Interesting consolidation of tweets discussing a possible move to #TTF for all the different groups of people classified as #Americansabroad https://t.co/M1dwgx1Sge
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) May 13, 2018
This post is motivated by the following Brock comment from “JC”. His comment concludes with:
So do we have a feature here on Brock to come up with stories about being proud Americans? So we may give them to Solomon.
Why not? Yes, let’s use this post to create a “Brock Feature” from expected comments. This can be the the “Isaac Brock Society” contribution to U.S. Tax Reform!
I realize that the Isaac Brock Society is not a site that is populated particularly by “Proud Americans” (am I wrong?). But, the idea of compiling a set of comments, about how U.S. tax policies have destroyed the lives of those who have attempted compliance could be valuable. They could be forwarded to all groups (RO, DA, ACA, FAWCO etc.) in this fight.
For once, let’s focus on those who are compliant!
I have a request though. Much of the focus on this and other sites is on people who have NOT complied with U.S. tax laws – usually because they have not bothered to enter the U.S. tax system. I don’t understand why those who have not entered the U.S. tax system have TAX problems. It seems clear that, those who have NOT complied, have NOT had their lives destroyed. They still have their pensions and their marriages. Noncompliant Americans abroad are in no danger of having their passports revoked (because those not in the U.S. tax system cannot have a tax debt). Noncomplaint Americans are in no danger of having their retirement savings stolen. Noncompliant Americans have no fear of crossing the border. But, I digress …
The reality of U.S. tax compliance for Americans abroad
It is those unfortunate people who have complied (with the assistance of the “very best” U.S. tax advisors), who have suffered the most. Think of all those who were ushered into OVDP. Think of those who entered “Streamlined” with their Canadian Controlled Private Corporations. After being assured that the “business earnings” were not subject to U.S. taxation, they are NOW retroactively subject to the transition tax. Think of the “transition tax” (punishment for your past). Think of GILTI (punishment for your future). Only those who have filed U.S. taxes generally and Form 5471 in particular are subject to the great “pension confiscation”. Those who have not complied will still have a happy retirement.
U.S. citizenship is primarily about penalties: Comparing the “penalties” for noncompliance with the “penalties” for compliance
Penalties for noncompliance: For years people have been forced to listen to a constant noise (that’s the problem with the internet isn’t it) warning people about the penalties for noncompliance. These are expressed in the language of either “tax crimes” or “form crimes”. Yes, the penalties for noncompliance are truly frightening! But, they are suffered randomly and sparingly. Let’s compare them to the …
Penalties for compliance: Nobody (don’t understand why) really talks about the “penalties” for compliance. They are real! They are NOT speculative! They are automatically assessed! Think I am kidding? Talk to anybody who is suffering the “transition tax” or somebody who has a real fear of “passport revocation”. Talk to somebody in Australia who has had problems with their Superannuation.
Americans abroad are subject to penalties no matter what they do. What were you thinking when you left the Homeland? You should be punished! And you are punished. Americans abroad are NOT subject to the same tax rules that Homelanders are subject to. They are subject to a different set of punitive rules. You should NOT be permitted to, simply leave the Homeland and expect those left behind, to pay your “fair share”! It is the duty of ALL Americans, wherever they may be, to support the Government of the United States (which as Cook v. Tait teaches – confers benefits to you wherever you may be).
Your experiences please …
Therefore, I think it would of great value to hear from those who have complied with – that Great Bible of American Life – the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (whether you have complied from inception/conception or whether you have recently come into compliance).
Remember that ALL U.S. citizens who were “Born In The USA” are presumptive “Tax Cheats By Birth”! This is because the USA confers citizenship by birth and imposes tax based only on citizenship.
Could you address the following 3 questions in your comment?
1. Why as a “nonresident” of the United States did you decide to enter the U.S. tax system? For example, did your accountant tell you do do it? Were you simply heeding “The Call Of The Condor?” Was your entry into the U.S. tax system associated with another significant life event (illness, divorce, etc.) Do you snap to attention when you hear the U.S. National Anthem?
2. How has U.S. tax compliance caused you specific damage (calling all “transition tax” victims and more)?
3. Will the proposed #TTFI bill (the one from Congressman Holding) solve your problems or not?
If you are not in U.S. tax compliance, you could comment on why you do not intend to enter the U.S. tax system. Were you lucky (probably) or clever (maybe)?
And now, turning it over to JC …
News from Twitter chat with Solomon Yue. He says we may see the TTFI legislation this coming week. One comment to that is ‘we have heard that before.’
It sounds like the treatment for Accidentals will be three years of compliance without FBAR & FATCA penalty and then may elect TTFI status. Comment to that: sounds like streamlined except 3 years instead of 5.
Karen says:
“Essentially, TTFI is saying go thru streamlined and then stop filing. For AA’s and LT expats that want to retain USC, this is a reasonable deal as long as they have no PFICs or CFCs or “foreign” pensions, or ….”
https://twitter.com/FixTheTaxTreaty/status/995328964901122050Point of information about the above: FBAR and FATCA 8938 still exist under TTFI – so still filing! However, I ask as 8938 requires specification of the line on the 1040 return income from specified assets appears, and if no return is required under TTFI then would that end 8938? The devil is in the detail.
Solomon Yue says he will ask the question about PFIC and its exemption. At least someone is listening (Solomon Yue). He has said before about the exemption of foreign pensions, yet it has always been in regards to after TTFI election, and not the 3 years compliance period before one may elect TTFI.
In terms of AA: he has stressed that the TTFI bill is about asking Congress to do something for those who wish to remain American citizens, as the best chance to get buy in from Congress. Then of course once passed he will focus on other changes. So it sounds like perhaps multiple bills: 1) TTFI, 2) remove transition tax and GILTI from US Corps overseas, 3) remove FBAR and FATCA for USP overseas, 4 or more) Dems have a few including one that eliminates Social Security WEP. All this and there is no precedent of passage of a single focused bill helping US Persons overseas.
I asked Solomon for a Preamble on the TTFI speaking about the injustices. He declined such preamble and it will be only to align with TTFC.
Re: PFIC. A thought of today is a new acronym is needed for this. I like the word “curse” today. So Punitive Foreign Investment Curse for U.S. persons living overseas, or PFIC treatment. Innocuous and purposeful sounding names for these things should be changed to more representative names. Else, IMO, we give in to the narrative of the U.S. Compliance-Congressional Industrial Complex. Of course a name including “curse” would never fly in compliance code with DNA predisposed toward compliance. But we may give it a nick name.
Re: Cursed Foreign Corporations. This is what SY says:
Regarding small business owners abroad: we need 3 things 2 be done 4 them: 1) Pass #TTFI 2 connect w/ #TTFC, 2) exempt them from the transition/GILTI tax, 3) allow them 2 elect S Corp pass-through (corporate salaries/distributions r reported as personal foreign-source income).
https://twitter.com/SolomonYue/status/995309965098340352Solomon Yue says that he likes this story about being Proud Americans, and has already used it:
Tamar says:
I’ve said this b4: I’ve raised my kids (Israeli expats) w/spoken English at home & proud of their US origins despite leaving as toddlers. One son refused any Army job that wld require him to renounce! Get rid of #CBT & expats can be proud US ambassadors & trade promoters again.
https://twitter.com/tdbho/status/994952184147120128So do we have a feature here on Brock to come up with stories about being proud Americans? So we may give them to Solomon.
@Ann#1, in terms of finding the flag wavers, and the suitably patriotic, I know of a few who have not renounced – for various reasons, and probably are attached emotionally to the US to various degrees (though some have never lived there), and one who probably would describe themselves as patriotic, but who never participated in these types of efforts – though I told them about IBS and sent links early on. The first category was born dual poohpoohed the threat, wasn’t compliant (and now recently lives in the US so they might eventually have to explain being previously non-compliant and come face to face with what that entails, another born dual I think just ignored all this because they were below filing or tax thresholds and probably FBAR, and retained US citizenship. The last was born and lived in the US, so I think maybe couldn’t contemplate renouncing when it came down to the wire, but is probably resigned to whatever they currently do to maintain compliance – is probably patriotic but perhaps with new reservations.
I live in a border area. There are still many here I hear of on a regular basis who marry an American, or their spouse gets sent down to the US for work and they go along, or their children go off to study there, and then some naturalize, some will come back not knowing about what being ‘compliant’ from ‘abroad’ will mean or that they are now taxable USPs. I meet some who are probably taxable USPs/dual Canadians but who still don’t know about US extraterritorial CBT.
Don’t know anyone who would fit the bill to post stories here.
@Badger
This post is in response to comment/request from JC to collect stories about how compliance with the tax rules that apply to overseas Americans (1) create huge difficulties in their lives and (2) make compliance with U.S. tax laws “somewhere between difficult and impossible” and (3) unfairly burden U.S. citizenship for those who ARE filing U.S. taxes and (4) I think that force the renunciation of U.S. citizenship would be appropriate.
I point that one can be a “proud American” and still be forced to renounce U.S. citizenship. In fact, I have met quite a few of them.
The story must be from one who has filed U.S. taxes to the best of his/her ability. What seems clear from the JC information and the “tweets” is that the focus on this discussion is specific examples of how compliance has ruined your life.
I would think that this would include:
– entry into OVDP or Strealined
– PFIC issues
– inability to find competent tax preparation help
– unjustified penalites
– PFIC confiscations
– CFC problems: Any kind of Subpart F income (including the transition tax and GILTI), problems with the 5471
– punitive U.S. taxation of non-U.S. retirement planning and pensions
– imposition of U.S. capital gains tax in countries that don’t have capital gains tax in general or specifically on the sale of the principal residence
– additional taxation caused by the necessity to use the “married filing separately category” if married to an alien who doesn’t want to be part of the U.S. tax system
– Australian Superannuation
– Punitive taxation of foreign life insurance policies with cash value
– inability to buy into non-U.S. businesses because of U.S. citizenship
– Paying REAL U.S. tax on FAKE U.S. income, generated by the interaction between the U.S. dollar as the functional currency and exchange rate fluctuations
– etc.
It seems to me that stories from those who felt forced to renounce would/could be compelling.
But, please take your cue from the part of the post that quotes JC. I wrote the post primarily on his behalf as his messenger (if you will).
But, again stories from those who have not complied are irrelevant to this thread.
‘I am the author of “I am Canada, Hear Me Roar Mr. President.” The story was posted on Brock, Sand Box and various other sites.’
And Forbes. Mr. President and Congress etc. can’t hear you because they have bananas in their ears.
Your article, like David’s letter, only helps innocent victims learn what they need to learn: we have to do what we have to do, and complying isn’t it.
“I didn’t have the benefit of reading Barbara’s comment before she asked it to be deleted.”
Barbara has her reason for deleting FROM THIS SITE the best answer that was available for the question that started this thread. I hope she’ll let it remain on another site, beginning at page 88 of this PDF file:
http://www.citizenshipsolutions.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/RichardsonKishCommentsAmericansAbroadApril152015InternationalTax-2.pdf
I have to repeat that Congress has bananas in their ears. The only people who will learn from this are people who need it.
“So there haven’t been any answers.”
Didn’t I answer a bit? Not as eloquently as David, but I used to try to comply too and I learned the same lesson he learned.
I am a US-American who is neither compliant, nor very proud / patriotic. I’ll try to find some better specimens for your project!
Ann #1: I’m the one who “attacked” you. Here’s why:
1) You knowingly change the subject and direction of an ongoing discussion, then when I call you out on it, you complain that I am the rude one?
2) I get it: you need an answer. You see the top thread on IBS and think, “That’s where people are, so my question will get attention.” May I direct your eye to the right-hand column of this page (or bottom if you’re on a phone), under the heading “Recent comments”. If you were to have posted your question in a much more related thread, such as “FATCA and Canada”, it wouldn’t matter that the previous comment there was from 2013 or whatever; your new comment would appear at the top of “Recent Comments”. I think most of us scan that column to see what’s new. It is 100 percent certain that people would have responded.
3) Here’s the kicker: if you had asked your question in a more appropriate thread, then future readers of IBS would be able to benefit. Those with Canada-specific issues would have looked there (like you say you did), and gain the wisdom of those who responded. Future readers will never be able to benefit from your experience if it’s all inside this absolutely unrelated thread. Thus, you have not only done the author of the original post on this thread a disservice by changing the subject, you’ve done your fellow Canadians-with-US-taint a disservice.
As you pointed out, you searched all over IBS and couldn’t find an answer to your question. Part of the problem is caused by exactly what you did (and you’re not alone), by posting off-topic, contributing to the gradual disintegration of Isaac Brock Society as a valuable resource.
The mods are very busy, but maybe they might consider immediately moving off-topic posts into appropriate threads so that this doesn’t happen again.
And now I’m over and out. I will lurk here and read posts and continue to learn, but until I have something of substance to add (rather than adding to the growing avalanche of snark and bickering here), my contributions to IBS will be minimal.
Should be all guns pointed outward. !
I don’t think it’s fair to say that Ann#1 derailed an ongoing discussion. In her comment yesterday, she was replying to a discussion already underway on this thread about this thread having gone off-course because someone posted on the wrong thread.
She wrote in that comment, mentioning that she may have made her first comment several years ago on the wrong thread, “. . . I did look at the sidebar, but it didn’t answer my question. Signing authority on multiple accounts for a lawyer. . . ”
Sounds to me like she did the right thing, looked for what might be the most appropriate thread before just jumping in, but didn’t find a thread on the topic (a thread on professional accounts didn’t exist), so she asked it somewhere, maybe on a “wrong” thread or maybe it was on thread not specifically about but somewhat related to her question.
BTW, I have noticed that newcomers sometimes post to the wrong thread, and it’s not uncommon for someone to reply something like, “I don’t know the answer to your question, but you’ll probably get more answers if you post your question on the xxxx thread.”
One other thing:
@USCA,
That comment you made earlier this evening went into incredibly explicit detail (and yet really clearly with those bullet points) about the project you and JC are working on. Thanks for taking the time to do that.
Why not make a new post for the project, using that comment for the post itself, as this thread has really diverged?
@ Norman Diamond
Yes you did give an answer. Sorry if you feel your contribution was overlooked. But as Barbara was pointing out, JC’s request seemed to have more to do with the ‘successful’ compliants.
Norman,I always appreciate your comments here expressing your frustrations and experiences.As I appreciated Barbara’s comments.
At the moment, I have no ideas to offer to solve topic drift. It happens and has its pros and cons I guess.
Hope we are all good. Infighting is rarely productive but hopefully we can still share different points of view while still being cognizant of the original poster’s request for particulars. Would that be a reasonable expectation?
A ‘successful’ compliant? Only Boris Johnson and insiders know how much he paid. Eric’s postings sometimes recognized a rich 1%’er in a liberty list, but we don’t know how much they paid, and we don’t even know if they complied or not. Dr. Marcio Pinheiro complied and didn’t renounce; should we call him ‘successful’? Donald Dewees complied and maybe didn’t renounce; was he ‘successful’?
Here is the story of a US citizen who came into compliance, and as a result of the experience was forced to give up their US birthright as the only remedy and respite from the caprices and injustices of the US tax system as applied extraterritorially based solely on US citizenship.
Compliance with the tax rules that apply to overseas Americans created huge difficulties in my life and the life of my Canadian family. It was almost impossible to achieve, required expensive and hard to find expert help, and was fraught with pitfalls for the unwary. It deprived me of the benefits of the ordinary government registered tax free savings vehicles that my country provides to my fellow Canadian taxpayers – which I had to dissolve, and were subject to US double taxation and also punitive treatment of my local legal savings and bank accounts solely because of my birthplace. The sale of my Canadian principle residence would have been subjected to US reporting and potentially US tax – but the US would not have allowed my mortgage payments to be treated the way US residents can. Those and other serious conflicts between the US system and that of my home country are not addressed or resolved by the existing tax treaty, and the US continues to invent new onerous rules that add to our burden and creates new jeopardies.
I tried to become compliant once I found out – by accident, via our local media – what the US was demanding.
All IRS help sessions at our local embassy and consulates outside the US had been suspended as a cost saving measure. There were no tollfree numbers to call for IRS information and assistance. The IRS website had very little information available specific to filing from outside the US.
I was forced to use the “married filing separately category” because I was married to a non-US person – and to have both of us dragged into the morass of the U.S. tax system would only increase the pain, the cost of filing assistance and the potential jeopardy. We were both already compliant Canadian taxpayers. Filing married with the US would have increased our exposure to the caprices and pitfalls of the US extraterritorial tax system. Filing separately resulted in the marriage penalty.
Though I had very little income, was not our household’s breadwinner, paid my local taxes in full, and sometimes was actually under the US filing threshold, had no economic activity in the US, no US property, and owed no US tax, perfect compliance with U.S. tax laws proved almost impossible and extremely costly, and unfairly burdened me solely because I had birthright U.S. citizenship acquired more than half a century ago. Since I ‘left’ the US as a pre-schooler, I was not aware of the punishments and significant conflicts that the US tax system imposes extraterritorially on US citizens and duals living outside the US – many of whom were born outside the US, or lived all or most of their lives outside its borders and jurisdiction. US residents themselves find it difficult to comply perfectly. The Taxpayer Advocate reports on those most serious problems annually, in her reports to Congress.
I feel that I was forced by the US government itself by its words and actions, with its punitive and slanderous characterizations of those ‘abroad’ to relinquish in order to have a chance at an ordinary life outside the US with my Canadian family, in my home of Canada. I could not afford to retain my US birthright. It also eroded my self respect as we were repeatedly lumped in with criminals, tax evaders and money launderers in public statements from the US Treasury, the IRS and US lawmakers. FATCA continued in the same vein, but even more so.
Surrendering my US birthright was the only achievable remedy for the stress, pain and anxiety that dealing with the caprices, injustices and penalty jeopardy pitfalls inherent in the US extraterritorial tax system and the incomprehensible and labyrinthine demands it makes of those outside its borders who try to comply.
I also felt I could not be proud of being American when America chose to characterize my local legal Canadian bank accounts filled with already taxed wages as equivalent to ‘hidden’ ‘offshore’ and ‘foreign’ accounts held by US residents in places considered tax havens.
Compliance in the manner the IRS demanded of us eroded the health and economic and psychological wellbeing of myself and my non-US family. OVDI treated even those with no US tax liability and only local legal savings as criminals before the fact. The Streamlined program was an improvement – but those who came forward first, to comply in the ‘noisy’ manner the IRS prescribed were treated far worse than those who did not comply, those who quietly backfiled and those who filed going forward.
It was very difficult and very expensive to find competent tax preparation help. Even after paying a US tax lawyer and accounting firm for help, they made mistakes. The fees exceeded my annual income. Firms would refuse to help with certain forms because of the cost, the complexity or the perceived risk. In Canada I file my own taxes on paper or with the help of common software. I could not understand how to do my own US tax and reporting forms – it cost me tens of thousands in professional fees to comply.
The threat of unjustified penalties continued to be wielded by the IRS and Treasury, even as US residents such as the then Treasury Secretary and other US lawmakers were absolved of far more significant errors in compliance, and US tax left unpaid in the thousands of dollars. If even a Treasury Secretary and US lawmakers cannot or do not comply without error, why should those already paying taxes in full to their home country be held to a far higher, more punitive and ruinous standard?
Why should our local legal banking be criminalized from afar? Why should we be judged guilty before the fact? Why are our signatory or co-signatory powers on workplace or community or voluntary organization accounts be criminalized just because we are not in the US?
Why are we and our US citizen children to report our ordinary accounts annually to an entity that deals with with ‘financial crimes enforcement’?
Why are our local registered government savings for retirement, education and disability penalized while the IRS urges US residents to benefit from the US equivalents? Why are our investments taxed extraterritorially to support a US healthcare system that we cannot access or benefit from – while we also pay for our own local one?
It was these issues and the disrespectful characterizations re FBARs and the likely unconstitutional treatment under FATCA that was the final straw. I could not bear to remain a US citizen under those unjust and unwarranted conditions. I could not remain proud of my history and relationship with a country so firmly wed to continuing that maltreatment. And one who would not even support the study or any inquiry into our complaints.
I could see no other remedy other than to sever my connection with the US.
And how did the US benefit from its treatment of me, and the punishment of expats and duals from afar ?
It lost a citizen, and gained nothing in tax revenue.
From me it gained no US tax, and likely never would have – I pay high taxes in Canada. My local accounts are legal and already taxed by Canada, or generate zero or very small interest – too small to generate any US tax. My house is very modest and likely any future sale would fall under the US tax threshold.
I am no tax evader, no money launderer, no criminal, but the US treated me like one without any grounds.
I was forced to surrender my US citizenship birthright in order to stop being victimized by the US extraterritorial citizenship based tax system and stop being slandered as a criminal before the fact. I am no longer any representative or advocate of the US ‘abroad’. Even further, the view of the US in the eyes of my Canadian family is now more negative. They see the US as preying on Canadian owned and generated assets and of holding Canada’s financial sector hostage under the gun of FATCA, while forcing Canadian taxpayers to pay for its implementation in Canada with our local tax dollars, while the US provides no equivalent information and refuses to reciprocate.
@JC, (and USC you already know) that is my story – of how compliance with the US tax system – particularly in the ‘noisy’ method as the IRS prescribed significantly hurt me and my family, and how I feel I was forced to surrender my US citizenship to stop the harm from continuing into the future.
If it helps, feel free to use whatever portions you like. Unfortunately I couldn’t bring myself to claim that I was ever an uncritical proudly flag waving type of patriot, but I and my family were attached to the US as our country of origin (and some of us returned to the US to live, while some stayed in Canada), and I always defined myself as an American, and was sentimental about it as my first home – up until I was forced under duress to sever the connection – by the direct and willful actions of the US itself.
I know this isn’t the uncritical testimonial that Yue probably wants, abut this is the best I could do and still be sincere and truthful. I feel regret mixed with relief, and anger and bitterness mixed with sadness. And I relinquished years ago now. I regret the necessity, but the US gave me no other viable choice. I just could not continue. Initially I had thought that I could achieve and maintain compliance (after all, my Canadian taxes weren’t complicated) – until I fully understood that it was and probably would continue to become even harder, more intrusive, more punitive and more unjust than it already was. And over the years since first becoming aware of US CBT, the US showed no signs of being interested in our plight, much less addressing it. My ‘representative ‘ showed no interest in it even though he himself was born and lived outside the US. Only a very few US politicians even bothered to support even in principle the idea of a commission to study any of the myriad of expat problems that expat organizations had been flagging for decades. They had to be forced to grudgingly acknowledge that FATCA was causing people to be rejected from local legal banking access in the EU. I’ll never forget that Treasury and FATCAnatics said that it was mere anecdotes.
To long time readers, I feel like I’ve said all this before and am weary of writing about it – as some of you are probably weary of re-reading it. I feel like I’m not adding anything of value that hasn’t already been said. My story or a version of it has already been told before. I started to go into my OVDI/Streamlined experiences in some detail, but figured that the intended audience Yue seeks to reach won’t sit still for it, and likely don’t care, so left that out.
Hope it helps.
@Barbara, I agree with @pacifica. And I don’t think the tone of your comments were either warranted or constructive.
Just for the sake of clarity…..
USCA indicated:
This indicates USCA had strong reasons to believe SadCanadian was not a newcomer to Brock. It is interesting that no one paid any attention to that. If people had noticed it, the thread might have moved in an entirely different direction. Or people could simply have made specific recommendations to try a different thread and moved back to the focus.
What has happened demonstrates exactly what Barbara is trying to call everyone’s attention to. She is not the only one who has brought this up and many others share her frustration. Especially some of the long term members who are starting to drop out of the conversations.
Due to the frequency of this happening, it would be virtually impossible for the moderators to start moving comments. Since people are not used to that, it would probably cause different problems.Perhaps everyone could try, just a little harder, to stay on topic.Not doing so does have consequences. And we’re all on the same side………….
I do believe Barbara’s later comment may have been meant for SadCanadian, not Ann#1.Please correct me if I am wrong Barbara.
@Patricia, I am annoyed by having to skim over repetitive or what I consider to be irrelevant comments here sometimes too, and in fact more often of late, but sometimes even the off topic ones are interesting. Sometimes I am also not clear as to the main point of posts – especially if they are long and include many different points.
I have re-read this post and the comments several times. I find that I am still more bothered by the severity and what I feel is the unwarranted tone of the rebukes than by the so-called irrelevant comments. And when the author left the rebukes posted, but removed the comment that was praised by several as being on-topic, well written and a model for the desired stories – that perversely did not help us to move closer to emulating the desired content.
Feel free to remove all my comments on this thread if they are deemed irrelevant or off-topic. I am sure that I too have been guilty of that in the past.
@badger
I understand what you mean. I am sure no one expects every word of a comment to be 100% in line with a post. And sure, some are interesting. Perhaps most of the time it doesn’t really matter if comments stray.
But maybe sometimes it does matter; some things may be being overlooked here. First of all, the frustration of the author that the purpose of the post could not be realized, primarily for two reasons. It takes a lot of time to write a coherent post. Adding links or tweets or photos to make it interesting is also time consuming. This also was not a concept piece per se but had the specific goal of producing something to try and help Solomon with his efforts to get something passed. There is a time element here as the primaries have already started and chances are once we hit November there’s not going to be a chance in hell of any further reform.
So a comment appears that derails the post and it was not innoculous.(unfortunately we cannot always tell that something is amiss until it is too late). It appears innocent to some and they want to help. The reason for the “tone” is outright rage; to watch so much effort go down the drain because someone purposely came in to derail it. And succeeded. Not only that but then other commentors started turning on each other. All because of one person who is not as he/she appears. That kind of action has a far worse tone if you ask me.
There have been a few attempts in the last few months to bring it up when these many long, off-topic threads go on and ask to stick to the point of the posts and to respect the efforts of the author(s). This by people who have been here from the beginning; who have done a lot of the work USCA mentions. It is very difficult to then be dismissed by others (some who are not even regulars if you will) who somehow think they can do and say whatever they like and act like the old-timers should just get out of the way. Nothing quite like feeling unwelcome in one’s own house so-to-speak.
I believe this is what fuelled the aggressive tone and I am sorry to say I understand it all too well. I have no clear idea what can or should be done about it but it is a problem that has been a long time coming and it needs a solution or at least some kind of shift.
I like pacifica’s idea of the original post being put up again, to give it a chance.
Must sleep and turn off this bloody phone. Goodnite.
@Badger
As the “author” of the post I respond to:
No comment(s) was removed by the “author”. @Barbara requested that the moderators remove her comment (which was responsive to the post). The Brock moderator removed two of her comments: (1) the long comment that responded to the post and (2) the comment requesting deletion.
Two additional thoughts:
1. Personally, I wish that @Barbara had allowed her comment to remain. But, I fully understand why she asked for it to be taken down. She was attempting to respond to the post and contribute to it’s purpose. There was little additional effort to contribute.
2. At least one of the comments (as was explained) was made for the purpose of derailing the purpose of the post.
wow as someone who has been here from the early days this thread i belive has gone of the rail the furtherest of any over the last 5 or so years i have been here
way back in the early days of brock this site was a life saver to me. i was angry, depressed, drinking to much and just not sure what to do about my american problem
now 5 or so years later i am once again calm and at peace with myself and MY decision
had it not been for brock in those early days i have no idea what i would have done….quite possibly entered the jaws of hell and who knows where i would be today
there have been flare ups on brock before and i am sure there will be more in the future but i belive the core value of brock still is needed. that core value being giving peace of mind to someone who has just had their “omg” moment and is in shock and struggling to comprehend what has just happened to their lives.
perhaps (ya right) one day there will not be a need for brock in the world however until that day comes can we not please all embrace our differences and unite in a common goal of educating people who need a place to turn and find solace.
@USC,
I have no quibble with a commenter – in this case, @Barbara’s right to ask that her comment be removed. I didn’t mean to imply that the mods removed it without her request or authorization.
What doesn’t make constructive sense to me is that she asked that the constructive model for what the post requested be removed, while we were left with the stinging rebukes remaining.
I think I might be able to guess who the commenter was that is referred to as not what they seem, but that does not afaik apply to @Ann.
There are many points, questions, etc. in the main body of the post. One sentence even mentions non-compliers; “If you are not in U.S. tax compliance, you could comment on why you do not intend to enter the U.S. tax system. Were you lucky (probably) or clever (maybe)?”
I may not be alone in being somewhat confused about what the main request is and which points we can and should respond to. I sent in a version of my story. Perhaps it too long, or it is not what was wanted because I’m not a ‘proud American’ any longer, and never was a sufficient flag waver in the unquestioning stereotypic sense. I thrilled to hear the national anthem, I felt warmth at the sight of the flags as I crossed into the US, and feel pride at some aspects of the US, but that is and never was unalloyed.
@ Barbara No I didn’t hijack the thread !!! I was standing up for Sad Canadian who Brockers were accusing of hijacking the thread and where snotty to…the thread had already been hijacked. I am not looking for any help, nor do I need direction. I was the author of “I am Canada, Hear Me Roar Mr. President.” I got compliant and then, renounced. But, I was however trying to make a point that you don’t always find what you are looking for on the sidebar. Nor is there a need to be so rude! When I had my omg moment, it was because I signed on seven different bank accounts – (6) of which were pooled trust accounts held by my employer who is a lawyer. No one was talking about signing authorities back then. Even the Law Society was blind sided by this issue. Brockers didn’t have a side bar for the topic. You need to chill.
@ Patricia I got the impression that Sad Canadian was a Canadian who suddenly found himself with unwanted US citizenship. I mentioned Keith Redmond because a lot of the members are accidentals.
I am very much a real person. I am not a troll. I may not here much anymore, but I still follow. I am still directing people to the site. It’s the first site I direct them .Several individuals on this site know my real name having guessed from Keith’s site and pm’d me on Facebook.
@AN#1, Thanks for your unique contributions here regarding the lawyer trust accounts, and for your letter to Forbes “I am Canada, Hear Me Roar Mr. President.” (sorry I type ‘Ann’ in this thread before, it was very late….).
It would have been very difficult for someone not a moderator to recognize that the other poster might not have been who they posed as – a new visitor to IBS truly looking for advice and help.
Attempting to help others was in the best spirit of Brock.
@ badger
“Attempting to help others was in the best spirit of Brock.”
Hear! Here! May it always be so.
@AN#1
I understand that. However, it had been stated by the author that the person was suspect. Perhaps people will notice that the two comments were not removed, primarily because others had already responded. No one is directing comments about trolls to you AN#1. 99% of what has happened is all based upon simple misunderstanding.
Regardless of what one knows or does not, the moderators have to trust the people who come on and comment. Until there is direct evidence to indicate otherwise. In spite of repeated patterns and content……………