Updated January 28, 2026
When one renounces U.S. citizenship one becomes an “alien” under U.S. immmigration law. Aliens do NOT have a right to enter the United States. Rather they must be permitted to enter the United States in accordance with the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Those who renounce U.S. citizenship, will be treated as citizens of whatever country they are a citizen of. For example, if a Canada/U.S. dual citizen renounces U.S. citizenship, that person will (from the perspective of U.S. immigration law) be treated as a Canadian citizen. (At present Canadian citizens do NOT need any kind of visa and are permitted to enter the United States with a valid Canadian passport.) The rules that would apply to you depend on your citizenship.
There continue to be concerns about the relationship between renouncing U.S. citizenship and future admissibility to the United States. Much of this is the result from “fear mongering” from uninformed advisors and marketers.
The concern is based on a provision (referred to as the Reed Amendment) included in the 1996 Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act. The history and context of the law is well documented in this article which includes:
The Reed Amendment, also known as the Expatriate Exclusion Clause, created a provision of United States federal law (8 U.S.C. § 1182(a)(10)(E)) attempting to impose an entry ban on certain former U.S. citizens based on their reasons for renouncing U.S. citizenship. Notably, entry can be denied to persons who renounced their U.S. citizenship to avoid paying income taxes. The United States is one of two countries in the world that taxes its citizens’ income earned abroad for citizens whose primary residence is abroad. The other country to do so is Eritrea.
The exact legislation deems certain former citizens to be inadmissible to the United States in the following circumstance:
(E) Former citizens who renounced citizenship to avoid taxation
Any alien who is a former citizen of the United States who officially renounces United States citizenship and who is determined by the Attorney General to have renounced United States citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxation by the United States is inadmissible.
What does it mean to “have renounced United States citizenship for the purpose of avoiding taxation by the United States?
Interestingly the U.S. Mexico tax treaty has some provisions that shed light on what it means to renounce U.S. citizenship to avoid United States taxation. Although beyond the scope of this post, dual citizenship from birth can rebut a presumption of a tax avoidance motive in renunciation.
The 1996 legislative context of the Reed Amendment
The Reed Amendment was part of Public Law 104-208 which was enacted on September 30, 1996. Notably this is during the same Congress (and one month after) the amendments to the Internal Revenue Code that created a rebuttable presumption of the intent to avoid taxation for certain individuals renouncing U.S. citizenship. From 2004 “intent” ceased to be relevant (under the Internal Revenue Code) in determining the tax consequences (if any) of renouncing U.S. citizenship.
On the one hand the renunciation of United States citizenship means a loss of the right to enter the United States. On the other hand there have been very few renunciants barred from the United States under U.S. immigration laws because of the Reed amendment (or because of renunciation of citizenship generally). The purpose of this post is to provide some additional commentary and (hopefully) allay your concerns.
What follows is a podcast that I did in 2020 with U.S. tax lawyer Virginia La Torre Jeker where we discuss the Reed Amendment.
The podcast refers to a November 30, 20215 document from the Department of Homeland Security titled:
Inadmissibility Of Tax-Based Citizenship Renunciants
Departmental Management and Operations (DMO) – Policy – Inadmissibility of Tax-Based Citizenship Renunciants_0
Concluding message:
The Reed Amendment has rarely been enforced. That said, in a renunciation interview one should NEVER suggest that avoiding U.S. taxation is a reason for renunciation. In reality, most Americans abroad who are renouncing don’t actually pay U.S. taxes. It’s the compliance burden that is the problem along with the inability to engage in financial planning in your country of residence.
Those interested in a “deeper dive” into this issue are invited to read the resources in the Appendixes below.
John Richardson – Follow me on X.com/expatriationlaw
Continue reading →
