— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) March 26, 2025
A recent article in the Boston Globe is evidence that more and more Americans are interested in acquiring a second citizenship. Second citizenship can be obtained through naturalization, investment or citizenship by descent. “Citizenship by descent” is citizenship conferred based on one’s relationship – ancestry – to a parent or grandparent. The nature of the ancestral relationship depends on the country. Countries offering citizenship by descent include: Italy, Ireland, Poland, Canada and many other European countries. Citizenship by ancestry is often referred to as “citizenship by descent”. The basic principle is that one acquires citizenship because of a familial relationship to a citizen of that country. Increasing numbers of people are learning that through ancestry, they may be able acquire or document a second citizenship.
An option for “citizenship by descent” that is much closer to home – Canada – will soon be an option for more U.S. citizens than it is under exiting law.
Citizenship By Descent – Equal Treatment And Opportunity For All Canadian Citizens
The precise rules governing citizenship by descent vary from country to country. The rules governing citizenship by descent have many difficulties. Should ANY citizen be able to pass his/her citizenship on to the next generation? Does the physical connection to the country of citizenship matter? Should citizenship by descent rules operate so that acquisition of descent can be available for many generations? These questions were explored in the context of Canada’s Charter of Rights And Freedoms.
Guest Post By Dr. Suzanne de Treville – Switzerland
Discussions about eliminating double taxation for U.S. citizens abroad often focus on reducing the significant compliance burdens these individuals face. When the U.S. taxes income or assets already taxed in a citizen’s country of residence, the resulting complexity is substantial while the extra tax revenue to the IRS that results from this double taxation by ordinary taxpayers is quite low. This complexity is particularly burdensome for the 80% of expat taxpayers with an Adjusted Gross Income of $100,000 or less.
The IRS requires expatriates to file intricate returns and is responsible for providing necessary assistance. However, while resources are available to domestic taxpayers, similar support is lacking for those abroad, despite their greater need. Continue reading →
On March 18, 2025 an article by Margot Patrick appeared in the Wall Street Journal.
A military-contract bonanza, European mansions, disgruntled business partners: The jet-setting case of one of America’s biggest alleged tax cheats. https://t.co/xfSgu6tva5 via @WSJ
Mr. Edelman was a U.S. citizen who had lived outside the United States since the 1990s. The case is NOT about his millions. The case is NOT about offshore companies. The case IS about whether Mr. Edelman’s shares in a foreign corporation were owned by Mr. Edelman personally or by his French citizen wife Delphine Le Dain. The subtitle to Ms. Patrick’s article is:
“Douglas Edelman’s glitzy European lifestyle came to a halt when he was charged with hiding income through companies put in his French wife’s name”
Mr. Edelman is a U.S. citizen. Delphine Le Dain is neither a U.S. citizen nor U.S. resident. The U.S. has limited taxing authority over Ms. Le Dain who is a nonresident alien. Therefore, the Edelman case has huge implications for Americans abroad!
The crux of the issue is who owns the Edelman interest in the corporations? Can the IRS recharacterize the ownership of assets in a marriage?
On March 20, 2025 I participated in a discussion on the Edelman case on the IRS Medic podcast.
I prepared slides for the presentation (updated since the presentation) which may be accessed here:
In May 2024, a grand jury returned a thirty-count indictment charging Edelman with one count of Conspiracy to Defraud the United States, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §371; two counts of False Statements to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in violation of 18 U.S.C. §1001; fifteen counts of Tax Evasion, in violation of 26 U.S.C. §7201 and 18 U.S.C. §2; and twelve counts of Willful Violation of Foreign Bank Account Reporting Requirements, in violation of 31 U.S.C. §§5314, 5322(b), 18 U.S.C. §2, and associated regulations. The factual allegations supporting those charges are extensive. In short, the Government alleges that Edelman perpetrated a decades-long scheme to defraud the United States of tax revenues by concealing his earnings in an intricate web of financial entities across the globe and by lying to regulators along the way.
“In July 2010, after Chairman Towns had issued official subpoenas for their documents and testimony, counsel for the companies and its principals disclosed that Erkin Bekbolotov and Delphine Le Dain, the wife of Douglas Edelman, were the named owners of Mina and Red Star, each with 50 percent. Ms. Le Dain has never had any active role with the companies and, for all practical purposes, it would appear that Mr. Edelman controls the shares and is the de facto beneficial owner.47 Mr. Bekbolotov and Mr. Edelman have been the 50-50 shareholders of the companies since Red Star’s founding in 2002,48 but their ownership interests are buried under several layers of straw ownership in jurisdictions known for their corporate secrecy. Though many have tried, it is virtually impossible to determine the companies’ beneficial ownership through public records.49″
As everybody (who even the slightest interest) knows there is:
1. A need to end the application of the U.S. citizenship tax regime to Americans abroad
2. An awareness of the issue – created primarily by President Elect Trump’s announcement to end the “double taxation” of Americans abroad (Shout out to the Republicans Overseas Tax Committee for their work over the years)
10. Superhuman efforts from a number of individuals either in their personal capacity or representing their groups. Particular mention should go to those who have specifically associated their names with the need for change. These include (but are certainly not limited to: Solomon Yue, James Gosart, Laura Snyder, Rebecca Lammers and many others (you can leave comments adding more …) These people have been working while you were sleeping. They have always been working when you were awake. They invested incredible amounts of time and energy in solving this problem.
Bottom line: This is where we are. Congress will be thinking about tax reform in 2025.
President Elect Trump has made the pledge that it’s time to end the “double taxation” of Americans abroad.
This is the single most important pledge and acknowledgement of this problem. A statement from the President is the single most important acknowledgement. (See the video referenced in the following tweet.)
🚨🚨🚨Breaking from UK Daily Mail Headline: MAGA Republican launches bid to abolish income tax on Americans living overseas A prominent House Republican has filed a bill to meet Donald Trump's call to end income tax for Americans who live abroad.https://t.co/y7KEHtpDoQpic.twitter.com/fd2I4csvaj
I have started a series of discussion on X.com “Spaces” to interact with interested people and to explore these issues. I have no idea how many I will do. I have no idea how long they will last. But, I thought it would be good to have a post the lists the discussions (previous and upcoming). So, that is the purpose of this post. You can bookmark this page and check back. Feel free to contact me X.com/ExpatriationLaw with comments or suggestions.
All of the “X Spaces” are summarized on Substack at:
This is the fourth in a series of posts about “treaty based” foreign tax credits. The purpose of this post is NOT to discuss how the foreign tax credit rules work. The purpose is to discuss when a later statute can override an earlier tax treaty. It just so happens that this principle will be discussed in the context of foreign tax credit issues.
(The three previous posts discussed the foreign tax credit rules in the context of the NIIT (“Net Investment Income Tax“). For a description of the first three posts, see the Appendix to this post.)
The governing principle for when a statute can override a tax treaty seems to be that:
1. Generally statutes and treaties are (if possible) to be interpreted to give effect to both.
2. A later statute will override an earlier treaty only when the the statute reflects a clear legislative intent to do override the treaty.
When Can A Statute Override A Tax Treaty?
The principle will be explored in the context of:
A. The Bruyea Case
B. The Section 2801 Regulations Governing Covered Gifts
Historical Context – ESTA and Social Media Handles
Generally, with the exception of Canadians (for now) a visa is required for non-citizens to enter the United States. Citizens of selected countries do NOT require a visa. These countries are referred to as “visa waiver” countries. The “visa waiver” program is described as follows:
Visa Waiver Program
Overview
The Visa Waiver Program (VWP) enables most citizens or nationals of participating countries* to travel to the United States for tourism or business for stays of 90 days or less without obtaining a visa. Travelers must have a valid Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval prior to travel and meet all requirements explained below. If you prefer to have a visa in your passport, you may still apply for a visitor (B) visa.
ESTA is an electronic travel application for individuals who are citizens of a “visa waiver” country. Although a visa is not required an electronic travel authorization is required. Information about ESTA and the online application is here.
Applicants are invited to provide information about their social media handles as part of the ESTA application. The government website includes:
How will CBP use my social media information collected through the additional question that was added to the ESTA application in December 2016?
Information found in social media will enhance the vetting process and may be used to review ESTA applications to validate legitimate travel, adjudicate VWP ineligibility waivers, and identify potential threats. If you choose to answer these questions and an initial vetting by CBP indicates possible information of concern or a need to further validate information, a highly trained CBP officer will have timely visibility of the publicly available information on those platforms, consistent with the privacy settings the applicant has chosen to adopt for those platforms, along with other information and tools CBP officers regularly use in the performance of their duties.
For example, social media may be used to support or corroborate a traveler’s application information, which will help facilitate legitimate travel by providing an additional means to adjudicate issues related to relevant questions about identity, occupation, previous travel, and other factors. It may also be used to identify potential deception or fraud. Social media may help distinguish individuals of additional concern from those individuals whose information substantiates their eligibility for travel.
DHS will handle social media identifiers in the same manner as other information collected through ESTA. DHS has documented these procedures in the updated ESTA System of Records Notice (SORN) and Privacy Impact Assessment (PIA), which are available on the DHS website (www.dhs.gov/privacy).
Now, the U.S. government proposes to make the disclosure of social media handles a mandatory part of the application process for all immigration related processes. Continue reading →
Attention: Those Who Have Renounced U.S. Citizenship
The decision of the Trump administration to enforce “Immigration And Nationality Act – §1302” from 1955 (See Appendix A) means that you will likely be required to register and be fingerprinted if you spend more than 30 days in the United States.
Attention: Canadian Snowbirds And Non-U.S. Citizens Spending More Than 30 Days In The USA
There is a good chance (See Appendix C below) that you are members of the group that will have to be registered with the U.S. Government and subject to fingerprinting!
To be “FORMWarned” is to be “FORMArmed!”
For further explanation or if you are a Canadian Snowbird, read on …
So, How Is The United States Treating Its Friends Compared To Its Enemies?
A recent media article includes:
An estimated one million Canadian “snowbirds” – seniors and retirees who winter in southern states such as Florida and Arizona – inject billions in tourism spending during their months-long stays in the United States. But under an executive order from President Donald Trump, these visitors will soon have to register to travel south of the border, as part of an effort to curb illegal immigration.
Mr. Trump’s order, called Protecting the American People Against Invasion, is believed to be the first time in history that the United States has included Canadians in a crackdown on undocumented migrants. Immigration lawyers in the U.S. said the order targets the wrong people and will further hurt the disintegrating Canada-U.S. relationship.
As Of February 25, 2025 The U.S. Government Has Clarified That:
Who must apply for registration
All aliens 14 years of age or older who were not registered and fingerprinted (if required) when applying for a visa to enter the United States and who remain in the United States for 30 days or longer. They must apply before the expiration of those 30 days.
The parents and legal guardians of aliens less than 14 years of age who have not been registered and remain in the United States for 30 days or longer, prior to the expiration of those 30 days.
Any alien, whether previously registered or not, who turns 14 years old in the United States, within 30 days after their 14th birthday.
Who is not registered?
Anyone who has not been issued one of the documents designated as evidence of registration under 8 CFR 264.1(b) and has not submitted one of the forms designated at 8 CFR 264.1(a) and provided fingerprints (unless waived) is not registered. Aliens who have not registered include:
Aliens who are present in the United States without inspection and admission or inspection and parole; Canadian visitors who entered the United States at land ports of entry and were not issued evidence of registration; and,
Aliens who submitted one or more benefit requests to USCIS not listed in 8 CFR 264.1(a), including applications for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals or Temporary Protected Status, who were not issued evidence of registration.
Yes, Canadian Snowbirds are ABSOLUTELY required to register and be fingerprinted!!
What’s Going On? An Explanation From President Nixon’s Old Law Firm:
On January 20, 2025, President Trump issued an executive order, Protecting the American People Against Invasion, that directed the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to ensure foreign nationals in the U.S. comply with the obligation to register, pursuant to Section 262 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (INA), and that failure to register be treated as a civil and criminal enforcement priority. In response, on February 25, 2025, DHS laid out more specifics about the proposed alien registration requirement, including additional guidance about who is required to register and the process to register.
What is the registration requirement?
Section 262 of the INA, originally enacted in 1952, mandates the registration and fingerprinting of certain foreign nationals in the U.S. In addition, the INA mandates that foreign nationals eighteen (18) years of age and over carry evidence of registration. With the exception of the National Security Entry-Exit Registration System (NSEERS), enacted by the Bush administration in the wake of 9/11 and requiring the registration of men over the age of sixteen (16) on nonimmigrant visas from 24 countries declared “havens for terrorists,” the U.S. has not previously enforced the INA’s registration requirement or provided a process for foreign nationals to register. The Trump administration has proposed to change that by providing a tool to register online and announcing the intention to enforce penalties for failure to register.
