Confirming reports passed on by commenters at the Isaac Brock Society, DiploPundit points to a State Department interim rule just placed on public inspection for printing in tomorrow’s Federal Register, which raises the fee for renunciation of U.S. citizenship (but apparently not relinquishment) to US$2,350, more than twenty times the average level in other high-income countries. As they state:
[D]emand for the service has increased dramatically, consuming far more consular officer time and resources, as reflected in the 2012 Overseas Time Survey and increased workload data. Because the Department believes there is no public benefit or other reason for setting this fee below cost, the Department is increasing this fee to reflect the full cost of providing the service. Therefore the increased fee reflects both the increased cost of the provision of service as well as the determination to now charge the full cost.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality”, while the Expatriation Act of 1868 says that renunciation of citizenship is “a natural and inherent right of all people” and that “any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officers of this government which restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is hereby declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of this government”.
As of press time, the State Department has not yet commented on whether it sees “public benefit” in other human rights such as freedom of election or freedom of marriage, or whether anyone seriously believes that charging people a month’s salary to get a ballot paper or a marriage certificate would not restrict or impair those rights.
Practical effects
Because this fee hike apparently does not apply to relinquishments, ex-Americans who naturalise in most other countries will still be able to obtain a Certificate of Loss of Nationality from the U.S. government for no more than the cost of taking a day off work and driving or flying halfway across the country to the nearest consulate which isn’t backed up for months with renunciation appointments. (“Most other countries” means those which allow dual citizenship, like Canada and France, or those which forbid dual citizenship but allow new citizens to submit proof of loss of their former citizenship after the naturalisation ceremony, like Japan.)
However, Americans seeking to naturalise in countries which require new citizens to give up their former citizenship before the naturalisation ceremony, like Taiwan, or those who have been foreign citizens for decades or all their lives and never exercised any benefits of U.S. citizenship but now need to acquire a formal CLN (for example because their bank will discriminate against them if they don’t have one), will feel the full impact of the new fee hike, and also have to wait for months or even longer than a year for the State Department to give them a CLN before they can get on with their lives.
What changed?
The State Department has always claimed that processing renunciations has a high cost, but four years ago when they first introduced the renunciation fee, they at least pretended to take a very different attitude to the cost:
The CoSS demonstrated that documenting a U.S. citizen’s renunciation of citizenship is extremely costly, requiring American consular officers overseas to spend substantial amounts of time to accept, process, and adjudicate cases. A new fee of $450 will be established to help defray a portion of the total cost to the U.S. Government of documenting the renunciation of citizenship. While the Department decided to set the fee at $450, this fee represents less than 25 percent of the cost to the U.S. Government. The Department has determined that it must recoup at least a portion of its costs of providing this very costly service but set the fee lower than the cost of service in order to lessen the impact on those who need this service and not discourage the utilization of the service, a development the Department feels would be detrimental to national interests. See 31 U.S.C. 9701(b)(2).
They also note the per-hour cost they use to calculate the new fee:
The Department previously charged a consular time fee of $231 per hour, per employee. This fee is charged when indicated on the Schedule of Fees or when services are performed away from the office or outside regular business hours. The CoSM estimated that the hourly consular time charge is now lower. Accordingly, the Department is lowering this fee to $135 per hour.
This implies that they take about seventeen employee-hours to process each renunciation (assuming that none of the fee goes to other expenses such as travel or printing). Oddly enough, in their 2012 Paperwork Reduction Act filings on Form DS-4079 (which is filled out by both renunciants and relinquishers), the State Department indicated that the cost for processing the form was just $33 per hour. I don’t understand how these two estimates relate to each other.
To explain the new fee hike, the State Department point to procedures (such as the pointless and repetitive double in-person appointment system) which are required neither by the Immigration and Nationality Act nor the Foreign Affairs Manual, nor used by any other countries:
For example, consular officers must confirm that the potential renunciant fully understands the consequences of renunciation, including losing the right to reside in the United States without documentation as an alien. Other steps include verifying that the renunciant is a U.S. citizen, conducting a minimum of two intensive interviews with the potential renunciant, and reviewing at least three consular systems before administering the oath of renunciation. The final approval of the loss of nationality must be done by law within the Directorate of Overseas Citizens Services in Washington, D.C., after which the case is returned to the consular officer overseas for final delivery of the Certificate of Loss of Nationality to the renunciant. These steps further add to the time and labor that must be involved in the process.
As demonstrated by the experience of other countries, the State Department could greatly lower their costs by simplifying their procedures, but apparently such a common-sense step has not occurred to them.
But look on the bright side! 31 USC § 9701 says that “[e]ach charge shall be … based on … (A) the costs to the Government; (B) the value of the service or thing to the recipient; (C) public policy or interest served; and (D) other relevant facts.” Given how valuable a CLN has become these days, imagine how high a fee they could charge for it if they set the price based on its value.
Timeline for fee hike and comments period
The State Department ends with an excuse for why they can’t be bothered to tell us about the fee hike more than two weeks in advance, while keeping renunciants waiting for dozens of times that long to get the CLNs in the first place:
The Department intends to implement this interim final rule, and initiate collection of the fees set forth herein, effective 15 days after publication of this rule in the Federal Register …. The Department is publishing this rule as an interim final rule, with a 60-day provision for post promulgation comments and with an effective date less than 30 days from the date of publication, based on the “good cause” exceptions set forth at 5 U.S.C. 553(b)(3)(B) and 553(d)(3). Delaying implementation of this rule would be contrary to the public interest because the fees in this rule fund consular services that are critical to national security, including screening visa applicants.
You have until 4 October to submit a written comment on this rule. I will update this post with a link to the docket page on Regulations.gov once the fee hike is officially published.
@Dash1729 – First EU law is like Federal law, it’s superior to each Member States national laws.
They way I see this in 2 years each member state will have to incorporate into their national law.
This raises an interesting point. If an IGA was struck down, the banks by this law would still have to provide a bank account to an EU citizen living anywhere in the EU.
This Directive looks like to have a number of intents:
Guarantee access to the banking system regardless of your financial situation
Encourage EU wide retail banking (or at least Eurozone) like US or Canada.
At present retail banking in the Eurozone tends to be on a country by country basis.
I guess I’ll have to keep hiding my wife and myself from the Green Police sent by the Nazis(US government AND Canadian government) This is getting to the real WAR stage and Civil disobedience stage very quickly!
Can we change Obamas name to Alois Schicklegruber?
Me too, Mettleman! As much as I’d like to meet you in person, it has to be more than just the two of us though!
We should maybe consider a same-day cross-country effort?
Where’s WhiteKat been.
@Verity:
The US Consulate confirmed to me that the fee one is charged is the fee that is in place when you go for your appointment, not when you book it. So I’m afraid you (and I) will both be paying the price that our US masters have placed on purchasing our freedom.
@bubblebustin
I have it on good authority that WhiteKat is safe and well and will rejoin us shortly!
Good Evening All,
Does any one have any idea if there is a consul that has a really short lead time? I am wondering if it is possible to get to some far reaching consul that may have a short time in order to save some money before this new charges come to pass. I would way rather give some of my hard earned money if I have to spend it to an airline and hotel then to these clowns in Washington.
I have not been following it too closely to wait lines other then Toronto saying that they are booking into January.
Cheers,
krackerjack121
Thanks, Tricia. I miss our spunky WhiteKat.
So who was it that said, “Let my People go?” I don’t recall that it required a large exit fee or tax, but did take 10 plagues to shake the Pharaoh loose. 🙂
krackerjack121,
Good luck with that — who knows you may be lucky if you start calling or sending emails to all of the U.S. Consulates of the world right now. We don’t have any such information. Most U.S. Consulates have a wait list of some length.
I don’t know where you’re from, but a better use of your $2,350 might now be the Canadian litigation which, if successful, may be the impetus for other countries to do the same. Please consider donating and joining the fight for some kind of justice in Canada and, ultimately, other countries around the world. Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty: http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/. Thanks if you can and will.
FATCAnatics on a mission…
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/FATCAnatic.jpg
In the past I have heard Taipei, Taiwan can do renouncements on really short notice.
@Just Me:
What, you never read the Bible story about how the Israelites spent 40 years in the desert memorising the Egyptian Internal Revenue Code from the 77,000 stone tablets that Moses brought down from Mount Sinai so that they could comply with their obligations as Egyptian Persons while temporarily abiding in the Promised Land?
Don’t worry, the Presbyterian Church USA read the story for you and wants to apply its message for modern times:
http://pc-biz.org/PC-Biz.WebApp_deploy/%28S%283502ffivihwvy1izhaly2rpl%29%29/IOBView.aspx?m=ro&id=4857
And what could be worse than “encouraging the movement of … citizens to foreign jurisdictions”? That’s why PCUSA is known for its strong stance against immigrants to the U.S., telling them all to go back to where they came from, right?
Oh wait …
http://oga.pcusa.org/section/mid-council-ministries/immigration/policy-immigration/
Mexico or Central America maybe? Is there a consulate in Bermuda?
Quebec City and Montreal? We haven’t really heard from people from Quebec much, have we?
Both kneeslappers, Just Me and Eric 🙂 thanks for the very needed laugh!
Hmmm, I think I will have to do some homework this weekend. And see where in the world I might be able to spend a day and then get back home to do that annoying called work that so I can pay for it. Good thing I have a mastercard. You never have to pay those back, right?
krackerjack121
Well…the US Government can just kiss my @$$. If I have to save up $2350.00 to have my wife expatriate…then we can give them the middle finger and tell them we’re not stepping foot in the United States…PERIOD.
@krackerjack121 — also consider Halifax and Caribbean islands. Some Islands have US embassies. Just make sure you get there soon enough so they give you time to “reflect” before September 12. Contact them for waiting times.
Here is a full list.. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_diplomatic_missions_of_the_United_States
I think that IBS needs to create a thread on relinquishing and the various ways you can do it. Such as municipal employment or accepting a commission with the Cadet Forces. Maybe linking to part time government employment web pages.
I don’t care what they give as an excuse to justify this increase. Of the 11 fees listed, 6 have gone down. And those that have increased only do so by a few dollars.
It’s obviously PUNITIVE.
@The Mom
Next available date in Montreal is October 17th. Uder 2 months for an appointment, but of no use now. I don’t think it’s possible to book appointments for Quebec City.
@LTR, it is punative. Thats why our own countries need to defend their Citizens of which we are!!
The Government of Canada needs to protect ALL Canadian Citizens from ANY foreign power.
And now the Chinese-language press are picking up the fees story & running with it
http://world.people.com.cn/n/2014/0829/c1002-25566323.html
Wheww… looks like I dodged a couple of bullets:
– Citizenship paperwork here was approved just a few days ago
– I never registered the kiddos. The chance of me doing that now are slim to never, probably never.
I just have the feeling this is the final “jab” they wish to inflict out of spite.
Chances are if you live permanently overseas, you are:
1) Happier living overseas than you are living in the USofA
I actually think this envy is the real driving force behind these *ocked up laws. Too bad most REAL resident Americans are too ******** stupid to realize that we aren’t really sipping champagne and and being served grapes 24/7.
2) Probably more productive than the leeches on welfare back in the USofA
I saw way too much of this when I went back there. I saw illegals getting food stamps, people working off the books to qualify for Medicaid, states finally getting around to prohibiting the use of the food stamp card to buy rims for cars, manicures, alcohol, cell phones, or use at casinos!! WTF is that!
And they want to give us a hard time if we want to leave!!