There is no way for a “middle class” U.S. person abroad to BOTH:
1. Comply with U.S. tax and reporting obligations; and
2. Participate in normal financial planning, retirement saving, and generally live a productive life.
Compliance with the first makes the second impossible.
Compliance with U.S. tax law is complex and carries huge risks of mistakes.
Bottom line for Americans abroad:
retaining U.S. citizenship is a theoretical option but not a practical option.
Yes, in theory they can live with the costs, the threats of penalties, the invasive paperwork, FATCA Hunt, etc. (which are well documented on he blogs). In practice they can’t.
The biggest cost of being a U.S. citizen abroad is the time required to think about the U.S. imposed requirements of living outside the U.S. And, come to think of it, Americans abroad must also comply with the tax rules in their country of residence.
The Truth is:
If U.S. citizens abroad want a normal life where their opportunities in life are not restricted by the place of their birth, they must divest themselves of U.S. citizenship.
U.S. policies are forcing people to renounce their U.S. citizenship. It’s like “constructive dismissal” in an employment situation. If an employer wants to “fire someone” they can either “fire them directly” or “create conditions that make it impossible for the person to stay.
The U.S. has created conditions which make remaining a tax compliant U.S. citizen abroad (unless you are very very rich or very very poor) impossible.
Expats are not advocating for a disregard of the law on the basis of a whim or just out of a general dislike for the law. I would say that the overwhelming majority of expats are current with the tax laws of their country of residence. What expats object to is the extraterritorial imposition of U. S. tax law which has the consequence of making their lives abroad illegal or at the least very unpleasant.
Expats actually have many rational arguments against C.B.T. while the U.S.'s arguments for it are irrational. The arguments for C.B.T. fit into a few self serving categories that don't constitute proof. They are:
a. The law is the law
b. Fair share obligations
c. Patriotism
e. You are a tax evader
Who do you think you would have a fiduciary responsibility to? Your family and the community around you or some foreign government? How would you like to live under a system that alienates you from yourself? Only Americans abroad have to live such a sad existence.
Expats are not a part of U.S. society in any meaningful or legal way. They have no representation because they are not part of a Congressional district. They can't receive any benefits because the Constitution and international laws regarding sovereignty do not allow Congress to spend money overseas on their behalf for the kinds of benefits that a homelander receives.
If it comes down to a choice between self preservation and conformity to a law that results in your own destruction then which choice should a sane person make?
If today's expats are to be accused of picking and choosing then the same can be said of its much beloved founding fathers. The same arguments that America, and you, are aiming at expats were also made by the King of England against the rebellious colonists. But a big difference is that expats are not on American territory whereas the American colonists were actually on British soil. By America's own standards this actually puts expats in a superior position compared to the rebellious colonists.
The US is trying to 'skim' tax off ex-pats who get nothing in return. The US doesn't contribute to another country's infrastructure, health care or other public services. So the US deserves zero from ex-pats.
Homelanders are blind to the fact that on 1 July 2014 their freedom to 'cash out' of the US was taken away from them. But since only about 35% of Americans hold passports most wouldn't notice.
FATCA is less about tax and more about the rights as a dual citizenship. The US has turned into a unilateral country who doesn't care about other countries opinions.
How long do you think it's going to be before countries get sick of paying fines on their banks, open to economic sanctions because the US abuses its position, ex-pats being tracked via the world's financial systems, it goes on and on.
The US is going to lose sole currency reserve status and it's only a question of time. That's the true reason FATCA was brought into law to handcuff people to the US tax system when that happens.
Most ex-pats are everyday middle class people who don't want the IRS in their face while paying another country's taxes. Also if a country has a better tax deal like Dubai, why on earth should US ex-pats not be able to take advantage of that while abroad than having ignorant Senators like Chuck Grassley making absurd statements like 'why should an American in Paris pay the same taxes as an American in Peoria?' Answer : the US contributes nothing to France or ex-pats living abroad.
http://hodgen.com/toronto-consulate-wait-times-have-ballooned/
1. Comply with U.S. tax and reporting obligations; and
2. Participate in normal financial planning, retirement saving, and generally live a productive life.
Compliance with the first makes the second impossible.
Compliance with U.S. tax law is complex and carries huge risks of mistakes.
Bottom line for Americans abroad:
retaining U.S. citizenship is a theoretical option but not a practical option.
Yes, in theory they can live with the costs, the threats of penalties, the invasive paperwork, FATCA Hunt, etc. (which are well documented on he blogs). In practice they can’t.
The biggest cost of being a U.S. citizen abroad is the time required to think about the U.S. imposed requirements of living outside the U.S. And, come to think of it, Americans abroad must also comply with the tax rules in their country of residence.
The Truth is:
If U.S. citizens abroad want a normal life where their opportunities in life are not restricted by the place of their birth, they must divest themselves of U.S. citizenship.
U.S. policies are forcing people to renounce their U.S. citizenship. It’s like “constructive dismissal” in an employment situation. If an employer wants to “fire someone” they can either “fire them directly” or “create conditions that make it impossible for the person to stay.
The U.S. has created conditions which make remaining a tax compliant U.S. citizen abroad (unless you are very very rich or very very poor) impossible.
Expats are not advocating for a disregard of the law on the basis of a whim or just out of a general dislike for the law. I would say that the overwhelming majority of expats are current with the tax laws of their country of residence. What expats object to is the extraterritorial imposition of U. S. tax law which has the consequence of making their lives abroad illegal or at the least very unpleasant.
Expats actually have many rational arguments against C.B.T. while the U.S.'s arguments for it are irrational. The arguments for C.B.T. fit into a few self serving categories that don't constitute proof. They are:
a. The law is the law
b. Fair share obligations
c. Patriotism
e. You are a tax evader
Who do you think you would have a fiduciary responsibility to? Your family and the community around you or some foreign government? How would you like to live under a system that alienates you from yourself? Only Americans abroad have to live such a sad existence.
Expats are not a part of U.S. society in any meaningful or legal way. They have no representation because they are not part of a Congressional district. They can't receive any benefits because the Constitution and international laws regarding sovereignty do not allow Congress to spend money overseas on their behalf for the kinds of benefits that a homelander receives.
If it comes down to a choice between self preservation and conformity to a law that results in your own destruction then which choice should a sane person make?
If today's expats are to be accused of picking and choosing then the same can be said of its much beloved founding fathers. The same arguments that America, and you, are aiming at expats were also made by the King of England against the rebellious colonists. But a big difference is that expats are not on American territory whereas the American colonists were actually on British soil. By America's own standards this actually puts expats in a superior position compared to the rebellious colonists.
The US is trying to 'skim' tax off ex-pats who get nothing in return. The US doesn't contribute to another country's infrastructure, health care or other public services. So the US deserves zero from ex-pats.
Homelanders are blind to the fact that on 1 July 2014 their freedom to 'cash out' of the US was taken away from them. But since only about 35% of Americans hold passports most wouldn't notice.
FATCA is less about tax and more about the rights as a dual citizenship. The US has turned into a unilateral country who doesn't care about other countries opinions.
How long do you think it's going to be before countries get sick of paying fines on their banks, open to economic sanctions because the US abuses its position, ex-pats being tracked via the world's financial systems, it goes on and on.
The US is going to lose sole currency reserve status and it's only a question of time. That's the true reason FATCA was brought into law to handcuff people to the US tax system when that happens.
Most ex-pats are everyday middle class people who don't want the IRS in their face while paying another country's taxes. Also if a country has a better tax deal like Dubai, why on earth should US ex-pats not be able to take advantage of that while abroad than having ignorant Senators like Chuck Grassley making absurd statements like 'why should an American in Paris pay the same taxes as an American in Peoria?' Answer : the US contributes nothing to France or ex-pats living abroad.
http://hodgen.com/toronto-consulate-wait-times-have-ballooned/
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.