6 ms·

Why I gave up my US passport

75 points by nekojima 13y ago

beedogs 13y ago
I haven't renounced yet, but it's so very tempting. The arrogance of the US's dual-taxation bullshit is enough of a reason to consider it.
- pekk 13y ago
  Be honest: it's not really about your perception of arrogance in a tax policy. It's really about the money. You think you are entitled to the privileges of US citizenship but somehow exempt from its legal obligations.
  - NamTaf 13y ago
    What benefit from paying income taxes, exactly? You're not living there, so you don't benefit from any of the social services that income tax funds. Just about every other country I can think of does not tax citizens abroad who do not earn money on their native soil. What makes you think the US system is right and all the others are wrong?
    - bandushrew 13y ago
      and yet you do not want to give up your citizenship, so clearly you feel you are benefiting from some of the social benefits that your income tax funds.
      - udit99 13y ago
        Maybe the reason to not give up citizenship is simply "The option to go back to being a US resident-citizen and enjoy all other benefits". I can't see why this benefit needs any funding.
      - Jayschwa 13y ago
        People probably hesitate because it'd be such a pain in the butt to get the citizenship back.
      - RDeckard 13y ago
        Like not having to deal with border officers on a power-trip at the airport!
      - halostatue 13y ago
        My sole benefit is that my parents have not died, and I don’t want some hopped-up border bureaucrat to be able to tell me that I can’t visit them (or my brother) for five years because his coffee was too hot. Remember how much arbitrary and non-appealable power U.S. border guards have over visitors. I get nothing else from my U.S. passport, because the only country I use that passport for is…the U.S.
      - NamTaf 13y ago
        I'm not an American citizen, so please go ahead and take my perceived American citizenship away - I'm happy to give it up. I hold dual citizenship but would expect not to pay taxes in nation B when I live and work in nation A. If I were to start working in B and stop working in A, I'd expect to pay tax in B as per B's tax laws, and cease paying taxes in A. If I earn an income in both, I expect to pay taxes on the portion of income in each nation, as per the tax laws of each nation. Similarly, because I live and work in A, I do not get the social services that B offers - for example, if I were to become unemployed, I'd expect to only utilise nation A's unemployment benefits. If I fall ill, I don't expect to be able to (and cannot) pin the cost on nation B's national healthcare services. The reason I don't choose to give up my dual citizenship is that I enjoy the ease-of-access to both nations, if and when I choose to move between them. That access does not cost the nation anything to retain.
      - beedogs 13y ago
        Which "social benefits" are you talking about? The ability to go home and visit my family? The ability to return to my place of birth to live and work should I so desire? The net cost to the rest of the country for these things is zero. Nil. Nada. But, somehow, these are now "social benefits" that must be supported by a tithe and not, you know, human rights? Why does the US effectively charge a membership fee for the kinds of basic privileges every other country simply offers for free? As I said in my original post, it's unbelievably arrogant.
    - chrsstrm 13y ago
      It's a pretty flimsy metaphor, but just because I go on long trips and stay in hotels, doesn't mean I'm not obligated to pay rent on my apartment back home. My status as tenant is recognized through my contribution of my monthly rent. Without it, I have no standing. My decision to live elsewhere, either in the short term or longer, means I either have to deal with paying double housing or give up my apartment.
      - coopdog 13y ago
        Most countries will, if you declare that you are closing up shop and living in anther another country for more than a year, allow you to cease all involvement with that country (including tax, levies, welfare), and then welcome you back as a citizen when you decide to come home. It's just too complicated otherwise.
      - sk5t 13y ago
        It's a very leaky metaphor indeed... do not the millions of US citizens who neither earn income nor owe any tax receive far more benefits than the citizen abroad? Why should the working migrant be forced to foot the bill for a room for other people to inhabit?
      - ArchD 13y ago
        Of course it's a flimsy metaphor. How do you make the choice to liken a country to an apartment with a long-term lease instead of a hotel that charges by the day or a club where you pay dues and can suspend your membership and due payment for a while? If the US were an apartment, it would be a very strange apartment with numerous people entering and exiting it everyday.
        greg5green 13y ago
        So it's like prison. Got it. Very American.
  - victorf 13y ago
    Obviously you are incorrect, the GP is claiming that the tax burden costs more than the worth of any privileges he's getting. I bet it's more a problem of choosing where to go permanently that isn't equally awful in a different way. Your assertion is ridiculous, as if everyone thinking about it who doesn't immediately renounce is getting fat off "entitlements" and is loving it.
  - beedogs 13y ago
    Which "privileges"? The ability to say I'm American? Tell me how that's worth it. Tell me how it's fair that I should be criminally liable to report my income and bank balances every fucking year to a country I neither live in nor draw a paycheck from. You'll be unable to come up with a reasonable explanation for this, but feel free to insult me again by ascribing my desire to live elsewhere unmolested to a sense of 'entitlement' or some other garbage.
MichaelGG 13y ago
What I'd be more interested in is if there is harassment for doing so. My daughter is an American citizen unfortunately (happenstance of birth), but won't be living in the US for any foreseeable reason. She'll be burdened with tax and reporting issues all her life if she doesn't renounce. But if she does renounce, will they hassle her when visiting family? What about if she does do some temporary work in the US, will they deny visas?
- nly 13y ago
  Happen-stance of birth? What are the rules there about citizenship by birth? In the UK one of your parents has to be a citizen, or have been "legally settled" (allowed to stay indefinitely).
  - jmreardon 13y ago
    With the exception of children of foreign diplomats, if you are born in the USA, you have citizenship. Who your parents are is irrelevant.
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - logicallee 13y ago
      can you link a citation to the 'exception' you mention?
      - deleted 13y ago
        [deleted]
      - jmreardon 13y ago
        Sure: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/101.3 http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/101.3 The relevant portion is: "A person born in the United States to a foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States, as a matter of international law, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That person is not a United States citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Such a person may be considered a lawful permanent resident at birth."
mscarborough 13y ago
Unfortunately the US gov could not care less. I'd be inclined to say "well if you left, then fine", but with the dual taxation and the inability of Congress to pay their bills (it is not just Democrat money, by a long shot)...what exactly are we paying for and why should everyone be responsible for it?
steven2012 13y ago
If a US-born citizen (as opposed to naturalized US citizen) renounces their citizenship, can they claim it again afterwards? Or is it forever gone?
- rrouse 13y ago
  The State department website on it says that the renunciation is final unless it meets certain guidelines, which basically means that if you did it at age 18+, you're going to have to go through the immigration process just like every other non American. http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
  - philiphodgen 13y ago
    That's correct. Once you have renounced U.S. citizenship you are like all the other billions of people on the planet--if you qualify to re-enter the USA and apply for citizenship, you can do so. The tax rules for giving up citizenship have specific provisions fully expecting people to give up citizenship twice. :-) Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, and I do lots and lots of expatriation cases.
  - bdamm 13y ago
    Presumably rules regarding American parents transmitting citizenship could come into play.
- rodgerd 13y ago
  It's right there in the article, in the interview with the guy who did just that.
LekkoscPiwa 13y ago
Some of the stuff the people in the article write is just plain stupid. If I could get US citizenship for my newly born daughter (born in Poland) after being in the US total just 5 years, why she couldn't get it done, is beyond me. People who have lived in EU complaining about US burocracy and pointing it as a reason for giving up on an US citizenship are beyond me too. US taxation system is a walk in a park compared with EU. All the people from the article seem to be carefully selected socialists big time who just couldn't wait to give up on the US citizenship no matter what. And for one each of them there are literally thousands foreigners who would rather live in the USA, including Germans, Canadians, etc.
- ajmurmann 13y ago
  The issue is not the complexity of the taxation system, but the fact that only the US and Somalia tax based on citizenship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Individual_taxation_systems.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Individual_taxation_system...
  - vellum 13y ago
    That's Eritrea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation
  - joonix 13y ago
    Sure, they are the only ones, but does that mean it's morally or logically wrong? Theoretically a government spends a certain amount of money on each individual as they live, become educated, and work in the US. If they decide to leave the US to work abroad, they shouldn't get any tax revenue back from you? They do allow you to deduct taxes paid to your residence country.
    - nmridul 13y ago
      Taxing is mainly to pay for the facilities that the Government is providing you currently. That is the reason why vast majority of the countries (99% ?) are taxing based on physical presence. So if you are out of the country for most of the time during the last year, then you don't pay tax.
scottlilly 13y ago
I'll be able to apply for Paraguayan citizenship in about a year, and I plan to renounce my US citizenship immediately afterwards. I'm so much happier here in Paraguay (even with all the cultural differences), instead of the US. I also can't say I feel happy about how things have progressed in the US over the last few years - regarding politics and economics. I really expect that Paraguay is the country where I will build my family and my future.
clueless123 13y ago
I wonder what is going to happen to all those US citizens living abroad with the new health insurance requirements.. Will they be forced to pay even they can't benefit from the services ? ( Specially if they are already covered by their host country healthcare system. )
- maratd 13y ago
  I'm very curious about this as well. Are there any provisions in ACA for those living abroad?
- Amadou 13y ago
  "U.S. citizens living in a foreign country are not required to get health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act. If you're uninsured and living abroad, you don't have to pay the fee that other uninsured U.S. citizens may have to pay." https://www.healthcare.gov/am-i-eligible-for-coverage-in-the-marketplace/ https://www.healthcare.gov/am-i-eligible-for-coverage-in-the...
- jacalata 13y ago
  US citizens who live abroad for 330 days in a calendar year are exempt: see question 12 at http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individu...
  - bentoner 13y ago
    That's really harsh. Someone living abroad could easily spend > 35 days/year in the US on business or visiting family.
    - anologwintermut 13y ago
      Not really. The point of the requirement is to subsidize the health care you will get if they find you unconscious, naked in a ditch without ID and can't tell if you are wealthy enough to pay or not. Absent insurance, that privilege is paid for by the higher prices charged to people unlucky enough to need healthcare. Now, if you can't get plans that consider the fact that you are only in the US for < 100 days a year, then yes it's harsh.
mathrawka 13y ago
Last year I was a contract worker for a US company while living in Japan. In addition, I had some side income earned, and all this was taxed as a Sole Proprietor in Japan. The paperwork was about 5 pages worth of just filling in boxes with the numbers from my books. My situation was pretty complicated on the US side, so I enlisted the help of a professional to get everything kosher on my US return. I have never seen such a complex tax return in my life. In the end, it was 40 pages long, and that is not including the FATCA I did seperately. And all that just to show that I owe $0 for US taxes. However, we are considering moving back to the US, if even for just a year, so I keep my US citizenship for now.
deleted 13y ago
[deleted]
ethana 13y ago
It used to be free to renounce U.S citizen ship, but I think it's $500 bucks to file for it now because too many people are lining up.
- philiphodgen 13y ago
  The fee is $450. Most people are happy to pay it. (Disclaimer: lawyer; handle lots of these cases).
spodek 13y ago
I grew up loving the philosophy and values I learned about America -- Jefferson, Adams, Thoreau, King, Edison, Feynman, ... welcoming Einstein and so many others. Young as the country and its culture is, we've produced some greats. As I've matured and times have changed it's been impossible to miss other parts of America grade schools don't teach -- increasing division between rich and poor, decreasing social mobility, corporate control of the government, entrenched racism, sexism, jingoism, needless wars based on lies, ... I could go on. Anyone could. I haven't lost faith in my country -- such vague words could mean so much in this context -- but I don't like how the powerful are influencing the processes that led to it flourishing so long, even taking into account its colossal mistakes (Prohibition?), nor how those without power aren't taking responsibility to gain power like they (we) could. I'm impressed with the love many foreigners have for much of our freedom, which I share. I tell myself living in Manhattan is like living outside any country. Legally New York City may be part of the United States, but culturally it's its own world. Still, I find it valuable to look at where you live sometimes with rose-colored glasses because life feels better when you love your home, but regularly to evaluate it warts and all. How else can you change it if you feel you can, or escape before the need becomes desperate, should the need arise? (Here is where people often ask where it's better or point out places it's worse. I don't argue against asking those questions, but we don't have to jump to comparisons with others, which distracts from evaluating it from what it could be. Or once professed or aspired to be.)
- ryanhuff 13y ago
  Don't you think that the division between rich and poor has historically been worse than it is today? I can't imagine that the early[edit] 1900's, characterized by horrendous labor practices that ultimately brought on the labor movement, were of a society with a more narrow division of rich and poor than of today. I have unsuccessfully looked for a reference to compare today's middle class to those of the early 1900s. Please share if you know of any.
  - jsaxton86 13y ago
    This isn't perfect, but it's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_Top1percentUSA.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_Top1percentUSA.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United...
arbuge 13y ago
It is hard to fathom the complexities you face when overseas as a US citizen due to the US tax code, which is basically the only code of a major developed country to tax its citizens wherever they may live worldwide, regardless of their source of income. There is a system of tax exemptions and credits within the code to offset the double taxation this would imply when living in a jurisdiction which imposes its own income taxes, as most countries in fact do. The difficulties arise in reconciling the US tax liabilities with those owed to the foreign country, calculating the applicable credits, etc. In practice this requires expensive tax professionals in most cases - and they get really expensive if you're an entrepreneur with an overseas corporation, which is pretty much a nightmare to deal with on several levels - different accounting standards, controlled foreign corporation tax reporting, paying estimated taxes when having no clue what the result of a complex tax calculation process will be, etc. Besides income taxes, there are also bank account reporting requirements (TDF 90-22.1 form) which have made many people's lives difficult. The penalties for not reporting any foreign bank account are draconian even if you live overseas and need an account where you live (you will). Even worse, foreign banks are reluctant to deal with US citizens because of the reporting they in turn are required to do on their behalf, resulting in frequent difficulties opening and maintaining bank accounts overseas if you are a US citizen. Finally, as a US citizen overseas you are still entitled to social security payments from the US government, but get no benefit from your contributions to Medicare, which only covers you within the USA proper. For that matter you also get no benefit from most of the residual income taxes you pay to the USA that you can't offset with tax exemptions/credits. It's not like those taxes will be used for any of the infrastructure etc. you use overseas.
mahyarm 13y ago
Here is a quick youtube issue summarizing the citizenship based taxation issue the USA has. Supposedly it came out of the civil war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DKFEpAWjeu4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DKFE...
okonomiyaki3000 13y ago
I'm turning Japanese.
hrasyid 13y ago
Is there any historical examples of a representative democratic country simplifying its tax code? How was it done? The United States have been around for centuries, and each elected governments and congresses have their own idea about how the tax code should look like. Probably that's why now we have very complicated system, because it's the aggregation of centuries' worth of ideas. The logical step is to simplify it, but I don't think it's really possible with the current US political system. Each part of the complexity benefits some group, and every group will influence the lawmakers to keep their benefit/loophole.
- rodgerd 13y ago
  New Zealand has dramatically (dramatically!) simplified our tax for ordinary (salary/wage employees), especially in the 1980s and 1990s. Given the period was one of dramatic economic and social change I doubt most Kiwis could give you a remotely impartial account (myself included); a couple of key elements that appear to be completely absent in the US culture are: 1/ A willingness to accept loophole losses. I have almost nothing I can really claim on as a salaried employee - childcare and charitable donations are about it. There used to be more. I certainly can't claim deductions for "having a mortgage", for example. If I was a lot poorer or had a lot more children (7+) I could get a tax redution for that, but nothing like as generous as the US rates are. Most of the loophole reduction went hand-in-hand with tax cuts, but we're talking dropping from a top rate of >60% by the end of the Muldoon government down to the 30s for the top tier. 2/ Much of the compliance burden and risk falls on employers, so business groups tend to support simplification, because it mitigates risk and reduces costs for them. 3/ There's more a perception of getting value out of taxes paid in New Zealand than the US. Mainstream political dialogue tends to be around fixing perceived problems in government, not nuking it to a smoking hole, pissing in the hole, and sowing the ground with salt. Many US progressives/lefties I've spoken with seem to react with suspicion and horror at the idea of being able to have the IRS estimate your taxes on your behalf in case they swindle them out of their tax breaks, which is both a nice combination of 1) and 3), and illustrates the gulf operating. Mainstream left/progressive voters in New Zealand are not commonly of the opinion that accepting the IRD's estimate on owed taxes is going to stiff them out of thousands of dollars in loopholes.
greg5green 13y ago
If corporations are people, why do they not need to pay taxes when they go all "ex-pat?"
jmspring 13y ago
Current citizen, wife with dual citizenship. Long term we will probably end up in her country (an EU nation), we are already looking at strengthening some of those ties. She had to divest some interests when she took up residence here, if we decide to go back over there (likely in the next 3-5 years), we will look carefully at whether or not staying in vested in the US makes sense. The US feels like it is trying to turn every benefit into something akin to a 401k -- HSA accounts, etc. Which isn't ideal, but they still aren't separating things from the employer based healthcare model...so in a sense many are getting the worst of both worlds. Healthcare may actually be the motivating issue for us.

75 points by nekojima 13y ago

I haven't renounced yet, but it's so very tempting. The arrogance of the US's dual-taxation bullshit is enough of a reason to consider it.

pekk 13y ago
Be honest: it's not really about your perception of arrogance in a tax policy. It's really about the money. You think you are entitled to the privileges of US citizenship but somehow exempt from its legal obligations.
- NamTaf 13y ago
  What benefit from paying income taxes, exactly? You're not living there, so you don't benefit from any of the social services that income tax funds. Just about every other country I can think of does not tax citizens abroad who do not earn money on their native soil. What makes you think the US system is right and all the others are wrong?
  - bandushrew 13y ago
    and yet you do not want to give up your citizenship, so clearly you feel you are benefiting from some of the social benefits that your income tax funds.
    - udit99 13y ago
      Maybe the reason to not give up citizenship is simply "The option to go back to being a US resident-citizen and enjoy all other benefits". I can't see why this benefit needs any funding.
    - Jayschwa 13y ago
      People probably hesitate because it'd be such a pain in the butt to get the citizenship back.
    - RDeckard 13y ago
      Like not having to deal with border officers on a power-trip at the airport!
    - halostatue 13y ago
      My sole benefit is that my parents have not died, and I don’t want some hopped-up border bureaucrat to be able to tell me that I can’t visit them (or my brother) for five years because his coffee was too hot. Remember how much arbitrary and non-appealable power U.S. border guards have over visitors. I get nothing else from my U.S. passport, because the only country I use that passport for is…the U.S.
    - NamTaf 13y ago
      I'm not an American citizen, so please go ahead and take my perceived American citizenship away - I'm happy to give it up. I hold dual citizenship but would expect not to pay taxes in nation B when I live and work in nation A. If I were to start working in B and stop working in A, I'd expect to pay tax in B as per B's tax laws, and cease paying taxes in A. If I earn an income in both, I expect to pay taxes on the portion of income in each nation, as per the tax laws of each nation. Similarly, because I live and work in A, I do not get the social services that B offers - for example, if I were to become unemployed, I'd expect to only utilise nation A's unemployment benefits. If I fall ill, I don't expect to be able to (and cannot) pin the cost on nation B's national healthcare services. The reason I don't choose to give up my dual citizenship is that I enjoy the ease-of-access to both nations, if and when I choose to move between them. That access does not cost the nation anything to retain.
    - beedogs 13y ago
      Which "social benefits" are you talking about? The ability to go home and visit my family? The ability to return to my place of birth to live and work should I so desire? The net cost to the rest of the country for these things is zero. Nil. Nada. But, somehow, these are now "social benefits" that must be supported by a tithe and not, you know, human rights? Why does the US effectively charge a membership fee for the kinds of basic privileges every other country simply offers for free? As I said in my original post, it's unbelievably arrogant.
  - chrsstrm 13y ago
    It's a pretty flimsy metaphor, but just because I go on long trips and stay in hotels, doesn't mean I'm not obligated to pay rent on my apartment back home. My status as tenant is recognized through my contribution of my monthly rent. Without it, I have no standing. My decision to live elsewhere, either in the short term or longer, means I either have to deal with paying double housing or give up my apartment.
    - coopdog 13y ago
      Most countries will, if you declare that you are closing up shop and living in anther another country for more than a year, allow you to cease all involvement with that country (including tax, levies, welfare), and then welcome you back as a citizen when you decide to come home. It's just too complicated otherwise.
    - sk5t 13y ago
      It's a very leaky metaphor indeed... do not the millions of US citizens who neither earn income nor owe any tax receive far more benefits than the citizen abroad? Why should the working migrant be forced to foot the bill for a room for other people to inhabit?
    - ArchD 13y ago
      Of course it's a flimsy metaphor. How do you make the choice to liken a country to an apartment with a long-term lease instead of a hotel that charges by the day or a club where you pay dues and can suspend your membership and due payment for a while? If the US were an apartment, it would be a very strange apartment with numerous people entering and exiting it everyday.
      - greg5green 13y ago
        So it's like prison. Got it. Very American.
- victorf 13y ago
  Obviously you are incorrect, the GP is claiming that the tax burden costs more than the worth of any privileges he's getting. I bet it's more a problem of choosing where to go permanently that isn't equally awful in a different way. Your assertion is ridiculous, as if everyone thinking about it who doesn't immediately renounce is getting fat off "entitlements" and is loving it.
- beedogs 13y ago
  Which "privileges"? The ability to say I'm American? Tell me how that's worth it. Tell me how it's fair that I should be criminally liable to report my income and bank balances every fucking year to a country I neither live in nor draw a paycheck from. You'll be unable to come up with a reasonable explanation for this, but feel free to insult me again by ascribing my desire to live elsewhere unmolested to a sense of 'entitlement' or some other garbage.

MichaelGG 13y ago

What I'd be more interested in is if there is harassment for doing so. My daughter is an American citizen unfortunately (happenstance of birth), but won't be living in the US for any foreseeable reason. She'll be burdened with tax and reporting issues all her life if she doesn't renounce. But if she does renounce, will they hassle her when visiting family? What about if she does do some temporary work in the US, will they deny visas?

nly 13y ago
Happen-stance of birth? What are the rules there about citizenship by birth? In the UK one of your parents has to be a citizen, or have been "legally settled" (allowed to stay indefinitely).
- jmreardon 13y ago
  With the exception of children of foreign diplomats, if you are born in the USA, you have citizenship. Who your parents are is irrelevant.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
  - logicallee 13y ago
    can you link a citation to the 'exception' you mention?
    - deleted 13y ago
      [deleted]
    - jmreardon 13y ago
      Sure: http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/101.3 http://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/8/101.3 The relevant portion is: "A person born in the United States to a foreign diplomatic officer accredited to the United States, as a matter of international law, is not subject to the jurisdiction of the United States. That person is not a United States citizen under the Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution. Such a person may be considered a lawful permanent resident at birth."

mscarborough 13y ago

Unfortunately the US gov could not care less. I'd be inclined to say "well if you left, then fine", but with the dual taxation and the inability of Congress to pay their bills (it is not just Democrat money, by a long shot)...what exactly are we paying for and why should everyone be responsible for it?

steven2012 13y ago

If a US-born citizen (as opposed to naturalized US citizen) renounces their citizenship, can they claim it again afterwards? Or is it forever gone?

rrouse 13y ago
The State department website on it says that the renunciation is final unless it meets certain guidelines, which basically means that if you did it at age 18+, you're going to have to go through the immigration process just like every other non American. http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html
- philiphodgen 13y ago
  That's correct. Once you have renounced U.S. citizenship you are like all the other billions of people on the planet--if you qualify to re-enter the USA and apply for citizenship, you can do so. The tax rules for giving up citizenship have specific provisions fully expecting people to give up citizenship twice. :-) Disclaimer: I am a lawyer, and I do lots and lots of expatriation cases.
- bdamm 13y ago
  Presumably rules regarding American parents transmitting citizenship could come into play.
rodgerd 13y ago
It's right there in the article, in the interview with the guy who did just that.

LekkoscPiwa 13y ago

Some of the stuff the people in the article write is just plain stupid. If I could get US citizenship for my newly born daughter (born in Poland) after being in the US total just 5 years, why she couldn't get it done, is beyond me. People who have lived in EU complaining about US burocracy and pointing it as a reason for giving up on an US citizenship are beyond me too. US taxation system is a walk in a park compared with EU. All the people from the article seem to be carefully selected socialists big time who just couldn't wait to give up on the US citizenship no matter what. And for one each of them there are literally thousands foreigners who would rather live in the USA, including Germans, Canadians, etc.

ajmurmann 13y ago
The issue is not the complexity of the taxation system, but the fact that only the US and Somalia tax based on citizenship. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Individual_taxation_systems.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Individual_taxation_system...
- vellum 13y ago
  That's Eritrea http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_taxation
- joonix 13y ago
  Sure, they are the only ones, but does that mean it's morally or logically wrong? Theoretically a government spends a certain amount of money on each individual as they live, become educated, and work in the US. If they decide to leave the US to work abroad, they shouldn't get any tax revenue back from you? They do allow you to deduct taxes paid to your residence country.
  - nmridul 13y ago
    Taxing is mainly to pay for the facilities that the Government is providing you currently. That is the reason why vast majority of the countries (99% ?) are taxing based on physical presence. So if you are out of the country for most of the time during the last year, then you don't pay tax.

scottlilly 13y ago

I'll be able to apply for Paraguayan citizenship in about a year, and I plan to renounce my US citizenship immediately afterwards. I'm so much happier here in Paraguay (even with all the cultural differences), instead of the US. I also can't say I feel happy about how things have progressed in the US over the last few years - regarding politics and economics. I really expect that Paraguay is the country where I will build my family and my future.

clueless123 13y ago

I wonder what is going to happen to all those US citizens living abroad with the new health insurance requirements.. Will they be forced to pay even they can't benefit from the services ? ( Specially if they are already covered by their host country healthcare system. )

maratd 13y ago
I'm very curious about this as well. Are there any provisions in ACA for those living abroad?
Amadou 13y ago
"U.S. citizens living in a foreign country are not required to get health insurance coverage under the Affordable Care Act. If you're uninsured and living abroad, you don't have to pay the fee that other uninsured U.S. citizens may have to pay." https://www.healthcare.gov/am-i-eligible-for-coverage-in-the-marketplace/ https://www.healthcare.gov/am-i-eligible-for-coverage-in-the...
jacalata 13y ago
US citizens who live abroad for 330 days in a calendar year are exempt: see question 12 at http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision http://www.irs.gov/uac/Questions-and-Answers-on-the-Individu...
- bentoner 13y ago
  That's really harsh. Someone living abroad could easily spend > 35 days/year in the US on business or visiting family.
  - anologwintermut 13y ago
    Not really. The point of the requirement is to subsidize the health care you will get if they find you unconscious, naked in a ditch without ID and can't tell if you are wealthy enough to pay or not. Absent insurance, that privilege is paid for by the higher prices charged to people unlucky enough to need healthcare. Now, if you can't get plans that consider the fact that you are only in the US for < 100 days a year, then yes it's harsh.

mathrawka 13y ago

Last year I was a contract worker for a US company while living in Japan. In addition, I had some side income earned, and all this was taxed as a Sole Proprietor in Japan. The paperwork was about 5 pages worth of just filling in boxes with the numbers from my books. My situation was pretty complicated on the US side, so I enlisted the help of a professional to get everything kosher on my US return. I have never seen such a complex tax return in my life. In the end, it was 40 pages long, and that is not including the FATCA I did seperately. And all that just to show that I owe $0 for US taxes. However, we are considering moving back to the US, if even for just a year, so I keep my US citizenship for now.

deleted 13y ago

[deleted]

ethana 13y ago

It used to be free to renounce U.S citizen ship, but I think it's $500 bucks to file for it now because too many people are lining up.

philiphodgen 13y ago
The fee is $450. Most people are happy to pay it. (Disclaimer: lawyer; handle lots of these cases).

spodek 13y ago

I grew up loving the philosophy and values I learned about America -- Jefferson, Adams, Thoreau, King, Edison, Feynman, ... welcoming Einstein and so many others. Young as the country and its culture is, we've produced some greats. As I've matured and times have changed it's been impossible to miss other parts of America grade schools don't teach -- increasing division between rich and poor, decreasing social mobility, corporate control of the government, entrenched racism, sexism, jingoism, needless wars based on lies, ... I could go on. Anyone could. I haven't lost faith in my country -- such vague words could mean so much in this context -- but I don't like how the powerful are influencing the processes that led to it flourishing so long, even taking into account its colossal mistakes (Prohibition?), nor how those without power aren't taking responsibility to gain power like they (we) could. I'm impressed with the love many foreigners have for much of our freedom, which I share. I tell myself living in Manhattan is like living outside any country. Legally New York City may be part of the United States, but culturally it's its own world. Still, I find it valuable to look at where you live sometimes with rose-colored glasses because life feels better when you love your home, but regularly to evaluate it warts and all. How else can you change it if you feel you can, or escape before the need becomes desperate, should the need arise? (Here is where people often ask where it's better or point out places it's worse. I don't argue against asking those questions, but we don't have to jump to comparisons with others, which distracts from evaluating it from what it could be. Or once professed or aspired to be.)

ryanhuff 13y ago
Don't you think that the division between rich and poor has historically been worse than it is today? I can't imagine that the early[edit] 1900's, characterized by horrendous labor practices that ultimately brought on the labor movement, were of a society with a more narrow division of rich and poor than of today. I have unsuccessfully looked for a reference to compare today's middle class to those of the early 1900s. Please share if you know of any.
- jsaxton86 13y ago
  This isn't perfect, but it's a good start: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_Top1percentUSA.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2008_Top1percentUSA.png http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United_States http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_inequality_in_the_United...

arbuge 13y ago

It is hard to fathom the complexities you face when overseas as a US citizen due to the US tax code, which is basically the only code of a major developed country to tax its citizens wherever they may live worldwide, regardless of their source of income. There is a system of tax exemptions and credits within the code to offset the double taxation this would imply when living in a jurisdiction which imposes its own income taxes, as most countries in fact do. The difficulties arise in reconciling the US tax liabilities with those owed to the foreign country, calculating the applicable credits, etc. In practice this requires expensive tax professionals in most cases - and they get really expensive if you're an entrepreneur with an overseas corporation, which is pretty much a nightmare to deal with on several levels - different accounting standards, controlled foreign corporation tax reporting, paying estimated taxes when having no clue what the result of a complex tax calculation process will be, etc. Besides income taxes, there are also bank account reporting requirements (TDF 90-22.1 form) which have made many people's lives difficult. The penalties for not reporting any foreign bank account are draconian even if you live overseas and need an account where you live (you will). Even worse, foreign banks are reluctant to deal with US citizens because of the reporting they in turn are required to do on their behalf, resulting in frequent difficulties opening and maintaining bank accounts overseas if you are a US citizen. Finally, as a US citizen overseas you are still entitled to social security payments from the US government, but get no benefit from your contributions to Medicare, which only covers you within the USA proper. For that matter you also get no benefit from most of the residual income taxes you pay to the USA that you can't offset with tax exemptions/credits. It's not like those taxes will be used for any of the infrastructure etc. you use overseas.

mahyarm 13y ago

Here is a quick youtube issue summarizing the citizenship based taxation issue the USA has. Supposedly it came out of the civil war: https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DKFEpAWjeu4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=DKFE...

okonomiyaki3000 13y ago

I'm turning Japanese.

hrasyid 13y ago

Is there any historical examples of a representative democratic country simplifying its tax code? How was it done? The United States have been around for centuries, and each elected governments and congresses have their own idea about how the tax code should look like. Probably that's why now we have very complicated system, because it's the aggregation of centuries' worth of ideas. The logical step is to simplify it, but I don't think it's really possible with the current US political system. Each part of the complexity benefits some group, and every group will influence the lawmakers to keep their benefit/loophole.

rodgerd 13y ago
New Zealand has dramatically (dramatically!) simplified our tax for ordinary (salary/wage employees), especially in the 1980s and 1990s. Given the period was one of dramatic economic and social change I doubt most Kiwis could give you a remotely impartial account (myself included); a couple of key elements that appear to be completely absent in the US culture are: 1/ A willingness to accept loophole losses. I have almost nothing I can really claim on as a salaried employee - childcare and charitable donations are about it. There used to be more. I certainly can't claim deductions for "having a mortgage", for example. If I was a lot poorer or had a lot more children (7+) I could get a tax redution for that, but nothing like as generous as the US rates are. Most of the loophole reduction went hand-in-hand with tax cuts, but we're talking dropping from a top rate of >60% by the end of the Muldoon government down to the 30s for the top tier. 2/ Much of the compliance burden and risk falls on employers, so business groups tend to support simplification, because it mitigates risk and reduces costs for them. 3/ There's more a perception of getting value out of taxes paid in New Zealand than the US. Mainstream political dialogue tends to be around fixing perceived problems in government, not nuking it to a smoking hole, pissing in the hole, and sowing the ground with salt. Many US progressives/lefties I've spoken with seem to react with suspicion and horror at the idea of being able to have the IRS estimate your taxes on your behalf in case they swindle them out of their tax breaks, which is both a nice combination of 1) and 3), and illustrates the gulf operating. Mainstream left/progressive voters in New Zealand are not commonly of the opinion that accepting the IRD's estimate on owed taxes is going to stiff them out of thousands of dollars in loopholes.

greg5green 13y ago

If corporations are people, why do they not need to pay taxes when they go all "ex-pat?"

jmspring 13y ago

Current citizen, wife with dual citizenship. Long term we will probably end up in her country (an EU nation), we are already looking at strengthening some of those ties. She had to divest some interests when she took up residence here, if we decide to go back over there (likely in the next 3-5 years), we will look carefully at whether or not staying in vested in the US makes sense. The US feels like it is trying to turn every benefit into something akin to a 401k -- HSA accounts, etc. Which isn't ideal, but they still aren't separating things from the employer based healthcare model...so in a sense many are getting the worst of both worlds. Healthcare may actually be the motivating issue for us.