Brockers,
The recent growth in posting frequency on IBS is a wonderful thing to be sure; it means more people are learning about us and the issues we face. But unfortunately, as the number of threads increases with time, it’s easier and easier to miss important news.
With the approval of site management (we’ve been discussing this in e-mail), I propose to designate this the “official”, or “definitive” thread for following news related to Sens. Casey, Schumer and Reed’s “Ex-PATRIOT” legislation proposal, which if passed would ban covered expatriates from ever re-entering the United States for any reason.
The whole point is that you can SUBSCRIBE to this thread, and then if everyone agrees to post new news information, links, etc. relating to this issue HERE, then everyone already subscribed will be able to follow it. In contrast, when you post news to a NEW thread, it’s increasingly likely that someone will miss it because we have so many new threads these days. For people with no connection to Canada, it’s very hard to follow all the new threads.
So if you are interested in EX-PATRIOT:
– Please subscribe to this thread so you can stay informed
– When you have new information on the issue, please post it HERE rather than creating a new thread
– Please keep this thread focused on news and new developments. If you wish to editorialize on your own views about the absurdity of this legislation, please do that elsewhere so that people who subscribed just to stay in touch with news developments can do so.
I encourage others to follow this format and create more “DEFINITIVE” news and information threads to make it easy for Brockers to share and follow news relating to the topics that interest them most.
To kick this thread off, I will briefly describe the status of this issue as I understand it. If I get anything wrong I’m sure someone will correct me. If you learn NEW information, please post it HERE as a reply to this thread so others subscribed can follow the issue.
—
Senators Casey, Schumer, and Reed (not to be confused with Reid) have for several years been trying their best to push through legislation that would ‘punish’ covered expatriates by both barring them from ever re-entering the USA for any reason, and also imposing punitive taxes on any investments they might have in the USA. These actions clearly undermine the best interests of the American People, but these senators seem to have had success selling themselves as protectors of the little guy who are bringing justice to evil tax cheats. Absurd or not, they are serious about this.
Efforts to push through EX-PATRIOT as a standalone bill failed miserably, probably because other senators were able to recognize what a stupid idea the bill was. Undeterred, the “three amigos” (Casey, Schumer, Reed) changed strategy and began looking for much larger bills they could “slip” the EX-PATRIOT language into. They almost succeeded in getting the language inserted into the 2013 Immigration Reform bill, but thankfully the bill moved forward in the legislative process before the three amigos could amend it to include the EX-PATRIOT language. However, most observers believe they have not given up, and will look for new opportunities to advance their legislative goals.
As of March 2014, I am not aware of any post-Immigration bill attempt to “sneak” this language into any other pending legislation. But I fear it’s coming, and when it does we need to be diligent in quickly putting the word out.
It behooves all of us to watch this closely, and post links to any new developments on the issue here in this thread. This issue isn’t dead, and when it resurfaces we need to watch it closely!
Thanks to all for following and participating in this thread. And just in case it appears that I’m “taking it upon myself” to set policy here at IBS, please know that I coordinated and received approval for this “Definitive news thread” format from site management before posting. I encourage others to post similar threads for other issues they follow passionately.
PxP
I subscribe
Link to Wikipedia article on Ex-PATRIOT below. It’s a useful backgrounder, with onward links to other associated articles and commentary.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ex-PATRIOT_Act
I presume to “subscribe” it would be to check “Notify me of follow-up comments by email” rather than to the whole isaacbrocksociety blog, which is the “subscribe”? As an administrator I should know, but I guess I don’t. Thanks.
Thanks for bringing this up Calgary.
To be clear, posting a note saying “I want to subscribe” does nothing. You have to subscribe yourself, and that can be achieved by posting a reply here AFTER checking the “Notify me of follow-up comments by e-mail” checkbox below the edit window.
What would be much better would be if there is a way for people to subscribe without having to post a reply in order to do so. That would eliminate the need for subscribers to receive notifications when someone else subscribes to the thread. But I’m afraid I don’t know how to do that. If someone else does, please post instructions here.
Thanks,
PxP
I’d like to ask that the term “non-resident U.S. citizen” or “non-resident citizen” be used, rather than the very loaded term “ex-patriot”. Particularly because our strongest argument in this fight against CBT, FBAR and FATCA is our Constitutional rights as U.S. citizens, I think it is in the best interests of us all to not abandon presenting ourselves as U.S citizens (even while ma y of us are also Canadian citizens). From a personal taste point of view, I’ve never liked the trm “ex-patriot” since I first heard it when I was a child. The term presumes that someone know longer loves their country of origin, in which they still hold citizenship, simply because the are not living there. My mother was born and raised in Toronto and worked for the British Air Command in Washington D.C. during WWII (with top secret clearance). She married my American father and spent the remainder of her life living in the US> and raising her children there, while never renouncing her Canadian citizenship. She raised her children to be proud of Canada and brught us here often. I live here now. My mother was not an “ex-patriot” and neither am I.
Susan, thank you for your good intentions, but I think you badly misunderstand the issue.
Nobody is promoting the use of the word Expatriate. We’re talking EX-PATRIOT, which is an acronym for proposed legislation that affects non-citizens who have relinquished or renounced, i.e. expatriates. Your sentiments about ‘representing ourselves as citizens’ make no sense when the topic under discussion is EX-PATRIOT, a bill that specifically targets FORMER citizens.
PxP
Here is the message received:
Can anyone tell if if the full language of this “Ex-Patriot” legislation is available anywhere online? WHAT does the legislation mean–how does it define–“uncovered”? Thanks.
Sorry, Imeant to ask “WHAT does the legislation mean by ‘covered'”? Thanks
To assure this is clear, here are some definitions:
Expatriate (used correctly) Under U.S. Law, INA 357(a) defines the word “expatriate” to mean a person who was formerly a U.S. citizen, but who lost their citizenship by renouncing, relinquishing, or being convicted of treason.
“Ex-Pat” or “Expatriate” (common usage) The vast majority of people describing themselves as “expats” are actually American Citizens living abroad. This usage is inconsistent with the legal definition of the term, but extremely common just the same.
EX-PATRIOT Acronym for “Expatriation Prevention by Abolishing Tax-Related Incentives for Offshore Tenancy”, a legislative proposal that has several times been put forth (and so far failed to pass) by Senators Schumer, Casey and Reed. The most stringent definition of the term EX-PATRIOT is a reference to a specific bill that was proposed and defeated in 2012, but in common usage the term refers to that bill and all subsequent attempts by these senators to get the same language included in other legislative bills.
Hope this helps
PxP
See this Moodys blog entry: http://www.moodysgartner.com/renouncing-your-us-citizenship-new-law-may-keep-you-out-forever/
@Susan Ouderkirk
The exact text of the law is on pages S4429 and S4430, linked from here. Look for SA 1252 on page S4429. It defines a ‘specified’ expat as one ‘covered’ under 877A, so income and asset tests with which we’re already familiar.
I found a link to the full proposed legislation: https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/112/s3205/text
Folks, the whole point of this thread is to provide a mechanism to disseminate NEW information about this issue to subscribers. We have to tolerate “I’m subscribing” posts because apparently you have to post in order to subscribe. But please refrain from conducting a conversation here about the issue. By doing so, you are forcing those who subscribed to receive news posts to get an e-mail announcing your post.
@Susan Ouderkirk, please stop posting here and post your questions in one of the several threads on this site already established for that purpose.
Thanks,
PxP
Subscribing.
Ticking box.
I will NEVER set foot in America again. EVER.
But my heart goes out to you with ties.
Box Ticked
Thanks for the links. I’ll give you another reason why the bill went nowhere: it is laughably unworkable as drafted. Of course they may do a better job next time, but that draft at least is DOA. Malevolent and spiteful little lot of buggers aren’t they?
I am just glad I got out of this hellhole by renouncing. I might be able to give constructive comments in a few months. Why does not everybody renounce, it is very simple.
@kermitzii: “Why does not everybody renounce, it is very simple.”
In principle I agree with you but in practice it can be more difficult. Here’s an article that describes the trials and tribulations to obtain another citizenship, which is normally considered a prerequisite for renunciation. The first person interviewed summarizes it well: “To be naturalized in Switzerland is more difficult than to break free from slavery in Roman times.”
If interested, you might wish to read the story of the third person interviewed, “Hannah Bodner”, who arrived from Germany as a girl in 1993 and still hasn’t managed to obtain Swiss citizenship due to changing residence within the country:
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.derbund.ch%2Fbern%2Fkanton%2FWarum-sollen-nur-gute-Menschen-eingebuergert-werden%2Fstory%2F17150767
Then there can be the issue of the exit tax with its non-inflation indexed asset threshold.
@innocente
Now that was a rotten translation! LOL But there is a law in Switzerland that if you change cantons, your time living in Switzerland starts again from scratch – basically this is a law to hinder people with criminal records from moving around to avoid being detected. It is far less sinister than it seems. Also- the other people in the story were on some form of welfare- and Switzerland is careful about accepting people who come into the country to be taken care of by the taxpayers. I`d call that wise and not stupid
idea – there is such a thing called “welfare tourism” and many countries with social welfare are being stormed by people who come in, work for 3 years, and then put their feet up to exist on unemployment benefits. I personally know of a Liberian immigrant who was allowed in as a refugee and he had hepatitis- but the kind that can turn into rapid liver failure and this is what happened to him. He had ALL of his healthcare paid for by Switzerland- including waiting for a liver transplant they will also pay for. Thats hundred of thousands of dollars the taxpayer is taking over for him. So if Switzerland wants to be careful about who they let in- I agree with them. They should not be imposed upon to help more people than they can afford to help.
I’m in.
…And still waiting for my official expatriate status, by the way. Six months and counting, Last time I emailed the US consulate they didn’t even bother to reply.
FYI…
http://blogs.angloinfo.com/us-tax/2013/06/27/urgent-update-expatriates-banned-from-the-us-senators-reintroduce-taxpatriate-bill-into-homeland-security-bill/
My understanding is that the mid-2013 rumors about EX-PATRIOT being re-introduced into the “Homeland Security Bill” were unfounded, and that people saying that were confused and really meant to refer to the reintroduction of the language into the IMMIGRATION bill. That was in fact attempted, unsuccessfully.
If the three amigos have reintroduced the EX-PATRIOT language into any new bill still pending (i.e. their next attempt after the Immigration bill), I am unaware of that development.
PxP