The Q1 2016 Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen to Expatriate, as Required by Section 6039G has been placed on public inspection for printing in Thursday’s Federal Register, five days later than required by law. By my count, it has 1,159 names (41 names per full page and 27 full pages, plus 22 names on the first page and 30 on the last page, with no entries taking up two lines this time). Let me know if you get a different count. Correction: As Andrew Mitchel and Haydon Perryman both point out, the actual count is 1,158; there’s an entry on page 7 of the the pre-publication PDF which takes up two lines.
In contrast, the number of renunciant records held by the FBI in the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) database increased by 1,281 during the same period, from 32,666 at last year’s end to 33,947 as of 31 March (and they added another 860 in April). The NICS renunciant figures have outstripped the Federal Register count of “published expatriates” every year since 2012, with the gap last year growing to more than a thousand — even though NICS only covers 8 USC § 1481(a)(5) renunciants while the Federal Register is supposed to include all relinquishers under any paragraph of 8 USC § 1481(a), as well as some of the estimated five to seven thousand people who file Form I-407 to abandon their green cards each quarter.
All of the people added to NICS definitely paid the US$2,350 State Department fee — twenty times that in other developed countries — which has been in effect for renunciants since September 2014, meaning that Washington D.C. collected at least US$3 million from people seeking to exercise their human right to change their nationality last quarter. The State Department claimed this obscene fee “protects” the right to change nationality — well, that’s one mighty profitable protection racket they’ve got going on there! (And it could have been even more profitable if some consulates weren’t restricting renunciation appointments to an hour a week, leading to ten-month backlogs in Dublin and Toronto.)
Media reports on individual ex-citizens
Here’s a table of nineteen people mentioned by name in media reports as having given up U.S. citizenship since the beginning of 2014; seven of their names are missing from the Federal Register (three out of eleven from 2014 and four out of six from 2015), while for two more — the ones from this year — it’s too early to say whether they’ll show up or not. 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).
Names of public figures included in this quarter’s list: South Korean pop singer Alex Kim, who renounced nearly two years ago; and Jonathan Tepper, who said in a New York Times op-ed in December 2014 that his big appointment at the U.S. consulate was scheduled for early the following year. No public figure who spoke to the media about their renunciation in 2016 has yet been included, though this quarter’s list does have one name matching that of a Hong Kong government official who took office recently: Sandra Leung Shuk-bo.
| 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 | Q1 2016 | 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 | Q1 2016 | 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) |
| Neil Llamanzares | Businessman | Philippines | Public opinion (his wife is running for President) | April 2015 | No | Rappler (Philippines) |
| Lee Chih-kung | Physicist | Taiwan | Appointed Minister of Economic Affairs by President-elect Tsai Ing-wen | May 2015 | No | Apple Daily (Taiwan) |
Congratulations to all those who made the expat honour roll this term!
@iota. Yes, that is right we have selfish reasons for complying and enforcing our own version of FATCA with the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories. We led the way, brought in the EUG5 and helped shape the CRS with the help of the OECD and DAC with the help of the EU.
What wonderful and at the same time selfish poodles we are.
@Canadian Ginny. Nice to meet you, albeit virtually.
@Haydon
I don’t think the issue is what the US thinks, it’s about what native countries will allow.
I might pass a law in my country saying I own your house in your country. I daresay your country would not apply my law.
In the same way the US may have self aggrandising views about Citizenship but local countries can choose to honour their Citizens, as their Citizens.
++++++++
This, in a nutshell. As can individuals. Which is why I get a little testy about willful and non willful terminology. Those are (legal?) tax terms of a foreign government. Our law suit is asking/demanding Canada to honour our Canadian citizenship with our full rights and entitlements to privacy and freedom from the foreign overlord despite our POB or imposed taint. As complicated as some want to paint it, it really is a simple concept except for that one nation that thinks it is above all international law. And of course the many countries that capitulated.
@Haydon – I’m only guessing, of course – no inside knowledge needless to say – but my guess is that the UK may have seen FATCA as an opportunity to exercise more control over the banks, while also keeping them from going bust through insane 30% American withholding on practically every transaction. I don’t see that as reprehensible. The wretched banks brought all of us to the brink not so long ago. Controlling them, while at the same time keeping them functional, is important for all of our wellbeing.
Those of us affected by FATCA have certainly been treated unfairly, but as far as I’m concerned it’s America that’s responsible for the injustices. I have no respect for America, and never have had. I have a lot of respect for the UK, and faith enough in British courts to hope that particular aspects of the FATCA IGA may be modified eventually, so as to ameliorate the problems at least for those who’ve been able to renounce.
@iota says
“Those of us affected by FATCA have certainly been treated unfairly, but as far as I’m concerned it’s America that’s responsible for the injustices.”
I hold the Harper govt responsible for allowing the robber in the front door. Trudeau is guilty of not recognizing a foreign thief in our midst and giving him the boot. My country’s govt has failed to defend Canada’s sovereignty– I consider it guilty of willful collaboration.
@Haydon Perryman
“If Spain passed a law saying [my wife] had to file taxes in Spain because she was born in Spain and therefore Spanish, I would be, to say the least, incredulous.”
Nice start. But that’s not the whole situation.
You’ve left out that Spain’s law would be meaningless without extra-territorial enforcement. You’ve left out the part where Spain has come up with a way to extort her local British bank into ferreting her out for them.
You’ve left out the part where Haydon Perryman would be the proud go-to guy ensuring her bank got her on Spain’s behalf.
For that scenario, does calling yourself merely incredulous seem to fully cover it?.
@Haydon
How would Haydon feel about paying tax to Spain on the gain when he sells his family and principal home in London?
Would he just say ” the law is the law”.
BC Doc said: “I hold the Harper govt responsible for allowing the robber in the front door. Trudeau is guilty of not recognizing a foreign thief in our midst and giving him the boot. My country’s govt has failed to defend Canada’s sovereignty– I consider it guilty of willful collaboration.”
@BC Doc – the comment of mine that you quoted was referring to the way UK residents (those of us accused by the US of USness) have been affected by FATCA. I have no doubt we would have been in a much worse position without the IGA. I’m hoping future developments may see further improvements, as that’s often the case with legislation here.
I’m not familiar with Canada, and have never lived there, so can’t comment. (I did have a fantastic west-to-east cross-country road trip through Canada, back in the trip-happy Sixties. Spectacularly beautiful!)
@Haydon re “If Spain passed a law saying she had to file taxes in Spain because she was born in Spain and therefore Spanish, I would be, to say the least, incredulous. My children would presumably be Spanish as well.”
Let me add to your incredulity. Just because you share a bank account with your ‘Spanish’ wife, all of YOUR banking details would also be sent to ‘Spain’. In addition, if you have the equivalent of 10,000 USD in your combined accounts, you would also have to complete an annual report to the ‘Spanish’ Federal Crimes Enforcement Network on their website, listing the account numbers, bank addresses, and highest balance of each account during the year. If you fail to report all of this you can be fined for more than what’s in these accounts by ‘Spain.’
Whilst you might think your wife in a UK citizen and therefore protected by Master Nationality, in fact that’s not the case where banking is involved and the Spanish will get the ammunition they need to enforce their laws from HMRC through the banks.
I applaud your willingness to add to this discussion and to understand how frustrating it is for those of us caught up in this. The issues are so complex that when you try to discuss it, listeners are not prepared to take the time to fully understand all the issues.
IBS Community – I get it.
@Haydon
As an intelligent man, well respected in your field, can you now spread your recently gained knowledge? Our politicians either don’t get it or have decided to ignore it at the expense of their citizens.
I guess it isn’t until you put yourself in someone else’s shoes that you can really understand it from their perspective.
Thanks for taking the time to listen.
http://www.taxjustice.net/2016/05/11/support-growing-for-our-withholding-tax-policy-against-tax-haven-usa/
@Heidi Yes
http://www.greens-efa.eu/fileadmin/dam/Documents/TAXE_committee/The_US_as_a_tax_haven_Implications_for_Europe_11_May_FINAL.pdf
@Haydon
The U.S. has long been breath-takingly extraterritorial in its application of the law. The law first followed the flag, then U.S. persons and now foreign corporations that do business in the U.S. market. Its purely power politics: the strong do what they can.
As for why countries go along with it, well, the weaker endure what they must to prevent the threatened 30% grab of assets. The U.K. government clearly views the minimisation of risks to the banks as being more important than what could be the potentially costly protection of citizens’ rights. As you undoubtedly know, some British citizens working as expats in countries that have fallen out of favour with the U.S. have had their U.K. bank accounts closed lest the U.S. slap these banks with sanctions. When these citizens complain, they are told that the banks were acting legitimately because U.S. fines pose too much of a risk to the banks.
And if Cameron can’t even say that Nigeria and Afghanistan are among the most corrupt countries without people criticising him for being undiplomatic, how is he going to call the U.S. out on its policies?
Maybe most countries figured that the IGAs were the best they could do. The non-reporting accounts are portrayed as being ones that present a minimal risk of evading U.S. taxes, but that is clearly incorrect. The IGA non-reporting accounts are usually non- or favourably-taxed foreign government savings and investment schemes, so the very ones on which U.S. tax is most likely to be due. The IGA accounts actually seem to be those least likely to involve off-shored money.
Given that resources are scarce and the injustices almost infinite, I’d welcome a conversation about how best to do what we can. That would include what injustices we will let stand so as to get larger injustices addressed and resolved on a timely basis.
(Banks would apply a MoSCoW method to this: Must, Should, Could, Won’t for now and rank them accordingly.)
For each of these candidates, the relative costs and changes of success would need to be assessed.
Also, “the message” needs to be addressed – you’ve got a just cause but at the moment – seeing it is a stamina event.
You probably need some “quick wins” so as to present the perception that this works.
@George – I can hear you already – no need to say it. 🙂
@George – heck it looks like you’re right about the “process guy’ too.
Also, “the message” needs to be addressed – you’ve got a just cause but at the moment – seeing it is a stamina event.
Yes, it is difficult for some to wrap their heads around the fact that it is abusive and a human rights violation to force people who neither live nor earn in the USA, to report their local bank accounts of savings earned and taxed locally, to the USA. Go figure.
Haydon, how many years of being a FATCA expert did it take you to figure out?
Haydon, the real STAMINA EVENT, is not the seeing it, it is the trying to get people to listen. If people listen, they get it. People do not want to listen.
ooops sorry. WTF? is really WK, but forgot to clear WTF? out of the name field. Mods can you fix? I know how you all hate multiple alias by the same person.
Gosh I am in a pissy mood this morning. Something about someone telling us we suck at delivering our message I guess. A message that my 15 year old has no trouble grasping. And I only explained it once.
Can we start a new thread about what to do about it please?
@Iota, “Personally I can’t see how you would go about challenging America’s stance on US citizenship. U.S. courts would throw it out; no other court has any jurisdiction.”
The Master Nationality Rule of 1930 was an attempt to iron out these types of citizenship problems. The USA did not sign because it was almost impossible to be a dual US.
In my opinion it will take a Non-USA court, maybe EU Court, to rightly redeclare what the Master Nationality Rule stated.
A Canadian IN Canada is a Canadian a Canadian and nothing else.
The UK Home Office actually issued a letter to me for my kids that whilst in the UK and having entered the UK on a UK Passport they are solely British Citizens in the eyes of HM Government.
@Haydon, “My wife, born to English parents, was born in Spain. Back then my in-laws we offered either dual citizenship or simply UK citizenship. ”
Let me offer up “Citizenship American Style.” Pun on words from very old US TV Sitcom…Love American Style.
The US Government and Courts have retroactively changed citizenship rules. It is the opinion of the US Courts that retroactively changing a law/regulation that serves to retroactively give US Citizenship is entirely acceptable!!
There are folks who lost their US Citizenship under old law who found out later that they got the citizenship back!!!
Lets talk about the dirty little secret on these unprecedented number of renouncings taking place at consulates. Whilst the law says it must be done voluntarily, most of the people are renouncing involuntarily.
I would not be surprised if Congress or the US Courts reflects back on this “era” and retroactively restores the citizenship to all these people because it was being done involuntarily.
Now to take your families situation and americanize it……
What if Spain passes a law that your wife gets Spanish citizenship retroactive making your kids spanish automatically and then passes CBT!!!
And……your wife and kids will get all their tax questions answered in Spanish and have to fill out forms in Spanish!!
Hey, a like your analogy on the house of cards….the cards need to be picked up and the table needs to be knocked down. I shall shamelessly use that.
Cheers,
Haydon Perryman said: “Given that resources are scarce and the injustices almost infinite, I’d welcome a conversation about how best to do what we can. That would include what injustices we will let stand so as to get larger injustices addressed and resolved on a timely basis.”
It’s not really in the hands of FIs, however well-intentioned (and of course many if not most FIs couldn’t care less about the effect of FATCA on anyone other than their own organisation). Only the courts have the power to declare specific aspects of bank practice unlawful, and require change.
@iota Yes, it is not in the hands of FIs. I couldn’t agree more. 🙂
So what do you want to do and how?
Certainly Court Cases represent one path.