5 ms·

Last number I heard, 6 million. I'm one of them. State department last said there was an estimated 9 million. I've also heard 3 million. So, 6. lol. Stupid US

by apercu 8y ago

Last number I heard, 6 million. I'm one of them. State department last said there was an estimated 9 million. I've also heard 3 million. So, 6. lol. Stupid US tax laws and FATCA are a major pain in the ass. FATCA made it all more ridiculous. I'm considering renouncing. Guess what, though? That costs like $3k.

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
You have to pay the US to stop being a citizen? I can understand a cost for filing, but that's a lot of money to opt out of your rights as a citizen. I'm trying to think of equivalent items that one would do when opting out of citizenship that are equivalent to emptying out the health spending account when you quit a job to try and make your money back.
- miscreanity 8y ago
  Yes, and the bar has been raised[1] in recent years. When high net worth individuals start to leave, it's good to question the reason since they typically have more flexibility than lower-income earners who might do the same if they had greater financial means. The high bar acts to prevent foolish decisions at best, and at worst serves to forcibly imprison the most vulnerable of the populace - it is akin to vendor lock-in of the worst kind. As for my own opinion, Trump's actions have improved the situation somewhat but perhaps only temporarily. The reporting requirements remain onerous, as the IRS effectively intrudes into every aspect of your life through financial inspection - it is an absolute violation of everyone's humanity and rights, regardless of income level. The United States had no income tax or reporting requirements for over a third of its existence and experienced growth; now that the tide has shifted, the US tax requirements would be causing a much greater exodus if it weren't for the fact that there are not currently many places worldwide in a better position. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/10/23/u-s-has-worlds-highest-fee-to-renounce-citizenship/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/10/23/u-s-has-w...
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    > The United States had no income tax or reporting requirements for over a third of its existence and experienced growth; now that the tide has shifted, the US tax requirements would be causing a much greater exodus if it weren't for the fact that there are not currently many places worldwide in a better position. I believe that the initial taxation was for import/export, but that's also a time when the social welfare state didn't exist. Though the first income taxes came along to pay for war - I guess all the United States needs to do is stop being in the business of war and the income tax could go away. Any day now.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > Though the first income taxes came along to pay for war - I guess all the United States needs to do is stop being in the business of war and the income tax could go away. The first income tax came to pay for the Civil War; I don't think the US is going to give up on maintaining it's territorial integrity, even if it gave up on foreign wars.
      - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
        Absolutely true. Though I'd argue at this point that the only way the United States would face a war that could be fought conventionally internally, it would be by a foe that's using the resource of the United States Army, as I don't believe there'd be another other viable option. We're a little far away from when every man had equivalent firepower to a member of the United States forces in their closet. It would also seem to be a very hard line to draw in regards to "preventing external threats". An argument could be made that that's exact what's happening right now, and that it's aggressive posture and presence around the world is solely in self defense, so really, the industry of war probably can't ever stop, and neither can the income tax.
        dragonwriter 8y ago
        > Though I'd argue at this point that the only way the United States would face a war that could be fought conventionally internally, it would be by a foe that's using the resource of the United States Army, as I don't believe there'd be another other viable option That's true because of the income tax derived funds lavished on the US Army (and other branches.) Were that to stop—which abandoning the income tax without a similar scale replacement would likely require—other options would rapidly open up.
- oh_sigh 8y ago
  "You didn't build that" - perhaps the intent of the law is that you can't become wealthy in America by utilizing its resources and public resources and then check out the moment you think you don't need America any more.
  - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
    But the only people who could afford to pay it then would be the (relatively) wealthy.
malapportion 8y ago
> Last number I heard, 6 million. I'm one of them. State department last said there was an estimated 9 million. I've also heard 3 million. So, 6. lol. Put another way, the number of US citizens living outside the US is somewhere between the population of Iowa (the 30th most populous state) and New Jersey (11th), with the middle of that range being approximately Massachusetts (15th). It's more than the combined population of the 5 - 10 (median: 8) least populous states that elect 10-20% of the US senate. Sadly, the political power of that constituency is seriously diluted. Voting is a pain in the ass, and if you have never lived in the US and your parents are from the wrong state you're shit out of luck; there's no way to even register to vote. Of course, Puerto Rico (and other territories like Guam, American Samoa, VI, CNMI) are the real injustices - Puerto Rico would be the 29th most populous state, but even US citizens who move there from other parts of the US lose their rights to vote in federal elections. Because they're still resident in the US. Infuriating. Sooner or later, the malapportionment of the US senate is going to tear the country apart. Again.

by apercu 8y ago

SketchySeaBeast 8y ago

You have to pay the US to stop being a citizen? I can understand a cost for filing, but that's a lot of money to opt out of your rights as a citizen. I'm trying to think of equivalent items that one would do when opting out of citizenship that are equivalent to emptying out the health spending account when you quit a job to try and make your money back.

miscreanity 8y ago
Yes, and the bar has been raised[1] in recent years. When high net worth individuals start to leave, it's good to question the reason since they typically have more flexibility than lower-income earners who might do the same if they had greater financial means. The high bar acts to prevent foolish decisions at best, and at worst serves to forcibly imprison the most vulnerable of the populace - it is akin to vendor lock-in of the worst kind. As for my own opinion, Trump's actions have improved the situation somewhat but perhaps only temporarily. The reporting requirements remain onerous, as the IRS effectively intrudes into every aspect of your life through financial inspection - it is an absolute violation of everyone's humanity and rights, regardless of income level. The United States had no income tax or reporting requirements for over a third of its existence and experienced growth; now that the tide has shifted, the US tax requirements would be causing a much greater exodus if it weren't for the fact that there are not currently many places worldwide in a better position. [1] https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/10/23/u-s-has-worlds-highest-fee-to-renounce-citizenship/ https://www.forbes.com/sites/robertwood/2015/10/23/u-s-has-w...
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  > The United States had no income tax or reporting requirements for over a third of its existence and experienced growth; now that the tide has shifted, the US tax requirements would be causing a much greater exodus if it weren't for the fact that there are not currently many places worldwide in a better position. I believe that the initial taxation was for import/export, but that's also a time when the social welfare state didn't exist. Though the first income taxes came along to pay for war - I guess all the United States needs to do is stop being in the business of war and the income tax could go away. Any day now.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > Though the first income taxes came along to pay for war - I guess all the United States needs to do is stop being in the business of war and the income tax could go away. The first income tax came to pay for the Civil War; I don't think the US is going to give up on maintaining it's territorial integrity, even if it gave up on foreign wars.
    - SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
      Absolutely true. Though I'd argue at this point that the only way the United States would face a war that could be fought conventionally internally, it would be by a foe that's using the resource of the United States Army, as I don't believe there'd be another other viable option. We're a little far away from when every man had equivalent firepower to a member of the United States forces in their closet. It would also seem to be a very hard line to draw in regards to "preventing external threats". An argument could be made that that's exact what's happening right now, and that it's aggressive posture and presence around the world is solely in self defense, so really, the industry of war probably can't ever stop, and neither can the income tax.
      - dragonwriter 8y ago
        > Though I'd argue at this point that the only way the United States would face a war that could be fought conventionally internally, it would be by a foe that's using the resource of the United States Army, as I don't believe there'd be another other viable option That's true because of the income tax derived funds lavished on the US Army (and other branches.) Were that to stop—which abandoning the income tax without a similar scale replacement would likely require—other options would rapidly open up.
oh_sigh 8y ago
"You didn't build that" - perhaps the intent of the law is that you can't become wealthy in America by utilizing its resources and public resources and then check out the moment you think you don't need America any more.
- SketchySeaBeast 8y ago
  But the only people who could afford to pay it then would be the (relatively) wealthy.

malapportion 8y ago

> Last number I heard, 6 million. I'm one of them. State department last said there was an estimated 9 million. I've also heard 3 million. So, 6. lol. Put another way, the number of US citizens living outside the US is somewhere between the population of Iowa (the 30th most populous state) and New Jersey (11th), with the middle of that range being approximately Massachusetts (15th). It's more than the combined population of the 5 - 10 (median: 8) least populous states that elect 10-20% of the US senate. Sadly, the political power of that constituency is seriously diluted. Voting is a pain in the ass, and if you have never lived in the US and your parents are from the wrong state you're shit out of luck; there's no way to even register to vote. Of course, Puerto Rico (and other territories like Guam, American Samoa, VI, CNMI) are the real injustices - Puerto Rico would be the 29th most populous state, but even US citizens who move there from other parts of the US lose their rights to vote in federal elections. Because they're still resident in the US. Infuriating. Sooner or later, the malapportionment of the US senate is going to tear the country apart. Again.