Tag Archives: FATCA

Both the Afghan hospital damage and the wounds of #Americansabroad are “self inflicted”

Why did the U.S. bomb the “Doctors Without Borders” Hospital? Is there any basis for the bombing being a war crime?

A fascinating interview …


The U.S. Justification – the Afghan Government asked us to do it making it a “self inflicted wound”

Watch the attempt to deflect blame to the Government of Afghanistan …

Although no reasonable person would believe that the U.S. deliberately targeted physicians and patients to be killed, the U.S. response is problematic. Nothing should be said until an investigation is complete.

The latest U.S. explanation is an attempt to say:

1. It’s not our fault (the Afghan Government asked us to do this); and

2. It’s the fault of the Afghan Government (they are responsible for the consequences of their action).

In other words, on the one hand it is NOT OUR FAULT (it was really the Afghan Government that did this) AND and the wounds are therefore (self-inflicted) the fault of the Afghan Government.

The uncomfortable commonality between the U.S. response to the bombing of the Afghan hospital and it’s response to the the FATCA induced banking problems of Americans abroad

Although I am NOT comparing the magnitude of what happened in Afghanistan to the FATCA war on Americans abroad, I note that the response of the U.S. government is exactly the same.

1. It’s not the fault of the U.S. that European banks are closing the accounts of Americans abroad. After all, it’s not the U.S. Government that is closing the bank accounts. It’s the banks that are doing this to Americans abroad.

2. It’s the fault of Americans abroad for wanting to have bank accounts with banks that would close their accounts.

The Americans of Barack Obama has no capacity to take responsibility for it’s actions …

Yes, those who are wounded because of U.S. extra-territorial overreach are experience “self-inflicted wounds”.

The long run question is …

Will the United States will be able to survive it’s own “self-inflicted” wounds – the hatred of American that is dramatically escalating?

Think of it …

In 2009 Barack Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize. Who could have anticipated the destruction and havoc his administration would inflict on the world?

Advertisements

FATCA – FBAR – OVDP: Comparing inside looking out (Homelanders) to outside looking in

https://twitter.com/USCitizenAbroad/status/647391630773751808

This is really worth  a watch. By the way, the prevailing view is that the Homeland does NOT care about how FATCA affects Americans abroad.

 

 

Free Internet Tax Summit: #FATCA, #FBAR, etc. – Sept. 21/15

 

Shame of #Americansabroad who can’t provide for families because of US tax policies

The above tweet references an interesting Facebook discussion which includes a “reply from President Obama” from an American abroad who is questioning FATCA. The comments that follow are extraordinary.

The reply from President Obama is:

talk about NOT responding to the question…… Asked him one question, Why FATCA?
The response:
Dear Kenton:
Thank you for writing. It’s clear you have faced great challenges, and I want you to know I am listening. Taxes affect all of us and reflect our Nation’s values, and understandably, people have strong opinions on this issue. As Americans, we don’t mind paying our fair share of taxes as long as everybody else does, too. That is why I am determined to fix our broken tax code and ensure it offers a leg up to Americans striving for a better future.
For too long, lobbyists have rigged the tax code with loopholes that allow some corporations to pay nothing while others pay full freight. Additionally, the super-rich are receiving giveaways they don’t need while middle-class families are not getting the breaks they do need. By closing loopholes that allow the top 1 percent of Americans to avoid paying certain taxes, we can help more families afford college, health care, a home, and retirement. We can also reward companies who are investing here in America instead of offering breaks to those who keep their profits abroad.
To help hardworking Americans get ahead, my latest budget includes several tax benefits for the middle class and those trying to reach it—including low-income earners, two-earner households, families with children, and those paying tuition for higher education. I have also proposed a tax credit of up to $3,000 per child to help millions of families afford quality childcare. These tax benefits would help put hundreds of dollars back in the pockets of those who most need the help.
To learn more, visit WhiteHouse.gov/issues/taxes. For help with a tax problem, visit IRS.gov/Advocate. You can also visit IRS.Treasury.gov/freetaxprep to learn if you are eligible to receive free, in-person help filing your taxes each year.
Here’s the bottom line: I am committed to simplifying the tax code for individuals and small businesses, making it more competitive for American businesses investing here at home, and ensuring the biggest loopholes are finally eliminated. With a more responsible tax approach, we can help working Americans not only make ends meet, but also get ahead in the new economy so we can build a future worthy of our children and grandchildren.
Sincerely,
Barack Obama

 

 

Few people believe either the form or the extent of the way USA abuses #Americansabroad

I came across an interesting discussion at Keith Redmond’s American Expatriates Facebook group.

The discussion starts here:

Interesting observation for the week. I have had the opportunity to explain to my fellow Australians the dire situation we face as US expats at the hands of the US government. I get the impression that the people I have told are doubting my facts because they find the unfairness of CBT so frigging unbelievable, the intrusiveness of FATCA so arrogant it couldn’t possibly be true. The shock on their faces is somewhat gratifying. So this is the type of “ambassadors” the US has made of 8.7 million  expats.

I encourage you to read the comments. I agree with this. In my experience the reality of the abusiveness of the U.S. government towards it’s citizens abroad that many people do NOT even believe it’s possible.

Confession: I didn’t think it was possible either.

Renounce and rejoice!

 

 

Cook v. Tait 29: “Citizenship-based taxation” or “Taxation-based citizenship” – From @IsaacBrockSoc

1. Citizenship-based taxation?

The above tweet references the following comment which is certainly “food for thought”.

A small change in vocabulary may be helpful. In point of fact, the US primarily practices RBT. More than 99.9% of tax returns are filed on by US residents. Within the US, the US tax net applies to RESIDENTS, both citizens and aliens and without distinction. It is meaningless to talk of taxing resident citizens based on citizenship when non-citizens are taxed on precisely the same basis. It is like saying we only tax people with blue eyes, but all people with eyes must pay the same tax. Within the US, it is meaningless to talk of CBT, since citizens and non-citizen residents are taxed on exactly the same basis.

The ONLY instance where the US practices CBT is in respect of NON-residents. That is a tiny fraction – fewer than a million filed returns from “compliant” non-resident citizens. With 7.6 million citizens outside the US and fewer than a million filed returns, one can only conclude that FATCA + CBT of non-residents has created is a situation of MILLIONS of US citizens hiding from the US government (7.6 million expats or duals can’t ALL be earning less than $2,500 per year…). The queue of renunciants is of course only the tip of the iceberg since almost all non-resident citizens are unquestionably non-compliant and simply live off the (US) grid and have ever done so.

Viewed in that light, the case for finding CBT to be discriminatory would seem to be a whole lot more evident since it ONLY applies to non-residents. A theoretical US resident who somehow renounced US citizenship would still be liable for precisely the same tax the next day as the day before. Citizenship is only a meaningful criterion for eligibility for taxation OUTSIDE the US; it is completely irrelevant within it. I’m sure someone who knows this better than I can check, but I’d be surprised if the domestic US tax return even asked if you are a citizen: why should they care?

2. If NOT “citizenship-based taxation”, then perhaps “taxation-based citizenship”?

The above tweet references the beginning of the discussion on whether the essence of U.S. citizenship really is just taxation. Remember that in 2004 the United States legislated a new kind of U.S. citizenship – that is the “U.S. Tax Citizen”.

Does the U.S. practice “citizenship-based taxation” or is it just “taxation-based citizenship”?

Bubblebustin suggests an answer.

We’ve had it all wrong! Unlike the rest of the world, the US practices taxation-based citizenship.

_______________________________________________________________

Bubblebustin: “Taxation-based citizenship”. Wow! Why haven’t we noticed that before? Well done! Actually, this very morning I woke up with the realization that those expat Americans who are quoted in articles or surveys as being perfectly happy and willing to pay their U.S. taxes from “overseas” because “they’re American and they owe it” are actually filing and paying their U.S. taxes *in order to keep their American citizenship*. That is, indeed “taxation-based citizenship” …. which is about as un-American as it gets!

________________________________________________________________

Echoing MuzzledNoMore, great phrase you coined @Bubblebustin, re;
“… “Taxation-based citizenship”..”

Got to get that into common usage! Very insightful and useful turn of phrase.
Thanks!

______________________________________________________________

Leave it to you, dear bubblebustin, one among others of the most creative here, to come up with this descriptive term — CBT turned on its head.

_______________________________________________________________

Taxation-Based Citizenship — TBC

Best one yet, Bubblebustin. It expresses perfectly the mindset of the U.S. government and those shadowy figures behind the U.S. government. Americans at home and abroad are nothing but tax fodder (some are both tax and cannon fodder). And they all thought they were being “loved” for their devotion to flag and country.

________________________________________________________________

Thanks everybody, but can we make the argument that Taxation-Based Citizenship is correct? I’ve struggled with the term CBT for quite some time and always thought there’s a better, less incriminating way to frame the issue. This all ties into the Human Rights Complaint that I’m actually just reading through now, which is very inspiring in terms of freedom, equality.

I think the argument here would be whether one can still enjoy US citizenship regardless of their personal tax situation. Can someone be denied certain benefits of US citizenship if they aren’t tax compliant?

Language matters. It’s important that we be clear in how we describe the taxation of U.S. citizens abroad.

Forcing #Americansabroad to renounce US citizenship is like #Civilforfeiture – Now “ain’t that America”

Introduction – The general principles of Civil Forfeiture Reexamined

 

Civil forfeiture is becoming increasingly prevalent in the United States and in Western democracies. In it’s simplest form, Civil Forfeiture is a process where governments seize your property without going through the judicial process. Governments love it. It’s efficient, profitable and risk free.  It’s on the rise in both Canada and the United States. It has been the subject of numerous posts at the Isaac Brock Society. Certainly, FBAR penalties and other penalties for “Form Crime” are instances of civil forfeiture. I have argued that OVDP is a form of Civil Forfeiture.

 

Your property, your U.S. citizenship and the forcible taking of your U.S. citizenship

As I have pointed out time after time, after time ….

The Supreme Court of the United States has made it clear that those born or naturalized in the United States have a constitutional right to NOT have their citizenship “stripped from them”. I explored this in:

Cook v. Tait 12: Afroyim v. Rusk, the 14th amendment, and the forcible destruction of citizenship

In Afroyim, Justice Black wrote:

Citizenship is no light trifle 268*268 to be jeopardized any moment Congress decides to do so under the name of one of its general or implied grants of power. In some instances, loss of citizenship can mean that a man is left without the protection of citizenship in any country in the world—as a man without a country. Citizenship in this Nation is a part of a co-operative affair. Its citizenry is the country and the country is its citizenry. The very nature of our free government makes it completely incongruous to have a rule of law under which a group of citizens temporarily in office can deprive another group of citizens of their citizenship.We hold that the Fourteenth Amendment was designed to, and does, protect every citizen of this Nation against a congressional forcible destruction of his citizenship, whatever his creed, color, or race. Our holding does no more than to give to this citizen that which is his own, a constitutional right to remain a citizen in a free country unless he voluntarily relinquishes that citizenship.

Hmm….

If U.S. citizenship belongs to the individual, and the Obama administration is forcing people to renounce their citizenship, is this not a form of “Civil Forfeiture”?

The following posts and comments bear on this question.

Continue reading