2Dec/01Off
Lookie here…
Travel.state.gov: Possible Loss of U.S. Citizenship and Foreign Military Service (via rc3.org)
"P.L. 104-191 contains changes in the taxation of U.S. citizens who renounce or otherwise lose U.S. citizenship. In general, any person who lost U.S. citizenship within 10 years immediately preceding the close of the taxable year, whose principle purpose in losing citizenship was to avoid taxation, will be subject to continued taxation."
Ahem. So who wants to rebutt that it is, or should I say, was possible to avoid taxation by renouncing one's citizenship?
About Jim Roepcke
No description. Please complete your profile.Roepcke Computing Solutions
Archive Calendar
Blogroll
Saved Searches
- WebObjects on Twitter Tweets about WebObjects (without all the iTunes store tweet spam)
Willing to Fail
WebObjects book
Badges
Recent tweets
- @bubbafat as far as I know, no, so we're putting links on a separate implicitly-related object to keep doc size manageable. in reply to bubbafat 11 hrs ago
- the #riak team is bold to put comparisons with similar systems on their wiki. they're inviting criticism but it's important to discuss this. 1 day ago
- @kazempour http://bit.ly/9KOnBp enjoy :) 3 days ago
- More updates...
December 3rd, 2001 - 05:18
At 01:22 AM 12/3/2001 -0500, Jim Roepcke wrote:
>”P.L. 104-191 contains changes in the taxation of U.S. citizens who
>renounce or otherwise lose U.S. citizenship. In general, any person who
>lost U.S. citizenship within 10 years immediately preceding the close of
>the taxable year, whose principle purpose in losing citizenship was to
>avoid taxation, will be subject to continued taxation.”
>
>Ahem. So who wants to rebutt (http://jim.roepcke.com/3056) that it is, or
>should I say, was possible to avoid taxation by renouncing one’s citizenship?
Just to sum things up, Jim:
1. It has always been possible to renounce American citizenship, and
certainly a handful of wealthy people have reduced their tax burden by
doing so.
2. Legally renouncing American citizenship, however, brings a number of
immigration-related laws into play. For example, since these folks are now
at best legal aliens when they are in the country. Most such people, for
example, are required by law to spend something like no more than 6 months
in the United States (such folks usually maintain homes in Caribbean nations).
3. What you *cannot* do — at least if you want to stay out of jail — is
try to tell a judge that the Constitution established a confederated
government called the united states of America, that the post-Civil War
amendments to the Constitution created a voluntary corporation called the
United States of America, and since you’ve never voluntary joined said
corporation, you are not subject to taxation by said corporation.
December 3rd, 2001 - 05:38
At 08:18 AM 12/3/2001 -0500, I wrote:
>2. Legally renouncing American citizenship, however, brings a number of
>immigration-related laws into play. For example, since these folks are now
>at best legal aliens when they are in the country. Most such people, for
>example, are required by law to spend something like no more than 6 months
>in the United States (such folks usually maintain homes in Caribbean nations).
Just to be clear here, there are laws that specifically apply to former
American citizens specifying how much time they can spend in the country
before they become subject to American tax law. There was a controversy in
the mid-1980s because the IRS and the INS were not keeping track of such
matters and there were a number of people worth hundreds of millions of
dollars who had renounced their citizenship but were living in the United
States for 10 or 11 months a year, and just flying to their home in the
Bahamas for what amounted to a short vacation.