The current media narrative is anti-Trump 24-7. He is bad. And of course all those celebrities and other people are waiting in line to flee the country and renounce their citizenship. So I was contacted by a reporter of a well-known news network who is writing an article on people who are renouncing their USA citizenship because of Donald Trump. He asked me:
- If there has been an increase of traffic to isaabrocksociety.ca since the November election.
- If anyone had contacted us with questions about renouncing directly linked to Trump.
Here is my response:
There has been no uptick in traffic to our website, and no one anti-Trump has contacted me in my function at Isaac Brock. I do not predict an uptick in renunciations over Trump. People are renouncing for practical reasons. Anti-Trumpism is fanatical, but Trump has not so far caused real problems for American citizens. FATCA, citizenship taxation, the Obama enforcement of FBAR, CBT and FATCA, and the compliance condors have created real problems for so-called “Americans” abroad–especially those of us who are little older and more established financially. Trump just seems to make some American citizens really angry but has not yet substantially harmed them (at least I do not know of concrete examples).
I had one person contact me on behalf of someone who owns property here in Canada, wanting to know the tax implications of moving to Canada and how one might transfer bank assets. This person was not asking about renunciation of citizenship–just the tax implications of moving to Canada (and how to move assets). She did not know I run the Isaac Brock Society. I know her from Facebook for other reasons.
I see that one of the problems with the shrill anti-Trump narrative in the mainstream press and social media is that the wrongs done against expats have been completely ignored. When I talk about the wrongs that Obama did, I am scorned.
Trump may eventually reverse FATCA, but I do not hold out hope. Nevertheless, in the current persecution of expats Trump only continues the demonic policies of his predecessor.
Here is a reminder of why Peter Dunn relinquished his USA citizenship:
ok ok this is getting way too depressing.
Mike Miller (not the lawyer but an expat on our FB sites) just put this up.
It is hilarious!
Grandpa makes a bet during his IRS audit, and it plays out perfectly
The IRS decides to audit Grandpa, and summons him to the IRS office. The IRS auditor was not surprised when Grandpa showed up with his attorney.
The auditor said, “Well, sir, you have an extravagant lifestyle and no full-time employment, which you explain by saying that you win money gambling. I’m not sure the IRS finds that believable.”
“I’m a great gambler, and I can prove it,” says Grandpa. “How about a demonstration?”
The auditor thinks for a moment and says, “OK. Go ahead.”
Grandpa says, “I’ll bet you a thousand dollars that I can bite my own eye.”
The auditor thinks a moment and says, “It’s a bet.”
Grandpa removes his glass eye and bites it. The auditor’s jaw drops.
Grandpa says, “Now, I’ll bet you two thousand dollars that I can bite my other eye.”
The auditor can tell Grandpa isn’t blind, so he takes the bet.
Grandpa removes his dentures and bites his good eye. The stunned auditor now realizes he has wagered and lost three grand, with Grandpa’s attorney as a witness. He starts to get nervous.
“Want to go double or nothing?” Grandpa asks. “I’ll bet you six thousand dollars that I can stand on one side of your desk, and pee into that wastebasket on the other side, and never get a drop anywhere in between.”
The auditor, twice burned, is cautious now, but he looks carefully and decides there’s no way this old guy could possibly manage that stunt, so he agrees again. Grandpa stands beside the desk and unzips his pants, but although he strains mightily, he can’t make the stream reach the wastebasket on the other side, so he pretty much urinates all over the auditor’s desk.
The auditor leaps with joy, realizing that he has just turned a major loss into a huge win. But Grandpa’s attorney moans and puts his head in his hands.
“Are you OK?” the auditor asks.
“Not really,” says the attorney. “This morning, when Grandpa told me he’d been summoned for an audit, he bet me twenty-five thousand dollars that he could come in here and pee all over your desk and that you’d be happy about it.”
Don’t mess with old people!
@ Patricia Moon
Thanks for the additional information. Seems those platform planks are full of termites but then we should know that from our own politicians. Still hoping though. That Ways and Means Committee was last year, under an Obama government, so maybe we have to wait to see what the committee does under the new administration.
https://waysandmeans.house.gov/brady-announces-115th-congress-ways-means-republican-member-subcommittee-assignments/
The Chairman, Peter Roskam, has stinky foreign policy opinions but he seems interested in homelanders’ problems with the tax code. However there’s nothing I could find on whether he gives a hoot about off-homelanders’ problems.
@EmBee
I wish I shared your enthusiasm. The thing is, that is the blueprint for this year-meaning the republicans, who hold the majority, intend to have these items in the legislation. It certainly is not encouraging to see we are not included in it. Perhaps everyone should switch their efforts to the members on the Committee as it stands now.
http://www.pwc.com/us/en/tax-services/publications/insights/house-republican-blueprint-a-destination-based-cash-flow-tax.html
Ok Madame Em here we go……some starting info for the tax committee
Chairman Peter Roskam (IL) @PeterRoskam R
http://house.ontheissues.org/IL/Peter_Roskam.htm#Tax_Reform
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Roskam
Taxes
Roskam advocates making permanent the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts,[81] and has sponsored or cosponsored fourteen pieces of legislation for lower taxes, including child tax credits and reducing the income tax, and has stated support for a research and development tax credit. As an Illinois General Assembly legislator, Roskam authored and supported several pieces of tax reduction legislation.[82] Americans for Tax Reform named Roskam “Hero of the Taxpayer” in 2005 for his opposition to HB-755[83] which would have raised income and sales taxes by 67% or nearly $7 billion.[84]
In 2010 Roskam signed a pledge sponsored by Americans for Prosperity promising to vote against any Global Warming legislation that would raise taxes.[85]
Dave Reichert (WA) @davereichert R
http://house.ontheissues.org/House/Dave_Reichert.htm#Tax_Reform
Reichert has signed the Taxpayer Protection Pledge by the Americans for Tax Reform, a group run by Grover Norquist.] The pledge commits the signer to oppose any legislation that raises taxes or eliminates tax deductions. On August 1, 2012, he also voted to extend the Bush tax cuts
https://reichert.house.gov/press-release/rep-reichert-demands-answers-fatca-implementation-irs-commissioner
https://reichert.house.gov/sites/reichert.house.gov/files/FATCA%20LetterFINAL.pdf
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/10/23/us-rep-dave-reichert-of-wa-state-posts-fatca-press-release-on-his-website/
Pat Tiberi (R-OH) (@PatTiberi)
http://house.ontheissues.org/House/Kristi_Noem.htm#Tax_Reform
George Holding (R-NC) R @RepHolding
http://house.ontheissues.org/NC/George_Holding.htm#Tax_Reform
Kenny Marchant (R-TX) @RepKenMarchant
http://house.ontheissues.org/TX/Kenny_Marchant.htm#Tax_Reform
Pat Meehan (R-PA) @RepMeehan
http://house.ontheissues.org/PA/Patrick_Meehan.htm#Tax_Reform
And the reporter is probably not going to write a damn thing you said. They only hear what they want to hear.
@ Patricia Moon
Didn’t mean to create work for you tonight when you should be noble dreaming but I appreciate what you’ve dug up. When I first saw the Grover Norquist #fatca tweets I couldn’t believe it was THE Grover Norquist of “The Pledge” fame. Very interesting.
Petros says “As for mainstream media, their anti-Trump fanaticism is quite evident, day in and day out.” I spent a few days giving equal time following the mainstream media, and non-mainstream right-wing sources such as Breitbart, Alex Jones and similar, and it was strongly evident that the level of fanaticism way higher in the non-mainstream sources than in the mainstream media. Some mainstream media reports included interviews with and comments from pro-Trump supporters, but I saw no equivalent opposite views in the extreme right non-mainstream media. If the news in the mainstream media does not portray Trump as a flawless leader, this is due to factual journalism, and not to anti-Trump fanaticism.
I am sure that the Mainstream Media takes pride in being just a little better than Alex Jones.
That’s why Rory Gilmore studied journalism at Yale. So that she could be little less fanatical than Alex Jones.
@All
Yesterday a friend pointed out to me that I had missed something in the GOP Blueprint from 2016.
There IS one sentence regarding our situation:
http://abetterway.speaker.gov/_assets/pdf/ABetterWay-Tax-PolicyPaper.pdf
I. 2016 A Better Way – page 29
“In addition to these important reforms that will create a modern international tax system for businesses, the Committee on Ways and Means will consider the appropriate treatment of individuals living and working abroad in today’s globally integrated economy.”
My apologies.
I still find it extremely difficult (and highly unlikely) to see the above as a particularly strong indication that our needs will be covered in any tax reform legislation………..
“appropriate treatment of individuals living and working abroad”
Maybe it will mean that the IRS will start putting proper postage on their envelopes? After all, the IRS frequently presents its position that the post office will not deliver letters without proper postage.
Maybe it will mean that the IRS will start putting the correct country name or abbreviation thereof at the end of the return address on their envelopes, so that when they mail letters with destination addresses so badly scrambled as to be undeliverable, the post offices in countries of destinations will return the undeliverable letters to the United States (US) instead of Panama (PA) or Moldova (MD) or Canada (CA) etc.?
Maybe it will mean that USPS will start obeying USPS International Mail Manual section 753.1, will put the delivery date and recipient’s signature and name on return receipts and return the completed return receipts to the senders?
Maybe it will mean that the IRS will send its letters by methods that are reasonably calculated to be delivered before deadlines expire for people to send replies, instead of by sea mail from Germany or the UK without dates in the postal meters, and instead of international surface air lift from the US without even postal meters and usually without dates?
Maybe it will mean that when the IRS asserts penalties, it will tell us about the false accusations that it trumped up against us instead of telling us that it will refuse to engage in correspondence about the matter?
Maybe IRS employees will stop embezzling our US withholdings? No, not going to happen. TIGTA told Congress that identity thieves get 6.5 billion US dollars of fraudulent tax refunds per year, and TIGTA and a few others have reported some of the identity thieves including IRS’s data entry clerks, an employee in the IRS’s Taxpayer Advocate Office, and an employee in the IRS’s Criminal Investigation department, but they haven’t found the ring leaders. They’re not going to find the ring leaders either. With 6.5 billion dollars per year, the ring leaders can bribe whoever they need to keep the gravy train going.
Well, sure, maybe someone will consider what kind of treatment would be appropriate. They’ll write another report for the recycle bin. Nothing will get done.
Thanks for the correction, Trish.
I just thought of something.
Johnny is born in Toronto. His parents die in a crash the next week. Johnny is placed for adoption.
His adopters obtain a corrected so-called birth certificate which falsely states that they are the parents. I know States do that, I dunno about Canadian provinces. However, the adoption, and the manufacture of documents by a Canadian province, cannot free Johnny of the U.S. citizenship he acquired at birth. His adopters provide him with his so-called birth certificate and it says they are his parents; and they are Canadians.
Years go by. How is Johnny supposed to know he’s a U.S. citizen if his so-celled birth certificate says his adopters are his parents? There is still a paper trail, but it is sealed to him until he is 18; and even then, he may need a special court order. Are all adoptees required to do that to make sure they didn’t acquire U.S.A. citizenship at birth?
In Massachusetts, the adoptee gets the court order, at age 18, and may VIEW the original record (writing down notes on paper while viewing it, of course) but they won’t issue a certificate, so how can he obtain his U.S.A. passport? Even so, he is stating under penalty of perjury that as far as he knows, he is NOT a U.S.A. citizen.
To borrow a phrase from Capt Aubrey, the US government speaks in symbols and you may suit what meaning you choose to the words.
I assume you meant to say that Johnny was born in Toronto of USC parents and was therefore a dual US/Canadian citizen from birth. If Johnny is even aware of this hopefully he grows up intelligent enough to let sleeping dogs lie.
@Tom Alciere
What is the point of this thought experiment?
If Johnny never discovers that he’s a “biological” US citizen, who cares? So what? He has no US indicia, so he won’t have FATCA or US border issues. Why does he need to know that he is not a US citizen, and more importantly, when does he need to state that under penalty of perjury?
Are you suggesting that all Canadian adoptees need to somehow prove that they aren’t the offspring of American parents?
If Johnny does discover that through his biological parents (alive or dead) he has a claim to US citizenship then he may or may not be able to obtain a US passport. I have no idea. But that’s a different question.
This reminds me of another thought-experiment I used to inflict on Obama “Birthers”. Back when Obama was president, I used to ask, How can we KNOW that he was not switched as a baby, with another baby with the same name? That means that the TRUE president of the United States might be a terrorist living in Afghanistan right now.
Imagine surviving the OMG! moment, paying all that money, because the man named on your birth certificate as your mother was a U.S.A. citizen, and then finding out you were adopted, and U.S.A. citizenship, like breast cancer, runs in the family on biological lines, not adoptive lines.
@Zla’do
I love your twisted logic. Kind of like mine and Yogi Berra’s.
@Tom Alciere
Can we assume this was a typo? “because the man named on your birth certificate as your mother”
US citizenship does run on adoptive lines, not biological lines. Once it is legally acquired by an adopted child, it’s valid, it won’t magically go away upon discovery that the biological parent was not an American. If the adopted person wanted to renounce US citizenship, they’d still need to go through the legal process.
There are specific rules about passing US citizenship on to adopted children born outside the US – friends I knew of some years ago when through a lot of hoops to do this and could not bring their child out of the country for a year or two while it was in process. I can’t be bothered to look it up but I’m not sure it’s automatic or easy or even possible if the US parent is living outside the country.
Illustrating again why the best reaction to the OMG moment is no reaction – continue on with your life and ignore the IRS.
I seem to remember reading on Brock some years ago that adoption societies had issued a warning to non US parents adopting a US child that the child would have certain US tax obligations where ever they live.
@Heidi,
From bubblebustin in a comment from the early days of Brock…
UPDATE: The relevant link is presently: http://www.sunriseadoption.com/important-information-for-all-canadian-w
AND,
This is another link there relevant to crossing the US / Canada border with that US born adopted child: http://www.sunriseadoption.com/crossing-the-us-border-with-your-adopted
The Sunrise article referred specifically to adopted children coming to Canada from the US, with a US birthplace and documented, existing US citizenship. Doubtless a heap of paperwork required to get them across the border.
Not the same scenario as the “thought experiment” of a Canadian-born child with a US-citizen biological parent then adopted by Canadians, or vice-versa.
@nononomous
Beware the ‘Thinkpol’ 🙂
‘Can we assume this was a typo? “because the man named on your birth certificate as your mother”’
The man might have had his operation after giving birth.
(By the way Jean Drapeau is not the man. He must have had a different kind of operation.)