6 ms·

You Are Not Free to Move Out of the Country

61 points by betocmn 6y ago

whatever1 6y ago
It is actually very expensive to get rid of the American citizenship and the IRS global taxation. A German-American friend of mine now living permanently in Germany for 10 years, still has to pay America for taxes. To drop the citizenship they will have to pay a significant portion of their net worth to the IRS.
- swebs 6y ago
  You have to file your taxes every year, but he shouldn't have to pay anything unless he makes over about $100,000 per year.
  - a2tech 6y ago
    When you hear people complain about paying taxes internationally they can be broken down into two broad camps: 1) People who have received bad tax advice 2) The wealthy
    - smnrchrds 6y ago
      3) Normal people having any sort of income other than employment income. In Canada, our retirement system is built upon three pillars, CPP/QPP/OAS (similar to US Social Security), RRSP (similar to US 401k), and TFSA (similar to US Roth IRA, but more inclusive, as every resident can use it regardless of income level). TFSA is arguably more important and a higher priority for retirement savings than RRSP in Canada. However, the US does not recognize TFSA as a retirement scheme. So if you are a dual American-Canadian citizen, the financial advice is not to use TFSA, as a) it won't be tax-sheltered, you will have to pay taxes to the US, and b) the paperwork required is a huge headache. Every country has something that they don't tax and US will. Because that country does not tax the thing, there is no tax credit to offset US taxes payable and you may end up paying a lot. The thing may be a retirement savings (Canada) or capital gains (Switzerland) or a myriad of things other than employment income.
      - a2tech 6y ago
        If you're living internationally wouldn't it fall under this? >If you are a U.S. citizen or a resident alien of the United States and you live abroad, you are taxed on your worldwide income. However, you may qualify to exclude your foreign earnings from income up to an amount that is adjusted annually for inflation ($103,900 for 2018, $105,900 for 2019, and $107,600 for 2020). In addition, you can exclude or deduct certain foreign housing amounts.
        intellirogue 6y ago
        >may qualify >certain There's a lot of exceptions. It's not a blanket "if you earn less than X you don't pay US taxes".
        nolite 6y ago
        No it would not. That's only for "earned" (thus employment) income
    - dayjah 6y ago
      #1 is a bit of a gotcha; in the case of the USA it holds tax treaties with some countries (maybe blocs like the EU?) and not with others. If you’re earning in a country with a treaty, say the UK, you pay the local tax and any difference is paid to the US if your local tax is less than what you’d pay the fed+state if applicable.
      - 627467 6y ago
        Obviously any country/society can enact any tax rules they see fit, but if I was american living and working and paying tax abroad I would wonder what the tax difference I needed to pay is for. I guess you could argue: military/consular protection. Yet, still feels expensive.
  - jihadjihad 6y ago
    Aren't you still subject to paying U.S. income tax on your earnings? https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxpayers-living-abroad https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxp...
    - swebs 6y ago
      >If you are a U.S. citizen or a resident alien of the United States and you live abroad, you are taxed on your worldwide income. However, you may qualify to exclude your foreign earnings from income up to an amount that is adjusted annually for inflation ($103,900 for 2018, $105,900 for 2019, and $107,600 for 2020). In addition, you can exclude or deduct certain foreign housing amounts. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/foreign-earned-income-exclusion https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/fore...
      - texasbigdata 6y ago
        To be clear you pay the delta. So if you make $X00 and in the Bahamas your income tax is $7, but in the USA your tax would have been $100, you remit $93 back to the US government. Even if you didn’t step foot in the US that year and all the income was Bahamas. Roughly. And if you don’t like it, you make a one time payment of (I think) a third of your net worth. Which is not ideal if the only thing you own is a tangible thing like your childhood home, because now you need to sell it. Being an American comes with a ton of benefits, and one of the costs is how mind numbingly expensive it is to leave. Note, the conversation of whether the US should have territorial taxation roars it’s head up every few years. all of the above might change
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
    - Schiendelman 6y ago
      Yes, but we have reciprocal tax agreements with many countries. In Germany he’s already paying n dollars in taxes, and that n becomes a tax credit in the US.
  - unishark 6y ago
    and you need to have been earning even more than before leaving plus have a net worth in the millions to be hit by expatriation tax for renouncing.
- MrMoenty 6y ago
  Ironically, that exit tax and the associated fees open up one of the only ways to obtain dual German citizenship as an American adult: Depending on your income, the German government may consider the cost of dropping the U.S. citizenship unreasonable, and therefore allow you to obtain German citizenship while keeping your American one. https://www.exberliner.com/features/politics/can-amis-double-up/ https://www.exberliner.com/features/politics/can-amis-double...
- dogma1138 6y ago
  There is little chance he has to pay any tax unless he manages to avoid paying taxes in Germany or the tax owed is lower than what you would pay in the US which again for Germany is highly unlikely.
ketamine__ 6y ago
Access to cutting edge mental health treatment, such as ketamine and estketamine for TRD, are really only available in the US. Also, if you look at the treatment, coverage, and support for ADHD it's clear the US has always been ahead of other nations. Related: Global Perspectives on ADHD: Social Dimensions of Diagnosis and Treatment in Sixteen Countries (2018)
- falcolas 6y ago
  WRT ADHD support, I can’t say I believe this. With our medications being on controlled substances lists, and all the (ironically incredibly ADHD unfriendly) hoops we have to jump through just to get those meds, it’s kinda hard to believe that everyone else in the world is somehow worse than that.
  - swebs 6y ago
    You'd be surprised https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate#Legal_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate#Legal_status
    - falcolas 6y ago
      Per that link, it's only illegal in Russia (which is fucked up) but it's pretty close to identical to how the US handles it in every other listed country.
  - atemerev 6y ago
    ADHD person here, who lived in 6 countries, including the US (the other 5 are Russia, Italy, Denmark, Spain, and Switzerland). Getting ADHD stimulant medications is way easier in the US than elsewhere. Here in Switzerland, for example, adult ADHD was even started to be recognized only since 2011. No immediate release formulations are legal here, only extended release. Even though Novartis, a Swiss company, is the producer of Ritalin. You can't get Ritalin in Switzerland, as it is an immediate release drug. In Russia, _all_ stimulant drugs are banned (and ADHD usually is not even recognized as a valid diagnosis). As is you can get to prison there if you take your Ritalin with you.
tangjurine 6y ago
Is there a way to read the article without the fluff? I feel like the concrete facts could have been listed in <500 words.
- wutbrodo 6y ago
  I'd settle for the fluff if I could somehow excise all the childish asides. I knew I'd regret clicking on a Current Affairs link. May as well read HuffPo
- m-p-3 6y ago
  I passed the article through SMMRY, 20 sentences. https://smmry.com/https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/you-are-not-free-to-move-out-of-the-country#&SM_LENGTH=20 https://smmry.com/https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/you... Copy on IPFS https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmQVWdzhXU52yLRNCMLFrX3sgYAjnVUhpFnJ5U7jTFZyL6/ https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmQVWdzhXU52yLRNCMLFrX3sgYAjnVUhpFnJ5U7...
aww_dang 6y ago
Politics isn't as important as people make it out to be. Perhaps people identify too much with their nationality via political leaders. With the exception of lockdowns, political outcomes rarely interfere with daily routines. As for the ease of living abroad, once you have a source of income everything else tends to fall in place. Many countries are happy to have you if you are self sufficient. The article lists expensive options for citizenship and residency permits before concluding that expatriation is impossible. I agree with the laments about the rise of the passport system. However the hyperbolic tone is off-putting. Likewise for the standard issue anti-capitalist tirades and slight of hand misrepresentations. >...the loudly pro-inequality magazine The Economist. >And despite capitalism’s promises to provide all the lifestyle choices you could ever desire, few of us have the option of trying our luck elsewhere if we want. Most expats I've known burn out within a few years. Eventually they can't cope outside of their previous environment either socially, culturally or economically. Everything is possible for those who are driven and able to adapt. If anything, the remaining freedom within the capitalist economic system makes this possible. For those who can't adapt, contribute or support themselves, what else can be expected of a foreign country and culture?
- repler 6y ago
  > The article lists expensive options for citizenship and residency permits before concluding that expatriation is impossible. I seem to recall that retiring to Mexico has been extremely popular the last decade or so. I have to agree with your point - each country is a quite different experience. If retirees can make it work then surely someone with a career can.
- 0x445442 6y ago
  > With the exception of lockdowns, political outcomes rarely interfere with daily routines. I used to agree with your first sentence but Government never gives attained powers back. The lockdowns represent a crossing of the Rubicon.
  - aww_dang 6y ago
    Yes, the "new normal" is reminiscent of the expansion of state powers following 9/11.
atemerev 6y ago
By the way, it is much, much, much easier for an American to emigrate somewhere (few exceptions aside), than for anybody anywhere in the world to immigrate into the US. I always wonder how Americans, who generally have a strong opinion on emigration (whether pro or against), are generally not informed on how the entire process works. The main reason Americans decide not to emigrate, is that the US is actually a fine country and a good place to live. There are a few other good places to live, like Western European countries, or maybe Japan if you can handle cultural differences, but the difference is not that much that it would be worth of getting through all the hurdles to move there. Nearly everywhere else, the quality of life is much worse.
- a2tech 6y ago
  This is incorrect. The US even in the current time has one of the most open immigration systems in the world. Which is awful, but it is nonetheless true. Try to become a citizen in Europe without having a familial claim or a ton of money. You can absolutely get a work visa (if you can arrange a job) but the chances of you becoming a full citizen is about 0.
  - atemerev 6y ago
    I moved to Switzerland from Russia, and currently live here in Geneva. I also lived in other European countries. No big deal, compared to the US (where I used to live for some time, too, but couldn't get a good path to immigrate without losing my independence as a consultant). In most European countries, you can get a citizenship in 5 years, less in some cases (if you are e.g. a student in France). Switzerland is an exception, it requires 10 years now.
    - a2tech 6y ago
      Living in places is not what we're discussing. Immigration is becoming a citizen of another place. Americans can move almost anywhere. Becoming a CITIZEN is an entire different kettle of fish. I feel like this is where a lot of misunderstandings in these discussions come from--the difference between being a permanent alien and being a citizen. In the United States there's a process for people to become a full member of our society. There's also a process for being a working alien here. Two different paths that don't have to necessarily overlap.
mark_l_watson 6y ago
The big thing not mentioned in the article is that there is an exit tax that Bill Clinton signed into law. Also, new banking laws make it difficult to do banking living abroad. These roadblocks are intended to keep taxpayers.
- a2tech 6y ago
  An exit tax? There is no such thing. Are you talking about the $2300 processing fee? You're paying for the paperwork and interviews. You're not going to be a citizen anymore so it seems fair to require you to pay for the time and attention of the US government to process your request.
  - Schiendelman 6y ago
    There is, but it’s for the very wealthy.
    - texasbigdata 6y ago
      The prong (from the link above) is $150k average trailing yearly income. And the prong only determines if you are elligible. From there, if you are close to retirement and have your wealth in illiquid assets where a penalty for converting them to cash is steep, you are kinda fucked. From Above link: “ IRC 877A imposes a mark-to-market regime, which generally means that all property of a covered expatriate is deemed sold for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date. Any gain arising from the deemed sale is taken into account for the tax year of the deemed sale notwithstanding any other provisions of the Code. Any loss from the deemed sale is taken into account for the tax year of the deemed sale to the extent otherwise provided in the Code, except that the wash sale rules of IRC 1091 do not apply. The amount that would otherwise be includible in gross income by reason of the deemed sale rule is reduced (but not to below zero) by $600,000, which amount is to be adjusted for inflation for calendar years after 2008 (the “exclusion amount”). For calendar year 2014, the exclusion amount is $680,000. For other years, refer to the Instructions for Form 8854.”
    - zeveb 6y ago
cryptica 6y ago
Emigration is going to be essential to avoid technological enslavement over the next few decades. I plan to move to a sovereign country with small population which has a good number of educated and well connected rich people and which has strong relationships with the elites of large (soon to be enslaved) countries. Ideally a country where the elites feel safe to have their holiday houses and send their children to school. The reason why the country must have a small population is because it's not profitable for corporate interests to take control of small countries. Corporations will want to enslave countries with large productive working populations because they are more profitable to exploit. With the US, for example, you just need to corrupt one election, one legal system and you can potentially acquire 350+ million workers/slaves in one fell swoop; that's very profitable. You just need to change one single law and you can reduce the freedoms of 350 million people to squeeze additional productivity out of them... Again in one fell swoop. That's extremely profitable. On the other hand, if you want to enslave a small country full of rich educated people, it's going to be challenging because these rich people can leverage their political connections and bribe your corporate insiders (or use their personal connections to manipulate them) to steer you off course... And then these people are not useful to enslave anyway; firstly, there are too few of them (doesn't scale), secondly, they have no skills to produce anything useful... Rich people are a liability; you want to take countries full of cattle you can milk, not parasites. As soon as people realize what's going on, it will be too late to leave. Just like what happened in North Korea. If you want to have a decent life, you need to think like a parasite. Don't make the mistake I did early in my career thinking that anyone will try to protect your rights in the name of 'justice' - There is no justice. Human evil has no limits.
jere 6y ago
Ok I'll bite > This isn’t just a case of comfortable white people itching to do Colonialism 2.0. While there are no official statistics on the breakdown of American emigres by ethnicity, the country’s ingrained racism has made it more appealing for Black Americans to move abroad, while many Asian Americans find the job opportunities overseas better than the ones at home. Hispanic Americans are also opting out in increasing numbers for a variety of reasons. Can someone explain to me why white people moving to another country is considered colonialism?
- wutbrodo 6y ago
  I really wouldn't bother. There are stronger versions of the argument that race defines everything you do, even though I disagree with them. But this publication is pretty in line with the popular view that "doing anything while white is problematic". You may be familiar with it in the context of moving house: move to a cheap neighborhood? You're gentrifying. Move to a good neighborhood? You're segregating. In both cases, you're reinforcing white supremacy. I'm not even white, I just find the logic transparently nonsensical and am somewhere between amazed and amused that it's become so popular (and hilariously, the animus is far more targeted towards race than class).
- temptemptemp111 6y ago
  white = bad blacklist = banned whitelist = blacklist
- helen___keller 6y ago
  > Can someone explain to me why white people moving to another country is considered colonialism? The premise is that colonialism was marked by people from wealthy countries (generally Europeans) occupying and extracting wealth from poorer foreign lands. So the author is alluding that a (relatively speaking) wealthy white person looking to hop to a lower cost of living land, and be treated like a king for their wealth, is similar at face value. That said it's really just at face value. Using your expatriated wealth to live like a king in a low cost of living country is not the same as extracting wealth, and the expats generally hold no political power either.
ExcavateGrandMa 6y ago
As a citizen of your country your are of course not free! but registered/recorded and soon the chip in skin :Ð
pgcj_poster 6y ago
> Yet on some instinctual reptilian-brain level, it’s hard to shake the feeling that it’s not supposed to be like this. This doubt is sometimes sparked by reading about the lives of historical figures. When you discover that Mark Twain spent more than a decade of his life living and working abroad in places like London, Berlin, and Vienna, you might be inclined to wonder “how?” I first had this feeling when I read in Les Mis where Valjean decides that France isn't safe anymore and that he's going to move to England, and then tells Cosette to be ready within a week.
627467 6y ago
I'm torn. Obviously sovereign societies are free to enact any rights and restrictions (within constrains of treaties they sign up to) they see fit. But I see people's freedom of movement as a natural balancing right in a globalized world were capital moves easily across borders. In EU freedom of movement is normally only talked about as a right due to shared european values but another pragmatic view is: if you allow for such drastic unequal neighbors to be living under similar legal/economical frameworks it's only fair (and economically sound) to let people move with capital.
sudders 6y ago
I have not read the article through, but as far as I can tell this is about US citizens. Because of that I'm wondering why the cover photo is from Bruges, Belgium, more specifically: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2091441,3.2241047,3a,90y,334.97h,100.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3BfSQgS44zXcLJK9hiXJAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2091441,3.2241047,3a,90y,334...

61 points by betocmn 6y ago

It is actually very expensive to get rid of the American citizenship and the IRS global taxation. A German-American friend of mine now living permanently in Germany for 10 years, still has to pay America for taxes. To drop the citizenship they will have to pay a significant portion of their net worth to the IRS.

swebs 6y ago
You have to file your taxes every year, but he shouldn't have to pay anything unless he makes over about $100,000 per year.
- a2tech 6y ago
  When you hear people complain about paying taxes internationally they can be broken down into two broad camps: 1) People who have received bad tax advice 2) The wealthy
  - smnrchrds 6y ago
    3) Normal people having any sort of income other than employment income. In Canada, our retirement system is built upon three pillars, CPP/QPP/OAS (similar to US Social Security), RRSP (similar to US 401k), and TFSA (similar to US Roth IRA, but more inclusive, as every resident can use it regardless of income level). TFSA is arguably more important and a higher priority for retirement savings than RRSP in Canada. However, the US does not recognize TFSA as a retirement scheme. So if you are a dual American-Canadian citizen, the financial advice is not to use TFSA, as a) it won't be tax-sheltered, you will have to pay taxes to the US, and b) the paperwork required is a huge headache. Every country has something that they don't tax and US will. Because that country does not tax the thing, there is no tax credit to offset US taxes payable and you may end up paying a lot. The thing may be a retirement savings (Canada) or capital gains (Switzerland) or a myriad of things other than employment income.
    - a2tech 6y ago
      If you're living internationally wouldn't it fall under this? >If you are a U.S. citizen or a resident alien of the United States and you live abroad, you are taxed on your worldwide income. However, you may qualify to exclude your foreign earnings from income up to an amount that is adjusted annually for inflation ($103,900 for 2018, $105,900 for 2019, and $107,600 for 2020). In addition, you can exclude or deduct certain foreign housing amounts.
      - intellirogue 6y ago
        >may qualify >certain There's a lot of exceptions. It's not a blanket "if you earn less than X you don't pay US taxes".
      - nolite 6y ago
        No it would not. That's only for "earned" (thus employment) income
  - dayjah 6y ago
    #1 is a bit of a gotcha; in the case of the USA it holds tax treaties with some countries (maybe blocs like the EU?) and not with others. If you’re earning in a country with a treaty, say the UK, you pay the local tax and any difference is paid to the US if your local tax is less than what you’d pay the fed+state if applicable.
    - 627467 6y ago
      Obviously any country/society can enact any tax rules they see fit, but if I was american living and working and paying tax abroad I would wonder what the tax difference I needed to pay is for. I guess you could argue: military/consular protection. Yet, still feels expensive.
- jihadjihad 6y ago
  Aren't you still subject to paying U.S. income tax on your earnings? https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxpayers-living-abroad https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/taxp...
  - swebs 6y ago
    >If you are a U.S. citizen or a resident alien of the United States and you live abroad, you are taxed on your worldwide income. However, you may qualify to exclude your foreign earnings from income up to an amount that is adjusted annually for inflation ($103,900 for 2018, $105,900 for 2019, and $107,600 for 2020). In addition, you can exclude or deduct certain foreign housing amounts. https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/foreign-earned-income-exclusion https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/fore...
    - texasbigdata 6y ago
      To be clear you pay the delta. So if you make $X00 and in the Bahamas your income tax is $7, but in the USA your tax would have been $100, you remit $93 back to the US government. Even if you didn’t step foot in the US that year and all the income was Bahamas. Roughly. And if you don’t like it, you make a one time payment of (I think) a third of your net worth. Which is not ideal if the only thing you own is a tangible thing like your childhood home, because now you need to sell it. Being an American comes with a ton of benefits, and one of the costs is how mind numbingly expensive it is to leave. Note, the conversation of whether the US should have territorial taxation roars it’s head up every few years. all of the above might change
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
  - Schiendelman 6y ago
    Yes, but we have reciprocal tax agreements with many countries. In Germany he’s already paying n dollars in taxes, and that n becomes a tax credit in the US.
- unishark 6y ago
  and you need to have been earning even more than before leaving plus have a net worth in the millions to be hit by expatriation tax for renouncing.
MrMoenty 6y ago
Ironically, that exit tax and the associated fees open up one of the only ways to obtain dual German citizenship as an American adult: Depending on your income, the German government may consider the cost of dropping the U.S. citizenship unreasonable, and therefore allow you to obtain German citizenship while keeping your American one. https://www.exberliner.com/features/politics/can-amis-double-up/ https://www.exberliner.com/features/politics/can-amis-double...
dogma1138 6y ago
There is little chance he has to pay any tax unless he manages to avoid paying taxes in Germany or the tax owed is lower than what you would pay in the US which again for Germany is highly unlikely.

ketamine__ 6y ago

Access to cutting edge mental health treatment, such as ketamine and estketamine for TRD, are really only available in the US. Also, if you look at the treatment, coverage, and support for ADHD it's clear the US has always been ahead of other nations. Related: Global Perspectives on ADHD: Social Dimensions of Diagnosis and Treatment in Sixteen Countries (2018)

falcolas 6y ago
WRT ADHD support, I can’t say I believe this. With our medications being on controlled substances lists, and all the (ironically incredibly ADHD unfriendly) hoops we have to jump through just to get those meds, it’s kinda hard to believe that everyone else in the world is somehow worse than that.
- swebs 6y ago
  You'd be surprised https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate#Legal_status https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methylphenidate#Legal_status
  - falcolas 6y ago
    Per that link, it's only illegal in Russia (which is fucked up) but it's pretty close to identical to how the US handles it in every other listed country.
- atemerev 6y ago
  ADHD person here, who lived in 6 countries, including the US (the other 5 are Russia, Italy, Denmark, Spain, and Switzerland). Getting ADHD stimulant medications is way easier in the US than elsewhere. Here in Switzerland, for example, adult ADHD was even started to be recognized only since 2011. No immediate release formulations are legal here, only extended release. Even though Novartis, a Swiss company, is the producer of Ritalin. You can't get Ritalin in Switzerland, as it is an immediate release drug. In Russia, _all_ stimulant drugs are banned (and ADHD usually is not even recognized as a valid diagnosis). As is you can get to prison there if you take your Ritalin with you.

tangjurine 6y ago

Is there a way to read the article without the fluff? I feel like the concrete facts could have been listed in <500 words.

wutbrodo 6y ago
I'd settle for the fluff if I could somehow excise all the childish asides. I knew I'd regret clicking on a Current Affairs link. May as well read HuffPo
m-p-3 6y ago
I passed the article through SMMRY, 20 sentences. https://smmry.com/https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/you-are-not-free-to-move-out-of-the-country#&SM_LENGTH=20 https://smmry.com/https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/11/you... Copy on IPFS https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmQVWdzhXU52yLRNCMLFrX3sgYAjnVUhpFnJ5U7jTFZyL6/ https://ipfs.io/ipfs/QmQVWdzhXU52yLRNCMLFrX3sgYAjnVUhpFnJ5U7...

aww_dang 6y ago

Politics isn't as important as people make it out to be. Perhaps people identify too much with their nationality via political leaders. With the exception of lockdowns, political outcomes rarely interfere with daily routines. As for the ease of living abroad, once you have a source of income everything else tends to fall in place. Many countries are happy to have you if you are self sufficient. The article lists expensive options for citizenship and residency permits before concluding that expatriation is impossible. I agree with the laments about the rise of the passport system. However the hyperbolic tone is off-putting. Likewise for the standard issue anti-capitalist tirades and slight of hand misrepresentations. >...the loudly pro-inequality magazine The Economist. >And despite capitalism’s promises to provide all the lifestyle choices you could ever desire, few of us have the option of trying our luck elsewhere if we want. Most expats I've known burn out within a few years. Eventually they can't cope outside of their previous environment either socially, culturally or economically. Everything is possible for those who are driven and able to adapt. If anything, the remaining freedom within the capitalist economic system makes this possible. For those who can't adapt, contribute or support themselves, what else can be expected of a foreign country and culture?

repler 6y ago
> The article lists expensive options for citizenship and residency permits before concluding that expatriation is impossible. I seem to recall that retiring to Mexico has been extremely popular the last decade or so. I have to agree with your point - each country is a quite different experience. If retirees can make it work then surely someone with a career can.
0x445442 6y ago
> With the exception of lockdowns, political outcomes rarely interfere with daily routines. I used to agree with your first sentence but Government never gives attained powers back. The lockdowns represent a crossing of the Rubicon.
- aww_dang 6y ago
  Yes, the "new normal" is reminiscent of the expansion of state powers following 9/11.

atemerev 6y ago

By the way, it is much, much, much easier for an American to emigrate somewhere (few exceptions aside), than for anybody anywhere in the world to immigrate into the US. I always wonder how Americans, who generally have a strong opinion on emigration (whether pro or against), are generally not informed on how the entire process works. The main reason Americans decide not to emigrate, is that the US is actually a fine country and a good place to live. There are a few other good places to live, like Western European countries, or maybe Japan if you can handle cultural differences, but the difference is not that much that it would be worth of getting through all the hurdles to move there. Nearly everywhere else, the quality of life is much worse.

a2tech 6y ago
This is incorrect. The US even in the current time has one of the most open immigration systems in the world. Which is awful, but it is nonetheless true. Try to become a citizen in Europe without having a familial claim or a ton of money. You can absolutely get a work visa (if you can arrange a job) but the chances of you becoming a full citizen is about 0.
- atemerev 6y ago
  I moved to Switzerland from Russia, and currently live here in Geneva. I also lived in other European countries. No big deal, compared to the US (where I used to live for some time, too, but couldn't get a good path to immigrate without losing my independence as a consultant). In most European countries, you can get a citizenship in 5 years, less in some cases (if you are e.g. a student in France). Switzerland is an exception, it requires 10 years now.
  - a2tech 6y ago
    Living in places is not what we're discussing. Immigration is becoming a citizen of another place. Americans can move almost anywhere. Becoming a CITIZEN is an entire different kettle of fish. I feel like this is where a lot of misunderstandings in these discussions come from--the difference between being a permanent alien and being a citizen. In the United States there's a process for people to become a full member of our society. There's also a process for being a working alien here. Two different paths that don't have to necessarily overlap.

mark_l_watson 6y ago

The big thing not mentioned in the article is that there is an exit tax that Bill Clinton signed into law. Also, new banking laws make it difficult to do banking living abroad. These roadblocks are intended to keep taxpayers.

a2tech 6y ago
An exit tax? There is no such thing. Are you talking about the $2300 processing fee? You're paying for the paperwork and interviews. You're not going to be a citizen anymore so it seems fair to require you to pay for the time and attention of the US government to process your request.
- Schiendelman 6y ago
  There is, but it’s for the very wealthy.
  - texasbigdata 6y ago
    The prong (from the link above) is $150k average trailing yearly income. And the prong only determines if you are elligible. From there, if you are close to retirement and have your wealth in illiquid assets where a penalty for converting them to cash is steep, you are kinda fucked. From Above link: “ IRC 877A imposes a mark-to-market regime, which generally means that all property of a covered expatriate is deemed sold for its fair market value on the day before the expatriation date. Any gain arising from the deemed sale is taken into account for the tax year of the deemed sale notwithstanding any other provisions of the Code. Any loss from the deemed sale is taken into account for the tax year of the deemed sale to the extent otherwise provided in the Code, except that the wash sale rules of IRC 1091 do not apply. The amount that would otherwise be includible in gross income by reason of the deemed sale rule is reduced (but not to below zero) by $600,000, which amount is to be adjusted for inflation for calendar years after 2008 (the “exclusion amount”). For calendar year 2014, the exclusion amount is $680,000. For other years, refer to the Instructions for Form 8854.”
  - zeveb 6y ago

cryptica 6y ago

Emigration is going to be essential to avoid technological enslavement over the next few decades. I plan to move to a sovereign country with small population which has a good number of educated and well connected rich people and which has strong relationships with the elites of large (soon to be enslaved) countries. Ideally a country where the elites feel safe to have their holiday houses and send their children to school. The reason why the country must have a small population is because it's not profitable for corporate interests to take control of small countries. Corporations will want to enslave countries with large productive working populations because they are more profitable to exploit. With the US, for example, you just need to corrupt one election, one legal system and you can potentially acquire 350+ million workers/slaves in one fell swoop; that's very profitable. You just need to change one single law and you can reduce the freedoms of 350 million people to squeeze additional productivity out of them... Again in one fell swoop. That's extremely profitable. On the other hand, if you want to enslave a small country full of rich educated people, it's going to be challenging because these rich people can leverage their political connections and bribe your corporate insiders (or use their personal connections to manipulate them) to steer you off course... And then these people are not useful to enslave anyway; firstly, there are too few of them (doesn't scale), secondly, they have no skills to produce anything useful... Rich people are a liability; you want to take countries full of cattle you can milk, not parasites. As soon as people realize what's going on, it will be too late to leave. Just like what happened in North Korea. If you want to have a decent life, you need to think like a parasite. Don't make the mistake I did early in my career thinking that anyone will try to protect your rights in the name of 'justice' - There is no justice. Human evil has no limits.

jere 6y ago

Ok I'll bite > This isn’t just a case of comfortable white people itching to do Colonialism 2.0. While there are no official statistics on the breakdown of American emigres by ethnicity, the country’s ingrained racism has made it more appealing for Black Americans to move abroad, while many Asian Americans find the job opportunities overseas better than the ones at home. Hispanic Americans are also opting out in increasing numbers for a variety of reasons. Can someone explain to me why white people moving to another country is considered colonialism?

wutbrodo 6y ago
I really wouldn't bother. There are stronger versions of the argument that race defines everything you do, even though I disagree with them. But this publication is pretty in line with the popular view that "doing anything while white is problematic". You may be familiar with it in the context of moving house: move to a cheap neighborhood? You're gentrifying. Move to a good neighborhood? You're segregating. In both cases, you're reinforcing white supremacy. I'm not even white, I just find the logic transparently nonsensical and am somewhere between amazed and amused that it's become so popular (and hilariously, the animus is far more targeted towards race than class).
temptemptemp111 6y ago
white = bad blacklist = banned whitelist = blacklist
helen___keller 6y ago
> Can someone explain to me why white people moving to another country is considered colonialism? The premise is that colonialism was marked by people from wealthy countries (generally Europeans) occupying and extracting wealth from poorer foreign lands. So the author is alluding that a (relatively speaking) wealthy white person looking to hop to a lower cost of living land, and be treated like a king for their wealth, is similar at face value. That said it's really just at face value. Using your expatriated wealth to live like a king in a low cost of living country is not the same as extracting wealth, and the expats generally hold no political power either.

ExcavateGrandMa 6y ago

As a citizen of your country your are of course not free! but registered/recorded and soon the chip in skin :Ð

pgcj_poster 6y ago

> Yet on some instinctual reptilian-brain level, it’s hard to shake the feeling that it’s not supposed to be like this. This doubt is sometimes sparked by reading about the lives of historical figures. When you discover that Mark Twain spent more than a decade of his life living and working abroad in places like London, Berlin, and Vienna, you might be inclined to wonder “how?” I first had this feeling when I read in Les Mis where Valjean decides that France isn't safe anymore and that he's going to move to England, and then tells Cosette to be ready within a week.

627467 6y ago

I'm torn. Obviously sovereign societies are free to enact any rights and restrictions (within constrains of treaties they sign up to) they see fit. But I see people's freedom of movement as a natural balancing right in a globalized world were capital moves easily across borders. In EU freedom of movement is normally only talked about as a right due to shared european values but another pragmatic view is: if you allow for such drastic unequal neighbors to be living under similar legal/economical frameworks it's only fair (and economically sound) to let people move with capital.

sudders 6y ago

I have not read the article through, but as far as I can tell this is about US citizens. Because of that I'm wondering why the cover photo is from Bruges, Belgium, more specifically: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2091441,3.2241047,3a,90y,334.97h,100.54t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1s3BfSQgS44zXcLJK9hiXJAQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en https://www.google.com/maps/@51.2091441,3.2241047,3a,90y,334...