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
Edit ; I guess I should have blockquoted…(not used to doing that) – testing
Dianne you said:
@A broken man on a Halifax pier
I think the passport application DECLARATION that you quote is from the current forms. To me, it looks simply like an oath that you’ve filled out the form truthfully, not an oath of allegiance to Canada itself.
I think others have posted that the form actually did contain some sort of oath to Canada back in the 60’s and 70’s. It would be great, if true, to get a copy of this oath.
I can’t help thinking, since dual-citizenship was not legal in Canada until 1977 and not legal in the US until 1986, and we have all been Canadian citizens since birth or the 60’s and resident in Canada, it should be a done deal that we deserve CLNs back-dated to those times. I’ve lost track of what actual point of law could deny it? On what basis are they denying the requests for back-dating CLNs?
@WhatAmI – The issue, perversely, is what a dual citizen from birth, born in Canada, can use as an expatriating act, having never been patriated in the first place.
The whole issue is silly, but solving it is the key to a simpler life for a lot of people. “I solemnly declare that I am a Canadian citizen” seems pretty straightforward as “an affirmation or other formal declaration of
allegiance to a foreign state,” which allows for a lot of possibilities.
@Whatami
Changes to Canada’s Citizenship Act in 2009 allows certain children of Canadian citizens abroad to become Canadian citizens at birth retroactively, that’s why you can’t find any information on registering Canadian births abroad.
I naturalized as a Canadian in 1996, but in 2009 I was deemed a Canadian at birth 🙂
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/rules_2009.asp
@whatAmI,
I don’t believe that dual citizenship was illegal in the US prior to 1986, I believe they ‘frowned upon’ it. Until that time, they also assumed that anyone naturalizing in another country, did so with the INTENT to RELINQUISH their US citizenship.
It was against the law in Canada, prior to 1977 and in fact when I naturalized in Canada in 1972, part of the oath was a renunciatory oath giving up allegiance to another, foreign sovereign or state. That was the law of Canada. The U.S. will tell you, they don’t recognize that law as their law.
The Hindu Business Line: Who wants to give up US citizenship?
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/features/taxation-and-accounts/who-wants-to-give-up-us-citizenship/article4912283.ece
@WhatAmI
The oath of Fidelity and Secrecy that I signed goes like this: I do solemnly swear that I will faithfully, truly and to the best of my judgement, skill and ability execute and perform the duties required of me as an employee of the Government of Canada at the Atomic Energy of Canada Limited. I am hoping to get a letter from my M.P. confirming that the A.E.C.L. was considered an arm of the federal government when I worked there in the 1970’s. What do you think?
@WhatAmI
In terms of losing my USC – both of my parents always told me I would lose it when I was an adult if I did not actively do something to retain it. I just assumed that I lost it years ago. I cannot find out further details now because my father is deceased and my mother’s memory is not good.
Dual nationality did exist and was legal. Section 350 of the INA of 1952 was about “Dual Nationals”. A dual national such as myself who lived continuously in a foreign state for three year years after age 22 lost US citizenship. This was repealed October 10, 1978. If you turned 25 before that date you probably lost US citizenship on your 25th birthday. Happy Birthday!
@Dianne,
I can only guess about the oath business, and my guess is that it might not count much towards performing a relinquishing act. The US wording for loss of citizenship is:
Again, yours sounds to me like an oath to work hard, not an oath of allegiance to the political body of the government (the government itself).
It still sounds to me like your parents were quoting the INA 350 rules. Have you read up this? They are detailed in the document that repealed them on Oct 10, 1978 (USCODE-2010-title8-chap12-subchapIII-partIII.pdf), and appendix C in the FAM (120532.pdf). The age at which this happened is hard to pin down. Sometimes it seems as early as 18, sometimes not until 3 years after your 22 birthday, etc.
My sister is your age. I’m 3 years older. As far as I can see at the moment we are all in the exact same situation.
@TrueNorth
Did you get a back-dated CLN based on INA 350?
I turned 25 three months after Oct 10, 1978. I wonder if they’ll notice?
INA 349 is similar to INA 350, except it seems to be for people who naturalized in the foreign country rather than born as a dual-national as in INA 350.
Very interesting and recent article by Kevyn Nightingale about the tax implications and issues surrounding the expatriation of ‘US taxable persons’ in Canada, political context, Canada/US tax treaty, double taxation, conflict between the two systems, covered expatriate category, etc.
Good to give to our MPs. Could use more full discussion of the FBAR – in terms of the draconian penalty structure, confiscatory nature, and the US arrogance demonstrated in the overbroad category of accounts to be reported. The article did not clarify that this includes the accounts of Canadian employers, and Canadian voluntary organizations where US person with the FBAR burden is merely in possession of a co-signatory power without any possible financial interest, or where the signatory power was only contingent. It does however touch on the refusal of the CRA to assist in collection of the FBAR, and on whether the FBAR is part of the certification of 5 years of compliance.
http://ca.linkedin.com/pub/kevyn-nightingale/0/b32/510
” Expatriation: The American’s Tax Experience in Canada
Canadian Tax Foundation (Canadian Tax Journal vol 61 #1)
May 1, 2013
Authors: Kevyn Nightingale, Dave Turchen
This article catalogues the tax challenges faced by US citizens living in Canada – the onerous filing requirements and the limitations on their ability to utilize normal Canadian tax planning techniques.
As a result, many Americans are choosing to renounce US citizenship. The article then discusses the tax implications of that decision. This is a peer-reviewed article.
The Article is posted under “experience”, above. While usage is free, any publication of the article must cite the Canadian Tax Foundation as publisher (see the CTF website or contact me for details). less”
@Badger
Thanks for posting the Kevyn Nightingale article, it looks like it will be a good one. I believe it’s deserving of its own post from the little I’ve read so far.
I turned 25 after October 10, 1978 so this did not apply to me. I am sure that they would be looking at all the dates very carefully. Section 350 is for a persons that became both a US citizen and a Canadian citizen at birth. There are other sections that cover other situations. I think some of these sections were on shaky ground even before they were repealed and would not be enforced by anyone wanting citizenship. If you were aware of the law prior to 1978, could have moved back to the US, but voluntarily continued to live outside the US knowing your US citizenship would be lost. Well then I think you should get a back dated CLN.
@TrueNorth
Where can we find a summary of your actions to get a CLN…?
Obviously, you didn’t get impacted by the Oct 10, 1978 ruling yet you turned 25 after that date…which means the rule was nullified by something you did…
Can you enlighten us?
I had the rules explained to me in general when I was a teenager by my parents. I don’t know now where my parents got the information. In 2011 I found both the US and Canadian laws on the internet and started to look for a way out. Two of the things I remember being told was not returning to live in the US and voting in a Canadian election would cause me to lose US citizenship. Both were true or at least had been true once. In the end nothing applied in my case and I ended up having to renounce.
@Benedict I’m not sure I answered your question. Had I turned 25 before October 10, 1978 section 350 would have applied to me. Section 350 and I think some other sections were repealed in 1978, so that section was no longer in existence when I turned 25. Just to complicate things section 350 does not actually say 25 years old, it says living three years continuously in the country of your other citizenship after 22 years of age.
Last comment should have said after 22 years of age. How do I edit?
Don’t know if anyone can make use of this, or if it is useful at all, but I was reading an article on NBC yesterday about the supposed death by papercuts of the Immigration Reform Bill down there. Apparently, a sticking point is whether currently undocumented should be allowed to follow the path to citizenship or can they just be made some sort of permanent, permanent residents.
Blah, blah, blah, mostly. But it pointed out that while Congress can, and has, changed the requirements and whatnot about who can and cannot be a citizen and why, it noted that the Constitution very narrowly defined who is a citizen – those born there or naturalized. There is no constitutional basis for anyone born overseas to be a citizen. The constitution simply does not permit it.
http://nbcpolitics.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/07/12/19437936-compromise-or-second-class-status-legalization-vs-citizenship?lite
In short the US Congress only has jurisdiction over immigration and the rules surrounding it. Period.
@TrueNorth
Thanks for the responses…actually the Oct 10, 1978 ruling is contradictory in itself…
It appears to cancel the “automatic loss by age 25” for dual citizens at birth…However, it also says:
f. Persons who had acquired U.S. or foreign nationality by naturalization as defined in Section 101(a)(23) INA were not subject to this provision.
and if one goes to Section 101(a)(23) it says:
(23) The term “naturalization” means the conferring of nationality of a state upon a person after birth, by any means whatsoever.
So, it appears to say that the “act of naturalization after birth” is not impacted by the Oct 10, 1978 reversal…so in theory – anyone who naturalized after birth “by any means whatsoever”
(no wonder people get confused)
@TrueNorth
I believe the issue of voting and loss of USC was scrapped in 1961.
Briefly, my details: Born to Canadian parents in the US in 1954, moved back to Canada in 1966 at 12 years old. Got a Certificate of Registration of Birth Abroad shortly after. The way my mother always told the story was that when we (my sister and I) would have US citizenship until we were 18 or maybe 21. When I was over 18 but I can’t remember exactly when, I went to the US consulate in Calgary to make sure the US citizenship expired automatically or fill out forms to “make it go away” if necessary. I was told dual-citizenship didn’t officially exist, that I was not a USC, that I was Canadian, and escorted out the door.
I can only guess, but I think the consulate and whoever told my mother the rules both had INA 350 in mind.
And here I am 40 years later. I’ve never done anything related to having USC since I was 12 and moved back here.
I’m hoping the above gets me a back-dated CLN, although as I said, I turned 25 three months after Oct 10, 1978.
Did you actually discuss your options with the consulate, or did do your own research and go straight to the renunciation route? When were you born?
@Benedict Arnold be me
I still don’t see the conflict. INA 350 was specifically for dual-citizens at birth. The point “f” that you quote simply reiterates that it did not apply to duals who naturalized in the foreign country after birth.
INA 350 required one to receive the benefits of foreign citizenship to lose USC, plus the 3 years after age 22 requirement.
It applied to me (and Dianne), but not you since you naturalized at age 10.
I think the following may apply to you, but I’m not sure I understand it. I’m not sure which INA it is part of (I thought INA 349), and I can’t tell if or when it was repealed. I just wanted to make sure you’vr seen it. It is in the doc USCODE-2010-title8-chap12-subchapIII-partIII.pdf
@WhatAmI
See that is where I get confused…
What constitutes a Dual Citizen at birth..?
If my mother was canadian and my father was US..I was born in the USA…then in theory, I was dual at birth…HOWEVER, I did get naturalized as a Canadian at 10…
so the ACT of Naturalization offset the dual at birth?
if that is the case…wouldn’t the act of filing for a certificate of birth abroad constitute an act of Naturalization in a foreign country? (say, as opposed to never bothering to file, but claiming dual citizenship by proving parents were either from 2 countries or in your case from the other country)
I don’t know offhand if you being born in the US with a US father and Cdn mother gets you the designation of being “born abroad”. If it does, then theoretically you could apply for and receive the RBA certificate that Dianne and I have.
I don’t know if that’s a good idea though. I don’t have an expatriating action (besides my going to the consulate in the 70’s to renounce and being told I wasn’t even a USC). You _do_ have an action, your naturalization at age 10. If your mother did it with the intention of relinquishing your USC, does that do it for you? You did not go do the oath between 18 and 18 1/2. I think you maybe also had to live outside the US until age 25 (the quote I gave above), but that was repealed in 1978 when you were only 21 or so. I’m not sure of all this, but you see where I’m going and what needs to be understood?
OK, look at the link the bubblebustin gave above. I think you were made a Cdn since birth in 2009. However, I don’t see that it helps you in any way.
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/citizenship/rules_2009.asp
@Benedict
Sorry, I just quoted to you the same section that you quoted from LadyBug’s letter (your “I almost fell out of my chair post 3 days ago).
You Observation #1 is wrong I think. The quote is to do with INA 349, but it was INA 350, not 349, that was repealed Oct 10 1978. A section “B” of INA 349 was repealed (1986 maybe), but I haven’t found what it was.
So, yes your naturalization at age 10 could be an expatriating act, but didn’t it require the 2 years after age 22 business, which you were too young for?
Still, you have your mother’s intention to lose USC (if it was?), your actions as a Cdn and your inactions as NOT a USC, hopefully amounting to a preponderance?