# Foreign Earned Income



## Andrea92x

Hi all (me again... sorry)

I'm trying to do my 2018 tax return on H&R Block but I'm running into issues.
I'm stating that I'm self employed and using schedule C to declare my income and that I work in UK. I also use form 2555 to declare that my income is foreign earned but in doing so my total income then drops to $0 (Schedule C income - form 2555 income). I wish my taxable income to be $0 but not my actual income.

I have managed to get the outcome I want by deleting my income on Schedule C and just leaving it on form 2555 but surely I have to declare it on Schedule C as well?

Is there anyone here that can advise me on how they file their self-employed foreign earned income? 

As you can see I'm a little confused. Any help is greatly appreciated!!


----------



## Bevdeforges

Not sure what you mean by my taxable income vs. my "actual" income.

If you mean that Schedule C shows you with an overall loss (or 0 net income from your business) then you could always take the position that you don't have to file at all, falling under the filing threshold.

Or, you could simply report your revenue as your "income from employment" and simply exclude it all with the 2555 without giving them all the detail on a Schedule C. (OK, OK, it's probably not the technically correct way to file - but trust me, it will definitely fly.)


----------



## Andrea92x

Hi Bev,

Thanks for your quick response again! My business income from self-employment, lets say it's 50k, is what I state on Schedule C. I then put that same figure on form 2555 to show that it's foreign earned income. Somehow H&R block calculates it to be 50k minus 50k due to me excluding the amount and gives me:

Income: $0
Your Taxable Income: $0

It does work for me like you said with excluding all the income without giving them all the details on schedule C in that Income shows as 50k and Taxable income is $0... but I'm wondering if I should actually be able to exclude it in this way since I'm 'Self-Employed' I didn't think the foreign earned income exclusion applies to me and I should be exempting myself under the social security agreement in Schedule C.

It seems which ever way I try to do this it doesn't quite arrive at what I'm looking for.


----------



## underation

My suggestion would be to pay an accountant to get your US taxes sorted out and then use the returns they prepare as a model for future years.

Edit: my suggestion would be to pay _*reasonable charges*_ to a tax accountant. Check out several, as there are wide variations in charges, even for simple situations.


----------



## underation

Andrea92x said:


> Hi Bev,
> 
> Thanks for your quick response again! My business income from self-employment, lets say it's 50k, is what I state on Schedule C. I then put that same figure on form 2555 to show that it's foreign earned income. Somehow H&R block calculates it to be 50k minus 50k due to me excluding the amount and gives me:
> 
> Income: $0
> Your Taxable Income: $0
> 
> It does work for me like you said with excluding all the income without giving them all the details on schedule C in that Income shows as 50k and Taxable income is $0... but I'm wondering if I should actually be able to exclude it in this way since I'm 'Self-Employed' I didn't think the foreign earned income exclusion applies to me and I should be exempting myself under the social security agreement in Schedule C.
> 
> It seems which ever way I try to do this it doesn't quite arrive at what I'm looking for.


The totalisation treaty exempts you from paying US social security taxes on your business income.

You then need to report your income and either (a) claim credit from the US for the UK tax you’ve paid (“foreign tax credits”); or (b) exclude it by claiming the US Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.

My suggestion would be to pay an accountant reasonable charges to get your US taxes sorted out and then use the returns they prepare as a model for future years.

Alternatively, spend time studying the relevant IRS publications to understand how it works and what you need to do to file US tax returns safely.

Or consider renunciation.

IANAL, or a tax accountant.


----------



## Bevdeforges

Andrea92x said:


> Hi Bev,
> 
> Thanks for your quick response again! My business income from self-employment, lets say it's 50k, is what I state on Schedule C. I then put that same figure on form 2555 to show that it's foreign earned income. Somehow H&R block calculates it to be 50k minus 50k due to me excluding the amount and gives me:
> 
> Income: $0
> Your Taxable Income: $0
> 
> It does work for me like you said with excluding all the income without giving them all the details on schedule C in that Income shows as 50k and Taxable income is $0... but I'm wondering if I should actually be able to exclude it in this way since I'm 'Self-Employed' I didn't think the foreign earned income exclusion applies to me and I should be exempting myself under the social security agreement in Schedule C.
> 
> It seems which ever way I try to do this it doesn't quite arrive at what I'm looking for.


Yes, you are able to exclude it that way. Actually, I wouldn't bother with the "self-employed" label at all. Just indicate that your employer is whatever your business name is, indicate your address (even if it is the same as your home address) and go ahead and exclude your whole revenue (given that it's well under the exclusion threshold of something north of $100K). 

There is no reason to volunteer all the detail of the Schedule C if you don't have to. And frankly, if you owe $0 in taxes, they aren't going to bother you any further about it.


----------



## underation

Don’t forget to backfile, and backfile any missing FBARs if required.


----------



## Nononymous

Bevdeforges said:


> Actually, I wouldn't bother with the "self-employed" label at all. Just indicate that your employer is whatever your business name is,


Wouldn't that approach mean that you'd also need to file a return for the business, since it is owned by a US person?

I won't pretend to know exactly how this works on a US return since I refuse to file them, but presumably one puts down $50k in self-employed income, makes any taxes owing disappear via either the FEIE or FTC routes, does whatever one does to exclude social security, and basta, there's your $0 return.


----------



## underation

> ...Just indicate that your employer is whatever your business name is, indicate your address (even if it is the same as your home address) and go ahead and exclude your whole revenue (given that it's well under the exclusion threshold of something north of $100K).


It occurs to me that if the OP reports her income to the IRS as wages, rather than as self-employment income, the benefits of the totalisation treaty will be lost.

Whereas, if I understand correctly, if she reports the income as SE income, evoking the totalisation treaty for exemption from SS taxes, and excluding the income by claiming the FEIE, she gets US SS credit as well as UK NI credit while paying only the UK NI contributions; and thus may be eligible eventually for a pension from each country.


----------



## 255

Andrea92x -- Both Bevdeforges and underation have given you some good advice. In answer to your question: "Is there anyone here that can advise me on how they file their self-employed foreign earned income?" I use the forms from the irs.gov web-site and then mail my returns. I use what forms I need and include any declarations/statements needed to reference anything that might be construed "out of the ordinary." I do not use any of the software vendors. Cheers, 255


----------



## underation

Nononymous said:


> Wouldn't that approach mean that you'd also need to file a return for the business, since it is owned by a US person?


Not if it’s just a sole proprietorship, rather than a partnership or LLC or any other such formal structure. Or so I believe.


----------



## 255

Nononymous -- Your question: "Wouldn't that approach mean that you'd also need to file a return for the business, since it is owned by a US person?" I think you're referring to the "Controlled Foreign Corporation" rules, which were designed to claw income from U.S. persons that are perhaps deferring income, by stashing it in a foreign entity. The rules only apply to an entity that is not currently taxed to the owners of the entity. To avoid this issue, a taxpayer can designate the entity a "Disregarded Foreign Entity." Of note, many U.S. filers will designate their domestic, single owner, LLCs as Disregarded Entities" and roll any income/losses onto a "Schedule C," usually used for sole-proprietors. In either case, no separate tax return is due (since all profit/loss is included in the taxpayer's individual return.)

In the OP's case, it appears that the issue is the software that doesn't recognize what is necessary to file, as per normal. There is no issue with a separate company, as it appears the OP is operating as self-employed and as has been stated before, is only trying to claim the "earned income exclusion" and take advantage of the "Social Security" totalization agreements. As long as everything is included on the personal tax submission, there is no need to conger-up some form of business tax return. Cheers, 255


----------



## Bevdeforges

Nononymous said:


> Wouldn't that approach mean that you'd also need to file a return for the business, since it is owned by a US person?
> 
> I won't pretend to know exactly how this works on a US return since I refuse to file them, but presumably one puts down $50k in self-employed income, makes any taxes owing disappear via either the FEIE or FTC routes, does whatever one does to exclude social security, and basta, there's your $0 return.


You're the LAST person I would have expected that comment from!

But your second paragraph is dead on. Nothing wrong with categorizing "self employment income" as "salary and wages" - I think ultimately that's where you do put the amount anyhow (especially with these new short forms).

But net-net, report the income (as salary), exclude via the FEIE (or the FTC if you prefer) so that your net taxable income comes down to 0 and there you are. No real need to worry their pretty little heads about that "self employment tax" thing. Or the "certain foreign controlled corporations" stuff, either.

What you're trying to show them is that you don't owe them a cent, no matter how they want to look at the situation.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> Nothing wrong with categorizing "self employment income" as "salary and wages" - I think ultimately that's where you do put the amount anyhow (especially with these new short forms).


You’re supposed to report the income minus the SS as if it was wages, yes. But it isn’t, for SS withholding purposes, according to the IRS. Hence the totalisation exemption.

Ultimately it doesn’t make any difference as all the income can be excluded. But losing the SS credits may be a consideration.


----------



## Bevdeforges

underation said:


> You’re supposed to report the income minus the SS as if it was wages, yes. But it isn’t, for SS withholding purposes, according to the IRS. Hence the totalisation exemption.


Um, no. For US tax purposes, you don't deduct the SS "contributions" before reporting income. For US tax returns, wages and salary are reported gross - with NO deductions.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> Um, no. For US tax purposes, you don't deduct the SS "contributions" before reporting income. For US tax returns, wages and salary are reported gross - with NO deductions.


Fair enough. If that’s what keeps them happy. Though as far as I can see it doesn’t make any real-world difference given that no tax is due.


----------



## Bevdeforges

underation said:


> Fair enough. If that’s what keeps them happy. Though as far as I can see it doesn’t make any real-world difference given that no tax is due.


If you're going to file, then the name of the game is to keep them happy whilst "proving" that you don't owe them a cent.


----------



## underation

Yes. One big pointless paperchase.

But easily avoidable, fortunately, for those with no US income, ambitions, desires or expectations — renounce, or just don’t file. 

No need to waste time keeping the IRS happy.


----------



## Bevdeforges

underation said:


> But easily avoidable, fortunately, for those with no US income, ambitions, desires or expectations — renounce, or just don’t file.


I would drop the term "easily" - there are considerations and ramifications to renouncing that each individual needs to take into account before making such an expensive ($2350) decision. It's not a "cure-all."


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> I would drop the term "easily" - there are considerations and ramifications to renouncing that each individual needs to take into account before making such an expensive ($2350) decision. It's not a "cure-all."


The main consideration, if an individual has none of those US ties I mentioned, and doesn’t care about the citizenship, may indeed be the price.

Renouncing is expensive, but it’s good value; and it gets you the status of being fully a Brit or Canadian or Australian or whatever. 

Some want that, some don’t. Those who don’t, can keep the citizenship and not file US tax returns.


----------



## Bevdeforges

underation said:


> The main consideration, if an individual has none of those US ties I mentioned, and doesn’t care about the citizenship, may indeed be the price.
> 
> Renouncing is expensive, but it’s good value; and it gets you the status of being fully a Brit or Canadian or Australian or whatever.
> 
> Some want that, some don’t. Those who don’t, can keep the citizenship and not file US tax returns.


Ties back to the US are a big part of the consideration - but not the only factors to take into account. You do need to have another nationality before you can renounce (and that takes time), plus possibilities in terms of friends and family, plus where you might wind up living (or wanting to live) in the future.

As the old saying goes, "renounce in haste, repent at your leisure."


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> Ties back to the US are a big part of the consideration - but not the only factors to take into account. You do need to have another nationality before you can renounce (and that takes time), plus possibilities in terms of friends and family, plus where you might wind up living (or wanting to live) in the future.


Obviously. Just as there are various considerations to most decisions costing $2K+. People know their own situation, and whether they want America to be part of their life or not. 



> As the old saying goes, "renounce in haste, repent at your leisure."


There don’t actually seem to be any online groups of repenting former US citizens.


----------



## Nononymous

underation said:


> Some want that, some don’t. Those who don’t, can keep the citizenship and not file US tax returns.


One may also keep the US citizenship and not file US tax returns. 

Easy to do in circumstances where a CLN is not needed to avoid FATCA problems (i.e. Canada, where banks rely on self-certification rather than checking for place of birth).

Benefits are that one saves money and the IRS is not alerted to one's departure (not that it currently matters) and one still has the possible future use of a US passport if needed. Downside is that one day in the future, non-compliance may become riskier or banks may become more strict about FATCA enforcement.


----------



## Nononymous

The above comment was made without sufficient coffee being consumed to see the original comment as "keep the citizenship and not file" rather than "keep the citizenship and file" so contradicts nothing. Keep or delete as long as it's clear I wasn't disagreeing with the statement I failed to read.


----------



## Bevdeforges

Nononymous said:


> Downside is that one day in the future, non-compliance may become riskier or banks may become more strict about FATCA enforcement.


That has pretty much always been one of the Great Unknowns. Of course on a personal level, you never know where you may wind up come retirement time or who you may wind up falling in love with and eventually marrying, or where your career may take you etc, etc. which may change those travel plans. 

It also may involve a change in status for the IRS, whereby they could come into more funding and more influence to better enforce the existing laws. Or Congress might someday get its act together and change the freaking laws to be more reasonable....

All I'm saying is that, until you're reasonably certain of your future plans, you want to leave your options open if you can.


----------



## underation

Nononymous said:


> One may also keep the US citizenship and not file US tax returns.


Yes. As I said. 

That’s the obvious, no-cost, straightforward course for US expats with only residence-country income (who thus have no need of the tax treaty, or the totalisation treaty, etc).

It does mean signing a W9 for banks, and accepting that your accounts will be reported to the national tax agency (HMRC, in the OP’s case) and on to the IRS. Who will never have occasion to be interested in them, as no wrongdoing has been committed.

If you don’t want to put up with the reporting, renunciation is the go-to solution.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> ...a change in status for the IRS, whereby they could come into more funding and more influence to better enforce the existing laws.


The obvious way to oblige US expats to report or renounce, would be revoking the passport. Whether that would ever come to pass, or would survive a challenge in court, who knows.

If it did come to pass, then at that point, the expat could then decide whether to start filing or renounce.


----------



## Nononymous

underation said:


> It does mean signing a W9 for banks, and accepting that your accounts will be reported to the national tax agency (HMRC, in the OP’s case) and on to the IRS.


Except in countries like Canada where banks only rely on self-certification to determine US person status, one is free to self-certify as not being a US person, thus avoiding W9s and FATCA reporting and all the rest.


----------



## underation

Nononymous said:


> Except in countries like Canada where banks only rely on self-certification to determine US person status, one is free to self-certify as not being a US person, thus avoiding W9s and FATCA reporting and all the rest.


That would definitely be against the law in the OP’s country of residence.


----------



## Nononymous

underation said:


> That would definitely be against the law in the OP’s country of residence.


Indeed. As it is in mine. But running stop signs on a bicycle is also against the law, as are many other common activities, and yet somehow we all manage to stay out of jail.


----------



## underation

Nononymous said:


> Indeed. As it is in mine. But running stop signs on a bicycle is also against the law, as are many other common activities, and yet somehow we all manage to stay out of jail.


You mean, it’s ok to break the law as long as you don’t get caught.


----------



## Nononymous

underation said:


> You mean, it’s ok to break the law as long as you don’t get caught.


Absolutely. That's the entire premise of non-compliance as a US tax strategy.


----------



## Nononymous

PS Important distinction between "caught" and "punished" - the former isn't a concern when the latter is not possible.

PPS One must of course distinguish between breaking US law and breaking domestic law in your country of residence. Failing to disclose US person status to your bank *may* be a violation of domestic law, but it may also be a violation with few consequences if discovered.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> If you're going to file, then the name of the game is to keep them happy whilst "proving" that you don't owe them a cent.


I would say that the name of any game worth the playing is to preserve one’s status as a law-abiding member of the society one lives in, by documenting for one’s own self-protection the fact that one has complied with tax requirements in both countries of tax-residency.


----------



## underation

underation said:


> I would say that the name of any game worth the playing is to preserve one’s status as a law-abiding member of the society one lives in, by documenting for one’s own self-protection the fact that one has complied with tax requirements in both countries of tax-residency.


In the OP’s case, of course, there’s no need to go to such lengths to document the fact that no US income tax is owed, assuming there’s no income except UK income which has been properly reported to HMRC.

The advantage of filing a US return in addition to filing the UK return, is getting US SS credit for the year’s work; which is why the HMRC letter is required: to confirm to the IRS that the OP is exempt from US SS tax on her earnings, and therefore the year’s work can be credited to her US SS account by the SSA.

If the OP doesn’t want or need the US SS credit, filing the US return isn’t necessary. (A fact which ought to be bleedin’ obvious, considering there’s plenty of us UK-resident UK-US duals or former duals who’ve spent our entire working lives in the UK without ever filing a US tax return.)

No harm in it though. And the credit may come in handy some day.


----------



## underation

underation said:


> In the OP’s case, of course, there’s no need to go to such lengths to document the fact that no US income tax is owed, assuming there’s no income except UK income which has been properly reported to HMRC.
> 
> The advantage of filing a US return in addition to filing the UK return, is getting US SS credit for the year’s work; which is why the HMRC letter is required: to confirm to the IRS that the OP is exempt from US SS tax on her earnings, and therefore the year’s work can be credited to her US SS account by the SSA.
> 
> If the OP doesn’t want or need the US SS credit, filing the US return isn’t necessary. (A fact which ought to be bleedin’ obvious, considering there’s plenty of us UK-resident UK-US duals or former duals who’ve spent our entire working lives in the UK without ever filing a US tax return.)
> 
> No harm in it though. And the credit may come in handy some day.


Whereas Boris Johnson, a UK-resident former US-UK dual who did have US income (from book sales and public appearances in the US), really would have needed to file US tax returns, and no doubt did (or rather, no doubt, his accountant did).

Consequently, when he sold his London house, his US tax return stopped generating a refund and instead generated a bill for US tax due on the gain from the sale of his London home. 

Swings and roundabouts. You win some, you lose some.


----------



## Bevdeforges

> The advantage of filing a US return in addition to filing the UK return, is getting US SS credit for the year’s work; which is why the HMRC letter is required: to confirm to the IRS that the OP is exempt from US SS tax on her earnings, and therefore the year’s work can be credited to her US SS account by the SSA.


Again, your interpretation of the tax law and treaties is "interesting" to say the least. You are not supposed to be able to get yourself covered in both systems. The point of the HMRC letter is to "prove" that the OP is NOT subject to US "self employment" tax (which is actually both halves of US SS contribution). The US system does not allow one to optionally buy additional quarters of cover.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> Again, your interpretation of the tax law and treaties is "interesting" to say the least. You are not supposed to be able to get yourself covered in both systems. The point of the HMRC letter is to "prove" that the OP is NOT subject to US "self employment" tax (which is actually both halves of US SS contribution). The US system does not allow one to optionally buy additional quarters of cover.


From the SSA website:



> To qualify for benefits under the U.S. Social Security program, a worker must have earned enough work credits, called quarters of coverage, to meet specified "insured status requirements." For example, a worker who attains age 62 in 1991 or later generally needs 40 calendar quarters of coverage to be insured for retirement benefits. Under a Totalization agreement, if a worker has some U.S. coverage but not enough to qualify for benefits, SSA will count periods of coverage that the worker has earned under the Social Security program of an agreement country.


https://www.ssa.gov/international/agreements_overview.html

But I’d forgotten that credits get allowed, if needed, regardless of whether the individual filed US tax returns.

So, I agree, the only reason for filing a US tax return is if the OP wants to document with the IRS the fact that she doesn’t owe US income tax or self-employment tax.


----------



## underation

For a UK resident US citizen or former US citizen, there’s a downside to claiming a small US SS pension, especially if it’s the only US income: HMRC will require you to start filing Self Assessment returns every year, so that you can report the SS pension and pay tax on it at your top rate.

So it may not be worth the trouble.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> ..your interpretation of the tax law and treaties is "interesting" to say the least.


Interesting, I agree. Mostly just common sense (why would the IRS want to waste time processing zero-due returns?); experience (50-odd years of never filing US tax returns), and observation (in particular, the observation that, just as in my citizen days, nothing happens to expats who don’t file US tax returns).

(This bit’s my interpretation): *US expats with no US income don’t need to file US tax returns if they don’t want to. The outcome is exactly the same whether they do or they don’t.*

That being said, there’s no harm in it, if it makes people feel better. We all have our comfort rituals. 

Also I’ve wondered from time to time if maybe filing US tax returns hasn’t become a kind of bonding thing for US-oriented expats. Like British expats to Mediterranean countries — doggedly passing up the gorgeous local food to dine on fish and chips. A marker of identity.

Interesting.


----------



## Nononymous

underation said:


> Like British expats to Mediterranean countries — doggedly passing up the gorgeous local food to dine on fish and chips. A marker of identity.


Or living on the Costa del Sol and voting Leave!


----------



## shony

It is my understanding that if you do not pay SS and Medicare tax from self employment income because of totalisation agreement then you do not earn any credits in US Social Security sistem. 
You will have to print your tax forms and mail them because you do not attach schedule SE plus you have to adjust schedule 4. Line 57 has to have a note saying EXEMPT, SEE ATTACHED STATEMENT. You will include the statement that you received from appropriate agency of your residence country saying that your income is subject to social security coverage of that country.


----------



## underation

shony said:


> It is my understanding that if you do not pay SS and Medicare tax from self employment income because of totalisation agreement then you do not earn any credits in US Social Security sistem.


Not if you’re working and paying social security taxes in a country that has a totalisation treaty with the US - such as the UK. See the SSA link I posted upthread. The SSA gets confirmation from the UK that you worked and paid National Insurance in the UK, and uses years from your UK working life to make up the minimum needed to be eligible for a US SSA pension.

But I agree that if you do file a US tax return, you have to include proof of working and paying NI with your return, as you say, to prove exemption to the IRS.

The SBU people at the London Embassy were very helpful when I applied for my totalisation benefit. The fact that I never filed US tax returns wasn’t an issue at all; it wasn’t asked about.


----------



## shony

You report GROSS self employment income in a form 2555. That is very important. Then you do not need to disclose expenses in schedule C (I would not) since it does not matter if you did not reach the maximum foreign earned income exclusion.


----------



## shony

underation,
You probably right. I do not know anything about UK. But simple common sence gives me an idea that you do not pay you do not play. You cannot receive benefits from two countries if you paid to one only. Totalisation agreement gives you the rights to pay to your residence country only. I am Russian. If I start self employment business in Russia I will pay taxes to both countries. It is the only difference between rulles for countries that are in agreement and not.


----------



## underation

shony said:


> underation,
> You probably right. I do not know anything about UK. But simple common sence gives me an idea that you do not pay you do not play. You cannot receive benefits from two countries if you paid to one only.


It’s confusing, I know. I don’t get double benefits for all the years I worked in one country or the other; I get a _very small_ pension from the US, and a considerably larger pension from the UK where I spent most of my working life.

I worked for about 2.5 years in the US before I emigrated to the UK. Without the totalisation treaty I wouldn’t have been eligible for a US SS pension; the money I paid into the system would have been lost. Under the treaty, I still don’t qualify for a regular SS pension benefit, but I do qualify for a (very small) totalisation benefit.



> Totalisation agreement gives you the rights to pay to your residence country only.


Some countries (the UK, for one) let you pay voluntary contributions, some don’t. It’s nothing to do with the totalisation treaty.



> I am Russian. If I start self employment business in Russia I will pay taxes to both countries. It is the only difference between rulles for countries that are in agreement and not.


I don’t know. The US-UK totalisation made a difference in my case. Before it was signed, I wasn’t eligible for a US SS pension; after it was signed, I was - though unfortunately I didn’t claim for many years because I didn’t know such a treaty had been signed.


----------



## Moulard

I can't speak for all totalisation agreements, but typically there are still minimum contribution requirements. If you In the case of the Aus Agreement it is 6 quarters rather than the standard 40. I think 6 is the default.

The other thing is that many of the totalisation agreements exclude the US Medicare component, which can be problematic if you choose to return to the US in your dotage.


----------



## shony

underation said:


> It’s confusing, I know. I don’t get double benefits for all the years I worked in one country or the other; I get a _very small_ pension from the US, and a considerably larger pension from the UK where I spent most of my working life.


Thanks for sharing. I will read through UK-US agreement. One day. I am still in US and busy working. But I am planning to move back. I will need all kind of information then.


----------



## underation

Moulard said:


> I can't speak for all totalisation agreements, but typically there are still minimum contribution requirements. If you In the case of the Aus Agreement it is 6 quarters rather than the standard 40. I think 6 is the default.


Yes, that sounds about right.



> The other thing is that many of the totalisation agreements exclude the US Medicare component, which can be problematic if you choose to return to the US in your dotage.


Correct - the US-UK totalisation treaty doesn’t make any difference to your entitlement (or lack of entitlement) to Medicare. (And nor would filing US tax returns to document exemption from US SS taxes.)


----------



## underation

shony said:


> Thanks for sharing. I will read through UK-US agreement. One day. I am still in US and busy working. But I am planning to move back. I will need all kind of information then.


You should be entitled to a US SS pension if you work for at least ten years in the US; but if you will also receive a social-security type of pension for work performed in Russia, be aware that your US SS pension may be reduced because of the US Windfall Elimination Provision. There’s a calculator on the SSA website which will estimate the effect of WEP on the eventual SS pension.


----------



## underation

underation said:


> You should be entitled to a US SS pension if you work for at least ten years in the US;


Though you may have to be a US citizen, and keep being a US citizen, to receive US SS in Russia. I seem to recall the US only keeps paying SS pension to NRAs if they’re living in a country with a totalisation treaty. Worth checking.


----------



## shony

underation said:


> You should be entitled to a US SS pension if you work for at least ten years in the US; but if you will also receive a social-security type of pension for work performed in Russia, be aware that your US SS pension may be reduced because of the US Windfall Elimination Provision. There’s a calculator on the SSA website which will estimate the effect of WEP on the eventual SS pension.


I know all of that. Pension in Russia is very small ($200). Nobody even bother reducing anything.  I mean I need the knowledge because of what I am planning to do in Russia. If I decide to work there. I probably do not need to.


underation said:


> Though you may have to be a US citizen, and keep being a US citizen, to receive US SS in Russia. I seem to recall the US only keeps paying SS pension to NRAs if they’re living in a country with a totalisation treaty. Worth checking.


Yes, you are right. But it's always a possibility to get your money. For example, to keep an account in american bank. But it is all in far way future.


----------



## Bevdeforges

https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10137.pdf

The terms and conditions for receiving US SS benefits while resident outside the US are kind of complicated.


----------



## underation

Bevdeforges said:


> https://www.ssa.gov/pubs/EN-05-10137.pdf
> 
> The terms and conditions for receiving US SS benefits while resident outside the US are kind of complicated.


Complicated to administer, indeed.

Fortunately not very complicated for an individual SSA claimant who only wants to know about the rules in the country they’re living in, or intend to be living in. The nearest Federal Benefits Unit can help, or there’s a “tool” on the SSA website.

https://www.ssa.gov/international/payments_outsideUS.html


----------

