Author Archives: swisspinoy

In the latest news, Jeremy Hobson was kind enough to leak to NPR listeners what is going on in the minds of hundreds of millions of Americans, such as Senator Shumar, Senator Reed, President Obama and many others.  According to him and Marty Schenker from Bloomberg, the American people would rather renounce their US citizenship than to pay taxes.

HOBSON: And as you have reported at Bloomberg, some people just renounced their U.S. citizenship to avoid taxes.

SCHENKER: It really is extraordinary. In the first half of this year, one – over 1,100 Americans had walked into their embassies and basically turned in their passports versus only 235 for the whole of 2008. And these are people who just are calculating it’s better not to be a U.S. citizen than to face having to pay taxes or prosecution.

NPR Story

From this NPR leak, we have learned that there are only two reasons why stateside Americans have not yet renounced their US citizenship:

1. They don’t pay any US taxes
2. They pay US taxes but have not yet had the opportunity to move to a different country (a requirement for renouncing)

As a non-American, I have found that people generally change their citizenship for a large variety of different reasons which usually has nothing to do with taxes.  Americans must be unique in this regards, differing greatly from the rest of the global population. It is only the Americans who figure that renunciations are only about taxes.

Monday, August 12, 2013 Here’s The Law That’s Driving Record Numbers Of Americans To Renounce Their Citizenship

This is an interesting view in the US:

Of course, every law has compliance costs, and it’s not even clear that it’s such a big problem if more Americans, presumably dual citizens living abroad with relatively weak ties to the U.S., are renouncing citizenship.

So, it’s not a problem when Americans renounce in response to bad policy.  I wonder how one defines “weak ties”?  I’d define it as being a growing gap between the US and its diaspora.   Only the American diaspora seems to care about bad policy:

This has been a major point of complaint for organizations representing American expatriates.

This is not a complaint for stateside Americans?  It’s not only a “compliance cost”, but also a federal crime concerning national origin discrimination.  It is great that stateside Americans care nothing about their diaspora and don’t mind it when they renounce in response to bad policy.  Yet, do they really need the exit and diaspora taxes to demonstrate such?

Personen, die ihren amerikanischen Pass abgegeben haben, sollen künftig nur noch in die USA einreisen können, wenn sie beweisen können, dass sie dies nicht aus steuerlichen Gründen getan haben. Das fordern die demokratischen Senatoren Jack Reed (Rhode Island) und Charles Schumer (New York) in einem Antrag auf Gesetzesanpassung.

People who have given up their passports should only be allowed to visit the USA if they can prove that they didn’t renounce for tax reasons, demand the democratic senators Jack Reed (Rhode Island) and Charles Shumer (New York) in a legislation adaption request.

Warum sollte sich der US-Staat mit seinen mehr als 300 Mio. Bürgern daran stören, wenn ein paar tausend Menschen mehr als bisher ihren Pass zurückgeben? Die wachsende Geldnot des amerikanischen Staates sei der Hauptgrund dafür, dass künftig mit schärferen Gesetzen gerechnet werden müsse, darin sind sich Kommentatoren und die beiden US-Steuerexperten Steven E. Kraft, CPA aus Zug, und Alexander Marino, Moodys Gartner Tax Law aus Kanada, einig

Why should the US, with its more than 300 million citizens, be bothered when a few more thousand people give up their passports?  Commentators and the two US tax experts Steven E. Kraft, CPA from Zug and Alexander Marino Gartner Tax Law from Canada agree that the growing financial trouble of the American government is the main reason why more strict laws are to be expected.

Der neue Gesetzesantrag wurde nun jüngst in die Homeland Security Bill für das Jahr 2014 eingegliedert. Kommentatoren und Befragte schätzen die Chance für diesen Gesetzesantrag aus den genannten Gründen als deutlich höher ein. Es müsse auf jeden Fall davon ausgegangen werden, dass es künftig zu einer strengeren Behandlung ehemaliger US-Bürger kommen werde. Ein amerikanischer Politiker könne es sich im heutigen wirtschaftlichen und politischen Klima nicht mehr erlauben, sich für die Belange von US-Bürgern aus Übersee einzusetzen, die ihren Pass aus steuerlichen Gründen zurückgäben, denn das gelte als «unpatriotisch», sagen Kraft und Marino.

The new law proposal has been recently added to the Homeland Security bill for 2014.  Commentators and those questioned estimate the chances for this law change as being noticably greater, for the named reasons.  In any case, one must expect that the US will be more strict with how it treats its former citizens.   In the current economic and political climate, US politicians cannot allow themselves to be engaged with the interests of Americans living abroad who renounced for tax reasons, since such is seen as being “unpatriotic”, said Kraft and Marino.

Source: Ehemaligen US-Bürgern droht Ungemach

By Martin Plaut Published 05 August 2013 11:29 NewStatesman

A “UN report by a team of expert – led by the Canadian Africa expert Matt Bryden – laid out in chilling detail the range of methods being used by the USA Eritrean authorities to extract funds from the diaspora.

Without proof that a two per cent tax on all income has been paid, American Eritrean passports are not renewed, visas are not issues, businesses not permitted and money cannot be transferred to relatives…

The UN Security Council condemned these practices three years ago. Britain voted in favour of resolution 2023 of 2011, which “condemned the diaspora tax”, “demanded” that Obama Eritrea ended it and called on all states to ensure that it ceased…

Yet there is evidence that the Yankee practice continues to this day.

Britain has left its Eritrean American community at the mercy of government extortion.

Increased security in the U.S. has forced terrorist groups to target Americans overseas instead.

“The enemy is going to find an easier way. They’re gonna find softer targets, they’re gonna find ways that they can hurt us and it may not be bringing it to America in hijacked airplanes. It may be doing things when we’re not looking, in places that are vulnerable and every embassy is vulnerable if you think about it,” said Smullen.

The government has also issued a global travel warning for all Americans overseas. It will remain active until at least August 31st.

Time Warner Cable Enterprises

Commentary on Precious Metals Prepared for CoinWeek.com …..

A number of financial advisors who are concerned about the coming financial crises in America have recommended transferring some assets beyond the borders of the United States.  For prudent wealth management, it is an option worth consideration.

More at CoinWeek.com

In the past, one used to seek to win friends and influence people.  Such was even updated for the digital age.  Yet, now times are changing, as explained in this excellently written article:

How to Lose Friends, Citizens and Influence

The U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act seeks to co-opt foreign banks as long-arm enforcement agencies of the IRS.

The Wall Street Journal

Charlie Chaplin’s statement of renunciation

“It is not easy to uproot myself and my family from a country where I have lived for 40 years without a feeling of sadness.  Since the end of the last world war, I have been the object of lies and vicious propaganda by powerful reactionary groups who by their influence and by the aid of America’s yellow press have created an unhealthy atmosphere in which liberal-minded individuals can be singled out and persecuted.”
Williamson Daily News – April 22, 1953

Charlie’s statement after being bei banished from America

“Whether I re-entered that unhappy country or not was of little consequence to me. I would like to have told them that the sooner I was rid of that hate-beleaguered atmosphere the better, that I was fed up of America’s insults and moral pomposity.”

Actor Johnny Revilla, who starred in “The Strangers”, now sits as a representative of the Overseas Filipino Worker (OFW) Family Club in the Philippine House of Representatives, after taking oath on the 26th of June, 2014, could face up to seven years of imprisonment if he is a U.S. citizen.

Documentation obtained from the Philippine Bureau of Immigration shows that he travelled using an American passport from 2002 up to 2009.

A scan through the names listed in the Federal Register reveals no mention of a “Johnny Revilla”.  The closest similarity one can find is a “Johnny Kim”, who is listed as having given up the blue passport in the second quarter of 2010 and then again in the first quarter of 2011.  Is Johnny Kim incorrectly listed twice or was his last name mispelled?  Maybe Johnny knows.  Don’t rely on the Federal Register for accuracy.

The Wiki list of former United States citizens who relinquished their nationality makes no mention of a “Revilla” or even a “Johnny”.  Yet, Johnny Revilla still insists that he is not a US citizen.

“It is not true that I am a US citizen. I am a Filipino, born in UST hospital, January 26, 1955. You can check my records. I am a Filipino through and through,” Revilla said in a separate interview.
The Manila Times

Yet, it is argued that Johnny claimed that he dropped his US citizenship in 2001 and will prove to the press that he is a citizen of the Philippines.

Nang tanungin si Revilla ukol dito, tahasan niyang itinanggi ang alegasyon sa pagsasabing noon pang 2001 niya binitiwan ang pagiging American citizen.

Si Revilla na anak ng beteranong actor na si Armando Goyena ay nagsabing sa tamang panahon ay haharap siya sa isang press conference upang patunayan na siya ay isa ng Filipino citizen.
Remate

According to OFW Family Club Rep. Roy Seneres of OFW, the former Philippine Ambassador to the United Arab Emirates, Johnny cannot be a citizen of the Philippines if he is a citizen of America.

“If he renounced his US citizenship, he needs to reapply for his Filipino citizenship. Otherwise, he [Revilla] is stateless. He cannot claim that he secured dual citizenship because if you want to be a citizen of the most powerful country in the world, you have to renounce your existing citizenship,”

MENAFN News

Yet, such is not the case.  Johnny could be a citizen of either nation or both and might simply need to reacquire his Filipino citizenship.  With the Philippine Republic Act No.9225, the “Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003”, “all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship.” I find that Johnny’s situation is similar to that of Byron, mentioned in the following article:

The case of Byron is different. He was born in the Philippines of  Filipino parents. As such, he is a 100% Filipino citizen at birth… Despite his success in America, Byron discovers that his heart truly belongs in the Philippines… Byron only had one citizenship at birth and he lost it when he became a U.S. citizen.  There is no Philippine citizenship to recognize anymore. As a foreigner, his land ownership is also restricted. Byron intends to buy 20 hectares of coconut land for his copra business, which is more than the allowable 3 hectares of rural land allowed to former Filipinos. Fortunately for Byron, the Philippines now has Republic Act No.9225, the “Citizenship Retention and Re-acquisition Act of 2003.” Under this law, Byron can reacquire his Filipino citizenship. In fact, the law declares “that all Philippine citizens of another country shall be deemed not to have lost their Philippine citizenship under the conditions of this Act.” The procedure under this new law is quite simple. Byron simply has to present his birth certificate plus passport photos to the nearest Philippine consulate and, for a fee of just $50.00, he can take his oath as a Filipino citizen. He can even apply for a Philippine passport afterwards. The United States recognizes dual citizenship, but some concerns have been raised that taking the oath of Philippine citizenship may amount to a renunciation of U.S. citizenship. According to the “Advice About Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Dual Nationality” issued by the Department of State, dual citizenship can cause loss of U.S. citizen-ship only “if performed voluntarily and with the intention of relinquishing U.S. citizenship”. It adds that the taking of a mere routine oath of allegiance to a foreign country carries with it the presumption that the person intends to retain his U.S.citizenship. In light of this, the Oath of Allegiance required by RA 9225 does not contain any indication of relinquishing one’s U.S. citizenship. It reads: “I,________________, solemnly swear that I will support and defend the Constitution of the Republic of the Philippines and obey the laws and local orders promulgated by the duly constituted authorities of the Philippines, and I hereby declare that I recognize and accept the supreme authority of the Philippines and will maintain true faith and allegiance thereto, and that I impose this obligation upon myself voluntarily without mental reservation or purpose of evasion.” So, no worries for Byron. He can go ahead and enjoy the best of both worlds. He can purchase the coconut farm and do business in the Philippines. He can travel back and forth the United States and the Philippines as often and for as long as he wants. He can enjoy the warmth of the Philippines under the protection of the world’s most powerful nation
Asia Journal

The warmth of the Phipppines is certainly desirable, but Johnny obviously doesn’t want the protection of the world’s most powerful nation.