cross posted from AmericanExpatFinance.com
By Helen Burggraf, Editor – September 08, 2018
A panel discussion that will consider recent and growing efforts to convince U.S. lawmakers to end America’s increasingly-unpopular “citizenship-based” tax regime is set to take place at a venue in the Mayfair district of London, on the 18th of September.
Continue reading
In addition the meeting mentioned below, we would like to have a second, more informal program for expats and their families and friends. This format would be a more intimate question and answer which will be focused on individuals subject to the CBT regime. This would take place on Sunday, August 12, from 2:00 – 4:00 pm on the U of T campus. We need a confirmed number of individuals before booking a room. If you are interested, please email nobledreamer16 at gmail dot com Cost: $20
A LIGHT AT THE END OF THE TUNNEL OR ANOTHER ONCOMING TRAIN: THE POSSIBLE END OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP-BASED TAXATION
If you are an American citizen residing and doing business in Canada, you bear the pain of the heavy tax burden endured by all U.S. citizens due to the fact that the U.S. is the only major country that imposes worldwide taxation on its citizens no matter whether they live in the U.S. or in another country. In addition, the U.S. imposes significant penalty laden reporting requirements on U.S. citizens living in Canada and abroad.
Change is a possibility.
Did you know that there is a possibility that the U.S. Congress may introduce, debate and vote upon a bill that may ease this worldwide taxation burden on U.S. citizens living and working in Canada? This bill would enact ‘Territorial Taxation for Individuals (TTFI)’. It is a tax cut for 9 million overseas Americans by ending double taxation.
Solomon Yue, CEO of Republicans Overseas has been involved with drafting the TTFI bill. Mr. Yue, who is currently working with AmChams throughout the world, will present publicly shareable information about the TTFI bill, and discuss its progress as it journeys through the legislative process. He will be encouraging AmCham Canada to lend its support in the global effort to encourage Congress to move forward with this legislation.
Continue reading
The 1967 CBC Massey Lectures, "Conscience For Change" – Martin Luther King http://t.co/unXKU5LfjZ – Fascinating https://t.co/3E8cBcwga5
— Citizenship Lawyer (@ExpatriationLaw) December 28, 2014
Recent discussions with a friend have me wondering whether Americans abroad are indeed the “property” of the US government. At first I considered this a bit exaggerated but am coming to appreciate that there is a great deal of truth in it. Perhaps reflecting a bit on the past might provide valuable insight on how we might approach this ongoing, changing situation. The idea that a human being could be considered “property” is initially strange to me. The only obvious parallel would be that of being a slave. In spite of growing up in a somewhat racially-tense city, I was largely unaware that the very foundation of the U.S. included slavery. I was 10 years old in 1965 when the riots in Watts occurred. Two years later, there were 159 riots during the “Long Hot Summer of 1967. The next year, following the assassination of Dr Martin Luther King Jr, more riots. By then I was 13 and able to understand some of the reasons: poor schools, lack of employment, overcrowding in filthy ghettos, pollution, discrimination by police, etc. MLK described it as “humiliation for decades, for centuries.” Along with the other assassinations, Vietnam, etc, it did not yet occur to me that the problem was rooted in a very underlying hypocrisy. In spite of the U.S. being the “Land of the Free and the “American Dream” supposedly available to all, the fact was the U.S. was a place where gross abuse of human “rights” was visible in daily life as long as I had been alive.
There are some interesting CBC Radio “Massey Lectures” given by Dr. Martin Luther King Jr that John Richardson wrote about recently on the ADCS wordpress site. As I listened, I was struck by the fact that intellectually, it was obvious enough that “rights” had been violated in a perverse way for so long. But I was more horrified by the immorality of it. I was much too young to really appreciate what he was and am overwhelmed by his intelligence, clarity and devotion to non-violence. The issue of race in America is clearly an ethical issue, no doubt about it. One could go on and on about social, economic and other mitigating factors but at its root, the problem truly is that one group of human beings is denied the basic respect, dignity and consideration others receive due to discrimination of what they are from birth. The recent incidents in Ferguson, Cleveland and other cities show not much has changed in the last 50 years.
I was taught that America was born due to the brave actions of those who left England because of persecution due to religious beliefs; later attempts to tax the colonists who had no representation in the parliament etc. In recent years, having learned my ancestral roots, I have been proud of the fact that my family has played an integral role in that beginning. Yet at the same time, for the last three years, experience of the treatment at the hands of the US government definitely casts a different light on it. Americans abroad (and even people who are not truly “American”) are not given the same respect as those who live in the Homeland. What’s at the root of this? Does the U.S. view us as if they “own” us? Are we their property and are we not free to leave the country? We may be able to buy our way out but fundamentally, what difference is there between that and a slave from the past doing the same? In the modern world there is a tendency to minimalize emotional or mental suffering as if it is not valid since it is not as severe as say, physical torture. That may be true to a certain degree yet I fail to see how that removes the immoral forces that can be responsible for both. In fact, the only way to see it may be to draw parallels between them.
Continue reading
Roger Conklin, a frequent contributor at Isaac Brock, has just had a letter published in the Wall Street Journal. I have been off the grid for a few days, so maybe it has been posted somewhere. If I missed it, I apologize, but thought I would pull out out for headline attention.
Territorial Tax: Whose Money Is It?
Nicole Tichon’s July 30 letter says that in many countries, with territorial tax systems that don’t tax corporate earnings when remitted back home, “unemployment is at record levels.”
… at the earliest due to the House rules limiting chairmanship of committees to three terms and impending retirement of Sen. Carl Levin.
This means the current chairman of the powerful Ways and Means committee, Dave Camp (Mich-R) is on his way out because he will soon hit the term limit although the battle for that quite coveted appointment has already begun, and because Camp is rumored to be making a run for Levin’s soon to be vacated Senate seat, he likely won’t be focusing on reforming much of anything anyway.
There is a whole lot of politics in play according to this article in The Fiscal Times, but the bottom line is that if American citizens abroad are hoping for an overhaul of the convoluted US tax code, and possibly relief from the tax on earned income worldwide in the form of a residence based tax, they shouldn’t look for that any time in the near future.
Congress hasn’t bothered with a comprehension refit of the US tax code since 1986, and there are more than a few issues that need attending to, but for the time being, they appear to have lost momentum and are allowing themselves to be more concerned with the titles and positions coming up for grabs than they are with Americans in or out of homeland.
I have received an okay to publish these notes from the Speaker of Part 2 of the meeting that was held in Toronto on June 15. I apologize that they are not in narrative form; I don’t have total memory of all that was said nor did I understand everything that was said and I fear giving the wrong impression if I were to attempt to elaborate. Hopefully, the general sense is correct. I wanted to do them as a separate post so that more might see them; it seems less people will benefit if they were buried as comments only. Many ideas were remembered by commentors on the original post but there are some important ideas that need to come out. The Speaker did an excellent job outlining and organizing a lot of information that many will need as they try to figure out what to do about their own situation. Also, I did not take any notes on the first session as it was my understanding that it was to be completely private and I thought it would be inappropriate for me to do so.
Recently I posted Arrow’s article at the Vancouver Sun concerning Peter Hogg’s letter to Finance Canada on LinkedIn. I just read a very interesting response from Jeff Mukadi, a Toronto tax law and compliance professional. (All emphases are mine).
He has published an article, ““FATCA Getting Rid of U.S. Clients Will Not Get You Off the Grid,” Journal of International Taxation, November 2012. He argues that foreign citizens affected by FATCA should bring their governments to court through class action suits to invalidate FATCA/IGA’s for unconstitutionality. He discussed some excerpts of the article; and makes a very strong case for the absence of reciprocity and true quid pro quo. “Reciprocity is not simply an exchange of one thing for anything, but one right for the same right and one obligation for the same obligation.” As we all know, this is simply not what the US is “offering.”
What is most interesting is his suggestion that FATCA cannot be implemented in Canada not only because of our privacy laws but more importantly, because of the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act (R.S.C., 1985, c.F-29). This Act was designed specifically to “deny effect to extraterritorial Acts of foreign governments violating Canadian sovereignty.” The US National Defense Authorization Act (“Cuban Assets Control Regulations,” July 8, 1963) was such a measure and prompted the issue of the Foreign Extraterritorial Measures Act (United States) Order of October 9, 1992 (SOR-92-584). By authority of the Canadian Attorney General jointly with the Secretary of State for External Affairs, SOR-92-584 prohibited a Canadian corporation, or director, officer, manager, or employee in a position of authority of a Canadian corporation, from complying with this U.S. law. So in addition to not joining the “Coalition of the Willing” in 2003, we have another instance of Canada standing up to the US. Mr. Mukadi emphasizes the fact that since FATCA is even more agressive than the US National Defense Authorization Act, “it is certain that SOR-92-584 will always be invoked as a precedent against any attempt to implement or enforce FATCA in Canada.” Since governments are not taking care of their primary duty, that of defending their sovereignty and protecting citizens, it might be easier to fight FATCA in the courts. And until this happens, we cannot know if we can be safe from FATCA.
He indicated he would send me the article so I hope I can pass on more. I also contacted Allison Christians to see if we could get her take on it. In any regard, this sounds like another specific “weapon” we can use in this fight and I believe we should let our government know we are aware of it.
UPDATE: Mr. Mukadi has kindly provided a copy of his article: FATCA JOIT Article November 2012 – Final Galleys Mukadi FATCA
With the 113th Congress in full swing, Dennis Ross (R-FL) has introduced H.R. 243, the so-called “Bowles-Simpson Plan of Lowering America’s Debt Act”. This is basically the same as the bill he introduced last year, and features the same ridiculous proposal to raise taxes on U.S. persons abroad to pay for tax cuts for Homeland corporations. For more details, see this previous post of ours.
What’s mildly interesting here is that just days after Ross introduced his bill, the Joint Committee on Taxation published its “Estimate of Federal Tax Expenditures for Fiscal Years 2012–2017” (hat tip: TaxProf Blog). Their estimate of the “cost” of the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion has fallen significantly compared to last year: US$5.9 billion for 2012, down by more than 20% against their US$7.4 billion estimate for 2011. So where does that leave Ross’ bill and the revenue projections he used to justify all his tax goodies for Homelanders and their corporations?
In case you hadn’t already figured it out, this is the shape of things to come for U.S. Persons abroad: relentless bipartisan attacks on the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion in the name of “simplifying the tax code” and “cutting subsidies to favoured groups”, because the “non-partisan” Joint Committee on Taxation (which is composed entirely of Homelanders) classifies it as a “tax expenditure”. The latest effort in this direction: Dennis Ross (R-FL)’s HR 6474, which purports to implement the recommendations of the Simpson-Bowles Commission regarding territorial taxation. It contains provisions to phase out 20% of the FEIE every year until it is fully eliminated in 2017:
SEC. 271. FIVE-YEAR PHASEOUT OF CERTAIN TAX EXPENDITURES.
(a) In General- Effective for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2012, the amount allowable as a credit, exclusion from gross income, exemption from taxation, or deduction for the taxable year under the tax provisions specified in subsection (c) (determined without regard to this section) shall be reduced by the applicable percentage of the amount so allowable …
(c) Specified Provisions-For purposes of this section, the tax provisions specified in this subsection are as follows:
(1) Section 911 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to citizens or residents of the United States living abroad).
Boom! Right there on top in pole position, the very first “tax expenditure” they propose to cut. That in itself should tell you volumes about Congress’ attitude towards U.S. Persons abroad.
Continue reading
