Some people have the perception that its all rich people that are renouncing.
WRONG.
I renounced because I got my original Dutch citizenship back. I haven't worked or lived in the USA since 1989 and have no intention of ever going back.
Quality of life, standard of living is much better in Europe and the day I left the USA I tripled my income overnight.
Also ,as a Vietnam Veteran who was shot at for a year for ''my country''. I have to laugh at ignorant people who call me a 'traitor''. They can go to hell, they are clueless about the laws and their own country.
America is an archaic shytehole of imbeciles (generally speaking) and I could never live around idiots like that anymore after experiencing being around half way intelligent people.
Some people have the perception that its all rich people that are renouncing.
WRONG.
I renounced because I got my original Dutch citizenship back. I haven't worked or lived in the USA since 1989 and have no intention of ever going back.
Quality of life, standard of living is much better in Europe and the day I left the USA I tripled my income overnight.
Also ,as a Vietnam Veteran who was shot at for a year for ''my country''. I have to laugh at ignorant people who call me a 'traitor''. They can go to hell, they are clueless about the laws and their own country.
America is an archaic shytehole of imbeciles (generally speaking) and I could never live around idiots like that anymore after experiencing being around half way intelligent people.
"The U.S.'s naming and shaming of renunciants is purely an act of reprisal."
We're going to shame you by telling the whole world you're intelligent? :) They can shame me like that any time they like.
"I wish some events happen to them in the future to make them regret their decision forever"
Well, that's very noble of you. But, given your country, its people, and its politicians, I don't think it likely - most of the things that have happened in the past have caused me to regret not doing it sooner.
But, if you have a shortage of citizens, I think there is a large, heavily populated country just to the south of yours, which has a substantial number of people who might like to come to yours? But you'd probably have trouble getting your hands on their vast hordes of treasure, because most of them don't have one. In fact, some of them are quite poor, and might even get the crazy idea that you should be giving them some money. Maybe that's why there's all this talk about building a wall to keep them out. Probably best anyway - a lot of them would surely regret their decision, when they find out what the US is really like.
Spoken like a true Fascist. It seems that Fascism is the type of government that Americans of all political stripes prefer to have. I guess the next step must be to penalize their relatives in some fashion.
It is the people and corporations who make their living in America who should be punished. Why should anyone use the legal tender of the U.S. Treasury and yet get away with paying no taxes. Although it is true that even those who pay no income tax do pay other taxes the plain truth is that they still run a negative account balance with the U.S. Treasury because Congress allows it.
The still consume government services everyday of the year. We, who live abroad, do not consume any government services. Why should the U.S. government get a free ride by receiving payments from those for whom it has not liability?
It is a perverse kind of morality that would assign the same social penalty to a person who comptently and legally declines to take on future tax obligations as would be assigned to a person who skips out on paying past and current tax obligations.
All people who renounce/relinquish their U.S. citizenship must pay their current obligations. They are skipping out on nothing. These same people will be paying taxes in their new country of citizenship so where are the grounds for this moral outrage that some Americans are expressing on this matter?
To compare renounciation to the act of treachery is way over the top. Not state secrets are being handed over to an enemy state. As a matter of fact I dare say that all of the states that the new citizenship is acquired in are allies of the U.S.
EXPAT - you nailed it... The one but very important detail the news media with their propaganda machine don't want the American people to know.. So I'll just repeat the important part you just provided.
ALL PEOPLE WHO RENOUNCE/RELINQUISH THEIR U.S. CITIZENSHIP MUST PAY THEIR CURRENT OBLIGATIONS. THEY ARE SKIPPING OUT ON NOTHING. THESE SAME PEOPLE WILL BE PAYING TAXES IN THEIR NEW COUNTRY OF CITIZENSHIP so where are the grounds for this moral outrage that some Americans are expressing on this matter?
I'd like to add another detail most people don't know. Because of complications with settling up your taxes and securing other citizenship this process of renouncing citizenship can be complicated and can take months and months if not years.
I have sympathy to Oona O'Neill because of witch hunting communists in 1950s America. But to some of the other rich folks who did it for paying less tax, I wish some events happen to them in the future to make them regret their decision forever...
And what makes you think that this isn't a witch hunt? The American people and their elected officials take steps to drive not only their economy but the economy of the world into the ground and then rather than take the blame for their actions they look for scape goats. What better source of scape goats then those who cannot defend themselves from U.S. attacks.
The reason why a person wants to give up his/her U.S. citizenship is really of no concern to anyone else, not even the U.S. government. The only concern that the government has is whether or not the person doing so is aware of the nature and consequences of taking the act. For the government to say that you can give up citizenship for reason other than wanting to relieve yourself of future tax obligations is an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of choice. Subjecting those who give up their citizenship to public process of naming and shaming is cruel and unusual punishemnt. Such things are done only to criminals who have done real harm to others. It is also an attempt to discourage others from taking the same step.
If the U.S. government is embarrased by these renunciations than the government should change its taxation policy with regards to none residents. In a world of over 195 separate tax jurisdictions the U.S. is the ONLY one whose citizens are driven to take this drastic step. But instead of the U.S. government admitting that its taxation policy makes no sense and changing its laws it instead decides to make them even worse.
In the end whether or not a person is rich or poor that person is not a FOOL.
EXPATAMERICAN - you tell them... I've got relatives that had to flee the US after the economy tanked for sheer economic survival reasons... I'm very well aware of what you are talking about... If a person works entirely outside the US for a company why should they be taxed twice... The US is the only country in the world that is left doing this. And also what resources and or services are being consumed by US citizens working 100% abroad for foreign owned companies... And what makes the US think its justified in demanding income earned outside the US... What if anything did the US provide that supposedly facilitated earning this income abroad? Obamacare only makes things worse... Huge problems there... A Citizen living abroad fulltime - now has to jump through even more hoops or pay fines. In what way does a person living abroad burden the health care system in the US at all? Last time I checked my family members used the foreign hospitals even for surgery.... Ends up that the cost of deductible in the US is even significantly more then the cost of surgery outright overseas in many countries.
I am not for sure what the agenda is with this article. Did the Denise Rich story (not new news) cause you to go scratching into the past to find the Rich and Famous who you charge that renounced for tax purposes. Maybe they did and maybe they did not , but that misses the bigger point.
You fail to recognize that some (Denise Rich as an example) have moved to higher tax jurisdictions than the US, so that destroys the tax escape narrative. And, that EXIT tax can be severe, so they are not getting off Scott free, for god sake.
It is not easy to renounce no matter what tax expert Duggan says. It is emotionally traumatic for many. It is a bureaucratic hassle and lengthy process. The State Department charges you $450 for the privilege of exercising a fundamental right to choose. It takes multiple appointments, declarations and there are many forms to sign before you get that CLN. Then you are not done yet as the IRS has more forms and reporting required.
Also, I note, that CBS has not been reporting on the last 3 years of IRS and Congressional jihad against offshore accounts using FBARs as penalty wedge and FATCA as a global hunt for All US Persons living EVERYWHERE in the world. Why not? If you had, you might have understood this story better.
FATCA was originally intended for Homeland Tax Evaders,(It was passed in the 2010 Hire Act) but now is having impacts on many dual citizens and accidental Americans abroad which do not seem to merit the same sensational attention of a Denise Rich, but how would you know? I doubt I will find one story on your web site speaking to FATCA and the impacts.
I would strongly recommend CBS get away from the one day hot headline of a big name reporting to do a serious focused analysis why Americans are renouncing their citizenship in ever increasing numbers.
U.S. citizenship tax policy coupled with FATCA legislation plus FBAR penalties and other SEC regulations has made it near impossible for Americans to reside overseas, to maintain bank accounts and even to keep jobs. U.S. policies are destroying the community of Americans abroad - many average citizens are forced to renounce to survive.
It is also blatant propaganda on our politicians part to define those who renounce as "despicable" while claiming it is for Tax purposes. Senator Schumer, for one, does not know what he is talking about. He lives in a bubble of his own absurd rhetoric. It is U.S. policies and application of stupid statutes that his votes created that are causing the uptick in those that are shedding that US passport. The cost vs benefit analysis has gone decidedly negative in the past 3 years, and folks are having to make hard choices to relinquish or renounce depending on their circumstances.
The United States is the only country to tax its citizens residing overseas, leading to double taxation and to second class citizenship. Furthermore, the U.S. sees the arrival of 100,000 or more immigrants every year who know not what they are signing up for, a life time shackle that can only be cut free by renouncing your citizenship if you return to your original homeland to live.
Other countries are not complaining about their citizens having a free choice to move abroad. In fact, they encourage them, as they are goodwill ambassadors and export job creators for their homeland. Ask the Indian, or the Chinese in your work place if their government treats them like the US is treating its diaspora, or requires them to pay taxes and report accounts back to their homeland under threat of draconian penalties for even non willful failure. I think you might be surprised by the answer. Why has the U.S. become so defensive, so narrow-minded, frankly so stupid in its handling of its citizens residing overseas. And we wonder why we have trade deficits. America wants all the salesman to come home to Kansas, apparently, as that is the effect of it current policies.
BTW, on those new immigrants arriving on American shores, they are never informed of their FBAR obligations in their "Welcome to America" State Department packages. Many are also being caught out in an IRS offshore tax hunt for benign failures to file FBARs and are being improperly characterized as Tax cheats hiding money over seas. Many of them are finding their American Dream dashed by U.S. practices promoted by the likes of Senator Schumer who lives in his New York tax ghetto. I bet he renounces those that leave NY and move to Florida as tax cheats too.
Beleive it or not but renouncing or relinquishing one's U.S. citizenship is NOT an IMMORAL act. No one is being harmed in any way and this act is perfectly in accord with the U.S. Constitution and the U.N.'s Charter of Human Rights. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean that you get to assault the person's character or impugn their motives.
The U.S.'s naming and shaming of renunciants is purely an act of reprisal. By publishing the names of those who renounce U.S. ctizenship the U.S. is treating renunciants as if they have created a crime when no such verdict has been rendered in a court of law. In the U.S. there are communities in which the names of Johns, drunk drivers, theives, may be published in the press and court reports but this is only done after a conviction has been handed down. For the U.S. to publish the names of renunciants is a petty act of cruel punishment that is meant to serve as a detterent to others who may be contemplating doing the same thing. The U.S. Congress may as well put our heads up on pikes and line them up along the streets. What right does the U.S. have to demand of any citizen that he/she tell them why he/she is renouncing U.S. citizenship? The only concern that the U.S. government has is to make sure that the act is being taken freely and with full knowledge its consequences. Other than that the government has no right to play Big Brother.
If the U.S. believes so strongly that renouncing one's citizenship is so immoral then how is it that the U.S. can require of new U.S. citizens that they renounce their citizenship. The U.S. oath of citizenship starts off with a renunciation act:
"I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"
Is American citizenship different from any other citizenship? Why is it not just as evil for a person to renounce his/her citizenship in Kenya, Holland, Brazil etc.?
When Senator Schumer says that it is not necessary to give up one's U.S. citizenship in order to live closer to one's family he is not telling the whole truth. The real truth is that maintaining U.S. citizenship or Green Card status is a costly expense which adds nothing of value to your life as an expat. When one does a cost benefit analysis between the advatages of keeping American citizenship or not you can only come to one conclusion, that it isn't worth it. The costs of U.S. none resident citizenship are seen not only in the annual filing expense but also in the lost opportunity costs that you suffer because of the requiremnt to abide strictly by U.S. investments rules. So not mutual funds are allowed unless they are are reported on an expensive to complete form. Then there is the humiliating act of each year having to tell the U.S. that you have not lived there within the specified number of days that are required to be considered a U.S. resident. As anyone can see therefore that U.S. citizenship is expensive to maintain in both a positive and a negative sense.
For a U.S. person who is not resident in the U.S. the direct costs of IRS tax compliance are a definite negative. The forms that a person has to file are voluminous and extremel complicated. It is wrong to assume that just because a person is rich that he or she should not care about this expense. It is not within the purview of the U.S. Congress to have a right to dictate to someone which expenses they should have. For a person to recklessly leave him/herself open to future IRS tax reporting expense and financial investment regulations is not wise but rather is foolhardy, when one already is exposed to legislative whim from your country of residence. Not since the days of the Soviet Union has there been a government that so harasses is citizens who live abroad and robs them of their property. It is worth noting that there is no immigrant to America who faces such systematic and pernicious legislative abuse from his/her government.
So Senators Schumer, Casey and Speaker Boehner you want not only present taxes from your citizens but you also want future taxes from them even when they are no longer citizens. Please explain the rational on that one. The same government that says it citizens have an unpayable debt of gratitude to the U.S. are the same ones who talk about giving green cards to graduate students from other countrys. What exactly do you think those graduate students owe to their countries of origin? Is it really fair for the U.S. to POACH the educated people of other lands? Will the U.S. give those nations anything back to compensate them for their real losses?
Americans have portrayed this issue in much too simplistic of a form. The complications of citizenship based taxation go much deeper than the issue if filling out a 1040. Even the process of filing is in and of itself very complicated and expensive. And this is because of all of the other tax reporting requirements that one must submit to.
Americans abroad are faced with all kinds of investment restrictions that they would not face if they lived in the States. Take investing in such everyday investment vehicles like mutual funds. If you live in the States you can can invest in a mutual fund without having to pay any tax on the increase in value until such time as you sell it. When you live outside of the States though the IRS calls foreign mutual funds, Passive Foreign Investment Corporations(PFIC), and you are forced to pay taxes on any increase in value and any distributions on a yearly basis. So in other words you have to have enough income outside of the mutual fund to be able to pay any U.S. tax owing or else sell enough of the mutual fund so that you can pay the tax. This is obviously a requirement that seriously hurts your return on the investment and in the end cripples your ability to increase your net worth. There are also discriminatory rules when it comes to pensions that are held outside of the States, college education plans and even small business ownership.
What it all amounts to is that if one is to be in COMPLETE compliance with the IRS you are faced with really living a life of poverty both now and in old age.
Now Americans should ask themselves what would they think of immigrants to America were faced with the same kind of onerous burdens on their financial lives as the U.S. Congress places on its none resident citizens? I highly doubt that the U.S. would be very happy knowing that billions of dollars in U.S. Treasuries were annually being converted into other currencies so that immigrants could pay taxes to their country of citizenship or residency. Nor would America be happy if those immigrants were deincentivized by their home country from holding ROTH accounts, IRA's, and the like. How would America feel if those immigrants were allowed to open and start businesses in America or even bank in America?
America has for years been getting away with receiving a subsidy from the other nations of the world because they don't tax their none resident citizens the way that America taxes its citizens. In other words America's on position on extraterritorial taxtion is hypocritical in addition to being a lie.
There is no such thing as citizenship based taxation when taxation is applied to none resident citizens. All taxation is a taxation on one's own economy and its productivity. If you tax the incomes of your none resident citizens you are taxing another treasury, its economy and its productivity but not YOUR own. Extraterritorial taxation is nothing less than out right robbery on the part of the U.S.
You fund them by making the people who reside where the infrastructure is located pay for its maintenance. If you live in another country you are already paying for the infrastructure that you use in that country. No one should face two tax bills for the same thing.
People forget and the U.S. government forgets that there is absolutely no benefit to being an American citizen if you don't live in America. The benefits of American citizenship are strictly meant to be enjoyed by American residents only. This is why Congressional spending authority is limited to those things that are under the U.S. Constitution. When a U.S. citizen lives outside of America he/she no longer even lives under the Constitution of the U.S. A U.S. citizen can appear before any none U.S. court but he can only make his/her case under the constitution of the country where the court has jurisdiction.
Focusing on the ultra-wealthy fatcats only tells 1% of the story. How about you do a series on the many more NON-rich people who renounced U.S. citizenship for political or personal reasons. Here's five names to start you off: Robin Winkler, Yuan T. Lee, Garry Davis, Mike Gogulski, Henry Martyn Noel. There's tens of thousands of others who have renounced citizenship over the years -- starry-eyed idealists, as well as plain old ordinary American emigrants living out their ordinary lives in other countries
The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
Reply to Comment The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. By using this Web site you agree to accept our Terms of Service. Click here to read the Rules of Engagement.
WRONG.
I renounced because I got my original Dutch citizenship back. I haven't worked or lived in the USA since 1989 and have no intention of ever going back.
Quality of life, standard of living is much better in Europe and the day I left the USA I tripled my income overnight.
Also ,as a Vietnam Veteran who was shot at for a year for ''my country''. I have to laugh at ignorant people who call me a 'traitor''. They can go to hell, they are clueless about the laws and their own country.
America is an archaic shytehole of imbeciles (generally speaking) and I could never live around idiots like that anymore after experiencing being around half way intelligent people.
WRONG.
I renounced because I got my original Dutch citizenship back. I haven't worked or lived in the USA since 1989 and have no intention of ever going back.
Quality of life, standard of living is much better in Europe and the day I left the USA I tripled my income overnight.
Also ,as a Vietnam Veteran who was shot at for a year for ''my country''. I have to laugh at ignorant people who call me a 'traitor''. They can go to hell, they are clueless about the laws and their own country.
America is an archaic shytehole of imbeciles (generally speaking) and I could never live around idiots like that anymore after experiencing being around half way intelligent people.
We're going to shame you by telling the whole world you're intelligent? :) They can shame me like that any time they like.
"I wish some events happen to them in the future to make them regret their decision forever"
Well, that's very noble of you. But, given your country, its people, and its politicians, I don't think it likely - most of the things that have happened in the past have caused me to regret not doing it sooner.
But, if you have a shortage of citizens, I think there is a large, heavily populated country just to the south of yours, which has a substantial number of people who might like to come to yours? But you'd probably have trouble getting your hands on their vast hordes of treasure, because most of them don't have one. In fact, some of them are quite poor, and might even get the crazy idea that you should be giving them some money. Maybe that's why there's all this talk about building a wall to keep them out. Probably best anyway - a lot of them would surely regret their decision, when they find out what the US is really like.
Confiscate all their remaining assets here and ban them from ever coming back.
Too rich to pay taxes so you renounce your country? Eff off then, we will do just fine without out you and your penthouses and yachts.
It is the people and corporations who make their living in America who should be punished. Why should anyone use the legal tender of the U.S. Treasury and yet get away with paying no taxes. Although it is true that even those who pay no income tax do pay other taxes the plain truth is that they still run a negative account balance with the U.S. Treasury because Congress allows it.
The still consume government services everyday of the year. We, who live abroad, do not consume any government services. Why should the U.S. government get a free ride by receiving payments from those for whom it has not liability?
All people who renounce/relinquish their U.S. citizenship must pay their current obligations. They are skipping out on nothing. These same people will be paying taxes in their new country of citizenship so where are the grounds for this moral outrage that some Americans are expressing on this matter?
To compare renounciation to the act of treachery is way over the top. Not state secrets are being handed over to an enemy state. As a matter of fact I dare say that all of the states that the new citizenship is acquired in are allies of the U.S.
ALL PEOPLE WHO RENOUNCE/RELINQUISH THEIR U.S. CITIZENSHIP MUST PAY THEIR CURRENT OBLIGATIONS. THEY ARE SKIPPING OUT ON NOTHING. THESE SAME PEOPLE WILL BE PAYING TAXES IN THEIR NEW COUNTRY OF CITIZENSHIP so where are the grounds for this moral outrage that some Americans are expressing on this matter?
I'd like to add another detail most people don't know. Because of complications with settling up your taxes and securing other citizenship this process of renouncing citizenship can be complicated and can take months and months if not years.
The reason why a person wants to give up his/her U.S. citizenship is really of no concern to anyone else, not even the U.S. government. The only concern that the government has is whether or not the person doing so is aware of the nature and consequences of taking the act. For the government to say that you can give up citizenship for reason other than wanting to relieve yourself of future tax obligations is an unconstitutional infringement on freedom of choice.
Subjecting those who give up their citizenship to public process of naming and shaming is cruel and unusual punishemnt. Such things are done only to criminals who have done real harm to others. It is also an attempt to discourage others from taking the same step.
If the U.S. government is embarrased by these renunciations than the government should change its taxation policy with regards to none residents. In a world of over 195 separate tax jurisdictions the U.S. is the ONLY one whose citizens are driven to take this drastic step.
But instead of the U.S. government admitting that its taxation policy makes no sense and changing its laws it instead decides to make them even worse.
In the end whether or not a person is rich or poor that person is not a FOOL.
You fail to recognize that some (Denise Rich as an example) have moved to higher tax jurisdictions than the US, so that destroys the tax escape narrative. And, that EXIT tax can be severe, so they are not getting off Scott free, for god sake.
It is not easy to renounce no matter what tax expert Duggan says. It is emotionally traumatic for many. It is a bureaucratic hassle and lengthy process. The State Department charges you $450 for the privilege of exercising a fundamental right to choose. It takes multiple appointments, declarations and there are many forms to sign before you get that CLN. Then you are not done yet as the IRS has more forms and reporting required.
Also, I note, that CBS has not been reporting on the last 3 years of IRS and Congressional jihad against offshore accounts using FBARs as penalty wedge and FATCA as a global hunt for All US Persons living EVERYWHERE in the world. Why not? If you had, you might have understood this story better.
FATCA was originally intended for Homeland Tax Evaders,(It was passed in the 2010 Hire Act) but now is having impacts on many dual citizens and accidental Americans abroad which do not seem to merit the same sensational attention of a Denise Rich, but how would you know? I doubt I will find one story on your web site speaking to FATCA and the impacts.
I would strongly recommend CBS get away from the one day hot headline of a big name reporting to do a serious focused analysis why Americans are renouncing their citizenship in ever increasing numbers.
U.S. citizenship tax policy coupled with FATCA legislation plus FBAR penalties and other SEC regulations has made it near impossible for Americans to reside overseas, to maintain bank accounts and even to keep jobs. U.S. policies are destroying the community of Americans abroad - many average citizens are forced to renounce to survive.
It is also blatant propaganda on our politicians part to define those who renounce as "despicable" while claiming it is for Tax purposes. Senator Schumer, for one, does not know what he is talking about. He lives in a bubble of his own absurd rhetoric. It is U.S. policies and application of stupid statutes that his votes created that are causing the uptick in those that are shedding that US passport. The cost vs benefit analysis has gone decidedly negative in the past 3 years, and folks are having to make hard choices to relinquish or renounce depending on their circumstances.
The United States is the only country to tax its citizens residing overseas, leading to double taxation and to second class citizenship. Furthermore, the U.S. sees the arrival of 100,000 or more immigrants every year who know not what they are signing up for, a life time shackle that can only be cut free by renouncing your citizenship if you return to your original homeland to live.
Other countries are not complaining about their citizens having a free choice to move abroad. In fact, they encourage them, as they are goodwill ambassadors and export job creators for their homeland. Ask the Indian, or the Chinese in your work place if their government treats them like the US is treating its diaspora, or requires them to pay taxes and report accounts back to their homeland under threat of draconian penalties for even non willful failure. I think you might be surprised by the answer. Why has the U.S. become so defensive, so narrow-minded, frankly so stupid in its handling of its citizens residing overseas. And we wonder why we have trade deficits. America wants all the salesman to come home to Kansas, apparently, as that is the effect of it current policies.
BTW, on those new immigrants arriving on American shores, they are never informed of their FBAR obligations in their "Welcome to America" State Department packages. Many are also being caught out in an IRS offshore tax hunt for benign failures to file FBARs and are being improperly characterized as Tax cheats hiding money over seas. Many of them are finding their American Dream dashed by U.S. practices promoted by the likes of Senator Schumer who lives in his New York tax ghetto. I bet he renounces those that leave NY and move to Florida as tax cheats too.
The U.S.'s naming and shaming of renunciants is purely an act of reprisal. By publishing the names of those who renounce U.S. ctizenship the U.S. is treating renunciants as if they have created a crime when no such verdict has been rendered in a court of law. In the U.S. there are communities in which the names of Johns, drunk drivers, theives, may be published in the press and court reports but this is only done after a conviction has been handed down. For the U.S. to publish the names of renunciants is a petty act of cruel punishment that is meant to serve as a detterent to others who may be contemplating doing the same thing. The U.S. Congress may as well put our heads up on pikes and line them up along the streets. What right does the U.S. have to demand of any citizen that he/she tell them why he/she is renouncing U.S. citizenship? The only concern that the U.S. government has is to make sure that the act is being taken freely and with full knowledge its consequences. Other than that the government has no right to play Big Brother.
If the U.S. believes so strongly that renouncing one's citizenship is so immoral then how is it that the U.S. can require of new U.S. citizens that they renounce their citizenship. The U.S. oath of citizenship starts off with a renunciation act:
"I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"
Is American citizenship different from any other citizenship? Why is it not just as evil for a person to renounce his/her citizenship in Kenya, Holland, Brazil etc.?
When Senator Schumer says that it is not necessary to give up one's U.S. citizenship in order to live closer to one's family he is not telling the whole truth. The real truth is that maintaining U.S. citizenship or Green Card status is a costly expense which adds nothing of value to your life as an expat. When one does a cost benefit analysis between the advatages of keeping American citizenship or not you can only come to one conclusion, that it isn't worth it. The costs of U.S. none resident citizenship are seen not only in the annual filing expense but also in the lost opportunity costs that you suffer because of the requiremnt to abide strictly by U.S. investments rules. So not mutual funds are allowed unless they are are reported on an expensive to complete form. Then there is the humiliating act of each year having to tell the U.S. that you have not lived there within the specified number of days that are required to be considered a U.S. resident. As anyone can see therefore that U.S. citizenship is expensive to maintain in both a positive and a negative sense.
For a U.S. person who is not resident in the U.S. the direct costs of IRS tax compliance are a definite negative. The forms that a person has to file are voluminous and extremel complicated. It is wrong to assume that just because a person is rich that he or she should not care about this expense. It is not within the purview of the U.S. Congress to have a right to dictate to someone which expenses they should have. For a person to recklessly leave him/herself open to future IRS tax reporting expense and financial investment regulations is not wise but rather is foolhardy, when one already is exposed to legislative whim from your country of residence. Not since the days of the Soviet Union has there been a government that so harasses is citizens who live abroad and robs them of their property. It is worth noting that there is no immigrant to America who faces such systematic and pernicious legislative abuse from his/her government.
So Senators Schumer, Casey and Speaker Boehner you want not only present taxes from your citizens but you also want future taxes from them even when they are no longer citizens. Please explain the rational on that one. The same government that says it citizens have an unpayable debt of gratitude to the U.S. are the same ones who talk about giving green cards to graduate students from other countrys. What exactly do you think those graduate students owe to their countries of origin? Is it really fair for the U.S. to POACH the educated people of other lands? Will the U.S. give those nations anything back to compensate them for their real losses?
Americans abroad are faced with all kinds of investment restrictions that they would not face if they lived in the States. Take investing in such everyday investment vehicles like mutual funds. If you live in the States you can can invest in a mutual fund without having to pay any tax on the increase in value until such time as you sell it. When you live outside of the States though the IRS calls foreign mutual funds, Passive Foreign Investment Corporations(PFIC), and you are forced to pay taxes on any increase in value and any distributions on a yearly basis. So in other words you have to have enough income outside of the mutual fund to be able to pay any U.S. tax owing or else sell enough of the mutual fund so that you can pay the tax. This is obviously a requirement that seriously hurts your return on the investment and in the end cripples your ability to increase your net worth. There are also discriminatory rules when it comes to pensions that are held outside of the States, college education plans and even small business ownership.
What it all amounts to is that if one is to be in COMPLETE compliance with the IRS you are faced with really living a life of poverty both now and in old age.
Now Americans should ask themselves what would they think of immigrants to America were faced with the same kind of onerous burdens on their financial lives as the U.S. Congress places on its none resident citizens? I highly doubt that the U.S. would be very happy knowing that billions of dollars in U.S. Treasuries were annually being converted into other currencies so that immigrants could pay taxes to their country of citizenship or residency. Nor would America be happy if those immigrants were deincentivized by their home country from holding ROTH accounts, IRA's, and the like. How would America feel if those immigrants were allowed to open and start businesses in America or even bank in America?
America has for years been getting away with receiving a subsidy from the other nations of the world because they don't tax their none resident citizens the way that America taxes its citizens. In other words America's on position on extraterritorial taxtion is hypocritical in addition to being a lie.
There is no such thing as citizenship based taxation when taxation is applied to none resident citizens. All taxation is a taxation on one's own economy and its productivity. If you tax the incomes of your none resident citizens you are taxing another treasury, its economy and its productivity but not YOUR own. Extraterritorial taxation is nothing less than out right robbery on the part of the U.S.
People forget and the U.S. government forgets that there is absolutely no benefit to being an American citizen if you don't live in America. The benefits of American citizenship are strictly meant to be enjoyed by American residents only. This is why Congressional spending authority is limited to those things that are under the U.S. Constitution. When a U.S. citizen lives outside of America he/she no longer even lives under the Constitution of the U.S. A U.S. citizen can appear before any none U.S. court but he can only make his/her case under the constitution of the country where the court has jurisdiction.
Americans are convinced that having an american passport is a great thing.
Well, they are wrong. Since I got my EU passport (Dutch) lots of high paying jobs opened up to me in my field.
In fact, there are some places I have been (was a flier) where an American passport will get you killed.