Last week a U.S. appeals court confirmed an earlier judgment that the plaintiffs “lack standing” in their case against FATCA. I thought this news deserved its own post.
In response, Republicans Overseas has declared its firm intentions to prosecute this matter all the way to the Supreme court.
Yes. A step on that road.
EmBee: I’m glad to have the connection with Roe vs. Wade cleared up too. Mr. Bopp DOES have some great ideas I would never have considered.
Bubblebustin: THAT would sure put FATCA/CBT on the map quick! 🙂
With regard to “one of you cheerleaders teach us how to…”
First off, NOBODY can provide an answer that will make everyone happy. The situation is complicated in a unique way for each individual, as we all have learned since Brock started.
I was talking with Stephen the other day and he asked me if I really believed that renunciation was the only option for Accidentals etc. I said that it wasn’t a matter of being the ONLY answer but more one of being the most PRACTICAL one.
Some like Ginny or Gwen or Katia would never choose to. I can already hear your reaction because I know your situation is complicated and that financially you cannot do it now. And that your kids by US law, are US citizens…
This is only my assessment of the situation. And it may or may not fit everyone. I am 62. I have no faith whatsoever at this point, that our IGA compliant govts will ever get off their bums and find a way to nullify those agreements. And I have absolutely not one shred of expectation that events will be congruent enough for tax reform will occur (useless for anyone already uncompliant..). So I see it as clear. Get unattached from the US as fast and as completely as one can. Either by the US’ way or by some combination of accepting that US law cannot actually do what it claims.
So if one cannot live with trusting that the US cannot really collect from anyone “overseas” or that staying under the radar and essentially self-renouncing or just renouncing with the State Department is enough….the option that makes sense for one’s state of mind is to file the damned returns, pay the $2350 and get out. If one is not going to owe any tax, find a way to get the US returns filed. Not all cost a fortune and the less complicated the return the less expensive it will be. Do only three and save for the renunciation fee. Or some such plan. It sucks but it is what it is. How many LCUs can one afford to sacrifice for this crap?
There is no perfect or nice answer.
It’s either make a plan and work towards renouncing or learn how to reprogram yourself to trust that US law is NOT above the law where you live. It IS possible to take the position your kids are NOT automatically US citizens. It is possible to accept the chances of the US collecting anything from you is basically nil. As for the banks, my understanding of your situation is that you are not Asian and it is difficult for you, even if you would consider lying, to get away with claiming you are not American. If that is the case, it may be that you and your wife will have to put everything in her name. If you don’t trust her to act as if your portion is really yours, draw up an agreement about how you would deal with any change (unfair control during marriage, separation, divorce…) get it notarized or some way to have clout.
Again, it definitely sucks. Whatever you choose will be difficult in all levels- financial, emotional etc. But you have to find something that will make the mental/emotional rankling stop. Life is just too short to let the bloody US occupy one’s head and make fear the ruling factor if life.
I am trying to be helpful here not trying to tell you what/how to do….It’s what comes to mind as an approach to your question.
Tricia, my point is a little different: I wondered whether renunciation of citizenship according to the strict rules of the United States foreign government is the most “reasonable-logical” option for those who never have considered themselves to be US citizens.
Renunciation may be “practical” for some non-meaningfuls but I do wince every time I hear that a person having no meaningful relationship with the U.S. goes to the time and expense of a formal renunciation of what never was accepted. Like our Plaintiffs, I personally don’t consider these persons to have anything that they need to renounce.
Perhaps we can agree that “ALL roads [should?] lead to renunciation” is an overstatement.
Also, if you assume (is this true?) that a very significant proportion of U.S.-tainted persons living overseas do not have ANY meaningful relationship with the U.S., perhaps, depending on your point of view, it is a gross overstatement.
Sorry if I gave the impression you were in agreement. I don’t consider US point off view valid for Accidentals either. My point is that if one is unable to take positions against the idea that US law rules all, one might save a lot of grief by simply accepting the situation and dealing with it. My comments are directed to Japan T who is not an accidental as far as I recall.
I am not fixated on anyone doing anything in particular. People have different situations and different ways of dealing with those situations. It is very difficult for some to work a way out for themselves. Primarily I think, because we are not taught to be indifferent nor disobedient to the law. But, if one cannot afford it, they either have to learn to live with it or learn to judge accurately what the US can or cannot do or comply.
I wince too however, perhaps the anxiety etc was simply too great and perhaps for them, it was worth it.
I don’t know why anyone feels the need to dispute “All roads lead to renunciation.” I think it is meant to be interpreted as “this is a no-win situation.” And I don’t recall “renunciation” to be limited to only the act at the consulate. It means remaining a US citizen will guarantee this nightmare will just continue.
Thanks for the suggestions. Sadly none can be applied in my case. All the suggestions I have received leave out the key element that must be taken care of first, the requirements for obtaining Japanese citizenship. I can not meet those requirements, a fact that renders all other points meaningless.
Can not live under the radar either. Unable to obtain JCship, I must renew my US passport at some point. Before then, I have to renew my alien resident’s card.
We have already put as much as possible under my wife’s name. The only things I can not are the bank accounts I need to receive my pay. Employers can/will not pay wages into a third party account. As all my pay is received via direct deposit and my banks are reporting all “tranactions, balances, etc.” to the US, I am on the radar if they care to look.
Personally, I am not concerned about banks taking funds from ME to send to the US, the aggregate balance of my multiple accounts is less than twenty dollars ($20.) US. But it was not that long ago when it was being said that FFIs would not be reporting data on their clients, they now are or closing out accounts of duals, they now are or have. It WILL happen by the time my children reach adulthood unless actively fought against BEFORE it becomes fact. And it is fast becoming fact. More on that later.
And as Mr. Kish said, what do my chidren have to relinquish? They can’t anyway until 18. Does anyone believe that it will be less difficult and costly to do decades down the road? Does anyone really believe it will not be more difficult and costly in the future?
What can the US do and not do? Well, lets take a look at what they can and are doing right now. They have required banks outside the US to obtain the US gov issued ID number of all UScs opening an account overseas and the ITIN or SSN of non USCs who have spent a certain amount of time in the US over the past 3 years.
That is HUGE.
The US has compelled these same banks to report “all transactions, balances, etc”, among other information on the same people listed above to the IRS.
This is HUGE.
As much of this data has no current application to taxes, what will the IRS be doing with this information?
How did the US gain these abilities? Though the threat of extorting 30% of US derived income from those who do not dance to Washington’s tune.
Walls are important things. Once breeched, whatever it was built to guard against is free to roam about the inside and destroy at will. The wall of sovereignty has been breeched. If/when your FIs were given the choice of collecting for the US or paying the 30% noncompliance fee, do you really think they will choose to pay the fee? They may not collect but then you would be completey locked out of all FIs, which is probably worse.
I think the rule should be “all roads lead to ignoring the US unless certain conditions apply”, and those conditions are:
(1) you live in a country where US citizenship restricts your access to banking or investment services
(2) your employer gives you an ultimatum due to signing authority and FATCA reporting
(3) you have US income, assets, expected inheritance or other familial or financial ties that make it difficult to flip Uncle Sam the bird
Accidentals without a US birthplace (like my daughter, born in Europe) can simply ignore this whole absurd situation, full stop. Accidentals with a US birthplace (like me) may need to renounce, depending on the situation. The worst off are US-only citizens living permanently abroad. If they can’t get a second citizenship, they’re potentially screwed.
Most of us duals living in Canada really need do nothing more than lie to their bank and remain non-compliant (and even then, being reported under FATCA doesn’t mean much if the US can’t figure out what you might owe and has no means to collect it). There’s no need to play the US government’s game and fork over $2350 unless it’s necessary for any of the reasons above.
“THAT would sure put FATCA/CBT on the map quick!”
It would put FATCA on the take-down-Roe roadmap, but would it put FATCA on the take-down FATCA roadmap? The two things are mutually exclusive.
If the court rules that the FATCA plaintiffs have standing, that could take down FATCA but not Roe.
If it’s ruled (again) that the FATCA plaintiffsdon’t have standing to challenge, despite the Roe precedent, that could result in the validity of the Roe precedent being reconsidered, ultimately before SCOTUS. Which could take down Roe but not FATCA.
Bopp commented, in reference to a previous case: “We were hoping in Planned Parenthood v. Casey that they would overturn Roe v. Wade. If they’re being asked to apply a precedent, the validity of the precedent is always before the Court.”
So which result is Bopp hoping for in the FATCA case?
“Accidentals without a US birthplace (like my daughter, born in Europe) can simply ignore this whole absurd situation, full stop.”
Here too, it is not as easy as presented. That MAY be the case in Europe, but it is not the case in Japan. The bank, potential employer, or potential spouse only need go public records to learn that my children, born in Japan, are of nonJapanese decent. As if looking at them and their surname didn’t betray that fact. What the search of public records would show, is that one of their parents was a USC at the time of their birth.
So no, not “full stop”. for all children born abroad to USCs but not registered at the Embassy.
Actually, the above ned not go to public records as it is the Japanese citizen who is tasked with providing public records to their potential employers, banks, financial employers and even to the family of their prospective spouses. So, my childeren are tasked with the burden of outing their bloodline each time they apply for a finacial service, employment, etc. m
Republicans Overseas asks full 6th Circuit 2 rehear #FATCA standing: 3-judge panel ruling conflicts SCOUS 2 rulings. http://bit.ly/2gJJuGo