Introduction: The Purpose and Limited Scope Of This Post
This post focuses on Green Card holders who are filing the 1040 tax return. The 1040 is the return that is filed by all individuals unless you are a “nonresident aliens”. Non-resident aliens file the 1040-NR. This post does NOT discuss (1) when it could be advantageous for a Green Card holder to file a 1040-NR (using a tax treaty tie breaker provision) and (2) what the (DANGEROUS) consequences of filing a 1040-NR (from both a tax and immigration perspective) could be. For a Green Card holder, there can be both disadvantages and also substantial advantages to using a tax treaty tiebreaker to file a 1040-NR.
This post assumes that the Green Card holder is filing a 1040 and is specifically focused on the following question:
Is it wise for a Green Card holder who is temporarily outside the United States to use the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion found in Section 911 of the Internal Revenue Code (as opposed to the Section 901 Foreign Tax credits) when filing the 1040?
(Most tax practitioners agree, that in general, it is better to use the Sec. 901 foreign tax credits and and not sue the S. 911 Foreign Earned Income Exclusion. Here is a post that explains why this is so. So, why would anybody ever use the FEIE? The answer is that some people live in countries where there is income tax and therefore no foreign tax credit to use against income that is taxable from a U.S. perspective.)
Continue reading
Category Archives: tax treaty tie breaker
What are the advantages to a Green Card holder becoming a US citizen?
Circa 2013: Many people with @PermResidentUSA AKA #GreenCard holders live in the USA for years and choose to NOT become U.S. citizens: "Making Choice to Halt at Door of Citizenship" https://t.co/rBrLDHNrYn
— US Green Card Abroad (@USGreenCardLaw) September 10, 2018
There are many “permanent residents” of the United States AKA Green Card holders who have never become U.S. citizens. Citizenship is part of one’s identity. There are many reasons why a “permanent resident” of the United States would NOT become U.S. citizens. There are also many reasons why a “permanent resident” would become a U.S. citizen.
This post explores some of the factors that might influence one’s decision to become a U.S. citizen. What follows is an answer that I posed on Quora.
The proper care and feeding of the Green Card – An interview with "long term resident" Gary @Clueit
Introduction
The Internal Revenue Code of the United States imposes worldwide income taxation on ALL individuals who are U.S. citizens or who are otherwise defined as “residents” under the Internal Revenue Code. “Residents” includes those who have a visa for “permanent residence” (commonly referred to as a Green Card). A visa for “permanent residence” is a visa for immigration purposes. Once an individual receives a visa for “permanent residence” he will be considered to be a “resident” under the Internal Revenue Code. His status as a “resident” for tax purposes continues until he fulfills specific conditions to sever his “tax residency” with the United States. The conditions required to sever “tax residency” with the United States are found in S. 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code. (Basically a Green Card holder can’t simply move from the United States and sever tax residency.)
In the same way that U.S. citizens are subject to taxation on their worldwide income even if they don’t reside in the United States, “permanent residents” will continue to be subject to taxation on their worldwide income until they take specific steps to sever tax residency in the United States. In certain circumstances Green Card holders living outside the United States can avoid filing some of the “forms” that are required of U.S. citizens living abroad.
The steps to sever tax residency are found in S. 7701(b) of the Internal Revenue Code. Those wishing to explore this further are invited to read my earlier posts about Gerd Topsnik: Topsnik 1 and Topsnik 2. Those “permanent residents” who qualify as “long term residents” will be subject to the S. 877A Exit Tax rules if they try to sever tax residency with the United States. It’s probably easier to secure a “permanent residence visa” for immigration purposes, than it is to sever tax residency for income tax purposes.
On September 5, 2018 I had the opportunity to participate in a conversation with Mr. Gary Clueit who has been a permanent resident of the United States for 34 years. Interestingly Mr. Clueit is one more Green Card holder who never applied for U.S. citizenship. There are both advantages and disadvantages to a “Green Card” holder becoming a U.S. citizen. One often overlooked disadvantage to a Green Card holder becoming a U.S. citizen is discussed here. In general, “permanent residents” (Green Card holders) of the United States have certain “tax treaty benefits” that are denied to U.S. citizens. Because of the “savings clause” U.S. citizens are denied the benefits of tax treaties. Interestingly (at least until now) other countries have failed to understand that the inclusion of the “savings clause” in U.S. tax treaties means that the treaty partner is agreeing that the United States can impose worldwide taxation on the citizen/residents of the treaty partner country. The reason is simple:
The primary impact of the “savings clause” is that assists the United States in imposing “worldwide taxation”, according to U.S. rules on people who are “tax residents” of other countries and who do not live in the United States!
The following tweet links to the podcast of the conversation. Anybody considering moving to the United States as a “permanent resident” should listen to this podcast.
A man of uncommon humanity – Gary @Clueit – explains some @USGreenCardLaw (from both tax and immigration perspectives) and why the #GreenCard is "Tax Kryptonite". The S. 877A Exit Tax figures prominently. https://t.co/gUmbBYr1Hx
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) September 7, 2018
More from Mr. Clueit after the jump …
So, you have received bank letter asking about your tax residence for CRS or FATCA – A @taxresidency primer
Prologue: In the 21st Century, The Most Interesting Thing About A Person Is His/Her Tax Residency
Welcoming the world's most famous @USCitizenAbroad: "Little Archie's big tax problem" – https://t.co/Yt9YtVivwu https://t.co/bVGqaguuOb
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) December 28, 2019
Introduction – So, what’s this “tax residence” stuff about? What does “tax residence” mean?
During the #InvestmentMigrationForum 2018, @ExpatriationLaw discussed multiple #Tax residencies, tax treaties and tax treaty tier breakers in #CRS and #FACTA world. pic.twitter.com/Y3hJ1PlJBz
— Investment Migration Council (@IMCouncil) August 2, 2018
In 2014, as people started to receive “FATCA letters” I wrote a lengthy post describing “What to do if you receive a FATCA letter“. Information exchange under the Common Reporting Standard “CRS” has begun in 2018. As a result, I am writing this post which is to explain what the CRS is and how it relates to the FATCA letter. It is important to understand that the “CRS letter is actually a combined “CRS/FATCA” letter which is more likely to be received than the original FATCA letter. I urge that those who have received a letter of this type to read this post PRIOR to seeking professional advice!!!
The #OECD Common Reporting Standard combined with @FATCA is forcing people to reveal where they have @taxresidency: "Thousands of bank accounts closed due to foreign information sharing law" https://t.co/aOLhsYFzd0
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) July 29, 2018
You are reading this post because you have received a letter from your bank that is asking you to identify the countries where you are a “tax resident” and/or whether you are a “U.S. Person”.
The purpose of this post is to help you understand:
– why you are receiving the letter
– what the letter means
– what is the meaning of “tax resident”, “tax residence” and “tax residency” (terms which are used interchangeably)
– why “tax residency” is important to you
– the significance of being a U.S. citizen or Green Card holder
– how to identify where you may be a “tax resident”
Why are you receiving this letter?
The letter is intended to fulfill the bank’s due diligence obligations under both the OECD Common Reporting Standard (all countries of “tax residence” except the United States) and FATCA (whether you are a “tax resident” of the United States).
In other words, the letter is for the purpose of satisfying bank “due diligence” under two separate reporting regimes – FATCA and the OECD Common Reporting Standard “CRS”
A declaration of @taxresidency used in Canada asks questions relevant to both Common Reporting Standard ("CRS) and #FATCA. As a result any #CRS inquiry now includes a @FATCA inquiry! See the form. https://t.co/HGHFxLsj6H pic.twitter.com/S2y0K4paTm
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) July 29, 2018
This is long post which is broken into the following parts:
Part A – How does FATCA differ from the “CRS”?
Part B – The Combined FATCA/CRS Letter
Part C – “Tax Residency 101”: It’s about where you should be paying your taxes
Part D – Different definitions of “tax residence” – Not all countries define “tax residence” in the same way
Part E – Oh My God! I think I might be a “tax resident” of two countries – What is a “tax treaty tie breaker”? How does a “tax treaty” tie breaker work?
Part F – A “U.S. citizen” cannot use a “tax treaty tie breaker” to break U.S. “tax residence”. How then does a “U.S. citizen” cease to be a “U.S. tax resident”?
Part G – How a “permanent resident” of the U.S. – AKA “Green Card Holder” – ceases to be a U.S. tax resident
Part H – Are you, or have you ever been a U.S. citizen or Green card holder? Sometimes it’s not what it seems.
Part I – “Relinquishments of U.S. citizenship and loss of U.S. citizenship for tax purposes
Part J – Beware! You don’t sever “Tax Residency” From Canada or the United States without being subject to massive “Exit/Departure Taxes!” – You may have to buy your freedom!
"Non-citizenship" has its privileges: An overlooked reason why a Green Card holder may NOT want to become a U.S. citizen
โNon-citizenshipโ has its privileges: An overlooked reason why a Green Card holder may NOT want to become a U.S.ย citizen https://t.co/yzxRjFikhp
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) July 30, 2018
U.S. Tax Residency – The “Readers Digest” Version
Last week I participated in a “panel discussion” titled:
“Tax Residency In A World Of Global Mobility: What Tax Residency Means, How To Sever It, The Role Of Tax Treaties and When Exit Taxes May Apply”
The panel included a discussion ofย the “pre-immigration planning” that should be undertaken prior to becoming a “tax resident of the United States”. U.S. citizens and U.S. residents are “tax residents” of the United States and (from an income tax perspective) are taxable on their world wide income. (There are separate “tax residency” rules for the U.S. Estate and Gift Tax Regime.) For the purposes of “income taxation”, the definition of “U.S. resident” includes “Green Card holders”ย , who by definition are “permanent residents” of the United States. Those who come to America and get that “Green Card” have subjected themselves to the U.S. “worldwide taxation” regime. Note that a Green Card holder who becomes a “long term” resident of the United States has also subjected himself to the S. 877A Expatriation Tax Regime! In other words, a Green Card holder may NOT be able to move from American without subjecting himself to a significant confiscation of his wealth! To put it simply: If a prospective immigrant is “well advised”, the S. 877A Exit Tax rules will provide a strong reason to NOT become a “permanent resident” of the United States. But, remember:
The S. 877A Exit Tax rules apply to “permanent residents” who become “long term residents”.
"Tax residence" for US Estate and Gift and "tax treaty tiebreakers with overlapping domicile
Introduction – Two kinds of tax systems – Two kinds of “tax residency”
Title 26, the Internal Revenue Code of the United States is composed of twelve subtitles. Subtitle A deals with “Income Taxes”. Subtitle B deals with “Estate and Gift Taxes” AKA the “transfer tax regime”. The two subtitles are administered separately. They also have different definitions of “tax residence”.
Continue reading
Domicile as a basis for tax residency: How to have @taxresidency where you may not live
What is domicile?
About domicile …
Domicile is an old “common law” concept. Domicile is NOT the same as “residency” (although it might include residency). Domicile is NOT the same as “citizenship” (although one could be a citizen of the country where one is domiciled). Domicile is a concept that refers to one’s permanent home and point of reference. Different jurisdictions might have differing definitions of domicile. It is also a concept that is relevant for a variety of purposes.
Why might domicile matter?
#Domicile is a question of fact and a matter of proof!! Interesting UK Gov discussion on the kinds of domicile. https://t.co/lXUUSAPoOy pic.twitter.com/5Ep6tLymSW
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) November 1, 2017
Domicile 101 – Different kinds of domicile …
Q. What is domicile? A. There are 3 kinds: "domicile of birth", "domicile of dependence" and "domicile of choice". https://t.co/VgFLOEkORX
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) November 1, 2017
Learning about domicile …
Much has been written about domicile. Here is a fantastic article written on domicile that was presented in 2011 at an ABA convention. It doesn’t get better than this:
domicile ABA Meeting 2011
Let me offer 5 key points from this article:
About #Domicile:
1. What is domicile? pic.twitter.com/07f3Q1sYJU
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) May 27, 2018
About #domicile
2. Tax consequences of #domicile pic.twitter.com/XpmrUU3D4h
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) May 27, 2018
About #domicile:
3. Evidentiary standard to determine whether one has acquired domicile pic.twitter.com/a5kvfx93MA
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) May 27, 2018
About #domicile
4. It is not easy to change domicile. More than an intention to change domicile is required. pic.twitter.com/ARPd3SHIKi
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) May 27, 2018
About #domicile:
5. In determining whether a person is domiciled in a place the court looks to a number of factors which include: pic.twitter.com/oFHtkC7Gqc
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) May 27, 2018
Can a person have domicile in more than one place for tax purposes?
Of course you can be domiciled in more than one place for tax purposes! In fact:
In the USA there's no constitutional reason that one cannot be subject to worldwide taxation in more than one state! https://t.co/Dk3eFLiuYU pic.twitter.com/kOhrhocgOx
— Tax Residency (@TaxResidency) November 1, 2017
Domicile as the definition of “tax residency” for U.S. Estate and Gift tax purposes
How do we know that “residence” for Estate and Gift Tax purposes means “domicile”?
The answer is found in the Treasury Regulations – Specifically Reg. 25.2501-1(b) which defines “residency” for Estate and Gift Tax purposes as follows:
(b)Resident. A resident is an individual who has his domicile in the United States at the time of the gift. For this purpose the United States includes the States and the District of Columbia. The term also includes the Territories of Alaska and Hawaii prior to admission as a State. See section 7701(a)(9). All other individuals are nonresidents. A person acquires a domicile in a place by living there, for even a brief period of time, with no definite present intention of moving therefrom. Residence without the requisite intention to remain indefinitely will not constitute domicile, nor will intention to change domicile effect such a change unless accompanied by actual removal.
Please note that different jurisdictions may define “domicile” differently.
Conclusion …
“Domicile” is largely a “subjective” concept that is proven by “objective” evidence.
Domicile matters!
John Richardson
Considering the EB-5 Visa? The IRC S. 877A Expatriation Tax Demonstrates that "Not All US @TaxResidency Is The Same!"
Considering the EB-5 Visa? The U.S. S. 877A Expatriation Tax Demonstrates that โNot All @TaxResidency Is Theย Same!โ https://t.co/QJnuiKmpQf
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) May 20, 2018
“Understanding U.S. Tax Residency …
The United States uses a form of “deemed tax residency“.
The Internal Revenue of the United States deems that all “individuals” (wherever they live in the world – including citizens and residents of other countries) except “nonresident aliens” are subject to taxation in the United States on their world wide income. One qualifies as a “nonresident alien” unless one is a:
1. A U.S. citizen
2. A U.S. resident as defined by Internal Revenue Code Sec. 7701(b)
Continue reading
Part 2: The problem is NOT โworldwide taxationโ. The problem is imposing โworldwide taxationโ on people who donโt live in South Africa or the USA and are โtax residentsโ of other countries.
As goes taxation, so goes civilization.
This is Part 2 of my post discussing the South Africa tax situation. Part 1 is here.
South Africa is NOT attempting to compete with USA by challenging the US monopoly on citizenship-based taxation https://t.co/nPc82VIEUY
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) September 6, 2017
This is a follow up to my post exploring whether South Africa is moving to a tax system that is based on “citizenship-based taxation” or (in the case of the United States of America) “taxation-based citizenship”. That post was the result of a “special request”. The response from that first post included:
I now understand the difference between the SA system and the US. I believe that the similarity that caused the consternation when this first came up was the issue of “tax residency”. CBT mandates that those declared US citizens by the US are simultaneously declared US tax residents. In a similar fashion SA has a concept of tax residency that *does* include some people who do not physically reside in SA but NOT just because they’re citizens. I get it. Thanks again for clarifying this!
That being said, I think the term “tax residency” is crazy. I wish that someone with the power to influence terminology in the general usage of language could come up with something that accurately describes the basis on which a person can be taxed by a country in which that person does not live. Taxes don’t reside; people do, and they can only live one place at a time. Any ideas? ๐
Part 1: South Africa is NOT attempting to compete with USA by challenging the US monopoly on citizenship-based taxation
As goes taxation, so goes civilizations
This is Part 1 of my posts discussing the South Africa situation. Part 2 is here.
The problem is NOT โworldwide taxationโ. The problem is imposing โworldwide taxationโ on people who donโt live inโฆ https://t.co/OCThq5Shx9
— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) September 7, 2017
There have been a number of suggestions in various blogs that South Africa is somehow taxing on the basis of citizenship. American citizens (whether by accident or design) are most sensitive to any discussion of “citizenship-based taxation”. After all, U.S. tax policies combined with FATCA (which is part of the Internal Revenue Code) are destroying the lives of those who have entered the U.S. tax system.
I recently received an email that asked:
They’re talking about SA expats, people who no longer live in SA, being taxed by SA. Like us, these people are residents and earners in countries other than their country of origin (and, I would assume, citizenship). http://www.internationalinvestment.net/regions/south-african-expats-hit-tax-exemption-removal-plans/ If this is not CBT, on what basis are they being taxed? If SA is just wanting to expand its definition of tax residency on what basis do they feel they can apply this to someone who no longer lives in their country?
The short answer …
South Africa imposes “worldwide taxation” on those who are “tax residents” of South Africa. The rules for an individual to qualify as a “tax resident” of South Africa are here. South African “tax residency” is irrelevant to citizenship.
