The January 6, 2026 anniversary and a summary of this post:
January 6, 2026 marks the three year anniversary of the State Department promise to U.S. citizens. Specifically, the promise was to lower the fee to issue a CLN from $2350 to $450. It is now three years later and the fee reduction has not been achieved. I am not suggesting that the fee will never be lowered. Maybe the fee will be lowered. The process of lowering the fee is still “in the system”. As of late December 2025, RIN 1400-AF61, titled “Schedule of Fees for Consular Services–Administrative Processing of Request for Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN) Fee,” was in the Final Rule stage. This suggests that the fee reduction WILL become a reality. Yet, the failure to have lowered the fee suggests evidence of a continuing animus and indifference toward Americans abroad and certainly strengthens the arguments for renunciation.
On October 2, 2023 the State Department began the rule making process as described in the Federal Register.
The “rulemaking” process generated more than 800 comments . Generally the comments emphasized that the fee to issue a CLN was NOT the dominant problem. Rather the problem was the need for Americans abroad to renounce at all. Comment after comment linked renunciation to the difficulties of complying with US citizenship taxation and FATCA.
The claim that Americans abroad are being forced to renounce because of U.S. citizenship taxation and FATCA raises the question of whether these circumstances violate the constitutional principle in Afroyim v. Rusk. The teaching of Afroyim is that Congress is prohibited from engaging in conduct that results in the “forcible destruction of citizenship”. It is clear that the specific rules of U.S. citizenship taxation do force some (but not all) people to renounce. At the very least, the circumstance of U.S. citizenship, makes it unreasonably difficult for Americans abroad to live freely outside the United States.
Is the difficulty citizenship taxation per se or the specific rules of U.S. citizenship taxation?
Could citizenship taxation be retained but be changed into a method of taxation that is more like “Eritrean citizenship taxation” – only an excise tax or possibly a passport renewal fee? Perhaps the United States could look to “Eritrea” for an acceptable means to tax Americans abroad.
Anecdotal evidence makes clear that some people have delayed renouncing U.S. citizenship in the hopes that the fee for issuing the CLN will be reduced. Would a fee reduction trigger a stampede to renounce?
Those who do NOT wish to read further should (at the very least) read the comments from Americans abroad about why they are renouncing U.S. citizenship.
For those who wish to read further …
The complete post is lengthy, comprehensive and organized into the following parts:
Part I – Introduction and purpose
Part II: “Rulemaking” and the comments it generated
Part III: “Rulemaking” and the comments it generated
Part IV – The $2350 fee is the first of three “Exit Taxes”
Part V – The “comments” to the notice and what those comments suggest
Part VI – U.S. “citizenship taxation”, Afroyim and the “forcible destruction of citizenship”
Part VII – Why does the United States continue to abuse U.S. citizens abroad?
Appendix A – AI generated podcast summarizing the “notice” to reduce the fee for a CLN
Appendix B – Two recent podcasts discussing Afroyim v. Rusk


Barbara raises an important question. How do we know what arguments Homelanders might respond to? We need (I think) to understand what is going inside the head of a Homelander. Why would a Homelander believe that those who live outside the United States should be subjected to U.S. taxation as though they live in the United States?
Therefore, the purpose of this post is to solicit your comments on the question of:
Why exactly do many (but NOT all) Homelanders believe that the U.S. should impose taxes on those who don’t live in the United States? What is their world view? What are the assumptions they are working with? Why do they believe that equality means that everybody should be subjected to the same rules?
There is often a difference between what people way and what their real motivation is
The question is NOT what they say. The question is why do they say what they say! In other words, what is their motivation? What is the “hidden issue” that they are not articulating?
Some possible suggestions …
– as citizens we all have an equal responsibility to support the U.S. government no matter where we live
– taxation is a punishment. Why should someone be able to escape punishment by leaving the country?
– what the f…? You think you are going to leave the USA and NOT pay any taxes? (In other words, I have the distinct impression that many Homelenaders don’t realize that Americans abroad pay higher taxes than they do, which is why you are generally better off with tax preparers in your country of residence)
My point is that:
In order to educate Homelanders and to address their arguments/responses we need to understand why they think/feel the way they do.
So, could you please comment on what is the motivation for Homelanders (those that do) to support the imposition of taxation on people who don’t live in the United States. Although, I am primarily interested in the thinking of “Everyday Homelanders”, you might find the following CBC Interview of Michael Kirsch interesting:
The interview referenced in the above tweet was the subject of a separate post on the Isaac Brock Society. See the comments as well.
Thanks very much.