If you arrive here through an old link, please click here for the Current Thread.
Wonder what really happens at the consulates? Find out in the Isaac Brock Society’s Consulate Report Directory, currently 274 pages of first-hand accounts of renunciation/relinquishment appointments, arranged by consulate location, along with links to further information and the required Dept of State forms.
Reports are updated as consulate visit stories are posted on the website.
You can post here or elsewhere on the site (we’ll keep an eye out for them). Some comments may be excerpted or condensed slightly in the consulate reports. The original posts and comments remain on their threads are not edited.
Thanks to everyone for sharing your experiences…and keep ’em coming! It’s a new experience for everyone and your information is really helpful.
To change or delete your report in the Directory, you can post the change as a comment on this thread or e-mail Pacifica@isaacbrocksociety.ca
Click here for the Consulate Report Directory
2013.02.12. As of today, this discussion now continues at Part 2. Please click here to go to Consulate Report Directory (Brockers describe their Consulate Meetings) Part 2.
I recently posted my experience with renunciation at the Consulate in Marseille, France. I decided on renunciation of my US citizenship because I was refused opening an account with a brokerage firm in Belgium even though I hold dual nationality (Belgian & American).
Although I have not yet received the CLN I was nevertheless able to open the account simply by providing proof ( copy of doc DS 4080 with the Consulate seal and signature and copy of the receipt for payment of the 450 $) of the request to renounce. I never expected this since it is clearly stated on doc DS 4080 “renunciation…is effective only upon approval by the US Dept. of State..”. Sometimes it pays to try. An example of practical business approach vs. bureaucracy!
@Dunja Very useful tip.
@ To whomever it might concern. One of the reasons I’ve encouraged several people who’ve gone forward with relinquishment CLNs in Canada to attach a sworn affidavit to their 4079, and to keep a second notarized copy in their safe deposit box, is to have something to show to their bank or investment broker if FATCA kicks in before they get their CLN.
Canadian consulates aren’t giving people copies of the oaths they signed AFAIK, either 4079 or 4080, and relinquishers don’t pay $450 hence no receipt. However form 4079 gives you an option to attach a statement about why you’re relinquishing (or renouncing, for that matter). A sworn affidavit, clearly addressed to whom it may concern at the US State Department, and laying out your case for relinquishment and ending the affidavit for a request for a CLN dated from your expatriating act, gives you something to shove down your banker’s or broker’s throat if they start making FATCA noises. And you can honestly swear under oath that the document you show is a true copy of what you attached to a form 4079 at a consular interview. In case they want to argue with you. Essentially you’re creating your own receipt, and their own form gives you the right to do this. Just word it carefully and maybe get a second opinion on the wording and structure, ideally from a knowledgeable lawyer, before getting three notarized copies made — one for the consulate, one for your safe deposit box, and one to keep handy at home in case you need it.
At the border, the US border guards will have access to the fact of your CLN application on their computers. But bankers and brokers don’t have that access, so you need to create your own “receipt.”
Hasn’t proved necessary in my wife’s case now she has her CLN, but the affidavit wasn’t a stumbling block at the interview and might even have helped convince the consular officer and higher ups of her sincerity and intent to relinquish, who knows? It sure didn’t hurt (she got her CLN in 4.5 months, though who knows why hers came faster than most in Canada), and it didn’t cost much. Well worth the investment IMO.
@schubert1975
That’s excellent advice — and we partially followed it for my wife’s relinquishment process. But the Vancouver consulate didn’t want the statutory declaration, and at the time my wife decided not to force the issue (for fear of a negative and unproductive backlash from a snivelling bureaucrat, I guess).
I think it will still be useful for the bank, if they start asking questions before the CLN arrives. If nothing else, I suspect the bank’s lawyers will advise them not to take any FATCA action on any account until they are 100% sure the account holder is a “US person.”
A lawyer I talked to some months ago (and who you’ll see quoted in my about-to-be published FATCA article) said the absolute worst thing an FFI can do is declare someone a US person, send off a report to the IRS, and then discover that the account holder is in fact not a US person. That’s when the lawsuits fly.
One of my credit union contacts told me in June that he thought September would be a pivotal month on this — that if the Jan. 1, 2013 date is to have any meaning then a few decisions must be made by the end of September. With only a few days to go, the silence from Ottawa is ominous. Maybe I’ll make a couple calls …
DW
@Arrow and anyone in Vancouver
On the subject of “snivelling bureaucrats,” we’ve had a number of reports of those at the Ottawa embassy, which is why we’ve been encouraging people here to go to Toronto or Montreal. Unfortunately I’ve recently heard a couple of things through the grapevine which, coupled with the rather stark contrasts in the relinq/renounce chart on this website, leads me to suspect that the Vancouver consulate may have more than its fair share of those life forms and that maybe Calgary might be a better venue for folks who can manage the time and cost to go there instead. I hope I’m wrong, but I’m beginning to fear I’m right. Keep your ears to the ground, folks.
*Arrow and Schubert
The problem as I see it is the only way this can get through Ottawa is through some type of omnibus legislation. In fact the US is encouraging countries not Canada specifically to deal with this basically by ramming it through “omnibus” style. However, in Canada the Conservatives are already in a bit of trouble with omnibus legislation and right now my sense is that “FATCA” and “Omnibus” are two live wires that no one wants to cross. “If” and this is only an if the Conservatives attempt to get this through on an omnibus bill then the NDP should basically shut down parliament(i.e. endless amendments, all night and all day sessions, basically what happened in the spring ten times worse). The problems is the Conservatives like to use strong arm tactics for their own agenda not Obama’s agenda on other hand everyone in the banking industry seems to think the Conservatives must do whatever is necessary to in order avoid all out war between the Canadian government and the IRS.
@Tim. My further sense is that right now I don’t think anyone on either side of the border wants to rock any boats or make any big sea changes until after the November election. I’ve never worked in the US federal government (except as a student trainee for a couple of summers in another lifetime, but nowhere near DC), but on the Canadian side where I have, nobody does anything major or different in the middle of a federal election campaign if they value their federal career much. I’d be surprised if things are that different in DC, maybe they are maybe not. And on this side of the border, why not wait and see what does or doesn’t happen, is the likely mood in Ottawa.
Not at all clear to me that Romney would change anything re FATCA, nor for that matter that with what seem to be terminal foot-in-mouth problems Romney has any real chance of winning at this point. (E.g., let’s write off 47% of the country … ooooh, good PR move sir …) But I don’t think anyone believes there is any love lost between Harper and crowd and Obama and crowd, so I don’t think our federal governing politicians are in any mood to hand Obama a victory on a platter before the election as a big favour. As for what happens after November, who knows? I don’t.
But that’s all speculation on my part. Politics and politicians never cease to stun and amaze me, unfortunately not always in good ways. “We live in interesting times.”
“Unfortunately I’ve recently heard a couple of things through the
grapevine which, coupled with the rather stark contrasts in the
relinq/renounce chart on this website, leads me to suspect that the
Vancouver consulate may have more than its fair share of those life
forms.” *
Schubert1975:
To be fair, they weren’t snivelling, they were actually very good and very helpful — but when you first front up to the counter and start the process, you don’t really know how it’s going to play out — so your guard is always up.
*One of the more interesting personal aspects of this whole thing is the current IRS Commissioner is leaving his job no matter who becomes president effective November 21 which just happens to be the Wednesday before American Thanksgiving. In large organizations they tend to be two types of bosses in these circumstances. One type hangs on to the bitter end and other other type checks out weeks prior.
Just popping in briefly to say there were some good analogies offered up here today regarding US citizenship (e.g. cancer from Petros and lead weight from Badger). Brockers really do rock as they provide valuable information, well reasoned advice, unwavering support for each other and good analogies too. I haven’t anything to offer except that I was relieved to read at Sandbox that Tiger is okay, despite some kind of procedural snafu at the consulate. (Several days of silence made me wonder if something had gone wrong.) Anyway I’m looking forward to her first post-consulate comment which she told Pacifica would be coming soon. It really takes a lot of courage to walk through those imposing consulate doors and I hold my breath for everyone who dares to enter and then I sigh with relief when the deed is done but the best part is when the prized CLN finally arrives. That makes my heart sing.
Petros –
US citizenship for extraterritorials as a cancer to be excised, leaving the unwilling patient pervaded by a numb feeling. An outstanding metaphor.
O say can you cauterize
By the pawn’s surly blight
What so loudly we railed at
At the twilight’s last reaming
Whose broad straps and tight bars
Through the parlous fright
Bore the rompers we botched
Where glances were steaming
And the rookers bad dare
The bums worsting not fair
Gave goof through the plight
That our rag was still bare
O say does that mar dangled banter yet rave
Oer the band of the fee
And the moan of the grave?
@usxcanada Thanks for my afternoon belly laugh!
forgot to add that I think I detect a fellow Walt Kelly/Pogo fan. Except I don’t think even Pogo would have had the guts to take on the words to that song …
@Tiger, one small tad of advice. You are not relinquishing. You have relinquished already. It is important to make sure that you maintain this distinction in your mind. It can make a difference in the Consulate. For example, when Mrs. A mentioned that I would have a second appointment, I said, “Um, excuse me. But I am here to inform you that I committed a relinquishing act with the intention of relinquishing my US citizenship. I don’t need a second appointment for that.” She said, “Oh, right. Of course.”
Also, on the forms which I submitted, we crossed out the word renounce and left only the word “relinquish” etc.
@JustaCanadian,
Thanks so much for your very detailed report! I’ll put it in the directory this evening.
That is really frustrating that they wanted to see your birth certificate since they’d already seen it at the first meeting, also that there was a 14 week delay in between meetings.
The overall impression I’m getting of Vancouver is that the staff is very pleasant to deal with, but that the procedure there is much longer than it should be, compared to elsewhere (although delay between appts had been showing a good improving trend this summer), and prone to glitches and oddities that we are not seeing at the vast majority of consulates, which seem unnecessary and are also causing delays. I’d really like to see them improve on that
But it’s great that you are finished now! You have your receipt, and hopefully you will get your CLN soon too!
schubert1975 – Amusement is good, so is appreciation. My three faves are Calvin & Hobbes, Road Runner, and Uncle Scrooge. You may recall an earlier Pogo-inspired distortion: We have met the enemy and he is U.S.
CLN arrived recently for a March renunciation in Toronto. Had been approved in DC in July, and had apparently been on a slow tour of various in-boxes ever since.
Congratulations, Broken Man! Four months for approval is another sign things are moving in Toronto, finally. Two months or more in in-boxes is another sign the Pony Express has been replaced by the Tortoise Express, or maybe the Cat Express (see my earlier posts about Catbert and my cat Schubert’s approach to paperwork). At least you finally got it.
Congratulations! Great news, Halifax Pier! Thanks for sharing your consulate visit report last winter and I’m very happy for you today.
So very glad your CLN arrived along the slow road to you, broken man on a Halifax pier. Thanks for reporting. Time to put this subject away and get on to the important things — like “building dinosaurs”. Congratulations!!
As many of you know, I had my first Consulate appointment in Vancouver, to report my ‘relinquishment’ from 40 years ago on Sept. 21, 2012. Unfortunately, things did not proceed as I had hoped they would.
It has been mentioned by others that Vancouver requires two appointments. The clerk who first saw me gave as the reason that two appointments were necessary ‘in order that you have the time to reflect’. I pointed out to her that my ‘reflection’ had been done 40 years ago. She smiled but did not respond.
I had brought to the meeting,in addition to the DS-4079 and DS-4081, a statement as to why I chose to relinquish 40 years ago, my Canadian passport, my Canadian citizenship document, a Marriage certificate (to show the name change) and 2 birth certificates. Two of my documents were not accepted by the clerk.
Regarding the birth certificates, one was a very old document, with some fading. She said you had to be able to read the “Filing Date” and parents’ names clearly. My father’s middle name was blurred on this particular certificate. She also said the filing date was blurred. All family and friends, who have looked at the document are able to read the “Filing Date”. I also had with me a Certified copy (from 1993), which clearly showed my father’s name and the filing date. She refused to accept this as she claimed it was a photocopy. It had at the end of the page “Certified copy of birth certificate…. certified by County Clerk, ..name…. etc”.
Regarding the declined Marriage Certificate, she said it was necessary to have the Civil certificate. Mine was the Church certificate, although, it clearly stated the marriage was performed according to the laws of the State of ……… I have no idea if other consulates only accept ‘Civil’ certificates of Marriage and would be interested to find that out.
The whole experience was quite dreadful and emotional as I had believed that I had ‘all my ducks in a row’. I do not believe there is anyone who has a more legitimate ‘relinquishment’. I have been a citizen of Canada for 40+ years; my citizenship oath includes an oath of renunciation (that was attached to the DS-4079); absolutely nothing has been done in those 40 years to negate my intent, ie, no U.S. passport, no tax returns, no voting in elections, no sponsoring of anyone to immigrate to the U.S. (the Consul asked me that question).
Both the clerk and the Consul were respectful. They did both mention that it was a relinquishment, not a renunciation and put that on the forms.
The clerk gave me a website to access to obtain the necessary ‘correct’ certificates from “Vital Records for the State of ……….”. In typical fashion, and as has been reported on other threads, the phone numbers are unreachable from outside the U.S. My U.S. domiciled brother has now obtained a phone number, where I can hopefully reach a live person. I will pursue this because quite honestly, I need to put an end to the worry and anquish. I was told by the clerk that I could scan and fax the documents when received and ask to book the 2nd appt. at that time. She also said all documents had to be brought to the next meeting. As, I believe, Arrow said – a bit redundant.
I wish to thank everyone on both IBS and Maplesandbox, who has expressed concern and sent messages to me. Your messages give me the courage to follow this through.
Tiger, thank you so much for the report of your Vancouver appointment for Pacifica’s Consulate Directory. To say the least, we’ve been concerned about you. It’s unbelievable the Vancouver Consulate could not accept your documents.
Hang in there — your facts are clear. You are absolutely correct when you say that you don’t believe there is anyone who has a more legitimate relinquishment!
What form of your documents will they deem acceptable? I wish you could leave it to the Consulate or the IRS or whoever to prove that you are a US citizen if they haven’t accepted the proof you offer. Just what would happen if that ball was in their court?
*Tiger
I just cannot help but seem to think they are being incredibly picky. Were you able to get an idea whether the next appointment would be the last?
@Tim
They said that when/if I get the correct documents, I was to scan and email the documents to them. They would then contact me for my ‘final’ appointment and it would be necessary for me to bring all the documents/certificates to that appointment. What a completely inefficient way to conduct business. They kept the DS-4079 and DS-4081 but returned all my documents to me.
@Calgary, Pacifica and all
One thing that I forgot to report above was I asked the Clerk if anyone read the Statement that we are allowed to add to our documents. The one explaining why we ‘relinquished’. She actually shook her head NO but I must have looked shocked because she backtracked but said well, it would not influence any decision made in Washington. Decisions would be based only on the facts on the DS-4079 and DS-4081. The Consul also stressed to me that all decisions were made in Washington.
@tiger, I am very very sorry to hear what happened. I hope that the consul and clerk, however ‘respectful’, realize the absolute absurdity of forcing someone in your very clearcut situation to come back ‘after reflection’, and to delay things further by requesting additional versions of your documents.
It may be that the consul and clerk truly felt the necessity to dot every i, but it is also tempting for me to hope that they will be unable to live with themselves, knowing full well the effect of sending you away and delaying things further – when all evidence points to the veracity of your status – for the last 4 decades. I hope it seriously disturbs their sleep and conscience. Take heart in that as you say, your facts clearly support a relinquishment in recognition of the act that has already taken place, and is documented – 40 years ago. They have temporarily delayed, but cannot deny you – your facts are too clear.
It is a travesty that the US should create laws, and then place the onus on the individual, retroactively, to demonstrate 40 years later, what is completely obvious to all – that your status and belief is entirely consistent with the laws they themselves made – losing US citizenship was automatic by US made law of the time – and you followed that law.
I do wonder at what point the Canadian federal government is going to step in and firmly rebuke the US over this treatment on sovereign Canadian soil, of those who had sworn the citizenship oath to Canada and have acted as only Canadians for decades. At what point will Canada step up and pro-actively defend its citizens inside Canada, from US arrogance and caprice? One would think that this is going so far beyond what any sovereign country would be prepared to swallow on its own soil. It is not as if you are a US citizen on US soil. You are a Canadian, and only a Canadian, living inside Canada’s sovereign borders, and have been for 40 years.
I realize that you may not want to approach your MP on this matter, but if you have any further difficulties, I wonder if it would help? It may be that the US would much prefer not to have attention drawn to this situation, or to any delay or barriers they are responsible for creating in such a clear cut case as yours – whether deliberate or through bureaucratic obtuseness. This is the kind of behaviour that creates bad press and diplomatic incidents – I would think that they would prefer to avoid that possibility.
@Badger,
Thank you for your kind words. My MP is Andrew Saxton. When I first became aware of all this, I contacted his office. An aide from his constituency office contacted me on February 8th and said Mr. Saxton was writing me a letter. When I had not heard anything by March 8th, I contacted her and said I was still waiting for that letter. Again in April. I then gave up but I am still waiting.
If my next visit produces no results, I may very well re-contact him and also some NDP members of Parliament. My youngest son is very good friends with the NDP member from Sudbury – Glenn Thibeault. He would possibly be a good person for me to contact.