# Citizenship-based taxation: live stream event



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

A web debate as to the vices and virtues of CBT versus RBT.

See https://www.taxconnections.com/livestream for details.

The pro-CBT speaker has posted his arguments at https://www.taxconnections.com/taxb...s-an-administrable-proxy-for-domicile-part-1/

The pro-RBT speaker has a website at Richardson Global – Citizenship Counselling For U.S. Citizens in Canada and Abroad

(Posting this in case anyone is interested; I'm not involved.)


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

The pro-CBT speaker says:

"The United States’ worldwide taxation of its citizens is less different from international, residence-based norms than is widely believed and is sensible as a matter of tax policy. An individual’s citizenship is an administrable, if sometimes overly broad, proxy for his domicile, his permanent home. Both citizenship and domicile measure an individual’s permanent allegiance rather than his immediate physical presence. Because citizenship and domicile resemble each other, and because other nations often define residence for tax purposes as domicile, the U.S. system of citizenship-based taxation typically reaches the same results as the residence-based systems of these other nations, but reaches these results more efficiently by avoiding factually complex inquiries about domicile."

Comments are invited. 

I commented as follows:

"The US treats birthplace as a proxy for citizenship and then uses citizenship as a proxy for domicile. And then charges $2350 to allow a US-born individual to renounce the unwanted citizenship thus imposed."

However, my comment hasn't appeared. I don't know whether the non-appearance is because of a technical glitch or for some other reason. As no comments at all have appeared, it may well be due to a glitch. Or maybe no one's interested.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

Still no comments. Perhaps the "debate" is actually just a turf war between the two tax advisers, each trying to attract new clients.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

underation said:


> Still no comments. Perhaps the "debate" is actually just a turf war between the two tax advisers, each trying to attract new clients.


Basically, that's right. This CBT has been going on a LONG time and despite the best efforts of the US expat groups (AARO and American Citizens Abroad) there is little or no interest back in the Old Country of making any changes. Every few years, someone in Congress proposes doing away with section 911 - the one that gives us the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion - and throws the whole working expat community into a frenzy. So far they haven't managed to do anything to section 911 - but when they do, you're going to find lots more folks reverting to "selected compliance" or even non-compliance.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

I can see why compliant US expats in low-tax locations would want to keep the FEIE, but wouldn't those in high-tax locations be able to claim foreign tax credits instead?

Is the FEIE not one of the nails that keeps CBT in place?

From my point of view (that of a US-born immigrant who really really resents FATCA and the IGAs), the problem is the imposition of US tax-residence on people who don't in fact live in America. (That's why I was hoping the question of phony domicile would be thrashed out in this debate. But that now seems unlikely.)


----------



## Nononymous (Jul 12, 2011)

underation said:


> Still no comments. Perhaps the "debate" is actually just a turf war between the two tax advisers, each trying to attract new clients.


Neither are tax advisers. 

Zelinsky (pro-CBT) is a law professor in the US. 

John Richardson (anti-CBT) is a citizenship lawyer in Canada, originally American. Richardson is one of the good guys, he's been involved in the campaign against FATCA for quite a few years, may have some role in the lawsuit attempting to strike down the Canadian IGA.

No idea what to expect from this debate, but it could be interesting. 

PS It can take hours or days (on a weekend) for comments to appear on those Tax Connections articles.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

underation said:


> I can see why compliant US expats in low-tax locations would want to keep the FEIE, but wouldn't those in high-tax locations be able to claim foreign tax credits instead?


FEIE vs FTC can depend on so many factors. And there have been all sorts of position papers, surveys, lobbying efforts and who knows what else, with basically no change in the US position on all this. 

One does what one has to based on one's actual sources of income and perceived risks.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

Nononymous said:


> Neither are tax advisers.
> 
> Zelinsky (pro-CBT) is a law professor in the US.


Oh yes, so he is. I see his five-part justification of CBT is already available on ssrn. Not enough downloads, I suppose.



> John Richardson (anti-CBT) is a citizenship lawyer in Canada, originally American.


And a tax advisor, according to his website:



> Citizenship Counselling For U.S. Citizens in Canada and Abroad
> Life planning, investment solutions, citizenship and Green Card expatriation, U.S. tax assistance and citizenship solutions


I'm not saying either of them is not a good guy. But I don't now think this debate will have any impact on CBT or FATCA.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

Mr Zelinsky's views in praise of citizenship taxation have also appeared in the paywalled publication Law360. 

A rebuttal by an ACA official has also appeared in Law360 and is reproduced on the ACA website.
https://static1.squarespace.com/sta...sproportionately+Burdens+Americans+Abroad.pdf


----------

