The exclusion of certain foreign-earned income (up to $95,100 in 2012) and housing benefits privileges income earned out of the country and encourages the movement of United States citizens to foreign jurisdictions.
1. With respect to tax evasion and fraud, work to maximize wealth and income transparency. The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and similar laws adopted by other countries, represents an important legislative step forward in requiring foreign financial institutions to report balances, financial activities, and transactions to a taxpayer’s home jurisdiction. Communions that recognize the fallen nature of humanity support transparent financial reporting. This transparency fosters equality and fairness, and helps address tax avoidance and fraud, including money laundering.
2. Work with international coalitions and communions to oppose “race to the bottom” policies enacted by states and countries that seek to attract business investment and wealthy depositors by assessing extremely low tax rates and creating secrecy jurisdictions. These policies hurt economic competition by disadvantaging companies that do not engage in tax avoidance strategies and reduce government revenues needed for domestic social and economic development.
Presbyterians? They’re Christians right? When it comes to Jesus I would judge the dude by his own words. Jesus apparently said “render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s”. And this was outside of legitimate Roman territory. Sounds like this Jesus dude may have been the original supporter of CBT. And if he was then I will make my own opinion extremely plain and simple: Jesus was wrong.
Thank God I’ve never set foot in that church. What a disgusting concept that a bunch of old church leaders congregrate to formulate what God should be saying to their congregations.
Hell can’t be any worse than being a USC living abroad at this point in time.
On a more prosaic note the Presbyterians don’t seem to have their facts straight. In the present day there are no similar laws to FATCA passed by other countries. The USA wouldn’t stand for the intrusion were it to happen in the reverse direction.
well since we are all going to hell here is a song by a little known canadian band to acompany us
“The exclusion of certain foreign-earned income (up to $95,100 in 2012) and housing benefits privileges income earned out of the country and encourages the movement of United States citizens to foreign jurisdictions.”
Has anyone here ever encountered anyone who has gone abroad due to the aforementioned “exclusion” and “benefits privileges”? I certainly haven’t. Too bad Mr. Stack only propagates lies in his collection of “myths”, otherwise he could have put this one at the top of his list.
@notamused
“Has anyone here ever encountered anyone who has gone abroad due to the aforementioned ‘exclusion’ and ‘benefits privileges'”
Yes it happens. Or it did in the past. To some countries. But not to Canada. As the late Mr. Flaherty said, Canada is not a tax haven.
@Dash1729
Hearsay.
Ah- now it is a religious issue.
Maybe they can start at home with Delaware?
@Dash:
Prof. von Koppenfels of Kent University studies Americans abroad. Her book “Migration, Diasporas and Citizenship” (2014) contains the results of two surveys she did of 864 and 884 of Americans living abroad. Survey 1 lists 11 reasons and survey 2 lists 26 reasons why Americans are living abroad. Taxation is never mentioned.
The book also contains the results of a survey by the Overseas Vote Foundation of 24,031 Americans abroad and their reasons for living abroad. Sixteen reasons are listed and the word tax or taxation does not appear.
If taxes were a driver for Americans to live abroad, I think it would show up on these professionally prepared surveys.
o_O -?????
http://youtu.be/0tJGk4ofc18
ALLLLLLLL- Righty…then. BLPPPPPP!
This is not a religious issue and most theologians would not even venture into that arena. A fast education is in order.
The term “presbyterian” is not a form of theology or a belief system. Presbyterianism refers to a form of governance as in how a religious order is governed.
There are MANY presbyterian denominations and they have nothing at all to do with each other. Just as Canada and Australia both have a parliamentary form of governance, Canada and Australia have nothing to do with each other.
There are presbyterian denominations which have a membership being politically/socially conservative and there are presbyterian denominations which are very liberal.
The Presbyterian Church (PCUSA) that did this is considered to be the most liberal in its theology, the most liberal membership in its governing leaders and the most liberal in its membership.
PCUSA has been in a constant decline of membership, faster than other declining religious denominations and in stark comparison to rising membership of conservative presbyterian denominations.
In theology there is the study of the Bible, preferably in its original text and language. Exegesis is the act of critically interpreting a text in an attempt to “draw the meaning out” of the text. This is in contrast to what has come to be know as eisegesis, where one reads his own meaning into the text.
The more conservative a denomination is it will be tighter in exegesis, the more liberal will be following eisegesis.
In regards to the study of theology, very conservative theologians would first be laughing as to why any denomination is even commenting on FATCA. They would first state that the civil magistrate is a body placed on earth and those filling the magistrate are simply flawed human beings filled with sin no different than anyone else, then any discussion would stop because it is a civil issue not an eternal issue.
Though I would suspect conservative theologians because the way the analyze the Bible, they would be extremely sympathetic and supportive of our cause in Canada. (Hint, hint…..)
Why would conservative theologians be supportive? On presentation of “original text” that being the US Constitiion and Declaration on Independence and early documents in the nations history “Expatriation Act 1868” they would likely see that expatriation is an inalienable right because thats what the earliest documents say in clear language. These types of individuals do not look for hidden meanings or pneumbras.
Liberal theologians however read deeply into things and encourage individual interpretation hence finding all kinds of social issues and even going as far as the FEIE.
Anyways, there is a major body critical of the PCUSA and they have pointed out the absurdity!
http://www.layman.org/presbyterian-church-usa-wants-raise-taxes-though-pays-none/
Again, conservative religious bodies would be very sympathetic to our cause because of the way they are.
A Tax Exempt Institution moralising about FATCA and tax fairness ? Really ??
What unmitigated gall.
@notamused
“Hearsay”
If you want to call it that. It involves the experiences of a friend who relocated abroad around 2009–pre-FATCA. She was in full compliance with the law of both the USA and her destination country (which wasn’t Canada) at least based on the laws in force at that time. AFAIK she isn’t involved with the current fight against FATCA and CBT.
Beyond that, I don’t talk about my friends on a public forum in detail. I am, myself, trying as a friend to share my personal observations on here. You can respond either as a friend and choose to believe me or not as a friend and choose not to believe me. It is your choice and I have nothing more to say on this particular subject.
@Innocente
I assume you are talking about this survey:
https://www.overseasvotefoundation.org/files/OVF_2009_PostElectionSurvey_Report.pdf
At least–this survey in the link refers to the exact same number of voters–24,031–as you do.
The survey doesn’t list “taxes” as a reason for moving abroad but it does list “employment”. In a small percentage of cases the tax rate that attached to that employment may be a factor. My comment is an anecdotal one based on the experience of one friend. You can either believe me or not. I do NOT claim it is a common reason for relocating abroad–only that it happens. Again, believe me or not. I have nothing more to say.
@George
You’ve made two statements that definitely contradict one another:
Statement A:
“In regards to the study of theology, very conservative theologians would first be laughing as to why any denomination is even commenting on FATCA.”
Statement B:
“Though I would suspect conservative theologians because the way the analyze the Bible, they would be extremely sympathetic and supportive of our cause in Canada.”
This two statements are definitely in contradiction. Which do you REALLY believe?
@Dash “Yes it happens. Or it did in the past. To some countries. But not to Canada. As the late Mr. Flaherty said, Canada is not a tax haven.”
I think some Caribbean countries fit that description.
But this is why US Dual Tax Treaties are where CBT and filing requirements need to be addressed.
In my country, it happens to work out that my overall tax rate is slightly, just slightly higher, than any possible US tax. Literally when I moved years ago, I did a spreadsheet to figure that part of cost of living.
Within my first few weeks I went to get my “local social security number” and then I went to the local tax office to ensure I was registered for the payment of taxes. I wanted to be a good citizen in my new country!!
I then asked local tax official about the US? I was told “We have a Dual Tax Treaty with the USA which means you only owe taxes here.” I then asked if that treaty meant I had to file any forms with the US on my income earned locally? The answer was no and he printed a copy of the treaty for me!! This was not some counter clerk but a revenue agent.
I actually read the treaty and when I was done the only conclusion I could reach was the local tax officer/agent was absolutely correct.
All of these issues could be corrected so easily and that is what is frustrating.
1. The filing requirements could be done away as part of the tax treaties. You file locally and if they are a higher tax jurisdiction you are done.
2. Secretary of Treasury has the lawful ability right now to raise the FBAR filing level and provide country exemptions!
The ONLY explanation I am left with is that the homeland hates us for what we have done in simply leaving.
@Dash1729
If your freind was in full compliance in her destination country prior to moving there, that suggests that she already had ties and was established there — for any number of personal reasons not necessarily related to taxation. I’m in no position to speculate on what those reasons may be, but I maintain that no one goes abroad solely due to “foreign income exclusion” and/or “housing benefits”.
@Dash, the lack of clarity is my fault.
The word theology is derived from “theo” meaning study and Logos meaning God. So theology is “the study of God” or “the study of God’s Word.”
In Option A, I am referring to does the Bible itself take a position concerning FATCA. This is in “the study of theology” or rather “study of God’s Word.” A “conservative theologian” would likely state that FATCA is not something you can tie into a theological discussion.
In Option B, I am referring to “conservative theologians” simply as people. This would be like mechanical engineers having certain ideas on how to address personal issues that are based on how they process information as being trained mechanical engineers. So, “conservative theologians” because they are predisposed to looking at original texts and not searching out growing meaning of words, would tend to be sympathetic to our cause based on the original text of the Decleration of Independence and the Expatriation Act 1868.
Liberal theologians are more likely to “find references” to FATCA in scripture.
@notamused, ” but I maintain that no one goes abroad solely due to “foreign income exclusion” and/or “housing benefits”.
I have seen companies that advertise second citizenships that can be obtained by “economic investment” in certain small countries and the adverts proclaim the income exclusion as a benefit of gaining a second citizenship combined with a new residency.
You can find such firms that act on behalf of those couple of governments online and sometimes in airplane magazines.
I would say that 99.99% of the seven million expats did not do this but I think members of Congress have seen those online adverts and airplane magazine adverts to add to the hatred they have of us.
We know that is largely untrue but Congress might think its the majority.
@George:
Ironically, one of the more famous & longer-running second-citizenship promoters is an ex-Congressman himself: Bob Bauman.
While PC (USA..USA..USA..USA..USA) extols the virtues of FATCA, a humble Parish Priest/Vicar with the Church of England makes his comments known;
“I am a parish priest in the Church of England. I am also a school governor and serve on the board of a small local charity. As part of my duties it would normally be expected for me to be a sig-nature on a number of bank accounts to do with these activities. I, obviously, have no personal financial interest in these accounts, and they are all audited and subject to the scrutiny of the UK Charity Commission.
However, because of the administrative burden (and the potentially rather punitive response if I were to
make an error) I have had to decline to be a signature on the accounts for the school and the charity
and have recently had myself taken off the list of signatures for our church accounts. All of these de-
cisions place additional burdens on others, and inhibit my ability to do my job properly.
When I explain why I have made the decision I have in regard to these accounts, it usually raises in-
credulity and astonishment. The idea that the vicar has to go line by line through the church bank
accounts every year to find the highest balance so he can report it to the American tax authorities does
not do the public image of the US in my parish much good”
http://bsmlegal.com/PDFs/American%20Citizens%20Abroad.pdf
So the PCUSA..USA..USA..USA..makes this decisions at their meeting overlooking the Detroit River at the edge of Windsor, Ontario, Canada.
So pcusa hates immigrants then, and thinks it is just and godly for them to be punished with double taxation?
Should this clearly expressed principle be extended to immigrants TO three USA as well?
@George
Yes, I’m aware of those kinds of companies as well. I readily accept that for some people the issue of taxation may be a motivating factor. Certainly. What I object to, however, is the manner in which FATCA propagandists and their like paint a black and white picture, implying that when people find out that there are such things as exclusions and housing benefits, they will just pack up and leave without further consideration. That’s naive. People simply just don’t tick that way. People don’t go abroad just because of exclusions and housing benefits.
@notamused, I think those economic citizenship deals have hurt us with our plight!! They may number one hundred out of seven million.
Do you remember the old US television series, “Lifestyles of the Rich and Famous?” I think homelanders believe thats the way we live.