Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 3 Votes - 4.67 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
06-09-2013, 09:07 AM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  You replied with a link to a Canadian government website which explains expatriation from Canada. And what does it mention about renouncing your citizenship? None of those words nor concepts appear on that page. Canada defines expatriation as "Severing residential ties", and "becoming a non-resident." And it says that are you officially relieved of all duties to the Canadian government "the date you leave Canada".

In other words, if Canadians don't like, if they don't like the health care system, if they think taxes are too high, if they think the laws are too restrictive, if the disapprove of the government, or even if they just don't like the weather, they are free to leave, no strings attached. No conditions. The concept of renouncing Canadian citizenship and becoming stateless doesn't exist because Canadian citizenship carries with it no burdens or obligations. Only RESIDENCY carries obligations. Citizenship is just a matter of where you were born.

It isn't no strings attached. There is a departure tax, and any further financial activity relating to Canada is still taxable.

The concept of renouncing Canadian citizenship and becoming stateless doesn't exist because Canada does not let one renounce Canadian citizenship without holding another citizenship.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  This concept of people having to renounce their citizenship and become stateless is uniquely American, because the US is the only country that places obligations on citizenship (ie where you were born, not where you live).

Yeah. That's not true. Non-resident citizens under the wealth threshold.

Also for some countries being a non-resident does not absolve one of, for example, having to return for obligatory military service. So there's that.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  You don't dispute that renouncing your citizenship and being a stateless refugee, unable to travel or work anywhere, is a big burden. Like, say, cutting off your leg is a big burden.

If a person chooses to do so without having another citizenship first then it's no fault but their own.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  So, your logic then becomes this:
All the countries in the world let you leave if you're not happy.
Not true. But not the point.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  The US only lets you leave if you let them cut off your leg.
Not true. But not the point.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  The other countries, however, think this is absurd and will not cut off your leg.
Disingenuous. They will not cut off your leg even if you let them. Absurdity is irrelevant.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Therefore, you conclude, the US provides its citizens a greater degree of freedom because it generously allows its citizens to choose to have their leg cut off. Right? That's your logic. Just substitute 'cut off your leg' with 'renounce your citizenship', and that is exactly the point you are arguing.

Not my logic. Just logic.

We can freely debate how stupid it is. (it is stupid). It is less restrictive than some alternatives. That is so tautological I wouldn't have thought it controversial. Oh well.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Technically, it's accurate. Other countries don't want to let their citizens renounce their citizenship and become stateless refugees. But they also don't force their citizens who want to leave to renounce their citizenship. If they don't it, they need only hop on a plane and leave--no strings attached--and they will be welcomed back any time they want to return. The US is the only country that requires you to renounce your citizenship, never return to US soil, and become stateless, if you want to leave. Therefore, you are arguing the US is a freer country.

Nope. Not arguing that. Just pointing out slight inconsistencies in your specific statements. Correct those inconsistencies and your argument will be better for it.
Thumbsup

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Wow! It's amazing the leaps of faith people make to defend their political views. I wish the pragmatism you extend to religion extended to politics.

I don't believe I have stated a single political view in this thread.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Therefore, you are arguing it is NOT actually a ban, because some people (those on official government trips) are allowed to go.

I am arguing that it is not a total ban, though of course it is in effect a partial (and near-total) ban.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  No, alcohol, cigarettes, etc. are not banned because rather than the law saying their use is prohibited unless the government gives you permission, the law says their use is allowed unless you are under age. Everybody over 18 or 21 can get alcohol and cigarettes. Saying 'everybody can do something except for a few exceptions' is NOT the same as saying 'everybody is prohibited from doing something except for a few exceptions'.

"Usage allowed unless [conditions]" is equivalent to "usage prohibited unless [conditions]". "Banned for minors" is equivalent to "allowed for non-minors". Therefore the distinction is in precisely what the conditions are. A difference in degree, not in kind.

(06-09-2013 08:45 AM)frankksj Wrote:  The fact is US citizens are prohibited by law from travelling to Cuba, except on official government-sanctioned trips. In my opinion, refusing to call it a 'ban' is just playing games.

Given the way we are throwing legal citations at each other, it makes sense to be as unambiguous as possible, no?
Big Grin

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 11:02 AM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
Quote:It isn't no strings attached. There is a departure tax, and any further financial activity relating to Canada is still taxable.

You're doing it again. Please, copy and paste exactly what you read that refers to a "departure tax", or any sort of penalty for leaving Canada. That phrase doesn't even exist on that webpage! Canada makes it clear that you ONLY pay Canadian taxes IF you are a Canadian resident or making money in Canada -- NOT if you are a Canadian citizen. Citizenship in Canada has nothing to do with taxation--it's based on where you choose to live and earn money. Residency is a voluntary choice, we can all decide where to leave. Citizenship is NOT a voluntary choice--nobody had a say in deciding where they were born. Taxing based on residency is voluntary. Taxing based on citizenship is involuntary. The Canadian government does not charge you taxes because you were born in Canada--they charge taxes IF you voluntarily choose to live in Canada, earn money in Canada, and use Canadian services. If you don't like Canada, there's nothing to stop you from leaving.

The US is different. You are subject to US obligations, such as taxes, based on CITIZENSHIP -- not RESIDENCY. This is very well known, and isn't disputed. You can look it up anywhere.

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expatriate#...ing_abroad

"The US is the only industrialized country to tax citizens on income earned abroad... even when those citizens are taxed by their countries of residence... Additionally, a new 2010 US law known as FATCA requires expatriates to report any foreign bank accounts exceeding $50,000, with heavy fines for noncompliance.[16] American expatriates have also frequently been denied service at banks and other institutions in their countries of residence. As the US government requires other nations to abide by its banking and financial laws when dealing with its citizens. As a result, hundreds of US expatriates renounce their US citizenship every year."

No serious professional disputes this. It's acknowledged by every international attorney.

Yet, so often when I remind people what that means as far as 'being free', even with people who are normally pragmatic, they go into complete denial mode and insist that it's not possibly the case, that the US is the land of the free, and that surely if Americans don't like the US system, they MUST be free to leave with no strings attached just like the rest of the world. But that's simply not true. Notice how every time and @Chas give a link, I copy/paste directly from that page showing you exactly what it says. Whereas, many times I've challenged you guys to copy/paste anything from your own links that in any way supports your position, and you've run from that challenge every time. You just keep throwing up more links that do nothing but support what I've been saying all along, and then say "Aha, see you're wrong".

Please, copy/paste something from any of those links that supports your claim that Canada (or any other country) requires its citizens to get past barriers, like a 'departure tax' if they're unhappy with their government and want to leave the system.

And, copy/paste something from any of those links that supports your denial that the US requires it's people to renounce their citizenship in order to leave the US system, which renders them stateless if they don't have alternative citizenship already.

Further, @chas said my original post was full of false assertions, but nobody has been able to copy/paste one of the assertions I made and show that it's false. Every link you've provided backs up my assertions.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 11:27 AM (This post was last modified: 06-09-2013 11:42 AM by cjlr.)
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
(06-09-2013 11:02 AM)frankksj Wrote:  You're doing it again. Please, copy and paste exactly what you read that refers to a "departure tax", or any sort of penalty for leaving Canada. That phrase doesn't even exist on that webpage! Canada makes it clear that you ONLY pay Canadian taxes IF you are a Canadian resident or making money in Canada -- NOT if you are a Canadian citizen. Citizenship in Canada has nothing to do with taxation--it's based on where you choose to live and earn money. Residency is a voluntary choice, we can all decide where to leave. Citizenship is NOT a voluntary choice--nobody had a say in deciding where they were born. Taxing based on residency is voluntary. Taxing based on citizenship is involuntary. The Canadian government does not charge you taxes because you were born in Canada--they charge taxes IF you voluntarily choose to live in Canada, earn money in Canada, and use Canadian services. If you don't like Canada, there's nothing to stop you from leaving.
(06-09-2013 11:02 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Please, copy/paste something from any of those links that supports your claim that Canada (or any other country) requires its citizens to get past barriers, like a 'departure tax' if they're unhappy with their government and want to leave the system.

There is a deemed disposition of property at the end of Canadian residency. This has tax implications. 'Departure tax' is a slightly crude way of encompassing them. This is all explained in some detail.

You're wildly conflating many different topics. Don't do that.


(06-09-2013 10:08 AM)frankksj Wrote:  Yet, so often when I remind people what that means as far as 'being free', even with people who are normally pragmatic, they go into complete denial mode and insist that it's not possibly the case, that the US is the land of the free, and that surely if Americans don't like the US system, they MUST be free to leave with no strings attached just like the rest of the world. But that's simply not true. Notice how every time and @Chas give a link, I copy/paste directly from that page showing you exactly what it says. Whereas, many times I've challenged you guys to copy/paste anything from your own links that in any way supports your position, and you've run from that challenge every time. You just keep throwing up more links that do nothing but support what I've been saying all along, and then say "Aha, see you're wrong".

That's nice. Explain to me where I have once "run from that challenge".

If you're wrong on technicalities, you're wrong on technicalities.

You said:
(05-09-2013 10:10 PM)frankksj Wrote:  I'll ask yet again, please copy/paste from that page whatever you're reading that leads you to believe that if an American no longer wants to support the US system, he is allowed to exit the system by doing anything other than renouncing his citizenship and dealing with all the penalties that come with it.
(06-09-2013 11:02 AM)frankksj Wrote:  And, copy/paste something from any of those links that supports your denial that the US requires it's people to renounce their citizenship in order to leave the US system, which renders them stateless if they don't have alternative citizenship already.

This is contradicted by the direct citation from the US government. Criteria given are:
Quote: - Your average annual net income tax for the 5 years ending before the date of expatriation or termination of residency is more than a specified amount that is adjusted for inflation ($147,000 for 2011, $151,000 for 2012, and $155,000 for 2013).
- Your net worth is $2 million or more on the date of your expatriation or termination of residency.
- You fail to certify on Form 8854 that you have complied with all U.S. federal tax obligations for the 5 years preceding the date of your expatriation or termination of residency.
If one does not meet any of these criteria, they cease, on assumption of non-resident status, to have any taxation-related obligations to the United States.

You originally made such assertions such as:
(05-09-2013 12:30 PM)frankksj Wrote:  The US does not allow you to renounce your US citizenship unless, like Eduardo Saverin, you already have citizenship in another country.

This was contradicted by such (of your) later statements as:
(05-09-2013 07:43 PM)frankksj Wrote:  If you were an American, and you were opposed to supporting the US war efforts and decided you wanted to live in Brazil, the only way you would be let out of the system and not forced to continue supporting the US's wars would be to go to a US embassy and renounce your citizenship. At that point you have to liquidate all your assets, pay an exit tax, and you will be stateless.
(06-09-2013 11:02 AM)frankksj Wrote:  And, copy/paste something from any of those links that supports your denial that the US requires it's people to renounce their citizenship in order to leave the US system, which renders them stateless if they don't have alternative citizenship already.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 11:58 AM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
@cjlr
Quote:This is contradicted by the direct citation from the US government. Criteria given are
(quote criteria for minimum income)
If one does not meet any of these criteria, they cease, on assumption of non-resident status, to have any taxation-related obligations to the United States.

That's just not true. I've given you dozens of links showing that non-resident status does NOT relieve Americans of their taxation-related obligations. There is nothing in that link you quoted that supports your claim. It's really plain and simple English.

http://www.irs.gov/Individuals/Internati...iation-Tax

See, at the top it says "Expatriation Tax", and then it says right there in the very first sentence "The expatriation tax provisions ... apply to US citizens who have renounced their citizenship". Nothing about that page has anything to do with non-residents. Nothing says that if you're a non-resident you have no taxation-related obligations if you don't meet the criteria.

There IRS is very clear. There is no ambiguity:

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/inte...24,00.html which says "If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, the rules for filing income, estate, and gift tax returns and paying estimated tax are generally the same whether you are in the United States or abroad. Your worldwide income is subject to U.S. income tax, regardless of where you reside."

The fact is ALL US citizens, whether they are residents or not, have the same obligations to, among other things, file and pay US taxes.

Quote:That's nice. Explain to me where I have once "run from that challenge".

Well the challenge was to copy/paste something that supports your claim that my assertion is wrong, that Americans have to renounce their citizenship in order to exit the US system (end their obligations to the US), whereas the rest of the world just lets you leave. I've provided many links and direct quotes from the IRS, Wikipedia and other 3rd parties supporting the claim I made. I haven't seen you provide any actual quotes to refute my claims. You just keep putting in links that do nothing but support what I've been saying all along. I cannot one find one time when you've accepted that challenge and posted any link to anything that says US citizens who are non-residents are released from their duties to the US government.

Quote:The US does not allow you to renounce your US citizenship unless, like Eduardo Saverin, you already have citizenship in another country.


This was contradicted by such (of your) later statements as:
(Yesterday 08:43 PM)frankksj Wrote:

If you were an American, and you were opposed to supporting the US war efforts and decided you wanted to live in Brazil, the only way you would be let out of the system and not forced to continue supporting the US's wars would be to go to a US embassy and renounce your citizenship. At that point you have to liquidate all your assets, pay an exit tax, and you will be stateless.

This is debating semantics and trying to distract from the issue at hand. The claim in my original post is that the US, unlike the rest of the world, puts up barriers to prevent its citizens from leaving the system. So, in the first quote, when I was saying Americans "can't" get out of the US system unless they have second citizenship, I simply meant that there is no reasonable way to do it.

It's like I were to say "you can't drive your car from LA to Hawaii". And then you respond "Aha, you're wrong! If you built a bridge, then you could do it. You're wrong to say that you CAN'T drive to Hawaii." Yes, ok, technically you're right. But that's using silly technicalities as a distraction to avoid addressing the core point I was making.

I've studied this subject a lot, so, yes, I knew that if an American was willing to be a stateless refugee, then in some cases (but not all) the US may allow him to renounce his citizenship. But, the barrier is so huge, just like building a bridge to Hawaii, that, effectively, it can't be done. And, remember, it's handled on a case-by-case basis, so even if you are willing to go to such an extreme measure, often the US will still not allow it.

We're caught in the weeds arguing over silly, irrelevant semantics rather than debating the core points.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 12:23 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
(06-09-2013 11:58 AM)frankksj Wrote:  See, at the top it says "Expatriation Tax", and then it says right there in the very first sentence "The expatriation tax provisions ... apply to US citizens who have renounced their citizenship". Nothing about that page has anything to do with non-residents. Nothing says that if you're a non-resident you have no taxation-related obligations if you don't meet the criteria.

Are we really doing this? It also says "and long-term citizens who have ended their US resident status for US federal tax purposes". You may recognize that as the second half of the very sentence you selectively quote. It then lists the conditions under which expatriation tax applies. Absent those conditions expatriation tax does not apply. Non-resident status alone does not qualify. That is true. That claim was also never made.

(06-09-2013 11:58 AM)frankksj Wrote:  There IRS is very clear. There is no ambiguity:

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/inte...24,00.html which says "If you are a U.S. citizen or resident alien, the rules for filing income, estate, and gift tax returns and paying estimated tax are generally the same whether you are in the United States or abroad. Your worldwide income is subject to U.S. income tax, regardless of where you reside."

The fact is ALL US citizens, whether they are residents or not, have the same obligations to, among other things, file and pay US taxes.

Not being American, and having no particular desire to peruse the US tax code, I was going by the link Chas originally posted, which is dealt with above.

If there are other circumstances and conditions beyond the scope of that particular article, I am ignorant of them. I'm sorry? It's not like tone has been exemplary on either side here. But you're the one reading "that's not quite true" as "that's totally wrong".

Having no follow-up to my clarification of Canadian law I assume you acknowledge the veracity of my prior statements.

(06-09-2013 11:58 AM)frankksj Wrote:  I haven't seen you provide any actual quotes to refute my claims.

There is the one directly cited above. For a start.

(06-09-2013 11:58 AM)frankksj Wrote:  This is debating semantics and trying to distract from the issue at hand. The claim in my original post is that the US, unlike the rest of the world, puts up barriers to prevent its citizens from leaving the system. So, in the first quote, when I was saying Americans "can't" get out of the US system unless they have second citizenship, I simply meant that there is no reasonable way to do it.

Perhaps you could say what you mean? Instead of being overly broad and ambiguous?

"You should know that what I meant to say is distinct from what I actually said" is rather a bizarre attitude.

(06-09-2013 11:58 AM)frankksj Wrote:  We're caught in the weeds arguing over silly, irrelevant semantics rather than debating the core points.

Meh. Is the United States government at times overbearing? Yes. That is not a discussion, it's self-evident Wink.

Hyperbole has its rhetorical place. Referring to precise and specific legalities is so, so, not the place for it.

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 01:58 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
Quote:Are we really doing this? It also says "and long-term citizens who have ended their US resident status for US federal tax purposes". You may recognize that as the second half of the very sentence you selectively quote.

Did you seriously think I wasn't going to double check the link and see that you altered your direct quote? You did NOT copy/paste from the website, because the website clearly "long-term RESIDENTS", not "long-term CITIZENS" which you claimed.

In other words, what it says is that the penalties for expatriation apply to BOTH U.S. Citizens, IN ADDITION TO, long-term residents (ie green card holders). It doesn't in any way say that US Citizens don't need to expatriate (ie renounce their citizenship) to end their obligations to the US, which is the point I was making.

That last half the sentence I intentionally left off actually demonstrates yet another uniquely US tyranny. Namely, if an American wants to go to Canada (or any other country) and live there for a few years, when he decides he's had enough and wants to return home to the US, there's no penalty. But if a Canadian comes to the US and lives for a few years and then decides he wants to return home, the US maintains that, even after returning home to Canada and never returning to the US, the Canadian is still obligated to pay US taxes for the rest of his life, because by living in the US for an extended period, the US claims lifelong ownership of him. For the Canadian to return home and be free of US obligations, the Canadian also must pay the same penalties (ie liquidating his assets and paying an exit tax).

So, that extra quote you've included is simply saying that if a foreigner comes to live in the US, it's a one-way trip and he has to pay a penalty to return. I left out that part only because it's unrelated to the point I was making, which is how the US treats its own citizens--not how the US treats foreigners who come to the US.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 02:16 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
As a P.S. the part you quoted about long-term residents doesn't bother me so much because it's done voluntarily. When @Chas, a Canadian, came to live in the US, he (hopefully) consulted an attorney who explained to him that it was a one-way trip and he'd either have to keep paying US taxes for the rest of his life or pay an exit tax to leave. But @Chas made a voluntary choice to reside in the US anyway. Thus, he's not 'unfree', because he had the choice of simply not moving to the US. However, for American citizens, there is no choice. I had no choice in deciding where I was born. In fact, the laws which effectively bar American citizens from leaving the US system were applied retroactively. It's not like the law says "If you decide to stay in the US past this date, or if you give birth to a child after this date, be warned that you and the child will be obligated to the US for life." Rather, it was retroactive. Someone may have immigrated to the US, based on the promise that they were free to leave anytime they wanted, he may have had children, also based on the promise that his children could leave whenever they wanted, and then suddenly the law becomes retroactive and he and his children are not allowed to leave the US system anymore.

To me, 'confiscating your citizens' is effectively the same as confiscating and nationalizing businesses, which is what Cuba did and the US put an embargo on them for it (though the US has also confiscated and nationalized private business as well).
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 02:22 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
(06-09-2013 02:16 PM)frankksj Wrote:  As a P.S. the part you quoted about long-term residents doesn't bother me so much because it's done voluntarily. When @Chas, a Canadian, came to live in the US, he (hopefully) consulted an attorney who explained to him that it was a one-way trip and he'd either have to keep paying US taxes for the rest of his life or pay an exit tax to leave. But @Chas made a voluntary choice to reside in the US anyway. Thus, he's not 'unfree', because he had the choice of simply not moving to the US. However, for American citizens, there is no choice. I had no choice in deciding where I was born. In fact, the laws which effectively bar American citizens from leaving the US system were applied retroactively. It's not like the law says "If you decide to stay in the US past this date, or if you give birth to a child after this date, be warned that you and the child will be obligated to the US for life." Rather, it was retroactive. Someone may have immigrated to the US, based on the promise that they were free to leave anytime they wanted, he may have had children, also based on the promise that his children could leave whenever they wanted, and then suddenly the law becomes retroactive and he and his children are not allowed to leave the US system anymore.

To me, 'confiscating your citizens' is effectively the same as confiscating and nationalizing businesses, which is what Cuba did and the US put an embargo on them for it (though the US has also confiscated and nationalized private business as well).

No, if I move back to Canada, I have no U.S. tax obligation thereafter. I surrender my green card and we're done except for my last partial year of U.S. residency.

Skepticism is not a position; it is an approach to claims.
Science is not a subject, but a method.
[Image: flagstiny%206.gif]
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 02:49 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
(06-09-2013 01:58 PM)frankksj Wrote:  Did you seriously think I wasn't going to double check the link and see that you altered your direct quote? You did NOT copy/paste from the website, because the website clearly "long-term RESIDENTS", not "long-term CITIZENS" which you claimed.

Yes. That was a mistake. Mea culpa.

Thumbsup

But y'know...
(06-09-2013 01:58 PM)frankksj Wrote:  But if a Canadian comes to the US and lives for a few years and then decides he wants to return home, the US maintains that, even after returning home to Canada and never returning to the US, the Canadian is still obligated to pay US taxes for the rest of his life...

That's still not true...

... this is my signature!
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
06-09-2013, 03:33 PM
RE: Ask a (GASP) CHINESE COMMUNIST ! ! !
Quote:No, if I move back to Canada, I have no U.S. tax obligation thereafter. I surrender my green card and we're done except for my last partial year of U.S. residency.

Sorry, @Chas, but you need to get a better attorney. That link you've provided explains how it works. If you want to go back to Canada you cannot just "surrender your green card". Even if you hand over your green card, you will STILL be bound to pay US taxes for life.

In order to get out from the obligation, you have file IRS form 8854. Here's the form: link. See it says that the form is

"Expatriation tax provisions apply to ... long-term residents who have ended their residency (expatriated)".

So if you are a long-term resident (ie green card holder) and you want to end your residency, it IS considered expatriation, and you have to file that form. Here is the form: form. See there Part 4. You MUST list all your assets, income, etc., and they will determine what the penalties and conditions are in order to let you out of the system.

There are lots of penalties and conditions that will apply depending on how much money you have, when you give up residency, etc. The restrictions on exiting were originally passed in 1996, buried in the back of a health-care bill (HIPAA), in response to a large number of people leaving the US because of the tax increase. Then it was amended (the Reed Amendment) to add more penalties for people trying to leave, including a ban on every re-entering the US once you left. But there were problems enforcing it since the Attorney General, who has to enforce it, isn't allowed to get the data from the IRS. It also had inconsistent language, like stating things apply to aliens who give up citizenship: aliens don't have citizenship, so was the law supposed to mean aliens who give up residency, or citizens who give up citizenship? One of the extra restrictions I recall was that if you leave and go back to Canada, you will be required to continue paying US taxes for 10 years after you leave, however that was later modified to have an exit tax. It's been updated several times, including last year, to tighten up the restrictions further. For example, one of the updates was that, if at any point in the 10 years that follows your return to Canada you come to the US for more than 30 days, you will be again be subject to US tax on all your worldwide income. The EX-Patriot act was adding further restrictions, after Eduardo Saverin defected, including a ban on re-entry if you left for tax avoidance, and you were automatically guilty of tax avoidance if you made more than $155k/year or had more than $2m in assets at the time of your departure. There are also penalties and exit taxes, depending on how much you have. Further, ALL your assets count, even assets you had in Canada long before you came to the US. Let's say you inherited a house in Canada, then years later moved to the US. As soon as you come to the US, the US lays claim to that house you have in Canada, and before you'll be allowed to give up your residency and return to Canada, you'll be forced to report it and pay an expatriation tax. And if you fail to do so, figuring it's in Canada and you had it before you came here, remember the US has pressured all countries, including Canada, to report to the US all the assets of US citizens and residents, and if they find it, even 30 years after you return to Canada, your form 8854 is invalid and you'll have to retroactively pay those 30 years of taxes. And, you probably won't be allowed to deduct your Canadian taxes based on the double-taxation treaty, meaning you'll have to pay US taxes on all the income you made during those 30 years you live in Canada.

I imagine this means you didn't consult an international tax attorney before deciding to come to the US, and you just assumed that when you wanted to go back to Canada you would be free to just hand in your green card and that was the end of it. A lot of people assume that, since that's the way it works for every other country in the world. But, I'm sorry to say, that's not the way it works in the US. If you don't make or have a lot money, the penalties for returning to Canada won't be much (if anything). But, you're mistaken when you think you can just surrender your green card and be done with it.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: