Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Statistics on U.S. green cards issued to people born in the U.S.

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 24 Comments

According to Department of Homeland Security statistics, from 1986 to 2013, more than three thousand people born in the U.S. obtained U.S. green cards, with the level in the past five years rising to roughly 230 per year after a long decline in the 1980s and 1990s.

Some of these (at least a few hundred, and possibly many more) are U.S.-born children of diplomats, who don’t receive U.S. citizenship at birth, but can apply for green cards fairly easily. However, it’s certain that former U.S. citizens by jus soli are also present in these statistics — there have been a few cases documented in the media, though the total number is unclear.

In any case, given that tens of thousands of American emigrants gave up their citizenship during that same period, it seems the “reverse migration” rate from among that group is not very high (though of course, some ex-U.S. citizens obtaining green cards may have been born in other countries, and so wouldn’t show up in these green card statistics).

GreenCards
Year Green
cards		 Year Green
cards		 Year Green
cards		 Year Green
cards
1986 129 1987 127 1988 114 1989 108
1990 122 1991 70 1992 66 1993 60
1994 47 1995 57 1996 51 1997 38
1998 31 1999 29 2000 35 2001 63
2002 66 2003 32 2004 57 2005 183
2006 333 2007 171 2008 216 2009 181
2010 201 2011 269 2012 279 2013 319
Source of data: Yearbook of Immigration Statistics, Table 3, for years 1998, 2003, and 2013

Continue reading →

Tricia Moon, your comment at the *Jack Townsend blog* is heart-felt and brilliant – THANK YOU!

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 57 Comments

I am taking the liberty of cross-posting here at Brock this current post from MapleSandbox: http://maplesandbox.ca/2015/no-crisis-see-you-in-court/. Lynne Swanson’s post of Tricia Moon’s reply on the Jack Townsend blog needs to be read far and wide…

 

No Crisis? “See You In Court.”

Posted on by

Tricia Moon has responded on Jack Townsend’s blog where he suggested U.S. Senate did not listen to submissions on citizenship-based taxation because they “are not yet willing to say there is a crisis.”

Tricia’s words are powerful. I post them here with her permission.

I came to know of the situation involving expats in late 2011. At that time, this blog was one of the only places to come for reliable information. I was much too frightened to be anything more than a lurker. I had never been one to participate online or engage in any sort of “cause.”

I renounced in 2012. The only way for many of us to deal with the anger and feeling of betrayal was to fight back. A completely American trait. I have lived in Canada more than 33 years and came due to marriage. I am an original “Brocker” and am the
Secretary-Treasurer for the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.

ADCS-ADSC put together a massive submission to the Senate Finance Committee; a total of 7 separate parts. See: (https://app.box.com/s/yn25x1gk….

The comments and stories of American expatriates is nearly 200 pages, demonstrating real-life circumstances of people affected by the U.S. hunt for ”tax cheats.” See:
(https://app.box.com/s/yn25x1gk…
& videos: https://vimeo.com/citizenshipt… ).

Needless to say, the lack of any real, substantial indication of change for American expatriates is deeply disturbing. As I understand it, there was a total of 347 submissions to the International Working Group. Seventy-five percent of the submissions are from individuals. On top of the dismay created by the SFC’s insignificant “nod” to the plight of expats, now we hear that those 260 submissions (compared to the estimated 7.6 million expats abroad), indicate this is not a crisis and therefore, it’s perfectly reasonable for the U.S. government to sit on this until they recognize one.

Surely, one can understand that this is much more than a “numbers” game. Not all of those 7.6 million are adults. Not all of those people speak/write English well enough to feel comfortable making a submission. Not all of those 7.6 million know they are about to be
exposed by FATCA. And many are probably still too frightened to say anything with their name attached to it. It must be understood that the number of submissions speak for thousands more. In no way can the number of submissions be a sole factor in determining the depth of the problem.

As to whether there is a “crisis”, I ask that the following be considered:

Ø more bank accounts being closed; France is now the focal point

Ø cancellation of mortgages continues

Ø U.S. taxation of tax-deferred accounts (in countries of residence)
(in Canada two types of accounts are matching grants by the Canadian government; this amounts to a tax directly on the Canadian people)

Ø capital gains taxation on principal residences in countries where no capital gains tax is imposed (and no interest for mortgages is deductible as it is in the U.S.)

Ø unwarranted insistence that accidental Americans with no meaningful ties to the U.S. other than birth are liable for exactly the same tax and information reporting requirements as Americans who lived in the U.S. for decades

Ø inability of parents/guardians/trustees to renounce for those unable to form intent

Ø disproportionate cost involved in tax compliance (compared to Homeland Americans)

Ø disproportionate information reporting requirements (compared to Homeland Americans)

Ø the undeniable psychological effects including:

§ destroyed marriages

§ people with serious stress, anger and depression, some are suicidal

§ people terrified they will never be able to cross the border to care for elderly parents, etc.

§ people humiliated by the requirement to report their legitimate financial accounts to FIN CEN

§ people labeled as “traitors” etc for trying to protect their “alien” families by renouncing/ relinquishing

I would like these committees to ask the people who HAVE been affected, “Was this a crisis for you and your family?” Or would they say to such people, “I’m sorry but unless there are thousands upon thousands of you writing to the Committee, your misery doesn’t matter.”

They have, in fact, just said exactly that.

There have been endless letters, emails, visits to Washington, forums, information sessions, media coverage, a large presence in cyberspace etc etc etc. It is abundantly clear:

The US government could care less about the American Diaspora and as far as they are concerned, it is perfectly acceptable to simply let this continue.

This situation is incomprehensible. The long, long history of no enforcement of these requirements, nor due diligence of any kind.

The misapplication of FBAR, designed to be applied to resident Americans with foreign accounts. The hideous situation of OVDP 2009 and FAQ#35.The horrible penalties that were inflicted on those who tried to come forward and “do the right thing.” Ratio of penalty for tax owed: 10th percentile (“minnows”) -129%;
90th percentile (“whales”)- 4.17%.

Douglas Shulman’s endless threats and humiliating manner. Douglas Shulman’s arrogant attitude that he need not respond to a TAD.

The outrageous extra-territorial behavior of the US requiring all other countries of the world to pass laws to break their own privacy laws or else a 30% sanction applied.

The absolute myth that expats have any real representation in Congress with the reality that this is indeed “taxation without representation.”

And then there is Mr. Schumer: “Nearly 10,000 people in the last 10 years have renounced their citizenship. Not a single one has been penalized. They will be.”

It must be remembered (and matters very much), that the majority of expats are law-abiding and tax-compliant where they live. Where is the need for all this demeaning treatment? Did it ever occur to someone in Treasury, the IRS, anywhere, that they might just let us
know and ask first? There would always have been time later for all the punishing.

This seems endless and is nearly the last nail in the coffin. For those retired or close to it, there is virtually no chance of change in their lifetime. Wait another 30 years? Even 20 will not cover it.

And many more will look at this and say “It’s time to get out.” There really are no options for these people.

In Cook v Tait, the standard (and very tired) justification for citizenship-based taxation, Justice McKenna writes:

“In other words, the principle was declared that the government, by its very nature, benefits the citizen and his property wherever found and, therefore, has the power to make the benefit complete.”

I don’t see it. I just don’t see it.

And our answer to the U.S. Government, as stated many times after the release of this report is:

“See you in court.”

2nd Circuit retroactively extends jus sanguinis citizenship to U.S. emigrant father’s out-of-wedlock kid

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 46 Comments

judge-lohier_small Held by Circuit Judges Raymond Lohier (Obama appointee, pictured at right) and Cormac Carney (Dubya appointee) and District Judge Jed Rakoff (Clinton appointee) in Morales-Santana v. Lynch, No. 11-1252-ag (2nd Cir., 2015). Ironically, given the effects this may have in Canada, Lohier himself was born in Montreal. In the opinion, released on Wednesday, Lohier wrote:

Petitioner Luis Ramon Morales‐Santana seeks review of a Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”) decision denying his motion to reopen his removal proceedings to evaluate his claim of derivative citizenship. Under the statute in effect when Morales‐Santana was born, Immigration and Nationality Act of 1952, §§ 301(a)(7), 309(a), (c) (codified at 8 U.S.C.§§ 1401(a)(7), 1409(a), (c) (1952)), Morales‐Santana’s father satisfied the physical presence requirements for transmitting citizenship applicable to unwed citizen mothers but not the more stringent requirements applicable to unwed citizen fathers. On appeal, Morales‐Santana argues principally that this statutory scheme violates the Fifth Amendment’s guarantee of equal protection, and that the proper remedy is to extend to unwed fathers the benefits unwed mothers receive under the statute. We agree and hold that Morales‐Santana derived citizenship at birth through his father.

It seems this ruling (if upheld on appeal) could retroactively extend U.S. citizenship to a large number of people who previously believed — and may even have confirmed with lawyers & consular officers — that they were non-citizens and would remain so for life unless they took the voluntary steps of immigrating to the U.S. and naturalising there. This includes people who do not live in the United States, and who would thus be caught in the net of FATCA and citizenship-based taxation. Who exactly will be affected? Detailed attempt at an answer after the jump.

(Update: for those of you who don’t like PDFs, the folks over at Findlaw.com have posted the opinion as an HTML page.)

Continue reading →

Major updates to Foreign Affairs Manual on U.S. citizenship renunciation procedures

Posted on by Posted in Renunciation 39 Comments

On Monday, the State Department posted an update to 7 FAM 1260, the section of the Foreign Affairs Manual which discusses procedures for renunciation of U.S. citizenship. For comparison, here’s the previous version, which is less than half the length. (Separately from this, 7 FAM 1220, which discusses standards for assessing relinquishments rather than renunciations of U.S. citizenship, was updated back in February: old vs. new.) There’s three major changes to 7 FAM 1260, and a bunch of minor ones which I summarise after the jump.

First, the update retains the two-interview system but recommends that the first interview (“initial information session”, in which the consular officer reviews the renunciant’s paperwork and discusses the consequences) be conducted by telephone or that the information required can be exchanged electronically. This means that renunciants should be able to avoid having to make two actual visits to the consulate, which may be distant from where they live — possibly even in another country, if their local consulate had a months-long backlog for appointments.

Second, the update disallows attorneys from being present for either interview, even if the renunciant does not speak English and needs a witness. State claims this is necessary to allow them to ascertain the person’s “free will”; I have my doubts about that explanation.

Third, the update provides that Form DS-4079, “Request for Determination of Possible Loss of United States Citizenship”, should not be required in routine renunciation cases; only a DS-4080, “Oath/Affirmation of Renunciation of United States Nationality”, and DS-4081, “Statement of Understanding Concerning the Consequences and Ramifications of Relinquishment or Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship”, are necessary.

Continue reading →

Message in a bottle 3: “First past the post” – How to win a majority government with a minority of the votes

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 1 Comment

We’ve had a few posts in the recent past, addressing different aspects of the upcoming election in October. For anyone wanting to keep track of our perspective of all things “Harper Govt:”

Canadian Federal Election: It’s Time to Throw the People Who Betrayed Us Out of Office

Hey Steve

Help Me Keep My April 5 Promise Revisited-We Will Never Forget the IGA Betrayal by the CONs

And now we have an excellent post explaining how “first past the post” works. Maybe I’ll link to a page in the next few days to keep all these together as references all in one place….

cross posted from adcsovereignty.wordpress.com

Prologue – From “Message in a bottle 2: Democracy, the appointment of judges and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms”

The post included:

I was reminded of a post that I wrote on this very topic during the 2011 Canadian Federal Election campaign (prior to FATCA and President Obama’s FBAR Fundraiser). You may recall that the Harper Government went into this election with a minority government. The reasons that he won a majority government exist today. The reality is that the Conservative Party of Canada – led by Stephen Harper has an excellent chance of retaining their majority government. That’s the price of the “first past the post” electoral system.

The “First past the post electoral system – How does it work and how does it encourage non-representative democracy?”

The video in the above tweet explains how the “First past the post system” works.

The “Conservative Government” of Prime Minister is extremely unpopular. Yet, it has a “majority government”. How can this be? If you watch the video in the above tweet, you will see an explanation of how “First past the post” works.
Continue reading →

Citizenship Taxation Lawsuit Against U.S. Congress Confirmed

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 64 Comments

Cross posted from: https://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2015/07/08/cbtlawsuit-first-report-of-senate-finance-committee-brings-citizenship-taxation-lawsuit-one-step-closer/

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

#CBTLawsuit – First report of Senate Finance Committee brings citizenship taxation lawsuit one step closer

Posted on July 8, 2015 by adcsovereignty
Citizenship Lawyer @ExpatriationLaw

82 page U.S. Senate International Tax Reform Report released… http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/07/08/82-page-u-s-senate-international-tax-reform-report-released/ … – 3/4 of submissions were from

82 page U.S. Senate International Tax Reform Report released…

Thanks to comment on Brock from *Johnson*. Good find by Johnson, but merely a mention of individual expat submissions from the Senate International Tax Reform Committee. The Senate International Ta…

View on web

 

As reported at the Isaac Brock Society, the “International Taxation Committee” has released it’s report on tax reform. In spite of the fact that more than 3/4 of the submissions were from Overseas Americans, the committee, acknowledged, but failed to address the intolerable treatment of Americans abroad.

As barely, a footnote, the Committee ended with:

F. Overseas Americans

According to working group submissions, there are currently 7.6 million American citizens living outside of the United States. Of the 347 submissions made to the international working group, nearly three-quarters dealt with the international taxation of individuals, mainly focusing on citizenship-based taxation, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).

While the co-chairs were not able to produce a comprehensive plan to overhaul the taxation of individual Americans living overseas within the time-constraints placed on the working group, the co-chairs urge the Chairman and Ranking Member to carefully consider the concerns articulated in the submissions moving forward.

What does this mean?

At a bare minimum it means that:

1. The “International Committee” views its purpose as dealing with “corporate interests” and not “individual interests”.

2. The “International Committee” views DNA Americans as less important than “Corporate Americans”.

3. The “International Committee” has acknowledged the urgency of the situation “for the international taxation of individuals, mainly focusing on citizenship-based taxation, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).”

Remember that many of the same submissions that were sent to the “International Committee” were also sent to the committee focusing on “Taxation of Individuals”. It’s difficult to see how this could not be addressed further by that Committee.

In terms of where to go from here …

1. There will (in the very near future) be a lawsuit launched in the United States against the most egregious aspects of U.S. TAX  policy,  as they relate to ALL PEOPLE deemed to be “U.S. persons” who reside outside the United States.

2. The lawsuit is likely to, in addition to issues of taxation,  include issues related to the “forced imposition of U.S. citizenship” on people who do NOT regard themselves as U.S. citizens or “U.S. persons”. Can the United States deem people to be “U.S. persons” when they believe that they are not?

3. The lawsuit will NOT be run by or through the “Alliance For The Defence of Canadian Sovereignty” (which will “stay at home” dealing with our FATCA lawsuit). It will be run by and funded by a different organization.

4. We hope for the support of all the various groups deemed by the U.S. Government to be “Americans abroad”. “If Americans abroad do NOT hang together, they will hang separately“.

Evaluating your personal situations …

It’s obvious that “U.S. citizenship abroad” lies somewhere between “difficult and impossible” (depending on your personal circumstances). The report from the “International Committee” suggests that the “plight of Americans abroad” is NOT likely to get better soon. This reality raises the obvious question of whether it’s safe to retain U.S. citizenship in a FATCA and FBAR world.

Stay tuned.

John Richardson

P.S. Here is the report from the International Committee.

Citizenship Lawyer @ExpatriationLaw

July 8/15 – “U.S. Senate Finance Report on International Taxation” https://adcsovereignty.files.wordpress.com/2015/07/the-international-tax-bipartisan-tax-working-group-report.pdf … – 3/4 of submissions from

The International Tax Bipartisan Tax Working Group Report

82 page U.S. Senate International Tax Reform Report released…

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 155 Comments

Thanks to comment on Brock from *Johnson*. Good find by Johnson, but merely a mention of individual expat submissions from the Senate International Tax Reform Committee.

The Senate International Tax Reform report is out.

It’s 82 pages all about corporate taxes until the final paragraph where they acknowledge receiving a large number of submissions from US expatriates regarding individual international tax issues. But they aren’t going to do anything about it.

In skimming through this, I see that there is reference to individual taxation issues (what is presently in place, I think).

This is what the final section, the one we’re most interested in, says (and doesn’t say):

F. Overseas Americans

According to working group submissions, there are currently 7.6 million American citizens living outside of the United States. Of the 347 submissions made to the international working group, nearly three-quarters dealt with the international taxation of individuals, mainly focusing on citizenship-based taxation, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).

While the co-chairs were not able to produce a comprehensive plan to overhaul the taxation of individual Americans living overseas within the time-constraints placed on the working group, the co-chairs urge the Chairman and Ranking Member to carefully consider the concerns articulated in the submissions moving forward.

Canadian Federal Election: It’s Time to Throw the People Who Betrayed Us Out of Office

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

The opposition candidates for the 2015 Canadian Federal Election are busy finding office space, gathering volunteers and developing strategies for keeping the seats they have and expelling the Conservative incumbents from those they don’t. Let’s give them some help!

If opposition candidates were Members of Parliament during the past couple of years they probably know about the FATCA IGA that the Conservative government signed with the Americans. It’s been a year and a half since the deed was done and they could probably use a refresher. If they have not been sitting in Parliament they will need to learn from scratch about us and the Conservative sell-out of our Charter rights and financial privacy.

On the continuing page is the cover letter that I have sent to the opposition candidates in my own riding. Attached to the letter is a link to a re-working of my “Introduction to FATCA” that some of you may have read here at Brock. This current version is specifically tailored to an audience of Canadian opposition party candidates.

Please feel free to make use of these materials however you wish in your correspondence with candidates in your own ridings. We can help them win and they can help us regain our status as 1st-class Canadians!

Continue reading →

Message in a bottle 2: Democracy, the Appointment of Judges and the Canadian Charter of Rights

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 8 Comments

cross-posted from the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty WordPress Blog.

by John Richardson
 

 

Introduction – The role of judges in a democracy with constitutionally protected rights

In “Message in a bottle (or from my basement)” I discussed why “freedom” and “democracy” are not the same. I also described the differences between constitutionally protected rights, common law rights and legislative rights.

The message was:

Constitutionally entrenched rights are necessary to protect certain minority interests from the tyranny of the democratic process. Canada’s “Charter of Rights” is a set of “constitutionally entrenched rights”. The effectiveness of a Charter of Rights is determined by the interaction of three groups of people:

First, the general public

Yes, individuals must have the courage to stand up for their rights. They must have the conviction to use the courts. I recognize Gwen Deegan and Ginny Hillis as courageous Canadians. They are strengthening Canada’s Charter of Rights by pursuing litigation against the Government of Canada. It doesn’t take a hero. But, it does take courage.

The truth is that:

All Canadians will benefit by our FATCA lawsuit initiated by Gwen Deegan and Ginny Hillis.

Second, the legal profession

The fact is that most lawyers are absolutely useless when it comes to defending individual rights. Absolutely useless. There are exceptions. Obviously our lawyer, Joe Arvay has a long history of Charter litigation and is an exception. We are proud to have him as our litigator in our FATCA lawsuit. Mr. Arvay has made a huge difference in the lives of Canadians.

But, speaking of lawyers who have made a difference, I can’t resist mentioning Toronto lawyer Rocco Galati – who Globe and Mail journalist Sean Fine, recently referred to as “the unofficial opposition“.

Third, the judges and the courts

Courageous plaintiffs and principled lawyers are not enough. The protection of individual rights requires a strong independent court composed of judges who are INDEPENDENT of the government. Few people realize how important judges are. Few people realize that the most “enduring” things that governments do is to appoint judges. Governments can leave their legacy through their judicial appointments.

At the present time, Prime Minister Harper has appointed (are you ready for this) seven of the nine judges of the Supreme Court of Canada. Yet, the Supreme Court of Canada has consistently ruled against the Harper government.

In a democracy, with constitutionally protected rights, judges can and do protect individuals from tyrannical democracies. It appears that the Supreme Court of Canada understands its proper role:

And this is why:
Continue reading →

Opportunity to Submit Questions for FOX News/Facebook Republican Presidential Candidate Debates

Posted on by Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 52 Comments

UPDATED!!

FOX News and Facebook have teamed up to present the first debates of the 2016 race for the Presidency of the United States.

“The format will allow Fox News viewers and Facebook users to share video questions via the social media site, some of which will be used for the debate, the network said.”

Readers of IBS who are also followers of Facebook may want to prepare questions that they would like the candidates to answer, such as this suggestion from Shadow Raider: “There are an estimated 8.7 million Americans living abroad, a population larger than 39 states. The United States taxes these people, but they cannot benefit from what their taxes pay for, since they are outside the country. The United States is the only country in the world that taxes its citizens abroad, other than the repressive government of Eritrea, which was condemned by the United Nations for this very practice. Should the United States tax people based not on citizenship but residence, like the entire rest of the world does?”

The first debate is scheduled for August 6, 2015 at 9:00 p.m. ET and will be aired on the FOX News Channel.

Moderators: Bret Baier, Megyn Kelly and Chris Wallace

Questions can be uploaded here (Thank You, Shadow Raider!):
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/videos/10153438307721336/
https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews/app_665293576939321
It can be just text, and the second link doesn’t appear to require a Facebook account.

This is another great opportunity to make our voices heard. Let’s make use of it!

https://www.facebook.com/FoxNews

https://twitter.com/foxnews

Bret Baier’s FB page: https://www.facebook.com/BretBaierSR?fref=ts email: http://bretbaier.com/contact/index.php Twitter: @BretBaier

Megyn Kelly FB page: https://www.facebook.com/MegynKelly email: megynkelly@foxnews.com Twitter: @megynkelly

Chris Wallace FB page: https://www.facebook.com/FoxNewsSunday email: http://www.foxnews.com/on-air/fox-news-sunday-chris-wallace/ Twitter: @chriswallace4