http://www.svt.se/nyheter/regionalt/vastnytt/svenska-banker-letar-efter-amerikaner

(hit the right button on the picture two times, and you come to a video with English text)

The article says:

Tinna’s mother became pregnant at the ship to America, and Tinna lived in the US its first three months. Now she can owe the US Internal Revenue thousands of dollars.

1962 had Tinna dad got a job as a visiting scholar in New Haven, United States. He took his family and on the way there was Tinna’s mother pregnant.

– They were bored on the boat, and nine months later I came, says Tinna who currently works as a teacher at Lerum’s high school.

She shows a photo of him and his proud big sister, and a telegram that his father sent when she was born.

– Rejoice Kristina is born, it says. After three months, we went home.

From Moodys Gartner Blog, Roy Berg, February 11, 2015: US proposes relief for some who renounce US citizenship: Is FATCA a motivating factor?

The details of the Proposal, and the chances of being given the effect of law, while interesting, are less so than the Administration’s motive for advancing it. Politicians don’t get re-elected by winnowing away their constituency base or enacting legislation that has the effect of raising tax (even in small measures). Normal people, even politicians, behave rationally so there must be a reason for the Proposal. Could the Proposal play a small part in a more subtle strategy that might involve foreign opposition to FATCA and IGA-partner domestic legislation?

• Some Canadian dual citizens who wish to renounce US citizenship may qualify
• Will the Proposal become law, and is the back door unlocked?
• Termination of United States Citizenship
• Why would the Administration propose relief to people who wish to renounce US citizenship?
• Is there another motive to relieve these dual citizens from tax and filing obligations?
• Conclusion – Regardless of the Proposal’s chance of being given the effect of law, the Administration’s motivation for bringing it forward, or the narrow class of individuals to whom it would apply, the Proposal is positive step. It is evidence that the unenviable predicament faced by dual citizens living abroad has been heard in Washington, DC and there may be the political will to affect change. Change may come quickly or not at all, but it will never come until there is understanding of the issue. The Proposal is an indication that understanding may be taking hold.

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

See, related:

Eric’s February 3, 2015 post, “Obama FY2016 budget proposes limited relief for accidental duals-at-birth who give up U.S. citizenship”

and

Analysis from Virginia La Torre Jeker JD, February 5, 2015, “Relief for Accidental Americans: Obama Administration’s 2016 Revenue Proposal“.

and, one more, to keep analysis (so far) all together in one post:

The 2015 Obama budget proposal for “dual citizens” cannot be implemented without Congressional approval

Part 1 – The Obama 2015 Budget Proposal – Change you can believe in?
Part 2 – My thoughts on this part of the Obama budget proposal
Part 3 – Differing perspectives on exempting a “sub-group” of “technical U.S. citizens” from the compliance and tax horror which is part of the U.S. “Tax responsibilities of expatriation“
Part 4 – Can this Obama budget proposal be implemented by Treasury without Congress?

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.

Continue reading →

Cross-posting from ADCS-ADSC.ca blog congratulations to constitutional lawyer, Joseph Arvay, and his team on today’s unanimous Canadian Supreme Court decision, with the disclaimer as rightly suggested…

This post and the Canadian Supreme Court unanimous ruling  is being cited solely to show the legal skills of Canadian constitutional lawyer, Joseph Arvay, and his team, not to discuss our agreement or disagreement with the ruling itself.

Congratulations to @ADCSovereignty lawyer Joe Arvay – SCC allows doctor assisted suicide

Joseph Arvay and team will use their same skills in working to uphold the rights of approximately one million Canadians, their spouses, their children, their business partners who presently face national origin discrimination (US-defined US citizenship / personhood) after the signing and implementation  by Omnibus Bill C-31, of an intergovernmental agreement to allow US FATCA law to override Canadian laws and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Post authored by Bubblebustin for you…

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

This feature article covers what James Jatras told us long ago when he said that the FATCA IGA’s are “dead on arrival”. The US Congress will not pass the legislation to make these IGA’s truly reciprocal, but my question is,

Will our governments choose to ignore this fact when our banks are running scared?

It’s up to each any every one of us to tell our MP’s that the banks should not collect the private banking information on EVEN ONE CANADIAN when the US isn’t holding up it’s end of the deal!

This confirms my worst fear, that our governments may turn a blind eye to the US’s lack of legislative authority on this matter, again sacrificing us just to make things run smoothly for the banks. Is there any reason to think they’d act otherwise?

Continue reading →