28 ms·

It's so irritating to be an American that has moved overseas. Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere e

• paulddraper 5y ago
  US states do the same thing. States with income tax will tax you whether you work in the state, or you are resident in the state.
  • a4a4a4a4 5y ago
    Or if you're in NY for too many days, even not for work, they'll tax you too :)
    • paulddraper 5y ago
      Or if you're remote but company HQ in NY.
  • umeshunni 5y ago
    Or in the case of California, up to 4 years after you leave the state.
    • deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    • Klonoar 5y ago
      Virginia also has some oddities here, frustratingly.
• baxuz 5y ago
  I don't see how wealth has much to do with it. It's a question of citizenship and taxes. The other extreme is what we currently have in Croatia: A vast group of people who don't live here have citizenship and they express their patriotism by voting for the conservative right without exception for the past 30 years. If you want to be treated as a citizen — live here and pay your taxes. If you don't, the door's that way.
  • NoOneNew 5y ago
    >If you want to be treated as a citizen — live here and pay your taxes. If you don't, the door's that way. Lol, that's considered "conservative right" ideology in the USA.
  • danmaz74 5y ago
    If you're Italian and living abroad, you can vote to elect one of the few members of parliament which actually represent migrated Italians. This way they can still have a bit of representation, but without the same amount of influence as if they were living in the country.
    • Leherenn 5y ago
      Is the ratio of electors/MP different for expats vs those living in the country? I can certainly understand the anger of the GP, apparently roughly 25% of the Croatian citizens do not live in the country. As an expat myself, having a say in how my home country is run is nice, but I feel it's a bit "easy", because I mostly do not have to live with the consequence of my choices.
      • danmaz74 5y ago
        Yes, I don't remember the actual ratios but it's much fewer representatives per person for citizens living abroad.
  • hehetrthrthrjn 5y ago
    For a bit of context, there is a bit of 'tension' between in-country Croatians and expats. Generally the latter left for greener pastures and the former stuck it out through communist rule and the war. There are at least as many Croatian expats as not. The expats usually left because they didn't like the strictures or ideology of communism. Some had property confiscated and/or were harrassed by the authorities for whatever reason. Most of these people have a reflexive aversion of the left and are reliable right wing voters. Those who stayed seem to be those that agree with communism to whatever degree, who were part of the communist regime in some way or those that did not mind or did not have the means or will to leave. Some have been indoctrinated to some extent, or maybe more correctly they have grown up in the culture of that time. Many ordinary people suffered from a relatively poor quality of life under communism. Croatians received a relatively smaller share of resources and opportunities because of Serbian dominance of Yugoslavian government. The differences are not all or even mostly political. Many locals just resent expats who avoided the misery and show up with money and a particular attitude, usually a critical one as to the dysfunction and corruption in Croatia, amongst other criticisms. Full disclosure: I'm an expat (who lives in Croatia, for now), so that may colour my view.
• tazjin 5y ago
  > Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere else I believe Eritrea does this, too. They don't have as much political power as the US though, so they resort to torturing your remaining family members in the country to get you to comply.
  • trutannus 5y ago
    > They don't have as much political power They're basically the North Korea of Africa. This is a massive understatement.
    • cjaybo 5y ago
      So they have as much political power as the US?
      • trutannus 5y ago
        I know you're being facetious, but still, even as a joke this comparison is deeply wrong. There's nothing even remotely comparable between the two nations. You won't have your family interned in a concentration camp for moving to Italy for example.
      • deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]
    • arwhatever 5y ago
      INTERNATIONAL political power
  • EE84M3i 5y ago
    Hmm, I seem to recall hearing Australians also have complicated rules about being an "Australian resident for tax purposes" that is not the same as an Australian resident for other purposes, especially when you don't have Permanent Residence/Green Card and are on a time-limited visa (even if it's years long). So they don't technically fall into the "America and Eritrea" bad list, but still tax many Australians abroad. I forget the exact details though.
• moneywoes 5y ago
  In Canada and not being able to open a tax free savings account is a major blow
• lordnacho 5y ago
  Deleted
  • bmitc 5y ago
    They do not.
• RufusJacksons 5y ago
  Couldn't agree more, sounds like you're in Australia too - I've been here 9 years and am yet to file tax... Interested how bad they will fuck me when I do...
  • mmmeff 5y ago
    Fake your death while you still can
    • jjgreen 5y ago
      A practical guide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_and_Rise_of_Reginald_Perrin https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Fall_and_Rise_of_Reginald_...
• PragmaticPulp 5y ago
  > It's so irritating to be an American that has moved overseas. Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere else, just because of where you were born. This is exactly why these people are renouncing US citizenship: They’re living overseas as citizens of another country and, like anyone rich or poor, don’t want to be paying taxes to a country they aren’t living in. It’s not exactly unfair or nefarious. If they’re no longer living in the US and they are citizens and residents of another country, surrendering US citizenship is a logical choice. Renouncing US citizenship is a common move for this exact reason. This article just happens to have drawn an arbitrary line in the wealth of people who renounce US citizenship and made a headline out of the wealthier subset. The wealthy are also more like to have dual-citizenship but relocate to another country, so they’d be over represented in this set.
  • andi999 5y ago
    One should actually be a bit careful to state such intent. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_Amendment_(immigration) https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reed_Amendment_(immigration)
    • pmoriarty 5y ago
      A pertinent example of the kinds of people this amendment was apparently intended to bar from entry to the US: "One example discussed was Kenneth Dart of Dart Container, who had become a citizen of Belize and then attempted to obtain a diplomatic visa to serve as Belize's new consul in Sarasota, Florida."
    • aarchi 5y ago
      Still seems relatively safe: > The Department of Homeland Security has stated that they cannot obtain the information required to enforce the amendment unless the former U.S. citizen "affirmatively admit[s]" his or her reasons for renouncing citizenship, and so from 2002 to 2015, only two people were denied entry to the United States on the grounds of the amendment.
    • bee_rider 5y ago
• larrysalibra 5y ago
  As a former American who lived abroad for about 11 years before renouncing, “cartoonishly cruel” is a pretty accurate description of the system. It’s even worse an American entrepreneur abroad because that makes things even more complicated. I gave up jumping through the hoops in 2018 and the self-torture and renounced. I shared my story in case anyone is interested: https://larrysalibra.com/goodbye-usa/ https://larrysalibra.com/goodbye-usa/
  • shell0x 5y ago
    This was a good read. It's interesting that you decided to stay in HK after the protests/hostile takeover in 2020. My partner and friends all left HK for the UK, Australia, and Canada.
    • larrysalibra 5y ago
      Thanks for reading! The stay versus go debate in HK is always very interesting and one that has been going on for decades and will no doubt continue for many people.
      • pas 5y ago
        What's the tipping point for you? (Or possible lines in the sand?)
      • shell0x 5y ago
        I think it reached a point of no return. HK is still a very special place, but I see a lot of expats leaving for Singapore and Hkers leaving for overseas(BNO visa). Singapore is more stable, but has even less freedoms than HK though.
        • walshemj 5y ago
          Depending on how bad it turns out I could see a wave of HK emigration to the UK. Similar how a lot of Asians living in Africa (Uganda Kenya etc.) did in the 1970's, Without the ethnic cleansing aspect.
• yardie 5y ago
  > 90% of investment firms These must be very small meat and potatoes investment firms then. They might not have a compliance department and might not be able to justify the salary of having someone tackle FATCA requirements. I, as an American abroad primarily used the big banks (HSBC, BNP, Barkleys) because its built in to the service.
  • beagle3 5y ago
    In Israel (9m pop), non of the banks available to the general public (Poalim, Leumi, Discount, Iggud/Mizrahi) will let you do anything other than a checking account and a saving account. Perhaps a loan but definitely no holdings; and similarly no broker will either. They are not small. It just isn’t worth it to them financially so they don’t. There are est. 300k US tax payers in Israel, but while the profit is per-person, the compliance costs are huge and mostly constant. HSBC in Israel, last I Heard, had a $2M account minimum.
    • david12345 5y ago
      Yes, but at least you can still buy US ETF's unlike in the EU. And Interactive brokers has a bank account in Israel you can wire money into, so one can get by.
  • robjan 5y ago
    HSBC Hong Kong does not accept US citizens or green card holders to open an investment account.
• bmitc 5y ago
  Edit: My question wasn’t clear, but it’s not important.
  • IG_Semmelweiss 5y ago
    The US is the top tax haven in the world. You read that right. The US is the top place to hide your money if you are a foreigner Yet foreign countries are not rushing to change their laws to tax their citizens living abroad. There is no urgency to tax their expats who havent worked or lived back on foreign home for years, even decades. So if nost countries have reason to complain about us helping hide stuff, they dont seem interested in enforcing anything
    • dathinab 5y ago
      > they dont seem interested in enforcing anything Or are not able to. Weather it's because of risking more people with money fleeing before changes take into effect, to much influence of wealthy people in politics or being forced by external forced, e.g. in context of not-so-public trade agreements.
  • dathinab 5y ago
    > [..] this taxation is in place effectively due to rich people in the first place hiding money in accounts overseas.[..] I think that was the original intent but: 1. It affects everyone including many people not paying taxes in a amount where it matters. 2. I'm not sure if it works, the really rich people (i.e. the ones you would want to be "captured" by this law the most) have way to many ways to avoid paying taxes and reduce the amount they "in person" have to pay. It might be reasonable to have a cut blow which you you don't have to bother with this. I also have frequently considered if it would make sense for the country I live in to have such a law. But in the end I realized that this is probably not what I would want. In the end the problem is much more countries which intentionally create tax gaps to benefit from it but directly hurting other countries with that and even potentially undermining their governments independence. Through without question even if that is solved there is still the fact that even wrt. countries which do not do so their can be huge differences in taxation, but "somehow" "disabling" tax havens would be a much bigger step in the right direction then this regulation IMHO.
• Chris2048 5y ago
  What's unfair isn't this practise per-say, but the fact that it's not equal. I think keeping hold of foreign citizenship represents an unfair advantage to some degree, as a kind of "fallback" - e.g. if things go to shit you always have the option of returning home. but other nationalities generally don't need to pay to remain citizens while they are abroad, so Americans are treated unusually.
  • Dracophoenix 5y ago
    How is it unfair to have fallback option? Is it unfair to California when someone decides to move Texas for lower taxes?
    • Chris2048 5y ago
      > How is it unfair to have fallback option? because natives with just one passport don't have that option. > Is it unfair to California.. California and Texas are in the same country
      • Dracophoenix 5y ago
        >because natives with just one passport don't have that option. If by natives, you mean Native Americans, they have their own sovereignties. Many have do have tribal passports in addition to US passports. If by natives you mean, John Q Public, then that's just crab-bucket thinking. The majority of Americans have zero passports, leave alone one. By your standard, it should be wrong for people to have one at all since most Americans don't have the legal certification to travel beyond North America and seek asylum as a fall back should the US crap itself. While not everyone has a similar option for a fallback, everyone has a choice. Nobody is prevented by the US government from attempting to a obtain a second passport. It's a matter of a person's choosing to meet the requirements to obtain one or not. >California and Texas are in the same country. Yes, however your argument was one escaping to another jurisdiction with the previous jurisdiction as a fallback. That isn't limited to hopping between states nor should it be. If a state or country can't compete in taxes, services, or culture, I have the right to vote with my feet and to obtain a new residence or nationality however I see fit. Mutatis mutantis, the same goes for everyone else.
• ithinkso 5y ago
  It's also problematic in other way, my friends moved to US for a job for few years and had kids there. US gives you citizenship by place of birth so the kids have US citizenship. Now that they are back they are in a bit of a pickle not knowing what to do, the kids might be screwed and own money to the US for nothing when they grow up but renouncing it now for them also doesn't make sense (if even possible) because they might want to have it, who knows.
  • Dracophoenix 5y ago
    Look up "Accidental Americans". It's been a problem for a lot of people including, especially Canadians and Mexicans who were born on the wrong side of the border.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
• Justsignedup 5y ago
  This was to close certain problematic tax avoidance issues. People were fleeting from the US to avoid paying taxes, but kept all the benefits, or hid the money off-shore. The problem here is that they never raised the amount you must report, because in the past, 150k used to be a lot. Now that should be closer to 500k. But like the minimum wage and tax brackets, they haven't kept it up with inflation. Not in the way they needed to at least. Unfortunately the main loss from US citizenship loss is voting and potentially travel to the US. But the wealthy influence politics by lobbying not voting. Now if Citizenship was required to fund lobbying... wooh that would be a big hit for those abandoning the US.
  • unishark 5y ago
    Kept all what benefits? People who fled the US are now living under some other country's benefits, and pay taxes there instead. Don't citizens of (almost) every other country in the world have the ability to go live abroad and keep all their benefits, whatever they are? I'm not following where Americans can actually get away with anything special.
    • masklinn 5y ago
      > Don't citizens of (almost) every other country in the world have the ability to go live abroad and keep all their benefits, whatever they are? aren’t those benefits just the travel-ability of their passport and the right to return? I can only guess the US is such a great country you need to pay fir the right to return?
  • propogandist 5y ago
    > the main loss from US citizenship loss is voting and potentially travel to the US There's a heavy to push to make this available to anyone regardless of citizenship, claiming that providing proof of identity will be burdensome. This is the same group that touted election fraud, russian interference and other false narratives for 4 years after the prior candidate lost.
• Causality1 5y ago
  expats the citizenship-based taxation system is almost cartoonishly cruel. If the concept of citizenship has no meaning to you beyond personal convenience, sure. If citizenship and the responsibilities inherent in it is something you take seriously, it makes a little more sense. Why should an expat who's not interested in living in and participating in the future of their former nation even be allowed to remain a citizen at all?
• texasbigdata 5y ago
  Your representation is a bit exaggerated. The law simplistically simplifies to: if your income is above $X, then if your foreign tax payment $Y is less than the theoretical amount of tax you would have paid doing the same work under American Tax laws $Z, then please remit the difference ($Z-$Y) to the American government. I've personally filled out the forms several times, for multiple periods (full and partial). However I do agree with you: sure it would be nice not to pay that fee, isn't that true of every expense in general? It seems you either have a complicated personal situation or are in a jurisdiction that's purposefully set up to benefit/interact with the US in a tax advantagous way (aka a tax shelter, though that's going away - see general harmonization trends in EU, etc). Without delving into your personal situation, your personal tax situation should not impact your employment. Your citizenship might in certain highly regulated industries maybe. In the US you are not asked if you file joint or single on your tax return as part of the interview. You are correct on renounciation. And worse, let's assume the renounciation fee is 1/3rd of the wealth, should your net worth be concentrated and iliquid (you own nothing but a paid off home) you now need to generate a transaction which you might not want to otherwise do (sentimental, bad timing, poor market prices for the asset or low liquidity). If you have a complicated personal situation, you also hire professional help even if you reside purely domestically. Not fair to pin it all on the foreign taxation code.
  • academia_hack 5y ago
    Some years are fine, just subtract the earned income exemption and move on. Others are nightmares. Unlike in America, where there are accountants lurking around every corner, the tax code here is very "simple" (the vast majority of people probably never fill out a tax return in their lives). This means accountants charge like you're some sort of multi-millionaire business owner (since that's who their clients typically are). My last quote to get US & domestic taxes filed here when I was a grad student was $6,000 on a total income of <$50k. My situation wasn't that complicated - I had 2 part time jobs, won a competition prize for $20,000 and sold some stock. I just did my best to file on my own. I probably got something wrong since it's crazy confusing. Prizes are tax-free here, but taxable in the US and not typically "earned income" but are maybe covered by the foreign income exemption or a dual taxation agreement (since I did have to report it to the taxman here, the tax rate was just zero). I literally couldn't afford to figure out how much tax I owed and to who - nevermind the taxes themselves! Hopefully the IRS doesn't care enough to seize me the next time I visit my family. I tried my best, but that doesn't necessarily mean much in court. I think a lot of the problem is with the American tax code in general, but American accountants know nothing about the tax code here so I can't just ring up H&R Block and ask them to file over zoom (I've tried). Meanwhile, the only accountants who know about American taxes over here are specialist catering to the millionaire expat market. An hour of their time costs more than I earn in a week.
• kaboomman 5y ago
  This. Living (even partially) overseas as someone who was born in the U.S. has so many disadvantages. The U.S. is the only country in the world that imposes global tax. Not only that, taxes are really complex and cost a fortune to file if you have overseas assets. Now, add to that that I cannot sign up for many bank accounts or other financial institutions because they don't accept U.S. customers - they don't want to deal with IRS filings either. It's not about tax evasion. It's just a huge pain being an American that owns property and spends a lot of time overseas. At some point, depending on how much time you spent overseas and how many assets you own, the benefits of giving up US citizenship start to outweigh the cons. And it's better to do this soon than later because exit tax is a thing.
  • sokoloff 5y ago
    Eritrea imposes a global tax as well.
    • pacman2 5y ago
      NK too
    • AdrianB1 5y ago
      How is this relevant, is Eritrea one of the great countries on this planet?
      • sokoloff 5y ago
        It corrects the erroneous statement “The U.S. is the only country in the world that imposes global tax.”
    • Izikiel43 5y ago
      Sure, I mean Eritrea and the US have the same power globally to enforce stuff right? It's not like one is ~25% of the world's economy.
• eplanit 5y ago
  Other nations reject our wealthy, while we prioritize herding the impoverished into the US. The future does not look so bright.
• berinateni 5y ago
  Eric Schmidt renounced his US citizenship even though he owns 2 California homes and one in Massachusetts.
  • DamnYuppie 5y ago
    You don't have to be a US citizen to purchase property in the country. This is the same for many of the European, Central/South American and South East Asian countries. Is it as straightforward as being a citizen no, but it can usually be done without much extra effort.
    • estebank 5y ago
      Also, given the exit tax, he'll have to pay taxes on them as if he had sold the properties, despite the properties not having been sold.
      • DamnYuppie 5y ago
        My reading of the exit tax is it is merely paying all the taxes on any gains that you have made but have yet to pay. For example if you have bought stock but not sold it you would be taxed on the gains you made. This applies to real-estate and other holdings as well. To me this makes sense it is like you paying your final taxes before leaving as such I don't see how it is anything additional but I could very well be mistaken.
  • rejectedandsad 5y ago
    He did not renounce his citizenship, where are you getting this information?
• emodendroket 5y ago
  Most people don't actually owe anything so the burden is mostly administrative, and what you're going through it for is not "where you were born" but continued citizenship and attendant benefits. As the article describes, you're free to give that up if you don't think it is worth it.
  • depressedpanda 5y ago
    The article states > "There are probably 20,000 or 30,000 people who want to [renounce citizenship], but they can’t get the appointment," Lesperance said. "There’s not a peak demand — the system’s capacity has peaked." Also, it seems you need to pay a non trivial sum to do it, which is a real problem for US citizens abroad who are not rich. "Free to give that up" does not apply, unfortunately.
    • emodendroket 5y ago
      Not sure where you got the thing about the cost, which doesn't seem to be in the article, but it also flatly states that "The people who flee tend to be ultra-wealthy, and many of them are seeking to reduce their tax burden."
      • depressedpanda 5y ago
        The article talks about the ultra wealthy, but they have the power, money and means to easily deal with the citizenship taxation bs. I don't care about them. The problem is that those rules are punishing regular people. I know one person who wasn't allowed to open bank accounts because of her citizenship. Another who yearly gets stressad out because filing US taxes is such a grueling process compared to the local process where you're done within ten minutes. Another wants to renounce citizenship because he doesn't want to deal with the bureaucracy, but he cannot afford it. They all live in Sweden, which I doubt anyone sane would consider a tax haven. If Eritrea is the only other country in the world that implements similar draconian tax laws, maybe there's something wrong with those laws?
• jimkleiber 5y ago
  When I lived and worked in East Africa, I know that most, if not all of my income, was not taxed back in the US because of the Foreign Income Exclusion Act. Basically, for foreign earned income anywhere below ~$80,000 at the time, I didn't have to pay tax, which the limit is now around $108,000 or so. However, as you point out, that doesn't seem to apply to dividends and capital gains and other types of income [1]. I wonder why it doesn't apply to those other incomes and if it did, whether that would alleviate many of the problems for most Americans overseas. In other words, why not just have a threshold below which all foreign income is not taxed and then tax above it? I'm curious to learn more about the history of that act and why it developed as it did. [1]: https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/foreign-earned-income-exclusion-what-is-foreign-earned-income https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/fore...
  • emodendroket 5y ago
    It seems like it is a more progressive scheme to protect wages over investment income.
  • mellavora 5y ago
    The problem isn't paying tax, it is 1) filing, which is enormously complicated, and 2) severe restrictions on what financial services you can access.
    • jimkleiber 5y ago
      I appreciate this comment. I as well wish just "regular" taxes were more simple to file and also I can imagine how frustrating it might be to not be able to access certain services. Thank for the clarification.
• api 5y ago
  AFAIK if you live in a country like Canada with higher taxes you still have to file to maintain citizenship but you end up paying zero since you can deduct what you paid in your home country. This would apply to people relocating to countries with a lower tax base. In that case you have to renounce.
  • simonh 5y ago
    You can still get caught out. Taxes in the UK are generally higher than in the US, but Boris Johnson still got hit with a US tax bill when he inherited a flat in London.
    • kingosticks 5y ago
      And any ISAs (or similar tax free savings things) you hold are fully taxable by the US. Joy.
  • christinamltn 5y ago
    There isn’t always symmetry in the tax status of various elements. The US doesn’t recognize Canadian Tax Free Savings Accounts (similar to Roth IRAs) so you can’t benefit from them without being taxed in the US.
  • deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  • guyzero 5y ago
    Deductions vary greatly between jurisdictions. Capital gains taxes vary greatly, tax-sheltered savings accounts may not be recognized, certain rollovers programs probably only exist in one of the jurisdictions, etc. None of these people renouncing their citizenship just make straight employment income.
• christkv 5y ago
  Oh god don't get me started. I cannot have a shared account with my wife because she is american. She can only be authorized. She cannot get her own credit card but has to be an authorized card holder on my account. If I tried to actually but her as a shared account user the bank told me they will terminate the relationship.
• ekster 5y ago
  I am renouncing for these exact reasons. I am lucky enough not to be rich enough for the exit tax, though.
• cortesoft 5y ago
  On the other hand, is it right to be able to leave the country indefinitely, not contribute to the country at all, but still expect to have all the benefits of citizenship forever?
  • Dracophoenix 5y ago
    What benefits does one have when living in a foreign country as a US citizen? There is no legal representation. There is no access to US government services. What exactly would an overseas US citizen be paying for?
    • cortesoft 5y ago
      If there are no benefits to being a US citizen while living abroad, there should be no issue with renouncing their citizenship. Why do they want to maintain their citizenship if it doesn’t give them anything?
      • BenjiWiebe 5y ago
        To keep the option open of coming back, and then using government services/paying taxes.
      • amanaplanacanal 5y ago
        I would suggest that the major benefit would be that if things go to shit wherever you are, you can flee back to the US. There are probably other countries you could choose for that instead, though. Also, if you give up your citizenship, does that have any implications for traveling back to the US? You might very well have friends and family you would like to visit occasionally.
      • abroadsaver 5y ago
        We are still culturally American, and we still have family in the US. And if we visit, we pay taxes on everything while we’re there. There are taxes on the flight in, on the fuel we use, on the stuff we buy. And maybe we’d like to move back. So why conflate being American with federal taxes and bureaucracy? Maybe America should think about the benefits we expats provide to it while living and representing our culture and values abroad. We usually make a good impression on our country’s behalf, but everyone abroad is shocked to hear about the potential draconian penalties and compliance headaches our government forces on us.
• mtnGoat 5y ago
  I used to live internationally and the taxes weren’t that much more complex. It really shouldn’t cost thousands, it’s just two extra forms if I recall correctly. If you Are living in high tax regimes like Switzerland you don’t have double tax on the first $xx,xxx in income, it used to be close to 90k.
  • a4a4a4a4 5y ago
    Switzerland is not a high tax regime (outside of some French speaking Kantons).
    • mtnGoat 5y ago
      All in, it’s higher than the US. Not a bad as Sweden or Austria though.
• tinyhouse 5y ago
  What about the benefits? You get social security wherever you live. Most countries don't pay social security to their citizens living abroad.
• gautamdivgi 5y ago
  Could it be because you're eligible for social security even if you don't reside in the US? I'm not sure about medicare or unemployment benefits.
  • jleyank 5y ago
    My understanding is that US-ian expats can collect Social Security while outside the country (not sure if it can be deposited, as we're not doing that). Medicare has no meaning outside the US but we're eligible. Non- (and I assuming renounced) citizens can't get Social Security unless they live in the US, I think. And don't forget there's also a foreign tax credit as well as the Earned Income exclusion.
    • gautamdivgi 5y ago
      Non-citizens are not eligible for any public benefit. As regards medicare you're probably eligible the moment you enter the country. So technically you could head back if you 're having issues - ymmv.
• djyaz1200 5y ago
  That is a bummer but on the plus side the USA will send the Navy Seals to get you if someone kidnaps you. That's worth something. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_Jessica_Buchanan_and_Poul_Hagen_Thisted https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rescue_of_Jessica_Buchanan_and...
• disabled 5y ago
  American here living abroad in Croatia, which does not have a tax or social security agreement with the US. The only reason why I do not renounce my American citizenship is because the very rare disease that I have was discovered on NIH grant funds in the 2000s and ultimately saved my life. I am not sentimental about being American, except for that.
  • Izikiel43 5y ago
    What disease if you don't mind me asking?
    • disabled 5y ago
      Autoimmune autonomic ganglionopathy: https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/11917/autoimmune-autonomic-ganglionopathy https://rarediseases.info.nih.gov/diseases/11917/autoimmune-... It's immune-mediated autonomic neuropathy and causes autonomic nervous system failure. I am in pharmaceutical remission now.
• deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
• jjcm 5y ago
  The worst part for me is not the taxes themselves, but it's that I feel like I have no representation while overseas. When I was living in Australia, my representatives were for the state of Oregon. Not once did one of my assigned representatives nor senators propose legislation meant to help expats overseas, they understandably represented their voter base in Oregon. It essentially creates a system of taxation without representation; ironically something the country has a deep history fighting against. The number of US expats is enormous, and if they were a state of their own they'd be the 11th most populated state (just ahead of New Jersey). If we're going to tax expats overseas, at the very least they should be provided with senators that are dedicated to fighting for their cause.
• matttproud 5y ago
  In case anyone is interested, the taxation on Americans abroad isn’t new but has its roots in the 1860s with the U.S. Civil War: https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-04-24/end-the-american-expat-tax https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2015-04-24/end-th.... FATCA is annoying. I don’t mind taxes. I want the process to be fair, predictable, and not exceptional. It’s a travesty the United States has been most of my adult life a failed state, which makes the tax treatment insult to injury. - American Abroad (on the pathway to naturalization in a new home)
  • robot_no_419 5y ago
    Calling the world's superpower and one of the wealthiest nations in the world a "failed state" is a bit ridiculous, is it not? Do words not have meaning anymore?
    • coding123 5y ago
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state I would say it has 3 of those 4 bullet points. > Likewise, when a nation weakens and its standard of living declines, it introduces the possibility of total governmental collapse. Standard of living https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/standard-living/ https://usafacts.org/state-of-the-union/standard-living/ So yeah, I personally don't call it a failed state, but I don't blame others that do if they're in those categories.
      • robot_no_419 5y ago
        The US is not anywhere close to meeting any of those definitions. USA has problems, sure, but it's nowhere close to being an actual failed state. You'd have to be aggressively biased against the US to argue that it's a failed state. By the same standards, pretty much every central american, south american, eastern asian country, and most european countries would count as failed states.
        • coding123 5y ago
• charonn0 5y ago
  It must be nice to have problems like that.
  • masklinn 5y ago
    You don’t need to be rich to move out of the US.
    • charonn0 5y ago
      Not according to the complaints here.
      • masklinn 5y ago
        Most of the complaints are that being an expat US citizen is: 1. a right pain in the ass, because you have to fill US taxes even when you don't reside in the US, work with the US, and haven't set foot there in years. 2. a right pain in the ass because you have to declare local welfare as income to the US government 3. a right pain in the ass because taxes being so much simpler in most other countries means accountants is a much rarer career very much specialised for extremely high income, far beyond your means, and most of them don't know and can't help with US taxes anyway 4. a right pain in the ass because things like FATCA means most financial institution have decided it's just not worth interacting with US citizens and will refuse to deal with them — this can make it very difficult to function at any sort of level especially as countries progressively increase their cashlessness 5. a right pain in the ass because even if you decide you've had enough and decide to renounce it's expensive and complicated I'm sure I'm missing a bunch as I'm not a US citizen let alone a US expat.
• throw37388 5y ago
  》Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere else, just because of where you were born. Some other countries do that as well. Norway for limited time period. Some others have exit fees etc.
• azinman2 5y ago
  The US has a lot of tax treaties with many countries to prevent double taxation. Does your country not have one?
• beezle 5y ago
  "Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere else, just because of where you were born." It is not about where you are born, it is about where you have citizenship (and possibly also residency). As long as you maintain your US citizenship you are morally obligated to contribute to the well being of the country, the biggest and easiest to understand of course is national defense. Likewise, if you own a property in another state that you only use a portion of the year you are not off the hook for paying taxes that contribute to, for example, road maintenance and local schools. Where I do have sympathy is that they make it extremely difficult for expats to file as well as maintain investment accounts.
  • masklinn 5y ago
    >and possibly also residency Not that is the issue. Residency is the norm, the US is both residency and citizenship.
• 3327 5y ago
  Nice summary 100%.
• monksy 5y ago
  > Basically the only country in the world that charges taxes on money you make and spend somewhere else, Only country in the world that charges taxes on money that they have no business over.
• AniseAbyss 5y ago
  Always amused me how every financial service the world over asks if you're a US citizen and denies you if you answer YES. Nobody wants to deal with the IRS.
• flippinburgers 5y ago
  So which investment firms will work with you? Asking for a friend... Also are you referring to FATCA when you talk about investment firms? My understanding is that FATCA doesn't really become an issue until you have more than a certain amount of assets in the country you are living in. FBAR does have to always be reported for all accounts but is a separate issue. EDIT: I think I misread. I was wondering if you were having problems with investment firms in the USA not wanting to work with you. Are you saying that you are trying to invest using companies located in your current country of residence?
• throwaway2037 5y ago
  You wrote: Thanks to IRS regulations, 90% of investment firms will just reject me outright rather than deal with the paperwork. Sorry for your troubles. Do you know about https://www.interactivebrokers.com https://www.interactivebrokers.com? They are an ultra-low cost international brokerage. It seems they specialise in handling complex regulations! They can open brokerage accounts for local residents in an incredible number of countries -- all legally. Even India, which very difficult! Normally, they have a tiny office in each location to handle local financial regulatory requires (KYC, AML). FYI: The head office is in the United States, which is great for strong securities regulations. I strongly recommend it. And they aren't some start-up. They have been around for a long time. Their product range is similar to a large investment bank. You can trade everything under the sun that is listed on an exchange. Save the best for last: They recently scrapped their minimum monthly fees for low balance accounts. (Re-reading this post, sorry if I sound like a 'shill'. Everything I wrote above can be independently verified with some Google searching!)
• HWR_14 5y ago
  I don't want to get too political, but things were different before the 2017 tax law change. The main point, overseas Americans still have to pay US taxes, was true before then. But, pre-2017, they could deduct what they paid to the country they were residing in. This meant, in reality, the vast majority of expats did not have to pay US taxes. It's quite possible that the Democrats will, if they modify the tax system, undo that change. That might be why investment firms hesitate to have you as a client. Although, unless you are using tax-advantaged accounts, it shouldn't be that much extra paperwork for them. As for rich people gaming the system - I can imagine Bezos et al. would not mind living in the Caymans for a year while he sold all his stock to pay no taxes. If you can determine when you pay taxes, that's a huge benefit.
• bradknowles 5y ago
  The ex-pat life comes with certain costs, yes. Did that from 1998 to 2006. My wife was brought over to Belgium by what was then a subsidiary of JP Morgan, and they paid for all the additional expenses, including the tax services of some very talented people at Earnest & Young. They also paid for all the paperwork to get her a Belgian work permit. We weren’t actually married at the time, just engaged. But JPM agreed to treat us like a married couple. The only thing they didn’t pay for was the work permit for me. It took a lot of effort for me to find work over there, a lot more than I expected, given my career and experience. And those companies did have to deal with the hassle of getting a work permit for me, as well as complications with US taxes. I didn’t end up working at Belgacom Skynet for long, but that cratered more because the parent company wanted to re-absorb the ISP arm back in-house, and so all the technical people with a clue bailed like rats from that sinking ship, and I was just one of the last to leave. But hoo boy, every year, that poor team of accountants at E&Y had their work cut out for them, when it came time to file our taxes. In the end, the reason we left was that my wife’s employer (now spun off from JPM) wanted to pay her as a Belgian native, and we had been in the country long enough to get Belgian passports. But that would have been a massive pay cut for her, and did not make financial sense to us. They were very surprised when she told them that she was not going to be accepting that offer, and so they had to negotiate to pay her as an ex-pay for one more year while she worked to help find a replacement and train her office to handle that transition. Part of that negotiation involved getting them to agree to move us to whatever country we wanted — including moving back to the US. So, yeah — I can understand why some people might choose to go the other direction, and renounce their US citizenship. OTOH, I don’t have a lot of sympathy for the ultra-wealthy people who have all decided to set up shop in New Zealand. Yes, visiting NZ is on my bucket list. But I’m not interested in giving up my US citizenship and moving there permanently.
• maceurt 5y ago
  To be fair, the United States is also one of the only countries with birth right citizenship.