Want to leave the country? It ain't easy!
 

I'm seriously thinking about leaving America. But there's no luck for me or for any Americans who want to become "stateless".

http://www.harpers.org

Electing to Leave

A reader’s guide to expatriating on November 3

Posted on Wednesday, November 3, 2004. Originally from Harper's Magazine, October 2004. By Bryant Urstadt.
Sources

So the wrong candidate has won, and you want to leave the country. Let us consider your options.

Renouncing your citizenship

Given how much the United States as a nation professes to value freedom, your freedom to opt out of the nation itself is surprisingly limited. The State Department does not record the annual number of Americans renouncing their citizenship—“renunciants,” as they are officially termed—but the Internal Revenue Service publishes their names on a quarterly basis in the Federal Register. The IRS’s interest in the subject is, of course, purely financial; since 1996, the agency has tracked ex-Americans in the hopes of recouping tax revenue, which in some cases may be owed for up to ten years after a person leaves the country. In any event, the number of renunciants is small. In 2002, for example, the Register recorded only 403 departures, of which many (if not most) were merely longtime resident aliens returning home.

The most serious barrier to renouncing your citizenship is that the State Department, which oversees expatriation, is reluctant to allow citizens to go “stateless.” Before allowing expatriation, the department will want you to have obtained citizenship or legal asylum in another country—usually a complicated and expensive process, if it can be done at all. Would-be renunciants must also prove that they do not intend to live in the United States afterward. Furthermore, you cannot renounce inside U.S. borders; the declaration must be made at a consul’s office abroad.

Those who imagine that exile will be easily won would do well to consider the travails of Kenneth Nichols O’Keefe. An ex-Marine who was discharged, according to his website, under “other than honorable conditions,” O’Keefe has tried officially to renounce his citizenship twice without success, first in Vancouver and then in the Netherlands. His initial bid was rejected after the State Department concluded that he would return to the United States—a credible inference, as O’Keefe in fact had returned immediately. After his second attempt,

O’Keefe waited seven months with no response before he tried a more sensational approach. He went back to the consulate at The Hague, retrieved his passport, walked outside, and lit it on fire. Seventeen days later, he received a letter from the State Department informing him that he was still an American, because he had not obtained the right to reside elsewhere. He had succeeded only in breaking the law, since mutilating a passport is illegal. It says so right on the passport.

Heading to Canada or Mexico

In your search for alternate citizenship, you might naturally think first of Canada and Mexico. But despite the generous terms of NAFTA, our neighbors to the north and south are, like us, far more interested in the flow of money than of persons. Canada, in particular, is no longer a paradise awaiting American dissidents: whereas in 1970 roughly 20,000 Americans became permanent residents of Canada, that number has dropped over the last decade to an average of just about 5,000. Today it takes an average of twenty-five months to be accepted as a permanent resident, and this is only the first step in what is likely to be a five-year process of becoming a citizen. At that point the gesture of expatriation may already be moot, particularly if a sympathetic political party has since resumed power.

Mexico’s citizenship program is equally complicated. Seniors should know that the country does offer a lenient program for retirees, who may essentially stay as long as they want. But you will not be able to work or to vote, and, more important, you must remain an American for at least five years.

France

Should one candidate win, those who opposed the Iraq war might hope to find refuge in France, where a very select few are allowed to “assimilate” each year. Assimilation is reserved for persons of non-French descent who are able to prove that they are more French than American, having mastered the language as well as the philosophy of the French way of life. Each case is determined on its own merit, and decisions are made by the Ministère de l’Emploi, du Travail, et de la Cohésion Social. When your name is published in the Journal Officiel de la République Français, you are officially a citizen, and may thereafter heckle the United States with authentic Gallic zeal.

The coalition of the willing

Should the other candidate win, war supporters might naturally look to join the coalition of the willing. But you may find a willing and developing nation as difficult to join as an unwilling and developed one. It takes at least five years to become a citizen of Pakistan, for instance, unless one marries into a family, and each applicant for residency in Pakistan is judged on a case-by-case basis. Uzbekistan imposes a five-year wait as well, with an additional twist: the nation does not recognize dual citizenship, and so you will be required to renounce your U.S. citizenship first. Given Uzbekistan’s standard of living (low), unemployment (high), and human-rights record (poor), this would be something of a leap of faith.

The Caribbean

A more pleasant solution might be found in the Caribbean. Take, for example, the twin-island nation of St. Kitts and Nevis, which Frommer’s guide praises for its “average year-round temperature of 79°F (26°C), low humidity, white-sand beaches, and unspoiled natural beauty.” Citizenship in this paradise can be purchased outright. Prices start at around $125,000, which includes a $25,000 application fee and a minimum purchase of $100,000 in bonds. Processing time, which includes checks for criminal records and HIV, can take up to three months, but with luck you could be renouncing by Inauguration Day. The island of Dominica likewise offers a program of “economic citizenship,” though it should be noted that Frommer’s describes the beaches as “not worth the effort to get there.”

Speed is of the essence, however, because your choice of tropical paradises is fast dwindling: similar passport-vending programs in Belize and Grenada have been shut down since 2001 under pressure from the State Department, which does not approve. In any case, it should be noted that under the aforementioned IRS rules, you might well be forced to continue subsidizing needless invasions—or, to be evenhanded, needless afterschool programs.

Indian reservations

Our Native American reservations, which enjoy freedom from state taxation and law enforcement, might seem an ideal home for the political exile. But becoming a citizen of a reservation is difficult—one must prove that one is a descendant of a member of the original tribal base roll—and moreover would be, as a gesture of political disaffection, largely symbolic. Reservations remain subject to federal law; furthermore, citizens of a reservation hold dual citizenships, and as such are expected to vote in U.S. elections and to live with the results.

The high seas

You might consider moving yourself offshore. At a price of $1.3 million you can purchase an apartment on The World, a residential cruise ship that moves continuously, stopping at ports from Venice to Zanzibar to Palm Beach. Again, however, your expatriation would be only partial: The World flies the flag of the Bahamas, but its homeowners, who hail from all over Europe, Asia, and the United States, retain citizenship in their home nations.

To obtain a similar result more cheaply, you can simply register your own boat under a flag of convenience and float it outside the United States’ 230-mile zone of economic control. There, on your Liberian tanker, you will essentially be an extension of that African nation, subject only to its laws, and may imagine yourself free of oppressive government.

Micronations

The boldest approach is to start a nation of your own. Sadly, these days it is essentially impossible to buy an uninhabited island and declare it a sovereign nation: virtually every rock above the waterline is now under the jurisdiction of one principality or another. But efforts have been made to build nations on man-made structures or on reefs lying just below the waterline. Among the more successful of these is the famous Principality of Sealand, which was founded in 1967 on an abandoned military platform off the coast of Britain. The following year a British judge ruled that the principality lay outside the nation’s territorial waters. New citizenships in Sealand, however, are not being granted or sold at present.

A less fortunate attempt was made in 1972, when Michael Oliver, a Nevada businessman, built an island on a reef 260 miles southwest of Tonga. Hiring a dredger, he piled up sand and mud until he had enough landmass to declare independence for his “Republic of Minerva.” Unfortunately, the Republic of Minerva was soon invaded by a Tongan force, whose number is said to have included a work detail of prisoners, a brass band, and Tonga’s 350-pound king himself. The reef was later officially annexed by the kingdom.

More recently, John J. Prisco III, of the Philippines, has declared himself the prince of the Principality of New Pacific, and announced that he has discovered a suitable atoll in the international waters of the Central Pacific. As of publication, the principality has yet to begin the first phase of construction, but it is already accepting applications for citizenship.

Imaginary nations

Perhaps the most elegant solution is to join a country that exists only in one’s own—or someone else’s—imagination. Many such virtual nations can be found on the Internet, and citizenships in them are easy to acquire. This, in fact, was the route most recently attempted by Kenneth Nichols O’Keefe, the unfortunate ex-Marine. In February 2003,

O’Keefe went to Baghdad to serve as a human shield, traveling with a passport issued to him by the “World Service Authority,” an outfit based in Washington, D.C., that has dubbed more than 1.2 million people “world citizens.” While laying over in Turkey, however, he was detained; Turkey, as it turns out, does not recognize the World Service Authority. O’Keefe was forced to apply for a replacement U.S. passport from the State Department, which rather graciously complied.

Upon his arrival in Baghdad, O’Keefe promptly set the replacement passport on fire. But he remains, to his dismay, an American.

I'm already married. :)

Details, details.

Speaking of which, why not emigrate to your wife in Vietnam. Expanding economy, mild climate, plenty of heroin available. :fumette:

So Radar, you seem well educated in this area. I'm married to a Russian. If we move to Russia, will they let me stay there?

It's fairly easy to leave the US, provided you have enough money to support yourself for the rest of your life... just become an eternal tourist, hopping from country to country.

Getting a skilled immigrant visa in an English speaking country is a bit more difficult but not as bleak as they make it out. Unless you're older or unskilled, anyway; then it's bleak.

It hardly matters if the US fails to recognize your renunciation of citizenship if you don't intend to return to US jurisdiction anyway.

Except if you fail to pay your taxes you become guilty of tax evasion, and most countries have extradition treaties with the US.

I'm quite curious as to what taxes America can levy against a non-citizen living outside American jurisdiction. I'm sure there's something, some vaudeville hook that reaches around the world and pulls "our boys" back into the country, but I'd like to know what.

The question, alphageek, is who determines whether you're a non-citizen or not. Apparently the U.S. can choose to not allow you to renounce your citizenship (which I'd never heard before...) And if they say you're a citizen, they can tax you.

Since US income taxes are illegal anyway, it can be fought, (and won).

In my book it only takes one party to renounce a relationship with another. Having the government deny your renouncement of citizenship is like telling someone you're breaking up with them and they look you in the eye and say, "No, I've decided I'm not recognizing your break up. You're still my significant other and I'll take part of your paycheck."

As far as Russia goes, I couldn't say. I'm not familiar with their immigration laws, but they're so strapped for $$, I'd be willing to bet they'd take anyone as a citizen if they had the money. Russia has some sexy people too. Very smart, very good looking, etc.

Cambodia has always been my refuge of choice if it ever came to that, total lawlessness is a virtue in such circumstances however St Kitts has potential..

The sixteenth amendment is by definition legal and constitutional.

not if it wasn't properly ratified it's not.

I can see St. Kitts, but....Cambodia? It's supposed to be very pretty there, but other than that I've never heard a whole lot of positive things about Cambodia. I'm curious to hear your reasons as someone (I assume) who has traveled there.

Fillipino rice farmer....turned sake maybe....they are gonna LOVE me...

False. It was fraudulently ratified without the proper number of legal votes. But even if it had been ratified it would be unconstitutional because it violates several other parts of the Constitution and nothing may be added to the Constitution that contradicts other parts.

You can add something, or you can repeal something, but you can't contradict something.

This is according to the Supreme Court.


No laws, court decisions, acts of congress, etc. can be made that contradict any part of the Constitution. That includes amendments which are laws. You can't say, "Jumping Rope is illegal" and then say "Jumping rope is legal". You must repeal the "jumping rope is illegal" portion of the Constitution and that alone would make it legal.

The Constitution was written specifically to limit the powers of government and NOT to place any limits on the rights of the people. Any amendments which violate our rights like the 16th and 18th are violations.

The 16th amendment contradicts and violates the 1st, 4th, 5th, 6th, 8th, 9th, 10th, and 13th amendments, and the apportionment clause of Article 1, section 8. So even if you were able to get the number of legal votes to pass the amendment (which they didn't do), you'd first have to pass amendments to repeal all of those before you could add it; otherwise it's blatantly unconstitutional in its face and is therefore null and void.

See above, if I'm in need of a bolt-hole a country with a liberal attitude to bribery, a mostly dsyfunctional justice system and unreliable police/military are all good traits =) I like some things about the place, lots of others (forced prostitution, child prostitution) give me the creeps. If I emigrating for purely political/monetary reasons it'd be St Kitts or another tropical island somewhere, plenty of little ones dotted though the pacific.

My ex-acquaintance Art Farnsworth will be testing all your theories in court:

Farnsworth's arrest grabs attention for tax movement

Art's take is that he's not liable. He hasn't paid for years.

He spent last weekend in jail. He's out on $100,000 bail and wearing an ankle bracelet. The feds are going to take a crack at him.

"Legal" is in the eyes of the courts.

The courts are not the sole arbiters of the Constitution. In fact every citizen of the United States has not only the ability, but the responsibility to decide what is or isn't Constitutional.

I can tell you what will happen. The IRS will deny him due process. They will tell him he can argue his case before a federal judge but no witnesses can be called, no evidence presented, and he can have no jury.

They've done it many times before.

They know no jury will side with the government so they refuse to allow anyone to have a jury trial and won't allow the public to attend the hearing.

So how many years will Art spend in the fed prison?

I did hear from a reliable source that you can buy a lobster dinner in Cambodia for like, a dollar. (Men in Black II)

Maybe you should think Romania or some other ex-East Bloc nation.

A Republican who doesn't pay taxes, what a rare find! :grinnylov

Oh dear. I turn my back for a minute and you guys got him started ... thing is, I agree with him on the tax thing, however, I'm desirous enough of a hassle free life in this respect that I fill 'em out and send 'em in and act joyously happy when I get the refund, which I give the special name of "free gun money."

I'll pass on the lobster, but the Eastern Bloc nations might be an interesting choice. Poland, the Czech Republic and Slovakia were quite enjoyable, but I have no clue about how immigration would work in those places. Plus the languages seemed pretty darn tricky, too.

I am applying for dual citizenship to Ireland, if I can manage to get all the necessary paperwork together about my grandfather. May come in handy the next time I travel internationally. :stpaddy:

Croatia has a growing economy and the land itself is gorgeous. The western coast is on the Adriatic (right across from Italy), and the people are warm and friendly.

Current living conditions are reminiscent of the Britain of 15 years ago. Radiating heaters, no air conditioning, very few people with internet access at home. However, some things are very modern: most people have a cell phone, the music is as varied as folk (kinda polka-ish) and American rock and hip-hop, and British pop.

The majority of people there speak some form of second language, English, German and Russian are the most popular.

The majority of folks are Eastern Orthodox Catholic, with a minority of Christian and Muslim faiths. There is a growing trend with the young people towards Pagan faiths.

The language is fairly easy to learn, it's phonetic, and similar to Czech, but most closely associated with Serbian (it's official name used to be Serbo-Croatian), and in it's ancient form (Glagolitic) it's very similar to ancient Russian.

I don't really have a good grasp of their industrial situation, as I wasn't really into that while I was there. There are ALOT of farms and agriculture outside of the main cities (Zagreb, Split, Dubrovnik, etc).

Citizenship is as follows:

You guys are overlooking the most obvious choice of a good place to go to not have to deal with the US political/justice system:

HAWAI'I

Over there, they fly the state flag at half mast on the anniversary of Hawai'i's statehood. That place is a refuge for mainland refuseniks.

Estonia is looking good as well, I can't wait to go there, they've got better broadband than us. Lobster thing is true, king prawns as well.

I'd love to move to Hawaii--if it gave me a foreign passport and didn't have George W. Bush as President...

I hear Estonia has really cheap booze too. When I was in Finland all the Finns were taking ferries over there to stock up. But since everything is so damned expensive in Finland, maybe it's just cheap for them. But those Finns sure know how to party! :drunk:

Tax Crack...again
 

Would Somebody Give Me An actual case, where a Person argued to the courts that Fileing a Tax Return Violated their 5th amendment right not to incriminate themselves... I've heard the mumbo jumbo about the 16th...I care less about them Requireing you to pay, What I wanna Know is (in a hipatehical Case) what would make say a drug dealer, or a mafia guy Report(file taxes) Knowing that it would incriminate his/her illegal activites and Illegally take away his 5th amendment right... I remeber not long ago a person used that on something else important, but for the life of me I can't remember what....

The Tax Crack 2
 

One Other thing, If (drug, Mafia, etc) busness is illegal, then is that said busness taxable? and If the (profits) money earned, is not legal, is that Taxable... Because (and I'll admit, watching too much scarface,) then Requireing you to Report your "illegal Busness" would definately violate your 5th amendment. and if you did not try to hide it (willfulness) then you would only be required to pay whatever is taxable (wich would be their requirment to prove, (and not just that you had money, but that its taxable.) and yes, they could actually prosecute you for the crime, and take all money and (profites, like your house, car ext.) but what if they don't have enough evidence to prosecute, and just want tax evasion.... would that (hipothetically) work against them?

you may be looking into this a little too deeply. you will eventually get hosed either way.

if you sling rock that is illegal. profits are illegally gained. LE can nail you for that. if you are good enough that they know you are doing it but can't build a case against you they will build a tax evasion case against you.

if you properly file your taxes as a self employed individual the IRS doesn't care where the money comes from as long as they get Uncle's share for him. i understand your concern about how the 5th applies to a 1040, but be real. no one is going to enter "rock slinger" or "hooker" on the line they provide for occupation. they just enter self employed or independent distributor or entertainer, etc... they pay their taxes and that is the end of the story.

if LE can't build a criminal case against them, and they don't have an IRS issue then the individual is fine. until the day they slip up and leave an opening for LE or the IRS. then they are toast.

i don't play these games myself, but i happen to know a few escorts who are fine taxpaying citizens who do walk this fine line.

It's much easier to build a tax case than a criminal case. In a tax case the IRS/Justice Department can do an estimate of your income from assets and purported lifestyle and the courts will buy it whereas a criminal charge has to be proven to a much stiffer standard.
If you go to a strip club and nurse a beer for 3 hours, the IRS/JD can portray it as an evening of nightclubing that cost you $500 and get away with it.
Just like the IRS tells waitstaff how much they make in tips and they have to pay on that regardless of what they actually made unless the waiter/waitress makes a federal (literally) case out of it. :(

I've heard that the smart pot growers buy tax stamps (like for ciggies) to cover their crop. I seem to remember something about how the feds took down some gangster during prohibition. It was too tough to prove the booze activity so they got him on tax evasion. I think that tactic still works.

Bottom line: don't fuck with the IRS.

An intersesting footnote: Leona Helmsley could have hired an army of mercenaries and sent them after the taxman for a lot less money than she paid in fines. Some people don't think out of the box.

It was Al Capone. I agree that it technically might be a violation of 5th Amendment to force individuals to choose between tax evasion and incriminating themselves to the IRS, who would share that info with other law enforcement agencies.

Let me tell you, How it will be.
There's one for you, Nineteen for me,
Should five percent, Appear too small,
Be thankful I don't, Take it all.

If you drive a car, I'll tax the street.
If you drive to city, I'll tax your seat.
If you get too cold, I'll tax the heat.
If you take a walk, I'll tax your feet.

Don't ask me what I want it for, (Uh-uh, Mr. Wilson.)
If you don't want to pay some more. (Uh-uh, Mr. Heath.)
And my advice to, Those who die.
Declare the pennies, On your eyes.

'Cause I'm the taxman.
Yeah, I'm the taxman,
And you're working for no one but me. :(

boy I really like that Taxman Poem...hahaha

oh, Buy the way, I think the Capone Thing Was What I was Thinking about, of Course, Back then the judges aren't like they are today.