Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 4 of 11 (Year 2017)

You can access all years at this link: Media and Blog Articles – Links for All Years

 If clicking on a comment link brings you to the wrong comment, click here  to get on the most recent page of comments.(alternatively, to reach the most recent comment page, go to  the url in the bar at the top of your browser and delete everything after http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comments-part-4-of-4)

Media and Blog Articles

EmBee suggested that it would be good if there was a thread for new articles, so that people would be aware of where to comment.   So, I created this permanent page.   I’ll make a permanent list of links posted here and keep adding to it,  but not deleting, so we’ll end up having sort of a  “bibliography” of FATCA/CBT articles.  [Note:  Some articles are not open for comments]

For more articles on FATCA, enter FATCA into Google then click on the link “more news for fatca” just below the most recent featured article.

Notes:

From JC:   To see #FATCA on Twitter for latest breaking news.  JC finds that is quite a good source and there even are some international articles that one may read using Google Translate.   Others may help certain tweets and articles remain in elevated position by retweeting them.

From Badger:   On an important archival note, please use the Internet Archive Wayback machine https://archive.org/web/ (see bottom right ‘Save Page Now’ box to enter URLs of webpages you want saved for posterity, and try to save backup copies of articles and other items of interest in some other form – such as a datastick or external drive. Some important and very significant webpages and the fulltexts of articles are no longer available (although some can be retrieved if someone using the Wayback machine saved them).

Be sure to read the comment stream for this thread — there are usually very recent articles mentioned there that aren’t on this list yet.

2017.12.28
It’s time to address the double standard about tax havens, Angela Wrights, Macleans, Canada.
The US Is Becoming the World’s New Tax Haven, The Editors, Bloomberg View, US.
2017.12.21
Rep. Dina Titus Supports Americans Abroad Tax Reform, Democrats Abroad, US. 
Now That The GOP Tax Bill Is Approved, The IRS Gets Busy, Brian Naylor, NPR, US.
2017.12.20
Taxpayers will have to wait to find out how they fare under new legislation , Renae Merle and Aaron Gregg, Denver Post (reprint from Washington Post), US.
U.S. Shareholders –Take Action by December 31, KPMG.
2017.12.18
Have You Ever Felt Sorry for the I.R.S? Now Might Be the Time, Patricia Cohen, New York Times, US.
2017.12.12
EU finance ministers issue warning to Trump over tax reforms, RTÉ, Ireland.
2017.12.11
Banque: les consequences étonnantes de l’accord FATCA, Edouard Lederer, Les Echos, France.
2017.12.10
As Australia ousts MPs with dual citizenship, Canada’s Parliament embraces many in its ranks, Kathleen Harris, Canada. (mentions MP who “assumed his U.S. citizenship was automatically rescinded because he did not meet several requirements for continued citizenship. [But when travelling to Washington] was told he was ineligible to enter the U.S. on a Canadian passport because he was a U.S. citizen. He was . . . allowed in on a one-time basis . . . it cost him $3,000 to later sort out the administrative requirements.”)
2017.12.09
The American Diaspora: Outreach and Organization, Victoria Ferauge, The Franco-American Flophouse, Japan.
2017.12.08
Foreign-owned banks to be hit by US tax rules, Financial Times, UK.
Trump Tax Plan Worries Europe, Christian Reiermann, Der Spiegel, Germany.

For articles earlier in 2017, click here.

1,720 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 4 of 11 (Year 2017)”

  1. RE: the discussion on The Hill
    https://origin-nyi.thehill.com/policy/finance/325072-free-market-groups-urge-repeal-of-obama-era-offshore-tax-law
    Nononymous just got a concession, of sorts, from Tax Guy. Yay!
    Tax Guy wrote:
    “I don’t think it is fair, but by the same token I don’t think this person should have been permitted to be a US citizen the first place, Be that as it may, that’s not the way the Constitution was written. I would give him the same advice you would; ignore them.”

  2. I thanked him, too. Being polite sometimes works.

    Feel free to recycle the “Mr. X” text anytime.

  3. For those who aren’t following the discussion on The Hill, here’s the Nononymous Mr. X text.

    So, Tax Guy, let’s for a moment leave aside the daily banking problems of US citizens abroad, or the discussion of rights and obligations etc.

    Let me propose for you a perfectly realistic scenario, and you tell me (a) if you think this situation conforms to any idea of fairness and (b) what you think this person should do.

    Mr. X was born to parents living temporarily in the US, and the family returned to their home country when he was a small child. Mr. X lived his life in his home country, maybe never even visited the US as a tourist, was perhaps unaware that he was a US citizen due to birth; perhaps he doesn’t even speak English. Mr. X worked his whole life in his home country, paid taxes there, was fortunate enough to save for retirement using investment vehicles protected from taxation by his home country; he also sold his primary residence, which was worth a great deal more than he paid for it decades earlier.

    One day, Mr. X receives a letter from his bank. FATCA has found him, due to that US birthplace. Now he discovers the joy of US tax compliance (perhaps that’s not so easy for him, since IRS publications are not widely available in Dutch or Norwegian). Quite apart from the possible loss of access to local banking services, he learns that to comply with US law he must (a) fill out rather a lot of complicated forms for which he will likely need to pay an expensive accountant; (b) due to the US limiting the capital gains exemption on sale of a primary residence, and not recognizing “foreign” tax-protected investment vehicles, he could actually owe the US quite a lot of money in taxes; and (c) due to his history of non-compliance, there is at least the theoretical possibility of huge FBAR fines. Mr. X can renounce, for the small sum of $2350, but if he wishes to be rid of all US tax obligations it’s going to cost him a lot more.

    Knowing all this, Tax Guy, what are your answers?

    (a) Does this conform to any sane standard of fairness? Mr. X lived and worked his whole life in his home country, but suddenly the US government wants a big chunk of his (and by extension his home country’s) wealth.

    (b) What would you advice that Mr. X do? Renounce or not? Comply – and pay a huge bill – or not?

    Given that the US cannot easily collect a nickel from non-residents with no US assets, I know what advice I’d give him. But I’m interested in hearing your opinion.

  4. Mr. X is pretty much some Dutch people I saw on a YouTube clip from a news show, who – being law-abiding bourgeois Dutch people – paid bills on the order of 80k euro. With a sort of weary resignation, as though this was just bad luck.

  5. @ Nononymous
    Do you mean Mr. X or Tax Guy’s uncomplaining US expat relatives with non-US businesses? I hope he helps them all with their heaps of US tax paperwork, including any PFIC propagated forms they might have to file.

  6. I wrote (on 1 Jan 2017):

    …the case of the 65-year-old mentioned (Bernhard Gubser) has not yet finished. Gubser is seeking a declarative judgment on what standard of evidence the IRS must meet when trying to levy a “wilful” FBAR fine.

    Gubser lost his case – lack of standing.
    http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.co.uk

  7. The government moved to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction, arguing that Gubser lacks standing, the case is not ripe, and the government has not waived sovereign immunity. The district court granted the motion to dismiss, holding that Gubser lacks standing for failure to show redressability. In particular, the district court found it was “highly speculative” and “far from likely” that Gubser’s requested declaration would prevent the IRS from assessing a penalty. It did not reach the government’s ripeness and sovereign immunity arguments.

    http://www.ca5.uscourts.gov/opinions/unpub/16/16-40948.0.pdf

  8. I think that TaxGuy has been the same person we have been up against from time to time yet he uses different handles. Is it also that same OnAMission TedBauman on Twitter? Never concede an inch.

  9. @ JC
    I think he has to have taken a few days off from the Tax Guy biz to post that many retorts. (He’s STILL there.) Anyway the Brock Squad has done pretty well I think.

  10. @JC

    I initially thought that as well except certain things mentioned don’t fit. ….I think it may be his buddy Mr. Khan

  11. Well, Bauman and OnAMission finally showed up at “The Hill” article with their pearls of wisdom. So sad they will be ignored this late in the game.

  13. @EmBee
    You missed OnAMission, another lovely long time intractable kool-aid drinker. They are rather fun to play with, so very predictable and easily refuted.

  14. @ Charl
    I had to step away from the computer for awhile (company) but it looks like some very good attempts there to make his mission impossible.

  17. @JC

    They all cover it to greater and lesser degree, but Kafkaesque is taking it.

    “What I’m against is someone going to catch a bus and finding that all the buses have stopped running and saying that’s Kafkaesque,” he said. “What’s Kafkaesque […] is when you enter a surreal world in which all your control patterns, all your plans, the whole way in which you have configured your own behavior, begins to fall to pieces […] What you do is struggle against this with all of your equipment, with whatever you have. But of course you don’t stand a chance. That’s Kafkaesque.”

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/kafkaesque-meaning-video_us_57768f83e4b09b4c43c02e5b

  18. Catch-22 definitely.
    I call it “damned if you do, damned if you don’t”
    There is only one way not to lose everything (winning or at least breaking even is not an option) and that is to just leave the game (relinquish/renounce).

  19. http://www.electoral-vote.com/evp2017/Pres/Maps/Mar28.html#item-1

    Interesting analysis of the push for tax reform in Congress. Failure to repeal and replace Obamacare has weakened the President and Congress. It may have hurt tax reform. Now it the time things are being decided and I just hope they get someone from the Freedom Caucus (which seems to be most sympathetic to repealing FATCA) involved. Unfortunately I’m not sure we have many sympathetic senators on our side.

  21. American Citizens Abroad advocates abolishing FEIE according to a blog post at http://blogs.angloinfo.com/us-tax/2017/03/26/foreign-earned-income-housing-exclusion-repeal-advocated-other-recent-developments/

    I could not find a stated rationale for ACA’s proposal to do away with these foreign exclusion benefits, but I suspect it may have to do with ACA’s hope that the RBT will be viewed as a revenue neutral proposal. If it can be demonstrated that the proposal does not cost the Treasury anything in lost revenue, RBT will have a greater chance of being accepted. Eliminating the Section 911 exclusions will certainly be injurious to many taxpayers, but it could help replace any tax dollars lost due to RBT.

    I don’t understand this. If CBT was abolished, USCs working outside the US surely would not have any need for the FEIE to avoid paying double tax on their earnings in their country of residence.

    I must be missing something.

  22. @ iota
    I think it has to do with that 5 year wait before someone overseas can get be RBT qualified. While waiting he/she would have CBT with no FEIE. From the detailed ACA proposal:

    Additionally, the residency test in current section 911, above, would have to be met for the most recent 5 taxable years prior to the year of claiming non-resident American status.The concern is that a US citizen or resident alien individual should not be able to “cash out” free of tax on holdings or businesses built up while he was fully taxable by simply moving abroad. He should be required to move abroad and remain there for a minimum of years before becoming entitled to the benefits of RBT.

    https://www.americansabroad.org/media/files/page/0aacae5d/Residency-Based_Taxation_ACA_Descr_and_Side-By-Side_Comparison_170207.1.pdf
    And of course, ACA wants an annual renewal:

    Any individual claiming RBT would be required to file an annual certification stating under oath that he/she is a US citizen or resident alien and fulfils the residency requirements for the taxable year (including the 5-year rule, above), and does not have income related to a “restricted country”. Failure to file an annual certification would terminate the individual’s status as a non-resident American. The concern is that without some on-going responsibility to maintain the status, individuals might return to the US, live in the US and improperly avoid paying US tax.

  23. I see. Thanks Embee.

    Worse than renunciation, and now apparently more costly, if the USC is supposed to file for five years without benefit of the FEIE.

    That ACA-proposal-writer person seems to be in the wrong job. He sees things only from the point of view of the IRS.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: