From Dr. von Koppenfels:
[See pdf’s: Univ Kent study brief and US citizenship renunciation Kent study summary]
Dear all,
As promised, here (are) two documents – cut and pasted to go here, so I hope they don’t look too strange with the formatting – that summarize the initial findings of my research from the survey “The US and You”, to which some of you may have responded. Many respondents (thank you!!) took the time to write extensive comments, and I am still working my way through those (400 pages) of data. Producing a more in-depth analysis of that may take some months, but I’ll post that eventually as well.
For now, here the initial results. And thank you to all survey respondents!!
Best,
Amanda
11 February 2015
New Survey Shows US Citizenship Renunciation Intentions Not Linked to Income
BRUSSELS, Belgium (11 February 2015) – Figures released by the US Treasury Department show 3,514 US citizens renounced their citizenship (also includes long-term residents who gave up their residency) in 2014; this is the highest figure ever, up over 2,999 in 2014.
A recent University of Kent (at Brussels) study surveyed 1546 US citizens and former citizens (from 5 December 2014 to 20 January 2015) on this topic. Of the US citizen respondents, 31% have actively thought about renouncing US citizenship and 3% are in the process of doing so. The study shows that, in contrast to what is commonly thought, income is not a key factor in their doing so.
Of those who have renounced or relinquished US citizenship (142 of the total respondents), nearly half (43%) have annual pre-tax household incomes of under $100,000 (USD). There is, similarly, very little difference in renunciation intention between those with lower incomes and those with higher incomes: of US citizen respondents with annual household incomes under $100,000 (USD), 28% are actively thinking of renouncing; of US citizen respondents with incomes above $250,000 (USD), 33% are actively thinking of doing so.
The University of Kent study shows that many overseas Americans are feeling increasingly pressured by US financial reporting requirements and that maintaining US citizenship is costly – in terms of accountants’ fees. One respondent noted: “I can’t pay an accountant 2000€ in order to pay the USA $0.00 in the end.” Fear of “draconian” FBAR (Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts) penalties is also widespread, as this pensioner noted: “Annual income under $4,000; potential FBAR penalties $30,000 per annum for 3 small accounts! I am old and dependent on savings; one paperwork lateness could leave me facing starvation.”
Numerous respondents also noted severe difficulties in retaining or opening investment accounts, bank accounts and, in some cases, securing mortgages, as local banks increasingly refuse US customers – which negatively affects their ability to plan for retirement. Some 39% have lived abroad for over 20 years, and over two-thirds (67%) say they are unlikely to return to the US.
All US citizens living outside of the US are required to comply with both taxation on global income and financial reporting requirements. Certain groups of US citizens and former US citizens feel particularly targeted, as a respondent in Canada explained: “Canada is home to many border babies, born in the US because that was the location of the closest hospital, and ‘accidentals’ like myself who left the US as young children with no say in where they were born.”
This University of Kent survey – the first academic study of its kind, and the largest look at the attitudes of Americans living abroad on this topic to date – shows that income is not the key motivating factor in prompting renunciations, but that increasing reporting requirements, fears of “draconian” penalties and increasing inability to hold a bank account are factors prompting renunciation.
A longer summary of initial findings is available.
———-
Executive Summary:
Survey of Citizenship Renunciation Intentions Among US Citizens AbroadThe US State Department estimates that 6.8 million Americans live outside of the US. The Treasury Department recently released its official numbers on 2014 fourth quarter US citizenship renunciations. In 2013, annual renunciations rose to their highest level ever, at 2,999, and in 2014 rose still higher, to 3,514.
A new research survey of 1546 US citizens and former citizens living outside of the United States shows that 31% of the US citizens are seriously thinking about renouncing their US citizenship, and that 3% are currently in the process of doing so.
The survey ran from 5 December 2014 to 20 January 2015, surveying 1404 US citizens and 142 former citizens, living in 69 countries. The survey was an opt-in snowball survey, distributed initially via overseas American organizations. The survey included closed-ended and open-ended questions, allowing for both quantitative and qualitative analysis.
Initial key findings of the study are:
Quantitative Analysis:
1) 31% have actively thought about renouncing US citizenship and 3% are in the process of doing so; 32% have never thought about renouncing US citizenship. Another 33% have given only a passing thought to the idea, however, they have no immediate or even long-term plans to do so. Many hold strong feelings of American identity and express pride in being US citizens.
2) More than one-third (39%) of all respondents had lived in their current country of residence for 20 years or more. The primary reason (33%) for moving to that country was to be with a spouse or partner, followed by employment (26%). 21% left the US as children. Over half (54%) are aged 50 or older, and 58% are female. 88% have at least a four-year college education. 45% have annual pre-tax household incomes of under $100,000 (USD) and an additional 18% between $100,000 and under $150,000.
3) Of those who have renounced or relinquished US citizenship, nearly half (43%) have annual pre-tax household incomes of under $100,000 (USD). Of those who have renounced or relinquished, more than half (56%) have lived at least 20 years in the United States, and three-quarters (75%) more than 20 years in their current country of residence.
4) Renunciation intentions are not linked to income: 43% of former citizens have annual household incomes under $100,000 (USD). Of US citizens with annual household incomes of more than $250,000, 33% have actively thought of renouncing and 4% are in the process of doing so. This compares to 28% of those US citizens with incomes under $100,000 (USD) having actively thought of doing so, and 3% currently in the process, and to 31% of all US citizen respondents who have actively thought of doing so and 3% who are in the process.
Qualitative Analysis:
5) US citizens who have renounced or relinquished their citizenship, or are thinking about doing so, mention several key factors. They note that financial reporting requirements are increasingly onerous and intrusive, and, second, that they are likely to remain overseas.
6) US citizens living overseas are affected by three sets of financial reporting requirements: first, they must file tax returns on global income – unlike nationals of any other OECD country living abroad; second, they must report all bank accounts with a combined total of $10,000 (USD) or more, or the so-called FBAR (Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts) and, third, they are affected by FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) requirements, a law which came into force 1 July 2014. All three factors play a role in individuals’ thoughts on renunciation:
a. In open-ended responses, analysis shows that it is not payment of taxes which prompts renunciation, but rather primarily costs associated with complying with US filing requirements – particularly FBAR, which many respondents only learned about recently, and the recent FATCA law. These can be as much as $1000 to $5000 per year – as one respondent, with a household income of between $50,000 and under $100,000, put it, “I can’t pay an accountant 2000€ in order to pay the USA $0.00 in the end.” This person, who renounced citizenship, would have had to pay nearly 10% of annual income in such costs: “To maintain tax compliancy with my pension account I was going to have to pay my accountant at least £1500 per year and I only earn £18 to £20,000 per year.” Maintaining US citizenship is costly – in terms of accountants’ fees. There are, moreover, no pre-tax retirement savings options for overseas Americans – unlike their US-based counterparts.
b. FBARs are now e-filed via the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, a phrase which riles many. The primary concern, however, over FBAR filing is that of many non-working spouses, as expressed by this woman, who has renounced her US citizenship: “Hated being treated like a criminal and filing FBARs on money earned solely by my UK only husband.” Others speak of stress created in their mixed-nationality marriages, especially those who are home-makers with income-earning non-US spouses, because of US filing requirements.
c. FATCA reporting requirements, also requiring reporting on joint accounts with non-US spouses, have further ramifications: numerous respondents also noted severe difficulties in retaining – or opening – investment accounts, bank accounts and, in some cases, securing mortgages, as banks increasingly refuse US customers. Numerous respondents reported great difficulties and stress in planning for retirement – with investment accounts increasingly closed to them in the countries they live in, as well as in the US (where many investment funds now require a US address).
7) Many respondents offered a “wait and see” response, noting that that if FATCA, in particular, is not changed, they feel that they will be “forced” to renounce US citizenship.
8) Two groups of US citizens and former US citizens feel particularly targeted by US financial reporting requirements, as well as by US citizenship policy, as explained well by this respondent in Canada: “Canada is home to many border babies, born in the US because that was the location of the closest hospital, and ‘Accidentals’ like myself that left the US as young children with no say in where they were born.”
These individuals – or their parents – believed that they no longer held US citizenship, having naturalized or held Canadian citizenship or not been aware of legal changes in US nationality law. Many realized only recently that the US Government still considers them US citizens, often after having been assured by US officials that they were not citizens, as this respondent said: “I was horrified to find out this year that the US is still claiming me as a citizen” – having relinquished US citizenship at the time of naturalizing as a Canadian. This person is not alone. Either not having been aware they were US citizens, or having been assured, many years ago, by Consulate officials that they were not, such individuals now face the cost of filing five years’ tax returns – even if no tax is owed – and potentially a $2350 renunciation fee, which for many is “prohibitively expensive”. They feel caught and targeted by US policy.
9) For many other respondents, a strong sense of anger and feeling of “being targeted” also emerged: “It is not a crime to live abroad and the US should not treat its expat citizens like criminals. I would never consider renouncing my US citizenship if the US treated me respectfully. As it is, I may end up renouncing, and that is a sad situation.” One person who renounced noted “What upsets me the most is the attitude by most US people that everyone outside the US is a tax cheat” and another noted “FATCA treats families like mine as suspected criminals until proven otherwise all because one family member is American who dared to marry abroad.”
10) Many expressed strong pride in being American, noting they would never renounce citizenship. Nonetheless, even some of those who have given no thought to renunciation still note, as this person did, “Folks upset about taxation without representation is what created the US.” A respondent with no intention of renouncing notes that “1. I’m an American. 2. I deeply resent being treated like a tax fraud or a drug lord.” This respondent, also with no intention of renouncing, said: “I find it tragic that many Americans living abroad are finding it necessary to give up their US citizenship based upon primarily taxation and banking problems. I think the IRS has to revise the code.”
11) Another person who has actively thought of renouncing, although does not intend to go through with it, said: “I do think that the mass media representation of this issue neglects to capture how difficult this decision is and how heartbreaking and frustrating it is. It’s like being in a cage.”
12) Many of those who did renounce or relinquish their citizenship expressed the pain of doing so, as this woman did: “It’s a bit like having a mastectomy because giving up my passport was traumatic for me.”
13) A very high degree of stress and even fear was expressed by a number of respondents, as expressed by this person “When I found about FBARs and the penalties involved I was unable to eat and sleep properly for weeks”. Many fear that inadvertent filing errors will wipe out retirement savings.
14) Numerous respondents mentioned their frustration with a lack of political representation of overseas Americans. They noted that they do vote in US federal elections, but also noted a lack of response concerning their concerns. Above all, respondents strongly felt the lack of representation of overseas Americans per se, as these two people did: “Double taxation without representation, without services, but with onerous ‘Orwellian’ compliance” or “I don’t feel that I have any representation within the US, so I might as well start forging links elsewhere.”
15) For many, American pride remains strong and a key factor in not renouncing, despite costs associated with remaining a US citizen (accountants’ fees, no pre-tax retirement savings options). On the other hand, frustration and resentment over US government financial reporting policies emerge strongly as well, even among those who feel they may return to the US at some point in the future.
Dr. Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels is the Director of the MA in International Migration at the University of Kent in Brussels (www.kent.ac.uk/brussels). She is the author of Migrants or Expatriates? Americans in Europe (2014; Palgrave-Macmillan).
Varney and company segment this morning. That start with ‘It is a colossal pain to be an American abroad’.
Very good segment if you can find it.
I would be curious to know how many are renouncing without certifying 5 years of compliance and just blowing off the form 8845. I bet the number is higher than most people think.
Form 8854 is really just giving the IRS a comprehensive inventory of your assets so they can easily confiscate some or all if they can dream up some reason to do so. The financial accounts they already know about because, by definition, if one is filing 8854, one has already been filing US returns for at least five or six years. The purpose of Form 8854 is to self identify all the other non-financial stuff like real estate, cars, art, etc.
None of those assets are any of the IRS’ business and they have no right to that information. I took one look at that horrendous form and swore I would never file one. If they are going to steal from me they will have to do their own research; I’m not going to hand it to them on a platter.
If homelanders were subjected to this travesty they would be rioting in the streets. The IRS gets away with this abuse because it happens away from the spotlight, just like the cops dragging an annoying homeless guy back into an alley and beating the crap out of him.
@Samuel Adams
I’ve wondered that too. If only to get the coveted CLN.
@Samuel Adams
I have heard of a few. They just renounce and that`s it- dont even bother to come into compliance. I think many would be unable to, financially.
I filled 8854 in to the best of my ability which is perhaps questionable – my ability. Did not spend a nickel on advice. I was not near the $2,000,000 so it was relatively easy for me. Today I looked at 8854 for people renouncing in 2014 and the instructions are a lot more torturous than for 2013. If you are close to the 2 million, and the IRS sort of knows about this I bet they spend more time looking around for your 8854 than for marginal people like myself.
maz57:
Ditto, Ditto and DITTO to every word of your Feb. 12, 4:37 p.m. comment! Form 8854 is, indeed, another important deterrent to people going through with a renunciation.
Bubblebustin: I like your idea about a future survey devoted to would-be renunciants’ reasons for not going through with it.
From a 2000 GAO report to the Joint Committee on Taxation:
2. What are IRS’ procedures for obtaining information on expatriates?
• Certificates of Loss of Nationality and expatriate tax information statements for former U.S. citizens are collected by the State Department from its Foreign Service posts and are to be forwarded to IRS monthly.
• INS provides annually to IRS a computer disc identifying individuals who gave up their residency permits (green cards). However, IRS does not use the data to track expatriates because the data do not distinguish former long-term residents from other former green card holders and generally do not include tax identification numbers.
3a1. How many expatriates self-reported that they met the criteria for presumed tax motivation?
• Based on IRS’ expatriate database, of the 1,158 expatriates who provided expatriate tax information statements indicating whether they met the tax- motivation criteria, 182 said they met one or both of the criteria.
• The 1,158 who provided expatriate tax information statements were among the 2,735 individuals who expatriated from 1995 through 1999 and whose names were published in the Federal Register from 1997 through March 2000.1
http://www.gao.gov/assets/100/90271.pdf
Thanks all for your comments. I will give more detailed comments shortly (on another tight deadline right now), but for now, just one quick comment. Yes, Green Card holders are the (even more) hidden group here. I agree. But @Publius, you are right – the challenges of finding Green Card holders made me decide to focus solely on US citizens.
I would love to go back to the US and get on their welfare programs. Imagine, sitting around all day long doing nothing but watching TV and collecting around $13/hour. It’s not a whole lot of money, but no boss, no traffic, and no headaches. The only reason I don’t go back there and get on welfare is because the wife doesn’t want to stay away from her family for very long 🙁
When I went back there, I went to the same restaurant at least 5-6 times. Each time, I saw people paying for their food with a food-stamps card. These people were able-bodied, and could work!! How come their food is free, but I have to pay for it?
I think my parents are right…. with all the handouts they give in the US, they are desperate for money. And we are easy targets.
American in France interviews Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels, Ph.D. regarding her *The US and You* survey results.
Dr Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels has a new article based on information and comments she garnered from her most recent survey:
Americans Abroad: A Disillusioned Diaspora?
http://www.migrationpolicy.org/article/americans-abroad-disillusioned-diaspora
I am an outlier to the majority of persons described in Dr. Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels’ new article. I consider myself a Canadian and have since 1975 when I became a Canadian citizen and was *warned* that I would thereby be losing my US citizenship (and since 2012 am finally that officially — only a Canadian with a CLN to show my local Canadian *foreign financial institution*). I somehow considered that warning a gentlmen’s agreement — taking Canadian citizenship as I wished to live and work in Canada, raise my family in Canada, be a contributing member to my local Canadian society. I purposely never registered my children as US births abroad. I want nothing more than for my family to be left in peace, considered by other Canadians the same as them, with the same rights under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
I read the Dr. A K von K’s article of today. It suggests to me that a vast majority of FATCA affected people don’t even know what’s about to hit them, and therefore aren’t as disgusted as they will be vis a vis the USA. My suspicion is that if she were to do exactly this same research 2 years from now, the results would be much more in line with the average IBS poster.
I have numerous relatives here in Canada with US taint. Some sound like me, and others are still in denial that the USA is really this evil, hence they look down on me and my warnings.
@Pierre
What struck me about the survey was that it was obviously capturing more politically aware Americans (65% of them voted last time around, which is much higher than average). I would guess that FATCA is going to hit the less political aware and frankly the less American U.S. persons even harder than those who answered this survey. The more politically aware people might have heard of FATCA before 2014 and could have arranged their finances to cope.
Quote selected from a survey respondent:
“From what I’ve seen, U.S. citizens who live abroad, regardless of their political affiliation, seem to be very proud of their country. More so than people in the same situation but with different nationalities.”
No such survey could possibly be complete without highlighting the exceptionalism attitude.
Have noted this in articles thread, but placing this here as well for anyone interested. Prof. Klekowski von Koppenfels continues to examine the situation of the American diaspora ‘abroad’ and their treatment by the US homeland. Might be a good source of rebuttal argument for the FATCAnatic and CBTenthusiasts like Michael Kirsch. If the evidence is that the state excludes us, then it is one more strike against the ‘benefits’ rationale for lifelong extraterritorial citizenship/parentage/birthplace based taxation where no actual residence and no actual economic relationship exists.).
New article by Amanda Klekowski von Koppenfels;
‘The disinterested state: negative diasporic policy as an expression of state inclusion and national exclusion’
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/1369183X.2017.1409173
“….Focusing on U.S. citizens abroad, the article argues that there is negative diasporic outreach on the part of the state – ‘disinterested’ from the state’s perspective, but ‘denouncing’ from that of the diaspora. Negative diasporic outreach is exemplified by the 2010 FATCA legislation, which sought to root out tax evaders resident in the U.S., but has, instead, affected millions of American emigrants through increased financial control and the repercussions of those policies, and has resulted in sharply higher citizenship renunciation figures. Impact on an American diaspora was not considered in the law’s proposal, debate and passage into law. Second, the article argues that this negative diasporic outreach, in combination with the continued facilitation of the right to vote, is a reflection of the inclusion of these American emigrants in the American state, but their simultaneous exclusion from the American nation.”
Unfortunately, no fulltext available open source at this time.
badger: “If the evidence is that the state excludes us, then it is one more strike against the ‘benefits’ rationale for lifelong extraterritorial citizenship/parentage/birthplace based taxation where no actual residence and no actual economic relationship exists.).”
It might be, if the argument was taking place. Unfortunately, as Cabezas says, it isn’t.
http://www.pennstatelawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/ARTICLE-3-CABEZAS.pdf
And (Klewoski von Koppenfels suggests) the debate can’t take place, because “the American political discourse even lacks a narrative that could ‘make sense’ of these overseas Americans.”
The inability to make sense of anything outside the US is clearly demonstrated in the Cook v. Tait case where the judge, deliberating over whether the USG “has the power” to tax non-US-source income, reasons that if Mr Cook’s rental property was situated in, say, Georgia, then a neighboring state – say, Alabama, wouldn’t have the power to tax it, because at the state line AL’s power to tax ceases and GA’s power to tax takes over. But since Mr Cook’s rental property is not in a jurisdiction bordered by any US state, the power to tax must reside with the US Federal Government (!). The fact that the rental property is situated outside the US altogether, is simply ignored as irrelevant.
That’s the non sequitur on which CBT rests: the Constitution says income received by a citizen must be taxed, and the Constitution says the power to tax rests with the (US) Federal Government. Q,E.D. The US is never going to be able to get out of that mindset.
“the Constitution says income received by a citizen must be taxed”
No it doesn’t. It says that the US federal government can tax everyone’s income. Where Congress made an exception for some non resident aliens, the exception wasn’t required by the constitution.
I thought as I wrote that, ND will be along in a minute saying no it doesn’t
🙂
@plaxy, you’re right. And there is apparently no-one who can compel the US into any examination of what it is doing. It does it because it can.
Fortunately, reality protects us, to a large extent.
The US can’t tax non-US-source income. The FATCA effect is a damned nuisance but FATCA is very unstable and is disliked by the donors, so it may not last.
America can be left in the land of dreamy dreams – dreaming up laws and regulations it can never enforce.
“The US can’t tax non-US-source income.”
They can when payers cooperate. FATCA is designed to make more payers “volunteer” but some already volunteered decades ago.
Norman Diamond:
Yes exactly.
“FATCA is designed to make more payers “volunteer” but some already volunteered decades ago.”
They don’t seem to do anything though, when non-US-residents stop filing. It’s the residents they’re after – the ones they can prosecute. IMO