Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Category Archives: Issues regarding US persons abroad

Nigel Green: “presidential candidates need to set out their stance on FATCA”

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 29 Comments

http://www.cpifinancial.net/news/category/economics/post/31506/devere-presidential-candidates-owe-it-to-america-to-explain-their-stance-on-controversial-fatca

Nigel Green, CEO of the deVere Group, is calling on all U.S. presidential candidates to explain their positions regarding FATCA and GATCA ahead of the 2016 election.

As reported by Matthew Amlôt in CPI Financial’s news site:

Mr Green comments, “FATCA adversely affects millions of hardworking, middle class Americans around the world, plus U.S. companies that operate internationally – and, therefore, it impacts U.S. jobs and the American economy.

“Presidential candidates who support this tax act now need to justify to America why they support it; whilst those who want it repealed now need to articulate to voters why they believe it is fundamentally flawed and why they will move to repeal it.

“It is an issue that must play a major part in the national conversation ahead of the election.”

Continue reading →

From #FATCA to #FIFA – If you use the $USD you are subject to US jurisdiction – which is NOT good

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 11 Comments

Prologue – The Context of FATCA, FIFA and U.S. Extraterritorial Laws:

 

 

The above tweet links to the following comment at this blog:

“@R talbot

With respect to your comment here:

https://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/04/29/senate-finance-committee-posts-submissions-and-shadow-raider-reports-to-brock/comment-page-9/#comment-6103112

which I will reproduce.

This is clearly a Republican-rant organization and fully misrepresents the Dems Abroad which has been working on FATCA issue much longer than Repubs who only recently jumped on it for political purposes. DA favors country-of-residence-exemption because it is the approach that will get the the quickest real results . . . rather than the full-blown Constitutional attack which will take years, but get their right wingnut lawyer Bopp maximum press.

Further the Republicans dirty little secret is that the REAL tax avoiders putting funds overseas are Republicans residing in the US. Republican position appears to be that tax evasion is OK while Dems Abroad is working to get relief for regular overseas Americans (of both parties) who are not the purpose of FATCA in the first place.

And lastly, before castigating the Obama and Dems for this law for political purposes, last I saw McCain is a Republican.

Let’s consider the “same country exemption” for what it is rather than drifting down the non-productive road of partisan politics. In other words, what does it mean. Not, who is it from.

Starting from first principles.

The Democratic Party (I don’t know them and don’t care about the label) is clearly in support of FATCA. They have made this very clear. Democrats abroad has made it clear that they are in support of FATCA. (Furthermore, in its recent submission to the Senate Finance Committee Democrats Abroad did NOT advocate for the repeal of “citizenship taxation”.) That’s all fine, everybody is entitled to support what they want. That said, (and I recognize that this is my opinion) FATCA is one of the most egregious examples of extra-terriitorial overreach in the history of the world. It is also absolutely immoral for many reasons including the following:

The U.S. dollar as the primary reserve currency

At the end of the World War 2 – in Bretton Woods, NH, the U.S. was trusted to the extent that the U.S. dollar became the primary reserve currency of the world. In practical terms this meant that there would be a constant demand for U.S. dollars because it was the commonly accepted currency. In other words, the U.S. was trusted with the great responsibility of it’s currency becoming the currency that all countries, people and financial institutions would need. Along with this agreement and responsibility, comes the assumption/trust that the U.S. would continue to make the U.S. dollar available. Since Bretton Woods, the U.S. dollar has become the “oxygen of the world financial system”.

FATCA is a law that the U.S. is attempting to IMPOSE through threats of economic sanction on ALL countries of the world. Why all countries? Because, of the status of the U.S. dollar as the world reserve currency. All the world conducts business in U.S. dollars. (This is why the rest of the world will move quickly to create conditions where the U.S. dollar will NOT be the primary reserve currency.)

Through FATCA, the U.S. is saying:

1. If you don’t do what we want (hunt for those we define as U.S. persons)

2. When you access the world reserve currency USD

3. We will deduct 30% of what you are entitled.

In other words, the United States of America – is in effect cutting off the oxygen supply to the rest of the world. In my view, this is in complete violation of the spirit of the Bretton Woods agreement which allowed the U.S. dollar to become the primary world reserve currency. I also believe that is an outright violation of International law.

Furthermore, FATCA is the “enabler of place of birth taxation” which operates to impose U.S. taxation on the the residents and citizens of other countries and ultimately on the country itself.

Now, I have a simple question for you and all others (including I suppose the Democrats) who as a matter of principle support FATCA.

My question is this:

Do you think it is immoral to cut off the oxygen supply of the world financial system just because you think you can get away with it?

As President Clinton once implied:

“To do something because you can is the least morally defensible reason for doing it.”

FATCA is not only an egregious violation of the sovereignty of other nations, but the assumptions it is based on (cutting off the world oxygen supply) is immoral in the extreme. But, it gets worse. Because under the FATCA rules, the United States alone defines who is a “U.S. Person”, FATCA can (and will be used) to extend U.S. taxation to more and more people who are citizens and residents of other countries. The effect of U.S. taxation of citizens and residents of other countries is that the U.S. can use “citizenship taxation” to remove capital from other nations. (For example London Mayor Boris Johnson)

Now, let’s move on to the FATCA “same country exemption”.

To promote the “same country exemption” is:

1. To clearly accept the absolute immorality of FATCA and principle of imposing U.S. taxation on the citizens and residents of other nations; but also to

2. Beg the United States Government to tweak the law so that this unconscionable act of immorality does NOT apply to one specific group – that is a subset of U.S. citizens abroad. And for the record, that specific group is NOT Americans abroad as a group. Rather it is Americans Abroad who are U.S. tax compliant. (The latter condones the immorality of citizenship taxation and does NOTHING whatsoever to assist the millions of Americans abroad who never even knew about citizenship taxation.)

Therefore, those who support the “same country exemption” (whoever they may be) are actually:

1. Supporting immoral laws in general and FATCA in particular; and

2. Saying, well please exempt me from this immorality and we will “wink wink” and NOT call your attention to the fact that you are immoral in the extreme.

My conclusion:

Individuals and groups who support the “same country exemption” are actually enablers of immoral laws that are a breach of the spirit of the Bretton Woods agreement, are designed to impose taxes on the citizens and residents of other countries and extract capital from those countries.

Afterthought:

I have not even mentioned the absurd and unfair costs that FATCA compliance impose on non-U.S. banks and on the residents of other countries. As one of many examples see:

http://www.repealfatca.com/index.asp?idmenu=4&idsubmenu=102&title=bahamas-urged-to-lobby-over-fatca

Afterthought 2:

FATCA is one component of U.S. policies which Juan Zarate would call part of “Treasury’s War” (google the title) and Ian Bremmer (google) would call the “Weaponization of Finance”. It’s really the U.S. saying to the rest of the world:

It’s our world. Get used to it.

Afterthought 3:

A previous comment on these issues included:

https://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/01/17/us-citizenship-based-taxation-and-fatca-are-egregious-violations-of-the-master-nationality-rule/comment-page-1/#comment-995056

The time has come to send the U.S. home where they can worship their FBAR Museum, PFIC Memorial and House of FATCA.

“

What follows are three video/audios.

Continue reading →

Boris Johnson: proud double-taxpaying supporter of the Anglo-American imperium

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 50 Comments

Other British commentators may not be so happy, but Boris Johnson heartily endorses Washington’s “extraordinary doctrine” (his words) of jurisdiction over actions undertaken in other countries which use the U.S. financial system:

While other countries turned a blind eye, the Americans have stepped in. The US has an extraordinary doctrine – that if you commit a crime by using an American banking network then you have committed a crime under American law and must answer to America; and if it brings the kleptocrats of Fifa to justice, then I am all for it.

Johnson also warns of evil anti-British and anti-American forces who aren’t so happy at the U.S.’ imperial triumphs with FIFA and FATCA:

And then there is a further geopolitical problem. You and I may rejoice at the notion of Britain and America triumphing in the final reel of the movie – James Bond and Felix Leiter coming together to winkle Blofeld from his lair. Not everyone sees it that way; not everyone likes the idea of an Anglo-American imperium.

This is a remarkable change of heart from seven months ago, when he was much angrier about U.S. extraterritoriality:

No is the answer. I think it’s absolutely outrageous. Why should I? I haven’t lived in the United States since I was five-years-old. I pay my taxes in full in the United Kingdom, where I live and work.

As you may remember, Johnson paid higher UK taxes during his entire period of homeownership in that country because of the UK’s lack of a mortgage interest deduction, and then — despite his early cries of resistance — gave in and paid US capital gains taxes on the sale of that same property because it went “untaxed” by the UK. This is just one example of how different countries’ incompatible tax breaks on housing result in double taxation for American emigrants and citizens of other countries who are deemed to be Americans. (And that’s not even getting into the issues with “foreign”-currency mortgages.)

Both Johnson’s Facebook post and the version at The Telegraph are open for comments (the latter using Disqus). There’s also a Reddit thread at /r/soccer.

OpenMedia: “Canada’s Privacy Plan” and its relationship with other Canadian Parliamentary Bills, including (for us) Omnibus Bill C-31 (2014)

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 29 Comments

EmBee
Submitted on 2015/06/01 at 7:18 pm

@ calgary411
While I was looking for the status of Bill C-51 (Committee Report Presented without Amendment in the Senate on 2015-05-27 — 2 more steps to go and it’s law) I found a group called Open Media which believes it has an antidote. Interesting. Since C-31 and C-51 are two peas in the anti-privacy pod I think their effort will indirectly benefit our FATCA fight too.
https://privacyplan.ca/

LM
Submitted on 2015/06/01 at 9:25 pm | In reply to EmBee.

@Embee – Thanks for bringing https://privacyplan.ca/ to our attention. I think as many of us as possible should write to this organization (and each of the organizations which have indicated that they support these views) and explain that we fully agree with their efforts (if that is how we feel) but that we will not be able to financially donate there until our issue is fully funded.
At that juncture, each writer could thoroughly introduce the FATCA and IGA issues. Maybe, just maybe, we will strike a nerve and they will consider spreading the word to their members and, possibly, gain some supporters, especially given the timeliness of our court challenge. Who knows….. Spread the word, spread the word and spread the word some more…..

 

From: Conclusion – Listen to Canadians in OpenMedia: “Canada’s Privacy Plan – A Crowdsourced Agenda for Tackling Canada’s Privacy Deficit”:

Behind the backs of their citizens, governments have been building surveillance tools unparalleled in their invasiveness, scope, and power. Our oversight mechanisms, designed for a different era, need to make sense in the 21st century. It’s remarkable that much of what we now know, we owe not to our official oversight bodies, but instead to a single NSA whistleblower, Edward Snowden.

This project came in response to these revelations, and to the perfect storm of legislation being advanced by a government seemingly determined to sacrifice Canadians’ most basic human and democratic rights on the altar of an increasingly powerful and unaccountable security bureaucracy.

As an organization, participatory values are at the heart of everything OpenMedia does. We don’t just want citizens to have a seat at the table, we work to place citizens at the heart of decision-making. That’s why we’ve tried to reach out to the broadest possible number of Canadians to help shape this report. This open, participatory approach is all the more important given the government’s efforts to conceal the dramatic expansion of its surveillance capabilities from Canadians.

Canadians are clearly deeply concerned about their country’s continuing evolution toward out-of-control government surveillance. This is borne out both by our own crowdsourcing work, and by opinion surveys conducted independently.

“Canada’s Privacy Plan”  (96 pages)

“Key Recommondations, Canada’s Privacy Plan”  (4 pages)

Send this Crowdsourced Action Plan to your Senators

The Senate is about to vote on Bill C-51 which will undermine the privacy of every Canadian.

Enter your information below. We will use it to email this Privacy Plan to your Senators.

We will protect your privacy, and keep you informed about this campaign and others. Find OpenMedia’s privacy policy here.

************

Related, also read Lynne Swanson’s post at Maple Sandbox: C51 Gives CRA Right to Share Tax Info

Money Sense reports Your tax info at heightened risk.

Money Sense is not exactly what one could call left wing civil liberties fanatics. Yet they report:

The CRA can now share not only your home address, but all of your financial information within the government, without any form of consent or a warrant.

All the CRA needs is to believe “there are reasonable grounds to suspect that the information would be relevant to an investigation of whether the activity of any person may constitute threats to the security of Canada.”

What’s more, the CRA can distribute these private details “on its own initiative,” possibly spurring…a “wide-scale fishing expedition.”

A Ryerson University professor says the more people that have access to taxpayer information under Bill C-51, the higher the risk of leaks, hacks and other foul play. He also says:

The change in legislation is “unprecedented. It’s snooping and meddling of the worst kind.”

Of course, CRA will have far more information about U.S. persons than they will about other Canadians because of FATCA. So the snooping and risk to us is mammoth.

Are we suspects of a “threat to the security of Canada?” Who knows?

I think we are defenders of Canada. But, I think it’s safe to assume the government is following Sandbox and Brock and that they consider us threats.

This is one more huge reason why we must persevere in our fight for our rights. Please keep those donations to ADCS coming.

Hmmm. Do they consider ADCS a “threat to the security of Canada” for standing up for the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?

**************

Something else I think is related:

I made this comment yesterday:

https://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/03/99929-needed-in-94-more-days-to-make-the-100000-august-4-2015-payment-for-canadian-fatca-iga-lawsuit-il-nous-reste-99929-a-ramasser-pour-notre-poursuite-judiciaire/comment-page-17/#comment-6146553

But now I am somewhat buoyed regarding *dual citizenship* and ALLEGIANCE as I’ve found on the US Embassy in Ottawa site: http://canada.usembassy.gov/consular_services/dual-citizenship.html which says (emphasis mine)

…
The U.S. Government acknowledges that dual nationality exists but does not encourage it as a matter of policy because of the problems it may cause. Claims of other countries on dual national U.S. citizens may conflict with U.S. law, and dual nationality may limit U.S. Government efforts to assist citizens abroad. The country where a dual national is located generally has a stronger claim to that person’s allegiance.

…

***********

That shows me the disregard of this Canadian government for its citizens who are also US citizens or *duals* as we are now referred to as *US citizens who happen to reside in Canada*. That doesn’t sound like Canada cares a whit about my allegiance to Canada (as I chose to become a Canadian citizen) or that of my children (born in Calgary, AB, Canada).

 

I don’t like how many Canadian Bills shoved through Parliament work together in taking away our rights.

Do you?

Please stand up for the rights of all Canadians: http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/

Congress knew about diaspora’s “phantom gains” problem in 1986 & refused to fix it

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 29 Comments

As USCitizenAbroad pointed out in 2012 (and as Phil Hodgen more recently reminded us), the “Internal” Revenue Code penalises Americans in other countries who want to become homeowners:

Assuming a falling US dollar, there will be a phantom gain on the sale of the property where you are receiving money, but a phantom loss on the discharge of the mortgage where you are paying money. Assuming a rising US dollar, there will be a phantom loss on the sale of the property when receiving the money and a phantom gain on the discharge of the mortgage when you are paying the money.

US law does require you to pay tax on the “net” phantom capital gain but will not allow you a loss on the “net” phantom capital loss.

The main reason this occurs is the absurd tax law definition of “functional currency”: U.S. emigrants must pretend for tax purposes that they really earn & spend U.S. dollars and realise foreign currency gains & losses in every daily transaction in a foreign country, even if all their income, assets, and liabilities are in another currency. This requirement came into being in piecemeal fashion, scattered throughout various IRS revenue rulings, and was finally given Congressional endorsement and clarification by the Tax Reform Act of 1986. That Act explicitly exempted businesses from this inane requirement; they can pick a functional currency that actually makes sense. (Remember kids, corporations are people too, except when it’s more convenient for them not to be.)

In drawing up the 1986 Act, Congress examined the confused state of regulations & case law on foreign currency transactions, identified problems for both businesses and individuals, and fixed businesses’ problems while refusing to fix individuals’ problems. One new provision which Congress enacted to address multinational businesses’ issues — “integrated treatment” of hedging transactions, 26 USC § 988(d) — could also have fixed the mortgage “phantom gains” problem. However, Congress explicitly stated their intention that this new provision be “inapplicable to exchange gain or loss recognized by a U.S. individual resident abroad upon repayment of a foreign currency denominated mortgage on the individual’s principal residence”.

The same year, Congress also passed the Immigration and Nationality Act Amendments of 1986, which would drastically expand the number of cases of dual citizenship among the American diaspora. Guess who was the one Senator who was in the perfect position to be closely familiar with both bills and thus to understand their combined impact on the diaspora?

Continue reading →

The ISA, *exempt from FATCA Reporting* says UK Intergovernmental Agreement with the US…

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 18 Comments

FULL ISA GUIDE (UK) – Save without paying tax is similar to  Canada’s Registered Tax Free Savings Account (TFSA).  Neither come with a warning sticker for investors who may be (or may not be) *US Persons* as to whom and how the US considers the ISA and the TFSA *foreign trusts*.

Both the UK/US Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) and the Canada/US Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) set out exemptions for the UK ISA and the Canadian TFSA.

Now, even with the UK IGA exempting the ISA, some investment brokers are refusing to open accounts for British savers who have US citizenship, as a result of draconian laws introduced by US tax authorities.

The legislation, called Foreign Account Tax Compliant Act (or “Fatca”), requires banks, brokers and other finance firms to report the names and financial details of US customers to America’s Internal Revenue Service.

This is costly and some organisations, including National Savings & Investments, have decided not to comply. Instead they have closed the accounts of US nationals, or refused applications for new accounts.

It has emerged that a number of DIY brokers have decided to take similar action, updating their terms and conditions to bar US citizens even if they are British residents and taxpayers.

…“We had not previously requested details regarding client nationalities as prior to last year there was no requirement to do so. When we become aware that a client has US links we explain any decision regarding the closure of the account to the client and what their options are.”

Other brokers to halt the opening of new accounts for US citizens include Interactive Investor, the Share Centre and Alliance Trust Savings.

The Share Centre’s current terms and conditions state: “In the future, should you become an American citizen, you agree to inform us immediately and consent to the automatic closure of your account.”

**********

Which other countries will follow suit / copy cat to protect themselves, even for such accounts *IGA exempted from FATCA reporting*?

the agreement clarifies that any pension scheme or other retirement arrangement established in the UK and further discussed in the agreement (including pension funds or pension schemes covered by IRS Announcement 2005-30) will also be treated as exempt beneficial owners under FATCA.  For this purpose, a UK retirement plan or arrangement includes an entity established or located in and regulated in the UK, or a predetermined contractual or legal arrangement, operated to provide pension or retirement benefits or earn income for providing such benefits under the laws of the UK and regulated with respect to contributions, distributions, reporting, sponsorship, and taxation. – See more at: http://www.ustaxfs.com/recap-uk-financial-institutions-affected-by-the-new-us-uk-fatca-agreement/#sthash.ZhLKKJci.dpuf
the agreement clarifies that any pension scheme or other retirement arrangement established in the UK and further discussed in the agreement (including pension funds or pension schemes covered by IRS Announcement 2005-30) will also be treated as exempt beneficial owners under FATCA.  For this purpose, a UK retirement plan or arrangement includes an entity established or located in and regulated in the UK, or a predetermined contractual or legal arrangement, operated to provide pension or retirement benefits or earn income for providing such benefits under the laws of the UK and regulated with respect to contributions, distributions, reporting, sponsorship, and taxation. – See more at: http://www.ustaxfs.com/recap-uk-financial-institutions-affected-by-the-new-us-uk-fatca-agreement/#sthash.ZhLKKJci.dpuf

Reality Bites for someone who Loved the USA

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 53 Comments

A good friend of mine, a Canadian citizen who has lived in Canada for 40 years, recently shared some of her thoughts with me regarding what she describes as a sort of cognitive dissonance in terms of her changing feelings towards the country she was born in, grew up in, and is still a citizen of – the USA. The following is narrated from some emails she sent me, and for which she gave permission to share with the Brock community. She says:

I needed a break from all this FATCA craziness, so went to a show called “Rock ‘n Roll Legends”, at a local theater with my neighbours. Although the theater is small, it is a class act and people come from all over to watch the shows. I expected to have trouble staying in my seat and figured I would want to dance up and down the aisles. And it was just fabulous! They did this retrospective of showing US news on the screen while performing the music that was current at the time from the 60′ and 70’s. The cast was amazing. They had the music just absolutely perfectly dead on, all could sing unbelievably well, mimicking the original artists perfectly, and each played multiple instruments.

It was unreal. But the most unpredictable thing happened to me. Instead of wanting to dance in the aisles, I ended up sobbing. You didn’t grow up in the USA, and are much younger than me. I lived through Viet Nam and lost classmates. I lived through the atrocities committed, and yet I loved my country – not the government but the nation. I loved my classmates that died in Nam, understood that: only the poor kids were sent to fight and were not honoured upon their return;  the politicians’ kids didn’t go; and the country didn’t care about the expendable poor kids but just used them for political fodder.

In a strange way that whole era, combined in my head at the same time with this FATCA mess we are currently in, and I had this soul wrenching, demoralizing sense of utter betrayal and complete understanding of what a fool I have been for so many years. I just sobbed. They showed pictures from Viet Nam – the young soldiers, the devastation – all to the backdrop of “He ain’t heavy he’s my brother”. It just killed me.

To actually have believed that the country was good, but to now understand that the government has always been and always will be just simply cruel, makes me ashamed to have this red, white and blue tattoo, just simply ashamed. Yet it is who I am. At a gut level I think I actually see myself as an American living in Canada. But now I am left with this empty, groundless, terrifying feeling. I cannot shed this ‘American thing’ that is me, nor am I really Canadian (aside from living here for 40 years and having a Canadian passport).

In the grand scale of life does it really matter? We are all citizens of this planet. Maybe having what one calls a ‘national identity’ is just simply foolish, and an ego thing. Intellectually, I believe this but in my gut I am simply sick, sad and very, very unhappy. It is a sense of being adrift, beyond lonely, of not having one drop of solid ground under my feet, having no identity, and of being terrified of and hurt by my once beloved country.

Am I making one drop of sense? I really can’t describe the source of my tears nor the pain in my tummy. Betrayal? Fear? Being adrift? Am I overreacting? Maybe being involved with this fight day in and day out is causing me to flip out. But it is real, and not dealing with it, not fighting back will do nothing to make it go away. I have to stay involved. Taking a break will just cause me more anxiety.

Well, so much for it being a fun night. I now feel hung over and exhausted, and I didn’t drink a thing! My head is stuck in a depressive bubble.

Opposition to stripping citizenship from draft evaders in the 1860s

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 14 Comments

As mentioned last time, the now-outlawed practice of stripping U.S. citizenship from deserters and draft evaders — and the still-current practice of denying them re-entry to the U.S. if they can be convinced to strip themselves of citizenship — goes all the way back to the 1865 “Act to amend the several Acts heretofore passed to provide for the Enrolling and Calling out the National Forces, and for other Purposes”, which in § 21 (13 Stat. 487, 491) provided that:

[I]n addition to the other lawful penalties of the crime of desertion from the military or naval service, all persons who have deserted the military or naval service of the United States, who shall not return to said service, or report themselves to a provost-marshal within sixty days after the proclamation hereinafter mentioned, shall be deemed and taken to have voluntarily relinquished and forfeited their rights of citizenship and their rights to become citizens; and such deserters shall be forever incapable of holding any office of trust or profit under the United States, or of exercising any rights of citizens thereof; and all persons who shall hereafter desert the military or naval service, and all persons who, being duly enrolled, shall depart the jurisdiction of the district in which he is enrolled, or go beyond the limits of the United States, with intent to avoid any draft into the military or naval service, duly ordered, shall be liable to the penalties of this section.

And the President is hereby authorized and required forthwith, on the President to passage of this act, to issue his proclamation setting forth the provisions of this section, in which proclamation the President is requested to notify all deserters returning within sixty days as aforesaid that they shall be pardoned on condition of returning to their regiments and companies or to such other organizations as they may be assigned to, until they shall have served for a period of time equal to their original term of enlistment.

In just one clause, this provided both for stripping of citizenship and prohibition of renaturalisation. These provisions of the Enrollment Act of 1865 were controversial even back when they were introduced, in particular over concerns of due process; I quote the various speeches after the jump.

Continue reading →

An exile wants to give up U.S. citizenship and come home to South Korea

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 9 Comments

Yoo Seung-jun, a 1990s South Korean pop star whose career came to an abrupt halt in 2002 after he renounced his citizenship — in what much of the public saw as a well-planned effort to avoid conscription — and was denied re-entry into South Korea upon his next arrival, recently asked to be allowed to restore his South Korean citizenship and to have the age limit on military enlistment waived so that he could belatedly join up. Yoo, who became a U.S. citizen, now lives in China. According to a Maeil Business News article, the government had a very negative response to that idea:

앞서 병무청 부대변인은 지난 12일 “국민들과의 약속을 어기고 본인 스스로 국적을 버린 외국인에 대해서는 논할 가치도 없다”며 “법에 따라 영원히 국적을 회복할 수 없는 것은 물론 입국 금지 해제도 고려 대상이 아니다”고 말했다. Previously, a spokesperson for the Military Manpower Administration had stated on the 12th that “there’s no value in discussing a foreigner who made a promise to the people of this country but then went and threw away his citizenship” and that “under the law, he’ll never be able to get his citizenship restored and he will not receive consideration for a lifting of the entry ban.”

Yoo’s next step was to appeal to the public. In a tearful interview last week in Hong Kong, Yoo got down on his knees and begged to be allowed to return to his country of birth, expressing regret for his past immaturity and stating that he wants to be able to accompany his son on visits to the country. (The Korea Herald has a partial translation of the video.) He then requested to meet with officials from the Ministry of Justice to discuss the possibility of restoration of citizenship; however, the Ministry of Justice was just as dismissive, says Money Today:

22일 법무부 대변인은 한 매체를 통해 “한 개인이 국적을 회복하거나 입국금지를 해제할 수 있는 방법은 없다”며 “입국금지령을 요청한 기관에서 해제 요청하는 것이 정상적인 법적 절차다. 개인이 요구해서 풀 수 있는 문제가 아니다”라고 단호한 입장을 밝혔다. On the 22nd, a spokesperson for the Ministry of Justice revealed that they were taking a firm position: “there’s no method to get permission to restore the individual’s nationality or to cancel the entry ban” and that “the cancellation request must follow proper legal procedures at the department which requested the entrance ban. This is not an issue which could be resolved by individual request.”

In a second interview this morning, Yoo broke down in tears and apologised again, but news reports are saying that Yoo or his assistants were heard using foul language and saying “now the articles will keep on coming” (지금 기사 계속 올라오네) in audio that was accidentally broadcast after the camera stopped rolling, and the public is now angrier than ever about Yoo after more than a decade of barely thinking about him. So things aren’t looking good for Yoo himself. But what about the millions of other South Korean emigrants?

Continue reading →

Reminder: “Solving US Citizenship Issues: Have You Received a FATCA Letter?”

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 10 Comments

toronto 31may15
TORONTO
Sunday
May 31,2015
12 noon – 2 p.m.
$20.00
Carr Hall
100 St. Joseph St.
Toronto ON M5S 2C4
MAP
 
The “FATCA Hunt” – the hunt for U.S. persons (whatever that is) began on July 1, 2014 which was “Canada Day”. Although both the definition of “U.S. person” and whether one meets the definition is not always clear, the search has begun. The level of FATCA awareness has begun. Some organizations are actively warning people that “U.S. Personness” matters. The purpose of the warning is presumably to encourage people to ”come clean” and deal with their U.S. tax situations. In some cases, there is no particular warning – just a letter indicating that they are suspected to be a “U.S. person”. Often one must prove to the institution sending the letter that one is not a U.S. person.

We have recently learned that no Canadians have yet been reported by the CRA to the IRS. This will not occur prior to September 15 and is required by September 30, 2015. You may wish to keep track of a suit trying to prevent this information from leaving Canada
www.adcs-adsc.ca
 
WHO: John Richardson, B.A., L.L.B., J.D., is a Toronto lawyer and a member of the Ontario Bar.
Citizenshipsolutions.ca

ADMISSION: $20 per individual or $40 for a family up to four. Payable in cash at the door.
 
Hope to see you, your families and friends! Spread the word!
 
Information presented is NOT intended or offered as legal or accounting advice specific to your situation.