Revocation/Denial of Passport For Americans With Seriously Delinquent Tax Debt

[Wake Up]

1 hour ago, Jaybott said:

You can always renounce your citizenship of your opressive country then you'll never have to pay taxes again.

100 percent wrong. Once you owe taxes you cannot get rid of your tax debt by denouncing citizenship. 

[jenny2017]

28 minutes ago, Thaidream said:

When the Us Constitution was written- people did not normally travel internationally- but in today's World it is a standard and normal thing.  It is the concept that is important- do people have a right to travel?  Travel means anywhere- domestic and international.  People have a right to due process. Simply because the IRS says you owe $51,000 does not make it so. A Taxpayer has the right of appeal and then court. Then they have the right to obtain an installment agreement with the IRS if they lose the appeal.  There is no need to restrict a person's travel rights.  It is oppressive. 

I'm wondering when they take Trump's passport away...

[jenny2017]

2 minutes ago, Wake Up said:

100 percent wrong. Once you owe taxes you cannot get rid of your tax debt by denouncing citizenship. 

Asylum in Germany?

[Wake Up]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

Freedom of movement is central to the rights of a citizen of any country. To enable such a right means a Passport and possibly a Visa is essential.  For a country like the US to restrict movement by witholding a Passport for alleged payment of taxes is tantamount to a violation of the US Constitution and the Universal Declaration of rights.

 

A person has a right to due process- just because the Us Government says a person owes $51000 in taxes doesn't mean it is correct. The taxpayer has a right to challenge and present evidence.  The way the law is written- it appears that the mere request of payment of $51,000 allows the state  Department to deny a Passport.  In my opinion-a court would invalidate the law, but  it is going to probably have to go to the Us Supreme Court.

 

Congress attaching this amendment to a Transportation  Authorization Bill and causing this conundrum is a perfect example of how easily one can lose a right  without the electorate even being able to provide an opinion on what is happening. Most Americans do not even realize this is happening and it smacks directly at our Constitutional  rights.

The interesting thing is that this bill was passed by a Democratic Congress and sponsored by a Democratic senator.

You don’t owe the back due taxes until it has already been adjudicated that you do or you forfeited your right to protest the taxed amount. Many debtors try to act like constitutional experts when they are not. Lots of excuses to not pay your bills from people who don’t want to pay their bills. 

[caughtintheact]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

When the Us Constitution was written- people did not normally travel internationally- but in today's World it is a standard and normal thing.  It is the concept that is important- do people have a right to travel?  Travel means anywhere- domestic and international.  People have a right to due process. Simply because the IRS says you owe $51,000 does not make it so. A Taxpayer has the right of appeal and then court. Then they have the right to obtain an installment agreement with the IRS if they lose the appeal.  There is no need to restrict a person's travel rights.  It is oppressive.  

2

If you have a credible source for saying that the constitution allows the right to international travel, I would like to know what it is. From my searches, the constitutional right to travel for Americans means only within the United States, not to other countries.  The USA can give permission to travel to other countries, i.e., a passport, but it cannot force other countries to let you in.  And since governments issue passports, they can also deny passports to people who break the law, and not paying taxes is breaking the law. At this site are some of the reasons for passport denial: https://fastportpassport.com/blog/reasons-passport-denied

 

[JerseytoBKK]

1 hour ago, Thaidream said:

When the Us Constitution was written- people did not normally travel internationally- but in today's World it is a standard and normal thing.  It is the concept that is important- do people have a right to travel?  Travel means anywhere- domestic and international.  People have a right to due process. Simply because the IRS says you owe $51,000 does not make it so. A Taxpayer has the right of appeal and then court. Then they have the right to obtain an installment agreement with the IRS if they lose the appeal.  There is no need to restrict a person's travel rights.  It is oppressive. 

Approximately 36% hold passports. The number that use them in any given year is around 10%.

 

While you think there should be a constitutional right to travel anywhere, it doesn't exist.

[JTXR]

2 hours ago, Thaidream said:

For a country like the US to restrict movement by witholding a Passport for alleged payment of taxes is tantamount to a violation of the US Constitution and the Universal Declaration of rights.

Any government has the right to deny a passport to a citizen for pretty much any reason its legislature passes a law on. 

If you are a U.S. citizen, you should open your passport to page 5 and see who it belongs to.  It is not your property; it is the property of the U.S. government.  And it has to be surrendered upon demand of an authorized official of the U.S. government.  Become seriously delinquent in paying a large amount of tax due, they're sure to want their property back. 

[Mansell]

Some people on here have made the point that it's possible to get into the IRS's clutches by a simple tax mistake. If you place a tax question with the IRS and nine so called tax experts, you will get ten different answers.....and if the IRS deems them wrong it is now your problem. I had my taxes done once by an English newbie to America. He took double deductions because he didn't know the system, but fortunately the mistake wasn't picked up by you know who. Later he was hired by the Police group when they were breaking up to travel the world collecting all their monies......he is now worth huge money as an international account.

[geriatrickid]

18 hours ago, Tom89 said:

It's oppressive to be made to pay taxes to a country where one no longer lives nor earns income. Only one other country in the world taxes its people based on citizenship rather than residency, Eritrea.

Then give up the benefits that attach to being the passport holder. Renounce your citizenship. Going forward there will be no  tax obligation.

 

17 hours ago, possum1931 said:

If people are getting made to pay taxes that are unjust and unfair, then it is oppressive, no matter what country it is.

I am sure many people object to paying taxes to support your benefits. Others object to supporting morbidly obese slobs on benefits and others object to subsidizing school lunches or providing medicare to the elderly. Unjust and unfair is usually based upon personal perspective.

 

13 hours ago, Wake Up said:

100 percent wrong. Once you owe taxes you cannot get rid of your tax debt by denouncing citizenship. 

That is not what was written. it was clear that the intent was to address events going forward.

[davidst01]

Ive said it before. Thankgod Im not american

[caughtintheact]

34 minutes ago, davidst01 said:

Ive said it before. Thankgod Im not american

Have no fear. We Americans also thank God you are not.

[Tom89]

22 hours ago, Jaybott said:

You can always renounce your citizenship of your opressive country then you'll never have to pay taxes again.

I would like nothing more, but easier said than done.

[Tom89]

21 hours ago, GalaxyMan said:

That is incorrect. Both Holland and Portugal tax word-wide earnings...if they know about them. I say this from personal experience.

Correct they tax world wide income if you live there. But if you are not a resident of either country do they still tax you? For example if you have lived in Thailand for 10 years abd pay Thai  income taxes. Do you still have to file in Holland and Portugal?

[Monomial]

23 hours ago, Jaybott said:

You can always renounce your citizenship of your opressive country then you'll never have to pay taxes again.

 

You can only do so if:

 

1. You already have citizenship of another country. You will not be allowed to renounce and make yourself stateless

2. You pay the $2400 fee.

 

Very few people actually have the money or qualify to renounce citizenship.

 

[Monomial]

8 hours ago, geriatrickid said:

Then give up the benefits that attach to being the passport holder. Renounce your citizenship. Going forward there will be no  tax obligation. 

 

 

As said previously, very few people are wealthy enough and/or lucky enough to qualify for that option.

 

[Thaidream]

ustice William O. Douglas, held that the federal government may not restrict the right to travel without due process:

The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.

 

The above can be found within the archives of the US Supreme Court and thus validates my argument that freedom of travel- anywhere in the World- is a right under the US Constitution.

 

My argument  is not that we should avoid tax payment but that the assessment of that tax is fair and just.   

 

The fact is that the US tax code is over 75,000 pages in length and so complicated that most Americans cannot file their own taxes without a compter guideline or an accountant or lawyer.  Mistakes are bound to be made due to interpretation of the law- credits and deductions are sometimes denied by the IRS but not until a few year later when a person has filed subsequent years.

 

The layers of response to the IRS, appeal and court action is so complicated and burdensome that a lawyer is necessary.  For example, if a person gets a $25,000 tax bill by the time they go through all the steps of appeal and court- years can pass and the penalties and interest add another $25K to the bill.  Now the tax payer is faced with payment and has to seek assistance with the payment and risks losing his right of abode through passport revocation.

 

For the US Government to Use revocation of a Passport for those who reside overseas is oppressive- it destroys lives because a Passport is necessary for a person to remain overseas and renew a Visa/Permission to stay. If a person is then forced back to the US how does this help the US collect taxes owed when the person has no home.   A silly new law- not thought out by the US Congress and passed in the middle of the night without any input from US citizens.

 

If you support this- you are making a huge mistake.  It doesn't affect me personally  but it will at some point cause havoc for some people who don't deserve to lose their lives over a debt.

[Rhys]

...a twist on the question, thus if you make below the required amounts and just don't file an IRS or FBAR, are the same types of sanctions applied when renewing a US Passport.

[Thaidream]

5 minutes ago, Rhys said:

...a twist on the question, thus if you make below the required amounts and just don't file an IRS or FBAR, are the same types of sanctions applied when renewing a US Passport.

NO, Only if you owe $51,000 to the IRS. They would have had to assessed the tax. They then send you a letter indicating same and if you owe the $51,000 and then don't pay it or ignore the notice- they then send a notice to the Department of State.  It is then up to the Department of State whether to deny the Passport or not.

[JimGant]

Quote

Correct they tax world wide income if you live there. But if you are not a resident of either country do they still tax you? For example if you have lived in Thailand for 10 years abd pay Thai  income taxes. Do you still have to file in Holland and Portugal?

The world's changing. OECD, of late, has been looking at dual taxation treaties, with the emphasis to do away with the "dual non taxation" avenue that had been inadvertently allowing no taxation, when one party to the treaty didn't exercise its right to exclusive taxation -- and the other party had no fall-back recourse. Such a situation never existed, however, for the US because of its "saving clause." This clause is the 'gotcha' for US citizens that, in spite of treaty language, allows the US to tax its citizens on all worldwide income. Dual taxation issues are avoided via the tax credit route.

 

http://download.rd.go.th/fileadmin/download/nation/Norwegian_answer.pdf

 

The above link shows something similar with Norway, which acknowledges that the treaty gives Thailand taxation rights on pension income, but also that Norwegian expats have to file a Norwegian tax return. But to get a tax credit for Thai taxes paid, they must present a Thai tax return showing the taxes paid. It all results in what Yanks go thru with their requirement to file a US tax return, with credit for taxes paid to Thailand. Thus, the sun is setting on the world of tax havens.

 

Further related info at this site, beginning with article 124:

https://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/1027274-youre-deemed-a-resident-of-thailand-if-you-stay-180-days/?page=9

 

[Wake Up]

6 hours ago, Thaidream said:

ustice William O. Douglas, held that the federal government may not restrict the right to travel without due process:

The right to travel is a part of the 'liberty' of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment. If that "liberty" is to be regulated, it must be pursuant to the law-making functions of the Congress. . . . . Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.

 

The above can be found within the archives of the US Supreme Court and thus validates my argument that freedom of travel- anywhere in the World- is a right under the US Constitution.

 

My argument  is not that we should avoid tax payment but that the assessment of that tax is fair and just.   

 

The fact is that the US tax code is over 75,000 pages in length and so complicated that most Americans cannot file their own taxes without a compter guideline or an accountant or lawyer.  Mistakes are bound to be made due to interpretation of the law- credits and deductions are sometimes denied by the IRS but not until a few year later when a person has filed subsequent years.

 

The layers of response to the IRS, appeal and court action is so complicated and burdensome that a lawyer is necessary.  For example, if a person gets a $25,000 tax bill by the time they go through all the steps of appeal and court- years can pass and the penalties and interest add another $25K to the bill.  Now the tax payer is faced with payment and has to seek assistance with the payment and risks losing his right of abode through passport revocation.

 

For the US Government to Use revocation of a Passport for those who reside overseas is oppressive- it destroys lives because a Passport is necessary for a person to remain overseas and renew a Visa/Permission to stay. If a person is then forced back to the US how does this help the US collect taxes owed when the person has no home.   A silly new law- not thought out by the US Congress and passed in the middle of the night without any input from US citizens.

 

If you support this- you are making a huge mistake.  It doesn't affect me personally  but it will at some point cause havoc for some people who don't deserve to lose their lives over a debt.

He was clearly referring to travel within the United States not worldwide. That is why you can drive through Alabama with a Texas license without an Alabama license. If you don’t have a drivers license because that is not a constitutional right but a privilege you can walk or take a bus.  Called interstate commerce that Justice Douglas was protecting. We have federal rights that states cannot obstruct. Has nothing to do with passports or international travel or visas. 

 

You also have the right to vote but that right is taken away when you commit a felony. Criminals and people who hate to pay always have these unfounded constitutional arguments. Sounds good but you don’t know what you are talking about as you never studied the law and you have taken words out of context. Not a slam on you but a lot of “Street constitution experts” are in the jail house or simply looking to avoid responsibility for their actions or inaction or buying information from some groups that support not paying taxes.  You don’t have a constitutional right to a passport or drivers license or to not pay taxes or whatever other freebird idea people like to make up. 

[Thaidream]

No, I am not a lawyer but I have studied the law regarding the IRS and what it can and can't do and I know exactly how they operate.In  My simple mind- I see Justice Douglas' words as I quoted indicating that in this modern World- a right to travel does include international travel.  there are about 9 million Americans residing permanently overseas.

Undoubtedly the IRS issue will , if used to the full extent. will result in a court case and ten we will see if the Supreme Court agrees  with Justice Douglas.  The beauty of the American Constitution is that the writers meant what they said-   per Justice Douglas- Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.

One cannot travel abroad without a Passport-therefore a Passport is a right.  However, I would agree that the US Congress can provide guidance on who can be refused a Passport- conviction of a criminal act- is one reason and if the IRS assess taxes and one refuses to pay that is a criminal act.   However , I would plead the 99.9% of all in arrears taxpayers are not tax resisters.

 

What I object to is the the whole IRS system of  letting one know they maybe in arrears of taxes. The penalties and interest add up quickly and a person who resides overseas and has his whole life there should not have a Passport revoked . over a tax issue  To me, this is considered over reach- a potential life sentence. These people are not tax resisters- they are Americans residing overseas- who may have made an error in credits or deductions or possibly a business issue.

 

It doesn't affect me personally but I am appalled  that the US Congress would add something such as this , which has such a life changing penalty, as a rider on a Transportation Bill.    This is not Government of the people and for the people but a symptom of a Nation State that seeks unreasonable retribution.

 

 

[JimGant]

Quote

Why only the first 100 K? Why not all of it, if the money wasn't earned in the US?

Yeah, why not 500K? For the highly trained US technician, earning 500k in a tax free country somewhere in the Middle East, a foreign income exclusion of 500k would be worth a 6 figure chunk of tax-savings change in his jeans. Change that otherwise would have gone into the US Treasury, to help pay for the EU share of NATO. So, why a tax incentive to have our best workers go abroad? Just write the contract to pay extra, to cover the US taxes that will be due. Same amount of money in his pocket, but Kuwait (or whoever) makes up for the gouge to US taxpayers.

 

No, I've never understood the FEIE. If you want to protect the US worker from double taxation, just use tax credits. And, actually, where your foreign income has a greater foreign tax than the US tax, the tax credit route is superior, allowing backward and forward carries of surplus credit. Plus, if you elect the FEIE over a tax credit (you can't use both), you lose out past 102k (per the 2017 FEIE cap).

[JimGant]

Quote

Freedom of movement across frontiers in either direction, and inside frontiers as well, was a part of our heritage. Travel abroad, like travel within the country, . . . may be as close to the heart of the individual as the choice of what he eats, or wears, or reads. Freedom of movement is basic in our scheme of values.

Unless you're a tax cheat. I think the exceptions listed on page one of this thread exempt everyone who is behind in his taxes from losing his passport -- except for the tax evading crook. No sense losing sleep over his lack of travel plans.

[GinBoy2]

So back to the actual topic....

I 'was' a my working slob, paid my taxes all my life, still do on my paltry retirement income.

So why again do I have to feel some sympathy for someone, who I assume as an American citizen has, and probably will benefit from that said citizenship, hasn't paid their taxes??

We are all American's, we contribute to the system that for better or worse we elect into office, who in turn legislate tax rules,

Don't like it, vote them out.

I can't help myself but be drawn into the fact that so many of the commentators on here seem not to be US citizens, and probably Europeans

You bitch about Amazon, Starbucks et al not paying tax . For God's sake you voted in the morons that let Ireland become a tax shelter!

Get some perspective for Christs sake

[5633572526]

I think this is great news. If you want to be a citizen pay your taxes that’s what I do.

[gk10002000]

On 7/12/2018 at 4:30 AM, Tom89 said:

It's oppressive to be made to pay taxes to a country where one no longer lives nor earns income. Only one other country in the world taxes its people based on citizenship rather than residency, Eritrea.

But the person did owe and does owe back taxes.  Should not be able to easily skip out on past obligations.  Now, going forward, if a person no longer lives in nor earns income in the USA there are minimal taxes that may be due.  Some foreign earned income can be exempt.  Many investments in passive income can be tax free municipal bonds and such.  Yes the IRS considers all USA citizens liable and subject to applicable income taxes anywhere, and for every, but there are many ways to owe little to none.