Does anyone know of cases where “US persons” at risk from the IRS have run into trouble entering the US? Have any of you had a bad experience?
The last time I entered the US was nearly three years ago and I was seriously hassled at the border crossing (we were driving) because I did not have a US passport. I have not dared try to enter the US since then. I do know a few people who seem to have come and gone without any questions asked.
Thank you.
If clicking on a comment link in the sidebar brings you to the wrong page in the comment stream, click here to go directly to the most recent comment page.
I bet the embassy official lied about whether you could relinquish, because your US passport was obtained under duress not voluntarily. However, the official would have caused you as much trouble as possible, so the Department of State officials in the homeland would have taken a long time to approve your relinquishment.
Did the embassy official give a reason for not returning your US passport to let you use it legally until your CLN arrives?
Never mind, I forgot that your US passport was about to expire. But anyway, did they return it to you so that you can return it to them when your CLN arrives, … but would they even want you to return an expired passport when your CLN arrives.
I wish you’d applied for a new passport, because it wouldn’t have damaged your renunciation (it can only damage other kinds of relinquishment). Then we could have learned if they’ll issue a passport to someone who declares that they renounced but didn’t get their CLN yet. Others could benefit by applying for passports and declaring that they relinquished, to find out if they can get a CLN for the price of a passport application.
The embassy staff said I could insist on the file arguing for relinquishment to be sent to the State department for their ruling, but as I’ve written, I couldn’t afford to pay the fee a second time if my case were turned down. Plus do I need all that uncertainty? Let’s just have the rotten tooth pulled out and be done with it. (Visiting the embassy felt a bit like going to the dentist!)
It would have meant being free of all the tax nonsense, but I’ve decided that as I’ve never filed anything to the USA in my life, I don’t plan to start now.
“Visiting the embassy felt a bit like going to the dentist!”
Oh dear – no improvement on Grosvenor Square then. 🙂
Congratulations BirdPerson.
Actually the building is beautiful as is the setting. The reasons were internal. I was hoping that it wouldn’t hurt too much.
This quote was etched on the wall in the entrance lobby, which struck me as very ironic:
“Each time a man stands up for an ideal, or acts to improve the lot of others, or strikes out against injustice, he sends forth a tiny ripple of hope, and crossing each other from a million different centers of energy and daring those ripples build a current which can sweep down the mightiest walls of oppression and resistance.” Robert F Kennedy
@birdperson
Yes we can now see the irony in many of the US’s statements on freedom.
Another one that struck me anew post FATCA was …
“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”
Aside what we can do for our fellow citizens, surely the Constitution states that the government is there to serve the people, not the people to serve the government.
“Actually the building is beautiful as is the setting. ”
Grosvenor Square used to be a very nice London square, before the Americans got hold of it. As for Battersea, I much preferred it as it used to be. Though most of the change isn’t the USG’s doing of course.
“The reasons were internal. ”
Indeed.
The reasons were internal.”
Heidi:
“Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country”
Surely that’s just telling it like it is.
The USG doesn’t want the citizenry to keep asking it to do things for them; the USG wants the citizens to do stuff for the USG – like, pay taxes and vote for more taxes.
@plaxy
Precisely, but in my younger more idealistic days I considered it a worthy sentiment.
@birdperson
“Actually the building is beautiful”
I thought that it would be after Trump’s condemnation, he doesn’t strike me as a man with good aesthetic taste. 🙂
Yes – a bit like Kitchener’s poster.
The Evening Standard headlined Trump’s condemnation with the comment: “Trump won’t go south of the river.” 🙂
Toronto Star: 2018-12-08 – ‘Travelling to the U.S.? Don’t Forget Big Brother’ – Gordon Pape
https://www.pressreader.com/canada/toronto-star/20181208/281878709454324
Tax and other complications for snow birds and other Canadians travelling to the US.
What the Toronto Star article doesn’t say is how the IRS would manage to track down a Canadian snowbird who somehow exceeded the 183-day average without filing the “closer connection” 8840 form to exempt themselves from US taxes. Per usual, compliance is voluntary.
Thanks for that article, Badger.
Hence why when I asked a border agent why US citizens are required to enter on a US passport, he said because if they don’t, they will be treated as visitors.
Indeed.
And it makes sense both for citizens (who don’t want to be treated as visitors) and for visitors (who don’t want to be treated as residents).
But it doesn’t make sense, of course, for a citizen who would rather be treated as a visiting non-resident citizen – an expat.
That whole concept is just missing from US citizenship law. Citizens live in America, and when entering are just returning home. It always used to make me feel slightly ill when a US border guard would say “Welcome home” to me as I stepped into a country so far from home.
A non-resident registration scheme (similar to the one suggested in the ACA scheme or the one reportedly proposed in the Holding bill) could be a major first step towards addressing this deficiency, and making life a lot more straightforward for dual nationals who don’t want to be forced to renounce or be treated like human quarks, existing in two places at once.
And could solve the problems of FATCA and the problem of the unaffordable renunciation fee in the blink of an eye, if properly implemented. With FATCA gone, and official non-resident status, US citizenship could stop being a blight.
In short, one way of looking at the predicament of US citizens living outside the US is to see it as a US citizenship law problem, rather than a US tax law problem.
I wonder if proposing changes to citizenship law might meet less kneejerk resistance.
So…. let’s say someone renounced their citizenship, but is waiting for their CLN which will obviously take longer because of the shutdown, and they have a receipt for the fee. They fill out an ESTA application which is approved. Their non-US passport does not have a US date of birth. Will they have any issues getting in to the States before they get their CLN? What could happen?
I expect that it matters not whether you have the CLN or simply the receipt, you are a documented ex-citizen.
@MaryLou
They have an ESTA application that has been approved, a non US birthplace and a receipt for the renunciation. There will be no problem. Even with a US birthplace there should be no problem once the ESTA is approved.
I thought US embassies now were returning passports after renunciation to be usable until the CLN arrives?
Anyway the border guards’ computer systems shut down when told to by Bill Gates not Donald Trump, so they probably have records of the renunciation and the ESTA approval.
@Norman
Some Embassies return the US passport to renunciants to use in the interim and some don’t although that I believe to return it is the correct proceedure.
Some renunciants may have an expired US passport or may never have had one in the first place.
I am closing comments on this thread. Please go to the new Entering the US thread.