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
@JustGetItDone, I agree with Karen. Contact the bank and tell them you’re not an American citizen any more. Send them a copy of your CLN as proof. They should then send you a W-8BEN form to sign and that should be the end of the matter.
You should let your other banks, if you have any, know too that you’re no longer an American and send them copies of your CLN as well. You’ll probably get a whole sheef of W-8BEN’s back to sign, but that will make the banks happy and finish things off.
Just Get it Done. Karen and Medea are absolutely right. Raise holy hell. Threaten to go public if they don’t straighten it out pronto.
@Karen, @Media, @Duke, thanks for the advice. Have raised a stink with several at CIBC since this morning, and escalated the issue, but so far they seem to need more time to look into it and have given no answers. I had thought that the process would have begun by asking or requesting some form of me, to confirm US person or not. It appears that due to requesting PFIC statements they decided to skip that. Not sure the FATCA rules would have required what they have done. It still appears ambiguous if they would apply this withholding on only US stocks or on all investments. I expect it will be resolved eventually but really not impressed with them.
A W8ben is the form you are supposed to sign. That’s the one for non US persons. Withholding on US dividends is then 15% instead of 30%. You could dump CIBC. They deserve to be dissed.
@JustGetItDone
Since you seem to have a non-registered investment account with CIBC (Investor’s Edge?), it is quite possible that you have in the past signed a W-8BEN instead of a W9 like you were supposed to. If so, it wouldn’t be too surprising if at some point someone from CIBC asks you why you didn’t sign a W9 even though you were a USC. Far be it from me to put words in your mouth, but it could have been because you read the W-8BEN and (incorrectly) thought “US Person” (the wording used in the W-8BEN) meant the same thing as US resident. Seems to me that would be an easy thing to get wrong.
At any rate, it does sound like someone at CIBC screwed up royally, and if you do stay with CIBC, consider escalating until you get an apology.
@tdott – no they have never mentioned a W8BEN, i did read about it online. My accounts have been around since a long time before this mess started so while it is part of the current process i don’t believe is was back in 2002. There was no indication on my account of being USC, so i think they did this only as i had requested PFIC stuff. Perhaps they are hitting everyone who requested PFIC statements. Not sure that is mentioned in the FATCA process information i have read.
@duke – i hold only mutual funds, and while one is called US Equity, my understanding is this is still considered as CDN fund. I was not aware there would be any withholding as a non-US person – i will look into that aspect. Perhaps that would only be for US stocks held directly.
Just get it done. You need to understand how withholding works. Say you have a US Equity mutual fund. It probably contains Apple, Microsoft and IBM which all pay dividends. 15% of the dividend is withheld at source and paid to the US treasury dep’t. At the end of the year you get a T3 or T5 including foreign dividends and foreign tax paid. These are reported on your Can tax return. No big deal. It happens to us all. CIBC should have asked you to sign a W8ben as a non US person long ago.
BB, I posted this comment months ago. I have no idea why it is just surfacing now. I did indeed write to Surowicki but, of course, received no reply.
I have a question about Germany. As somebody else noted here somewhere, he had to become stateless before he was allowed to get german citizenship. I just talked with somebody in Germany who told me that there are certain ((( professions ))) which don`t allow for double citizenship in Germany as well. For example- a lawyer in Germany cannot have a german and an american passport. So my question is the following- lets say its the 1980s and somebody had to relinquish their american passport in order to be a lawyer in Germany because in those days no duals were allowed no matter what profession. And as we have come to understand, America returned the privilege of US citizenship back to those who were forced to give it up sometime in the 90s without informing anybody. So we have this lawyer in Germany – does he get his US citizenship returned or not? Because if he did- THEN he would be in trouble with the germans and most likely not be allowed to have his law office. Is somebody who is a lawyer in Germany ( or any one of a few designated professions) an exception to this rule or not? Are they american citizens again or not because the GERMANS wont allow it?
My take on this is if the person relinquished their US citizenship, for whatever reason (as long as it was voluntarily and they did nothing to act as a US citizen after that date), they remain relinquished.
Due to several court decisions, DoS reversed the presumption in 1990, so that the burden of proving loss of citizenship lies on the party claiming the citizenship is lost. So, when a person performs a potentially relinquishing act, it is presumed that a person intended to keep their citizenship. But, even after the presumption changed, if the person acted voluntarily and did not avail themselves of US citizenship after the relinquishing act, they’re still relinquished.
I think that under today’s presumption, if the person has not got a CLN, it seems they can continue (for lack of a better word) to be a US citizen if they want – the US doesn’t seem to be forcing citizenship loss on anyone these days, even if they took on another citizenship under the former presumption, such as in the 1980s. Just my 2c, and actually it seems unlikely many (any?) people in that situation would want to be USCs these days.
This topic was quite important to me because of what happened to me when I went to get a CLN several years ago. The embassy tried to pull a snow job that the citizenship had been reinstated. Fortunately I knew that was a crock, that it was only the presumption that changed in 1990. I followed up on this with DoS, got my CLN, and the embassy here stopped playing games telling old relinquishers that they are or became US citizens again by operation of law.
@pacifica
I thought it was a lot more difficult than that and that you had to prove you had relinquished wilfully by a “relinquishing act” like a job working for the government. I honestly dont know if this person is deemed a US citizen or not. And if he IS, then he is in big trouble with the german government and most likely would have to close his law practise?
Sigh. All of this is so senseless….
@Polly, is this someone who visits the US regularly? If not, then who cares? The Americans can’t make him take back US citizenship, the Germans aren’t likely to ask him as they already know he relinquished to get German citizenship in the first place and nobody else in the world would even ask the question.
Even if he does go to the States fairly often he probably won’t get queried unless he has an American birthplace in his passport. If he’s an “accidental” then the Americans won’t know at border control as he won’t be in the system one way or the other if it was that long ago. If he does have a US birthplace then dig out the relevant law pacifica777 referred to and he can quote it if needed.
People are told by immigration/embassies/the IRS/DoS that they are one thing or another a/o that they must do one thing or another.
Other people say that what these US governmental agencies are saying is not supported by law.
Law or not, the USG has made it clear which track they are on. The USG train will continue down that track until it is derailed or at least stopped. The train is further down the track than it was when those who have already gotten their CLNs, the landscape is diffrent for tjose going through it now that is was for those who got off the train earlier.
The law is a tool for THEM to use against anyone, it is NOT a tool we can use to stop them. That should be very clear by now
Technology is also progressing. The tools available to the US to forcably return to compliance to its laws are more powerful and numerous than they were just a very short time ago. We risk getting caught up in this again if we believe that just because the US does not currently have the ability to find all its hidden and secret US persons that it forever will be unable to. They are currently continuing to increase their ability to do so.
In some countries, at least here in Japan, local authorities are independantly devising their own policies to gather and use all data on their residents. Japan has their new “My Number” system which is linked to all documents, public and private. My child’s birth certificate and family registry states that one of their parents was an American at the time of their birth. This bit of info is now permanently attached to their My Number.
The completeness of this My Number system can not be overstated. Just to cash a $40. USD Postal Money Order at the PO requires me to allow the PO to not just see my My Number card and photo ID, I must allow them to photo copy both and keep them on file. Once my My Number is linked to my Permanent Resident visa, then all transactions I make will be easily knowable to anyone anywhere. So too for those of my child, born in Japan to a Japanese parent and an American parent.
This system is already in place in Japan, not completely set up but is being implemented. Is Japan the only country who will do this? Where will all this take us, where will we be in five years, ten, twenty years?
There is no keeping hidden much longer unless one completely gives up on modern life, but even then if they ever need medical assistance, they are “caught”.
.
@medea
Thats exactly what the problem is- an impending trip to the US. Yep- US birthplace passport.
@Polly, then find that law so he can quote it when questioned. And what proof did he have to give the Germans when getting their citizenship? Surely there must have been some documentation? Does he have copies? If not can he get some from the German citizenship office?
AD203,
They were talking about an old change in the law. If you have your CLN you will be fine. I assume Germany is part of the visa waiver program with the US. You’ll need to apply for pre-clearance through ESTA. Then when you visit the US take your CLN with you. If they ask about the US birth place just show your CLN. I haven’t visited since relinquishment, but all the reports I’ve seen say it’s no problem.
@AD203, it shouldn’t be a problem. I’ve got a trip planned end of August and got ESTA clearance with no hassle. I plan to take a photocopy of my CLN and my cancelled US passport – the original CLN is staying home. Frankly, I’m more concerned about the ridiculous wait times to clear security leaving the States at some airports. It’s taking so long that flights are being delayed because the passengers are still trying to get through.
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36316366
Reading that I’m very glad I booked a direct flight!
@AD203, yes, it doesn’t matter what you wear, it’s how you conduct yourself in the important things – voting, etc. God, think what a mess it would be if every tourist wearing a cowboy hat was suspected of being a closet American!
My cancelled passport makes it quite clear. “Lost US citizenship under the provision of Section 349(a)(5) INA” and signed by the Consul here in Switzerland. If that and a copy of the CLN itself isn’t enough, tough luck. I’ll take a copy of that section of the law with me too.
I wondered if it might take a while for the ESTA to be approved, but it was done within a few hours. You will need your old US passport details though so make sure you have it ready when filling out the application form. For info when it asks for the expiry date I put down the year I renounced, not the year the passport would have expired. No problem with that either.
I’m just tossing this out there as I feel it is weird to expect non-action without expressing it’s requirement.
RE: voting & using a USA passport.
Where, in the renunciation info, does it say you must not use these?
Or, am I wrong?
@Jane, voting and using a USA passport when applying for a relinquishment may be taken that you don’t really intend to give up your citizenship hence the questions on DS-4079. So it’s best not to do these for a successful application.
For a renunciation, well once it’s done theoretically you shouldn’t be able to do either. But, given that the State Department has to approve the renunciation, again theoretically you could vote in a US election before they finalise the paperwork. In which case they could also argue you didn’t really want to renounce.
But no, there’s nothing in the paperwork for either to say you mustn’t do them. Basically it’s down to your good sense. Your US passport is taken when you renounce anyway so you couldn’t use it unless you have a second one you didn’t turn in. I assume they do the same with a relinquishment, but they may let you keep the passport until the application is approved.
Remember the USG’s assumption is that you made a mistake and want to keep your citizenship. That’s why the “intent” part is so important. By not voting and not using your passport you’re showing your intent not to continue using the “privileges” of US citizenship.
But no, there’s nothing in the paperwork for either to say you mustn’t do them. Basically it’s down to your good sense. Your US passport is taken when you renounce anyway so you couldn’t use it unless you have a second one you didn’t turn in. I assume they do the same with a relinquishment, but they may let you keep the passport until the application is approved.
Very sketchy indeed.
For a relinquishment they do keep your passport. Just like for a renunciation.
@ Polly,
Re: “ I thought it was a lot more difficult than that and that you had to prove you had relinquished wilfully by a “relinquishing act” like a job working for the government.”
Sorry, I was being pretty vague, not really addressing the particular person — that if a person performed one of the relinquishing acts in s. 349(a) of the INA, voluntarily with the intention of relinquishing, and didn’t act as a US citizen after that, they remain relinquished. They could get still get a CLN or self-document the relinquishment today, even though the presumption regarding intent changed in 1990. But, yes, by either method, they’d have to prove the reqlinquishing act occurred (you can’t really prove intent (get inside someone’s mind), so the intent is inferred by your statement that it was intentional and by your lack of US-cititzen-behaviour after the reqlinquishment date).
I think I misunderstood your question, but Medea Fleecestealer picked up on the details and “got it”.
@AD203
Yes- I was referring to people who had become canadian or german like in the 1970s or 1980s. Back then- getting the other citizenship automatically made you lose US citizenship. Nobody actually “renounced” so then 20 some years later America decided that maybe people had given it up against their own will- and so they reinstated the US citizenship, seeing that being dual was no longer a problem. The US either thought they were being nice or they wanted to collect the taxes- take your pick.
That was what happened to this person. He became german back in the 80s in order to open a law practise and so his US passport was taken away from him by the americans who said you can’t be both back then. He even tried to get it back and was refused! He has been living as a german ever since.
So fast track to today – and now seeing that he is a lawyer – he can`t have 2 passports according to GERMAN law. So then- has he been bestowed an american passport again during the 1990s or not?
At any rate- this is something that he needs to clarify for himself. As it is, he could be getting into trouble on both sides of the fence, because if he is forced to accept that he is american again ( against his will today) then the germans might tell him to close his offices?
@pacifica
Thx nonetheless for your concern and effort.