"3. I understand that:
(a) I will be billed for the cost of my/our transportation no greater than the amount of a full-fare economy flight, or comparable alternate transportation, to the designated destination(s) that would have been charged immediately prior to the events giving rise to the evacuation.
(b) My obligation to repay my loan will not be considered paid in full until it clears through the account of the Treasurer of the United States. (c) Until I have paid my loan in full, I and all listed U.S. citizen family members will only be eligible for a limited validity U.S. passport.
(d) If my loan is in default, I and all listed U.S. citizen family members will not be eligible for a limited validity U.S. passports.
(e) My loan will be subject to interest, penalties, and other charges for late payment as directed by law and regulation.
(f) I will be liable to pay any costs for collection."
If you're interested in reading the State Department Budget:
You'll notice that US Citizens Services is self-funded from fees collected from Americans using their services. I'm not saying that's wrong or right, but by comparison, the Social Security Administration doesn't charge fees for services.
In the Facebook group Citizenship Taxation, FATCA and Citizenship Based taxation are the key topics. There are countless stories of double taxation (despite normalization agreements, as those agreements don't cover certain taxes like French Social Charges.)
My primary complaint about Citizenship Based Taxation is that Americans abroad have no representation. You register to vote in your "state of residence" -- so while you can just pick a state at random if you want, the fact is that we do not have representation because the representatives from a state represent residents of that state. It is illegal to register to vote in a state in which you aren't resident. To register to vote as an overseas American, you effectively have to commit fraud.
There's also the related issue of "Accidental Americans" -- these are Americans who became Americans by virtue of birth to American parents even if they have never set foot in the US. Many of them don't even realize that they are Americans -- however, they have FULL tax liability to the United States on all their income for their entire life. When they open overseas bank accounts, banks often discover they are a "US Person" and thus their accounts are subject to either not being opened or subject to seizure by the US treasury department for failing to report the account per FATCA. Violations start at $10,000 per incident. Here's an article about those penalties: http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/01/pf/taxes/irs-penalties/
My opposition to Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is based exclusively on their support for FATCA (Bernie voted for it) and Citizenship Based Taxation. Clinton was the one who introduced the $450 citizenship renunciation fee (now raised to $2300.) Democrats Abroad is on record opposing Rand Paul's repeated bills to repeal FATCA. They also oppose the lawsuit challenging both FATCA and the constitutionality of citizenship based taxation.
I know this was a long rant, but this issue is one I face continually and it has harmed a large number of people for minimal benefit.
The myth that American citizenship has "value" to an overseas American is just that.. a myth.
Blows my mind that you people can't even vote when living abroad. As a Swiss, the embassy registers me in either my home canton or my last residential canton for votes (i.e. all the people referendums) and elections. They send me the voting letters to my Japanese home address. Free of charge.
Things like this and the Flint water scandal make me want to never work in the US, even if it's just a year. Dealing with your tax authorities? No thank you.
They send me the voting letters to my Japanese home address. Free of charge.
I get letters like that, too, also addressed to Japan but bearing a conspicuous bald eagle. An American citizen is a resident of the last state one had legal residence in for voting purposes even if one has no particular intent to return to it. One's friendly local State Department employee will happily confirm this:
For voting purposes, your state of legal residence is generally the state wherein you resided immediately before leaving the United States, even if you no longer own or rent property or intend to return there in the future. Twenty-four states and the District of Columbia specifically allow U.S. citizens who have never resided in the United States to register where a parent would be eligible to vote.
I'm a US citizen living in Sweden. I still vote in the US, as if I were a resident from where I used to be. In fact, I have a ballot for two municipal offices on my desk right now. (This is the second ballot I've gotten this year. The first was for a school bond. The US has a lot of elections.)
In reference to briandear's comment "It is illegal to register to vote in a state in which you aren't resident", that simply isn't correct.
However, I don't know what happens with Americans who were born overseas and are citizens because their parents were citizens, but who have never been resident in the US. Ahh, https://www.fvap.gov/citizen-voter/reside gives details.
He's right and wrong. Living in Sweden, you cannot just decide to register to vote in New York City or Minneapolis just because, as you don't meet the criteria to register.
But, once registered, you can vote as an absentee indefinitely from wherever you came from.
I'm not sure how it works in other situations, but I know that a few of my friends who joined the military moved to Texas and New Hampshire, as the military treats you as a resident of the state in which you enter service for tax purposes.
I'll quote briandear more fully: "so while you can just pick a state at random if you want, the fact is that we do not have representation because the representatives from a state represent residents of that state. It is illegal to register to vote in a state in which you aren't resident. To register to vote as an overseas American, you effectively have to commit fraud"
None of that is right. You cannot pick a state at random. The representatives are also there to support the overseas voters and citizens. And you do not need to be a physical resident in the state in order to register to vote overseas in the state. Moveover, registering as an overseas voter is not effectively committing fraud.
So I disagree with you. briandear was wrong on all points relevant to the snippet I quoted. Otherwise, I think your first two lines make the same points I made.
However that doesn't account for State laws which, many are explicit -- the country in which you reside. I know that isn't how it works in practice, but technically, if you aren't a resident, you aren't a resident -- regardless of your parents.
Correct. But you don't need to be a physical resident to vote in a state. (Nor can you pick a state at random.) Here's what the government says, from https://www.fvap.gov/citizen-voter/additional-info :
> Citizens residing outside the U.S. may not arbitrarily choose which State to declare as their legal voting residence without meeting the State's residency requirement. The following are basic guidelines to follow in determining voting residency:
> * Your "legal State of residence" for voting purposes is the address where you last resided immediately prior to your departure from the U.S. This residence remains valid even though the citizen may no longer own property or have other ties to their last State residence and their intent to return to that State may be uncertain.
> * Voting in an election for Federal offices only may not be used as the sole basis to determine residency for the purposes of imposing State and local taxes. If you claim a particular State as your residence and have other ties with that State in addition to voting, then you may be liable for State and local taxation, depending upon that particular State law. Consult your legal counsel for specific questions or situations.
The qualifier "for voting purposes" is why there's no fraud.
Kindly point to the relevant state law which requires you to be a physical resident of the state, and thereby disallows deployed members of the military and overseas voters from voting in the state. There may be some, but I've not heard of one.
In any case, your complaint was about the lack of representation in Congress for overseas citizens, excepting by those who fraudulently declare residency in the state. The Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act says the state must allow overseas voters to vote in federal elections, and therefore do have representation, and without resorting to fraudulent means.
Thanks. I can't believe people on HN are defending FBAR. Go and take a look at the online form. It is disgusting how intrusive it is. I thought HN is supposed to be opposed to government intrusion into privacy.
There are many different scenarios which the law as it currently stands do not adequately cover for.
Scenario:
* Parent gains US citizenship through immigration. Parent inherits from grandparents.
* Person gains US citizenship through immigration. Person inherits from parents foreign bank accounts.
* Based on my understanding, US now has a claim on monies which have at no point entered the US, nor have been derived from US related activities.
* This is crazy.
I'm totally fine with paying taxes on income derived from being in the US but to have to pay US taxes on income derived elsewhere is just insane overreach.
I'm not a tax expert but don't think the scenario you describe is correct.
In most countries when you inherit it's the estate that is taxed and generally the estate is taxed in country of domicile of the estate rather than citizenship of the recipient.
In your scenario the estate would would be taxed by the country of domicile, and then the remaining money transferred to you. If you were a US person then you would be taxed on any interest or capital gains from that point onwards.
That said this kind of thing is generally fairly complex (determining country of domicile for example is not obvious) so generally you would involve an accountant or tax professional.
To be clear, the money is not intended to transfer into a US bank account. So for all intents and purposes, it has remained outside the US and will continue to do so.
The point being that the US has no business trying to tax income generated from funds that has never entered the country. Residence based taxation (like the rest of the world) would address this immediately.
Almost all countries tax foreign income of residents. In your example you would be taxed on gains beyond the initial amount in all countries that aren't considered to be tax havens.
(The non-domiciled rule in the UK being one notable exception)
You're wrong about voting: americans living abroad register in their last state of residence, and can vote in those elections. It's not illegal to do so. Most states have programs specifically to assist overseas voters, and the federal government provides overseas voting support to americans living abroad through the FPCA program. No fraud is committed.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-04-22/americans-t...
Have a look at this evacuation application:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/211837.pdf
Here's the key wording:
"3. I understand that: (a) I will be billed for the cost of my/our transportation no greater than the amount of a full-fare economy flight, or comparable alternate transportation, to the designated destination(s) that would have been charged immediately prior to the events giving rise to the evacuation. (b) My obligation to repay my loan will not be considered paid in full until it clears through the account of the Treasurer of the United States. (c) Until I have paid my loan in full, I and all listed U.S. citizen family members will only be eligible for a limited validity U.S. passport. (d) If my loan is in default, I and all listed U.S. citizen family members will not be eligible for a limited validity U.S. passports. (e) My loan will be subject to interest, penalties, and other charges for late payment as directed by law and regulation. (f) I will be liable to pay any costs for collection."
If you're interested in reading the State Department Budget:
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/100033.pdf
You'll notice that US Citizens Services is self-funded from fees collected from Americans using their services. I'm not saying that's wrong or right, but by comparison, the Social Security Administration doesn't charge fees for services.
The US is the ONLY country besides Eritrea that taxes non-resident Americans. Interestingly, Eritrea's tax warrants "investigation" by Swiss authorities: http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/controversial-levy_swiss-prosecu...
And from the British: http://www.theguardian.com/global-development/2015/jun/09/er...
Yet, the US does the exact same thing.
Here's an economist article discussing the situation in more detail: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21605907-americas-new-...
In the Facebook group Citizenship Taxation, FATCA and Citizenship Based taxation are the key topics. There are countless stories of double taxation (despite normalization agreements, as those agreements don't cover certain taxes like French Social Charges.)
My primary complaint about Citizenship Based Taxation is that Americans abroad have no representation. You register to vote in your "state of residence" -- so while you can just pick a state at random if you want, the fact is that we do not have representation because the representatives from a state represent residents of that state. It is illegal to register to vote in a state in which you aren't resident. To register to vote as an overseas American, you effectively have to commit fraud.
There's also the related issue of "Accidental Americans" -- these are Americans who became Americans by virtue of birth to American parents even if they have never set foot in the US. Many of them don't even realize that they are Americans -- however, they have FULL tax liability to the United States on all their income for their entire life. When they open overseas bank accounts, banks often discover they are a "US Person" and thus their accounts are subject to either not being opened or subject to seizure by the US treasury department for failing to report the account per FATCA. Violations start at $10,000 per incident. Here's an article about those penalties: http://money.cnn.com/2015/04/01/pf/taxes/irs-penalties/
My opposition to Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders is based exclusively on their support for FATCA (Bernie voted for it) and Citizenship Based Taxation. Clinton was the one who introduced the $450 citizenship renunciation fee (now raised to $2300.) Democrats Abroad is on record opposing Rand Paul's repeated bills to repeal FATCA. They also oppose the lawsuit challenging both FATCA and the constitutionality of citizenship based taxation.
I know this was a long rant, but this issue is one I face continually and it has harmed a large number of people for minimal benefit.
The myth that American citizenship has "value" to an overseas American is just that.. a myth.