LifeontheBeach

I agree that quite a number people who are renouncing their US citizenship are living abroad, but there are lots of others who are moving from the US due to loss of freedoms and pervasiveness of Government control.

True.

jokerjokerj

I am not a lawyer. And being based in the UK, I know very little about the complexity of US law. But what if you don't pay? Why not just write a note relinquishing the citizenship? There surely isn't any contractual obligation here. Paying some money so that you get confirmation might be reasonable, but I can't see that (if you do have another citizenship to fall back on) it would be fair to hold someone to ransome in this way...

SeriouslyLost

You've never encountered the US government, have you?

The IRS does such entertaining things as seizing assets that it decides (often with no probable cause) are behaving in a manner that it declares as structuring (ie. arranging your finances in a manner designed to avoid taxation). Making regular deposits under US$10,000 is the most well known of these events - something that catches a not insignificant number of small business owners out. You then have to fight the IRS to prove you didn't do what they say while they hold onto all your liquid assets they can lay their hands on.

GUWonder

Not paying the fee to relinquish or renounce may mean that the USG, some foreign governments, and some other foreign parties (worried about getting hammered by Uncle Sam, directly or indirectly, for not dealing with USG-designated US persons in the way the USG wants them monitored) may deal with you as if you are a US person and with all that comes with that designation.

What all comes with that designation? See the following (from a quote earlier in this thread) about the cost side of the US designation.

Amongst other costs is the exposure to other reporting requirements and to the extraterritorial applicability of some US laws to US persons but not to non-US persons.

:D!

The only way this could work is if you have UK (or another) citizenship and your US citizenship was by descent (or possibly naturalization), and you have never informed any financial institution in the UK about your US citizenship, and you have no assets in or linked to the US, or any other link to the US and absolutely certain that you never wish to visit the US (including international transit) in the future.

You would, of course, still have to lie every time a financial institution asks about your US status. This can happen at any time out of the blue - it's happened to me despite no knowledge on the part of the banks that I've ever had any links to the US (and the nearest thing to a link I have is that I use American Express products ).

yandosan

All this legalese is making my brain hurt.
You have to be a tax-onomist just to get by these days...
Seriously, how much longer before the anal American mega-bureaucracy
crumbles under its own weight?

Error 601

I know a few people who have abruptly found their European careers in jeopardy because of FATCA but don't really have an avenue to renounce because they don't have a spare passport.

But by all accounts I hear the advice European lawyers and accountants are giving companies is to just purge "US persons" from their lives.

GUWonder

Indeed, compliance costs and risks of compliance cost failures may be higher when dealing with US persons than if avoiding/minimizing
doing business with US persons. Lots of countries should have teamed up and collectively told the US to go pound sand over FATCA, but it didn't happen and now Americans abroad are paying the price for the long arms of the US in yet another way.

GUWonder

http://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwo...i-list-longer/

indicates that State, Treasury/IRS, and Justice/FBI are maintaining somewhat separate track of renunciation/relinquishment numbers.

The FBI blacklists those who have renounced citizenship, and so face crippled ability to make legal gun purchases in the US.

"For 2015, the State Department estimates it separately for renunciations (5,986) and relinquishment (559)."

yandosan

indicates that State, Treasury/IRS, and Justice/FBI are maintaining somewhat separate track of renunciation/relinquishment numbers.

The FBI blacklists those who have renounced citizenship, and so face crippled ability to make legal gun purchases in the US.

"For 2015, the State Department estimates it separately for renunciations (5,986) and relinquishment (559)."
__________________

Wonderful to see the US is not fudging numbers, playing games or retaliating
against people who make a decision to move on to greener pastures--
all signs of a transparent, healthy gov't.

STBCypriot

I wonder why the USG publicly publishes the list of people who have renounced their US citizenship. I understand why they would keep track (statistics, etc.) but I can't think of a single reason to go to the expense of publishing the list of names.

GUWonder

It's sort of like a name and shame effort, but name and shame approaches may be rather shameful when used against those who committed no crime.

LifeontheBeach

Uncle Sam doesn't like people leaving the flock.

STBCypriot

I may be a bit dense here, but I still don't see how the name and shame concept really affects anyone in this situation. IMHO, it's just a waste of money to publish the list.

BSBD

It's an attempt at discouragement. Occasionally a rich, famous, or rich and famous person will decide to renounce/relinquish. The hope is that the news media will pick up on this and run a hit piece to whip up some patriotic outrage amongst the hoi polloi.

The goal is to generate enough negative attention that the famous/wealthy person suffers, thus dissuading others who might be considering doing the same thing.

It's happened a few times.