A public service announcement during this Holiday Season: Uncle Sam Is Demanding Retired Accidental Americans for Their Life Savings

Uncle Sam Is Demanding Retired Accidental Americans for Their Life Savings

(Some Holiday Season wisdom sent to me from an anonymous source)

Meet one of the most fascinating anomalies of our time, the accidental American. That is to say, folks who were born in the United States but who were not raised there. Whether you identify as an American or not, Uncle Sam is itching to take your money. Here’s what you need to know about being an accidental American, apologies in advance for the inconvenience.

Breaking it Down, Prepare to be Outraged, You Should Be

You might want to brace yourself for the inevitable frustration that will ensue. Picture this, you’ve lived in Spain for most of your life and were born in the United States. You’re about to retire and are getting excited about getting the chance to wind down, relax, and spend more time with your family. Unfortunately, Uncle Sam sees your retirement as his cue to come knocking on your door demanding money.

Uncle Sam Wants to Turn Your Life Savings Into Back Taxes

The money that you worked the better years of your life to accumulate is something to be proud of as a productive citizen. Uncle Sam, less affectionately known as the IRS, is determined to drain your life savings. The U.S. government will tell you that you owe money to them for back taxes. Any rational mind will readily surmise that these claims and demands are as fanciful as they are unfair.

We aren’t talking about a few hundred Euros here. You could easily owe tens of thousands of dollars to the U.S. government for no reason other than having been born in the United States of America.

Unfortunately for all of us retired accidental Americans, Uncle Sam couldn’t care less over the reasoning. The cold hard fact is that America is a business. President Calvin Coolidge spoke some of the most honest words ever uttered by a politician when he said, “The business of America is, business.” That’s it plain and simple. When Uncle Sam comes gunning for your savings, don’t ask him why he’s doing it, it’s just business.

You Are Not Alone

As an accidental American, you are not alone. There are thousands of people who are suffering from the same injustices. Through arrogance, greed, delirium, or all three, the U.S. government is helping itself to the savings of people around the world.

The IRS is an ever-hungry machine that is intent on strangling every red cent out of people that it possibly can. Given the lofty powers awarded to it by way of the U.S. government, they can be a scary bunch. However, staying informed on the monstrous policies that you’re unfairly expected to comply with is always a good idea. The U.S. government has deliberately made it as difficult and as painful as possible to preserve your savings from the ravages of Uncle Sam’s insatiable fiscal desires.

Over the years, governments have been driven to squeeze citizens of their savings. Some governments are fair when it comes to this. The disturbingly innovative voraciousness of the U.S. government’s mechanisms for sucking money out of its citizens is highly concerning. Of course, that voraciousness extends to accidental citizens around the world.

Stay Informed and Stay Angry

It’s always advisable to stay informed on these matters so that you can at least anticipate the damage before it hits you. Unfortunately all staying informed is going to do is let you know what to expect and be a bit proactive about it. The policies themselves aren’t changing and they have shown no signs of doing so any time soon. Why should they? The U.S. government is making a killing by raking in all of that money from accidental Americans.

Skimming from their life savings is a cash cow that will be hard for Uncle Sam to give up. That’s why you should be upset. The IRS is actively targeting your life savings and will use unrelenting bureaucratic forces to get a chunk of it. You have a right to be upset, no one should have to dole out so much of their hard earned money because of a fanciful design in policy.

(Some Holiday Season wisdom from an anonymous source)

John Richardson – Follow me on Twitter @Expatriationlaw

IRS Relief Procedures For Former Citizens Update – Relief For Former Green Card Holders Coming!

Introduction

On December 17, 2019 Gary Carter published a post on Tax Connections, which outlined the “Options Available For U.S. Taxpayers With Undisclosed Foreign Financial Assets“. It contained an excellent overview and analysis which included a discussion of the IRS definition of “non-willfulness” under the Streamlined Program. In commenting on the definiton of “non-willful” he noted that:

The IRS definition of non-willful covers a lot of territory. Negligence, for example, includes “any failure to make a reasonable attempt to comply with the provisions of the Code” (IRC Sec. 6662(c)) or “to exercise ordinary and reasonable care in the preparation of a tax return” (Reg. Sec. 1.6662-3(b)(1)). Further, “negligence is a lack of due care in failing to do what a reasonable and ordinarily prudent person would have done under the particular circumstances.” (Kelly, Paul J., (1970) TC Memo 1970-250). The court also stated that a person may be guilty of negligence even though he is not guilty of bad faith. So the fact that you ignored the FBAR filing requirements for many years, and failed to report your foreign income, might be negligent behavior, but it’s probably not willful. That means you likely qualify for one of the new streamlined procedures. On the other hand, if you loaded piles of cash into a suitcase and lugged it over to Switzerland to conceal it from the IRS, you don’t qualify, because that is willful conduct. If you believe your behavior may have been willful under these guidelines, consult with an attorney before submitting returns through one of the streamlined procedures. We work with attorneys who are experts in this field and we would be happy to provide a referral, free of charge or obligation.

Notably, the definition of “non-willfulness” for the Streamlined Program is the same as the definition for the new “IRS Relief For Former Citizens Program”.

Part A – IRS Relief For Former Citizens Who Relinquished U.S. Citizenship After March 18, 2010 (the date FATCA became law)

The program was announced on September 6, 2019.

Continue reading

Of all the different kinds of residency, the one that matters most is your “tax residency”

Introduction

In a world of information exchange (FATCA and CRS), fiscally challenged governments (United States and other Western Democracies) and expanding notions of taxation (GILTI, France Digital Tax, etc.), your “tax residency” matters. In fact, in the 21st Century the most interesting thing about a person is his tax residency (or residencies).

At the same time, we are living in a world of increased Global Mobility. There are more and more opportunities for residency and citizenship. As people and capital have become more global, tax authorities have worried more and more about how human migration impacts their their tax bases. For example, people are severing tax residency with high tax states like New York and California. The level of (and form) of taxation impacts investment and migration decisions.

Taxation matters. Tax residency matters. People must keep track of both their “citizenship” and “tax residency” portfolios. It’s important to understand how the concepts of “citizenship”, “nationality”, “domicile”, “deemed residency”, “actual residency” and “tax residency” relate.

I recently came across the following article that explores these concepts. Please note that the article uses the term “fiscal residency” as synonymous with “tax residency”.

The following post was authored by Marios S. Kalochoritis, Managing Partner of Loggerhead Partners. We are reproducing this with the full permission of Loggerhead Partners.

Loggerhead Partners is a provider of “multi-family office” services including, estate planning, transaction advisory, corporate structuring and tax planning.

Loggerhead Corporate Services is the Dubai-based specialized entity of Loggerhead Partners that optimizes tax and preserves the wealth of its clients, through tailor-made, corporate structuring solutions with a focus in the UAE

Enjoy …

John Richardson – Follow me on Twitter

Continue reading

FATCA @Citizenshiptax and Wealth taxes: Laura Snyder Engages @Gabriel_Zucman In The Twittersphere

Introduction

Citizenship-based taxation, FATCA and how the interact can best be understood by Americans abroad.

The professors (who have clearly never lived under a citizenship taxation regime and have limited understanding of FATCA) explain the relationship between U.S. citizenship-based taxation and the success of a – “Made In The USA” wealth tax – in the article which includes:

The situation in the United States is different. You can’t shirk your tax responsibilities by moving, because U.S. citizens are responsible to the Internal Revenue Service no matter where they live. The only way to escape the IRS is to renounce citizenship, an extreme move that in both Warren’s and Sanders’s plans would trigger a large exit tax of 40 percent on net worth.

Some people tweet. Some people tweet for fun. Some people tweet to educate.

The purpose this post is to collect the series of tweets that Laura Snyder complied to provide a higher level of education to the professors.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Continue reading

Questions to Democrat candidates about a change from @citizenshiptax to RBT should NOT assume revenue neutrality!

Appreciate these interviews from Democrats Abroad. But, they need to STOP making the question about residence-based taxation conditional on revenue neutrality!
See starting at the 9 minute mark … Separate questions about FATCA and citizenship-based taxation …
This is the @Demsabroad interview with Senator Sanders that includes two distinct questions: 1. About FATCA and 2. About residence-based taxation.
Many people have reported (based on this interview) that Senator Sanders supports residence-based taxation on a “revenue neutral” basis. This is NOT what he said. His answer did NOT include the “revenue neutral” condition. The question asked by the DA representative phrased the question in terms of revenue neutrality. (Arguably, the Senator’s answer was based on an assumption of revenue neutrality – but, I don’t think so.
My impression is that Senator Sanders did NOT condition his support on revenue neutrality. Democrats should stop building the “revenue neutrality” condition into the question. It is obscuring the meaning of the answers.
Finally, Mayor Pete when asked the question ABSOLUTELY made it clear that his support for residence-based taxation WAS based on revenue neutrality. Again, it is possible that he was NOT answering the question more generally.
I applaud Democrats Abroad for this interview series and for asking these questions of all candidates. That said, I do NOT think the question should be based on a move to residence-based taxation being revenue neutral.

Appreciate these interviews from Democrats Abroad. But, they need to STOP making the question about residence-based…

Posted by Citizenship Solutions on Friday, November 8, 2019

#Citizide? Letting Go And Moving On – Online Renunciation Discussion

The situation for many Americans abroad has reached the boiling point. On Saturday November 9, 2019 I will be hosting an online discussion about renunciation generally and HOW TO DECIDE WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE FOR YOU SPECIFICALLY. The time will be 7:00 a.m. EST (Toronto time). This means that it should work for people in most parts of the world. Although, general in nature, I will attempt to answer as many individual questions as time permits. I recognize that this is a very difficult issue for people – spanning the emotional, financial, identity, etc. That said, the U.S. Government is forcing Americans abroad to consider renunciation as a defensive measure to protect themselves and their families.
See the announcement on Twitter below.
If you are not on Twitter feel free to email me at: expatriationlaw at outlook dot com for registration.
The discussion will last approximately one hour.
John Richardson – Follow me on Twitter at @Expatriationlaw


If you are not on Twitter feel free to email me at: expatriationlaw at outlook dot com for registration.

Recently Released Survey Report Dispels Myth of the Wealthy American Abroad and Demonstrates Why Middle Class Americans Abroad Are Forced To Renounce US Citizenship

This blog post features the research of Laura Snyder. It is (I believe) the single and most comprehensive study of (1) the U.S. legislation that is understood to apply to Americans abroad and (2) the disastrous impact this legislation has on them. To put it simply, Congress is forcing Americans Abroad to renounce their U.S. citizenship.

The bottom line is that for Amerians Abroad:

“All Roads Lead To Renunciation!”

____________________________________________________________________________________________
And now over to Laura Snyder with thanks.
Continue reading

Naomi Osaka does NOT automatically relinquish US citizenship by choosing Japanese citizenship

Citizenship is becoming more and more interesting. In my last post I wrote about Canada’s Conservative leader Andrew Scheer’s U.S. citizenship. Theoretically, on October 21, 2019, Canada could have it’s first U.S. citizen Prime Minister. (Think of the extra pressure that the United States could bring to bear on Canada.)

The newsworthiness of U.S. citizenship continues. There has been much discussion of citizenship as a prerequisite to compete for countries in the Olympic games. This week, it is being reported that tennis star Naomi Osaka , a dual Japan/U.S. citizen is complying with a Japanese law that requires her to choose either U.S. or Japanese citizenship. A number of media outlets are reporting that Ms. Osaka is relinquishing U.S. citizenship. Is this really true? Interestingly the Toronto Globe and Mail initially reported that:


The Globe later (presumably realizing their error) changed the title of the article to:

“Naomi Osaka set to represent Japan at Tokyo Olympics”

Note that there is no U.S. law that requires her to choose one citizenship over the other. Ms. Osaka is apparently linking her “choosing Japanese citizenship” to a desire to represent Japan in the upcoming Olympics. A number of media sources are reporting that by choosing Japanese Nationality (under Japanese law) that Ms. Osaka is relinquishing/renouncing U.S. citizenship under U.S. law. This is probably incorrect. The act of “choosing Japanese nationality” under Japanese law does NOT automatically mean that Ms. Osaka has relinquished U.S. citizenship under U.S. law. As a matter of U.S. law:

Unless Ms. Osaka’s “choosing Japanese Nationality” meets the the test of voluntarily and intentionally relinquishing U.S. citizenship under Section 349(a) of the U.S. Immigration and Nationality Act, then “choosing Japanese Nationality” will NOT result in the relinquishment of Ms. Osaka’s U.S. citizenship. The act of “choosing Japanese citizenship” under Japanese law does NOT automatically result in the loss of her U.S. citizenship.

Every country is free to decide who it’s citizens are or are not.

Continue reading

On October 21, 2019 Canada could have it's first US citizen Prime Minister! Think of the penalties!

It started on the campaign bus


Worked it’s way to the Toronto Star


(Speaking of the “noose” of citizenship-based taxation, it’s worth noting that former New Brunswick Premier David Alward was reported to have been in the IRS OVDI program.)
Brought back memories of other victims
British Prime Minister Boris Johnson renounced U.S. citizenship before becoming Prime Minister.
Somalia’s president revealed that he had recently renounced U.S. citizenship.
Was confirmed by the Isaac Brock Society
As reported at the Isaac Brock Society and assuming the truth of the Toronto Star article referenced in the above tweet, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer may become Canada’s first U.S. citizen Prime Minister. If the article is to be believed, he wouldn’t be a U.S. for long. He is apparently in the process of renouncing U.S. citizenship.
Triggered some of our fondest memories in politics


In the 2015 election debate, Justin Trudeau famously claimed that:
“A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian!”
Made us ask whether anything in Canada should be off limits to the USA
___________________________________________________________
Became the subject of public discussion and debate
Update: The Globe and Mail confirms the news! Mr. Scheer is subject to the U.S. sanction of citizenship-based taxation. @InFBARWeTrust!


Q. Is it appropriate for a U.S. citizen to be the head of state of a non-U.S. country?
A. The comments the Globe and Mail article are interesting.
________________________________________________
More twitter coverage/discussion:
https://twitter.com/i/events/1179861494650953728

Part 33 – US residents bring suit alleging that the Section 965 US Transition Tax is Unconstitutional


A lawsuit alleging that the Section 965 transition tax is unconstitutional affords the opportunity to write Part 33 in my series of posts about the U.S. Transition Tax.
Part 22 of this series included a discussion of a paper by Sean P. McElroy which argued that the Section 965 repatriation tax was unconstitutional for the following reasons explained in the abstract:
Continue reading