UPDATE: JUNE 14, 2015
from JakDak:
The Senate Finance Committee chairman, Senator Orrin Hatch (R-UT), has established working groups to study different aspects of the tax system. These working groups are scheduled to report back to the committee by June 26.
Tax Policy Update
June 09, 2015[Interesting: NUMBER OF THE WEEK: 61. The number of countries that have signed on to implement the OECD’s multilateral agreement for the automatic exchange of tax information, in conjunction with the ongoing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (BEPS) project. Although the U.S. has committed to implement the standard, it has not yet signed onto the formal agreement (the “multilateral competent authority agreement”), which lays out in detail what information will be exchanged, the timing and method of exchange, and how signatories will work together to ensure compliance. Signatories to the agreement will begin exchanging information as early as 2017. Additionally, the OECD released on June 8 its “Country-by-Country Reporting Implementation Package” developed under the BEPS Action Plan. Under the plan, which the Treasury Department has said it will implement for the 2016 fiscal year, multinational companies are required to aggregate and report information annually regarding where they do business, the global allocation of income, and amount of taxes paid, along with other information that will allow taxing authorities to more closely examine multinationals’ tax practices. The release of the package coincides with the 2015 OECD International Tax Conference in Washington, D.C., this week where OECD representatives are expected to review and discuss key initiatives under BEPS.]
SPOILER ALERT: Comprehensive Tax Reform Unlikely in 2015. In an interview last week, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) outlined a busy legislative agenda between June and August recess: passing a highway bill, cybersecurity legislation, No Child Left Behind, and the Toxic Substances Control Act. Tax reform, however, is conspicuously missing from the list. “We’re certainly not going to be able to be doing big, comprehensive tax reform with this president,” McConnell said. Tax reform optimists have been eyeing the highway reauthorization bill as a potential vehicle to move a limited set of tax reform measures, but according to McConnell, the bill might instead be better suited to pick up a different legislative passenger—the reauthorization of the Export-Import Bank. McConnell believes the highway bill would provide the best opportunity to reauthorize the bank, which is set to expire June 30.
The inability of the Senate Finance Committee Tax Reform Working Groups to meet their original May 31 deadline to report recommendations to Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-UT) and ranking member Ron Wyden (D-OR) only adds to the general pessimism. The international tax working group may offer the only glimmer of hope, with reports that it has made the most progress in hammering out detailed recommendations. The working groups are now aiming to deliver their reports before Congress departs for the July 4th recess.
***************
UPDATE: MAY 25, 2015
Em’s comment to JakDak:
I’m not sure of the where for the SFC recommendations but the when has been delayed:
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/242916-senate-tax-reform-groups-get-more-time
The Senate Finance Committee’s leaders are giving tax reform working groups some more time to formulate their recommendations.
Finance Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and the panel’s top Democrat, Sen. Ron Wyden (Ore.), had hoped for recommendations by the end of May.
But in a statement Thursday, the two senators said that the working groups made it clear that they needed extra time to do the job right. The panel will set a new deadline after lawmakers return from next week’s recess.
“It is our hope these bipartisan working groups will use this extended time to finalize their recommendations for tax reform and produce in-depth analyses of options and potential legislative solutions,” Wyden and Hatch said in a statement.
etc.
*************************
Shadow Raider says
April 29, 2015 at 6:39 pm
The Senate Finance Committee just released the comments sent by the public on tax reform. As expected, there are lots of comments about CBT and FATCA.
http://www.finance.senate.gov/newsroom/chairman/release/?id=3b14e94b-69f9-41e2-9fd3-7d191971b7ee
Hatch, Wyden Release Public Input on Bipartisan Tax Reform
Over 1,400 Submissions Made to Working Groups
WASHINGTON – Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch (R-Utah) and Ranking Member Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) today released over 1,400 submissions from stakeholders on how to best to overhaul the nation’s broken tax code. In March, the Committee sought input from the public in an effort to provide additional data and information to the Committee’s bipartisan tax working groups, which are currently analyzing existing tax law and examining policy trade-offs and available reform options within each group’s designated area.
“We thank the stakeholders and public who provided us with this valuable data and input,” Hatch and Wyden said. “These submissions have equipped us with the ability to better evaluate how reforming the tax code will affect both American families and business of all kinds. As our bipartisan groups work towards producing substantive recommendations on how to reform the tax code, they will now be able to consider these valuable ideas.”
All comments received by the Committee that met submission requirements were made public.
Submissions can be found below. Total submissions to each bipartisan tax working groups are as follows:
Individual Income Tax – 448
Business Income Tax – 332
Savings & Investment -128
International Tax – 347
Community Development & Infrastructure – 207
Each of the five bipartisan working groups is currently working to produce findings on current tax policy and legislative recommendations within its area, with the goal of having recommendations from each of the five working groups completed by the end of May.
###
Thanks, Shadow Raider, for alerting all here. There will be many Brockers reading, starting with the submissions (not all by individuals) to International Tax.
Grassley has long been a principal nemesis of Americans abroad. If he could be led to see the error of his ways, it would represent a huge turn-around for him. If.
Both AARO and FAWCO were sent a list of comments from the Isaac Brock website criticizing our positions and our submission to the Senate Finance Committee.
We stand accused of caving and pandering – I beg to differ!
Both AARO and FAWCO have progress to their credit in terms of citizenship and election reforms – in each case, we followed the legislative path and worked with allies. It is true we do not have a history of “rocking the boat” but we do have one of sometimes major successes: when we inundated Washington with tea bags in the mid-Seventies (a campaign that started in AARO), we got the vote for overseas Americans!
People say we don’t advocate RBT? This is simply incorrect. As I said to Walt Sanchez: The AARO board agreed that there is one organization that has done the very heavy lifting with regard to the RBT proposal and that is ACA. Why would we try to do again, and less well, what they did with vast amounts of input from a panel of specialists around the world and from Congressional experts from both sides of the aisle? RBT is not a “footnote” for AARO; we have supported the ACA RBT position from the beginning and defended it in Washington, and when we talk about other “fixes”, they are prefaced with the comment “absent RBT….”
Please see the position paper AARO and FAWCO took to Washington in March that begins by saying the US should “join the rest of the world and convert to Residence-Based Taxation:
https://aaro.org/position-papers-2015/taxation-and-financial-reporting
FATCA repeal? The AARO and FAWCO position is that this is unlikely in a world moving to generalized CRS / AEOI but that the undue burden that FATCA places on Americans, specifically (as opposed to, e.g. Swedes and Turks, in this new world), could be alleviated by Treasury or by Congress (the former being more likely than the latter in the current Congressional climate). We are not “in bed with the Democrats” – we had the same idea at more or less the same time and continue to think (like Nina Olson) that it makes sense.
Being “used” by the Democrats? It is in the statutes of both AARO and FAWCO that they cannot support a political party. It has happened in the past that the Republicans were our best natural allies (in fighting attacks on the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion, for example); today, we find ourselves more aligned with the DA arguments. But anyone who calls us a tool of any political party is looking for a lot of enemies!
I don’t believe that anyone “in bed with the Democrats” would have offered a public forum to Senator Mike Lee and Jim Bopp in Paris, to talk about their constitutional challenge…
Our request for continued funding for IRS offices? Are you ready and equipped to assist the thousands of US persons who need advice and assistance right now? The offices are closing and Americans are still taxable in the US until major reform occurs. Is it more constructive (right now) to castigate the IRS or to advocate funding so they can continue to help the people you say you defend?
JacDac accuses me on May 6 of “political writing”? No, it was an attempt to keep my submission to one page so it might be read, rather than rambling for pages that would be glazed over…
I have been working on “overseas Americans issues” for a long time now and there is really one big constant over all those years of siding with Republicans or with Democrats or with no one: when we work together, we are more powerful; when we help each other to develop common positions, our voices are stronger; when we bicker and point fingers, we shoot ourselves in the collective foot.
Rather than belittling other organizations, why not try to work with them and find common ground, to build on our collective strengths?
I will not repeat them here
No, it was an attempt to keep my submission to one page so it might be read, rather than rambling for pages that would be glazed over…
Thanks for the explanation
when we work together, we are more powerful; when we help each other to develop common positions, our voices are stronger / try to work with them and find common ground, to build on our collective strengths
Thanks join the forum. I find this is the best site that people can can share common collective ideas and opinions WELCOME
Thanks Lucy
Lucy Stensland Laederich
Lucy LaederichLUCY STENSLAND LAEDERICH is a past president and the current U.S. Liaison for FAWCO (Federation of American Women’s Clubs Overseas). She was involved in the drive to get overseas Americans counted in the U.S. Census and has particularly focused on election reform legislation since 2001. She has participated in Overseas Americans Weeks since 2002 and has recently gone twice to Washington to discuss the dangerous unintended effects of FATCA on Americans with foreign spouses and partners. A Vice Chair of the World Federation of Americans Abroad (WFAA) in the early 1990’s, she is currently Vice Chair of the Alliance for Military and Overseas Voting Rights (AMOVR). Lucy, who is originally from NYC, holds degrees from the University of Saskatchewan (B.A.), the University of California at Berkeley (M.A.), pursued her studies at the University of Washington (Ph.C.) and moved to France in 1970 with a Fulbright research grant. Lucy, the mother and grandmother of dual-national children, recently moved to Bordeaux where she is a free-lance translator
@ Lucy Stensland Laederich
I agree with Lucy.
It is difficult to find people who are even aware of these issues, or who even care about it.
More voices = more awareness = more support.
Even though I relinquished US citizenship decades ago – and have a CLN to dispel any ambiguity about the matter – I follow this issue and support the ADCS lawsuit.
The amount of fear, grief and anger this has caused among so-called “US-persons” who were formally “good will ambassadors” for the US is pathetic. The loss of good will is massive and irreversible. It is lose/lose by any definition.
The entire situation is a classic example of official folly, similar to the Vietnam War, the Occupation of Iraq, the militarization of municipal police departments, the deadly gun entitlement culture based on 2nd Amendment literal textualism. or the “War on Drugs”.
Barbara Tuchman defines folly as “Pursuit of Policy Contrary to Self-Interest”; especially where a clear alternative course of action is available, the actions are endorsed by a group, not just an individual leader, and the actions are perceived as counter productive by a significant number of people as they are unfolding.
@Lucy Stensland Laederich;
“….why not try to work with them and find common ground, to build on our collective strengths?”
Why not try to work with us? The expat groups abroad benefit from the heat and light and media that we have generated and the litigation that we are undertaking. Just as civil rights in the US were not won only by polite and diplomatic delegations. Social and political change requires a range of approaches and tactics.
I’ve come to know of and respect the work of those in the ACA, AARO and FAWCO through the writings of the late Roger Conklin (who we frequently conversed with here at IBS) and Victoria of the Franco-American Flophouse blog http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/p/the-diaspora-tax-war-of-2012.html . I am not unappreciative of the ACA Foundation debate – and the fact that it was sited in Toronto Canada (though I wish we had had our own videographer and captured the critical and pointed real life questions and frank feedback from the audience – not just the musings of US tax law theoreticians). I am not unappreciative of the ACA, the AARO and FAWCO’s work – (much done solely by volunteers )- which is of longstanding and very valuable.
But since first becoming involved 2011, I have come to feel very strongly that we needed to go beyond the current approaches.
We have commonalities, but we have significant differences. And I haven’t felt entirely comfortable that other groups representing US expats really represented me and those in Canada – with our particular historical and social and geographic relationship to the US.
Canada is an important constituency of those deemed “USpersons” it has the second largest population of those deemed “UStaxablepersons”/citizens “abroad” (Mexico is 1st). Because of the long common border and intertwined history, and flow of people back and forth across the Canada/US border, and entwined families, what happens here affects a large proportion of the population in Canada – whether they are cognizant of that right now or not. That is a significant number of families and lives affected on both sides of the border. We were used to travelling into the US without having to have obtained and maintained a US passport – but since 9/11, more and more of us were coerced into getting one – sometimes by border guards who insisted that even people who lost US status by becoming Canadian decades ago must still travel only with the US passport – which then created the problem of seeming to negate their earlier relinquishment by obtaining one – under duress – bringing needless trauma and anxiety for many http://www.robertsandholland.com/siteFiles/News/03-05-13_Expats%20Live%20in%20Fear_MJM.pdf http://www.caplindrysdale.com/michael-pfeifer-comments-on-the-issuance-of-us-guidance-on-expatriate-tax-status . We have the problem of “accidentals” AND ‘border babies’ due to the many border communities ( http://www.cbc.ca/player/AudioMobile/Quebec%20AM/ID/2661540815/ ) that have created many “UStaxablechildren” and adults who did not seek US status – many who consider themselves Canadians only, or first and foremost.
I never came across any US citizen abroad activities in Canada growing up here (over 5 decades ago), and wasn’t even aware that the groups existed. We have the 2nd most number of UStaxablecitizen/persons, yet any IRS assistance in person here at the embassy and consulates was cancelled long ago. Canadians looking for Taxpayer Advocate assistance are officially directed to a Puerto Rico # for “international” assistance (forced to work around that by calling the US TAS offices to get someone in PR to call back – after incurring expensive long distance charges on hold to PR) though in many cases we can actually see the US from here. The 800 numbers never worked from Canada.
Lobbying for the IRS to get more money won’t ensure that they spend it on ‘service’ to those located outside the US. They already CHOSE to allocate more to ENFORCEMENT than to customer service and information WITHIN the US. The Taxpayer Advocate has taken them to task for that, years ago – to no avail. The IRS CHOSE not to give those ‘abroad’ any avenue to come into compliance except the OVD programs until there was substantial outcry. It CHOSE not to offer any information in Canada while issuing threatening and slanderous statements about what the IRS would do to those with “foreign” accounts – our local legal post-tax savings.
That tiger will not be changing its stripes – ever, even with unlimited funds. As someone said, to a hammer, everything is a nail. Any increase in the IRS budget will NOT be going to the only source of help we ever found there – Nina Olson and the Taxpayer Advocate service. Her recommendations have been falling on deaf ears – both in Congress and within the IRS.
And we will not be able to change the minds of the vast numbers of US homelanders like FATCAfather ‘Dick’ Harvey and Mythster Robert Stack, and politicians like Max Baucus, and Sander Levin who see benefit on using us as scapegoats – even if they know that we cannot possibly be billionaires with Cayman accounts (or have powerful connections to “understand” our inadvertant compliance problems like Douglas Shulman, or own massive family trusts offshore like Penny Pritzker, or own businesses opaquely incorporated in Biden’s state of Delaware ….. ). Even if changes are made, US citizenship for those outside the US will mean constant vigilance, as the US continues to enact laws that either intentionally or through willful ignorance harm US citizens and duals ‘abroad’. Look at how those outside the US barely escaped the full brunt of Obamacare ( https://americansabroad.org/issues/healthcare/obamacare-does-not-apply-abroad/ ) – and I acknowledge that was in large part due to the efforts of ACA, AARO, FAWCO, and others.
I was daunted and disturbed by the fact that during the ACA Foundation debate (which I attended in person all day), it appeared that speaking of renunciation/relinquishment as one remedy – AND as a potential form of protest, did not appear to be up for open discussion. I am not seeing expat groups outside NAmerica protest at the effective denial of that American and international human right http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/2014/08/want-to-renounce-join-queue.html. And I am not seeing materials highlighting the plight of those with deemed legally incompetent who can never renounce and have no remedy for the US extraterritorial taxation and penalization of their disability savings and benefits and accounts. And the families who can renounce – but who cannot renounce for their dependents. Or that of the minors who are having their education savings and grants treated the same way – but are not allowed to renounce until they can prove that they are mature enough. And the children who are to then report those funds directly to the Financial CRIMES Enforcement Network. Parents and guardians can renounce themselves, but not their children and dependents. In the meantime, the US is eating up the legal local funds saved for their support and their education.
That is something that should cause us to picket the US embassy and consulates, not politely write letters to Washington. The US is harming the most vulnerable – and it doesn’t show any signs of caring.
I wanted to remain a US citizen – it was my birthRIGHT, but was FORCED to relinquish for the sake of my Canadian family. I gave it up – under duress, and consider it not only my only real remedy, but also in protest.
I felt duped and betrayed by the specifics of the 2008 Obama pledge to listen to and represent those “abroad”.Ex. “….Obama will work with members of the Americans abroad community and the U.S. embassies to determine how the U.S. government can be responsive to the concerns of overseas Americans. As a U.S. Senator, Obama has taken seriously the concerns of all Illinoisans, whether they are currently in Illinois or not. As president, Obama will work to establish a direct dialogue with Americans abroad.
Other Governmental Services and Benefits: Americans living abroad have little access to basic information about U.S. government services and affairs. Barack Obama believes that U.S. embassies and consulates, which are the main U.S. government contact points for Americans abroad, should develop and implement concrete plans on how to communicate basic information to Americans living abroad. Additionally, Obama supports efforts to ensure that U.S. State Department staff members have proper training to assist Americans abroad in determining their various rights and responsibilities as American citizens. He welcomes a continued dialogue between the White House, the State Department, and citizens abroad in an Obama administration….” http://archives.uruguay.usembassy.gov/usaweb/2008/08-469EN.shtml . Followed soon after by the HIRE Act, FATCA and the OVDI threats and slander of those “abroad”, the extortionate increase in renunciation fees, etc.
My contact with the office of my US “representative” was fruitless. My emails to the Congressman and Whitehouse went unanswered – or generated mere nonsense form replies. The more I learned, the better I could see the depth of the serious peril that US citizenship was coming to represent. It became a shackle that I could only remove with great effort – and at great cost.
I have come to believe very strongly that litigation and open protest is the only remedy and recourse for us.
The US responded to the polite representations by increasing the renunciation fee to 2350. The American Chamber of Commerce noted that it is a growth industry worth exploring from the business perspective; “……Here’s a hot tip for accountants and tax attorneys: now is a good time to develop specialized expertise in advising clients who may be seeking to expatriate from the United States. That demographic looks more and more like a real growth opportunity……. from;
‘Exit Strategy: FATCA Tax Law Keeps Pushing Americans To Give Up Citizenship’
Monday, August 18, 2014 – 12:15pm David Kinkade https://www.uschamber.com/blog/exit-strategy-fatca-tax-law-keeps-pushing-americans-give-citizenship ).
Where do the expat groups stand on that issue? It is our American RIGHT to expatriate if we choose to or are forced to. US consular officials posted to Canada are making those in Canada wait in a queue which is getting longer and longer just to inquire about an apt. to renounce. They told one of us that we are low priority which they have no intention of attending to http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/11/04/my-november-4-2014-conversation-with-toronto-consul-general-of-us-new-renunciation-appointments-extended-to-september-2015/comment-page-1/ . I had to stand outside in the cold in a lineup in order to exercise my right to relinquish. The consular official was needlessly abrasive and unpleasant during my apt. So much for those “benefits” conferred on me at birth that I had to pay thousands to rid myself of.
The ADCS legal challenge has given me hope where there was none, and I support it with all my heart. It speaks to BOTH my strong desire to protect the sovereignty of my home country of Canada AND to my desire for remedy for those who have chosen to or who have no choice but to remain US citizens – though I could not. I found specific support and information here at IBS that I could not find elsewhere. I think what the US is doing (in many arenas) is VERY WRONG and unjust. I don’t want to be muzzled because it is impolitic to say out loud that the Emperor is naked. I don’t really believe that if we were nicer that the Senate Finance Committee, the US Treasury and the IRS will do what is right.
But there is something important missing. If we are to work together, that has to be addressed. I want to be able to state freely that the US Emperor has no clothes. I don’t want to have to pretend to admire his latest outfit while begging him for alms.
I just posed the following question (or paraphrase thereof) to AARO, ACA and RO on their FB pages:
“Some here, including myself, believe that a lawsuit against CBT (challenge to Cook vs. Tait) could speed things up for RBT. Would AARO and ACA consider supporting such a lawsuit?”
Let us see what the replies will be.
I would ask DA the same question, but I would obviously be barking up the wrong tree.
Lucy, I have just one observation on why FATCA needs to be repealed and it relates to being on the same level as any other country signing onto AEOI — not exceptionally for the US, with FATCA as part of the deal. (And, for many other reasons!)
From http://www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/AEOI-commitments.pdf, 6 March 2015, exceptionally:
“The United States has indicated that it will be undertaking automatic information exchanges pursuant to FATCA from 2015 and has entered into intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with other jurisdictions to do so. The Model 1A IGAs entered into by the United States acknowledge the need for the United States to achieve equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic information exchange with partner jurisdictions. They also include a political commitment to pursue the adoption of regulations and to advocate and support relevant legislation to achieve such equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic exchange.”
@Badger:
Your comments to Lucy posted above is one of the BEST posts I have ever read here at IBS!
Without question!
BRAVO!
Thanks for your views on behalf of many here, badger, especially (for me)…
One commenter says to a Guardian article, http://www.theguardian.com/global-development-professionals-network/2015/mar/13/white-people-expats-immigrants-migration#comments, regarding the difference between *expats* and *immigrants*:
I said in an earlier comment:
Believer in only things that make common sense and realizing my naivety, I have trouble with ACA (and other Americans Abroad groups) philosophy but I can see how it fits for others — is it because I don’t consider, and never have, myself nor my children *expats* but have considered mine just another Canadian family with all the benefits of Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
(Neither was I in all my time in Canada and as a Canadian citizen from 1975 ever part of any *US group in Canada*. In the Alberta oilpatch I likely worked with many who had some US-ness, but the subject really was never discussed (if it was only a matter of some coincidence that someone was going to visit family in the US) — I never knew my fellow employees as Americans, only as the Canadians we thought we were. I have met more Americans in Canada in these past few years than I ever knew in all of my many years before.)
Is it different in Canada than many other countries, this phenomenon? Is it because I (and many of us) have never seen myself going back to the USA – other than to visit family or perhaps be a tourist as other Canadians and persons from around the world? I don’t get to define who I am? I don’t get to act in the best interests of my Canadian-born son?
i.e., US Taxes While Living Abroad FAQ from American Citizens Abroad, the Voice of Americans Overseas (https://americansabroad.org/issues/taxation/us-taxes-while-living-abroad-faq/)
refers to *expat* over and over. My conclusion is I am not an ACA member (or a member of any other such American organization) because I am not an *expat*. I came to Canada as a *landed IMMIGRANT* on my path to Canadian citizenship in 1975. I reject being labelled by MY country *a US citizen who happens to reside in Canada*. Though I in 2012 OFFICIALLY renounced my US citizenship to get that precious CLN proof — my Canadian-born son does not have that right???! The whole concept is absurd to me.
It is clear (to me) that we cannot all be labelled using only one definition of who we are.
IMHO, I believe organizations such as ACA, AARO, etc. work to represent the interests of Americans who happen to be residing in other countries (perhaps temporarily). People like myself, and many of the people commenting on this website do not fit into that category. Many of us are Canadian (or other nationality) citizens, resident in Canada who happen to have a US birthplace. Members of the first group want to retain their place in US society whereas members of my group really just want to be left alone.
Thank you @Furious AC and @calgary.
It cannot be a surprise to the expat groups that there is disagreement and criticism – we are a very diverse group – potentially 6-7 million or more strong. Even within the community at IBS there is no perfect solutions and perfect strategy agreements or completely harmonious worldview amongst us. Sometimes it gets quite heated. All coming at this from different angles and experiences and context.
But I note that we have come a very long way since 2011 – so we must be doing something right. And, I will acknowledge that we are all on a continuum – some at one end of spectrum and some on others as to how best to get our message across.
I do think though that one needs BOTH carrots and sticks to motivate the US to make change.
The carrots also need the stick wielders in order to incentivize those who have power and hegemony – and who otherwise will not respond. The carrot groups get to be set in happier contrast to the more troublesome stick wielders. In the abolition movement and suffrage and civil rights, they needed a range of tactics and a range of spokespersons and tones in order to get the powerful to give anything at all. Moral suasion only goes so far, as does polite petitioning. And with FATCA, the denials of bank and mortgage accounts, and the upcoming abridgement of sovereignty, privacy, personal and financial info in the first data turnover, we don’t have time to rely only on the more traditional petitioning of the powerful and political. Not that that doesn’t have its role as well.
It would be nice to have the stick wielders acknowledged along with the carrot danglers.
@Lucy Stensland Laederich
Speaking as one of those who just wants to be left alone… please tell me your group is contributing to the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.
http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/
I’m prepared to be impressed.
I am not and have never been American but I’m still considered to be a “US person for tax purposes” … ONLY for tax purposes and apparently FOR LIFE because a U.S. agency fumbled the I-407 form I sent as soon as I was aware of its existence (nearly two decades after my departure). Maybe that was due to a lack of funding too? Anyway, Lucy’s attempt to vindicate the various overseas American organizations who politely lobby their U.S. congressmen but fail to take definite and forceful action against CBT and FATCA really doesn’t help me all and I’m sure none of them care. As with Badger, the only hope on the horizon right now for me comes as a result of definite and forceful action taken right here on Canadian soil. It’s the ADCS lawsuit. My opinion of Lucy’s AARO/FAWCO SFC submission is that it was milquetoast at best.
@Lucy Stensland Laederich;
Just had an idea:
A useful step to working together could be to list IBS and Maple Sandbox as “useful links” at https://www.aaro.org/useful-links and on the website of the only Canadian branch of FAWCO. Is it http://www.awco.ca AWCO in Oakville? I see they have also done some liaising with the Toronto consulate;
http://www.insidehalton.com/news-story/3067830-us-consul-general-visits-american-women-in-oakville/
@Lucy: Like Marie, I do not consider myself American. US Consulate was clear, firm and direct 42 years ago that I was “permanently and irrevocably” relinquishing U.S. citizenship.
AARO and ACA have nothing to offer me. In fact, I do not believe they even have operations in Canada which to me says something about how little they think of Canada, Canadians and Americans living in Canada.
I do think there are definite benefits to trying to work together, My impression, however, is that AARO and ACA only represent American citizens. It would be self-defeating for most of us to define ourselves as such.
Pingback: Some #Americansabroad view themselves as US citizens and some do NOT believe they are US citizens | Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty
From what I have seen, ACA has done an excellent job of creating a detailed, concrete proposal for RBT, and getting it on the table for discussion. Their RBT proposal submissions to the House and Senate committees have generated feedback from supporters of CBT in the form of academic papers arguing the fine points, and I suspect it was a large part of the reason the Senate Finance Committee made mention of RBT last December. ACA has also supported interim, stop-gap measures, such as the same-country exception, which may not help all or even most “US persons” abroad, but might at least be an incremental improvement for somebody. They have taken a broad-spectrum approach, shying only away from discussing the issue of relinquishment/renunciation. AARO and FAWCO, as far as I understand, have basically been on the same wavelength as ACA, and those 3 groups have joined forces in lobbying efforts. I think all 3 groups represent the interests of long-term US persons abroad, not just short-termers. (Let’s face it, none of this stuff much matters to a short-termer.) So I have nothing but respect for what those 3 groups have been trying to accomplish.
Democrats Abroad, of course, has been a major disappointment. More than disappointing, infuriating, what with refusing to even mention their claimed desire for RBT to the rest of the DNC. They really don’t represent the interests of democrats abroad at all. They rather seem to serve to represent the interests of the DNC to democrats abroad. I will give them credit for their data collection and reporting on the problems of FATCA (and that credit may go mainly to Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels, but her efforts are being supported by DA leadership, I believe, so I will give them that much), but their proposed solution (a stupefyingly complicated version of same-country exception, which requires even more paperwork on the part of individuals and banks than the present system does) is exceptionally lame. Still, it might help somebody, somewhere, so it is not bad in itself. But their resolute refusal to attack the root of the problem, CBT, is infuriating, and tells me that they just are not interested in advocating for the problems faced by the people they claim to represent. I’m not even sure they really understand the problems. I get the sense they have given up on long-termers, and are just looking to milk the enthusiasm of short-termers who don’t yet understand the realities of the situation.
Republicans Overseas has made a lot of the right noises, though they have not been successful in getting much actual legislative action going despite their party now controlling both houses of Congress. And they are also focused too much on FATCA, and while they got the RNC to pass a resolution calling for RBT, they have not followed up with any proposed legislation.
Then there is the scrappy crew here at IBS, who have actually been getting things done. Of course, these are the people on the receiving end of the spear, so have no choice but to fight back or die.
So I see:
1) ACA, AARO and FAWCO, non-partisan official groups, who are lobbying for the interests of Americans abroad, with a focus on what it would take to make it possible for Americans abroad to remain Americans.
2) Democrats Abroad and Republicans Overseas, whose first priorities are to drum up support for the Democrat and Republican parties. They’ll use the interests of Americans abroad to the extent they see it useful for their primary aim of keeping their respective parties in power. Expecting more out of them is probably delusional.
3) The actual Americans (and other “US persons”) abroad, and former Americans/US persons abroad, who are just trying to right a wrong and make the pain go away, either for themselves, for their children, for the sake of others who may end up in the same boat some day. This includes trying to get the laws changed so that people don’t have to renounce in order to have a normal life abroad, as well as helping those who cannot wait for change to navigate the renunciation/relinquishment process. Plus those who thought they relinquished years ago, those who never realized they were US citizens until recently, etc. There are also those who immigrated to the US, and got caught up in some of the same issues.
All 3 sets of groups can agree and collaborate on some things, but will never completely agree on the scope of the issues and the methods for dealing with them. And that’s ok — and actually, even if it is not ok, it is not productive to complain that someone else does not share exactly the same priorities that you do. Everybody and all groups are in different situations. Collaborate where possible, diverge where necessary. As long as none of these groups are actually pulling in the opposite direction, then with enough shoulder pressure the wagon train should move forward in a generally positive direction.
By the way, when I write above, “Then there is the scrappy crew here at IBS, who have actually been getting things done,” I don’t mean it to sound like the other groups are not doing anything. As I said, all groups are doing good things. I’m just more and more impressed at what a bunch of largely-anonymous, not formally organized, “little people” have been able to accomplish, in terms of relentlessly getting the word out and changing the terms of the debate in the public sphere, not to mention getting the ADCS challenge funded through small, anonymous donations from around the world. It is really remarkable.
As Margaret Mead said, “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
Margaret Mead acclaimed anthropologist (1910-1978) born in Philadelphia and died in NYC
If you knew me fits like a T
Good document re “Where you are at”
Hopefully Senate had a good read of this (If not guys have another look)
“I never planned on staying here or anything like that. I just did and home is where your junk collects and I collected a lot of junk here, and so there I am. It wasn’t any conscious decision.”
https://americansabroad.org/files/8613/5972/6757/acapiecejan2013.pdf
@Blaze, “Like Marie, I do not consider myself American. US Consulate was clear, firm and direct 42 years ago that I was “permanently and irrevocably” relinquishing U.S. citizenship.”
You know my background, though it was another agency that confirmed for the record I had relinquished my US Nationality.
Just like you and Calgary and Foo, I am NOT an American Citizen who is abroad. The USA is abroad to me!!!
Today I blew up with someone who was trying to make some excuses for the USG. It was the old “paying taxes of part of citizenship.” My response was they can and should keep their damned and precious citizenship if a person does not pay their tribute taxes to the USA.
Seriously, I wish they would simply make a requirement that tax payment is a requirement to have and use a USA Passport!!! That would be fine by me and my children!!!
But instead they are FORCING unwanted citizenship on people and then demanding tax payments under threat of foreign law!!
Just one more point, I can support CBT if CBT is a requirement of citizenship retention!!!
Dont pay US Taxes and fill out reams of forms……then you lose your USC automatically and if you want to come back to the USA you must do so as a foreigner.
They just do not get it……we do not want their stinking citizenship!!!!
A JC point
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Master_Nationality_Rule
“Master Nationality Rule”, the practical effect of this Article is that where a person is a national of, for example, two States (A and B), and is in the territory of State A, then State B has no right to claim that person as its national or to intervene on that person’s behalf. Such a person who goes into the territory of a third state may be treated as a national of either A or B – it does not normally matter which one, except, for example, where the courts of the third state have to adjudicate upon matters relating to that person’s status and the relevant laws depend on the person’s nationality. In such cases, it is necessary to choose an effective nationality (i.e. one of the two nationalities is selected as effective for the purposes of the third state).[2]
FYI: Just in from Republicans Overseas FB page:
I wrote: “Many here, including myself, believe that a lawsuit against CBT (challenge to Cook vs. Tait) could speed things up for RBT. Would RO give serious consideration to supporting such a lawsuit?”
Republicans Overseas (presumably Solomon Yue): “If you raise RO $50K, I will hire Jim Bopp to study the case. I will not use FATCA lawsuit money to study the possibility of a successful challenge to Cook v. Tait since It is much difficult to reverse a SCOUS decision.”
As I wrote earlier, I am 100% in favor of not touching one single penny of the ADCS/ADSC FATCA lawsuit. However, the sooner we get started in challenging CBT, the better.