52 thoughts on “Opportunity to Submit Questions for FOX News/Facebook Republican Presidential Candidate Debates”

1. I would preface such a question with the reminder: “There are an estimated 7-plus million Americans who live abroad, many permanently…” then follow with the question …
   Remember, we are not on the average home-lander’s radar.

2. It’s 8.7 million now according to the state dept website

3. You can also contact:
   Hillary Clinton: https://hrc-demo.secure.force.com/contact/
   Bernie Sanders: berniesanders.com

   It would be GREAT if we could swamp every single candidate and debate moderator with our CBT repeal demands. They all have FB and campaign sites that allow comments. Political / campaign stuff is separate from official Senate business, and the staff and constituencies are different.

   Now is a great chance to get out there and COMPLAIN, big and loud and often. We must be heard. If only a few complain we will be ignored.

4. If someone does this, ASK ABOUT CBT. Sure FATCA should go but lets stop getting off the main topic which is CBT. Without FATCA, NOTHING CHANGES. It just makes it a little harder for the USA to enforce.

5. Phil,

   Re: “Without FATCA, NOTHING CHANGES. It just makes it a little harder for the USA to enforce[CBT] ”

   I disagree. Without FATCA, EVERYTHING CHANGES. Without FATCA, it is A LOT HARDER(not just a little harder) for the USA to enforce CBT.

   Re: “Sure FATCA should go but lets stop getting off the main topic which is CBT.”

   Some of us see ‘forced US personhood’ as the ‘main topic’ rather than CBT or FATCA. I guess it just depends on your own personal agenda and how much you trust your master. For those who wish to be US slaves (err…I mean US persons), and think that somehow the abolition of CBT alone is enough to keep them safe from any other devious plans the master (err… I mean USA) might conjure up in future to steal from its ‘US persons’ living outside of USA – think again. Let not your imagination be limited to CBT (or FATCA enforced CBT).

   I wonder….if CBT miraculously disappeared tomorrow, would this prevent USA in future from imposing some sort of a ‘head tax’ on every ‘US person’ living outside USA? And if FATCA was in place(no one says it can’t stay even if CBT is gone), perhaps this head tax could be calculated as a percentage of one’s foreign(i.e. non-US) bank accounts. Or when GATCA comes to fruition, perhaps a US person head tax could be calculated as a percentage of foreign (i.e. non US) property values…..What fun$ we can have, especially if we know what is in their bank accounts, CBT or no CBT!

6. Great Muzzled! Thanks.
   I put this up at American Expatriates FB and AARO FB group pages

7. Questions can be uploaded here:
   https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10153438307721336/
   https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/app_665293576939321
   It can be just text, and the second link doesn’t appear to require a Facebook account.

   I suggest something like this: “There are an estimated 8.7 million Americans living abroad, a population larger than 39 states. The United States taxes these people, but they cannot benefit from what their taxes pay for, since they are outside the country. The United States is the only country in the world that taxes its citizens abroad, other than the repressive government of Eritrea, which was condemned by the United Nations for this very practice. Should the United States tax people based not on citizenship but residence, like the entire rest of the world does?”

   @WhiteKat, CBT is “forced US personhood”. Your question contradicts itself, eliminating CBT means redefining “US persons” as US residents only. Besides, a “head tax” is unconstitutional. I doubt that you would even know FATCA existed if banks were only identifying “US persons” as those with US addresses, regardless of place of birth (as the OECD is proposing for “GATCA”).

   I don’t see any problem with forced citizenship if it’s merely a legal definition that doesn’t come with any obligation. All countries do this, including Canada.

8. “The United States taxes these people” isn’t the biggest problem, but the United States penalizes these people even when their US taxes are zero, and the United States penalizes these people for being honest. Reference should again be made to the IRS’s report to Congress on 2011-12-31 (http://www.taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov//userfiles/file/TAS_arc2011_execsummary.pdf) and another report that I haven’t seen but where some people have quoted the IRS as asking “Why are we tormenting these people?”

   If the questions are simply “If you become President will you make it your goal to remove from the Tax Code the provision for income taxation on the basis of citizenship (CBT) and replace it with residence-based taxation (RBT) in line with the established practice of the rest of the world?” and “Should the United States tax people based not on citizenship but residence, like the entire rest of the world does?”, no one will give a shit. The politicians already know and no one gives a shit. Homelanders don’t even understand it, except for a few homelanders who understand and don’t give a shit.

   Well wait, two or three Forbes columnists understand it and do give a shit, but no one understands or cares about what those columnists write, especially when those columnists are more concerned with the 1% than the 99% even among the “diaspora”.

   I’ve been diagnosed as being an inartful writer or inartful arguer, quite accurately. Sorry I can’t exactly say what those questions have to ask. But if the questions stay the way they’ve been put here, they’re going to be losers.

9. ShadowRaider

   You said: “CBT is “forced US personhood”. Your question contradicts itself, eliminating CBT means redefining “US persons” as US residents only.”

   I did not realize “CBT means redefining “US persons” as US residents only”. I must confess not to have read in great detail some of your past analyses on the CBT issues (I should have). You have been studying CBT in much more depth than I, so perhaps I am missing some basic facts.

   So are you saying that if CBT is gone tomorrow, FATCA automatically starts applying ONLY to US residents even though the current legislation applies to ‘US persons’?

   And what about FBARS? – when CBT is eliminated, do FBARS automatically start applying only to US residents as well?

   Is this because there is a master definition of ‘US person’ somewhere (yes my ignorance is showing) that will be changed to exclude US citizens living outside USA, upon elimination of CBT?

   Hopefully I am not the only one wondering these things.

10. ShadowRaider, also you said: “I don’t see any problem with forced citizenship if it’s merely a legal definition that doesn’t come with any obligation. All countries do this, including Canada.”

    A mere $200 and mailing of a form is all it takes to renounce Canadian citizenship. But US citizenship can not be easily shed. That is what makes US citizenship forced. What other country charges $2,350 and an exit tax to renounce citizenship for someone who left USA as a young child? Will a change to RBT eliminate these two burdens of US personhood?

11. @Norman, You have a point. How about this: “There are an estimated 8.7 million Americans living abroad, a population larger than 39 states. For the last 5 years, the US government has made their lives a nightmare, imposing massive amounts of useless paperwork, disproportional penalties, causing closures of bank accounts, and leaving them with no other choice but to renounce US citizenship, which they have been doing reluctantly in record numbers. The root of this problem is the system of taxation based on citizenship, which no other country uses except the repressive dictatorship of Eritrea. Should the United States adopt the standard of taxation based on residence, like the entire rest of the world does?”

12. Shadow Raider, thank you. Now I can suggest a few minor tweaks.

    “There are an estimated 8.7 million Americans living abroad, a population larger than 39 states. The US government makes their lives a nightmare, imposing massive amounts of useless paperwork, disproportional penalties, causing closures of bank accounts, and leaving them with no other choice but to renounce US citizenship, which they have been doing reluctantly in record numbers. Even the IRS itself reported to Congress that these policies force honest people to renounce US citizenship. The root of this problem is the system of taxation based on citizenship of non-residents, a policy which the United States shares with the repressive dictatorship of Eritrea but with no other country in the world. The few other countries which used to have a similar policy found it unworkable and abandoned it in favor of taxation based on residence. Should the United States join the rest of the world instead of Eritrea, and adopt the standard of taxation based on residence?”

13. @ShadowRaider….ooops. I accidentally eliminated the word ELIMINATING in my previous before last comment to you. Second paragraph, 1st sentence should have been:

    I did not realize “ELIMINATING CBT means redefining “US persons” as US residents only”.

14. @WhiteKat, Yes, there is a master definition of “US person”, in section 7701(a)(30) of the Internal Revenue Code: “a citizen or resident of the United States”. Almost all reporting requirements, including the FATCA IGAs, refer to this definition. Eliminating CBT consists of changing this to “a resident of the United States”, similar changes throughout the tax code, and also in section 5314(a) of title 31 (FBAR). It’s actually very simple, nothing has to be added, it’s the already existing word “citizen” that has to be removed, so taxation and reporting requirements would automatically not apply to nonresident citizens.

    I agree that the renunciation fee and the exit tax are outrageous. Eliminating CBT would logically also eliminate the exit tax, or change it into something based on residence and more reasonable like what Canada does. The renunciation fee is not defined in law, so eliminating CBT wouldn’t change it, but I imagine that not many people would feel the need to renounce without CBT.

15. Perhaps include something about people who are deemed U.S. persons and happen to live abroad simply want the freedom to live normal lives, like others in their countries of residence — e.g., to work, have local bank accounts, contribute to accounts for their children’s education, save for retirement — without being penalized or treated as a criminal by the U.S. Government simply for living outside of the U.S.

16. @Norman Diamond, here is a reference for the statements made by Nina Olson, IRS Taxpayer Advocate about “tormenting” those ‘abroad’:

    Worth reading in entirety;

    October 8, 2014
    ‘FATCA ‘Tormenting’ Taxpayers, Olson Says’
    by William Hoffman

    Full Text Published by Tax Analysts®
    “….Olson also questioned the penalty regime underlying FATCA. The law provides for a $10,000 penalty for failing to disclose a foreign bank account, and up to $50,000 for failing to disclose after IRS notification, she said. For someone with a $51,000 unreported foreign bank account, that could be a $60,000 penalty.

    IRS policy states that penalties should be objectively proportioned to the offense, Olson said. “Putting a $60,000 penalty on someone for failing to report a $51,000 account does not seem to me like a penalty that is proportioned objectively to the offense,” she said. ….”….

    …..””Again, that comes back to that proportionality issue,” Olson said. “So you’re really looking at this and thinking, why are we doing this to folks? Why are we tormenting them in this way?”..”……
    http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/FD2860D17810639485257D6B0052AC9C?OpenDocument

    Also see her statements here http://blogs.wsj.com/totalreturn/2014/10/08/tax-officials-express-doubts-about-fatca/

    and related, here:
    http://oversight.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/4-15-2015-Gov-Ops-Hearing-on-Tax-Advocate-Report-Testimony-Olson.pdf

17. Expect to revise after our issues are (or aren’t) addressed by the International Committee on tax reform.

18. @bubblebustin, have lost track – so when is that Committee supposed to report? The reporting was postponed wasn’t it?

19. @badger

    JaKDac has been doing a great job keeping us up to speed here:

    http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/04/29/senate-finance-committee-posts-submissions-and-shadow-raider-reports-to-brock/comment-page-15/#comment-6268202

20. I’d like to express my heartfelt gratitude to the many Americans and former Americans abroad who, by providing input like what’s asked of us here are working for change.
    A special thanks to those Americans living in the US like Shadow Raider, who with the combined effort of the many Americans abroad are finally getting our issues in front of the very people who can do something about it. If successful, it will improve the lives of all Americans abroad whether they be accidental or just wishing to live their lives in peace without having to renounce US citizenship – just as so many citizens of other countries get to enjoy theirs, with no major interference or threats.

21. Problem is, all these suggested wordings are so long, they don’t fit into a soundbite question. The further problem is, the issue doesn’t fit into a soundbite in order to express the problem.

    May I suggest we whittle it down, first, by forgetting about Eritrea? No one knows where it is or gives a rat’s ass. Just say the USA is the only country in the world that taxes citizens abroad, period. In a real argument, if someone were to challenge that, one could reply, “I left out Eritrea, the only other one, because the UN–with US backing–made a human rights complaint against them for it, so they don’t count.”

    I also wouldn’t mention renunciations. Way too touchy a topic, especially because the dots too easily connect that renouncers are doing so to dodge taxes. Of course I know they’re not, so don’t flame me! I’m just saying that no Homelander, and no presidential candidate, is going to reflect on the existential dilemmas and pressures which lead many to renunciation. Plus, renouncers are way WAY outnumbered by new immigrants to the USA, so renouncers look mean and petty to Homelanders.

    I think by dropping Eritrea and dropping renunciation, we can come up with leaner questions. And then I think as many of us as possible should bombard the Facebook board with similar (but not word for word identical) questions, to give Megyn & friends the impression that there is weight in numbers behind this issue.

    I’m still considering how to word mine.

22. Found you

    JakDac says
    July 6, 2015 at 8:10 am
    Finance Working Groups Set To Release Proposals As Tax-Writers Continue To Focus On International Tax Reform

    By Brandon Roman on July 6th, 2015
    Posted in Tax and Retirement
    Legislative Activity
    Deadline for Senate Finance Committee Working Groups’ Proposals Nears, Talk of International Tax Reform Continues
    After being delayed for a second time, the Senate Finance Committee Tax Reform Working Groups are expected to submit their reports to the full Committee on Tuesday, July 7. Presently, it is unclear the extent to which (if at all) the reports will be made public, although it appears that this will be left to the discretion of the various groups’ co-chairs.

    In addition to timing, it is also uncertain at this time what the final recommendations will look like. While the recommendations are unlikely to be tied to specific legislative proposals, it is likely that some of the Working Groups’ proposals – especially the International Tax Working Group – will be quite detailed. Moreover, with regard to international tax reform specifically, the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) efforts to combat base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) have created a particular sense of urgency among lawmakers to reform the country’s current system of international taxation. However, while the OECD BEPS efforts have had an impact on the timing of reform, it does not appear that the International Tax Working Group is particularly vested in the Obama Administration’s recommendations to the OECD.

    Relatedly, it appears that the future of any reforms to the U.S. tax Code this year are likely to be linked with how Congress chooses to proceed on funding the Highway Trust Fund. In the Senate, Majority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) is hoping to move a two-year highway bill, as well as a package of two-year tax extenders, before highway funding expires on July 31. On the House side, however, tax-writers are likely to pursue a highway patch through the end of the year, with a six-year highway bill, a package of permanent tax extenders, and international tax reform all to be addressed later this year. While it is presently unclear what approach will triumph, the ultimate outcome may be impacted by timing constraints.

    http://www.capitalthinkingblog.com/2015/07/7927/

23. Eritrea? No one knows where it is or gives a rat’s ass. Just say the USA is the only WESTERNISED country in the world that taxes citizens abroad, period

    Renunciations. Way too touchy a topic, especially because the dots too easily connect that renouncers are doing so to dodge taxes

    If so include emotional content ie. CRYING as they (included in my fox ask the candidates)

24. Good suggestions BUT can not find too much on ExPat issues on Fox site

25. Could we use the phrase “Expat tax” so we can search comments other Brockers submit