This post ends with the following question:
Are Americans really “so beaten down, so subservient, so fearful of authority that it complies with the most horrific and undemocratic “laws” and is unable to unite and simply say NO, collectively.”
I invite you to express your answer in this poll:
Perhaps you could consider this question while reading the following post.
_____________________________________________________________________________________________
Re: US Tyranny and Terrorany "People are developing resistance and figuring out there is not much the U.S. can do." https://t.co/Vakr3uya4g
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 3, 2015
The above tweet references the following comment from @Homelander_NOT on Robert Wood’s blog.
Yet another punitive measure that will further the creation of a US Berlin wall plus make life more complicated for Americans/”U.S. Persons” abroad. Other recent moves which demonstrate the tendency of the U.S. government to repeatedly “do the wrong thing:” ” Is US considering not publishing #USExpatriation list anymore? If yes, efficiency or embarrassment?” https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2015/12/01/2015-30366/proposed-collection-comment-request-for-information-collection … (not at all sure that is what implied by this tweet I received) and Executor liability for U.S. income tax and penalties, interest, etc., may extend to you if you were aware that the decedent owed the U.S. treasury for say tax from unfiled tax returns.http://www.taxconnections.com/taxblog/good-to-know-part-3-from-larry-stolberg-cpa-ca/#.Vl79_PmrTIV . For such an “ advanced” nation, the U.S. seems not to understand basic psychology. The more one tries to restrict somebody, the more they are likely to be resisted. If it is true the Name & Shame List’s days are numbered, it won’t be of any consequence. Who reads the Federal Register anyway? Personally, I could care less if they kept an ongoing list published in the NYT and like many, consider it a badge of honor. Proof of being a ‘real’ American if you will. And more nonsense/confusion for an executor (really? even an “alien one? Just how would they enforce that?). Or is it more along the lines that no one can even imagine someone having the gall to not obey the exceptionalistic conditioning that can only be dumped by experiencing the rest of the world? It is a well-documented problem that the IRS does not have records for expats; even with FATCA there are likely to be many pieces of undeliverable mail. Yes the IRS cares not and will continue to follow their own procedures. I expect thousands upon thousands to simply ignore those letters. People are developing resistance and figuring out there is not much the U.S. can do. Other than count on the fact that such folks will surely want to come to the U.S. so “we’ll get them at the border.” Lots of people are figuring out the better choice is simply to go elsewhere for vacations and have family visits where the expat families are. All of this is pathetically sad. All this grief for insistence on filing forms to show there is likely no tax owed-when everyone KNOWS its the big fish living in the U.S.that all this effort should be expended toward. Again, such a very basic, basic thing that eludes those running the most dominant, most fortunate country on earth. I remain puzzled that this is what has happened to the country I grew up in and in spite of awareness of its many flaws, still loved until FBAR.
It’s interesting that the recent linking of passport restrictions to tax compliance has received little discussion at the Isaac Brock Society. To me, this suggests that Brock is largely populated by those who:
1. Do NOT consider themselves to be U.S. citizens (meaning they don’t care about a U.S. passport anyway); and
2. Are primarily concerned with the effects of U.S. extraterritorial tyranny and U.S. terrorany on Canadian citizens.
It’s the opposite in Europe where the Facebook groups (at least here and here) have included much discussion about the upcoming passport restrictions. The usual lobby groups, have done their usual letter writing, with the usual response (nothing) from the USA.
U.S. citizenship and the U.S. passport …
The State Department takes the position that a U.S. passport is proof of U.S. citizenship. It is an “incident of U.S. citizenship”. What is the meaning of U.S. citizenship? What does it mean when one holds a U.S. passport?
Bubblebustin recently asked the following question:
@USCitizenAbroad
Isn’t the current Congressional enforcement of CBT in fact resulting in the destruction of US citizenship we are seeing today, the justification for these laws derived from the notion that citizenship is based in taxation, or, “Taxation-Based Citizenship”?
Congress has turned what it means to be a citizen on its head, the result of which is that the citizen becomes the servant of the government, as opposed to the reverse. CBT is like a splinter that until now one could ignore, but because of irritating acts of Congress is now festering to the point of becoming life threatening. Unfortunately because citizenship and taxation are intertwined as such (Cook v Tait) the citizen must remove him/herself from the splinter instead.
Are we dealing with “citizenship-based taxation” or with “taxation-based citizenship”?
Since the 2004 creation of the “Tax Citizen” (as described by Virgina La Torre Jeker), U.S. citizenship and taxation have become one and the same. Taxation = citizenship and citizenship = taxation (without specifying the “incidents of taxation”).
The new meaning of U.S. citizenship – Taxation isn’t everything, it’s the only thing
In 2013, U.S. tax lawyer, Stephen Mopsick opined (while acknowledging the problems of FATCA) on the meaning of U.S. citizenship. On June 30, 2014 (largely in response to his post) I wrote the following post on Brock.
July 4 Reflection: Meaning of "Being an American" vs. "Being one of those #Americansabroad" https://t.co/d3tAQemx0N via @@IsaacBrockSoc
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 3, 2015
It included:
As we approach the 4th of July – Independence Day – one must ask whether the there is a difference between “Being an American” and “Being an American Abroad”. Another year has passed.
– the formal relinquishments of U.S. citizenship continue to grow
– the informal relinquishments of U.S. citizenship (run and hide) are going through the roof
– the rollout of “FATCA Hunt” is forcing Americans abroad to hide their “USness”
– the U.S. Congress has shown no interest in freeing Americans abroad from the “prison of citizenship-based taxation” – AKA taxation based on place of birth
Tomorrow July 1, 2014 marks the Official start of FATCA Hunt.
As Americans abroad contemplating the arrival of Independence Day:
What are your thoughts on the MEANING of being an American abroad?
What message would you like to send to America this Independence Day?
I encourage you to go and reread the comments to this post.
Leading to: The role of the passport in “facilitating” “taxation-based citizenship” …
A. History of the control of movement through the passport
U.S. Passport as Instrument of Control https://t.co/d0iP8nvkRS – History of the use of the passport as an instrument to prevent travel
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 3, 2015
The above tweet references a Brock post from USXCanada. It includes:
The extraordinary Mrs. Shipley: how the United States controlled international travel before the age of terrorism
Connecticut Law Review 43:3 (Feb 2011) 819-888http://uconn.lawreviewnetwork.com/files/documents/JeffreyKahn43Conn.L.Rev.819.pdf
[389 footnotes] Career civil servant Ruth B. Shipley acted as chief of the Passport Division of the U.S. State Department from 1928 to 1955. Shipley personally reviewed every passport application, and prior to 1958 Supreme Court decision, her actions were subject to no judicial review. Shipley denied passports to Paul Robeson, Arthur Miller, Linus Pauling, and “many other” Americans during the 1950s. Kahn’s article explores how Shipley acquired such power and how the US passport became an instrument to prevent rather than permit travel. A backgrounder opening (825-842) provides a history of travel controls from 1789 to the Shipley era. Originally the passport was “a document [issued by the country that the traveler sought to enter] that granted a foreigner permission to pass into or out of a country’s ports” (825) — the opposite of what the passport came to be. Kahn concludes that current administration of U.S. citizens has achieved the Shipley effect through authority “diffused among intelligence analysts in multiple agencies who now compile watchlists of people deemed too dangerous to travel.” In this environment, judicial review is crippled by “the traditional deference accorded to national security and the sometimes secret processes by which that government interest is secured” (887).
B. The passport application as a means to notify U.S. Treasury of the existence of Americans abroad
There is NO DOUBT that that passports are now linked to tax compliance. For the past several years it has been common knowledge that passport applications and renewals were being used to notify U.S. treasury of the existence of Americans Abroad (as discussed in this post by MopsickTaxLaw). Until now, the passport application has been used to notify U.S. Treasury of your existence. That was then. Now as discussed by Rober Wood and others , the IRS can “in effect” deny you a U.S. passport.
C. The denial of a U.S. passport to those (including Americans abroad) who “owe” U.S. taxes
Americans abroad are the most likely to be affected by these incredibly punitive measures. Most Americans abroad are in a position where they:
1. Don’t know they are required to pay U.S. taxes; or
2. Can’t understand the rules they are asked to comply with.
Because the Internal Revenue Code penalized all things “foreign”, Americans abroad are particularly susceptible to penalties and IRS tax debts. The effect of this measure is that eventually (we all know how things get worse and worse) many Americans abroad will be denied U.S. passports. This means that they can’t travel to the USA (as is required by law) on a U.S. passport. Perhaps they can risk travel on another passport.
At a bare minimum, it is very risky for a U.S. citizen to live outside the United States if he/she has ONLY a U.S. passport.
Conclusion: The future of U.S. citizenship abroad …
It’s over. U.S. citizenship citizenship is now synonymous with taxation. Taxation is a code of taxes, reporting requirements and rules of life control that:
1. Cannot be understood by the average person (except with the assistance of “tax professionals” of questionable competence); or
2. Is of a level of complexity that compliance is almost impossible; or
3. Is such those who can comply will find that U.S. tax compliance makes living life outside the United States impossible.
And now, the Government of the United States – that “Great Citadel of Freedom and Justice” claims the right to deny you the right to travel from or to the United States. Seems to me that you can either (1) realize that compliance is impossible or (2) take whatever steps are necessary to renounce.
The true Obama Legacy is the destruction of “U.S. citizenship abroad”. Of course, that’s change you can believe in!
The teaching of Cook v. Tait is that the U.S. Government somehow benefits its citizens wherever they may be. That was in the era of “citizenship-based taxation”. In new era of “taxation-based citizenship”, it has become clear that the sole purpose of the citizen is to benefit the government.
The question is: why have Americans allowed this to happen? Why has there been no resistance?
"What astonishes all of my “foreign” friends is how passive, obedient and fearful US people are of their government" https://t.co/1Lfa7lI5fu
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 3, 2015
The above tweet references the following comment from the Maplesandbox blog.
As a former U.S. citizen, who renounced just in order to survive, as my four non-U.S. business partners gave me an ultimatum, either get rid of your U.S. citizenship, which was contaminating our totally German business and subjecting our company’s accounts to U.S. Treasury and IRS scrutiny, or you must sell your shares and leave. This all started upon the advice of our German bank, who said that they wouldn’t deal with our accounts if there was any American/’U.S. Person’ involvement? Not to mention the personal impact on my mortgage, on my bank closing all of my investment accounts and everything else that every reader here knows all too well.
What amazes me most, and also amazes all of my personal and professional friends, all of them non U.S. persons, is how obedient and conforming the organizations supposedly representing the interests of U.S. citizens abroad are. With all that has happened, and especially now, subsequent to the Senate Finance Committee’s “report” on tax reform, paying nothing but contemptuous lip service to the plight of US citizens abroad, it should be more than obvious that U.S. Citizens abroad are of absolutely no relevance for lawmakers and legislators in Washington. Yet, the attitude of all of the organizations supposedly looking out for and fighting for the rights of US citizens abroad has been to follow a very respectful path of presenting the case for change, as if they were dealing with a fair democratic system, that respects equal representation and justice. They look ridiculous, all of them! When I read that Democrats Abroad have been trying to push the “bandage” fix of ‘Same Country Exception’ for more than four years, with no result, I say that this is absolutely pathetic. When I see American Citizens Abroad sending endless delegations to Washington, year after year, and even opening an office there, only to see the interests of overseas Americans relegated to a footnote, with no action proposed n the recent Senate Financial Committee report, I would think that they should be embarrassed and ashamed, as they should be. It has taken the group Republicans Overseas over one year to formulate an intended lawsuit, which has been postponed endless times, with a “promise” to file it next week, I say that they too have not approached this in the right way. Too much damage has been done in the interim.
What astonishes all of my “foreign” friends is how passive, obedient and fearful U.S. people are of their government, especially when confronted with such outright injustice, literal extortion and destruction of their financial well being and that of their families and business partners. Even the ever law abiding Germans wouldn’t put up with any of this and they would probably, en masse, as one lawyer friend told me, simply refuse to cooperate with any of this Byzantine filing of forms and endless intrusions into their privacy and that of their families and business partners. They would collectively refuse and file class action suits against the authorities behind these injustices worthy of a fascist totalitarian regime. Perhaps the Germans understand better than the Americans what this sort of thing leads to, when a society becomes so beaten down, so subservient, so fearful of authority that it complies with the most horrific and undemocratic “laws” and is unable to unite and simply say NO, collectively. Until Americans fight to recover some form of democracy and fairness, the ravages of FATCA will be but one in a coming litany of similar such abuses. To continue believing that they are dealing with democratic institutions and that reason and fairness will prevail is nothing but a naive attitude that will lead them nowhere, as we can now see with the recent Senate Finance Committee report.
I have bolded the last paragraph of this comment. Are Americans really “so beaten down, so subservient, so fearful of authority that it complies with the most horrific and undemocratic “laws” and is unable to unite and simply say NO, collectively.”
If the US starts refusing or revoking US passports over ‘owed’ taxes, do they really think if someone has a second passport (which probably a majority of ex-pats do and even more so if they’re smart) is going to increase tax revenue?
At what point is the ACA going to stop putting faith that the US Congress will do the right thing? The ACA should use its contacts to start an IBS style lawsuit for the EU courts.
(1) DENIAL.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided under subparagraph (B), upon receiving an application for a passport from an individual that either—
(i) does not include the social security account number issued to that individual, or
(ii) includes an incorrect or invalid social security number willfully, intentionally, negligently, or recklessly provided by such individual,
the Secretary of State is authorized to deny such application and is authorized to not issue a passport to the individual.
https://www.congress.gov/bill/114th-congress/house-bill/22/text#toc-HA2663D98EA1D4281958F6FB7872BFB85
What does that mean? If someone doesn’t owe taxes and refuses to supply a Social Security number then their application will be denied as well?
Rand Paul should challenge this as well. Isn’t freedom of movement a constitutional right?
Honestly I think the outrage over this is too late. The IRS if you’re subject to it is the most evasive system in the world. You can’t live you life without inspection when you can’t steal a dollar, give a dollar, find a dollar, not receive a dollar from a loan, have a dollar in a foreign bank, earn a dollar or earn something else instead of a dollar without inspection and taxation. Once you owe the IRS money they have massive powers to screw you over. Politicians don’t want private creditors to have anywhere near the powers of the IRS.
Given all this, if you owe money to the IRS you have to pay. So I don’t have much sympathy to somebody who doesn’t. Yes it might be unfair they had a tax applied to them in the first place or that the tax was crazy in complexity or size but you have to pay. If you really can’t pay you can get the IRS to reduce what you owe but you have to not really be able to pay.
So in my book taking their passports seems pretty minor compared to all the other stuff.
Here’s a good poll question:
Is a US passport becoming more or less valuable?
Well, speaking as one who’s just given up my passport/citizenship I can’t say as I feel very different. God knows, the US/IRS will do everything they can to make life difficult for any poor souls who have a US passport and dare to live abroad, but I’m SO pleased to be out of the agony of wondering just WHAT they can do. Who knows what American laws the US will impose on Europe? Who would have thought they would twist the arms of over 200 countries’ banks to bully them into compliance with their medieval tax regime; jeez, who would have thought that the foreign banks would comply? Me, I see the whole world as becoming an extension of the US’ laws, especially if Europe passes TTIP. Here in the UK we’re becoming the 51st state anyway, why not all of Europe?
The irony that those most likely to have their passports revoked don’t drive on US highways is not lost on me.
@Neill – Completely disagree with your comments. It’s probably fair comment most people on this site either have a second passport or are eligible for one.
Homelanders will be the ones to suffer the most out of this change in law. For them a US passport is not a lot different than a ‘get out of jail’ card in Monopoly except it’s hardly free.
Homelands can brand ex-pats anything they want, but at the end of the day it’s the ex-pats that are the brave ones leaving for other shores assimilating into other cultures and learning new languages.
The US will never be able to ‘handcuff’ people to the system. History has shown that never works forever.
This is particularly true that US citizenship is simply a legal status that can be shaken off if necessary by legal or illegal means.
I should make it clear that I am not a US person but I sympathise very much with all of you who are affected by the tyranny of the US government and their inhuman attitude towards their own citizen living inside or outside the US. I find it incomprehensible to see a government taking pleasure in the suffering of its own people. On the other hand I think, If the American mass wants to influence changes in US legislation they certainly can; it’s no different from any other democracies in the world. But, the Americans living abroad cannot alone make the changes happen. It has to be done in conjunction with the homelanders. The problem here is that the homelanders are affected very little or none by those laws, therefore they will be unwilling to join a fight to initiate a change. Also, they firmly believe that the whole world should dance to America’s orders and accommodate their laws no matter how bad they are ( by the way homelanders don’t agree that these laws are bad to begin with). All said, if you are affected and If you are expecting the change to happen on your life time you may never see it. Just drop that passport and walk away to a freer land. America was a great country at one time but sadly, the American dream no now only a dream.
“even with FATCA there are likely to be many pieces of undeliverable mail.”
Even before FATCA there were many pieces of undeliverable mail. The IRS misaddresses mail, the IRS puts the international standard abbreviation for Panama (PA) or Canada (CA) etc. at the end of its return address so the destination country’s post office returns undeliverable mail to other undeliverable places, and the IRS mails some of its letters from the UK to Japan or Germany to Japan etc. with unreadable return addresses in the postal meters.
With FATCA there will be so much more undeliverable mail.
When the IRS sends mail from its home country it often affixes insufficient postage. If the US Postal Service checks the postage they might return it (in which case the IRS actually gets the undeliverable mail returned) or might destroy it (because the IRS asks the post office to destroy some undeliverable mail instead of returning it).
“Yes the IRS cares not and will continue to follow their own procedures”
Well, except for when the IRS continues to NOT follow their own procedures.
“C. The denial of a U.S. passport to those (including Americans abroad) who “owe” U.S. taxes”
D. The denial of a US passport to those (including Americans abroad) who DON’T owe US taxes but were framed by the cohorts of Monica Hernandez.
By the way a few days ago I saw a news report that some of Monica Hernandez’s cohorts were also arrested recently. Indeed she wasn’t working alone. I think they didn’t get the ringleaders though. The IRS, DOJ, and courts continue to abuse victims.
“(1) DENIAL.—
(A) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided under subparagraph (B), upon receiving an application for a passport from an individual that either—
(i) does not include the social security account number issued to that individual, or
(ii) includes an incorrect or invalid social security number willfully, intentionally, negligently, or recklessly provided by such individual,
the Secretary of State is authorized to deny such application and is authorized to not issue a passport to the individual.”
This almost means that when a US person has to travel to the US to get a social security in the first place, they can’t get a US passport to do it. Almost, but there’s a loophole. If the passport application includes an incorrect or invalid social security number unwillfully, unintentionally, unnegligently, and unrecklessly because of the legal requirement that they have to report a social security number when they can’t even get one, they might be able to get a US passport.
The word “intentionally” is ambiguous though. When the intent to require fabrication of a social security number is the intent of Congress and the intent of US Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit but not the intent of the victim, does that mean that the victim’s intent to comply with the law and comply with the Federal Circuit differs from intent do fabricate a social security number?
@Norman Diamon. Re:mail. My experience is that while US mail takes one week to get here, IRS letters tend to take three weeks for some reason? Also there is no differentiation into time limits for requests to comply if you live overseas or in the US. So it all assumes the notice will be delivered in a few days.
on my last trip to amerika over 3 years ago now the parting words of the border agent were ” I know that there is a post office in xxx which is where you are going. make sure you make that your first stop and get a pass port.”
luckily for me I am a rebel and so my wife and I made the local grocery store our first stop for a 6 pack of beer and we went to the beach instead.
the last known address amerika has for me is from 1966 when I was 6 years old.
I will never cross the border again and I will never have in my possession an amerikan passport. how the heck is uncle sam ever going to find me especially since I am at a “local client based” credit union that only wanted my drivers license and visa credit card for i.d.
like I have said many times before….if a brown envelope arrives in my mail box it will be added to the newspaper in the bottom of the bird cage.
uncle sam will only find you if you make it easy for him to find you.
I think that after almost 50 years on not living in that country there is little possibility of them finding me
I’m no longer a “US Person” but didn’t do my ‘final filings’ for various reasons I have discussed in the past. I am fully committed to never setting foot on US soil again and am MORE than ok with that. The only thing I dread is when a parent or such dies and I have to explain why I didn’t go to my own parent’s funeral, etc. I’ll explain though and they’ll have to deal with it and move on. US Expats are victims, living in a world of violated human rights. At this stage we can only do our best.
“My experience is that while US mail takes one week to get here, IRS letters tend to take three weeks for some reason?”
Air mail from the US to Japan usually takes around 8 days, except around 20 days when the transit period overlaps with December.
In my experience, air mail with proper postage from the IRS or DOJ or courts are about the same. But often they cheat the USPS instead, and sometimes they get caught.
If the IRS or court remails a notice in an envelope with a new postal meter, the postal meter might be dated days, weeks, or months later than the date printed in the notice.
If the IRS sends a letter by Surface Air Lifted, which the US calls Surface Air Lifted, add a few weeks. Those envelopes might or might not have a date printed by computer, but they don’t have postal meters.
If the IRS mails its letter from the UK or Germany, to Japan, add a few weeks. Those envelopes also don’t have dates or postal meters. Some of them are even labelled for sea mail.
“Also there is no differentiation into time limits for requests to comply if you live overseas or in the US. So it all assumes the notice will be delivered in a few days.”
The only exception is a Notice of Deficiency. We get 150 days to petition Tax Court and try to find out how the IRS is cheating us (usually they won’t tell us anyway, but we get time to try). Homelanders only get 90 days.
So does Congress assume that all IRS letters other than Notices of Deficiency will be delivered incredibly quickly? Or is it more like the usual, where they know and don’t care?
Umm, I keep seeing some very false statements and very important facts omitted in these discussions on passport revocation. If one has their passport revoked, not being able to travel on the U.S. Passport or use it for local requirements are not at all a concern. At least in Japan and I would have to believe everywhere, a passport is required for a visa. You lose your passport you lose your visa.
My spouse checked on this for me. I lose my passport, I lose my permanent resident visa and my right to live anywhere outside the U.S. .
@bubblebustin
Is a US passport becoming more or less valuable?
An interesting question. This particular thread seems to present an answer to that question that is at odds with the generally prevailing position on Brock.
The generally prevailing position on Brock is that a US passport has low and diminishing value.
But this thread presents the contrary view: it suggests that a US passport is actually very valuable. After all, if a US passport has no value, why would anyone be offended if the US government tried to take it away?
Note that I’m not going to or trying to answer @bubblebustin’s question one way or the other–I’m just pointing out what I see as an obvious contradiction here.
@Don
I think you presume too much. I do not have a second passport and until renewing my US passport a few years ago could not conceive of any reason to have one. From reading comments on this and other sites, from the ACA reports to Congress cited by the IRS TAS, many do not.
@Don and Neill
Losing my passport is be far my worst fear. That can order me to pay however much they want but no one can squeeze blood from a stone. I have nothing of any great value from them to take.
These are statements that were on my application to renew my passport three years ago and a few comments.
“The Department of State must provide your SSN and foreign residence information to the Department of Treasury. If you fail to provide the information, you are subject to a $500 penalty enforced by the IRS.”
“Your Social Security Number will be provided to Treasury , used in connection with debt collection and checked against lists of persons ineligible or potentially ineligible to receive a U.S. Passport, among other authorized uses.”
And then we have the following, (emphasis in bold mine)
“Your social security numbers will be provided to the U.S. Department of Treasury and failure to provide it may subject you to a penalty, as described in the Federal Tax Law provision. It also may be used for identification verification for passport adjudication and in connection with debt collection, among other purposes as authorized and generally described in this section. PROVIDING YOUR SOCIAL SECURITY NUMBER AND OTHER INFORMATION REQUESTED ON THIS FORM OTHERWISE IS VOLUNTARY, BUT FAILURE TO PROVIDE THE INFORMATION REQUESTED ON THIS FORM MAY RESULT IN PROCESSING DELAYS OR THE DENIAL OF YOUR U.S. PASSPORT APPLICATION”.
“Voluntary” you say?
The following bold is from the application.
“CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION: Failure to provide the information requested on this form may result in Passport Services’ refusal to accept your application or result in the denial of a U.S. Passport.”
For myself and others who are lawfully living overseas, this document reads, ‘The applicant will provide the following information and allow us to use it illegally or risk having the right to travel and reside outside the borders of the homeland illegally revoked’. My Permanent Residence Visa requires that I maintain a valid passport. The revocation of my passport would immediately tear myself away from my family, home and employment, causing irrevocable negative changes to my rights and privileges to reside with my family in our home and to the positions I worked hard over a number of years to secure, without due process nor any taxes owed.
@Neill,
you and I are certainly not in the same world if you believe losing my passport is minor compared to all else.
Your argument that we all must pay regardless is also flawed. These taxes, requirements and penalties are not only unfair, they are in violation of various U.S., international and Japanese ( I live in Japan) laws and treaties. You mean to say that I MUST comply with the laws of the nation of my birth when doing so would cause my to violate the laws of the land I have chosen to live in? That IS the reality of this situation.
@Japan T
I wonder how many people are simultaneously non-IRS compliant AND living overseas with the US passport as the only passport they have/to which they are entitled.
I’m guessing the numbers would be small. It seems to be primarily people who have been living for years/decades as citizens of another country (eg Canada) who are getting bit on the butt by the IRS. But I could be wrong.
@Dash1729
To deny someone their passport is to deny them their right to exit and enter the US. Isn’t any price too high for what should be a right? I’d say yes. And if I could make a prediction, passport revocation is going to cause US passports to depreciate in value – just as overriding the rights and protections of the Charter in Canada has lessened the value of Canadian citizenship by creating two classes of Canadians.
As such,
“Many critics suggest that the new citizenship law will ultimately weaken citizenship since the requirements are more exclusionary. Audrey Macklin, a professor of law at the University of Toronto says: “If you take the view that citizenship is a commodity, you want to make it more valuable. Then like any commodity its value increases if it’s scarce, hard to get and easy to lose.” Such a transition to view and treat citizenship as a privilege rather than a right would change the meaning of citizenship for new immigrants and non-Canadian born citizens. It means that government would reward them citizenship for “good behavior” and could take it away for “bad behavior”. This is a form of “punishment,” and in fact, an unnecessary punishment, especially when there are other avenues to deal with the so-called “bad behavior”. The introduction of citizenship as merely a privilege, and not a right comes from the negative perception that immigrants are cheaters. It constructs the idea that immigrants, refugees, foreign workers, and naturalized citizens are terrorists or criminals and need to be deported to their “home countries.”
http://www.sfu.ca/education/cels/bilingual/bilingual-corner/bill-c-24.html
I believe passport revocation will weaken the value of US passports for the same reasons:
-Passports are no longer a right, but a commodity
-Would change the meaning of freedom of mobility for potential immigrants and citizens
-Some citizens would be rewarded with mobility rights, others denied as punishment
-Other less punitive options are ignored
Expect to hear, “well if you ain’t a tax cheat, you’ve got nothing to worry about”.
Petros is right, the US is becoming a debtors prison.
“If one has their passport revoked, not being able to travel on the U.S. Passport or use it for local requirements are not at all a concern.”
Do you mean “not the only concern” instead of “not at all a concern”? Either way, what statement by someone else do you see as false? I’m confused.
“At least in Japan and I would have to believe everywhere, a passport is required for a visa.”
There are exceptions.
Around 1952 or so, Japan stripped Japanese nationality from ex-slaves that it had imported from Korea while Korea was annexed, and ethnic Koreans changed from second class Japanese citizens to special permanent residents. They had to choose North or South Korea. Many chose North, which was understandable at the time. Now their descendants get travel documents from the Japanese government labelling them North Koreans, with permission to stay permanently in Japan as long as they don’t do something stupid like try to exercise free speech at the wrong time.
More recently, Japan issued a second class residence card to all foreigners who are here legally, not first class like Tama-chan the seal who swam in the river for a while, but anyway replacing the old alien registration cards. We no longer have stamps in our passports saying that we have permission to stay in Japan for whatever length of time; it’s all in the residence card now.
I don’t know what happened to people who had the old alien registration cards indicating no permission to stay in Japan (i.e. illegal immigrants). If they renewed their passports, obviously they had no visa or residence stamps to transfer to their new passports.
One time I saw someone in immigration with a stateless person’s travel document. I think it was issued by Japan but am not sure. I assume his presence in immigration meant he was applying for extension of stay, possibly after having been born here and maybe never going abroad.
Meanwhile, in 2004 I figured out that it might be possible to transfer my Japanese permission to stay from my US passport to my Canadian passport. An immigration official had to go look it up, but he came back and answered affirmatively, and made appropriate stamps in my passports. I also had to go to my city hall to amend my alien registration card. If that were to be done today, there would be nothing to stamp in the passports; it would all be done in the residence card.
Then silly me, I sent my US passport to the Social Security Administration, so that now they could hold onto it for months before returning it by unregistered misaddressed mail and I would not have to worry about what happened to it. Though oddly the passport came back safely after a few months. Though non-oddly, still no grant or rejection of SSN application.[*] Well, silly me, even though I’d seen the tip of the iceberg by that time, I didn’t know about the rest of the iceberg, and I did not immediately renounce US citizenship.
America’s chess hero Bobby Fisher was jailed because the US, despite knowing his address, didn’t tell him when they were cancelling his passport, so when he went outbound through Japanese immigration expecting to go on a vacation, Japanese immigration told him his passport was cancelled. At this point you are right, permission to stay gets cancelled when the passport gets cancelled.
A few decades ago, a US citizen could obtain landed immigrant status and live permanently in Canada without a passport. Later Canada changed its rules so such a person would need a US passport.
[* In 2010 the SSA reneged on its 1994 letter and finally rejected my 1994 application for SSN. They still haven’t granted or rejected my application for my wife though, which was required in 1994 when the IRS hadn’t invented ITINs yet.]
@bubblebustin
Whatever value a passport may (or may not) have–and I’m not taking a position on that–the ability to travel in and out of the US does not appear to be something dependent on carrying a US passport. Both plaintiffs in the Arvay lawsuit state in their statement of claims–and presumably will eventually testify as well–that they travel in and out of the US (as visitors) without a US passport despite a US place of birth.
Boris Johnson would disagree, Dash!
Boris Johnson would disagree, Dash!
BTW, I’m sure the revenue that his “denied entry” has netted hasn’t gone unnoticed by the IRS “gotcha” team.
To prove we have changed for the worse in the U.S. I got into a taxi driven by a Russian Jewish man. I asked him if he had come here to escape Communism. His answer shocked me. he said he came here after the communists lost power. He said he had been able to live very well when they were Socialists, it was the capitalists he hated. He said, No.1. he gets aid from the local Jewish group who paid his way here. 2. his wife get aid to dependent children from the State of IL. for their 3 children. 3. She keeps two infants for young couples for cash and pays no taxes on what she makes. 4. He drives a cab that he rents from a relative for cash and pays no taxes on the cash he makes. 5. He has drawn unemployment compensation on two extended periods. 6. When he doesn’t drive a cab, he sells stuff at Flea Markets for about 1000% profit and has never filed a Tax Return. When I asked him what they make a month with all his income streams, I was shocked when he said, Oh about 25,000 a month cash and when the Capitalists fail in Russia I’ll go back with suit cases full of 100 dollar bills and live like a king on cash.
He said, you guys are the Socialists now and when you fail I’ll leave.
@bubblebustin
I don’t know why the plaintiffs had a different experience from Boris. We don’t need to resolve the discrepancy here but I hope that Joe Arvay has a clear position on this in case it comes up in court.