More Americans renouncing U.S.citizenship

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
Some were making business decisions, some moved for cheaper retirement, some because of marriage. The fb guy was born in Brazil. I imagine very few on the list could care less about a protest, they were simply protecting their cash.

This country is not and will not errupt into a civil war of sort. A huge majority have no interest in picking up arms against the goverment. Those of you who hold such fantasy will be looking over your shoulder for reinforcements that were never coming.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums
 

scottm4211

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
So if you state (ad nauseum) that all politicians are bums, then say vote all the bums out, who is left?
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
"As I said, since my grandkids have been born in the last 2 yrs, the chances of me leaving are pretty slim...but id have no problem fighting back...."

I know I can count on you to 'stand when needed'. I can't say that for a lot of people.

I understand the problems, I just believe that we have lost a LOT of the 'fire' that formed this Nation.

Like this MAN, Nathan Hale, said as he was about to be hanged:

"I only regret that I have but one life to give for my country,"

OR

Patrick Henry's famous line:

"Give me liberty or give me death"


The 'cut and run' crowd are losers.



 
Last edited:

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
But thats the point they are not a cut and run crowd they are decision makers. They weigh their options and make the choice that works right for them. It is no different than deciding if you want to start your own business or work for someone else.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Xiggi wrote:

This country is not and will not errupt into a civil war of sort. A huge majority have no interest in picking up arms against the goverment. Those of you who hold such fantasy will be looking over your shoulder for reinforcements that were never coming.

You are right, the huge majority are those that just don't see any problems with how things are going and those that are ok with letting others take care of them...that leaves a smaller minority and has to carry them...its not a fantasy for me, because as i said in my post, theres not enough support from the people to take on the government even to vote let alone take up weapons..but 1 can pray.....
 
Last edited:

paullud

Veteran Expediter
Neither does running. Stand up, say no, do not submit to arrest. The "Minute Men" did not run, they had the courage to stand their ground. They won. It is rapidly reaching that point again. One can choose to be a mouse or be a MAN. Mice ALWAYS end up losing. Sooner or later something eats them.

I don't see enough people getting to the boiling point, if there was a big enough group to fight or protest I would say there was a shot. People that leave the country are doing more than just running, they are protesting, they are saying enough is enough and will legally no longer be paying taxes to a government they don't agree with.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
But thats the point they are not a cut and run crowd they are decision makers. They weigh their options and make the choice that works right for them. It is no different than deciding if you want to start your own business or work for someone else.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums


Your beliefs, not mine.

I believe they cut and run, only looking out for their own hide and money and not what is good for the Nation as a whole.

When I leave this earth I want to leave knowing that I did EVERYTHING I could to insure that my granddaughter was a slave to no government. That I did everything I could to protect the idea that everyone has the RIGHT to succeed on their own, without government interference.

Those are my beliefs. I would stand with Nathan Hale before I would leave. That would be my choice, you would have to make your's on your own, according to your beliefs.
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I don't see enough people getting to the boiling point, if there was a big enough group to fight or protest I would say there was a shot. People that leave the country are doing more than just running, they are protesting, they are saying enough is enough and will legally no longer be paying taxes to a government they don't agree with.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums

Most people who renounce have already been out of the country for years and paying taxes in two countries because of it. The whole thing has very little to do with a protest against our goverment.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
Most people who renounce have already been out of the country for years and paying taxes in two countries because of it. The whole thing has very little to do with a protest against our goverment.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

I am not here to argue with you. That is not my intent. I just believe differently. That's it.
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I vote according to my beliefs and in the United States. I try not to comment on the politics of foreign countries. My opinion is of no importance there.
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I am not here to argue with you. That is not my intent. I just believe differently. That's it.

I am not arguing its just facts are facts. If you research the whole renounce thing youll find it isnt people suddenly moving and renouncing. The large.majority have been gone and are looking at economics.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Here is a very good article on this topic. As you will see and as i said above, this is not always about the super the rich..er rich or even the rich..regular everyday people are doing this because of how our government screws with them...

[h=1]Special Report: Tax time pushes some Americans to take a hike[/h]By Atossa Araxia Abrahamian
Mon Apr 16, 2012 12:34pm EDT
Special Report: Tax time pushes some Americans to take a hike | Reuters

(Reuters) - A year ago, in Action Comics, Superman declared plans to renounce his U.S. citizenship.

"'Truth, justice, and the American way' - it's not enough anymore," the comic book superhero said, after both the Iranian and American governments criticized him for joining a peaceful anti-government protest in Tehran.

Last year, almost 1,800 people followed Superman's lead, renouncing their U.S. citizenship or handing in their Green Cards. That's a record number since the Internal Revenue Service began publishing a list of those who renounced in 1998. It's also almost eight times more than the number of citizens who renounced in 2008, and more than the total for 2007, 2008 and 2009 combined.

But not everyone's motivations are as lofty as Superman's. Many say they parted ways with America for tax reasons.

The United States is one of the only countries to tax its citizens on income earned while they're living abroad. And just as Americans stateside must file tax returns each April - this year, the deadline is Tuesday - an estimated 6.3 million U.S. citizens living abroad brace for what they describe as an even tougher process of reporting their income and foreign accounts to the IRS. For them, the deadline is June.

The National Taxpayer Advocate's Office, part of the IRS, released a report in December that details the difficulties of filing taxes from overseas. It cites heavy paperwork, a lack of online filing options and a dearth of local and foreign-language resources.

For those wishing to legally escape the filing requirements, the only way is to formally renounce their U.S. citizenship. Last year, IRS records show that at least 1,788 people did, and that's likely an underestimate. The IRS publishes in the Federal Register the names of those who give up their citizenship, and some who renounced say they haven't seen their name on the list yet.

The State Department said records it keeps differ from those published by the IRS. They indicate that renunciations have remained steady, at about 1,100 each year, said an official.

The decision by the IRS to publish the names is referred to by lawyers as "name and shame." That's because those who renounce are seen as willing to give up their citizenship primarily for financial reasons.

There's also an "exit tax" for the very rich who choose to leave. During the last 25 years, a number of millionaires and billionaires have renounced their citizenship. Among them: Ted Arison, the late founder of Carnival Cruises, and Michael Dingman, a former Ford Motor Co. director.

But those of more modest means renounce, too. They say leaving America is about more than money; it's about privacy and red tape.

LIABILITY, NOT PRIVILEGE

On April 7, 2011, Peter Dunn raised his right hand before a U.S. consular officer in Toronto and swore that he understood the consequences of giving up his U.S. citizenship. Dunn, a dual U.S.-Canadian citizen who has lived outside the United States since 1986, says he renounced because he felt American citizenship had become more of a liability than a privilege.

As an American, Dunn had to file tax returns and report all of his bank accounts - even joint accounts and his Canadian retirement fund. If he didn't, he would be breaking U.S. law and could face penalties of up to $100,000 or 50 percent of his undeclared accounts, whichever is larger. Dunn says he was tired of tracking IRS policy changes, and he had no intention of returning to the United States. Renouncing his citizenship, as he puts it, was "a no-brainer." "If it was just me then it would be one thing," says Dunn, a part-time investor who worried that having to share information with the IRS would deter future business partners - and upset his wife, who is Canadian. "Disclosing joint accounts I hold with my wife and anyone I ever want to do business with - that's just too much. My wife's account is none of their business."

Dunn, who blogs about expatriation, takes issue with being characterized as a tax evader. He says the taxes he pays in Canada are higher than what he would pay in the United States, and he says he had always complied with the IRS before renouncing. But, Dunn says, the IRS approach to enforcing compliance is misguided. "It's making life difficult for a lot of people," he says. "It's driving us away."

OLD, NEW REGULATIONS

Dunn is referring to two filing requirements that affect Americans abroad: the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts - which has been around since 1970 but now carries penalties for noncompliance - and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, passed in 2010 with the aim of reducing offshore tax evasion.
The first regulation requires all Americans, including those living abroad, with at least $10,000 in overseas bank accounts, to file a supplementary form disclosing all of their foreign accounts. That includes any accounts in which the U.S. citizen has a financial interest. That could include a joint account with a spouse or child, accounts for corporations in which the American owns more than 50 percent of the value of shares of stock, or any trust or estate that benefits the U.S. citizen.
The tax compliance act - the newer law - asks foreign financial institutions such as banks, hedge funds, and private equity funds to provide the IRS with information on U.S. clients.

The United States and five European Union countries recently announced their intent to allow institutions to report the information through their own governments, rather than directly to the IRS. Institutions that do not comply will be subject to a 30 percent withholding tax on certain U.S.-sourced payments and proceeds of property sales beginning in the 2013 tax year - for instance, dividends on investments in U.S. companies.

Some expatriates say they were unaware of the first regulation for years and even decades. In 2008, the IRS received only 218,840 such filings. American nationality law grants citizenship to almost everyone born in the United States or born abroad to American parents, regardless of how much time they've spent in the United States. Many may not even know the extent of their U.S. ties.

In 2004, the stakes for noncompliance rose. Failure to file meant potential fines and criminal charges. Americans abroad can be punished for noncompliance even if they owed no income tax - and IRS data show that most of them don't owe money.

Income up to $95,100 isn't taxed under a rule called the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion. In 2009, the income cap was $91,400, and 88 percent of all taxpayers claiming the foreign earned income exclusion owed nothing. Since 2008, the IRS has offered several voluntary-disclosure grace periods during which expatriates can file back taxes without facing criminal charges - but with the possibility of incurring penalties.

Marylouise Serrato, head of American Citizens Abroad, a nonprofit organization based in Geneva, says that many members feel scared about reporting requirements they did not know existed. Their disenchantment, she says, is pushing some to renounce.

"Americans abroad are terrified. We've had people pay tens of thousands of dollars in fines. We've had people … pay huge amounts of back taxes," she says. "Up to this point, we never heard of anyone renouncing, or if they did, they didn't talk about it," says Serrato, who says her group does not advocate renunciation.
"Now," she says, "we're seeing a lot of people speak openly about it and come to us for information."

Congress is taking note. "While I fully support measures that reduce fraud and address offshore havens, the U.S. should not have policies that place undue burdens on legitimate Americans abroad," says Representative Carolyn Maloney, D-N.Y., and the chair of the Congressional Americans Abroad Caucus. Maloney says she has taken the matter to the Department of the Treasury, which oversees the IRS.

'TOO EXPENSIVE TO KEEP'

Lawyers report that banking is a big reason why people renounce. "I hear about banking problems again and again and again," says Phil Hodgen, an attorney who has been helping Americans expatriate since 2008. The new reporting rules, he says, pose "a huge administrative burden. It's made Americans too expensive to keep."

Francisca N. Mordi, vice president and senior tax counsel at the American Bankers Association, says she has received a number of calls from Americans in Europe complaining about banks closing their accounts. "They're going to drop Americans like hot potatoes," Mordi says. "The foreign banks are upset enough about the regulations that they're saying they just won't keep American customers, and it's giving (Americans living abroad) a lot of sleepless nights."

Taxpayer complaints sometimes make their way to Nina Olson, the U.S. taxpayer advocate for the IRS, who addressed some of the international tax issues in a December report.

"The complexity of international tax law, combined with the administrative burden placed on these taxpayers, creates an environment where taxpayers who are trying their best to comply simply cannot," the report reads. "For some, this means paying more U.S. tax than is legally required, while others may be subject to steep civil and criminal penalties. For some U.S. taxpayers abroad, the tax requirements are so confusing and the compliance burden so great that they give up their U.S. citizenship."

In the same report, the IRS responded to the criticism, stating that the penalties for failing to report foreign accounts issued in its guidelines are maximums, not set amounts. It said the agency will not fine filers if the lapse is due to a "reasonable cause." The IRS also acknowledged the need for more public awareness, and it detailed its efforts to inform Americans overseas through fact sheets, a telephone help line and Twitter
.
The IRS did not respond to requests for comment.

WOMEN IN A TOUGH SPOT

Around the world, American women's clubs - known for promoting American culture overseas through Fourth of July celebrations and Thanksgiving dinners - are growing empathetic toward those who renounce.

The American Women's Club in Dusseldorf, for instance, now links to renunciation information on its Website. The Federation of American Women's Clubs Overseas has opposed new IRS rules, in part because the rules were pushing members to give up their citizenship. "The candidates are not tax-evaders or un-patriots," reads the organization's last annual report.

In Europe, American women say they feel pressure to renounce even from their husbands.

"American women married to non-Americans are only just now finding out that they have to disclose years and years of income and accounts," says Lucy Stensland Laederich, a leader of the women's club who lives in Bordeaux, France.
Laederich has been acting as the group's liaison with politicians and bureaucrats in Washington, D.C., and plans to attend a meeting to discuss expatriate tax issues with Maloney and Treasury Department officials on Tuesday.

"When they decide to come clean and report everything," she says, "they have to go ask their husbands for all of their bank information, retirement funds, and investment accounts, everything."

Some of their husbands, Laederich says, refuse to hand over information to the IRS. That leaves the women in difficult predicaments.

"Your options are to ignore the IRS and stick your head in the sand; take your name off of all the accounts and live in a completely cash economy; divorce; or renounce U.S. citizenship," Laederich says. "We've seen all of these things happen."

DIVORCE OR DISCLOSE

Genette Eysselinck, a friend of Laederich's, renounced early this year. Her husband, a European Union civil servant, saw no good reason to share his account information with the IRS, she says. And after considering all her options, Eysselinck decided that renouncing was the best path.

"It created a lot of tensions around here," she says. "Divorce seemed a little extreme, so I asked myself, 'What am I gaining as an American?' And the cons outweighed the pros."

Eysselinck was born in Fort Bragg, North Carolina, and says she grew up on military bases all over the world. Her father, she says, was an Air Force pilot. Eysselinck has lived abroad for decades and no longer has any close connections in the United States.

She spent her final months as an American collecting paperwork and filing tax returns from the past five years, even though she says she owed nothing. Her last act as a citizen was to swear before an American flag that she renounced all ties with the United States. She called the process "gut wrenching."

"I grew up in a military family where patriotic feeling was very strong" Eysselinck says. "I'm amazed at how terrible I felt renouncing. But it was the only way to get them off my back. It's very distressing and time consuming to keep up with all the paperwork. But if it's this bad when I'm 64, how bad will it be when I'm 74?"

(Reporting By Atossa Araxia Abrahamian; editing by Blake Morrison and Michael Williams)
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
I am not arguing its just facts are facts. If you research the whole renounce thing youll find it isnt people suddenly moving and renouncing. The large.majority have been gone and are looking at economics.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

I understand the facts, I am not arguing the facts. I am arguing that those people are as much a part of the problem as the government is. IF they stood up and said 'enough is enough', assuming that they are 'real' decision makers, people would follow. I think that they can ONLY make money and have zero backbone when it comes to important issues. Like liberty and freedom. Just my beliefs. Anyone can believe as they choose. They are ONLY leaving to protect money, money is not important.
 

paullud

Veteran Expediter
Most people who renounce have already been out of the country for years and paying taxes in two countries because of it. The whole thing has very little to do with a protest against our goverment.



Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

I just read another article about this recently that basically agrees with what you are saying but the fact is that the people were making the choice to drop their US citizenship because the taxes were becoming to much of a problem.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums
 

xiggi

Veteran Expediter
Owner/Operator
I just read another article about this recently that basically agrees with what you are saying but the fact is that the people were making the choice to drop their US citizenship because the taxes were becoming to much of a problem.

Sent from my ADR6400L using EO Forums

The point im making is it isnt cut and run or in protest, just a decision plain and simple.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Here is one of the e-mails i got from the people that send the newsletter. The e-mails are free, the newsletter cost. Its generic because in the e-mails, they are referencing the past and coming newsletter. if anyone wants to go for it, you can easily figure out where it came from. But the point is there are more people then you think doing this and it is for alot of different reason..and they are not all super rich or rich.

Yesterday's letter about "social upheaval"received a lot of comments, and I want to address the major themes today.

First, 'Simon the White' wrote: "You imply that it's not just the USA, but that all Western countries are screwed. Where will the contagion end? You appear to be arguing 'expatriate at all costs,' but if things are bad enough that there is rioting in the USA, where on earth will be safe?"

To summarize yesterday's letter, I view social upheaval as a foregone conclusion-- it's already happening around the world, and is a direct consequence of deteriorating economic conditions. In the developed world, social upheaval is a gigantic pyre desperately seeking a spark.

I recommend having a place outside of your home country as an escape pad, but I recognize that many people either cannot or do not want to leave-- at least, not yet. Even those who are aware of the problems are still comfortable at home.

I think this is fine... as long as you HAVE A PLAN.

The funny thing about the boiling frog is that every day, the pot gets a little bit warmer. First they start by fondling 5-year old girls at the airports, then it's train stations. Train stations become bus stations, bus stations become shopping malls, etc.

This erosion of civil liberty and economic opportunity is a slippery slope, and only YOU know your breaking point. Having a plan ensures that, when you reach your breaking point and/or social upheaval hits, you'll at least know exactly where to go and what to do when you get there.

This is not a decision you'll want to make while packing your suitcase.

To Simon the White's point, where will it be safe if there's rioting in the streets of the United States? To be perfectly frank, it's not the rioting that I'm concerned about. It's the government response to the rioting.

Certain countries (and the US is near the top of the list) will have a Mubarak-style response to social upheaval. When you see wide-scale riots in the streets of Cincinnati and Pittsburgh, you'd better believe that all available police forces will show up in full combat gear to squash the protestors.

Politicians will denounce participants as a 'fringe minority of criminals' and laud the police for their courage and professionalism. That's when the real fun will begin... 'cuz if you think you're living in a police state now, just wait until they tighten the screws in response to mass riots. It'll be an all-out war.

I acknowledge that some countries which are 'stable' today will probably experience their own problems in the future. There are four key differences to bear in mind, though-

First, what is the level of dependence that the country (or specific location) has on the outside world? Is it like the tiny nation of Palau that has to import everything, or is it like Chile, which is largely self-sufficient? The more dependent, the more potential for nasty upheaval. The US is OK here.

Second, are there existing tensions within society, particularly among race or class? Countries with an expansive gap between rich and poor are going to be the first to break. With the erosion of the middle class in North America and Western Europe, this is becoming a great concern.

Third, what is the level of violence and criminality in the culture? Is it a society that deals with turmoil in a calm, stoic way (Japan), or do people go postal? In the US, there is certainly historical evidence (Hurricane Katrina, LA riots) which suggests that pockets of the country could become unglued.

Fourth, what is the expected government response? Does the government have a massive military or paramilitary force that will violently crush protestors or impose some state of martial law? Again, this is what I view as the greatest threat in the US.

Bottom line-- I'm not suggesting that everyone simply pick up and go, **** the consequences; thinking people need to weigh the options carefully against their own situation and craft a very deliberate action plan, including a clear idea of where to go in case you reach your breaking point.

Chile is one place that I recommend, and I'll address the ridiculous coverage of the protests there next week. Andorra is another great example. We discuss these routinely and will continue to do so in future letters.

Next, Hamsterdreams writes, "A lot of us reading your articles are already too poor to have a second home in another country! What can we do?"

Here's the deal. The traditional recipe for success is pretty much dead. 'Working your way up the ladder' just isn't an option anymore. The best way to improve your cash position is to learn a skill that's valuable to other people-- so valuable, in fact, that they're willing to pay you for it.

This could be anything, ranging from learning a foreign language to certifying rare coins to growing organic vegetables in people's backyards. Think about how you see the future and then consider what services will be in demand based on that vision. Learn how to provide those services.

Also, if you don't have much money, you'll find that the opportunities to provide valuable services and create wealth are often greater overseas where the economy is growing and the market is not already saturated with competitors.

To give you an example, in July's Newsletter I wrote about some great opportunities in Kosovo. I offered to co-finance them if a highly qualified person demonstrated interest, though no one has taken me up on the offer.

Last thing to bear in mind: if you're low on cash, remember that your living costs can be reduced dramatically overseas. If you're barely surviving on $2,000 per month, you can live quite well in places like Ecuador on $1,000 per month.

[FONT=verdana, geneva]That's all for now, have a great weekend.[/FONT]
 

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
Xiggi is right, most of these people aren't "standing up in protest"..alot of them are older and retired..they just see that they are gettings screwed over by the government and for reasons that retain to them, they renounce...for some its heart wrenching decision, for others its strictly business..for some its to get awayd from lawsuits or the government itself...and for some yes its a protest, but that us not the large majority...
 
Last edited:

chefdennis

Veteran Expediter
I have already gotten PM's asking for the info on the newsletter i get, if you want the info, PM me, i'll decide who i give it to...:D
 

layoutshooter

Veteran Expediter
Retired Expediter
The point im making is it isnt cut and run or in protest, just a decision plain and simple.

Sent from my SPH-D710 using EO Forums

What is the decision about? Keeping more money? In the case of the Facebook dude, it is ONLY about money. Not principle. He is going to live in one of the most controlled and ruled countries on the globe, Singapore, where chewing gum has been illegal since 1992.

You are correct, it is not a protest. Nothing will be improved here. His act of leaving is not for the greater good. He even chooses money over freedom. That is SAD.

Again, you can believe as you please. I believe that anyone who ONLY stands for their own good and abandons ideals is weak and we are better off without them, or their money.

I would not want that dude backing me up on a hose while making an interior attack and I would NEVER trust him with my back for ANYTHING if push comes to shove.
 
Top