Posted on May 2, 2014 by Petros Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 72 Comments Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:Like Loading...
Kuenzi, mutual fund filing time equals 35 hours per year.
Cullen: RESP TFSA considered foreign trusts
personal residence easy to exceed capital gains threshold
US estate tax is not compatible with other countries
Obamacare tax on onvestment income with income as low as 125,000 a true double taxation
You just watch.. I bet Mr. Rankin blows the whistle on Fatca loud! He would likely appear at our protest if we organize one….
Em @ Husky236
“In regard to the RRSP, is Hodgen’s suggestion to just begin filing 8891 forms, and not filling past few years 8891s with 1040x amends?”
Umm, I think so If you take Petros’s hasty post to read: “RRSP leaving your RRSP off the form is a treaty election. A win by omission. Just comply going forward 8891.”
@NativeCanadian: Murray Rankin and Craig Scott of the NDP went out and talked to some of the protestors in Ottawa last year.
@Blaze, yes, I was there when they came over to speak with us.
@NativeCanadian, the way this is going down, I think we need one, and soon, but if we cannot go a lot bigger than last time, we may as well just stay home.
You have my full support and participation for any live protest. For the record, I think Mr Rankin might just become a Canadian “Hero” for his role in saving Canadian rights and sovereignty. I fully believe that will happen once enough people see this attack from the USA for what it is…..
If a protest is set up, I will go to every single NATIVE website, newspaper and radio station to advertise for support as this fully affects Native peoples of Canada.
I asked Michael Kirsch, the proponent of US Citizenship-Based Taxation, why the US thought it had the right to transfer wealth from other countries to the US by taxing its citizens who are residents of those other countries. His answer was basically that the US gives foreign tax credits for “the first bite” (up to a maximum amount) for taxes US citizens pay to the countries in which they reside. He ducked the question as it applies to taxes paid to the US for amounts in excess of the foreign credits, or for capital gains occurring outside the US.
I found his answer quite unsatisfactory. So at the lunch break I pursued the question with him. The most he could come up with to counter the wealth transfer objection to CBT was to say that many people go to the US from poor countries and send money earned in the US back to their families in their countries of origin, thus transferring wealth out of the US. Of course I objected to seeing such voluntary transfer as a fair parallel to wealth transfer due to mandatory CBT.
Finally, I mentioned that I thought other governments, such as Canada’s, should object to US CBT over the wealth-extraction issue. He replied that from what he knew, such objections had been raised in US tax treaty negotiations with other countries, but the US had always dismissed those objections.
My conclusion: The US will continue to impose CBT on residents of other countries as long as its financial power enables it to do so.
The US is actually very conservative politically at the national level. I agree they will never remove CBT (takes one to know one).
“Kirsch: Reed amendment not justified. Voluntariness of citizenship must be respected. Name and shame list is wrong. It does not respect the voluntary aspect of US citizenship.” I only had one can of Granville Island beer yesterday to celebrate being on the name and shame list– I guess was the one who made it larger than 1000. I am a proud Canadian.
@AnonAnon – What is even more appalling about Michael’s answer is the ‘tax credits’ don’t apply to pension payment as the USG classifies these as ‘passive income,’ the same as interest income from a bank.
So there you are living in a foreign country, earned every cent there, and the USG expects you to do two tax filings, one for your local government and one for the IRS. If for some reason you owe zero to your local government, and the IRS shows you that you owe them, what on Earth do you receive for this tax payment? No Medicare, No Elderly Services etch, these are all paid for by the ‘local’ government. So if you were to pay the IRS it represents a ‘tax grab’ from the US with nothing in return.
The USG can stick that programme.
Michael Kirsch is not bad. He knows the subject fully, is consistent and logical, recognizes the problems and proposes solutions. I disagree with his idea of citizenship as membership in a community, but I respect his opinion. I wonder what he would think of the possibility of reacquiring citizenship (or a green card) for former citizens by request, like many countries allow. With that possibility, plus all of his other suggestions, I think CBT would be tolerable.
Meanwhile, congressmen have no idea what they’re doing, are inconsistent and illogical, don’t recognize the problems and don’t even care to read the proposals. I can’t respect their opinion because I don’t think they have one. They just do things haphazardly. I wish they had a fraction of Kirsch’s intelligence, honesty and sympathy.
“Meanwhile, congressmen have no idea what they’re doing, are inconsistent and illogical, don’t recognize the problems and don’t even care to read the proposals. I can’t respect their opinion because I don’t think they have one. They just do things haphazardly. I wish they had a fraction of Kirsch’s intelligence, honesty and sympathy.”
It would appear that those of us who watched the Finance Committee hearing yesterday and have had less than satisfactory feedback from our MPs feel much the same about parliament as you do about Congress and congressmen. What the hell do they think they are there for anyway?
Surely it is to do their job which requires educating themselves about the issues and doing what they can to effect responsible and compassionate government for the people who elected them.
I hope Rankin comes out of there like a pit-bull. He’s our most informed MP, no doubt, and I’m grateful to him for caring enough to use this opportunity to further educate himself.
Thanks for doing this, so I could catch up on the commentary of what was being said. Good to follow, even from Sydney, Australia.
Don’t know if this has been posted yet:
Nathan Cullen tells Conservatives to slow their roll on FATCA today:
@Bubblebustin asked on another thread: “Who won the debate?”
After the speakers had debated the issue, I put the following formal motion to the audience for a vote:
“Be it resolved that citizenship based taxation should remain the general rule for the United States and NOT be replaced with residence based taxation.
The motion was defeated.
(Tricia has the numbers.)
I am not surprised that RBT prevailed in a vote.
For me, its kind of like debating:
“Polio Vaccination – good idea or bad idea?”
I don’t think there were very many Jenny McCarthy types in the audience, were there.
The numbers were:
The numbers do not represent everyone who was in the room and due to the fact that the person who voted “for” had asked a question which indicated non-acceptance of CBT, it was discussed that this person did not understand the wording of the motion. 😉
But if the vote were taken among homelanders, the results would probably be much different with the high percentage of “don’t let the door hit you in the ass” attitudes still among the homeland population.
Pingback: Cook v. Tait 22 – Kirsch Schneider – Toronto – Citizenship taxation debate | U.S. Persons Abroad – Members of a Unique Tax, Form and Penalty Club