Renunciation and Relinquishment of United States Citizenship: Discussion thread (Ask your questions) Part Two
Ask your questions about Renunciation and Relinquishment of United States Citizenship and Certificates of Loss of Nationality.
Participants will need to provide their e-mail address (real or fake) and an alias. The only written rule is that participants must use a same alias each time they post (and not “anonymous” or derivatives thereof).
Bear in mind that any responses that you get from participants is peer-to-peer help, and it is not intended as a replacement for professional advice. Also, the Isaac Brock Society provides this disclaimer: neither the Society nor any of its members are professionals. We offer our advice here only in friendship and we recommend that our readers seek professional advice if they need it.
If you wish to receive an e-mail notification of comments, check the box to that effect when making your first comment.
NB: This discussion is a continuation of an older discussion that became too large for our software to handle well. See Renunciation and Relinquishment of United States Citizenship: Discussion thread (Ask your questions) Part One
@Duke of Devon
Should your bank ever ask you if you’re a US person you should lie and tell them you are – just to screw the IRS up. Don’t worry, you can always avoid any fallout by never travelling to the US.
As a matter of fact, wouldn’t it be great if all Canadians who know the significance of FATCA (as Duke of Devon does) stood in solidarity with their fellow Canadians and told their banks that they’re Americans too – just like the world did after 9-11?
@Bubblebustin Yep, then see how the banks do after ALL of the accounts are closed?
Brilliant idea!
Bubbles. Great idea but no thanks. I’ve got enough om my plate.
@andygr05, you provided some excellent wisdom.
Cheers, George
@Molly, you should look at the name and shame list and see if you are listed.
Also, I think you can request a freedom of information copy of your file and that may shed some light.
Thanks @George. I checked the list not too long ago and I was not on it. Thank you also for your previous comments. One thing of note. I did have a SSN, which I applied for in my 20s, so technically I was already known to the USG long before my relinquishment appointment. I was very open about that in my relinquishment application. While I am frustrated and angry that my relinquishment was denied, I am not feeling any undue anxiety at this point. I am very seriously considering coming forward as a witness, but have to consider carefully any and all possible ramifications not just for me, but my family and significant other. Thank you again for your support.
@Molly, go back and wave Wikipedia’s entry under the State Department’s nose. They consider CBC to be a Crown Corporation.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Broadcasting_Corporation
@Molly, it says this too:
“As a crown corporation, the CBC operates at arm’s length (autonomously) from the government in its day-to-day business. The corporation is governed by the Broadcasting Act[11] of 1991, under a board of directors and is directly responsible to Parliament through the Department of Canadian Heritage. General management of the organization is in the hands of a president, who is appointed by the Governor General of Canada in Council, on the advice of the prime minister.
According to The Hill Times, a clause in Bill C-60, the Harper administration’s omnibus budget implementation bill, “appears to contradict a longstanding arm’s-length relationship between the independent CBC and any government in power.”[12][13] The clause allows the “prime minister’s cabinet to approve salaries, working conditions and collective bargaining positions for the CBC.”[12]”
As I said, crown corporations don’t exist in the US. Do you really expect the US to recognize another country’s crown corporation as being strictly a government entity if in their analysis of its functions they determine it’s not? The CBC was determined by State to be a “hybrid entity”, regardless of whatever anyone else says it is.
That’s why I think this is a diplomatic issue. It was not unreasonable for Molly to assume she was relinquishing US citizenship by taking employment at the CBC, based on the widely accepted definition of what a crown corporation is here in Canada.
What difference does it make to the consul in Calgary if one more person relinquishes? It’s no skin off his nose. He must be a complete ass. I just don’t get it. A complaint to the State Dep’t is certainly called for.
@Duke — I have that exact same question, What difference does it make to them? Unbelievable.
@Duke @Canoe
It’s the mentality of the homelander when they think people would only go to that much trouble in order to get out of paying their ‘fair share’.
@Duke et all, States presumption is that in the absence of a statement of intention to lose citizenship the intention is to retain.
The converse then MUST hold true and it is ultra vires if State holds anyone back. Thats what should happen….
To be honest, IMO if someone presents themselves and states they took a job with XYZ that they believe was a political subdivision and they did so with intent to relinquishe AND pay the fee, then give them a CLN.
@Duke.
“What difference does it make to the consul in Calgary if one more person relinquishes? It’s no skin off his nose. He must be a complete ass. I just don’t get it. A complaint to the State Dep’t is certainly called for.”
Because now they have a chance to collect US$2350 to process a renunciation, instead of giving her a CLN for free. Too bad Molly returned that CLN. If I found myself in that position, they would have had to send in the special forces and knock down my door to get it back. I hope she made certified copies.
You are right; they are complete asses.They are doing it because they can do it. They could just as easily process renunciations online for $100. Instead they charge $2350 and require the whole Consular appointment, prostrate yourself before the King’s representative rigamrole. They are purposely making it as difficult as possible. That’s why I believe “self relinquishment” is the proper response, but, of course, that’s not for everybody. The whole business makes my blood boil.
@RLee wrote: “As far as I know in 1968 the US did not permit dual citizenship so I am puzzled if you were given the US passport without any questions about your other nationality.”
The USA has always “permitted” dual citizenship. That was never an issue, even after the Revolution. The question is whether an expatriating act occurred at any time.
Offspring of aliens attached to foreign consulates have always been deemed to acquire American nationality at birth. That is (like so much else) a vestige of inherited English law on allegiance. (Current British Nationality Law is otherwise, and anyway the UK has abolished jus soli in most cases.)
It is arguably contrary to diplomatic and consular practice and international law for the USA to attribute its nationality to offspring of foreign consuls, but the USG has never much respected international law except when it supports its own interests and arguments. Think of the Nicaragua case before the World Court: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nicaragua_v._United_States
@Duke of Devon, I did send a complaint in a written email that was forwarded to the DoS about the Calgary vice consul’s conduct during my appointment. I also reiterated why I felt strongly that CBC qualified as a Canadian crown corporation. I sent this at the same time I sent the CLN back. I’ve never received a reply, other than the letter denying my relinquishment application.
Someone on this board mentioned an individual who had relinquished based on work with Atomic Energy of Canada. Can anyone confirm that? If so, that would establish a precedent. The DoS’s letter to me states, “Our office has determined that Crown corporations, such as the CBC, are hybrid entities which combine elements of both the public and private sectors, and as such would not place those in their employ within the purview of INA 349(a) (4).” According to Wikipedia, “AECL is funded through a combination of federal government appropriations and commercial revenue.”
Honestly, every time I start writing about this, I can feel my blood pressure rising….
Thanks @MedeaFleece Stealer. I included the definition of a Crown corporation in my application, as well as links to various other articles that demonstrated the CBC’s dependence on the federal government and its funding. To be honest, I can think of few Crown corporations that are more Canadian than the Corp! CBC’s own mandate, posted on its website says, “CBC contributes to the development of Canada’s shared national consciousness and identity, reflects the regional and cultural diversity of Canada, and contributes to the development of Canadian talent and culture.”
Moderator could you please give Molly my email.
@ Dianne
Have done.
Done, Dianne.
(And, thanks.)
@andy05, I think it’s not so much a case of “permitting” as “if you don’t tell us, we won’t know”. I know when I first enquired about getting a British passport I was warned not to mention it when I renewed my US passport in the future as I would risk losing the American citizenship if they found out. And that was back in the early 1970s.
@Molly, though its difficult these things must be looked at USAcentric.
On reflection, I think State is looking at CBC and saying it is nothing more than the Public Broadcast System PBS in the USA.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PBS
@Molly
You were informed by the State Department that they felt the CBC is a “hybrid entity”. Being a hybrid public – private agency means that in addition to being government it also has private elements. In other words, not being exclusively government doesn’t negate the fact that it’s still a government entity in another form. They’re just being dicks.
Hey,
I’ve been on and off here as I have worked through the issue of being born in America.
I (finally) got my CLN in late November, having been pushing it since March. Not yet ready to celebrate though as I am now looking at submitting under the Offshore Streamlined Process.
My main question is, can I submit form 8854 at the same time as submitting for Offshore Streamlined? Or do I need to wait for the Streamlined to have hit their systems first? As part of the Streamlined, I am also requesting a TIN, as having never lived in the US as an adult, I do not have an SSN. I think one of these is needed for 8854?
I can’t file FBARs until I have that too… though I am considering submitting paper FBARs as part of the Streamlined Process, not sure if that is allowable?
I really hope that throwing myself into the open through Streamlined won’t be a mistake. I would have no concerns if the USA could be relied upon to act morally and fairly, but as they have demonstrated in force, that doesn’t interest them. I can’t shake that nagging feeling that I’m just about to step in front of a tax bus.
Grateful for any thoughts and wishing you all a happy holiday season.
Chris