SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the breaking-up-is-hard-to-do dept.
The USA has been making life difficult for Americans residing abroad; FATCA causes plenty of problems; but so does citizenship-based taxation. The IRS and Treasury department have made the reporting and taxation more onerous, and stepped up their collection efforts.
The result should be a surprise to no one: more and more Americans are handing in their US citizenship. Total numbers are unavailable (the lists published by the government include only a portion of the total), but undisputed is the fact that the numbers are increasing rapidly.
Having lots of citizens want to leave is...embarrassing. One solution could be to review the policies leading to people to hand in their citizenship. Another would be to make the fee unaffordable, especially for people living on second- or third-world incomes. It's obvious, of course, which route the USA has chosen: It now costs $2350 to hand in your US passport; more than 20 times the international average.
(Score: 3, Informative) by bradley13 on Wednesday December 03 2014, @02:19PM
Thanks for the graph [typepad.com] - that's a prettier one that those I had found. These figures represent the numbers in the lists published by the government. Note the threefold increase from 2012 to 2013. For 2014, well, we'll see.
Why are these lists incomplete? Because they only include formal renunciations. They do not include relinquishments (loss of citizenship when naturalized in another country), and the government does not publish those numbers.
However, we can find hints. As an example, in early 2013, the US ambassador ambassador to Switzerland let slip that 900 Americans in Switzerland had handed in their passports the previous year (i.e., 2012). Yet for 2012, the total number of officially listed renunciations is under 1000 - how many of those will have been Swiss? Switzerland is tiny - there are much larger populations of Americans living in many other countries. There's no way to get any sort of exact numbers out of this, but certainly the total numbers are much, much higher.
To the AC who complained about my assertion that the rapid grown is "undisputed" - use Google, and find a single source that says otherwise. The government, the media, the expat organizations - all of them agree that the numbers are skyrocketing. The five-fold increase in the fee may reduce renunciations (or it may not), but it apparently does not apply to relinquishments, at least, not yet...
Everyone is somebody else's weirdo.
(Score: 3) by M. Baranczak on Wednesday December 03 2014, @02:33PM
To the AC who complained about my assertion that the rapid grown is "undisputed" - use Google, and find a single source that says otherwise.
Sorry, that's not how it works. You're the one who's making a factual assertion, it's your job to provide the evidence.
(Score: 2) by urza9814 on Thursday December 04 2014, @05:43PM
Sorry, that's not how it works. It would literally require violating the known laws of physics for the submitter to prove that statement true. You can't prove a negative.
You're essentially asking the submitter to provide for your review every word ever written, every statement ever vocalized, every thought ever considered by any human being, living or dead. Where to prove yourself correct, all you need to do is provide a single link.
Although to be REALLY pedantic, you've already proven yourself correct. I suppose it can't be undisputed if you dispute it...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 03 2014, @03:21PM
A threefold or fivefold increase means next to nothing when you are talking in the hundreds of people. A couple hundred people out of 330 million is a statistical blip.
(Score: 1) by Lunix Nutcase on Wednesday December 03 2014, @03:27PM
Even with that many fold increase and assuming the numbers are underrepresented by a margin of 10:1 (which is way overly generous) we are talking a rate of renunciation rate of .00000023%. It's a tempest in a teacup.
(Score: 1) by Lunix Nutcase on Wednesday December 03 2014, @03:47PM
Oops divided instead of multiplying. That should be .0023%. Either way, as I said this is hugely overblown.