Self-Documented Relinquishment
The relinquishing act itself causes the citizenship loss. A CLN provides proof of it, but it’s not the only way to prove it.
This thread is a place for people who have self-documented, or who are considering self-documenting, to share information and experiences. Thanks for sharing — your stories will be very helpful to others!
This a very important thread, as the Canadian FATCA IGA allows for a “reasonable explanation” as to why a bank customer may not have a CLN.
“Bubblebustin,
That’s a very important point about the Canada IGA and “reasonable explanation.” I’ll post links here for convenience.
Canada FATCA IGA, Annex I, B.(4)(a)(3) – page 21-22
“A copy of the Account Holder’s Certificate of Loss of
Nationality of the United States or a reasonable explanation thereof:
(a) The reason the Account Holder does not have such a
certificate despite relinquishing U.S. citizenship …”
CRA Guidance on enhanced financial accounts information reporting
“8.32. The CRA’s views of what may be accepted as a reasonable explanation for not having a CLN despite relinquishing U.S. citizenship for purposes of Part XVIII and the Agreement are informed by certain practical realities and how changes in law over time would have influenced reasonable courses of actions taken by individuals.
“8.33 Generally, it is the CRA’s view that an explanation demonstrating a relinquishment of U.S. citizenship (other than by a renunciation before a U.S. consular or diplomatic official) before June 4, 2004, and in accordance with the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act (Title 8 of the U.S. Code) as it existed at the time of relinquishment, is sufficient to demonstrate a reasonable explanation as to why an account holder does not have a CLN. Financial institutions are not expected to be experts in U.S. nationality law; any such explanation accepted by a financial institution is accepted for the purposes of Part XVIII and the Agreement only and is not finally determinative of tax or nationality status.”
Thank you Pacifica777! I’m lazy sometimes 🙂
As far as I’m concerned, the requirement to appear in person at a US consulate which may be hundreds of miles from where you actually live (after waiting weeks or months for an appointment) is a VERY reasonable explanation for not having a CLN. The extortionate $2350 fee they charge for that piece of paper is reasonable explanation #2. I don’t have to ask the US government for permission to not be a US citizen.
Canadian citizens in Canada should not have to prove that they are NOT something in order to have a normal financial life. If someone needs to prove something, it should be the banks and the CRA proving that you are a US person.
The only proof I need (and will ever have) is my certificate of Canadian citizenship.
@maz57, re;
“Canadian citizens in Canada should not have to prove that they are NOT something in order to have a normal financial life.”
And what makes that a continuing concern is that as a Canadian-only now, though I formally relinquished, and have a CLN, I do not think I should have to continue to be ready to prove to any institution or Canadian government body like the CRA that I am NOT in addition something else. That I am a Canadian citizen should be sufficient on Canadian autonomous sovereign soil. Why should I or anyone else potentially have to produce the CLN in Canada at all? If the FATCA IGA stands, as my birthplace is immutable, it will forever prove a burden to me, and at my death, potentially to my Canadian family.
The FATCA IGA means that despite having jumped through all the costly US compliance hoops, under the FATCA IGA, as one of the prime identified US ‘indicia’ my birthplace makes me a second class Canadian – despite no longer being a dual.
I resent the possibility that I might be asked to produce the CLN or give any kind of explanation to anyone at all. It is simply not anyone else’s business what my national origin or birthplace was.
It will be interesting to see if there are objections and outcry from other Canadians who have no US birthplace to identifying or providing documentation testifying to the non-Canadian country of their birth under the terms of the OECD CRS as expected to be implemented by Canada (government statement re CRS in general expected to be issued today?).
And of course, as @Bubblebustin has pointed out, those UStaxable person duals born in Canada, but US citizens via parentage will not be outed by birthplace. So there remains an essential inequity in application. An inequity which I am very glad will let some fly undetected (the more the better), but which nevertheless demonstrates a big flaw in FATCA’s application.
@badger – for what it’s worth, CRS as implemented by the UK doesn’t treat birthplace as any kind of “indicia” to be searched for in due diligence procedures. Birthplace is reported, but that’s for matching/identification purposes. It’s not something that has to be “cured”, as with FATCA. If I’d been born in France, for instance, my accounts wouldn’t be reportable to France unless I was still tax-resident in France as well as in the UK.
With a tip of the hat to George, it would be more accurate to describe my present status as an “undocumented self-relinquishment”. Now the US not only has their problem of “undocumented immigrants”, they have managed to create a brand new category…”undocumented emigrants”.
Too bad I can’t give that unwanted US citizenship to someone who could really use it. That would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people but it’ll never happen because it makes too much sense.
If a relinquishment occurred but the person doesn’t get a CLN, I’d say the person is undocumented by the US government; but that the person is documented in that they could still provide documentary proof (such as naturalisation certificate) in situation such as if a bank, in the context of “reasonable explanation,” requires proof to back up their word that their relinquishing act occurred.
@Pacifica. I agree, but if a bank asks “the question” I’d be more inclined to toss it right back in their face. None of us should allow the banks to get away with this crap.
I’d point out that the IGA says “reasonable explanation” and nothing more. I’d also point out that if they don’t accept my reasonable explanation, then its easy enough to find a bank which does. I’m tired of being second class. We’ve all tried being nice and it doesn’t work. Not with the US government, not with the banks, and not with our own government.
@ Maz,
I agree with you too. I was just commenting on the concept of documentation as proof, not favouring a particular course of action. The gist of your comment was going through my mind as well, thinking how, like so much of this, it comes down to each handling the situation as works best for them, there being advantages and disadvantages to various actions and varying circumstances.
“Too bad I can’t give that unwanted US citizenship to someone who could really use it.”
Paging Mr. McBean:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sneetches_and_Other_Stories
I think it’s important to note that the “Self documented” relinquishment is perfectly legal. There is NOT and has NEVER been a requirement, under the Immigration and Nationality Act of notification of the relinquishing act. The Immigration and Nationality Act (along with the 14th amendment) is what defines U.S. citizenship. The Internal Revenue Code does NOT define citizenship. It simply states that under certain circumstances you will be treated as a U.S. citizen, whether you are or not a citizen under the Immigration and Nationality Act.
So, what are those circumstances? Since June 16, 2008 the Internal Revenue Code requires a CLN (“Certificate of Loss of Nationality”) only to be cease to be treated as a “U.S. citizen”: for tax purposes. This law did NOT take effect until 2008. This is S. 877A of the Internal Revenue Code and S. 7701(a)(50) of the Internal Revenue Code.
If you hear from some lawyer or accountant that you are a U.S. citizen until you receive a CLN, you should get another legal opinion.
@Maz57, “Canadian citizens in Canada should not have to prove that they are NOT something in order to have a normal financial life.”
Simple but so profound.
The USA through the FATCA IGA has overturned eighty years of SETTLED international law, that being the master nationality rule.
Yes, you are correct when you open a bank account…once you answer YES to resident in Canada and YES to Citizen of Canada, that should be it.
@USCA
“Since June 16, 2008 the Internal Revenue Code requires a CLN (“Certificate of Loss of Nationality”) only to be cease to be treated as a “U.S. citizen”: for tax purposes.”
So it’s not “Citizen” based Taxation, but “Document” (or lack thereof) based Taxation – at least for those who’ve relinquished as of June 16, 2008.
@George
And what about those who can’t prove they aren’t a US citizen, such as those children born on non-US soil who are “entitled” to US citizenship through one or more parent?
A trip down to the US consulate may just get them a US passport.
What about those of us who received Canadian citizen ship after 2004 but before 2008? With no paper CLN?
New words from Phil Hodgen:
For someone who claims to have voluntarily relinquished U.S. citizenship before June 16, 2008 — and never received a Certificate of Loss of Nationality — there is a profound dilemma:
Read the rest at
http://us2.campaign-archive2.com/?u=b343af01b0c3e75921e909c4d&id=00d9286e8a&e=fcf5c985d1
@USXCanada, thank you for pointing this out as all information is indeed helpful.
But let me say one very important thing. At one time this DID bother me but then sanity did prevail with me personally. To be blunt, I have personally faced things far worse in life, far worse than ANYTHING a compliance condor can produce. When you have already been to hell and back, all else is mild…….there is nothing left that can be thrown at me. I am done, I have relinquished a decade ago, the US Government acknowledged in writing that I was no longer a USC, I do not care anymore about CLNs, my sole goal in life now is for my Government to stop treating similar situated persons as 2nd class citizens.
And I thank Ginny and Gwen who helped me jump off the edge to realize that having already in my prior life already been to hell, none of this really matters.
From the article;
“Do not apply for a Certificate of Loss of Nationality now. Wait for clarity from the U.S. government. If sanity prevails and IRC §877A(g)(4)(B) is rewritten to make the tax definition of relinquishment of citizenship coincide with the Immigration and Nationality Act’s definition, then you are safe. Apply for the Certificate of Loss of Nationality and you are home free. If, on the other hand, sanity fails to triumph, find some other avenue to document the fact that you are no longer a U.S. citizen, with an effective date pre-dating 2008.”
@George
I am done, I have relinquished a decade ago, the US Government acknowledged in writing that I was no longer a USC, I do not care anymore about CLNs, my sole goal in life now is for my Government to stop treating similar situated persons as 2nd class citizens.
And I thank Ginny and Gwen who helped me jump off the edge to realize that having already in my prior life already been to hell, none of this really matters.
+++
That is exactly what Gwen and I are dedicated to doing. We expect every government, other than the USG, to treat its citizens and permanent residents as citizens of their own country and as equal to the others.
Apparently that is too complicated for the USG to comprehend.
Like you and others,none of this really matters. It is true that we have the deepest stain, if you will, having been born there. But it enrages me to contemplate the many others who got a different US tattoo based on where their parents were born or merely having had a GC for a limited time.
Then the additional complexity as Phil Hodgen points out between being a US tax person v. how citizenship is defined elsewhere in US law merely adds another bizarre layer, which to me, demands non compliance.
Pick a lane, USG. Gwen and I have picked ours. Never in my life did I ever contemplate suing my own government. ( Note: for those of you who have reported how emotionally difficult it was for you to renounce your US citizenship, I am understanding that a little better than I used to.) Never did I think this is how I would be spending my senior years. It gives me no sense of pride that I have to do this. I love and appreciate being a Canadian. But there comes a time when one has to look at injustice and take a stand for yourself and others. When I realized this was never going to morph into a class action suit, that was when I realized what I had to do. Like you George, Gwen and I realized none of this mattered to us personally but it was a life changer for many others. When you sit and contemplate that thought for a few days, you come to realize that there is a bigger cause ( access to justice) than just your own situation.
I might have busy days with this litigation process; I might even question my sanity at times; I might prefer not to have the occasional interference of the press in my life and disclosure of my personal information filed for all to see in court documents, but I have not regretted standing up for our rights.
Gwen and I feel privileged to do so as I have stated before. I cannot contemplate a day when I will ever forget the impact of the support we have received from so many.
While Gwen and I have received many kind gracious remarks-though I do also get a kick out of our detractors calling us unbelievable names-, it is all of you who we thank for this life changing experience.
For many of you it has been devastating. For Gwen and me, not so much. I can’t think of any other circumstance where I might have come across a person of her fine quality and integrity. She set the template, and I followed her. Not a hard decision at all.
@Maz57 “Too bad I can’t give that unwanted US citizenship to someone who could really use it. That would solve a lot of problems for a lot of people but it’ll never happen because it makes too much sense.”
I would NEVER wish this nor transfer ownership of such a horrible status to ANYONE.
I know you mean something else, I just completely balked at the thought! They are “babes in the woods” with regards to shifting to the USA w/o knowing the implications if they then decide to leave it.