As posted by CitizenshipSolutions.ca and suggested by JC for a post at Brock:
Jackie Bugnion and Roland Crim, Directors
American Citizens Abroad, Inc.
Nov. 23, 2014
Thank you, Mayor Boris Johnson, for Speaking for Many
The ending may not go down well for all. Part of the ending paragraph:
To all its Members, and indeed all Americans living overseas, American Citizens Abroad recommends strict observance of the law.
Quite notable for its articulation for the case against CBT. The devere Group posted that Boris Johnson was legally wrong, but morally right. http://www.funds-europe.com/news/14732-johnson-s-anti-fatca-crusade-is-noble-says-wealth-manager To which I added, that Boris Johnson was correct in that the US tax was in violation of his inalienable rights.
I e-mailed this letter to Robert Wood.
Well-articulated letter.
Great letter from ACA.
“To all its Members, and indeed all Americans living overseas, American Citizens Abroad recommends strict observance of the law”
I’m sorry but WTF?? “strict observance”??? Bullshit!
If the ACA recommended anything other than observance of the law (as stupid and immoral as it is), it could be dismissed as an organization for “tax cheats”. That would serve nobody’s interests IMO.
Yes, GWEvil, you’re correct in your comments. I think this is just a poor choice of words by ACA. I think their message is correct. I also feel that pressure from IBS is starting to embarrass them and make them get off their collective, passive behinds and get to work on what their title would imply. It’s a good start. Now, about that video…….
@tdott – that’s all well and good, but they could have said “we don’t recommend breaking any laws” but instead they said “we recommend STRICT adherence” so, I’m sorry, but I call bullshit on them.
Nice letter, but where’s the CBT debate video?
Sorry “observance”, but same bs, unless they mean “to look at” when they used the word observance, which is about as much as I’d ever plan on doing.
Did Rosa Park “strictly observe” the law?
Whilst the ACA’s words are appreciated, it should take to task EU Govt’s by setting up a legal challenge in EU courts.
It’s nearly impossible to scrap CBT without offending someone in DC.
If ACA is going to attach morality to Boris Johnson’s reaction, it wouldn’t have been too radical to refer to CBT as an immoral law, in fact doing so would have been more consistent with their message than back-pedaling as they did. Their disclaimer is one they used to prevent being dismissed as a bunch of scofflaws – even though they are throwing their support behind Boris as one. Kind of funky on their part.
These incidences, like Rosa Parks flouting the law, and also the fall of the Berlin Wall to me seem almost like gestures that are representative of something that has already happened. It’s as though they were ripe, or even over-ripe for happening, so in themselves are not so much an act of rebellion, but sort of a natural progression.
Until US comes to value it’s citizens abroad, no gesture in the world is going to make an iota of difference. I believe for us, big change is not quite ripe for happening. More people need to renounce. BoJo’s rebellion would certainly help, and to really drive their point home, ACA should have said Boris is morally right in flouting what they refer to as an immoral US law.
Some of you aren’t going to like this, but Boris becoming compliant then renouncing would sent the most effective message to the American public and lawmakers, that some people would pay anything not to be American under current law as it stands. Otherwise he’s just a ‘scofflaw’ to most.
At one point, ACA bemoans “a decision on the part of the United States to unilaterally grant itself the right….”
But on he other hand, “To … all Americans living [in countries outside U.S. jurisdiction], American Citizens Abroad recommends strict observance of [American] law.”
I guess ACA thinks it’s right for the U.S. to impose itself extraterritorially after all.
GwEvil is right to call bullshit.
The Washington D.C. Pukes can add 8,000 amendments to the tax code, in the years since Ronald Reagan stripped the code down to its basics and promised along with the politicians from both parties, that they’d leave it alone.
I’d say adding 4 amendments for each day they were in session isn’t leaving it alone. The cash kept getting in the way. It is as if the congressmen and women acted in concert to add ”tax extenders” or amendments to the tax code, that expired on the years congress was to stand for re election. If the parties who benefitted got a big campaign contribution, they acted in unison to extend that interested party’s ”tax extender”. No contribution, no tax extender. If you or I did this it would be criminal and we’d go to jail for extortion, but if congress does it they are just acting in the interest of a voter or group of voters or a company whose check book gets in the way of honesty.
If it sounds like I am disgusted with the congress, then the sound matches the feeling. The whole bunch is disgusting. If we could have just one thing done to reverse all this nonsense it would be the FairTax. A national Sales Tax on everything spent above the poverty level. HB25 and SB122 would solve the CBT, FACTA, tax lawyers, The IRS, accountants, tax preparers, tax forms and hundreds of other tax problems would all disappear…..My son say I am a Don Quiote, tilting at windmills, fro the back of a flying horse. It may not come in my lifetime but it will come if we are to survive as a Republic.
Reading the last paragraph again, isn’t this their roundabout way of saying that they normally support the law, but for the reasons they’ve stated cannot support CBT?
GwEvil says
December 1, 2014 at 7:34 pm
“To all its Members, and indeed all Americans living overseas, American Citizens Abroad recommends strict observance of the law”
I’m sorry but WTF?? “strict observance”??? Bullshit!
……
I’m with GwEvil on this.
This is a spectacular example of the difference between true Americans, and those deemed as such who don’t feel they are Americans. True Americans may want to go home someday. I AM home, my place of birth does not change that.
@Bubblebustin – if that’s what they are trying to say, it’s more like their “opaque” way of saying it!
No comment in the letter about the tax treaties.
What IGA agreements are to FATCA, tax treaties are to Citizenship Based Taxation.
The tax treaties make CBT legal for the laws of the US to tax income/assets/accounts in other countries by not saying otherwise.
There could be legal case against these treaties in Canada, UK, Australia and elsewhere – as they allow discriminatory treatment within one’s own country and allow the contravention of government policies (such as allowing tax deferred retirement accounts for the purpose of helping residents save for one’s retirement and reduce the need for state care late in life, and having all this overturned by penalties and extra taxation from the US). With ADCS the first focus is the Canadian IGA. Next they could sue the Canadian government for the tax treaty they agreed with the US.
In the commentary a lot recently, one theme is that Boris Johnson is a US citizen and he should pay his US taxes. Yet it is not the same – and these persons should not pretend that it is as if Boris Johnson lives in the US (tax is mind boggling especially when tax systems are overlayed on each other). Legally, because of the tax treaty, he does not have to pay all the US taxes as the tax treaty reduces double taxation. So the interplay of the tax treaty pays some respect to his different status compared to US citizens living in the US – yet the tax treaties (drafted by the US treasury) do not go far enough.
I would like to see the ACA have a go at the tax treaties and highlight injustices with them.
It is the definition of some form of insanity to write such an excellent article and at the same time end it with “you have to comply”.
Well, I agree the use of the word ‘Strict’ is too much – but the letter is good and I hope someone sends a copy to Boris. Pending the new Congress coming in it has been very quiet from Republicans Overseas. Today another suit by the House against Obama was filed relating to ObamaCare, but no Bopp suit yet. I am sure (would hope) there is a plan to cut the head off the snake as soon after the 1st of the year as possible but for now it’s all hush.
I wonder if ACA would have recommended “strict observance of the law” for Rosa Parks?
@Steve
Nothing but the sound of “crickets” from RO and Bopp — not good.
“To all its Members, and indeed all Americans living overseas, American Citizens Abroad recommends strict observance of the law.”
@Gwevil, Are you a member of ACA? Are you an American Citizen abroad?
If none of the above, then you have no beef.
Personally, I think it is very wise for all American Citizens abroad to strictly, yes strictly observe, all laws in the country they are presently in, even though the laws may be distasteful and that they strictly obey all laws of the USA because by their very definition they will return home.
@Bubbles, “it wouldn’t have been too radical to refer to CBT as an immoral law, ”
Spot on.
The gross immorality is that the USG is defining who is a USC outside of its own borders.