Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Posted on by Posted in Ethics, Issues regarding US persons abroad, Law & Morality 170 Comments

UPDATED WED APRIL 26

videos are posted at youtube

ONLY PLACE TO GET AUDIO FEED AT THIS LINK

FATCA HEARING HERE

 
bitch bean

As Ms. Bean testifies to the insignificance of #Americansabroad, Dani’s uniform and passport are to her right. Yes, those of us abroad, only 4300 renouncing vs 730,000 coming in, simply do not matter. Noticeable large errors regarding foreign countries supposedly taxing their citizens when they leave (that is not what CRS is); not getting it clear that OVDI is the source of the collection, starting in 2009, before FATCA was even signed; US banks do not like FATCA, they don’t want to report like foreign banks required. Maybe someone should explain to Ms. Bean that Hillary was the shield of the other 47,500 that were not turned over.
 
 
Before adjourning, Mr. Meadows has asked each witness to come up with 3 ways revisions could be made that would address the issues heard about today. While we all want FATCA repealed, maybe for the sake of compromise, we could at least try the same……………….
****************************************************
Updates April 25, 2017!!
 
TESTIMONIES OF WITNESSES FOR TOMORROW’S HEARING ARE HERE
 

VIDEO TESTIMONY OF DONNA-LANE NELSON

REVIEWING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE FOREIGN ACCOUNT TAX COMPLIANCE ACT
Subcommittee on Government Operations
SUBCOMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
HEARING DATE: APRIL 26, 2017 2:00 PM 2154 RHOB

PURPOSE:

To examine the effects of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) on the U.S. and international economy, as well as potential legislative remedies.
BACKGROUND:

Signed into law in 2010, FATCA requires non-U.S. financial institutions to report assets and identities of U.S. citizens with non-U.S. financial accounts to the Internal Revenue Service.
As a result, many foreign banks have stopped serving U.S. citizens, and record numbers of Americans have renounced their citizenship.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) and five expatriates filed a lawsuit claiming FATCA constitutes an unconstitutional breach of privacy, as well as an illegal treaty

WITNESSES AND TESTIMONIES

Name Title Organization Panel Document
The Honorable Rand PaulU.S. Senator State of Kentucky
Mr. James Bopp, Jr. Attorney The Bopp Law Firm, PC
Mr. Mark Crawford Director AKSIONER International Security Brokerage
Mr. Daniel Kuettel Former U.S. citizen living in Switzerland who renounced his U.S. citizenship due to FATCA
Ms. Elise Bean Washington Co-Director Levin Center at Wayne Law Wayne State University
 
 

Updates April 23, 2017!!

The Democrats have selected Carl Levin Protege, Professor Elise Bean, as their witness in support of FATCA. Professor Bean is an interesting choice given that the focus of the hearing, in its plain terms is:

REVIEWING THE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE FOREIGN ACCOUNT TAX COMPLIANCE ACT

It seems to me that Professor Bean might be a much better witness if the hearing were for the purpose of:

CELEBRATING THE INTENDED CONSEQUENCES OF THE FOREIGN ACCOUNT TAX COMPLIANCE ACT

To glean some insight into the perspective of Professor Bean, read the account of her March 30 meeting in Washington with PANA committee of the European Parliament. In explaining the superiority of the U.S. approach to penalties and enforcement she noted:

Bean agreed with MEPs that the US is in a more advanced position than the EU when it comes to penalties and enforcement.

“On improving enforcement, there are three things you can do in the EU,” she said. “The first is to increase your fines – your fines at the moment are a fraction of what the banks are earning. Secondly, you should require that the company or bank admits liability. This opens the door for class action lawsuits. Thirdly, make sure that the fines are not tax-deductible. Taxpayers end up paying more than big banks when the fines are tax-deductible.

“In the US, we also use monitors on compliance. We have a monitor who will monitor the institution for a period of two years to ensure that the required changes are actually made. Make the banks pay for their own monitoring.”

Bean also informed the European delegation that there will be tax justice demonstrations taking place in Washington and 60 cities across the US on April 15. The protests will demand Trump releases his tax returns but will also call for ending deferral of corporate taxes and for action on shell companies, she said.

Professor Bean is a colleague of Professor Linda Beale of Wayne State Law School. Professor – through her own writings – is NOT sympathetic to problems of taxation-based citizenship and Americans abroad. She has distinguished herself as one who fundamentally believes that everybody with an undisclosed “offshore bank account” is (to use her words) a “scofflaw“. The professor, as well as a professor of tax law, is apparently also an expert in investing and diversification of assets as evidence by the following gem:

Now, there are at least two interesting things about the Romney’s stashing $3 million in a very low yield Swiss bank account.

1) There are better things to do with money. Even if you don’t mind a low return, you could hold that money in the US–helps the US economy more than in a Swiss bank, and is easily available without the transaction costs of getting it out of your secret Swiss bank account. Why would the Romney’s have a Swiss bank account with a very low yield? The Romney spokesperson says “diversification” but that doesn’t hold water. Makes one wonder where this money came from and certainly why it ended up in a Swiss bank.

In 2012, Professor Linda Beale introduced herself to the Isaac Brock Society in a thread which is referenced in the following tweet:

Professor Beale is a living, breathing argument for why it has become impossible for Americans abroad to retain U.S. citizenship and one of the reasons why:

________________________________________________________________________

And now back to our originally schedule broadcast …

Q. What do Ronald Reagan and Heidi have in common?

A. They both became disillusioned with the Democratic Party

When questioned about this, Mr. Reagan noted (referring to the period in his life when he was a Democrat) that:

1. He thought many foolish things in those days; and

2. In any case, he had not really left the Democratic Party. Rather the party had left him.

Heidi writes:

@FredB

“Speaking of which my personal politics are being completely turned on their head, and I am in danger of turning into a former Democrat even before I turn into a former American. Because even though most of what the Republicans stand for makes me shake my head, the only ones who have caused me harm personally are the Democrats.”

This is also the road I have travelled, from a liberal minded, east coast, physician to a renounced EX American who would rather see anyone in the White house rather than the likes of the Clinton democratic mindset.

But honestly , does it matter what the social policies of the US are anymore? We don’t live there, our concerns should be just about their fiscal policies and the effects on US citizens abroad.

I am no longer an American . My concerns now are for my own country and their policies. If you are settled abroad in your other citizenship, then does it matter if you have second thoughts about being ‘their form” of an American Democrat? You can still be a Democratic socialist or whatever in your resident country. Let America go, it is an abusive partner in your life. Hoping for it to change doesn’t work

And now, an advertisement from Democrats Abroad …


Sad but true. The Democrats Abroad AKA “The Stepford Wives” have once again conveyed the message (reminding me of a Democrat president):

“Let every Expat know, whether he wishes us well or ill, that Democrats shall pay any price, bear any burden, meet any hardship, support any friend, oppose any foe to assure the survival and the success of FATCA and Taxation-based citizenship.”

Yup, #YouCantMakeThisUp

For years and years the Democrats have made it clear that they fully support FATCA and taxation-based citizenship. One would think that they would keep their sentiments quiet. Yet, once again they have broadcasted their hatred of Americans abroad to the world.

It reminds me a bit of a teacher I once had who reminded me that:

“Sometimes it’s better to keep your mouth shut and let people think you are ignorant than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.”

Yet, that’s what those “Stepford Wives” have done, yet again. Brace yourself, after publicly condemning the Bopp/Republicans Overseas FATCA lawsuit, after failing to directly call for a move to “residence-based taxation” in it’s submission to the Senate Finance Committee, after arguing for FATCA Same Country Exemption (which would benefit only tax compliant Homelanders Abroad and support a U.S. FATCA attack on their own countries of residence), on the eve of the April 26/17 FATCA hearings in Washington, DC, they have once again confirmed their total and absolute hatred of Americans abroad and their support of FATCA.

Here it is, straight from the Donkey’s mouth:

In light of the annual IRS deadline, we’ve been receiving a lot of questions about DA’s advocacy on filing issues for overseas Americans. Why not support Rand Paul’s proposal to eliminate FATCA entirely?

From our late 2016 FATCA FAQs:

Republicans say they want to repeal FATCA. Why won’t Democrats Abroad join their campaign to repeal FATCA?

Democrats Abroad supports policy that cracks down on illegal tax avoidance. When some taxpayers break the law by hiding assessable earnings from the IRS in offshore accounts it increases the burden for the rest of us. For many decades those with access to elite financial structures and schemes have been using offshore accounts in bank/tax secrecy jurisdictions to become even richer. Nations throughout the world have determined to bring this practice to an end and Democrats Abroad believes that is a good thing. Democrats Abroad supports the policy initiative behind FATCA. We also think FATCA can be fixed to remove the unintended adverse impacts it has on law-abiding Americans abroad.

In January 2014 the Republican National Committee (RNC) passed a resolution calling for the repeal of FATCA. While the resolution made it look like repealing FATCA would be Republican Party policy, the Republican-controlled House of Representatives did not introduce a bill calling for FATCA to be repealed in all of 2014. A bill calling for the repeal of parts of FATCA was reintroduced in the Senate by Senator Rand Paul in March 2015. It has one co-sponsor and a 1% chance of being enacted.

The RNC and Republicans Overseas, the organization formed in 2013 by members of the RNC to cultivate the overseas vote for Republicans, has been very open about their strategy of exploiting the anger and upset around FATCA to raise money and build support for Republican candidates amongst Americans living abroad.

Republicans Overseas has admitted that it sees FATCA as a political tactic for activating a ground game to attract overseas voters. If FATCA had been repealed by Congress before 2016, the Republicans would lose this wedge issue in the 2016 campaign. Republicans ran in the 2014 midterm elections on a pledge to repeal FATCA as soon as they won control of the Senate. They
have had control of both houses for two years but a repeal bill to mirror Sen Paul’s bill has not as yet been introduced in the House. And why would it? The GOP can use the promise of a FATCA repeal to take into its campaigns for Congress and the White House. We understand that FATCA hearings may be planned for the months leading up to election day – an opportunity to make the case for repeal. We are putting ourselves forward for inclusion on the witness list for a House hearing on FATCA should one be scheduled for this year.

There is a global context for this question as well. By 2017 FATCA will have been in place for more than three years and be well entrenched in the compliance practices of international banks and brokerage houses. In addition, in 2017 the “global FATCA” will start to come online with the commencement of financial account reporting by at least 80 countries under the OECD Common Reporting Standards. By that time international financial account transparency and disclosure will be a given and the global crackdown on illegal tax avoidance will be very difficult for Republicans to arrest.

Is this for real? Rather than defend their FATCA Attack On Americans Abroad, they are attacking those Republicans who support FATCA repeal. Yes, yes, bring it on!!

Don’t forget that the Obama Treasury (you know the “Change You Can Believe In” – Hopey Changey Guy”) refused to to accept Same Country Exemption confirming its attack on Americans abroad.

Now, back to the April 26, 2017 FATCA hearings in Washington, DC (resulting from the FATCA repeal legislation proposed by Congressman Mark Meadows and Senator Rand Paul). Although these were not organized by the Democrats, they apparently will have witness(es) in attendance who will defend FATCA. This is good, because instead of attacking and condemning the Republicans (the current justification of their focus on FATCA retention), they will (presumably) be forced to explain why FATCA is so desirable. Rumour is that there will be a way to witness this spectacle live online!! Yes live online!!

Check back and the link to the link to the proceedings where there will be a hearing into FATCA (including the harm done to Americans abroad). This spectacle should NOT be missed. You will see that those who oppose FATCA (a broad range of people) and those who support FATCA (the Democrats) providing evidence and discussion.

But, the FATCA hearings aside …

The great “genius” of “Democracy in America” is that it is dominated by two private clubs. These private clubs are the Democratic and Republican parties. This party dominated process brought us “The Donald” who was chosen in spite of the Republican Party and “Crooked Hillary Clinton” who was chosen BECAUSE of the DNC.

In other words, the Democratic Party will not be going away in the immediate future.

Democrats Abroad (which is probably a group of Homelanders) is here to stay and here to continue one of the core missions of the Democratic Party:

The Democratic Party wants to destroy Americans abroad.

And the lesson from this is:

170 thoughts on “Those @Demsabroad reiterate their support of #FATCA! Tune in April 26/17 to see how! – Updated April 23/17”

  1. Ginny. Grade 4 vocabulary.. Most powerful because they spend more on their military than the next 15 countries combined. Powerful bullies because they are ‘born fighting’. They have been at war continuously since 1941.
    Greatest?– not so much. Way down the list for freedom, health, education, democracy, justice, social services and so on.

    However starting in preschool kids are told their country is the greatest and eventually most learn to believe it.

  3. Jeez that dcreport is such crap!!! Too bad there is no comment section. What the heck is this dcreport.org? Reminds me of a communist version of Rush Limbaugh. “We will equip you with hard facts”. Yeah.
    Oh, there’s a tip line to send confidential tips. I’m going to write there.

  4. @Ginny, “:how is it that the USA was and is still referred to as the greatest most powerful nation in the world? Unless most powerful means the biggest bully in the world.”

    With that comment I developed that odd grin and started the proverbial maniacal laugh…..

    Your inner fibre and all your words and actions represent the very attributes of the first American Patriots.

    What did make America great is now long gone.

  5. Ah, DoD and George:

    There is so much about the USA I have never understood. I can remember asking my father when I was a tween why the USA still had so many overseas bases ( a few of my cousins were in the US forces- some stationed overseas -which is how they acquired their US citizenship) since World War Two was over. Most of the time he would take my questions very seriously and answer them, other times he would just give me his Irish- Canadian wiry smile. But since he did so much work in the social justice areas and exposed me to many interesting politicians, legal beagles and ambassadors and rebel fighters, his usual answer was: I know just the person you should pose that question to and I would. Their answers would fascinate me but never satisfy me.
    As a child, I went to summer camp in Michigan for many years. Yup, across that river again. Every morning as though it was a requirement to enter the Dining Hall for breakfast, we had to recite the Pledge of Allegiance as we watched the flag being raised.I was hungry so I recited it all the while recognizing the indoctrination occurring. I could never account for such blatant public patrioticy. Still find it fascinating. And it still means nothing to me.

    But DoD, why are they so combative, why do they allocate the most funds? Why do they feel they must right all the wrongs in the world, which can be considered an admirable quality per se. Where does this righteous saviour complex originate? Because it so quickly morphs into bully category, protecting self interests as opposed to actually helping the countries they invade or regimes they overthrow and/or leaving them in a vacuum that needs to be readdressed down the road. Whack a mole. Do homelanders never get tired of funding this deep pocket Bank of America?
    Basically it always comes down to the same question I have been asking all my life: who do they think they are?
    And to be an equal opportunity questioner that’s a question I am now asking of my own government since they signed the IGA abrogating so many of our rights.

  6. Thank you Heidi for that article which gives me a lot to think about. The comments below it were what I consider quite a typical cross section of that population.

  7. @Embee, the credit unions had been pretty consistent – for a variety of reasons, about opposing FATCA, so it is good to see them coming out again in public to urge repeal. Note that some of their reasoning has had nothing to do with us https://www.cuna.org/Legislative-And-Regulatory-Advocacy/Removing-Barriers-Blog/Removing-Barriers-Blog/CUNA-Joins-WOCCU-in-Opposing-Expanded-FATCA-Reporting-Requirements/
    .

    @Blaze, don’t remember if it was Bean who also said something about FATCA targeting ‘those who have the means to move/live ‘abroad’ as if merely being outside the US is a mark of unusual wealth and means. What? She’s a well paid powerful person. Has she never met any ordinary people outside the US or any ordinary people from the US who have gone outside it to study, to work, to marry someone, to do charitable work, etc.? Has she never met people with more than one country of origin or parents and family from outside the US? Maybe she doesn’t mix much with ordinary folk like us.

    What don’t they get about the tax burdensome US citizenship status incurred via parentage, even if already born and living abroad? Are billionaire UStaxable fetuses somehow managing to plot and scheme to move ‘abroad’ in order to ‘evade’ or ‘avoid’ US taxes? Ditto for babies who were born in the US and whose parents returned or moved ‘abroad’ to Canada or elsewhere. Were those baby tax evaders in the making so very early and that is why they are not inside the US still?

    And as for the means to live ‘abroad’, when my very ordinary lower to lower middle class family moved to Canada, the list of goods and assets was pretty darn slim. We moved for my father to work. My dad once had nothing but a fistful of peanuts left to eat when he was younger and looking for work during the Great Depression used soup kitchens. He went to a segregated school in the rural south and lived under Jim Crow. Couldn’t afford to finish college even with a scholarship. My grandmothers worked cooking and cleaning other people’s houses and offices.

    And what about teachers of English, spouses of non-US people, US students who’re being urged to study ‘abroad’, etc. Billionaires all of them? Just masquerading as ordinary people – mingling with the plebes ‘abroad’ to ‘hide’ money ‘overseas’?

    Anyone named one of the ‘Most Powerful Women’ in Washington https://www.washingtonian.com/2013/11/30/most-powerful-women/ is far more likely to mix with US millionaires and billionaires than I am here outside the US.

  8. “She’s a well paid powerful person. Has she never met any ordinary people outside the US or any ordinary people from the US who have gone outside it to study, to work, to marry someone, to do charitable work, etc.?”

    Bingo. I wonder why you answered your own question BEFORE asking it. Anyway the answer is no.

    “Has she never met people with more than one country of origin or parents and family from outside the US?”

    That’s probably a yes, but so what? Until someone persuades Kenya to CBT and FATCA Obana, or persuades the UK to CBT and FATCA Trump, it won’t matter if she knows them or not.

  9. @badger & Blaze: don’t remember if it was Bean who also said something about FATCA targeting ‘those who have the means to move/live ‘abroad’ as if merely being outside the US is a mark of unusual wealth and means.

    Yep, that was Bean, during her opening statement. 1:02:45 or so:

    To conclude, I want to say that repealing FATCA today would be a mistake. It would hurt honest taxpayers, who have to disclose their account information on a bulk basis, every year, to the IRS. That’s what honest taxpayers do in … whether you’re honest or not, that’s how the banks treat your bank accounts here in the US. It would hurt honest taxpayers living here in the United States to allow the people who have the wherewithal to go abroad to not play by the same rules. It would encourage Americans to move more of their money offshore to get some of that secrecy.

    Oh yeah, this cracked me up:

    It would disadvantage US banks, who would again have to compete against foreign bank secrecy.

    US bank secrecy for foreigners must be the only bank secrecy allowed on the planet! Can’t have the bipartisan campaign donors being disadvantaged! (For someone who’s so fanatic about FATCA, she sure seemed ignorant about CRS. Wonder if that’s because she doesn’t actually support CRS in all its glorious actual reciprocity, or because she didn’t it to come up as a topic of discussion because Republicans would jump on it, the way Meadows jumped on her idea about “expanding” 1099s but then cut himself off because he thought it was off-topic.)

  11. @Eric, it would be declared a NAFTA bad very unfair deal if Canada or Mexico did it, but if US banks are advantaged, (as they already are with the US punitive treatment of non-US savings like non-US mutual funds – well that would be okay, or so much the better right?

  12. @ Ginny
    “But DoD, why are they so combative, why do they allocate the most funds? Why do they feel they must right all the wrongs in the world, which can be considered an admirable quality per se. Where does this righteous saviour complex originate? ”
    I think the savior complex was inherent from their beginnings as a reaction after their people had fled religious oppression and tyranny. It was admirably expressed in their Declaration of Independence and Constitution but their value judgements slowly changed over the years into an expression of unchallenged exceptionality. It was later driven by a powerhouse of an armaments industry.
    I wonder is you have read Eisenhower’s speech in 1961, all the more pertinent coming from a military man.
    http://coursesa.matrix.msu.edu/~hst306/documents/indust.html
    Also a good NPR report.
    http://www.npr.org/2011/01/17/132942244/ikes-warning-of-military-expansion-50-years-later

  13. They forgot to include the war against expats in Heidi’s link. The U.S. government’s dishonest war on their own citizens, Americans living outside the US. (Or who they claim are Americans)

    They say it’s to go after tax evaders but it’s no such thing and they know it.
    And to add insult to injury being reduced to being called a “US Person” and second class citizen. I never even heard the term US Person until Fatca.

    I was a first generation American and my grandparents with my parents were able to move from a European Country and were free to prosper and not have to suffer from their birth country what any US expat does at the hands of the US government. I would never take US citizenship back under any circumstances nor would I ever become a resident in a different way.

    I finally had a chance to watch the replay and it shows how ignorant the democrats really are. Some parts made me sick. The witnesses were amazing and brave and I have to say thank you to all the witnesses and work behind this and for the excellent recap on this website.

  14. @UK Rose
    What really made me sick is Ms Bean’s attitude to all the US citizens being lost saying that it didn’t matter as they are being replaced, like we were a commodity to be disposed of after we were no longer a taxable asset.
    Citizens who had given service to their country through the military, or through teaching or medical services ,ambassadors of business etc and some citizens whos US lineage goes back centuries. We are all of no consequence. What a nasty woman.

  15. It is clear. FATCA Is about one thing and only one thing. Punishment for having the audacity to live outside the United States of Arrogance.

    Disgusting. Really really disgusting. Believe me.

  16. Why is Trump silent on FATCA? With all the businesses he and his kids have overseas, aren’t they subject to FATCA reporting?

    Oh wait. It’s really just to stop us from financing terrorism and human trafficking with our middle class incomes and retirement savings.

  17. @ Heidi
    Thanks, I especially enjoyed the NPR report and very much agree with you about Ms. Bean’s pompous attitude. What a bunch of ingrates we are for leaving or not ever living in the great ole USA. What was I thinking when I was five years old?

  18. @Eric

    Bean also got cut off when she began explaining to Mr Meadows how FFI’s are paying the bulk of FATCA’s costs, not domestic banks – as though that made it ok.

    Does someone have the quote from her where she urged the OECD delegation to not pursue CRS reciprocity as it would probably result in FATCA getting repealed?

  20. Nothing will change. That’s reality. There will be no real traction appealing CBT and/or FATCA. The us empire was outstanding at propaganda and psy ops—-those rich rich filthy rich expats are living the life hiding their money while you corporate -owned slaves are slogging it day in /out in the states, add in us pollys narcopathic desire to get re-elected yr after yr, they do not give a RIP about expats or duals.

    The us empire only wants tax bases/subjects to get its’ manifest destiny groove on

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: