320 thoughts on “This is Fantastic! Don’t Think We Have Ever Had Support Like this!”

1. @WhatAmI

   Regarding the GAO report, the Pomerantz case will be quite instructive, I imagine. Though it predates FATCA, the IRS has all the information they need to issue a huge penalty, but if they can’t even serve the papers, let alone collect the money, then we Canadian citizens may continue feeling relatively safe up here north of the border.

   Part 1:

   On the bigger issue, here are two possible explanations.

   1. CBT and FBAR have been around for a long time, but with minimal US interest or ability to enforce against long-term non-residents, be they expats or dual citizens. FATCA is created in response to outrage over US residents stashing money in Swiss banks, at a time when many other countries are also ramping up efforts to combat offshore tax evasion by their own citizens. FATCA is a shitty, ill-conceived piece of legislation that sideswipes a lot of “ordinary” US citizens abroad. Foreign governments capitulate because the political cost of sticking it to small numbers of dual citizens is very low, and the perceived risk to their financial institutions is much higher. Chaos ensues. Well maybe not chaos, but certainly injustice.

   2. Globalists, Democrats, the UN and their nefarious allies conspire to bring all countries’ financial systems under tighter US control. Regulation of all aspects of life for all US citizens anywhere in the world is their ultimate, evil goal.

   So, apply Occam’s Razor and ask yourself which explanation makes more sense?

   Part 2:

   I take issue with the idea that anyone who isn’t furiously coming into compliance and/or renouncing US citizenship has their head in the sand. I am not renouncing (yet) and I am certainly no ostrich.

   In metaphor terms, having one’s head in the sand is the same as plugging one’s ears and singling “la-la-la-la-la” – it means I don’t want to hear it, I don’t want to know. That does not apply to anyone who is well-informed on the subject.

   I won’t list the reasons, but in my case I firmly believe that the best course of action is remain non-compliant but also not to renounce. If conditions change in the future, I will revisit that decision. Perhaps it will be too late and the long arm of US law will bankrupt me and enslave my family, but since I tend to the first explanation above, I expect that is not the likely outcome.

2. iota said: Cross-border account reporting is the way the world is going .. it’s not just the US….

   Really?

   It is just the US who requires reporting across borders for people with accounts in their country of residence. Correct me if I am wrong but cross-border reporting for other countries is only for non-residents’ accounts. Big difference.

3. @fn0

   I meant to add something similar to the post above. Definitely a push towards cross-border eporting (the CRS thing) now, and the promise of reciprocity is another reason governments signed on to help enforce FATCA, but of course this reporting only applies to (tax) residents for countries other than the US.

4. “It is just the US who requires reporting across borders for people with accounts in their country of residence. Correct me if I am wrong but cross-border reporting for other countries is only for non-residents’ accounts. Big difference.”

   As I understand it, CRS and FATCA both report accounts to all jurisdictions in which the accountholder is tax-resident. Many, perhaps most – including US-resident USCs – will only be tax-resident in the country where they live. Some, including non-US-resident USCs, numerous EU citizens, and assorted non-domiciled UK taxpayers, will be tax-resident in more than one country.

5. Yeah, my understanding is that there are situations where one can be tax-resident in more than one country, particularly moving around within the EU or when working abroad for a few years. Plenty of Canadians in the US file returns in both countries because they don’t want to (or can’t meet the criteria to) claim non-residency. But of course the US is still special because it never gives you the option of non-residency!

6. “…the US is still special because it never gives you the option of non-residency!”

   Yep.

7. @Nononymous

   You forgot about the aliens.

8. My comment about harassment at the border was based on several conversations, most recently with someone who has a close relative who’s a dual-accidental, born in the US to Canadian parents, and who moved to Canada as an infant. This person recently attempted to join fellow students on a university break trip to the US. When the US border officials saw the US birthplace on the Canadian passport they wee extremely angry and aggressive, in an interview that lasted for hours. The parents told my friend that their child was terribly upset. They contacted the US embassy or consulate, and the student finally got an apology, but is now beginning the procedure to renounce the US citizenship she never used in any form.

   I know someone who was born and lived in the US until early teenage years, and has lived in Canada during the remaining decades, but never became a Canadian citizen. At the last family trip to Cuba they did stamp the US passport. No problem getting back into Canada, but was afraid of trouble going back into the US to visit relatives, so has begun the procedure to become a Canadian citizen, and can then begin the procedure to renounce.

9. @Queenston,

   So, in your first paragraph, the US border officials were extremely angry and aggressive because of the US birthplace on Canadian passport instead of having a US passport as required by law for US citizens, and this had nothing to do with Cuba?

   This is very important for me to get straight!

   I also have a US birthplace on my Canadian passport, with Cuban stamps, except I relinquished and have a CLN. I am going to enter the US by car in May. I’m not expecting any trouble since I have the CLN.

   BTW, when I travel to Cuba I carry a photocopy of my CLN in case there is an emergency landing in the US. Maybe I should take a notarized copy with me to the US in May?

10. @Iota

    “Read the document cited by WhatAmI. The IRS explains at great length how difficult it is to enforce CBT.”

    That was 19 years ago.

    FATCA not coerced? How much are countries paying to implement it? What are they receiving for these vast sums of money? No one willing spends that much money for zero benefit.

    Those that were not coerced were dupped into into thinking it is something it i not.

    Inthink it was Adlie (sp?).Stevenson who said that nothing is ever done for just one reason.

11. “The real threats and damages that are being perpetrated upon us are by our own governments and financial institutions who are far more concerned about covering their asses than vigorously exercising their moral and legal responsibility to us, their citizens and customers.”

    And those are the ones who will turn us in and dance to what ever tune the IRS plays.

12. “The IRS is totally overwhelmed trying to enforce the US tax code within the confines of the US.”

    True, yet the only area where audits are in creasing instead of decreasing is sudits of overseas filers.

13. “Oh lord this is getting conspiratorial. We’re turning into breitbart.ca once again.”

    Eh! Say Wha–?

    If our banks and/or governments sending our data to the land of our birth or the land of our parent’s birth is so benigh, THEN WHY THE FUCK ALL THIS? Why in the fuck am I reading 19 year old IRS documents if there is fucking nothing to worry about? Why in the fuck have huge sums of money been raised for lawsuits? Why the fucking need for lawsuits in the fucking first place.

    Either this is something that is worthy of all the time, effort and money that a lot of people have and are putting into it or we are all a bunch of suckers.

    If it is the former, then it is not just something to be blown off as “Oh lord this is getting conspiratorial. We’re turning into breitbart.ca once again.” or “black heliocopters”. If the latter, then let’s just shut all this BS down and get on with our lives.

    If it matters, act accordingly. If it ain’t nothin’, act accordingly

    Which, the bloody fuck is it?

14. BRAVO, JapanT, bravo.

15. What you say is correct, except perhaps for “Many, perhaps most, .. will only be tax-resident in the country where they live”. I think it’s a definite most, not a perhaps most, for non-US persons anyway.

    Except for US persons, being tax-resident in more than one country, if it happens at all, would generally be a temporary situation, to be avoided or ended as soon as possible. I had colleagues who went from Canada to Saudi on 3-year terms. Those who took their families and rented the home out on a long-term tenancy were non-tax resident in Canada and paid the low Saudi tax only, but those who had to leave family behind were tax-resident in both countries and paid tax in both countries. If they were also US persons they had 3 countries to deal with. As a side thought I wonder does the IRS allow Foreign Tax Credit if the tax is paid to a different country from where the income is sourced? This question would be relevant to passive income, and not to earned income below the maximum Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.

16. @fn0:

    “Except for US persons, being tax-resident in more than one country, if it happens at all, would generally be a temporary situation, to be avoided or ended as soon as possible.”

    Because of the free movement of labour, and the disparity in income between Western and Eastern EU countries, it often happens that EU citizens may work for years in various countries, sending money back to support their families. It’s temporary, but often longterm.

    However, USCs are certainly the only ones who find themselves forever tax-resident in a country they don’t live in, simply because of their national origin.

    “As a side thought I wonder does the IRS allow Foreign Tax Credit if the tax is paid to a different country from where the income is sourced? This question would be relevant to passive income, and not to earned income below the maximum Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.”

    Presumably it would depend on the treaties. Generally the source or residence country has the taxing rights so if the US is neither, and is claiming the right to tax solely on the basis of the Saving Clause, it would have no choice but to allow FTCs.

17. Leaving aside the muddy waters of the US savings clause, tax treaties between 2 countries typically include an agreement that a type of income is taxable in only one of the two countries, which could be the source country or the tax-residence country. In some cases partially in both but no double tax.

    If a tax treaty says that income from country A (not US) is taxed by residence country B (not-US) instead of source country A, then how do separate treaties between the US and countries A and B help?? Any trilateral tax treaties out there?

    I am not sure that IRS form 1116 lets you put in foreign taxes paid to a different country than the country that was the source of the income, so maybe you are just double taxed.

    It’s an academic question for me as I renounced the US just before my main pension from Country A (taxable in country B) started, but I am still curious.

18. “I am not sure that IRS form 1116 lets you put in foreign taxes paid to a different country than the country that was the source of the income, so maybe you are just double taxed.”

    It’ll be tucked away in some obscure Article in the treaties. Anyone who got double-taxed would have a right to appeal to the Competent Authority, so the treaties are probably going to try to avoid that.

    Personally I would just leave it off the 1040. Life’s too short to waste any more of it than is absokutely necessary on interpreting US tax treaties. 🙂

19. @JapanT

    “If our banks and/or governments sending our data to…” What do you mean by “our”? You only have one citizenship. The US government is your government. Apparently you’re little more than a guest in Japan.

    CBT and FATCA and all that is a bad situation for everyone with US citizenship, but yours is a far worse situation than mine and others like me. So I can afford to be a little more blasé perhaps.

    As for the rest of it, I think it would be helpful if we focused on pragmatic efforts to mitigate the damage – good solid practical advice to anyone having their OMG moment, the lawsuit in Canada, supporting lobbying efforts in the US for whatever they’re worth – and stay away from the conspiratorial alt-right whackjob explanations of how this all came about.

20. “CBT and FATCA and all that is a bad situation for everyone with US citizenship, but yours is a far worse situation than mine and others like me.”

    The situation doesn’t seem to be irremediable though, provided money can be found to pay five to six years back taxes plus the renunciation fee.

    Getting Japanese citizenship should be the priority, it seems, in order to make it possible to renounce. And apparently getting citizenship and renouncing requires compliance.

    So the first step would be to enter Streamlined and backfile 5 years of returns (paying taxes due) and six years of FBARs (if required). Then get Japanese citizenship, renounce US citizenship, file for the part-year up to R-day, file the 8854, and Bob is your non-US uncle.

21. Or if concerned about the Streamlined certification statement, use quiet disclosure.

22. One of my uncles is gay. When he taught down south somewhere. It made it clear to the school office that they were not to give out his address to anyone for any reason. They did. Two men used this info and attempted to abduct my uncle. Seems that some are moved to violence to keep gays from teaching their children.

    Luckily, he was able to break free or my uncle would most likely not be with us today.

    Are ye gettin the idea why I do not want anybody knowing where my wife works and my kawaii halfu kids go to school yet?

23. ” provided money can be found to pay five to six years back taxes plus the renunciation fee.”

    Yeah, sure. Been turning over ever stone I find just hoping I find the latest yakuza drop off spot.

    You people are unfucking believable.

24. ” and stay away from the conspiratorial alt-right whackjob explanations of how this all came about.”

    Yeah, well when I looked into when the various policies were implemented, I found FACTA predates all others.

    Tell me, why is there a “Nobel Peace Prize”. Because mr. Nobel was horrified that his name was associated with TNT, which he invented. His great mind, a peace loving yet naive as a child’s mind, could not conceive that his invention, TNT, which he invented to make mining, quarrying and tunneling safer would be used by others to blow others up. I mean, who’d a thunk it, right?

    FBAR started out as a anti money launduring law, now it is called the “FBAR Fundraiser”. Who’d a thunk it?

    Email surpassed snail mail as the number one means of long distance personal communication. Now the NSA records every bit of electronic data it can scoop up.
    Who’d a thunk it?

    How about “Civil forfeiture”?

    If it can be misused and abused by a government or members therein, it will be.

25. “You people are unfucking believable.”

    Nice. Very nice.