[May 18 2017 update: I now include in this LINK the recommendations of Elise Bean, a long-time FATCA supporter and witness at the FATCA hearing.]
On April 26 2017 there was a Hearing at the U.S. House Subcommittee on Government Operations dealing with the harm caused by the U.S. FATCA law imposed on the world.
At the conclusion of the hearing, Chairman Meadows asked the Witnesses for “three recommendations on how to improve the legal framework set up by the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act” (FATCA).
My personal-only interpretation of this request is that the Chair is saying something like: “If FATCA has to be replaced with something else, can you recommend three compromise laws/approaches that would achieve the “good” aims of FATCA but minimize the harm, and which would receive bipartisan support?”
— I enclose as a link the May 15, 2017 submitted personal recommendations of Jim Bopp, a witness and attorney for the U.S. FATCA/IGA/FBAR lawsuit currently pending in United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit (I am one of the plaintiffs).
From the Bopp text:
“This letter provides three recommendations on how to improve the legal framework set up by the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (“FATCA”).
First, we recommend that any taxation of overseas Americans comply with established United States constitutional principles and international legal norms.
Second, we recommend that the current laws be repealed in their entirety [Bopp goes on to include specifically FATCA, IGAs, FBAR, and citizenship-based taxation] and certain proposals rejected.
Third, we recommend that Congress enact a 1099 requirement on foreign banks, established by treaty, as long as this complies with established United States constitutional principles and international legal norms…”
—- Appended to the end of the Bopp recommendations are my personal thoughts as a separate submission: I support, as does Mr. Bopp, the repeal in entirety of FATCA, FBAR, IGAs, and citizenship-based taxation (the latter to be replaced with territorial/residence-based taxation), do not support any “watered-down” FATCA-replacement legislation whatsoever — which I believe will continue the harm, and offer suggestions on changing U.S. citizenship laws in the very limited context of FATCA harm. In hindsight, I now feel that I should have gone further in my recommendations for citizenship law changes.
—- When I receive the recommendations of strong FATCA supporter Elise Bean, a hearing witness, I will post.
— Ongoing developments: Republicans Overseas has initiated an intensive lobbying campaign with Congress to kill citizenship-based taxation and replace with territorial taxation. There can be no promise of success, but these people are trying. I am not aware of similar efforts on the Democrat side.
“He’s tried for over a year to get a credit card, and though he qualifies in every possible way, he has been turned down.”
I bet FATCA isn’t the only reason. In 1988 I was turned down too, which is surely because I don’t have citizenship in the country where I’ve been living. In 1990 I was approved because a department store cooperated with a group in my employer; if I’d tried alone I bet I would have been rejected.
Canadian financial institutions didn’t renew my Canadian credit cards when I live outside of Canada.
“China, like the USA, imposes Chinese citizenship on anyone born in HK, whether they want it or not, the moment they set foot on mainland Chinese polluted soil.”
No that’s not like the US. If someone born in American Samoa (without inheriting infection from parents) sets foot on mainland US soil, they’re still US non-citizen nationals. If someone was born in the Philippines and was 6 years old when the US turned them into US aliens for the purpose of immigration (but I think still US non-citizen nationals for purposes other than immigration), then if the US issues a visa to them and they step foot on mainland US soil, they don’t get US citizenship imposed on them. Ane here, all we can do is envy the ways the US abuses them and wish we could be treated the same.
Let’s not treat anyone with reproach, please. We were all acting in good faith believing the US hype about freedom. Who’d have known about some obscure law that requires you to pay tribute to a country where you no longer live?
@Bubbles
http://blogs.economictimes.indiatimes.com/globalindian/born-in-the-usa-the-problem-of-two-citizenships/
https://renounceuscitizenship.wordpress.com/2014/12/24/its-1100-p-m-do-you-know-what-your-child-who-you-registered-as-americansabroad-is-doing/
@Bubblebustin:
“I don’t see anything wrong with a country requiring its citizens to enter their country on the appropriate passport.”
What is an appropriate passport, Bubblebustin?
Do you see anything wrong with a three-year-old child – a citizen of the UK – being permanently banned from visiting the United States? Why is that appropriate?
Do you see anything wrong with a nine-year-old girl – a citizen of France – being questioned by border guards, alone, for three hours, before at last being permitted to rejoin her frightened parents and enter the United States AS A VISITOR on her French passport – her only passport? Her inappropriate passport.
I don’t know why you can’t see anything wrong with that.
Her stupid parents should have done the right thing and turned her into that cursed creature, a US Person – right? Then she would have had the appropriate passport.
@Bubblebustin:
“Had the US enforced their own laws earlier on word would have gotten out allowing people to make informed decisions.”
The problem’s not the laws, it’s the fact that the laws were not enforced strictly enough?
How do you see that working for my children?
If the US had enforced its laws strictly enough, back in 1975, or 1965, I would somehow have known this? by osmosis? and therefore I would have been able to make an informed decision to…what? Not leave America? Not have children? What informed decision could I have made, if the US had enforced its laws more strictly, that would have made a difference to the way my children, and many other non-US children, have been treated by the US?
You need to stop trying to justify America.
@Bubblebustin:
“As for carve outs for accidentals based on whether they’ve obtained a US passport after a certain age? I don’t think that’s going anywhere. ”
You just don’t get it, do you? Children born outside the United States are not “accidental Americans”. America goes out of its way to make them Americans.
My children weren’t citizens of the United States, until I registered them as citizens. They were citizens of the UK. Until I signed that piece of paper they had the same freedoms as other UK citizens.
UK children born in the UK whose parents do not register them as US citizens, are not US citizens and can’t be treated as US citizens unless they choose to claim US citizenship and can prove they are eligible for US citizenship.
That’s not what US law says, of course, but my children weren’t subject to US law until I unwisely signed that form. As UK residents, they were subject to UK law, and UK law does not register a child born in the UK as inheriting foreign citizenship.
Accidental Americans are children born accidentally in America, thus saddled forever, accidentally, with a US place of birth. Children born outside America are not saddled at birth with a US place of birth or with US citizenship. If their parents never sign that form, they’re free.
“You need to stop trying to justify America.”
It looks to me like she’s just doing a logical analysis, not calling it right. If a detective finds who murdered someone, it doesn’t mean the detective thinks the murderer is right.
“If the US had enforced its laws strictly enough, back in 1975, or 1965, I would somehow have known this?”
The US would have told you.
Consider my situation, where I didn’t know that it’s illegal to tell the truth on a US tax return. When I wrote on my 1982 return that to the best of my knowledge and belief the attached W-2 was NOT true and correct, the IRS should have penalized me for being frivolous, I would have paid one US$500 penalty, I would have renounced US citizenship in 1984, and that would have been the end of it. But since they didn’t enforce the law, I continued telling the truth for another 27 years, and they punish me so much for it that I needed heart surgery.
Now you KNOW that it’s illegal to tell the truth on a US tax return, so you won’t repeat my mistake.
@Norman Diamond:
They did tell me, and they told me to sign over my children, and I did as I was told. So yes, I guess you could say that I made an informed decision to accept US citizenship for my minor children.
Only, it doesn’t solve the problem. It creates the problem.
@Barbara – I’m terribly sorry to hear what happened to you.
You absolutely should not reproach yourself. You couldn’t possibly have foreseen what was going to happen. Your story is indeed far worse than mine.
Bloody not fair.
Thanks for that ND.
Iota, I would think twice about scapegoating me. We are in the same boat.
No it doesn’t help you or your children that only now are people learning about the problems associated with US citizenship, but it’s enforcement that’s bringing those problems to light. Fewer people are registering their children as a result of enforcement. Our folly is other’s gains. That’s just the way it is. Move on. I’m just grateful I put only one of my children in the jaws of the US.
No, you and I are not in the same boat. You’re in favour of the US enforcing its laws more strictly. I’m not. Arguing that stricter enforcement solves the problem by teaching those at risk to take to avoid enforcement, is just sophistry. It’s like arguing that FATCA is good because it teaches those at risk how to avoid getting caught.
FATCA certainly does use enforcement to teach people how to commit tax evasion; and also teaches them not to register their children as US citizens. The problem is, FATCA teaches people by hurting them. Very American. Punish them to teach them not to disobey. Force citizenship on them before letting them into America, so their native country can’t come to their aid.
I’m not scapegoating you. How could I? I am disagreeing with you.
” UK children born in the UK whose parents do not register them as US citizens, are not US citizens and can’t be treated as US citizens unless they choose …”
This has been discussed a few times way back. I believe that you are wrong .Technically, they are American. Registering them is merely surrendering them for slaughter.If you don’t register ,they have to search and for that you have to give them a reason .The only wiggle room one may have is the retention rules for the parents at the time of the child’s birth.
“Accidental Americans are children born accidentally in America, thus saddled forever, accidentally, with a US place of birth. Children born outside America are not saddled at birth with a US place of birth …”
Any child born abroad to US parent/parents is also is an accidental, I think , but they would have to do a treasure hunt to find you.
Technically?
Two girls, born on the same day in New York. Little Apple leaves America the day before her 16th birthday and settles in the UK. Little Orange leaves America the day after her 16th birthday and settles in the UK.
Two boys, born on the same day at the same time in London. Apple Jr is born a UK citizen, uncontaminated by any USness. Orange Jr is born a dual US/UK citizen.
Ten minutes later, US legislation comes into effect: to claim US citizenship, a child born abroad must now be able to prove that his/her parent lived in the US for at least three years after the age of 14. Orange Jr is no longer a US citizen. Just like Apple Jr, he is a UK citizen with no other citizenship.
Was Orange Jr a US citizen for ten minutes? You decide.
“Any child born abroad to US parent/parents is also is an accidental, I think.”
A child born in the UK is a UK citizen.
@Robert Ross — it’s not that simple. When I registered my children, born abroad, I read the law and it said I had to document that my lengths of stay (childhood and adulthood) in the US to fulfill the requirements so that my sons could be US citizens. I was almost a week short. There is no way anybody but me could have put together the proof necessary to obtain that citizenship. Nobody could have “forced” this upon my sons. There is no situation where I can imagine that the US would do research and pull out documents from the 1970s just to make someone’s child an unwilling citizen. In citizenship cases like mine if you don’t claim it you don’t get it. I could very well have ignored the US and not given the boys that blue passport. Not even they could have obtained it later without my help.
@FredB – exactly.
However, the US does force US citizenship on children born abroad to a USC parent if the parent wants to take the children to the US, and meets the citizenship-transmission requirements, and is not willing to lie.
But also – in many cases it wouldn’t be possible to lie about it. If one’s US passport shows the date one first left America, that would show whether one transmitted US citizenship to one’s child, according to US law.
Once the passport has been renewed, that evidence is gone. At present.
Also, a USC parent whose born-abroad child does not qualify for US citizenship, should probably apply for a US passport for the child, in order to get the ultimate proof of non-USness: a failed passport application. (To be shown to US border guards when visiting the US.)
@iota
” Also, a USC parent whose born-abroad child does not qualify for US citizenship, should probably apply for a US passport for the child, in order to get the ultimate proof of non-USness: a failed passport application. (To be shown to US border guards when visiting the US.)”
And what would you do in the event that they send a bona fide passport? It ‘s akin to sending you nails for your coffin.You never know. They recently issued citzenship papers to immigrants to be deported.
@Fred (B)
The retention rules do/ did have validity.In your case,they were a hindrance but for one like me with no interest in being American,they would have been a gift to my children.
Many countries have a residence requirement for people to retain citzenship .USE IT OR LOSE IT seems quite valid and these residency/retention requirements in a small way were the only way out of CBT.
For residency requirements, I’m referring to children acquiring citzenship abroad .
@iota
I absolutely do see how you were railroaded into getting US documentation of existing US citizenship for your children.
It would seem that in order to maintain any voluntariness in obtaining US citizenship for those born elsewhere, one would have to avoid travelling to the US altogether. It’s ridiculous.
Unfortunately there’s a distinct lack of consistency of enforcement between border officers. I suspect that had you had the one who told me that a foreign passport would have meant I could enter as a visitor you would not have had to do a thing. Who’s strictly enforcing the law – my border agent or yours, when the only existing proof of US citizenship is a US passport?
@Bubblebustin – It was the London Embassy that told me they wouldn’t be allowed to enter except on US passports. Indeed I could have chosen to fly anyway and take a chance that we could get in, but that would have been a stupid gamble in those days, when transatlantic flights were very expensive.
In any case, it never crossed my mind to argue, much less refuse. The downside of US citizenship didn’t become apparent for another forty years – just as the price for shedding it hit the ceiling.
Technically, I suppose, I wasn’t actually forced. And as I said above, I don’t really see how the consular officer could legally have done otherwise. It’s just a repressive, horrible law, like so many others in a repressive, horrible country.
As for who was enforcing the law – obviously, the Embassy. The law doesn’t say USCs can enter on a foreign passport as a visitor.
“And what would you do in the event that they send a bona fide passport? It ‘s akin to sending you nails for your coffin.You never know. They recently issued citzenship papers to immigrants to be deported.”
True. I withdraw that suggestion.
This is why I’m grateful I didn’t register one of my born-in-Canada sons. Let it be his choice.
That son once volunteered to a US border official that his brother is a US citizen and that he was entitled to US citizenship but I didn’t go through the steps to declare it for him. The border official seemed a little miffed that I didn’t, but waved him on. What I haven’t told my son is that I didn’t register him because he was acting out at the time I would have done it and I didn’t want to reward his bad behaviour with the “gift” of US citizenship. Bad behaviour has its rewards, I suppose. He now knows better than to volunteer such information.
My apologies about overlooking that important detail concerning the embassy. They would be assumed to have the final word concerning what US citizens can and can’t do, wouldn’t they. The reality on the ground is quite different though when their decrees are put into action. Still, we must take them at face value.
Now that everyone’s scrambling for the exits, things like the issuance of passports make a difference, especially when there are proposed carve-outs that exist for those obtained under certain conditions. That part seems so arbitrary especially for those who had no choice in the matter and assumed there was no toxicity associated with renewing one.
The US loves its GOTCHA legislation.
To be frank though, most of us wouldn’t give a rodents behind if there wasn’t tax associated with these little missteps, except maybe in principle.