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
@Benedict Arnold be me
Where have you seen any reference to a MINOR commiting a potentially expatriating act?
Yes, exactly! Never, nowhere! Thanks, I keep forgetting to ask that same question.
In the back of my mind I’m making a list of justifications for the US CBT. I’ve only come up with two:
1) As in the tax598.pdf document, US citizens abroad have the benefits of US citizenship such as traveling with a US passport, and seeking help and protection from US consulates.
2) Wealthy expats made their wealth by being citizens of and living in the greatest country on the planet, so they should continue to pay if they leave. If they renounce, hit them with exit taxes as a lump sum to cover the future losses of them leaving.
Seriously, has anybody seen any others? I’m especially looking for how they justify taxing accidental Americans.
Okay, but if a minor can’t commit an expatriating act why then does it say that said minor can reclaim their citizenship between 18 and 18.5?
It’s my understanding that a minor can renounce once they begin to close in on 18. For example, my child will graduate from high school when she is 17. She is for all intents and purposes prepared to do what comes next – move out, go to university, get a job. While not technically an adult, she would more than likely be taken seriously by the consulate should she show up to renounce so why would she not be taken equally seriously if she showed up and declared that she considered her acquiring of Canadian citizenship when she was younger a relinquishing act?
I think there is a lot of wiggle room that we have yet to fully suss out. Perhaps we need a new thread to keep track of some of this?
@YogaGirl
First off…WhatAmI and I are referring to is acts prior to Oct 10, 1978…
The one you are referring to would call upon that 2009 LETTER I referenced you to that says the DOS is required to advise a MINOR renouncing (nowadays) that they understand that they have until their 18 1/2 to reclaim US Citizenship…
What I didn’t want to say, but I think it is obvious is that any child who has played MONOPOLY understands what a “GET OUT OF JAIL FREE” card is… 😉
@WhatAmI,
Here are the official reasons for being a US citizen:
Freedom to express yourself.
Freedom to worship as you wish.
Right to a prompt, fair trial by jury.
Right to vote in elections for public officials.
Right to apply for federal employment requiring U.S. citizenship.
Right to run for elected office.
Freedom to pursue “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.”
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=4d4a9b66f5e3a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=39d2df6bdd42a210VgnVCM100000b92ca60aRCRD
Vote.
Serve on a jury.
Travel with a U.S. passport.
Bring family members to the U.S.
Obtain citizenship for children under 18 years of age.
Apply for federal jobs.
Become an elected official.
Keep your residency.
Become eligible for federal grants and scholarships.
Obtain government benefits.
http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=4ad708e46986f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=0e8808e46986f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD
The second link should be this one: http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.749cabd81f5ffc8fba713d10526e0aa0/?vgnextoid=4ad708e46986f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD&vgnextchannel=0e8808e46986f210VgnVCM100000082ca60aRCRD
@Wondering
Thank you in return for your kind words. I certainly agree there’s a strong affinity between Oz and Canada. We’ve always adored Canada so very much ourselves and admired the wonderful traditions of freedom and tolerance in that beautiful land. Long ago we nearly ended up trying to immigrate there, except in the end we decided the proximity to the US was a bit unnerving. It seemed wisest to seek new lives someplace a safe distance away if nothing else.
As an older gay person I have been on the receiving end of ugly discrimination many decades ago. The choice was always to lie low and fly beneath the radar, or own up to it and face devastating unjust consequences. So I can very much relate with the atrocious ordeal which Canadian-Americans are facing. It beggars belief how that segment of society is being singled out for unfair tax treatment based on national origins (not only in Canada but worldwide, to be sure). For a while my partner and I lived in terror ourselves due to the constantly worsening situation for overseas Americans, and it was the utmost relief of a lifetime when we finally got things sorted and received our CLNs.
Being members of an oft-maligned minority, we’ve always been quite sensitive to political situations and possible developments, for reasons of self-preservation. It was back in the 1980s that we decided we had to begin focusing on removing ourselves from the US permanently. In our humble, bumbling fashion we foresaw the country gradually heading in a direction which frightened our timid selves. Yet in my worst nightmares I could never have foreseen injustices of the likes I read about on this web site and other similar ones. I commend the people on this site for their courage, conviction, dedication to justice, and sense of community.
Sadly, I suspect Australia and NZ will probably give in to FATCA without even a whimper. Mice do not pick fights with lions. Too few Americans here for anyone to take notice or care. If Burkina Faso or Kyrgyzstan were to abuse their citizens overseas similarly, our government likewise would do nothing either. At least in Canada you’ve got some safety in numbers perhaps. Best of luck to all the Canadians affected; our hearts are with you.
If your travels ever take you to Melbourne, Wondering, consider yourself as having a couple friends here. My partner and I would gladly take you for dinner at St Kilda by the beach, we could dine beneath the graceful palms, have a friendly chat watching the ruby sun set over sparkling Port Phillip Bay. We virtually never meet anyone from North America in these parts, and cannot really afford to travel to that part of the world ourselves. In honour of Isaac Brock you would be welcomed. Your kind words were appreciated. Cheers.
Hope everyone in Toronto is okay after the flash flooding. Best wishes.
@YogaGirl
Fresh Morning…
“It’s my understanding that a minor can renounce once they begin to close in on 18. For example, my child will graduate from high school when she is 17. She is for all intents and purposes prepared to do what comes next – move out, go to university, get a job. While not technically an adult, she would more than likely be taken seriously by the consulate should she show up to renounce so why would she not be taken equally seriously if she showed up and declared that she considered her acquiring of Canadian citizenship when she was younger a relinquishing act?
I can’t counsel you…what I can say is that at the Age of 10, I knew full well why I got my Canadian Citizenship and a Canadian Passport and celebrated it… A single mother and children travelling under different passports and nationalities into Central American countries during the 60’s and 70’s was subject to harassment as the politics with the US were not stable..particularly Guatemala and Nicaragua so far as the USA was concerned…
At the age of 10, I was already fluent in English and French and versed in German and Russian…as well in advanced math…I question how any Customs/DOS officers could judge my comprehension levels…
Thus I find it amusing that the wording in that 2009 letter clearly spells out how the Government has no right to influence and make that decision for you, yet they aim to say they should determine a childs comprehension level…
The answer lies in oneself..how determined are you to be strongwilled enough to hold on to an ideal…
What a deluge Toronto had. I hope you are able to manage your flooding disaster well.
Yours and ours show how this can happen anywhere at anytime — and it also shows how wonderful people / volunteers are in these times. Communications are so important.
All the best for any Torontonians affected. Stay strong.
@Calgary411 and @Medea Fleecestealer
Thanks for the kind thoughts for Toronto persons after our rainstorm (the most severe–ever). Still no power at my home but nothing to compare with what Calgarians had to endure.
@ozteddies
What a gracious comment, thank you.
This is the first time in my life I’ve ever felt persecution. I have a lot to learn from people like you who’ve had a life of it.
@Benedict Arnold be me
This document has some info about loss of nationality and minors:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/120538.pdf
@WhatAmI
Thanks,,.,THAT is the link I gave @YogaGirl on a different thread…where it references the 2009 Letter…
@Em, I love your earlier phrase; “Mordor Over the Border (the MOB)”. Captures perfectly the stench of extortion, threats and ‘might makes right’ that characterizes our relationship with the US.
Like the MOB, they are hell bent on extracting revenue by any means – draconian, confiscatory and unconstitutional. The fact that they’re using the BSA FBAR (as a threat or in actuality ) as a lever even in the absence of any possible US tax assessed or owed, via means totally disproportionate to the US tax obligation they state that we are all liable for – based only on non-reporting of our entirely legal, local, non-US generated and held assets (post-tax or tax exempt), and in the absence of any economic or other US connection other than parentage, birthplace, expired residence or other long past US status shows that the IRS and Treasury are like MOB ‘enforcers’ trying to collect on ‘protection money’ (ex. the argument that we fund the US military to protect us) – imaginary debts they say we owe them. The demand that we must only use a US passport to travel in, out and over the US – despite our passport from the country we live in and are citizens of (ex. Canada) is another means to entrap us and control our movement and restrict our autonomy. Thuggish tactics, as is holding our minor and disabled adult children as tax hostages too.
These tactics and strategy are no doubt well documented in talks and memos within the IRS and Treasury. There must be communications, reports and other written records of the approaches they have chosen to take over time – and their adjustments to it over the last two years in reaction to renunciations, bad press, Flaherty’s initial very public advocacy, the Taxpayer Advocates reports to Congress, and other pressures that resulted in the December 2011 factsheet, and the Streamlined process, and the behind the curtain moves within OVD to shift out some of those ‘minnows’ and others who came forward to try and be compliant but who are not the US residents deliberately and willfully evading taxes.
Our unwanted US citizenship or expired greencard is the ring that binds us all, and the renunciation/relinquishment and exit process is the way to throw it back into the fires of Mount Doom in Mordor.
@ozteddies
What you said 🙂
Hello everyone,
Does anyone know to what extent the US authorities fine for late FBAR declarations ? Also, do they use any degree in common sense in differentiating between “genuine” Americans stashing money abroad or “accidental” Americans who have spent all of their adult life outside of the ÙS of A, getting on with their normal lives ? Or do they just pig-headedly consider an American in America exactly the same an an “American” in Canada (or elsewhere) ?
Thanks for any input !
David, so far, I’ve only heard of FBAR penalties being applied to ODVI/P participants or stateside tax cheats. Other than that, your guess is as good as mine and that of anyone else. Yet, here’s the latest on the topic of late filings:
Finally! I’ve been trying to get an answer to the question of whether or not the 6 years of FBARs required for the Streamlined Procedures and the questions in the required Questionnaire changed from 2006 to 2011 as announced in Sep 2012, to 2007 to 2012 on January 1, 2013, and therefore 2008 to 2013 on January 1, 2014.
The link that SwissPony quotes indicates this is the case. It would seem obvious that the 6 years should roll along, but since what can one apply logic to anything to do with US rules for citizens abroad?
The reason I don’t take this for granted is that although the instructions say “FBARs for the last 6 years”, questions 5 and 6 of the Streamlined Filing Compliance Procedures for Non-Resident, Non-Filer Taxpayers Questionnaire that is online today are still hard-wired referring to 2006. Shouldn’t this be 2007 since January 1, 2013?
http://www.irs.gov/file_source/pub/irs-utl/non-resident_questionnaire.pdf
@David –
FWIW I filed five years of back FBARs from Canada – the only peep I heard from Detroit was a request for a reasonable-cause letter, which I sent them, and never heard from them again.
The CRA (Canadian revenue agency) doesn’t have the authority to collect US penalties under the US-Canadian tax treaty in any case.
Just a thought? Is renouncing because of fear of FBAR/FATCA compliance considered duress under the law? Could that be cause to vacate a CLN?
USCIS writes about duress here:
http://www.uscis.gov/ilink/docView/SLB/HTML/SLB/0-0-0-1/0-0-0-45077/0-0-0-51063.html
Specifically:
b) Expatriation must be voluntary. (1) Definition of voluntary expatriation . Expatriation, whether it occurs under accepted legal principles in the absence of statute or treaty, 3 or as the result of statute or treaty always involves “voluntary” action, 4/ unconstrained and deliberate in nature. 5/ Prior to the decision in Afroyim v. Rusk, 6/ expatriation was said to be voluntary when the performance standing alone could cause nationality loss under viewpoints which prevailed prior to that decision. However, while voluntary performance of an expatriative act continues to be the first essential of every expatriation, standing alone it can no longer be regarded as resulting in nationality loss unless the test laid down in Afroyim [see (d)(2), infra] has been met.
(2) Duress as a defense . Since expatriation must be voluntary, the courts have given effect to the defense of duress 8/ and, upon such basis, have relieved many citizens from a loss of nationality. Duress has precluded expatriation by foreign naturalization, 9/ foreign military service, 10/ foreign governmental employment, 11/ foreign voting, 12/ citizenship renunciation, 13/ and foreign oath of allegiance. 14/ Obviously, where duress precludes expatriation, application of the Afroyim principle [see (d)(2), infra] becomes unnecessary.
The means of exercising duress is not limited to guns, clubs, physical threats, 15/ imprisonment, 16/ or the like, but may include a threat of economic deprivation, if the ability to secure the necessities of life is adversely affected thereby. Expatriation through foreign governmental employment has been avoided under such circumstances, 17/ as has loss of nationality premised upon voting in foreign election. 18/
Under certain conditions, the threat or fear of statelessness may constitute duress and a defense to expatriation based upon foreign naturalization. Thus, where a naturalized citizen of the United States on her own initiative applied for and was granted naturalization in a foreign state, such application having been made solely because such citizen wished to avoid becoming stateless, a condition she believed was imminent and would prevail solely because she previously had been informed by an American consul ar official that her continued residence in the foreign state would expatriate her under former section 353, 19/ information which later proved to be erroneous be reason of the decision in Schneider v. Rusk, 20/ the Service regarded the foreign naturalization as involuntary and nonexpatriatory. For the effect of official misinformation as to citizenship loss under section 494(a), (b), or (c), Nationality Act of 1940, consult INTERP 352.1(b)(2). ( Revised )
Again, military service in the armed forces of foreign states entered upon prior to January 13, 1941, on which date such action first became a statutory ground of expatriation, remained nonexpatriative when continued beyond such date, provided the person concerned was merely fulfilling the unavoidable obligation of his original enlistment. Under such circumstances, the continued service was and is deemed involuntary. 21/
@Somewhere,
Duress is the reason for my valued CLN. I can think of no reason I would vacate my CLN.
@David, I’ve not heard of anyone under Streamlined being fined. What my tax preparer told me was that the advantage of streamlined was that is allows faster processing and reduces the cost of compliance. The downside being that it doesn’t provide protection from possible criminal prosection, depending on individual circumstances. If you want to use the OVDP to obtain clearance from the IRS Criminal Investigation Division you can, but be aware that participants are required to pay a mandatory penalty whille those using streamlined may avoid the penalty when no taxes are owed. If you use streamlined then you can’t later use OVDP.
@WhatIAm, I just sent FBAR’s for 2006 to 2011 to Detroit and the 2012 off to Austin so yes, 6 years of back filing plus this year’s and then I’ll file the bit of 2013 I need to do next year. That’s what my tax preparer said was needed so that’s what I’ve filed.
@Medea Fleecestealer
Would your tax preparer agree that a person entering the Streamlined Procedure in October 2012 file 6 years of FABRs from 2007 to 2012? (all to Austin, not Detroit!)
Damn, I mixed them up again! Yes, 2006 to 2011 went to Austin with the 2012 one and questionnaire going to Detroit. That sounds right WhatAmI (damn again, got your name wrong too, sorry, my brain obviously isn’t working well today). I renounced in March this year so fell within this year’s FBAR filing requirements, but now that it’s moved over filing from 2007 to 2012 is logical.