When law becomes a substitute for morality Why the #Americanabroad attitude makes sense-NO #FATCA NO #FBAR NO #CBT https://t.co/NttmGuqTB5 pic.twitter.com/kDfXL793uQ
— U.S. Expat Canada (@USExpatCanada) March 8, 2017
As many Brockers have stated, they don’t do FB; one thing that has happened over the last year is the ADCT site has built connections with many of the expat FB groups and/or pages. My comments about “A Blast From the Past” applies to something happening over there (not here). For whatever reason, it seems they do not come to Brock and so miss out on a lot of the great stuff that is available here.
That said, after reading this when it went up, I thought the original post was just too good not to repost. And given it is now nearly 4 years old, there’s a good chance newer Brockers have never come across it.
*******
from the ADCT blogsite
March 7, 2017
Today I’ve decided that I would like to go back and reblog some of the best expat posts from the last five years. For lack of a better title, I am going to call it the “A Blast From the Past Series.” This week I am going to focus on the disconnect between law and morality.
Every now and then I realize that people are still coming into awareness and that they do not realize a lot of what has gone on; how long some of us have been involved in this and most importantly, why some of us are so vehemently resistant and unyielding when it comes to evaluating the U.S. government, the tax compliance industry and so on. I guess some of us are afraid that this long period of lassitude may give a false sense of “safety.”
Without resorting to outright fearmongering, there are a number of things that may not happen (tax reform) or that will change (discontinuation of the Streamlined Program) etc. Our main reason for being involved in this from the very beginning, was to get the word out, to do our own research/take responsibility for educating ourselves and others about this hideous situation. I think it is important for people to understand how this situation has played out since the beginning……..
One of the worst aspects of everything happening today is the growing lack of morality in the world. I mean this in the “big” sense of the word; something which is on the mind of every human being as we watch America turn from being an open and welcoming society into one moving toward closed borders, over-the-top surveillance, etc. Today the Secy of Homeland Security literally said he was considering separating (illegal) parents from their (American-born) children. Unbelievably cruel and totally unnecessary. And the reinstatement of the “travel ban” which has been tweaked a bit but cannot possibly be seen for anything except what is clearly is – a move to keep Muslims out of America.
What does this have to do with us? Everything. Because when you see your government behaving like this, you are forced to evaluate two things:
1) Can YOU trust them?
2) Is there any reason to reject them/protect yourself given the unusual situation expats find themselves in?
In addition to being scared out of my mind and full of doubt whether to renounce or not (late 2011), what I could not ignore was my observation of how the U.S. was behaving outside the law. Clear, undeniable abuse of the law. Invading Pakistani airspace (I don’t care what the reason, that is not supposed to be done); the horrid abuse of prisoners at Abu Ghraib ; the assassination of Americans without due process and worst of all, holding men at Guantanamo Bay for as long as 12 years without charge, torture, etc. I did not find it difficult to believe the U.S. would think nothing of destroying our retirement by forcing me to sell my home to pay FBAR fines. It was a no-brainer.
Everyone has to come around to this decision on their own terms. All the more reason however, to take a long hard look at what has gone on over the last five years (which should influence whatever decision you choose to make).
Some of the people mentioned in this post you may not be aware of:
renounceuscitizenship – in addition to his/her own blog, one of most influential authors at the Isaac Brock Society from the beginning. Has an uncanny ability to predict long in advance, how things are going to move and a piercing, unbending analytical approach to assessing the source of our issues. Originator of the Renounce & Rejoice meme.
Steven J. Mopsick – aka “30 year IRS Vet” – a former IRS attorney who took part in a lot of the early conversations at Brock. The relationship was friendly at first and eventually disintegrated due to the natural friction between someone from a compliance point-of-view and those who did not intend to buckle under. A nice gentleman of whom was said “You can take the man out of the IRS but you cannot take the IRS out of the man.”
JustMe a much-beloved expat who suffered two-plus long years having entered the 2009 OVDP program, trying to make things right. He coined many of our expat idioms: “LCUs (Life Credit Units – how much of your life lost trying to deal with this); FATCAnatics (you can guess); CC&W (Complain, Comply & Warn-his explanation of what he was doing!),DATCA, GATCA, and so on. After he requested the help of the Taxpayer Advocate, he spent quite a long time devoting himself to our cause and taught a lot of us how to do Twitter, learn html, you name it. He finally needed to put it aside (I am sure his wife was happy about this!) and is much missed……..
Former Secretary of the Treasury Timothy F. Geitner aka “Turbo Tax Timmy” – who hadn’t paid social security or self-employment taxes on income received from the International Monetary Fund from 2001 to 2004; the IRS audited Geithner for tax years 2003 and 2004, which resulted in him paying back taxes and interest–but no penalties–totaling $16,732. Geithner voluntarily amended his 2001 and 2002 returns only after Obama expressed interest in nominating him to the Treasury post. The total bill this time: $25,970. He also failed to get proper verification for three individuals who worked for his family. As a prior Treasury employee who later ran the NY Federal Reserve, one has to wonder how he could fail to understand social security or SE tax. This was infuriating to expats suffering through the OVDP/OVDI penalties. As well, former Congressman Charlie Rangel (D-NY), a sponsor of FATCA, headed the powerful House Ways and Means Committee that writes the nation’s tax laws, was censured by the House of Representatives in December for ethics violations.A chief violation included his failure to pay 17 years’ worth of taxes on rental income from the Dominican Republic property. GRRRRRRR! (still burns……..)
****************
reblogged from the renounceuscitizenship wordpress blog
also appeared at Brock on March 22, 2013
The following tweet appeared as a post at the Isaac Brock Society and generated a collection of comments.
@MopsickTaxLaw Great post on "FATCA Feast" think you salivating people mean "stakeholders" – not "steakholders" http://t.co/8CLv2U0Ija
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) March 19, 2013
To provide some context:
Steven J. Mopsick wrote a post which was a report of his experience at a recent FATCA conference. He was impressed by how the attendees were exploiting the business opportunity (inadvertently referring to them as “steakholders”) that FATCA has created for the compliance industry. Interestingly, Mr. Mopsick specifically makes the point that:
The focus of the conference was strictly on FATCA from the standpoint of complying financial institutions. Most of the participants did not even know about and individual’s duty to file FBAR’s, Foreign Asset Statements (form 8938) and there was very little talk about privacy concerns, fears about the dangers of an emerging international banking data base system, or how Canadian politicians were doing in shaking their lap dog image as pawns of the US government.
In other words: the focus was on the law of FATCA with no consideration of the morality, unintended consequences or effect on society as a whole. (Most law students would kill to have a prof like this!) To put it another way, the important consideration is the law itself. The fact of the law itself is the only issue. The values that underlie the law are irrelevant.
“Just Me” in his usual “wit and wisdom” commented that:
This is the Truism I take away from Steven: “The people around the world who stand to profit from FATCA are not thinking much about government intrusions into the private lives of the world citizens.”
“Them’s the
FATCAsFACTs”, as they say.Although, they may think it is a ‘business and growth opportunity’ others see it as a pending financial disaster for the World’s economy. Who is right? I think the latter, but we shall see. I could be wrong.
FATCA and US fiscal imperialism threaten to sink global economy
In all due respect to 30 year IRS vet, I think he may have his perspectives twisted (which comes from his background?) when he thinks that profiting off the backs of the government regulatory tit is “free enterprise/free market system at work.” Rather, it represents the worst of unprincipled and amoral aspects of human nature at work. These actions are not based upon free enterprise/free markets, but on artificial markets based upon dubious legal assertions.
Free markets do not require or accept extortion as their engine of enterprise.
I can think of other examples of so called free enterprise ~70 years ago, where other“hard-working, serious, responsible business men and women who were on their way up in their companies” were probably attending conferences on how to ramp up manufacturing and supply of cattle cars for another freight train in another era that he would not be so willing to celebrate. He would not like that comparison, and maybe it is a bit hyperbolic, but the same human nature principle is at work.
More recently, there was an army of war profiteering “hard-working, serious, responsible business men and women” contractors, attending conferences in Vegas to learn how suckling off the “free enterprise” of ‘War Contracting Gone Wild’ could benefit their companies. They didn’t want to get left out of the ‘business and growth opportunity’that an amoral and unnecessary war provided. What if the government threw a contractor party to support its misguided war effort at that time, and no one came? I blame the compliant and willing contractors co-enablers as much as the government initiators for the sad legacy we left in Iraq.
Maybe in fairness to Steven, what he is saying, is yes, human nature is responding to an artificial market that would NOT exist, except for US hubris, financial imperialism and extra-territoriality. I don’t think I would be citing the FATCA Compliance Industrial Complex’s (FCIC) “hard-working, serious, responsible business men and women” as an example of ‘supply and demand’ in action that Adam Smith would identity or praise.
Although I certainly agree that “Free markets do not require or accept extortion as their engine of enterprise”, the Mopsick post raises an even larger issue. Mr. Mopsick has and continues to make an enormous contribution to the discussion of FATCA, FBAR and U.S. tax compliance in general. Some of the best thinking on these topics may be found in the “Mopsick Trilogy” – a series of posts that he wrote about the compliance problems facing US citizens abroad. His posts are a unique blend of raising questions and answering questions. In this case, his post has raised an important issue.
The issue is that, in the America of today, laws have become a substitute for morality. A society where laws have become a substitute for morality, is a society that is past the point of “no return”. This is where “Form Nation” – AKA The United States of America – finds itself today.
“Form Nation” – A country structured by laws and not by men
In the beginning we had the ten commandments which were expressions of the fundamental principles of justice. The ten commandments reflected principles which were for the common good. Gradually legislatures began to create laws. In the early stages of society, these laws were specific applications of fundamental principles of justice and for the most part these laws continued to be for the common good.
What is in the common good is not necessarily what is good for specific individuals. Those specific individuals who control the political process have strong incentives to act in their interest at the expense of the public interest.
Once legislatures saw how easy it was to create laws, they began to create laws which were NOT for the common good but were to benefit specific individuals at the expense of the common good. That’s how the Internal Revenue Code and regs grew to 17,000 pages. It’s simply incredible. Mr. Romney pays low tax on his “carried interests” and U.S. citizens abroad pay confiscatory taxes on their mutual funds “PFICs”. Not only is this unfair, but it’s a wonderful example of how laws are passed to benefit the individual at the expense of the common good.
But, it gets far worse. Who exactly are the legislatures? Democracy in the “Form Nation” of today is controlled by two private clubs. You will recognize them as the Democratic and Republican parties. Not only are they private clubs, but they have the intellectual dishonesty to rely on public funding for their existence. Their job is to campaign and to stay in power. Why? Because they will profit from being power. Those of you who have seen the Movie Chicago will remember Mama Morton singing “reciprocity“.
If you have the money you can get the ear of a Congressman. If you don’t you can’t. If you are the mutual fund industry you can lobby to get the PFIC laws passed. If you are the Romney’s of the world (and I still believe Romney would have been a better president) you can lobby to get your “carried interest” laws passed. As Fareed Zakaria has noted, the system is corrupt at it’s core. A large part of the problem is the way the political system works in the United States. There is nobody who represents the voters. The elected representatives (and they are not really elections because of a lack of choice on the ballot) are in business for themselves. Their business is in passing laws that benefit themselves or their clients. This is the only reason that the IRC and regs grew to 17,000 pages. To put it simply: elected representatives are in the business of making laws.
It’s laws, laws and more laws!
The United States of today is burdened by so many laws that:
– everybody is in violation of some law (show me the man and I will show you the crime);
– the complexity of the laws means that people cannot even understand what they are required to do (the FBAR rules are a weird combination of the enabling statute, the regs and the form itself);
– people are forced to pay lawyers for an opinion on what they may be required to do (lawyers have become the modern day “priests”);
– the sheer volume of laws means that enforcement is largely discretionary (will the IRS enforce FBAR penalties or not?);
– the focus on laws leads to a presumption of criminality (the fact that US citizens abroad are subject to so many laws means they must be guilty of something);
– the moral foundation (if any) of the law becomes irrelevant. The original purpose of the law becomes irrelevant. All that matters is the mechanical application of the law. Nobody ever imagined that PFIC rules, Foreign Trust rules or the FBAR rules would be used to unleash a “reign of terror” on US citizens abroad. On the “Homelander Front”, do you really believe that Martha Stewart deserved incarceration? Of course, the good old USA has the highest rate of incarceration in the world.
Laws have become a replacement for morality. Laws are the only standard for morality.
If you are not in violation of the law, you are not immoral.
If you are in violation of the law you are immoral.
(If the U.S. is really concerned about the “crime rate” then maybe it should reduce the number of laws.)
Conclusion: The US does not have laws that are fair.
“Form Nation” – A country governed by those who decide when to apply the laws and in relation to whom! (A government of tyrants)
In the context of the laws, the laws are not applied equally
President Obama commented that Mr. Geithner should not be punished for a mistake commonly made. It was okay for Timothy Geithner, a man with the money to get accurate tax advice, to file inaccurate tax returns. It is NOT okay for US citizens abroad to fail to file or to file inaccurate tax returns.
Conclusion: The US does NOT have fair application of the law.
1. The United States of today is country where laws are passed by members of private clubs, which have no incentive to benefit the common good and every incentive to benefit themselves at the expense of the common good.
2. The laws are so numerous that every person in the United States is in violation of something.
3. The laws that passed carry no presumption of morality and simply have no moral force.
4. The laws (regardless of content) are enforced in an unpredictable and unfair way.
The result is that people live in terror of the government.
As Jefferson said:
When people fear the government there is tyranny. When government fears the people there is liberty.
So, what’s all this got to do with #FATCA and the Mopsick post?
FATCA is the “gift that keeps on giving” (well to the compliance industry that is). As Mr. Mopsick confirms, the concern of the industry in on the fact of the law. What does it say? What does it require? As Mr. Mopsick reports:
Many readers of this blog will be disappointed to hear this report. The people around the world who stand to profit from FATCA are not thinking much about government intrusions into the private lives of the world citizens. That is the furthest thing from their minds. These folks were all good students, in effect, knowing full-well that there was a new body of rules and regulations on the table which they needed to learn and master.
The implication is that the “good students”, those “hard-working, serious, responsible business men and women who were on their way up in their companies”, the “best and the brightest” (are they really that bright?) should be concerned with embracing the new morality, getting in tune with the “new world” caring about the implications of their conduct. That’s exactly what happens when law becomes a substitute for morality. Just Me compares this mentality to another time in history when he notes that:
I can think of other examples of so called free enterprise ~70 years ago, where other“hard-working, serious, responsible business men and women who were on their way up in their companies” were probably attending conferences on how to ramp up manufacturing and supply of cattle cars for another freight train in another era that he would not be so willing to celebrate. He would not like that comparison, and maybe it is a bit hyperbolic, but the same human nature principle is at work.
Interesting analogy. What is the purpose of FATCA? What are the moral underpinnings of FATCA? Has anybody ever asked the question? Clearly nobody in the world of the FATCA compliance industry. They would be afraid of the answer!
But, that’s what happens when law becomes a substitute for morality. Many of you are concerned about what reason to give for renouncing your U.S. citizenship.
Why not just say:
I do not wish to be a citizen of a country where law has become a substitute for fairness and morality!
TOMORROW : Burning Barns Down is not Wrong Because it is Illegal – It is Illegal Because it is Wrong
Thanks Patricia for this great post 🙂
I feel betrayed and very deceived about the world we’re living in today. The law and regulation’s tyranical fascist world created by the global corporate financial system !
Their laws and taxes have destroyed the world economy and they know it.
FATCA, FBAR, FRANCK ACT, BRRD DIRECTIVE…all laws and rules designed to outright rob our hard earned money and savings, all laws seen as legal by the compliance industry when they really are violating constitutions and human rights.
This underlines that humans are not important for humans anymore and thus morality has become a blunt word !
As you know I totally refuse to obey illegal unjust bully laws !
I have found ways of getting out and avoiding their dirty central bank financial system and I advise all of you to do the same.
How ? Easy just do what they do. Buy gold and silver in a private safe in Switzerland with Veracarte, Goldbroker, Bullionvault you name it. I’ve done it. I have debancerised my savings to prevent them from being robbed by any bank or any state or country.
That’s what they do so do it to.
All these bad immoral laws have been made to bail In the banks with the next financial collapse that is just around the corner.
With the 2008 crisis the value of gold has tripled from 2007 to 2012 and houses have lost 30 to 40% of their value and that’s undisputible fact.
With this new crisis wich will be a financial collapse (we’re actually in it) the value of gold will multiply by 10 and the value of homes will be devided by 10.
This is the world as it stands today. Money has lost 97% of it’s value !
I have a friend who works as export director for a german company.
He bought gold in a private safe in Switzerland 10 years ago. He is selling an appartement that he rents and he told me “with the money of the sale of that appartement I’m going to buy more gold in Switzerland and when the next crisis comes around I’ll sell that gold and by 10 appartements”.
And that’s how the rich get richer !
They buy gold, provoque a financial collapse, confiscate our homes and savings with their dirty immoral rules and regulations.
The way this world works is now cristal clear to me.
There are allways ways to get around tyranny, do what they do !
I highly recommend reading Ergon von Greyerz’s articles on King World News or Goldbrocker.
I have learned a lot and taken act to protect my financial life from the system thanks to people like him.
Good luck to all
It really bothers me when issues not directly related to our own are misrepresented here.
Examples.
“we watch America turn from being an open and welcoming society into one moving toward closed borders”
Controlled borders are not the same as closed borders. America remains a welcoming society. We welcome those who come LEGALLY. Just as there is a difference between avoiding tax and evading tax, there is also a huge difference between legal and illegal immigration and the welcome one receives should differ dependent upon which of these two groups they are in.
“over-the-top surveillance, etc.” Yes, and this sadly has been a long time coming. I think that at least some has been recently rolled back. Aerial surveillance, I think, has been greatly curtailed.
“Today the Secy of Homeland Security literally said he was considering separating (illegal) parents from their (American-born) children. Unbelievably cruel and totally unnecessary. ”
Yes, cruel on the part of the parents who knowingly broke the law and thus exposed their family to the consequences. Not necessary? How else does a nation regain control over who does and does not enter? The terrorist who attacked the Pulse night club in Orlando Florida, should never have been born in the US. His father was and remains a supporter of terrorism in the name of Allah and should never have been permitted to enter the US in the first place. In that one attack alone, there are almost 50 dead victims of that provably false concept. How many others must die or suffered injury, rape, theft and lesser crimes to support this nonsense. If someone wants to come to the US, they do as I did and fullfill the requirements of the host country and apply for permission.
“And the reinstatement of the “travel ban” which has been tweaked a bit but cannot possibly be seen for anything except what is clearly is – a move to keep Muslims out of America.”
If this is true, then why is the greatest part of the world’s muslim population unaffected?
If the world opperated as these comments suggest, then Japanese, German and Italian citizens entered and moved about the allied nations freely during WWII. Obvioulsy, this was not the case. Should it have been?
Many here have expressed anger over seeing the US flag displayed on private property in Canada, yet demand that the US allow a hell of a lot more than just a non US flag fly over private property.
Citizenship is not just a parcel of goodies for those who gain it. It comes with responsibilities. If I wanted to immigrate to Canada, I would expect to be expected to assimilate. A huge hang up I have personally with renouncing is that I have no desire to assimilate to Japanese. That is a responsibility that will be very difficult to live up to.
Yet, the US must allow any number of people in who have no intention of assimilating to America? People who instead state that they are in America to force Americans to assimilate to their home beliefs?
“America remains a welcoming society. We welcome those who come LEGALLY.”
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/01/29/politics/donald-trump-travel-ban-green-card-dual-citizens/
“The terrorist who attacked the Pulse night club in Orlando Florida, should never have been born in the US. His father was and remains a supporter of terrorism in the name of Allah and should never have been permitted to enter the US in the first place”
How about the terrorists who attacked the Oklahoma federal building?
How about the terrorists who brought smallpox to the original inhabitants of the US?
How about the terrorist who murdered a Sikh and said “go back to your own country”; when will that terrorist be deported to the countries his ancestors came from (divide into as many pieces as necessary to accomplish that).
Um, wait a minute.
“America remains a welcoming society. We welcome those who come LEGALLY.”
Does that include US natural born citizens who enter the US legally, let’s see…
“The terrorist who attacked the Pulse night club in Orlando Florida, should never have been born in the US. His father was and remains a supporter of terrorism in the name of Allah and should never have been permitted to enter the US in the first place”
No, that doesn’t include US natural born citizens who enter the US legally. Sure maybe the guy shouldn’t be welcomed, he should be deported in as many pieces as necessary, but that doesn’t make the US a welcoming society. The Statue of Liberty needs to be deported to the country she came from too.
“How many others must die or suffered injury, rape, theft and lesser crimes to support this nonsense”
Funny, there are Japanese people asking the same question, wondering why some people are allowed to come legally and wondering why they’re allowed to escape legally after committing those crimes.
@JapanT
I don’t agree that the issues discussed in this post “have nothing to do with our own” nor that they are misrepresented. It is one’s opinion as to whether an issue is/is not related to ours and whether something is misrepresented.
The point is to look at the moral temperature if you will, of the U.S. as one makes a decision with regard to “our issues.” Should one become compliant or not? Should one renounce or not? Such decisions require weighing a lot of factors. And whether or not one can “trust” the United States, is not irrelevant. Sorry but there are other aspects that come in to judging America and it is not all about how others have done America wrong but whether or not America lives up to its own declared level of being superior, highly moral and so on. What about Guantanamo, Abu Gharib and so on? Torture is not legal and it was done. Assassinating American citizens is not legal.
There is one very important aspect of Canada that perhaps you are unaware of.
Then you do not at all understand what Canada is about.
We are not a melting pot.We aim for multiculturism, which allows people to retain the identity they have from their first nation/culture. We aim to make being different, work. I suspect that is why though I understand what you are saying, I can’t really see it that way. I have been influenced by living here for 35 years and it is a different mindset than when I entered as an American.
Canada has taken in thousands of Syrian refugees. We are not experiencing any issues. And I don’t think one could say the U.S. is welcoming Syrians. They have not entered the country at all, never mind illegally. And perhaps the people who have recently been separated from the U.S. and their kids (all Latino that I am aware of) did enter the U.S. illegally years ago. Does it not matter that the majority of them work hard, pay taxes and obey the law? Does that not indicate they may have already been responsible and have earned at least consideration for staying? Both of the offences of being “illegal” are misdemeanors, not felonies and are civil not criminal transgressions.
I do not know enough about the man or his family with regard to Orlando. Are you saying that his family was there illegally? If legal, how would you manage keeping out the ones who “should never have been allowed to enter in the first place?” Maybe his father wasn’t like that when he came but became bitter watching the U.S. actions in the Middle East. The U.S. can hardly claim innocence in this regard. At any rate, I would like to learn about his father. Where did you learn that he was/is a supporter of terrorism?
It is not irrelevant that the 6 countries are primarily Muslim. Are you saying it was okay for the Americans (and the Canadians did this as well) to round up the American citizens of Japanese origin and keep them in camps for 4 years?
I really do not want to go on and on arguing about these things but I also don’t want to just ignore what you’ve said. I don’t see the U.S. as the compassionate place it once was. I don’t see it as abiding by its own laws. That’s all. And I definitely took that into account when I decided to renounce.
That was the main point and it definitely is one of our issues as far as I am concerned.
@ND
You are confusing actions of individuals with that of societies. This argument is often used to deflect criticism, “Yeah? Well what our peolpe isn’t so bad, just look at what your people did” and it misses the key point. Yes, bad actors are to be found in every society, thus no meaningful comparison can be made with this line of thought.
The comparison must be made between how each society responds to these actions of its own members. A brief example, US soldiers arrested in the US by the US FBI, tried in the US under US law and sentenced to prison by a US court for rape and murder of and Iraqi family in Iraq. Does that mean that mean that all such bad actors are caught and punished, no, of course not. But let us compare how many such cases there where, say, among all beligerents in WWII and then we’ll have a real comparison to work with.
So, what happened to the perps of the crimes you cited? Timothy McVeigh at least was put to death, so I find it a bit of a stretch to say that US society condons such actions by its members.
“Terrorism” and “terrorist” are too more terms to add to the ever growing list of misused words. They do not apply to small pox and native Americans whether intentionally spread or not. Nor do they apply to actual combat between the so called “terrorists” and a state military force on the battlefield, BTW.
On foreignors being allowed entry, once allowed in, then they are to be allowed protections unless national security conciderations disallow such. Have you read the law behind the executive order? Have you read either excutive order? It is legal and given that the US gov’s number one duty is to protect US citizens, I believe moral too. It is a human right to LEAVE one’s country but it is not a human right to ENTER another country. Once granted citizenship, then they must legally and morally be aforded all the rights and privledges of citizenship. So no, I do not advocate deporting the father of the Pulse night club attacker, nor will you find any reference in my post to the concept. Nor in Trumps travel ban. Nor does his travel ban call for the deportations of those already LEGALLY IN the US. But my example does show that the US has not been doing a good job of screening (vetting) applicants for citizenship.
How about the brothers who bombed the Boston Marathon? They and their mother were let in as refugees. How did that work out? Four innocents dead; a child, two young women one of whom was an exchange student from China and I believe the fourth was a police officer, and how many injured. How did their mother react? They should never have been allowed in and four are dead because they were. How many more must die? Wait, are you trying to say that these deaths are justified because of the case you cite?
“Funny, there are Japanese people asking the same question, wondering why some people are allowed to come legally and wondering why they’re allowed to escape legally after committing those crimes.”
And rightfully so, but this too is an issue that has many facets. Can the accused expect a fair trial when J citizens are not afforded such? Just one example. That does not excuse the actions you refer to but gives a wee bit o’ insight as to why that may happen.
You said,
“I don’t agree that the issues discussed in this post “have nothing to do with our own” nor that they are misrepresented. It is one’s opinion as to whether an issue is/is not related to ours and whether something is misrepresented.”
But I said,
“It really bothers me when issues not directly related to our own are misrepresented here. ”
I do believe these issues are related but are not directly related. But no, facts are facts and not opinions. The answer to your question about whether the US can be trusted is simple, “No”. But not for the reasons you give.
Guantanamo.
When in the history of modern warfare has been the case that captured combatants are released before the ceasation of hostilities? Any and all captured SHOULD stay there until the war is over. Both legal and moral. There is actually a lot more to this issue but I will leave it here for now.
Abu Gharib.
Fake news and one that fits my cmments to ND. Yes, US soldiers misused and abused prisoners they had authority over, but very little else as the story become known is. I knew of this incident months before you did. I know this to be true because were it not, you would not be citing it to make this point. I read about it in the newspaper months before it became a huge story, that is to say before the pics were published. The newspaper article I read stated that more than one US soldier at the Abu Gharib prison had been arrested for abuse of prisoners. By the time the pics were released more than one trial was under way and one may have been already concluded with a conviction, all eventually were convicted. Yes it happened, but it did NOT take the press and outrage from the public after the pics were released to make the US Army take action against those who commited the crimes. What is really infuriating with this example, is not only does the actual time line, the facts, not fit the public perception of the crimes, but even if it did occur as you believe it did, were not the American people outraged over it? I was Stateside at the time the news “broke” and I can tell you they were. So how does this support your arguement of shifting values in the States?
“We are not a melting pot.We aim for multiculturism, which allows people to retain the identity they have from their first nation/culture. ”
And yet, posters here from Canada have expressed their anger at seeing a US flag displayed on private property.
“Canada has taken in thousands of Syrian refugees. ”
Are you sure? As an amature historian, I have seen many photos of refugees dating as far back as the US Civil War. There is a huge difference between pics of Syrian refugees and all other refugee pics. In the non Syrian refugee pics you are going to have some difficulty finding large numbers of men of military service age. Instead, you will find mostly women, children and the elderly, which conversly are not in high numbers among the very many young men of military service age found in the photos of Syrian refugees. But, if Canada wants to let them in, then it is Canada’s right to do so just as it is America’s right not to.
And NO problems, really? Europe sure can not say that. There have been attacks in Canada too, not sure from where the attackers hailed from but Syrians are among six nations that are temporarily banned in the US. No more should be let in until a vetting system is in place and then only those who pass screening allowed in. I think the family of the Boston bombers were from Syria. There are Syrian refugees in the US. The ban is a new thing although the previous admin chose the same 7 nations as places from where travel to the US should be restricted, it appears that they did not fully implement this policy however.
“… did enter the U.S. illegally years ago. Does it not matter that the majority of them work hard, pay taxes and obey the law?”
Logic fail. One who entered illegally is living in the country illegally and are thus not obeying the law. As you mentioned latino, you should check out the immigration laws in various Latin American counties to see how they treat those they find living in their countries illegally.
The Orlando shooter’s father immigrated to the US. I do not recall the particulars, but he was an out spoken supporter of violence in the name of his religion before admission to the States and subsequent granting of citizenship. Once he has that, then deportation is off the table, but he should never have been allowed entry.
“It is not irrelevant that the 6 countries are primarily Muslim. Are you saying it was okay for the Americans (and the Canadians did this as well) to round up the American citizens of Japanese origin and keep them in camps for 4 years?”
And where do you get that idea from? No one, and I mean no one is suggesting such a thing. The executive order is to prevent more non USCs from those countries from entering the US for the time being. Other action in regards to those living in the US illegally regardless of county of origin including deportation is also in the works or underway, but where does this notion that US citizens decending from certain nationalities are going to be rounded come from? Certainly not in the executive orders thus far issued nor any remarks made by the president, and certainly not I.
Is it not relevant that those six nations are hotbeds for terrorist activity and/or recruitment. It seems you only see this as a muslim issue. I see it as a terrorist issue. I believe the fact that most of the world’s muslim population is unaffected by the travel band lends more creditablity to my view.
Yes entering illegally and living illegally are misdemeanors but are punishable as felonies if they reenter illegally after being deported. Further, if they are living in the US illegally, then they are working illegally or receiving benefits illegally or both. If they send any of their illegally gained money out of the country then they are breaking even more laws. No, they are not obeying law.
But there ARE reasons to not trust the US. Just look at FATCA, FBAR and CBT. With in those three bodies of “law” there are plently of examples of the US ignoring its own laws, international law and the laws of other nations. Why muddy the waters by bring up other issues that are not as commonly reported? It distracts from the main argument. Just lay out how these three violate US law. But having experienced trying to persuade Homelanders, what we have to distrust is the American public. They seem to be supportive of it all.
I too do not want to have to argue these points, but so much given is not based upon fact. Remember, those from whom you learned about Guantanamo and Abu Gharib are the same that are informing the world about our issues. How are they doing with that? I remember a nice piece titled something along the lines of “Another 30,000 tax chests come Clean”. Do you really think ours is the only story they get wrong?
Over 18,000 Syrian refugees have settled in the US since war broke out in Syria. Over 3000 this year already.
@Japan T
Between November 2015 and January 2017 Canada accepted more than 40,000 Syrian refugees. None of them are known to have perpetrated any violence. On the contrary, what violence there is in Canada is being perpetrated against Muslims by white supremacist native born lunatics. They are the ones who deserve to be deported but unfortunately that is not legally possible.
True that more, double, have been allowed in, but 18,000 is not zero. The US also has many more from other countries and additionally an estimated 12-20 million illegal aliens, roughly half the entire population of Canada. Yes, you have had attacks by at least one white supremist, but who was it who killed the unarmed soldier standing guard at a memorial? Was he a white supremacist? As it was an attack against the muslim community, can I then say that Canadian society is no longer welcoming? Not until we see what Canada’s legal system does with him and what Canada’s society thinks of the verdict and possible punishment.
It is not only crime that may be a problem. Are they being properly screened for public health reasons? In the US, they are not. Diseases that had been eradicated in the US decades ago are now once again present in the US. So too with diseases that had never been in the US. The feds are forcing local school districts to accept children from abroad with out the medial screening required of citizens.
How is Canada’s employment situation? Are there jobs for all of those 40,000 who are of employable age? The US has over 90 million people who are no longer participting in the work force. In anticipation of the usual counter arguement, no, these are NOT the young, elderly and infirm. I have taken the numbers reported and looked at census numbers and other data and found that while the US population has grown, the number of jobs has decreased. There are over 90 million fewer Americans working now than there were 8 years ago. US pop. is around 350 million. That is a huge number of citizens who are not employed. The US no business bringing in any more people until it can employ those who are already present.
If Canada wants to let thm in, bully for you. But it is the US’s right to not to and under the current circumstances in the US, a moral duty to staunch the ingress.
“Rinkeby and nearby Stockholm suburb of Husby are both considered No-Go Zones by Swedish authorities who are often attacked by residents when they go to the areas.
Police are not the only ones to be assaulted in these zones. Recently, an ambulance union head complained paramedics needed military defence gear to protect themselves from residents who mostly come from a migrant background.”
The US does not want this and it is both right and moral to prevent it by not letting any more in.
“The Justice Department and the Department of Homeland Security made public Monday a harrowing fact about refugees taken in by the United States. Coinciding with the signing of a new “travel ban” executive order from President Donald Trump, the agencies revealed that of the 1,000 current FBI terrorism investigations, 300 of them involve foreign refugees.”
That is 300 investigations that would not have been needed if the 300 in question were not let in. That would have freed up 30% of the resources curently being used invetigating terrorism to be used on the cases of homegrown terrorism.
Let it go, dude, let it go. It’s got nothing to do with FATCA and you aren’t going to change anyone’s mind.
If facts do not change minds, then we might just as well pack all this up and do whatever we can to enjoy our lives until FATCA takes away our accounts or families.
Some of us already think facts will not change any politician’s mind about FATCA and discuss how the US’s diaspora have to decide which parts of their situation they have to pack up.
I’m all for a dual-track approach to FATCA.
Make an attempt at legal and political change to fix the overall problem.
Take pragmatic steps to protect yourself as an individual: lie, forge, cheat if you must, renounce or comply if that works better. Don’t be distracted by antiquated concepts like honesty.
@ND and Nononymous
Sadly, I fear you are both right.
We (Canada) do not have a right to impose our moral values within the boundaries of the United States, just as we feel that the United States does not have a right to impose its values or its laws (FATCA) within the boundaries of our sovereign nations.
I say the road goes both ways.
The proper response to a bully with no morals and a loadful of hypocrisy: Avoidance…ostracization, Do not seek to do trade with them. Do not accommodate them in any way shape or form. Do not indulge their attitudes, vices or proclivities. In otherwords…have NOTHING to do with them, Eventually when the rest of the world has nothing to do with the United States, then the United States will seek to mend its ways. The rest of the world can establish trade with other countries, It takes time and effort. And the human population tends to put in the least amount of effort for the greatest reward. But my question to you is: Is the relationship with the United States, the billions of $ in trade…worth the abusive relationship that the US is projecting on the rest of the world. When is the rest of the world going to wake up?
The world will never wake up .To much dependence on that almighty yankee dollar. The best you can do is to make some economic treaties outside their grasp. Sad to say but the only ones with backbone are the media hated,North Korea,Russia,Iran,etc.
Agree in part with Japan T about refugies and the the problems they are creating in Europe economically and socially.Trump must have spoken with some tongue in cheek when he praised Canadian immigration procedures as a role model while our borders are wide open to anyone who can afford a taxi. In time,we may need a wall.
You know what I think is immoral? A government’s sudden enforcement of laws that it chose to conveniently ignore in the past. A lot of the problems associated with illegal immigration and Citizenship-Based Taxation could have been avoided if the US government hadn’t been negligent in enforcing its own laws. It borders on entrapment really, but “the law is the law”, and until the laws change any government can pick it up, dust it off and enforce it to its fullest degree.
@Bubbles
Could not agree more. Always felt it was just too convenient for that “ignorance of the law is no excuse” claptrap.
As if none of the responsibility for this mess lay with government. Northern Dar used to point out, when did any of this get taught back in school? When was there any attempt to get that information out via a likely contact with the Consulates? And just how did most find out about it? By seeing an article in a foreign newspaper. By being scared out of your mind by a tax compliance professional. When one of those guys gets on us for “It’s US law ” (above the laws of our own countries) I could just strangle them.
With all these corrupt gouvernements and their dirty fascist rules, This today has become my philosophy :
Just Keep On Breaking The Rules by AC/DC :
https://youtu.be/-aFAj9fwFG8
Screw them !!!
They’re turning me from an honest patriot to a desobedient ennemi ! So be it…
That’s their tough shit !
@Bubblebustin
Excellent sentiment:
Actually you are being far too kind to the U.S. government and ascribing a level of respect that it (particularly the former Obama administration) doesn’t deserve.
Take the case of applying the PFIC rules to Canadians who are/were long term holders of Canadian mutual funds. Basically, the longer the holding period the higher the confiscation just for the crime of retirement planning in Canada. (Your money should be in the Homeland.) Both the rules and the application of the rules are immoral, criminal and result in the financial rape of Canadians attempting to save for retirement.
But, it’s far worse because the IRS was not even aware of the PFIC rules until 2009 (thank the OVDP program). But, once the IRS discovered PFIC they began retroactively applying the punitive form of taxation to something that:
1. Nobody could have imagined existed
2. The IRS didn’t even know existed
3. The U.S. tax compliance industry didn’t even know existed.
Think of it. They applied rules to Americans abroad that THEY THEMSELVES DID NOT EVEN KNOW EXISTED!
But, did that stop the tax compliance industry and the IRS? Hell no.
They simply revelled in the:
“Joy Of Discovering A New Way To Rape and Pillage The Economies and Citizens Of Other Nations!”.
It’s the American way!!!!!
One takeaway from this is that you need to be very very careful about what information you give to tax preparers, etc. and what tax preparers you choose. The compliance industry is the enforcer (with pleasure) of these rules.
Americans abroad must choose between:
1. Obeying these horrible unjust “laws” which result in their financial destruction; or
2 Doing what they need to do to save themselves.
There is NO possibility of existing as “U.S. tax compliant Americans abroad” in such a brutal, immoral, dishonest and corrupt system.
All Roads Lead To Renunciation” – the only question is which road you personally will take.
Speaking of “blasts from the past”; I see that there is now a renunciation services ad in the Business section of the Toronto Star. Contains the usual fear fostering reference to “How to avoid becoming barred from the US”. Obviously renunciation has gone mainstream, since readers of the Star Business section are probably not quite the same target readers of the Globe or Financial Post Business section.
Meant to add to my comment above that the US extraterritorial tax compliance industrial complex – now with a renunciation arm does not appear to be driven by morality or ethics in many of their marketing strategies.