose just to stay under the radar rather than start filing…it will be hardest for those already in the system who may have had to amend tax returns and wound up owing substantial tax, such as from holding PFICs or from capital gains from selling one’s principle residence. They’re already in the system and renouncing could well raise red flags and make them targets.
A while ago, I wrote about somebody who I was told just renounced and is not doing anything about back taxes. They just renounced and said to themselves: “I`m outa here.” Period. I asked folks here what would happen to them? I was told they would be seen as covered and treated accordingly.
Maybe these are the people who the IRS wants to investigate? Maybe there are more than just the ones I was told about? Because I somehow doubt that they are going to go back to Saverin and TIna Turner and revoke their CLNs?
Perhaps they want to investigate my Fifth Amendment filings: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/04/29/form-8854-fbar-and-the-fifth-amendment/
I’m not scared. I did everything right and would welcome an investigator to speak with me. My interactions with IRS were pleasant and I was even told by one agent “this is wrong, what is happening to you, this is just wrong.” I really appreciated her blunt honesty. Both of us realized there was nothing to be done about it as the U.S. laws were going to proceed as is despite Nina Olsen pointing out the many problems.
What I dislike is that they are doing an investigation perhaps as a veiled threat to those getting in line now to renounce. Look, you’ve made it impossible mostly for minnow expats to continue their normal lives abroad and they cannot return home without a job and a place to live. You’ve refused to amend FATCA to make it workable for these people to retain their citizenship. You’ve left them no choice in the matter and hopefully any investigation will reveal these facts. Nobody relinquished or renounced lightly, most would have done it before if they had known this was coming at them. They didn’t do it before because they were law abiding Americans abroad who formerly were positive representatives of the U.S. If they cannot see that, then it’s their problem and to their own detriment.
What puzzles me is the flat refusal to do some amending to FATCA and the flat denial that innocent people are being driven to such a drastic decision and are being harmed by all this. All it would take is a simple amendment and it would NOT deter them in any way from getting those people who tried to off shore purposely to hide money such as those in the UBS scandal. The mistake here is lumping in every expat family with those criminals and all that is needed is to admit that and fix it. Sadly, I think they are still looking for angles that support their position of not changing a single thing. They would look much better in the eyes of the rest of the world if they would simply admit that there was collateral damage and unintended consequences and fix those issues. There’s nothing hard about that and yet the chosen position is still being defended.
@Polly, in previous years it was only the wealthy for the most part who gave up their citizenship and those people have always been used as examples. I recall though Terry Gilliam saying he did so when he realized anything he left to his British family would partly have to go to the U.S. and he didn’t want his family burdened with that.
God forbid they would admit that citizenship based taxation is the problem with all of this and what is wrong here. Instead it’s everyone else who is wrong and they are right. Maybe this investigation in future years will be helpful to point up the issues with CBT and what is indeed wrong with it.
This thread is a bit misleading…
“IRS starts Criminal Investigations of Renunciants and Relinquishers”
In no other information do i find the IRS pointing a finger at Relinguishers, as the only way to relinquish is to perform an act of expatriation. This in itself opens and closes the book on why one relinquished and therefore no further investigation(s) would be required.
Question — as I am not sure that this argument makes sense:
Is it correct that U.S. citizens do NOT have the right to renounce their citizenship if they believe that, because of crippling U.S. tax rules, they are FORCED to renounce (i.e., the act of renunciation is INVOLUNTARY).
The “Oath/Affirmation of Renunciation of Nationality of United States” requires that we HONESTLY affirm:
“I make this renunciation VOLUNTARILY and of MY OWN FREE WILL, FREE OF ANY DURESS AND UNDUE INFLUENCE.”
What is the legal level of Congressional threat required for “duress and undue influence”? One lawyer tells me that the bar for this is very high — but isn’t it that the person’s perception of the threat and the voluntary nature of the act are what count?
If the consular official is advised that “I love my country and am only renouncing because U.S. Congress is FORCING me and my family into bankruptcy if I remain a U.S. citizen—I am sorry to do this but I really have no choice.” will the oath of renunciation be approved by DOS?
Is this argument logical? Has DOS taken away our right to expatriate? I might speak to the DOS on this.
Not a surprise, especially considering Carl Levin’s demand on behalf of the Investigations Committee that FATCA information be available to law enforcenement and national security for investigation of money laundering, drug trafficking, terrorist financing and other crimes.
http://maplesandbox.ca/2013/carl-levin-fatca-for-law-enforcement-national-security/
While we don’t know what the article itself says, it makes me even more determined not to go anywhere near a US Consulate to confirm I relinquished 41 years ago.
I realize I am in a very different situation than almost everyone else. I have a signed copy of my citizenship oath, which contained an oath renouncing all other citizenship. If necessary, I can provide that to my bank as proof I am not a “US person.”
Renunciation of other citizenship was only a requirement in Canada until April, 1973. I just squeaked in three days before it changed. I never thought then that four decades later it would be my restraining order for my Canadian bank!!!