Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)

1,714 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)”

1. “It’s pretty obvious that true RBT (i.e. the international norm), with no retroactive fees, penalties or filings required, would solve your problem … and everyone else’s too. ”

   There’s no one solution that would solve the problem for all. It depends on the person’s circumstances and plans, and what they see as acceptable.

2. EmBee – yes I understand that it’s a matter of principle. I’d be interested to hear what MNM sees as a solution that would feel right.

3. @ plaxy
   Then we’ve been wrong all these years to think that the abolition of CBT and the adoption of RBT is the solution? I don’t think so.

4. It’s right for those who feel it’s the right solution for them.

   Others choose other options, which they feel are right for them.

   What suits one, may not work for another. Everybody’s situation is specific to them.

5. Plaxy: your remark puzzles me. Had simple true free RBT existed we wouldn’t be here talking about it. Should it happen, we will no longer have any of these issues. I mean sure, FATCA will bug banks and US residents, but that’s another issue. I fail to see how RBT would not solve all the problems discussed here daily, including letting MNM travel, and all of us get on with our lives.

6. Fred – Not everyone wants the rules to change. In a forum not a million miles from here, minimalist filing is the preferred solution; in another, that’s seen as unacceptable – scrupulous compliance is preferred. While for many others, renunciation solves the problem. And for most, not filing appears to be the favourite option.

   There is no one solution. It would be a miserable situation indeed if there was only one option, and that option nowhere in sight.

7. “FATCA will bug banks and US residents, but that’s another issue.”

   It’s the main issue, for some.

8. Agree with Fred (B) with respect to RBT as the best cure for the malaise. It would cure 99% of the hardship. After all, we live in imperfect world.

9. Indeed we do. One of the imperfections being, that RBT is not a currently available option. There is not even an agreed proposal for people to look at.

10. RBT with no strings attached would solve most problems. However it is unlikely to be retroactive so will benefit those already in compliance or leaving in the future or future generations .

    If they start demanding certificates of departure or proof of compliance those now under the radar will not be better off. They can’t prove past compliance and probably won’t want to apply for certificate anyway and put their name on the radar

    So it’s not just RBT but one with no strings attached that works best

11. Thank you, one and all, for your thoughts on my *problem*. Indeed, Plaxy, as EmBee suggested, the full and complete adoption of RBT – the system under which I grew up here in Canada and which is the world standard form of taxation – is the only solution that will work *for me*.

    My stand actually is quite practical in my case (although it does reflect the ethics of the matter as well). When I first obtained my US passport I was advised in no uncertain terms that as a dual citizen I must be very careful to obey US law while in the United States. Under international law if I were to be found in violation of the law within the United States the Canadian government would be unable to assist me. For that reason I don’t feel safe to travel there as things stand at present. (It would have been nice if the official had mentioned the tax filing issue at the time!)

    There is a second solution for me and that would be a complete drop in the renunciation fee back to a reasonable level (and the cancellation of the tax filing requirements that go along with it. I left the United States when I was five years old so my situation is not unlike that of the accidental Americans except for the fact that I was aware of my American identity.

12. Ideally ,a no strings RBT is the solution. However,that will never happen ,whatever the US comes up with will involve compromising and result in strings ,as well as ,penalties ,even for the minimalists.
    Nothing is free. IMHO, a time will come when other nations will feel or be pressured to react ; otherwise, business as usual.

13. TTFI Accidental treatment hinted at

    Quoting tweets from Solomon Yue:

    Indeed. We discussed ur case: @ExpatriationLaw could help u 2 be 3-yr in full compliance w/ US tax obligations per #TTFI eligibility. Then u can elect 2 have a qualified non-resident taxpayer status. TTFI will be friendly 2 expats who want 2 end double taxation & #CBT & #FATCA.
    https://twitter.com/SolomonYue/status/989692583424114689

    I asked about Accidentals

    I am grateful 2 Congressman Holding, W&M staff, & JCT 4 finding a good solution 4 Accidental Americans who want 2 be in compliance. This #TTFI bill will instruct IRS 2 allow Accidental Americans 2 be in compliance w/o #FATCA & #FBAR penalties b/c of banking services also denied.
    https://twitter.com/SolomonYue/status/989744993928601600

    Note that for the above that 3 years TTFI compliance will be much different than the current obligation

    I asked about Accidental amnesty and reduction of the renunciation fee

    I won’t ask 4 that. Bad idea. This #TTFI bill is 2 save citizenships. Reducing fees 2 make renunciation easier will not only kill the bill but also lose support & sympathy 4 Accidental Americans. No lawmakers would do anything 4 someone who isn’t interested in being an American.
    https://twitter.com/SolomonYue/status/989770478771363841

    9M expats’ well has been poisoned as FATCAT tax cheats. Many have no sympathy 4 Accidental Americans & said it’s their responsibility 2 file tax returns even they don’t owe $. Ms. Bean testified renunciation is 2 avoid pay taxes. Playing into their hands won’t help #TTFI passage.
    https://twitter.com/SolomonYue/status/989838083741777920

14. MNM. Although I understand your concerns, if you live in Canada, there is little to worry about as far as crossing the border is concerned. We let our Us passport languish, years ago and had no problems crossing for the next 30 yrs. or so.

15. MuzzledNoMore – “Under international law if I were to be found in violation of the law within the United States the Canadian government would be unable to assist me. For that reason I don’t feel safe to travel there as things stand at present. ”

    Yes I agree. Although I think it’s unlikely that any problem would actually arise, (and even if it did they’d be more likely to sermonise or threaten rather than actually take any action), I wouldn’t choose to put myself in a position of such powerlessness, to have to stand there and take it, unable to defend myself.

    To me, it’s a major disadvantage of the cursed unsought predicament of US dual citizenship – the loss of the right to diplomatic protection.

    “ I left the United States when I was five years old so my situation is not unlike that of the accidental Americans except for the fact that I was aware of my American identity.”

    Most of us are accidentally American, I suspect, given that we can’t choose our place of birth. The significant difference (IMO) is not when or why we left the US, but whether we want to carry on being dual citizens. For those who do, a solution that allows compliance with both countries laws may be essential; while for a person with no desire to retain US citizenship, the most important thing may be just to be left alone to live a normal life in our own country. So – for us, renunciation is the obvious solution, if achievable.

    The French have stated that “facilitated renunciation” is their preferred solution. It’s not clear what that means or whether the Americans would agree, but if some solution could be found to allow all who want to to renounce, that could benefit a lot of people.

    Thanks for the discussion, and good luck.

16. UKRose – “RBT with no strings attached would solve most problems. However it is unlikely to be retroactive so will benefit those already in compliance or leaving in the future or future generations .”

    IMO, any bill that threatens to change the status quo for expats is unlikely to get through Congress and even if by some miracle it did, it would be vulnerable to being challenged in court and struck down, or reversed by subsequent legislation. I would be glad, if that turned out to be an overly pessimistic view.

17. @MNM

    As I’ve said a few times, I travel on a Canadian passport with US birthplace and the worst that happened was one moderately polite lecture. I continued using the Canadian passport after that, as recently as a few months ago, with no trouble at all.

    I had assumed that the penalty for using a non-US passport, if they really wanted to be dicks about it, was a $10,000 fine. But I was wrong. Doing so is illegal but they haven’t actually managed to define a penalty. So in reality it’s perfectly safe.

    If you want to stay out for reasons of principle, more power to you. But as a practical matter it’s not a problem to use a Canadian passport. If asked about US citizenship, answer with yes. If asked about a US passport, say I had no idea, and oops my old one expired. And on you go.

18. JC quoting Solomon Yue:

    I asked about Accidental amnesty and reduction of the renunciation fee

    I won’t ask 4 that. Bad idea. This #TTFI bill is 2 save citizenships. Reducing fees 2 make renunciation easier will not only kill the bill but also lose support & sympathy 4 Accidental Americans. No lawmakers would do anything 4 someone who isn’t interested in being an American.

    Very helpful to have that clearly stated, though unfortunately it may mean the French suggestion of “facilitated renunciation” may not be possible. Best to know what’s possible, not wait in vain for what won’t happen. Thanks for posting this, JC.

19. “Nothing is free. IMHO, a time will come when other nations will feel or be pressured to react ; otherwise, business as usual.”

    I think that time is coming, though when….

20. “Doing so is illegal but they haven’t actually managed to define a penalty. So in reality it’s perfectly safe.”

    Hey, just like FBAR. Nothing at all to worry about then. Woo hoo!

21. @plaxy:

    Very helpful to have that clearly stated, though unfortunately it may mean the French suggestion of “facilitated renunciation” may not be possible.

    I would have thought if the French government were serious they’d try to get it in writing as a protocol to the DTA, same way the Dutch got their formerly-advantageous version of the saving clause against the old exit tax.

    (Of course, US tax treaties are all getting stuck these days, but maybe Rand Paul wouldn’t put a hold on this particular treaty. Or maybe he would, if some devious soul in Treasury decided to poison-pill it by putting additional exchange-of-information provisions in it).

22. Eric – Unfortunately it doesn’t sound like the French are that serious; see badger’s post at http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/fatca-and-france/comment-page-2/#comment-8200968.

23. (quoting Plaxy): “Doing so [an “American” crossing the border on a non-US passport] is illegal but they haven’t actually managed to define a penalty. So in reality it’s perfectly safe.”

    (quoting Japan T): “Hey, just like FBAR. Nothing at all to worry about then. Woo hoo!”

    And THAT is my point. Things that were not formerly penalized now are. Things that once were only half-scrutinized with a blind eye are now analyzed under a microscope. It will be my dumb luck to choose the border line-up with the letter-of-the-law pile of manure at the end of it – – – just like I did 20+ years ago when I stepped in it the first time. I’m not going to put myself in that position ever again.

    I am not suggesting that others should adopt the same stance. But this is the stance *I* must take despite the non-problematic experiences many of you have spoken of. I hope with all my heart that your good luck holds. As for me, from the sounds of Solomon’s latest reports via JC I’ve probably seen the last of my former homeland. I will not pay taxes or fines to a country I “owe” nothing and I will not pay a ransom to be released from its clutches. So, yes, I guess my stance IS primarily an ethical one.

    OK, ’nuff said on this! I appreciate your “ears” and your comments, everyone! “We return to our regular programming . . .” 🙂

24. “This #TTFI bill is 2 save citizenships.”

    I thought TTFI was supposed to relieve US expats (and those so deemed) of their tax-filing “obligations” to the United States. I must have missed something.

25. MuzzledNoMore – “(quoting Plaxy): “Doing so [an “American” crossing the border on a non-US passport] is illegal but they haven’t actually managed to define a penalty. So in reality it’s perfectly safe.”

    Quoting Nononymous I think. Not me, at any rate. A non-US passport is the only kind I’ve got nowadays, I’m happy to say.

    Good luck MNM – you’re on the right side of the border, that’s for sure. 🙂

Comments are closed.