# Tax Help



## ccrrents

Hi All,

I've been reading through many of the discussions here and there's a lot of misinterpretation and misunderstaning about the requirements of compliance and the consequences of not being compliant.

Renounciation is of course an option to avoid the requirement to comply, but it also means loss of potential US benefits, including travel to the US.

And rather than get distressed, obsessed and frustrated about the potential issues that can arise due to FBARs, FATCA, all asset reporting (and I'm sure much more to come), why not just find an advisor that you feel comfortable with and trust to make sure you are covered in every detail.

Here's my story of finding that advisor:
I've been residing in Canada for 6 years now, originally my employer covered costs for my US tax reporting, but that stopped after the first year so I continued with the tax firm on my own... it cost about $3,500 for my returns to be completed which I thought was high compared to when I lived in the US, but figured what choice did I have?

The following year, I checked around for pricing to see if I could get a better deal.

The larger international tax firms quoted me about $4,000. I checked out the yellow pages, craigslist, backpage, etc. and got quotes in the of $25 (which I figured the guy had no clue of what I was asking) to $10,000 (at which I just laughed).

I figured that tax return preparation would cost a little more than what I had paid while living in the US, but I was blown away by the greed of many of the so-called tax preparers out there. When I was younger H&R (US) charged me about $150 to do my return. Before leaving the US, I paid $400. So the Canadians were taking advantage of my filing obligation.

Over the watercooler, I mentioned this a bud and he agreed it was a game out there... not only did the fees be outrageous, but the competency of these people was questionable too.

He mentioned he found a small firm he was using from which another expat friend referred him. Decent fee (meaning fair priced) and very good customer service has made him use him for several years now.

My bud gave me an email address and phone number; he said these guys do a lot of virtual work (they have clients across Canada and in Europe) so email would be the fastest to get a response. I figured, why not check this out, nothing to lose. I called them up and left a message that I was enquiring about services and rates.

I got a call back about a couple hours later, Connie apologized for the delay as they do most of the communication by email, but she was happy to answer any questions I had. First I asked about rates, she said that through the convenience of virtual preparation, the rates they offered were about the same I had been paying when I lived in the US. I was intrigued, how come your rates are so low? Connie said that the firm held high ethics and didn't follow the trend to stick it to the customer.... "fair price for quality experience and service" she said.

After talking with Connie for about 30 minutes, I was convinced she knew what she was talking about because she offered some great tax tips too.

I received an info package via email giving me details of why I needed to provide and a questionnaire to get some personal info. They also asked for copies of the last two years of tax returns, as they provide a complimentary review for possible errors in the previous returns.

I sent all in by fax... easy for me! I got an email confirming receipt of documents and was advised if addiional info was needed they would be in contact. I sent in a retainer of $200 and it was a go.

I got an email a few days later advising errors were found in my last two tax years. Bad news, some of the exemptions were calculated incorrectly. Good news, I was owed $2,000US! Ok, so I asked how do I get the refund? Connie said that usually their fee is 25% of the refund as a finder's fee (didn't sound bad), but because I was a referral from a current client, the fee would be only $100 (I was shocked!!!). I said ok and a few days later the required 1040X was sent to me to mail in. So far, the service is great!

A week later I received notice the tax returns were completed and I was sent copies to review before finalizing. I have a finance background, but avoided tax, so I had an idea how the return was supposed to be done; I reviewed and reviewed and couldn't find any errors. I emailed back my approval.

My Canadian return was efiled with a refund coming within 10 days. My US return was sent to me in pdf form for me to sign and mail into the IRS. The total cost $400 including the 1040X!

I got my Canadian tax refund and no word from the IRS (which means they were happy) for my current return and a check for $2,000!

I have not looked elsewhere for a tax advisor/preparer since then. Anytime of the year, if I have a question or concern, I get a speedy no cost answer! They may say they are a small tax firm, but they certainly are big and knowledgable enough to help me.

I recommend them to anyone looking for a fair (excellent) priced and experienced group of people to deal with.


<SNIP>
Cheers!
Charlie


----------



## Ladyhawk

I agree, sounds too good to be true.


----------



## Mona Lisa76

Tee hee,


----------



## 416

This is very transparent. In any case:



ccrrents said:


> Renounciation is of course an option to avoid the requirement to comply, but it also means loss of potential US benefits, including travel to the US.


There is no reason to believe, in most cases, that renunciation would affect travel to the US. From an earlier thread:




416 said:


> #1 comes from an alarmist take on the perfectly correct observation that as a renunciant you have no right to enter the United States. A US citizen (like the USC in New Brunswick who carved up his two neighbours and crossed into Maine raving and carrying a bloody chainsaw) has the right to enter the United States, and a former citizen does not. OTOH Canadians with no arrest record are admitted to the US all the time as a practical matter, so draw your own conclusions.
> 
> (If you have a police record in Canada, or for that matter the United States, you may want to think twice about renouncing.)


----------



## justbrowsing

I thought for a moment I had tuned into a late night infomercial.:nono:


----------



## ccrrents

416 said:


> This is very transparent. In any case:
> 
> 
> 
> There is no reason to believe, in most cases, that renunciation would affect travel to the US. From an earlier thread:




Actually if you refer to the IRS web site as well as the Social Security web site, anyone that renounces US citizenship is limited to travel a maximum of 30 days in the US.

Other benefits would include any social security benefits banked for retirement, these would be removed from record. 

Cheers,
Charlie


----------



## ccrrents

justbrowsing said:


> I thought for a moment I had tuned into a late night infomercial.:nono:


Really? Sorry to have passed on news I thought would have been a benefit to you other US expats... I guess there are many expats that more interested in renouncing citizenship rather than other considerations.

Hey, I saved a lot and if you guys think otherwise, it's your choice.... we're in Canada, the home of the truly free!

Cheers,
Charlie


----------



## ccrrents

Ladyhawk said:


> I agree, sounds too good to be true.


Hi Ladyhawk,

I wouldn't post an untruth... I guess you must the extra dollars around to pay. I certainly prefer to keep my money in my pocket and spend it on a treat rather than a drudgery.

Besides, if you want to spend the big bucks for tax service, it's your choice. If you don't believe me you can check them out and ask for references before tax hits us (remember the clock is counting down).

Cheers,
Charlie


----------



## 416

ccrrents said:


> Actually if you refer to the IRS web site as well as the Social Security web site, anyone that renounces US citizenship is limited to travel a maximum of 30 days in the US.


180 days for Canadians.


----------



## Ladyhawk

ccrrents said:


> Hi Ladyhawk,
> 
> I wouldn't post an untruth... I guess you must the extra dollars around to pay. I certainly prefer to keep my money in my pocket and spend it on a treat rather than a drudgery.
> 
> Besides, if you want to spend the big bucks for tax service, it's your choice. If you don't believe me you can check them out and ask for references before tax hits us (remember the clock is counting down).
> 
> Cheers,
> Charlie


I didn't say you posted an untruth. I said it sounded too good to be true, ie the way advertisements do. Your response to me clinches it. This is not a believable response from someone who genuinely wants to tell people about his really great tax preparer. It's a "you'll be sorry" message and a snide comment about my finances, what I'd expect from a salesman. Quite off-putting.


----------



## 416

justbrowsing said:


> I thought for a moment I had tuned into a late night infomercial.:nono:


Plus: STEAK KNIVES!


----------



## Canadian Guy

ccrrents said:


> Connie said that usually their fee is 25% of the refund as a finder's fee
> 
> <SNIP>
> Cheers!
> Charlie


I would be very careful using any firm that would take a percentage of the refund. It would be to their benefit to get you a larger refund than you are entitled to, and therefor a bigger payday for them. If you get a $2000.00 refund and pay the $500.00 what happens if it is later found that an error was made and the refund is smaller or you actually owe money. Do you get your $500.00 back?


----------



## ccrrents

Ladyhawk said:


> I didn't say you posted an untruth. I said it sounded too good to be true, ie the way advertisements do. Your response to me clinches it. This is not a believable response from someone who genuinely wants to tell people about his really great tax preparer. It's a "you'll be sorry" message and a snide comment about my finances, what I'd expect from a salesman. Quite off-putting.


Dear Ladyhawke,

My comments were not in any way disturbing, or as you phrase it off-putting, we each have our opinions and yours is your right. But just as I have an opinion and expressed it in this forum, you don't have the right to negate my opinion.

I wanted to share my opinion and experience I encountered in the market. It's been talked about that tax fees for US citizens will be doubling because of the additional new filing requirements of the IRS. I wanted to pass the word on to others that they have a choice and that the choice I made was a good one.

I am not a salesman, but a production control manager in manufacturing and passed on the details of my experience because I thought others in a similar position to me should be treated with respect rather than an open wallet. I am not compensated for my opinion.

I apologise for being a sharing individual. 

Cheers,
Charlie


----------



## ccrrents

416 said:


> 180 days for Canadians.


180 days is the maximum duration before a Canadian becomes a tax resident of the US.

A renounced US citizen cannot travel to the US for period exceeding 30 days per year. They may even be required to apply for a visa for that period of time.

Charlie


----------



## Bevdeforges

ccrrents said:


> Actually if you refer to the IRS web site as well as the Social Security web site, anyone that renounces US citizenship is limited to travel a maximum of 30 days in the US.
> 
> Other benefits would include any social security benefits banked for retirement, these would be removed from record.
> 
> Cheers,
> Charlie


Are you sure about that? According to the State Dept. site, someone who has renounced their US citizenship, but who has another citizenship and passport is subject to the rules applicable to their new home country. They even mention entering the US on the VWP, which would allow them to return for up to 90 days at a time.

Social security is not a benefit of citizenship. It is a benefit payable based on having paid into the system for the requisite number of quarters. Social security is paid out to plenty of foreigners, whether or not they ever had US citizenship. I don't believe they would be able to annul a person's entitlement to benefits based on their renunciation of US citizenship. But if you have a link to something on the Social Security website, I'd be interested in seeing it.
Cheers,
Bev


----------



## TooMuchCoffee

ccrrents said:


> 180 days is the maximum duration before a Canadian becomes a tax resident of the US.
> 
> A renounced US citizen cannot travel to the US for period exceeding 30 days per year. They may even be required to apply for a visa for that period of time.
> 
> Charlie


Charlie, I believe you are mistaken. If you have a link to a credible source please post it.

*Renunciant rights*
My understanding is that renunciants who have citizenship in another country have the same rights re: travel to the U.S. as any other citizen of that country.

The site for the U.S. Bureau of Consular Affairs does have small section on renunciants (secion "D" if you go to that page). This section deals mostly with people who are stateless, but it does say: 

_Even if they were not stateless, they would still be required to obtain a visa to travel to the United States, or show that they are eligible for admission pursuant to the terms of the Visa Waiver Pilot Program (VWPP). If found ineligible for a visa or the VWPP to come to the U.S., a renunciant, under certain circumstances, could be barred from entering the United States. _

Canadians don't require a visa to travel to the U.S., so I don't believe this would apply to Canadians. All Canadians would have to show is a Canadian passport.


The Renounciation Guide site (I find it credible, others may not agree) has a page on rights after expatriation: 
*
Visiting the U.S.*

If you have citizenship from one of the 35 visa-waiver countries (mainly Europe, and a few countries in Asia-Pacific; see here for list), you can travel visa-free to the U.S. for tourism or business for up to 90 days, just as any other citizen of your country may.

[Note that even though you don't need a visa if your citizenship is from a visa-waiver country, you will still need to hold the "ESTA Travel Authorization", which the U.S. started in January 2009 to pre-screen travellers against law-enforcement databases before they embark for the U.S. You apply for free on-line and generally receive approval within seconds.]

If your country of citizenship is not a visa-waiver country, then you can apply for a visa to the United States, just as any other citizen of your country would. You should be treated in the visa application process as other citizens of your country would be treated. Generally, if you are not a security risk and the embassy believes you have sufficient funds, sufficient reasons to return to your country, and will not overstay your visit, then you should be granted a visa. We're personally familiar with several cases of individuals who were citizens of the U.S., renounced, and at some point later applied for visas to visit the U.S. In every case, they were treated normally and were approved for visas.

*Under current law, the U.S. cannot treat you differently after your renunciation than other citizens from your country. The only law that calls for different treatment is the so-called Reed Amendment (described below), which is unworkable and unused.*

Please note that after your renunciation, your biometric information – 10-digit fingerprints and digital photograph – will be taken and stored by the U.S. either when you apply for a visa or when you enter the U.S. This policy applies to all non-U.S. citizens from the ages of 14 to 79. The U.S. does not currently take biometric information from its own citizens, although it seems quite likely to begin within a few years.

We've had a few questions about the possibility that although the law doesn't specify anything, U.S. officials nonetheless follow an "unwritten policy" to bar entry to ex-citizens. We know personally that this is not true. Moreover, we think it unlikely this could ever be the case. It'd be very difficult to apply (not to mention impossible to keep secret). First, information on ex-citizens is very faulty (see here for details). Ex-citizens from non-visa-waiver countries might be identified in the visa process, but records are not good enough to find all of them. And ex-citizens from visa waiver countries don't go through any visa application process at a U.S. embassy, so border control in the United States would somehow need to have access to details of every ex-citizen and be prepared to stop them. It could happen, but it'd be a lot of technical work, and we don't think it's a priority for anyone.

Note that this is the current state of the law after the 2008 expatriation changes in the HEART act. Any of these policies could be altered by a new law, but at the present time there is no movement to change anything.

Regarding taxes, you will be taxed as a non-resident non-citizen unless you spend "substantial" time in the U.S., roughly defined as more than 4 months per year, on average. (The exact calculation looks at a rolling 3-year period; see here for our explanation of the full details).


*Length of stay in U.S.*
I couldn't find anything that says a renounced citizen can only stay in the U.S. for 30 days. Canadians can stay up to six months, though I don't know what (if any) visa they'd have to apply for to do so. The Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada site says:

_Canadian retirees seeking to winter in warmer climates will receive a maximum admission period of six months. Those who wish to stay longer may apply for an extension with the nearest office of USCIS once they are in the United States, but before their authorized stay expires. They may be asked to demonstrate that they are only remaining temporarily in the United States._


----------



## Ladyhawk

ccrrents said:


> Dear Ladyhawke,
> 
> My comments were not in any way disturbing, or as you phrase it off-putting, we each have our opinions and yours is your right. But just as I have an opinion and expressed it in this forum, you don't have the right to negate my opinion.



Your initial post sounded like an advertisement which is why a moderator removed your reference to the service you were talking about. You have done nothing to dispel that impression.


----------



## Peg

My father never took out US citizenship and still gets his US Social Security.


----------



## Peg

ccrrents - your initial post simply reads like spam hence the snarky comments (which I particularly liked) from established members of the forum. It did not sound believable.


----------



## 416

On the other hand, renunciants can't buy firearms or be licenced to transport hazardous materials in the US. fwiw. 



> 7 FAM 1267 RENUNCIATION AND THE BRADY ACT
> (CT:CON-277; 01-05-2009)
> The Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act (Brady Act) of 1993, Public Law 103-159 — Persons Who Renounce U.S. Citizenship Ineligible to Purchase Firearms, provides that it is unlawful to sell firearms to persons for whom a finding of loss of nationality due to renunciation has been made. Subsequent laws have extended this restriction to the transporting of hazardous materials by renunciants and other activities. The U.S. Department of State and the FBI entered into an interagency agreement on the sharing of information concerning renunciants of May 1998 (CA FBI 1998 MOU)―persons who lose U.S. citizenship under Section 349(a)(5) INA. See 18 U.S.C. 922G Unlawful Acts — Sale of Firearms to Renunciants; Federal Register 68, 86, May 5, 2003 Transporting Hazardous Materials By Renunciants. For additional information, see 7 FAM 1244.


link


----------



## 416

Good grief:



> (d) It shall be unlawful for any person to sell or otherwise
> dispose of any firearm or ammunition to any person knowing or
> having reasonable cause to believe that such person -
> (1) is under indictment for, or has been convicted in any court
> of, a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one
> year;
> (2) is a fugitive from justice;
> (3) is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled
> substance (as defined in section 102 of the Controlled Substances
> Act (21 U.S.C. 802));
> (4) has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been
> committed to any mental institution;
> (5) who, being an alien -
> (A) is illegally or unlawfully in the United States; or
> (B) except as provided in subsection (2), has been
> admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa (as
> that term is defined in section 101(a)(26) of the Immigration
> and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)(26)));
> (6) who (!2) has been discharged from the Armed Forces under
> dishonorable conditions;
> *(7) who, having been a citizen of the United States, has
> renounced his citizenship;*
> (8) is subject to a court order that restrains such person from
> harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner of such
> person or child of such intimate partner or person, or engaging
> in other conduct that would place an intimate partner in
> reasonable fear of bodily injury to the partner or child, except
> that this paragraph shall only apply to a court order that -
> (A) was issued after a hearing of which such person received
> actual notice, and at which such person had the opportunity to
> participate; and
> (B)(i) includes a finding that such person represents a
> credible threat to the physical safety of such intimate partner
> or child; or
> (ii) by its terms explicitly prohibits the use, attempted
> use, or threatened use of physical force against such intimate
> partner or child that would reasonably be expected to cause
> bodily injury; or
> (9) has been convicted in any court of a misdemeanor crime of
> domestic violence.


----------



## Peg

That sure gives me the warm fuzzies to be considered on par with 'bad guys'.


----------



## pwdunn

Peg said:


> That sure gives me the warm fuzzies to be considered on par with 'bad guys'.


This could be another benefit of relinquishing as opposed to renouncing.

It could be tested that a person go to a citizenship ceremony an renew the pledge to the Queen of Canada. That could suffice as a relinquishing act.


----------



## 416

PetrosResearch said:


> It could be tested that a person go to a citizenship ceremony an renew the pledge to the Queen of Canada. That could suffice as a relinquishing act.


So could filing a passport application.


----------



## TooMuchCoffee

Ah yes, I'd heard that if you renounce your citizenship you can't buy a gun or ammunition in the U.S. And I am okay with that.

Well, I guess on a philosophical level, it's annoying. But if the world ever gets to the point where I am in the U.S., trying to buy guns and ammo . . . yeah, I'm having a hard time picturing that.

Not being able to buy a gun in the U.S. sure isn't something that makes me think twice about renouncing. If it were true that you can't spend more than 30 days in the U.S., I might be concerned. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, though.


----------



## Canadian Guy

PetrosResearch said:


> This could be another benefit of relinquishing as opposed to renouncing.
> 
> It could be tested that a person go to a citizenship ceremony an renew the pledge to the Queen of Canada. That could suffice as a relinquishing act.


I think that would be a relinquishing act, after all what other reason would there be if the person was already a citizen. For that matter take the oath today in your own home, put the date on form DS-4079 and sign it. Tell them you did this with the intent to relinquish. Today is December 31st 2011, do this before midnight if you are still waiting for an appointment to renounce in 2012. It just might save you $450.00 and move the date on the CLN from 2012 to 2011. The law does not say that the oath must be performed in a court or in front of a judge.


----------



## Guest

TooMuchCoffee said:


> If it were true that you can't spend more than 30 days in the U.S., I might be concerned. I'm pretty sure that's wrong, though.


I lost my US citizenship when I became a Canadian in 1975 (didn't get my CLN until late 1976 because I didn't bother writing them about it until July of that year). In my original letter to Kissinger and also on the declaration form they sent to me, I chose to use the word "renounce" a couple of times (being utterly unaware of the intracies of Section 349 wording at the time and up until only a few months ago), but they still listed me as having "self-expatriated" by becoming a Canadian, on my CLN.

I've never stayed in the US as long as 30 days at a time since returning to visit for the first time in 1978, generally I only visit for a week or maybe two, but I've visited family in the US probably 30-40 times since 1978 and have never had any hassles at the border. Mind you, to date no one has ever asked to see my CLN, but I'm pretty sure the border patrol has some sort of entry about me on their computer, from the funny looks and double-takes-at-the-monitor I've been given a couple of times at airport clearances. But no one has ever said anything, never mind grilled me or delayed me.

I wouldn't lose any sleep over this, as far as I know it's another one of those "urban legends" that isn't true. And I refuse to spend any time speculating about various doomsday scenarios as to what might happen in the future; there are enough real problems to worry about without inventing new ones.

And on that note, just before closing down my computer and going to the kitchen with my wife to prepare our traditional New Year's Eve cheese fondue, I'd like to wish everyone a happy, safe, and sane (especially in Canada) New Year!


----------



## Canadian Guy

416 said:


> So could filing a passport application.


Would you please explain this one for me. I looked at passport application and did not see how it would apply.

Also could a person who was a guarantor for a passport application be included? And as a real stretch has a guarantor performed duties for a foreign state?


----------



## 416

Canadian Guy said:


> Would you please explain this one for me. I looked at passport application and did not see how it would apply.





> DECLARATION—I solemnly declare that I am a Canadian citizen, that the photos enclosed are a true likeness of me and that all of the statements made in this application are true. I declare that I have read and understood the WARNING to all applicants and guarantors at the top of this page.


link




> POTENTIALLY EXPATRIATING ACTS
> 
> Section 349 of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1481), as amended, states that U.S. citizens are subject to loss of citizenship if they perform certain specified acts voluntarily and with the intention to relinquish U.S. citizenship. Briefly stated, these acts include:
> taking an oath, affirmation or other formal declaration to a foreign state or its political subdivisions (Sec. 349 (a) (2) INA);


link


----------



## Canadian Guy

416 said:


> link
> 
> 
> 
> 
> link


Thank you, "I solemnly declare that I am a Canadian citizen" should be enough. I guess I was looking for a longer or more formal oath on the application. I will put this on DS-4079! I intend to put any and every relinquishing act on the form, not just the first. Just in case they something was not actually relinquishing.

In reference to my other post I just took the oath of citizenship at home while my wife watched. She laughed and said this is something they would never accept.


----------



## AntiFATCAman

*No to FATCA*



ccrrents said:


> Hi All,
> 
> I've been reading through many of the discussions here and there's a lot of misinterpretation and misunderstaning about the requirements of compliance and the consequences of not being compliant.
> 
> Renounciation is of course an option to avoid the requirement to comply, but it also means loss of potential US benefits, including travel to the US.
> 
> And rather than get distressed, obsessed and frustrated about the potential issues that can arise due to FBARs, FATCA, all asset reporting (and I'm sure much more to come), why not just find an advisor that you feel comfortable with and trust to make sure you are covered in every detail.
> 
> Here's my story of finding that advisor:
> I've been residing in Canada for 6 years now, originally my employer covered costs for my US tax reporting, but that stopped after the first year so I continued with the tax firm on my own... it cost about $3,500 for my returns to be completed which I thought was high compared to when I lived in the US, but figured what choice did I have?
> 
> The following year, I checked around for pricing to see if I could get a better deal.
> 
> The larger international tax firms quoted me about $4,000. I checked out the yellow pages, craigslist, backpage, etc. and got quotes in the of $25 (which I figured the guy had no clue of what I was asking) to $10,000 (at which I just laughed).
> 
> I figured that tax return preparation would cost a little more than what I had paid while living in the US, but I was blown away by the greed of many of the so-called tax preparers out there. When I was younger H&R (US) charged me about $150 to do my return. Before leaving the US, I paid $400. So the Canadians were taking advantage of my filing obligation.
> 
> Over the watercooler, I mentioned this a bud and he agreed it was a game out there... not only did the fees be outrageous, but the competency of these people was questionable too.
> 
> He mentioned he found a small firm he was using from which another expat friend referred him. Decent fee (meaning fair priced) and very good customer service has made him use him for several years now.
> 
> My bud gave me an email address and phone number; he said these guys do a lot of virtual work (they have clients across Canada and in Europe) so email would be the fastest to get a response. I figured, why not check this out, nothing to lose. I called them up and left a message that I was enquiring about services and rates.
> 
> I got a call back about a couple hours later, Connie apologized for the delay as they do most of the communication by email, but she was happy to answer any questions I had. First I asked about rates, she said that through the convenience of virtual preparation, the rates they offered were about the same I had been paying when I lived in the US. I was intrigued, how come your rates are so low? Connie said that the firm held high ethics and didn't follow the trend to stick it to the customer.... "fair price for quality experience and service" she said.
> 
> After talking with Connie for about 30 minutes, I was convinced she knew what she was talking about because she offered some great tax tips too.
> 
> I received an info package via email giving me details of why I needed to provide and a questionnaire to get some personal info. They also asked for copies of the last two years of tax returns, as they provide a complimentary review for possible errors in the previous returns.
> 
> I sent all in by fax... easy for me! I got an email confirming receipt of documents and was advised if addiional info was needed they would be in contact. I sent in a retainer of $200 and it was a go.
> 
> I got an email a few days later advising errors were found in my last two tax years. Bad news, some of the exemptions were calculated incorrectly. Good news, I was owed $2,000US! Ok, so I asked how do I get the refund? Connie said that usually their fee is 25% of the refund as a finder's fee (didn't sound bad), but because I was a referral from a current client, the fee would be only $100 (I was shocked!!!). I said ok and a few days later the required 1040X was sent to me to mail in. So far, the service is great!
> 
> A week later I received notice the tax returns were completed and I was sent copies to review before finalizing. I have a finance background, but avoided tax, so I had an idea how the return was supposed to be done; I reviewed and reviewed and couldn't find any errors. I emailed back my approval.
> 
> My Canadian return was efiled with a refund coming within 10 days. My US return was sent to me in pdf form for me to sign and mail into the IRS. The total cost $400 including the 1040X!
> 
> I got my Canadian tax refund and no word from the IRS (which means they were happy) for my current return and a check for $2,000!
> 
> I have not looked elsewhere for a tax advisor/preparer since then. Anytime of the year, if I have a question or concern, I get a speedy no cost answer! They may say they are a small tax firm, but they certainly are big and knowledgable enough to help me.
> 
> I recommend them to anyone looking for a fair (excellent) priced and experienced group of people to deal with.
> 
> 
> <SNIP>
> Cheers!
> Charlie



Hi...I'm sure you're a nice person, but quite frankly when you live abroad for decades, you don't have the 1040 or other US tax laws on your mind anymore. 

When your kids don't attend substandard US high schools, you drive on smooth roads, travel through modern airports, go 300 km/hr on trains, not have to look at legions of homeless people dragging trash bags full of cans and bottles for the deposit money, not have to fight for health care, you start to ask yourself why the IRS needs to know about my finances?

I pay high European taxes which the US government doesn't recongize VAT, social taxes, and high gasoline taxes as taxes!!!!

Citizenship-based taxation is wrong along with FBAR and FATCA forms should be repealed.

The "privilege" of having travel to the US doesn't stack up. My other passport is visa waiver. The US Congress acts like it's 1950 with the US as the last remaining economy intact. Well in 2012 the US is not the only game in town - the US Congress should wake up to that fact.

Instead of the US having its citizens acting as salespeople promoting the US and its products, it angers them with silly taxation rules. No other major country comes to mind that its citizens renounce because of taxes - it's the US shooting itself in the foot.

As Winston Churchill once said - the US will do the right thing once all the alternatives have been exhausted. Well FATCA is the last straw in the taxation game.


----------



## Guest

_I got an email a few days later advising errors were found in my last two tax years. Bad news, some of the exemptions were calculated incorrectly. Good news, I was owed $2,000US! Ok, so I asked how do I get the refund? Connie said that usually their fee is 25% of the refund as a finder's fee (didn't sound bad), but because I was a referral from a current client, the fee would be only $100 (I was shocked!!!). I said ok and a few days later the required 1040X was sent to me to mail in. So far, the service is great!

A week later I received notice the tax returns were completed and I was sent copies to review before finalizing. I have a finance background, but avoided tax, so I had an idea how the return was supposed to be done; I reviewed and reviewed and couldn't find any errors. I emailed back my approval.

My Canadian return was efiled with a refund coming within 10 days. My US return was sent to me in pdf form for me to sign and mail into the IRS. The total cost $400 including the 1040X!

I got my Canadian tax refund and no word from the IRS (which means they were happy) for my current return and a check for $2,000!
_

Buyer beware.......this seems to be the latest "scam" where Firms are getting there money by doing past returns and taking as much as 25%. There is an Accountant firm in the states with a project called "second look" which goes thru your previous returns to find you more money....of course they take a percentage.

Why put yourself on the radar???....the object here is to get out, not piss them off.


----------



## pwdunn

AntiFATCAman said:


> As Winston Churchill once said - the US will do the right thing once all the alternatives have been exhausted. Well FATCA is the last straw in the taxation game.


Churchill wasn't dealing with the idiots and thieves that we have today in office. Consider that they are borrowing 43 cents on every dollar spent. This is a like the kids who party and trash the house when the parents are away. But where are the adults in Washington?


----------



## ccrrents

Canadian Guy said:


> I would be very careful using any firm that would take a percentage of the refund. It would be to their benefit to get you a larger refund than you are entitled to, and therefor a bigger payday for them. If you get a $2000.00 refund and pay the $500.00 what happens if it is later found that an error was made and the refund is smaller or you actually owe money. Do you get your $500.00 back?


Hi Canadian Guy,

Yes, I did get my $500 refund. The firm did not take a finder's fee on my regular tax return filing.

The finder's fee is standard in tax situations, not only for personal income tax, but especially for business when it involves excise, GST and income taxes. 25% is the norm... how is it different from other services, such as legal, etc. when their service feees can be as much as 50% or more on legal claims. 

If I was foolish not to see the refund due in the first place, a finder's fee is totally acceptable.


Charlie


----------



## pwdunn

AntiFATCAman said:


> Instead of the US having its citizens acting as salespeople promoting the US and its products, it angers them with silly taxation rules. No other major country comes to mind that its citizens renounce because of taxes - it's the US shooting itself in the foot.
> 
> As Winston Churchill once said - the US will do the right thing once all the alternatives have been exhausted. Well FATCA is the last straw in the taxation game.


Wall Street Journal now makes this point.


----------

