Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 34 Comments

CashingInOnTheAmericanDiaspora

I count 1,058 names in the latest Quarterly Publication of Individuals Who Gave Us At Least $2,350, which has just been placed on public inspection for printing in the Federal Register next Monday, a mere nine days later than required by law. Meanwhile, the FBI, which also tracks American emigrants who renounce citizenship (but not those who relinquish in other ways) for the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), says that NICS had 27,240 renunciant records on 31 December 2014, and 32,666 renunciant records a year later, for an increase of 5,426 during the year 2015, and another 253 in January. Only 4,279 names showed up in the Federal Register in the same period, meaning that the IRS missed more than eleven hundred of us at minimum.

Last year was the first full year in which the $2,350 fee — the world’s highest fee — was in effect, and Q4 2015 is the first full quarter in which not just renunciants but all relinquishers were charged that fee for exercising the human right to change their nationality. Clearly the American diaspora is wildly enthusiastic about State’s efforts to protect that right, and that’s helped make it a record year for State Department fee revenue: at least US$12,908,550!  (That figure, and the chart above, only includes revenue from renunciants listed in NICS; I haven’t tried to estimate how many non-renunciant relinquishers there might be, though our earlier analysis suggests they might be only slightly less numerous than renunciants.)

More than two-thirds of that revenue is attributable to people giving up citizenship within the past year — that’s an amount nearly 50% bigger than State’s entire 2015 budget request for American Citizen Services. (Keep in mind that all the fees went to State, rather than the IRS who actually do the hard work of compiling the list by copying the names from the CLNs which State sends them into a spreadsheet and deleting a bunch for kicks and giggles or something.)

Table of contents

  1. General comments
  2. Media articles about specific relinquishments
  3. Comparison with NICS
  4. Conclusion

General comments

The pre-print of this quarter’s list takes up 27 pages. Most full pages have 41 names; two pages (11 and 25) have only 40 names due to long names taking up two lines. There’s 22 names on the first page, and 13 on the last page. So unless I’m even worse at math and counting than the U.S. government, that’s 1,058 names.

The IRS’ Federal Register list is far from the only illegally-late government report these days. For example, under 19 USC § 2432(b) (part of the hilariously hypocritical Jackson-Vanik Amendment), the State Department is required to give Congress “information as to the nature and implementation of emigration laws and policies and restrictions or discrimination applied to or against persons wishing to emigrate”, so that Congress can confirm whether the President is correctly exercising his obligation to sanction countries which “impose[] more than a nominal tax on emigration or on the visas or other documents required for emigration, for any purpose or cause whatsoever”. However, State’s report on the emigration policies of Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, and Uzbekistan was around two weeks late, according to the Congressional Record — it was supposed to have been submitted to Congress by the end of last year.

The IRS list is not only late, but incomplete as well. It’s supposed to include not just the renunciants who show up in NICS, but people relinquishing citizenship under any provision of 8 USC § 1481. Yet, for the fourth year in a row, NICS added a bigger number of names than the IRS printed in the Federal Register. (And that’s not even mentioning the nearly 20,000 people per year who turn in their green cards, some of whom are also supposed to show up in the Federal Register list.) This discrepancy has led observers such as international tax lawyer Andrew Mitchel to conclude that the IRS list is “missing a significant number of names”. (See here for our earlier discussion of various theories about the list, such as the claim that it’s only supposed to include covered expatriates.)

In total, since then-Secretary of State and current presidential candidate Hillary Clinton first authorised the imposition of a $450 fee on renunciants back in 2010, they’ve collected more than $18 million from people who don’t want to be Americans any longer.

Media articles about specific relinquishments

Here’s a table of seventeen people mentioned by name in media reports as having given up U.S. citizenship since the beginning of 2014; nine of their names have not yet appeared in the Federal Register (four out of eleven from 2014, and five out of six from 2015). I’ve also included one person who posted his own CLN on Twitter and later showed up in the list (I haven’t included people who tweeted their own CLNs but didn’t show up in the list). Oddly enough, not a single one of these showed up in the Q4 2015 list. Maybe I’m just missing some media reports of famous people who gave up citizenship and did show in the revenue list; if you know of any others, please leave a comment. In any case, a non-publication rate of more than one-third for 2014 is still pretty bad.

Name Occupation Other
citizenship		 Giving up US citizenship Appeared in
Federal
Register?		 Source
Reason Date
Lu Shu-hao Military Taiwan Service in Republic of China Army January 2014 or earlier No Taipei Times
Sandy Opravil Housewife Switzerland Save her mortgage February 2014 Q3 2014 Newsweek
Roger Ver Bitcoin investor St. Kitts & Nevis Libertarian political opinions February 2014 No Bloomberg
Sophia Martelly Politician Haiti Run for Senate of Haiti March 2014 Q3 2015 Haiti Press Network
Ya’aqov Ben-Yehudah Writer Israel Complicated; see source March 2014 Q2 2014 Times of Israel
Sean Cavanaugh Technology Canada FATCA April 2014 Q1 2015 Tweeted own CLN in August 2014
Mona Quartey Politician Ghana Become Deputy Finance Minister of Ghana July 2014 No Graphic News (Ghana)
Alex Kim Singer South Korea Obtain South Korean citizenship & serve in military August 2014 No Herald Business (South Korea)
Nicole Beaudoin Unknown Canada FATCA September 2014 Q3 2014 La Presse (Canada)
Kim Sungkyum Military South Korea Be commissioned an officer in the Republic of Korea Army December 2014 Q1 2015 Kookbang Ilbo (South Korea)
Lin Jou-min Architect Taiwan Take position in Taipei city government December 2014 Q3 2015 Central News Agency (Taiwan)
Rachel Azaria Politician Israel Members of Knesset cannot hold foreign citizenships January 2015 No Times of Israel
Jonathan Tepper Macroeconomic analyst United Kingdom FATCA & other U.S. tax reporting requirements January 2015 No The New York Times
David Alward Politician Canada Become Canadian consul-general in Boston April 2015 or earlier Q3 2015 Canadian Broadcasting Corporation
Alfred Oko Vanderpuije Politician Ghana Stand for election to Parliament August 2015 No Starr FM (Ghana)
Philip Ryu Singer South Korea Serve in South Korean army September 2015 or earlier No Money Today (South Korea)
Rachel Heller Writer Netherlands FATCA & other U.S. tax reporting requirements even when no U.S. tax is owed November 2015 No Blog (will be included in TV news programme at a later date)

For earlier reports (including the date, if any, in which those people showed up in the Federal Register), see Wikipedia’s list of former United States citizens who relinquished their nationality, though note that it only includes people who have Wikipedia articles. (I’ve seen two media reports of people without Wikipedia articles giving up U.S. citizenship in 2013: Kim Young-keun, who according to the Dong-A Ilbo renounced to take a position in the Overseas Korean Foundation under South Korea’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs, and showed up in the Q3 2013 list; and Michael Putman, interviewed for this BBC article, who finally showed up in last quarter’s list.)

Back to table of contents

Comparison with NICS

The below table lists the monthly additions to NICS for 2011–2015, compared with the quarterly lists in the Federal Register. The FBI has the bad habit of uploading the new NICS report each month at the same URL as the old one; the only way to keep a verifiable collection of old reports is to save old ones in the Internet Archive each month, and unfortunately we didn’t remember to do this for all months. If the month is set in upright type, the link goes to an actual Internet Archive copy of the FBI NICS report for that month. If the month is in bold type (for December), the link goes to the NICS annual operations report for the appropriate year. Finally, for months in italics, the link goes to a Brock post or comment.

A few caveats. The “addition” figure for April 2011 refers to all additions since December 2010. The “addition” figure for October 2012 includes what the FBI described as a “backlog” of 2,900 renunciant records, also included in the annual total for that year. I also gave an estimate of what the annual total would be without the backlog, even though some of the backlog may relate to other periods covered by the chart.

First quarter Second quarter Third quarter Fourth quarter
Month,
year		 Addi-
tions		 Month-end
total		 Month,
year		 Addi-
tions		 Month-end
total		 Month,
year		 Addi-
tions		 Month-end
total		 Month,
year		 Addi-
tions		 Month-end
total
Apr 2011 41 15,387 Jul 2011 89 15,705 Oct 2011 118 15,930
May 2011 98 15,445 Aug 2011 54 15,759 Nov 2011 40 15,970
Jun 2011 129 15,616 Sep 2011 53 15,812 Dec 2011 34 16,004
Q2 total 268 Q3 total 196 Q4 total 192
76 FR 27175 499 76 FR 46898 519 76 FR 66361 403 77 FR 5308 360
Annual totals for 2011 NICS 656 Fed. Reg. 1,781
Jan 2012 265 16,269 Apr 2012 204 16,662 Jul 2012 22 17,188 Oct 2012 3106 20,577
Feb 2012 98 16,367 May 2012 Missing Aug 2012 149 17,337 Nov 2012 97 20,654
Mar 2012 89 16,458 Jun 2012 504 17,166 Sep 2012 114 17,451 Dec 2012 0 20,654
Q1 total 452 Q2 total 708 Q3 total 285 Q4 total 3,203
77 FR 25538 460 77 FR 44310 189 77 FR 66084 238 78 FR 10692 45
Annual totals for 2012 NICS *4,648 W/o backlog:
~1,700		 Fed. Reg. 932
Jan 2013 176 20,830 Apr 2013 319 21,823 Jul 2013 298 22,908 Oct 2013 302 23,557
Feb 2013 478 21,308 May 2013 374 22,197 Aug 2013 278 23,186 Nov 2013 118 23,675
Mar 2013 196 21,504 Jun 2013 413 22,610 Sep 2013 69 23,255 Dec 2013 132 23,807
Q1 total 850 Q2 total 1,106 Q3 total 645 Q4 total 552
78 FR 26867 679 78 FR 48773 1,130 78 FR 68151 560 79 FR 7504 631
Annual totals for 2013 NICS 3,153 Fed. Reg. 3,000
Jan 2014 320 24,127 Apr 2014 382 24,602 Jul 2014 577 26,000 Oct 2014 426 26,916
Feb 2014 95 24,222 May 2014 205 24,807 Aug 2014 180 26,180 Nov 2014 187 27,103
Mar 2014 -2 24,220 Jun 2014 616 25,423 Sep 2014 300 26,480 Dec 2014 137 27,240
Q1 total 413 Q2 total 1,203 Q3 total 1,057 Q4 total 750
79 FR 25176 1,001 79 FR 46306 576 79 FR 64031 776 80 FR 7685 1,062
Annual totals for 2014 NICS 3,423 Fed. Reg. 3,415
Jan 2015 271 27,511 Apr 2015 767 29,413 Jul 2015 856 30,973 Oct 2015 194 31,869
Feb 2015 105 27,616 May 2015 543 29,956 Aug 2015 552 31,525 Nov 2015 318 32,187
Mar 2015 1,030 28,646 Jun 2015 161 30,117 Sep 2015 150 31,675 Dec 2015 479 32,666
Q1 total 1,406 Q2 total 1,471 Q3 total 1,568 Q4 total 989
80 FR 26618 1,335 80 FR 45709 460 80 FR 65851 1,426 81 FR ????? 1,058
Annual totals for 2015 NICS 5,426 Fed. Reg. 4,279

Back to table of contents

Conclusion

The Department of State is collectively charging us millions of dollars to exercise our human right to change our nationality, while the “Internal” Revenue Service refuses to compile an honest list of our names as required by their own laws. Meanwhile, the Department of “Justice” continues to seethe about U.S. persons “concealing foreign accounts and evading their U.S. tax obligations” and threatens that “[t]hose who underestimate the ability of the United States to pursue offshore tax evasion do so at their own peril”.

With this kind of attitude from the U.S. government, expect the ten-month consular wait list for renunciation appointments to get even longer.

34 thoughts on “Nearly $13 million in renunciation fees last year, and they can’t even compile a simple list of our names”

  3. A couple of “Name and Shame” lists ago, I was talking to the mother of someone who was on the list. We will call the “named renunciant” – Tom.

    She said:

    You know, I have NEVER been prouder of Tom, than I was on the day that I saw his name on the list of those who had renounced U.S. citizenship.

    By the way, this woman (the mother) has a lineage that this is rich in American history. In fact she said that she is a member of the “Daughters of The American Revolution”.

    http://www.dar.org/national-society/become-member

  4. Maybe we should call it the “Liberty List”.
    Looks like another record-breaking year, 25% over 2014 by my estimates.

  5. Thanks once again for your most comprehensive report on the US reports, Eric. Your work amazes me each time I read it. Tom’s mom (above), a member of the *Daughters of The American Revolution*, would, I’m sure, also be proud of the work you do regarding the *Name and Shame* list her son appears on.

  7. I think a group ought to take up challenging the $2,350 fee in the U.S. courts (regardless of any other challenges to FATCA and/or CBT), since such a high fee would likely run contrary to the Expatriate Act of 1868 which in part says “Whereas the right of expatriation is a natural and inherent right of all people, indispensable to the enjoyment of the rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness … Therefore any declaration, instruction, opinion, order, or decision of any officer of the United States which denies, restricts, impairs, or questions the right of expatriation, is declared inconsistent with the fundamental principles of the Republic.” 15 Stat. 223; R.S. 1999; 8 U.S.C.A. 1481….” $2350 is IMO high enough to “restrict” and “impair” that right. Additionally, there might be grounds under the U.S. Constitution and/or international law to strike down that fee.

    I wouldn’t be opposed to a more nominal fee being charged (e.g. what some other civilized countries charge), but the current amount is unacceptable, illegal under existing law (remember that the fee was not enacted via an act of Congress, but rather by action within the Department of State), and unconstitutional to me.

  8. @George

    Good old American exceptionalism. Well, not so old as many of these patriots would like to believe, but actually a term invented by Stalin for the US’s rejection of Communism:

    http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2012/03/how-joseph-stalin-invented-american-exceptionalism/254534/

    There’s nothing to prevent anyone (except homelanders) from interpreting “exceptionalism” as anything other than being unique. It doesn’t mean infallible. Should everything the US does be exceptional, then they’ll have to accept that they’re #1 at the stupid stuff too.

  11. Yes, it appears that the DoS enacted the high fee not because of processing costs, but trying to profit off of expats giving up their citizenship (meaning that in a court challenge DoS will probably have a very weak case on their side – since by statute agencies can charge a fee that is reasonable based on processing costs, but they shouldn’t charge a fee designed to profit especially when it restricts and impairs a fundamental right).

  12. @Eric
    Thank you for this post on the escalating USA extortion of now ex-US persons.

    @Bubblebustin
    I agree, it should be renamed the “Liberty List” for those who have bought their freedom from the plantation.

  13. Re renunciation fees, the State Department justified the fee increase because of complexity, something they could easily reduce if they cared to. They don’t care to because complexity and fees are apparently the only things slowing the exodus down.

    If the US charged $100 and did it by mail like Canada does, we wouldn’t be looking at a mere 25% increase in renunciations over last year.

    USCIS, which processes citizenship applications, is also a “fee based” agency yet charges only $680 to process each application. Notably, there’s a fee waiver for those who can’t afford the cost of applying for US citizenship.

    https://www.uscis.gov/feewaiver

    @PatCanadian

    Glad you like it. Liberty List it is for me here on in.

  14. @Brockers…..I think we are on to something about CLNs and the idea of going to Court.

    But there is a step that needs to be taken before going to Court AND it is a step that I think could be useful to the litigation in Canada.

    We need someone who has committed a relinquishing act to contact their Consulate, advise they have relinquished, advise they can not afford the fee to purchase a CLN.

    They then ask the Consulate what to do?

    Why would that be useful? Well if State said the relinquishment is “not recognized” that would fly in the face of 8 US Code as passed by Congress. It is ultra vires.

    The alternative would be for State to say in writing that the CLN does not matter and citizenship has been lost.

    Could IBS be used as a platform to bring this out into the blogosphere to see if we have takers. Doing it in Canada would help the litigation but someone ANYWHERE can do it.

  16. Thanks, Eric. In a quick glance at the list I spotted two MC NEIL DAVID names on the list. Are those two different people with the same name or a duplication of the name. There is no way to know. Remember: This is just a list of names, not people!

  17. Fabulous work, Eric! You do so much to keep us all informed!

    I, too, believe that the outrageous renunciation fee should be challenged in court. In fact, wasn’t there a lawyer in the States looking into this on behalf of a private individual who was funding the case him/herself? So much has happened I’ve lost track of this? Was it ADCS that informed us of this a while back? Am I imagining this?

    George, it would be interesting to see something happen along the lines of what you’ve described. Someone walks into a consulate, wishes to renounce his citizenship and refuses to fork over the fee. If that person is denied a renunciation that person has been denied their legal and human right to renounce and now has a case to sue.

  18. I just went over the list and found five names that are the same as the names of people I know. Only of the five names is highly unusual; so the person behind it is quite possibly the person I know. The others are common enough that one would get lots of hits on Google if the names were searched.

    Again, I question the purpose of this list as far as the US Government is concerned. It is neither complete, nor correct, nor specific. It continues to be an example of bureaucratic automatism mandated by poorly considered legislation. But then what else can one expect from a government that is so dysfunctional that it can’t even simplify its own tax code, which almost everyone agrees needs major overhaul? It’s just another small, sad sign of the slow Decline of the “American” Empire.

  20. I did a spot check of some of the name.

    A family member of Thai International Sugar owners. A number of financial people, Swiss based managing director, academics, Hong Kong based financier, teacher from NS, General Mgr of Pakistani Oil & Energy Company.

    It’s the same pattern, not the poor, but educated middle class, those involved with family businesses, and company executives.

    There’s probably about 1150 to 1200 this time around.

  23. March NICS stats are out: 33,947 total renunciant records (+489 since last month)
    https://web.archive.org/web/20160402075935/https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/active_records_in_the_nics-index.pdf

    The FBI are now also releasing US state-level NICS statistics. In theory this should be irrelevant for renunciants, since only the Department of State should be adding records to the “Renounced U.S. citizenship” category, but it turns out that 10 records were added to that category by state agencies (9 by Illinois and 1 by North Carolina) between 1998 and 2015
    https://web.archive.org/web/20160402083353/https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/nics/reports/active-records-in-the-nics-index-by-state

    Renounced U.S. Citizenship — Renounced Citizenship submissions into the NICS Index are typically made by the U.S. Department of State. Therefore, entry by a state or other federal agency would be minimal to nonexistent in this category.

    Likely to be a case of some state cops getting confused over “sovereign citizens”/”freeman on the land” types who claim they are only citizens of their state and not US citizens.

  24. Let’s hope some states start offering their own Certificates of Lost Citizenship. For much less than $2350.

    I wonder if a UK bank would know what to do, if presented with a state-issued CLN? 🙂

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: