— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) November 6, 2019
As citizenship evolves …
I began this post in 2015. It has languished in draft form since that time.
It is now November of 2017. As #TaxReform17 comes to an end, I feel motivated to finish it. It is now 2019. Really, it’s probably now or never. This post draws heavily from posts, insights and comments from a number of bloggers and (past) contributors to the Isaac Brock Society. Your comments have helped to shape this discussion. This post will continue my Cook v. Tait Book (a collection of posts written about U.S. citizenship based taxation taxation-based citizenship, which started in 2011. (Much of the Cook v. Tait book appears as a resource at the Isaac Brock Society – a rich source of comments about life in an FBAR and FATCA world.
About citizenship: One way or the other, citizenship matters ..
The purpose of this post is to explore various aspects of the concept of citizenship through the 20th century and the first part of the 21st century. This is an interesting topic in it’s own right. It is particularly important in the context of Cook v. Tait. As the likelihood of a lawsuit against “citizenship-based taxation” increases, the importance of understanding “the evolution of citizenship” increases. I propose to consider this issue under the following “Part”s:
Part A – Citizenship under international law – An aspect of the Sovereignty of Nations
Part B – Citizenship, international law and citizenship evolution triggered by “war”
Part C – Evolution of citizenship under U.S. “domestic law” – 1967 – Afroyim – The U.S. Supreme Court and the “constitutionalism” of U.S. citizenship
Part D – Notions of Citizenship in the 21st Century
Part E – The forced imposition of U.S. citizenship
Part F – Citizenship as a weapon – The role of “citizenship taxation” in the “weaponization of finance”
Part G – Citizenship-based taxation as a way of controlling the life choices of Americans abroad
Part H – Citizenship-based taxation as a mechanism to export U.S. cultural values to the rest of the world
Part I – Dual citizenship in a world of U.S. extra-territorial laws
Part J – Citizenship-based taxation as a way to export U.S. cultural values to the Muslim world
Part K – Multiple citizenships and public office: Australia’s “Citizenship Seven”
Appendix – Modern thinking and research on the rights and obligations of citizenship
My comment on the “state” of Americans abroad and the broad outline of the Trump tax proposals on the Isaac Brock Society site. Please read the complete thread.
This is reasonably positive. Come on people. Barbara has it right when she writes:
“In certain respects, it’s a good thing that TTFI is not mentioned in the document. Can you imagine the shrill outcry that would result? “Ya mean them trillionaires bathing in champagne in their Riviera mansions don’t have to pay taxes? Hang them!” Politically, it is in our favor if TTFI is inserted in the meeting rooms of the Ways & Means Committee, and not coming from the pen or mouth of Trump.”
If you think for a minute that a 9 page skeletal outline of tax reform is going to include the concerns of Americans abroad you are delusional. The point is that there is NO ASPECT of these proposals that is inconsistent with territorial/residential taxation for individuals. This is intended to be is a statement of the general principles (a possible constitution if you will) of tax reform. The point is that the concerns of Americans abroad CAN fit into this. It is now the job of Americans abroad to make sure that their concerns WILL fit into this. The door is open to convey the message. But, the message must be conveyed.
The problem now is less the proposals and the committees. The problem is the simple fact that few Americans abroad are taking the time to express their concerns. I will say it again. At this particular point, the problem is less the U.S. Government than it is the inaction of Americans abroad. The number of people who have responded to the requests for letters and petitions is pathetically low. In fact the numbers are so low that the fact of the low numbers is doing harm. They are so low that it’s now easy for the drafters of the legislation to say:
Look how few Americans abroad are complaining. There really cant be much of a problem, can there!
Sure there are reasons for not participating. Sure Americans are terrified of their own Government (the new litmus test for determining whether they really are American). But, the simple fact is that with VERY FEW exceptions, Americans abroad are NOT participating in the fight for (a once in a generation) legislative change. It reminds me of a bumper sticker I once saw that read:
“When my ship came in, I was at the airport.”
Quite pathetic really.
Ask not, what your country can for you! Ask what you can and should do for yourself and your children!
Do you want your children to be born into tax slavery when you had a chance to object to it?
By the way, here is the outline of the Trump tax proposals:
So, what do you think?
(Those who need a “reset” in terms of the issues in the “Alliance For The Defence of Canadian Sovereignty Lawsuit” should watch the complete video here.)
Canada in 2017:
The article referenced in the above tweet includes:
On Friday, the government confirmed a payment had been made to Khadr to settle a longstanding lawsuit. Khadr’s suit claimed Canada had violated his rights and was complicit with the United States when he was detained at the U.S. base in Cuba, denied access to a lawyer and tortured.
The Supreme Court of Canada in 2010 ruled Khadr’s rights had been violated.
The apology sparked fresh public debate about Khadr, but Trudeau says the settlement is not about the details of Khadr’s case but the fact his rights were violated.
Trudeau says the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians, “even when it is uncomfortable.”
“When the government violates any Canadian’s Charter rights, we all end up paying for it,” he said.
Trudeau says the Charter of Rights and Freedoms protects all Canadians, “even when it is uncomfortable”
Pierre Trudeau would have believed that the Charter of Rights of protects all Canadians. Justin Trudeau doesn’t believe that. In theory constitutional (including Charter rights) are great things. In practice “rights” often make people feel uncomfortable.
The examples of Canadians with a “U.S. taint” and Mr. Khadr make people uncomfortable. That is perhaps why both really are “Charter of Rights” cases!
(Of course the Supreme Court of Canada has not (unlike in the case of Mr. Khadr) YET ruled that the rights of Canadians with a “U.S. taint” have been violated. Perhaps, that is the real difference.)
What follows is the full text of the Facebook post referenced in the above link. Really now, it’s time to understand that taxation is NOT the price you pay for Government services (or certainly not civilization). It’s something you are required to pay to support the Homeland. Homelanders abroad, Accidental Americans and other dual citizens, academics, and those opposing FATCA, FBAR, PFIC, CBT and other forms of U.S. extra-territorial harassment should really be asking:
“Ask not what the Homeland can do for you! Ask what you can do for the Homeland?”
The above tweet references a post written four years ago in June of 2013. The post predicted that at some point the United States would require disclosure (in addition to FATCA (Form 8938) and FBAR (FinCen 114) and other forms) of the email accounts used by Americans abroad.
That post concluded with my prediction:
The purpose of FBAR and FATCA is to …
Provide the U.S. with information that is outside of its jurisdiction. In other words, the U.S. has no legal right to the information. Therefore, by threatening “life altering” penalties, the U.S. forces its citizens to provide this information to the U.S. government.
If the contents of bank accounts is important, then the contents of an email account would be even more valuable.
You heard it here first:
The next information return that the U.S. will require is the:
“Foreign Email Account Report” – FEARBar for short!
Congress will (like FATCA) unknowingly pass the general legislation (slipped in as part of a Hiring Act) and authorize the IRS to specify the contents of the return. What an Orwellian World!
FEARBar coming to an information return near you!
America has an obsessive-compulsive disorder. The rest of the world thinks so, based on America’s seemingly non-sensical, misguided, and random behavior. Examples are long and storied: the failure to adopt the metric system, the insane void of gun control, a refusal to fund the United Nations yet an expectation to run the organisation by its lonesome, a fetish for free trade yet a near communist obsession with cheap oil and food, and the list runs on. These are decisions most of the rest of the world has made; because they make sense. Such a patient cannot accurately judge their own actions and motivations, so don’t bother arguing this point if you are an American living in the 50: I won’t listen to you just as you won’t listen to me.
I am focusing on income tax. Americans believe all its citizens must pay income tax. It is a value grounded…
View original post 685 more words
The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (#FATCA) is a law requiring all foreign financial institutions (FFI) to provide the United States’ Internal Revenue Service (IRS) with financial account details of any American Persons who has accounts with it. If a FFI does not comply, then it is subject to a 30% withholding tax on all its American transactions.
There are arguments for and against #FATCA, and even though I am fully against it, I will try to present both arguments.
- The United States has suffered from tax evasion where its citizens and residents park their nest eggs abroad tax free. FATCA forces other countries to report these monies to the IRS. Estimates of taxes that will be recovered vary from $250 million a year to $792 million per year. The actual amounts received in taxes to date is only about $400 million.
- Since implementation in 2010, the Treasury…
View original post 817 more words
Republicans promised voters all sorts of pro-growth reforms. They assured us that they learned a lesson about the dangers of expanding government and calling it “compassionate conservatism.”
Give us control of both Congress and the White House, they said before the election, and we’ll move our agenda to limit government and drain the swamp in Washington.
- Repeal Obamacare!
- Cut tax rates!
- Slash wasteful spending!
- Reform entitlements!
- Eliminate senseless red tape!
Of course, now that they’re in power, they’re getting cold feet. It now appears there will be reform of the disastrous Obamacare law, but not full repeal. Moreover, tax cuts are being jeopardized by a risky scheme for a $1 trillion “border-adjustable” tax hike. Based on Trump’s recent address to Congress, I’m also not holding my breath for much-needed spending cuts and entitlement reform. And it’s unclear whether we’ll see much progress cutting back…
View original post 1,985 more words