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. I’m not convinced that the South African tax is CBT – it appears (from my limited reading) to be a case of expansive rules on who is a tax resident. One article implied that a person remains a SA tax resident as long as they have an intention to return to SA. As we’ve seen on other areas (e.g. relinquishment), intention is a slippery concept.

    I have no idea what the exit tax rules are in SA, but if they’re anything like Australia or Canada, it’s a capital gain tax, so only hits those who have assets when they leave. Australia’s does not include retirement (super) or real estate – as those are still taxed in Australia for non-residents.

    Giving up SA citizenship is not forever. A colleague who is a former SA citizen told me that he had to give up his SA citizenship when he took up Australian citizenship, but if he ever decides to return, he has a right of return and can re-activate his South African citizenship. He was truly amazed that the same did not apply to me as a former US citizen.

    Finally, on compliance, CRS is NOT based on physical residence, it is based on TAX residence. It is quite possible to be a tax resident of two countries simultaneously. To open a new bank account in Australia, you must now provide a list of all the countries where you are a TAX resident. The regulations make a particular point that US citizens are US tax residents regardless of where they live. The regulations also provide for a fine on the account holder for knowingly misleading statements with regard to their tax residence(s). So, anyone who is a SA tax resident will be “required” to out themselves under CRS. This will probably mean a rush to formally emigrate for tax purposes.

  2. Something to watch. Seems right up our alley, some of the same things we are saying about privacy…

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-data-storage-privacy-1.4220272

    Trudeau and other federal officials say that in the lead-up to the start of NAFTA talks next month, they won’t be negotiating in public: they’ll keep their detailed strategy close to their chests.

    In response to a request for comment, Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland’s spokesperson Adam Austen emailed a general statement saying the government is committed to hearing from Canadians about their priorities.

    “When negotiations begin, we will be ready to work with our partners to modernize NAFTA, while defending Canada’s national interest and standing up for our values,” he wrote.

  3. @calgary, re; “Something to watch. Seems right up our alley, some of the same things we are saying about privacy…
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-data-storage-privacy-1.4220272”

    Note that;
    Ontario Chamber of Commerce’s submission for NAFTA renegotiation priorities included FATCA (see excerpt in comment above, or read at http://www.occ.ca/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/OCC-NAFTA-Letter-with-CCC-July-2017.pdf ).
    the CBA Bankster letter of their NAFTA priorities does not;
    http://cba.ca/Assets/CBA/Files/Article%20Category/PDF/sub-20170718-letter-on-nafta.pdf
    and the CBA’s submission re NAFTA renegotiation says; “…….the CBA would be supportive of extending the prohibition of data localization to financial services as long as it is consistent with the banking industry’s domestic statutory and regulatory requirements…..”…….

    I urge all Canadians to submit NAFTA re-negotiation submissions including objections to FATCA and urging the Trudeau government not to accede to US demands to water down or override our Canadian laws – urge Trudeaus and his negotiators to protect Canadian *data localization and privacy (*see resources like this one https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3898951/Government-of-Canada-NAFTA-Consultation.pdf ).

    For resources, how to submit, etc. see my comments starting here;
    http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/fatca-and-canada/comment-page-8/#comment-7944770 and also, starting here http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/surveys-let-them-know-what-you-think/comment-page-1/#comment-7942347

    I sent in my submission via their portal. The deadline for comments and submissions has been extended.
    http://www.international.gc.ca/trade-commerce/consultations/nafta-alena/info.aspx?lang=eng

    I also wouldn’t take for granted that any of the submissions will be shared with your MPs or with the Senate. Send a copy to your and other MPs and Senators also, and don’t assume that they’ll be privy to the public submissions – remember that when Finance called for public submissions on FATCA, they didn’t share them with the Parliamentarians and Senators who would be discussing and voting on the IGA. Remember that Blaze had to fight to get a copy http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/here-is-what-canadians-said-on-fatca-iga-the-cons-didnt-listen/ .

  4. NAFTA-

    Same as with TPP – hiding the details.

    And within the U.S. the treaty changes may not be submitted to the Senate for review like lots of other treaties.

  6. Fred (B): I would say Shahira Knight is definitely someone we should be contacting. Thank you for posting the link to the article about her. I will try to find her contact information and will post it in my next reminder about our August letter-writing campaign.

  7. Culled from Facebook American Expatriates group:

    Last week’s hearing of the Ways and Means Committee: Congressman George Holding again calls for residence-based taxation. His speech is from 1:33:00 to 1:36:40.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jpP_xJ5aojo

    US Republicans Kill Border Tax, Focus on Corporate Rate Cuts:
    https://www.voanews.com/a/us-republicans-kill-border-tax-focus-on-corporate-rate-cuts-/3962072.html

    Comments on Today’s Joint Statement on Tax Reform:
    “Without the border adjustment, lawmakers will need to carefully consider how to design a territorial tax system that eliminates many of the perverse incentives in our current system, but also prevents base erosion.”
    https://taxfoundation.org/comments-todays-joint-statement-tax-reform/

  9. Some of the impetus behind tax reform is to make the US more competitive. Territorial tax for individual should be right up their alley.

  14. http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opinion/os-ed-why-more-americans-leave-the-us-20170731-story.html

    So much of a mish-mash of misinformation, half truths, confusion, hyperbole, etc. at this article about people ‘leaving’ the US, miscasting and miscounting those renouncing and those ‘abroad’ – as usual leaving out fact that many are born outside the US and inherit US status via parentage – thus did not ‘leave’ the US at all. FATCA mentioned but confused with the exit tax and 8854 and other filing requirements. Tedious attempt at linking the rise in renunciations with domestic politics.

  15. @BAdger
    I think the article isn’t about us. Its not really about taxes or expats, but about homelanders leaving America.
    I think that is a different issue?

  16. @Muzzled & Polly

    Not only is the article well-written concerning FATCA but highlights outrageous actions against the Caribbean community. It demonstrates a different layer of banks cutting off services and robs countries of economic growth…….

    http://www.imf.org/en/News/Articles/2016/11/11/NA111116-Withdrawal-of-Correspondent-Banks-Poses-Significant-Risk-to-Caribbean

    Correspondent banking with global banks allows smaller banks access to the international payments system, facilitating money transfers through transactions such as wire transfers, check clearing, and currency exchange. Without these banking relationships, businesses are cut off from international trade and financing, families are unable to collect remittances from relatives working abroad, and foreign investors may be unwilling to invest if there is a risk they will be unable to repatriate their profits.

    A survey conducted by the Caribbean Association of Banks shows banks in 12 countries in the region have experienced loss of correspondent banking, among them The Bahamas, Belize, Guyana, Jamaica, Suriname, Trinidad and Tobago, and countries in the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union.

    Increased regulation of banking systems globally—to address concerns about tax evasion and combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism—has had the unintended consequence of making correspondent banking relationships costlier and less attractive to global banks. Increased enforcement and unclear regulatory expectations present correspondent banks with the possibility of large fines for noncompliance, particularly in cases where local privacy laws prohibit the sharing of information about banks’ customers. Thus, the withdrawal of correspondent banking services is seen as “de-risking” by global banks.

    Another concern highlighted during the forum is the risk that increased monitoring would push transactions to informal channels, making it difficult to monitor illicit transactions and in effect countering anti-money laundering efforts.

    https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/sdn/2016/sdn1606.pdf

    While most U.S. global banks indicate that decisions to withdraw CBRs peaked two to threeyears ago, the withdrawal of CBRs continues for other banks, mostly those in Europe. Even though most cases of the withdrawal of CBRs involve U.S. banks, according to local and regional banks (World Bank 2015a), this is not surprising given the key role played by the U.S. dollar in the international financial system.

    Here again appears the phrase “unintended consequences.” I have a very hard time believing that is the case.

  17. @Polly, the Orlando Sentinel article http://www.orlandosentinel.com/opinion/os-ed-why-more-americans-leave-the-us-20170731-story.html leads with the paragraph below, which misleadingly appears to falsely equate renunciants only with disgruntled homelander emigrants – citing (with no evidence) politics and dissatisfaction with life inside the US. It leaves out those born abroad and those who left as infants – and may very well be the children of citizens of other countries on short stays in the US (ex. students). Ex. as I was a toddler when my family moved to Canada, I didn’t have any say in the matter, and don’t consider myself a US homelander emigrant. I relinquished due to aggressive arrogant US extraterritorial life control and US extraterritorial taxation of my citizenship and parentage – and I also appear on the Federal Register which is I think where they are getting the stats they quote;

    “…Some emigrants choose the ultimate route, namely, to renounce their citizenship. In 2014, for instance, 3,415 made this decision, a 14 percent increase over the previous year. By contrast, in 2009, only 742 left. The last two years have seen even more records broken: 4,279 for 2015 and 5,411 for 2016. And in the last three months of last year, coinciding with the emotion-laden presidential election, 2,365 picked up stakes.

    It’s not easy to renounce your American citizenship. Coughing up $2,350 to turn in your passport is a pittance compared to the necessity to comply with the Foreign Account Compliance Act, enacted in 2010, requiring, at a minimum, ‘fessing up to five years of filing proper federal income tax. Although the State and Treasury Departments try to put on a good face by suggesting that emigrants do so to avoid high taxes on their wealth, a good case can be made that the trend is attributable to the decline in the American quality of life.”…….

    The author also cites the State Dept. number of aprox. 9 million ‘expats’ ‘abroad’, but that number includes those born abroad who inherit US status via a parent, those born in the US but of non-US parents who later returned to their country of origin, those living outside the US for decades, etc. I’m not sure that he understands who makes up that 9 million. Emigrants and renunciants are groups which overlap but are not automatically congruent.

  21. IRS Criminal Investigation plans to leverage not only tax data, but also information gleaned from the Bank Secrecy Act, whistleblowers, the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, Panama Papers, and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA.

  25. @Barbara

    From the Forbes article,

    “These lists of those who expatriated may not seem too big, but just how complete these lists actually are remains unclear.”

    “Not too big” relative to what? Compared to the number of people taking US citizenship? Compared to other nation’s citizens renouncing their citizenships? Even if they aren’t complete, why are they “not too big”?

    As Congressman Meadows said, “even one American renouncing because of bad law is too many”, or something to that effect.

    He may be understanding, but Mr Wood never quite gives us confidence that he’s fully on our side.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: