DOCSLIB.ORG

Dateline United States

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Dateline United States February 2017 VOLUME 28 NUMBER 2 UN ITED STATES MARC J. STROHL, CPA GREEN CARD CHECKLIST his article provides a comprehen - LTR is defined as a legal permanent res - tion of tax motivation so the tax - T sive checklist for a U.S. person pri - ident (“green card holder”) whose sta - payer can no longer request a pri - or to renouncing U.S. citizenship or tus was held in at least any part of eight vate letter ruling to avoid the legal permanent residence. It is not of the last 15 tax years ending with the application of Section 877. Notice intended to teach the technical compe - year in which residency ends. 4 Not 2005-36, 2005-1 CB 1007, removed tence required for self-compliance but it counted is any tax year in which the tax - the presumption of tax avoidance will give the knowledge to determine if payer is treated as a tax resident of a for - by the introduction of the “net a U.S. tax preparer knows all that is nec - eign country that has an income tax worth” and “income tax test” and essary to provide technically competent treaty with the U.S. and the taxpayer did the filing of Form 8854. professional services. not waive treaty benefits. Taxpayers that meet these tests after If (1) or (2) above is met, the expa - June 16, 2008, are subject to the Section triation rules will apply and the tax - 877 and 877A expatriation provisions. Expatriation After June 16, 2008 payer will be deemed a “covered Effective June 16, 2008, the Section 877 expatriate”‘ if any of the following (Expatriation to avoid tax) and Form apply: Exceptions 8854 (Initial and Annual Expatriation 1. Average annual net income tax for Exception (effective June 3, 2004, for - Statement) reporting requirements the five years ending before the date ward) to the expatriation rules applies were amended and Section 877A (Tax of expatriation is more than for dual citizens and certain minors 6 responsibilities of expatriation) was $162,000 for 2017. 5 (however, the Form 8854 certification added to the Code. 1 Different rules 2. Net worth is $2 million or more on regarding U.S. federal tax compliance apply to expatriation (1) before June 4, the date of expatriation. for the last five years must still be sup - 2004; (2) between June 3, 2004, and 3. Effective June 3, 2004, forward, the plied). The exceptions are as follows: June 17, 2008; and (3) after June 16, taxpayer fails to certify on Form • Dual citizen. An individual who was 2008, in accordance with Notice 2009- 8854 that he has complied with all at birth a U.S. citizen, is a citizen of 85, 2009-45 IRB 598. 2 U.S. federal tax obligations for the another country and continues to be Expatriation applies to (1) U.S. citi - five years preceding the date of MARC J. STROHL, CPA, is a Principal at Protax Con - zens or (2) long-term residents (LTRs) expatriation. Effective June 3, 2004, sulting Services Inc. in New York (mstrohl@protaxconsult - 3 that have renounced respectively. An there no longer remains a presump - ing.com; www.protaxconsulting.com). 56 JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL TAXATION l FEBRUARY 2017 l DATELINE: U.S. a resident of that country, where he 2. They furnish the State Department treaty with the U.S. and the individ - is taxed as a resident, and was not a with a signed statement of voluntary ual filed Forms 8854 and 8833 U.S. resident for more than ten of the relinquishment of U.S. nationality (Treaty-Based Return Position Dis - last 15 years. (provided that this is followed by closure Under Section 6114 or • Minors. An individual who expatri - issuance of certificate of loss of 7701(b)). ates before 18 1/ years old and was a nationality). 2 resident of the U.S. for not more than 3. The State Department issues a cer - ten years prior to expatriation. tificate of loss of nationality. Expatriation Tax 4. A U.S. court cancels the certificate of Effective June 17, 2008, in accordance naturalization. with the Heroes Earnings Assistance Effective Date Former LTRs. Former LTRs are con - and Relief Tax Act of 2008 (P.L. 110- An individual is considered to have sidered to have terminated long-term 245, June 17, 2008), Section 877A was expatriated as of the later of the date residency as of the earliest of the fol - added to the Code to abolish the exist - that he relinquishes U.S. citizenship or lowing dates: ing expatriation rules with regard to fil - terminates long-term residency. Effec - 1. They voluntarily relinquish/aban - ing U.S. tax returns (Forms 8854 and tive after June 16, 2008, there is no don their green card by filing 1040NR (U.S. Nonresident Alien longer a requirement to file a Form Department of Homeland Security Income Tax Return) for a period of ten 8854 to establish an effective expatria - Form I-407 (Record of Abandon - years, to be replaced by a one-time tion date. ment of Lawful Permanent Resident mark-to-market tax on the individual’s Former U.S. citizens. Former U.S. Status) with a U.S. consular or immi - net unrealized gain on property over a citizens are considered to have relin - gration officer. specified exemption limit, as of the day quished U.S. as of the earliest of the fol - 2. They became subject to a final before the expatriation date. lowing dates: administrative order for removal These new rules align the U.S. with 1. They renounce U.S. citizenship from the U.S. under the Immigration similar tax rules in other income tax before a U.S. diplomatic or consular and Nationality Act and actually left treaty countries. Accordingly, if individ - officer (provided that this is followed the U.S. uals meet the expatriation rules (“cov - by issuance of certificate of loss of 3. For a dual resident, the country of ered expatriates”), they will now be nationality). new residence has an income tax treated as if they sold (deemed sale) all DATELINE: U.S. l FEBRUARY 2017 l JOURNAL OF INTERNATIONAL TAXATION 57 of their property for fair market value Mark-to-market exceptions. These on the day prior to the expatriation include: date. The mark-to-market tax is • Eligible deferred compensation imposed on the property’s net unreal - items. ized gain to the extent that it exceeds • Ineligible deferred compensation $699,000 for 2017. 7 items. This exclusion amount must be allo - • Interests in nongrantor trusts. cated to all built-in gain property that is • Specified tax-deferred accounts. subject to the mark-to-market regime Eligible deferred compensation. Section that the covered expatriate owned on 219(g)(5). All basic work-related quali - the day before expatriation, regardless fied retirement plans are subject to 30% of whether the covered expatriate withholding at source and an irrevocable makes an election (see below) to defer waiver of any right to claim any reduction tax with respect to any property. The in withholding under any treaty with the exclusion first must be allocated pro U.S. These plans include profit-sharing rata to each of the built-in gain proper - plans, including Section 401(k)/403(b); ties by multiplying the exclusion by the annuity plans and contracts; simplified ratio of built-in gain per asset over total employee pension (SEP) plans; simple built-in gains of all assets. The allocat - retirement accounts; foreign pension ed exclusion may not exceed the per- plans; similar retirement arrangements or asset built in gain. If the built-in gains of programs; any item of qualified deferred all assets are less than the total exclu - compensation “substantially vested”; sion, the exclusion is limited to this total qualified or unqualified options; restrict - built-in gain amount. ed stock awards; stock appreciation The exclusion is once per lifetime. rights; and Section 83 property. However, any unused initial exclusion Ineligible deferred compensation. For (subject to a future-year’s inflation any item not covered under eligible adjustment) may be applied to a second deferred compensation, the individual expatriation. is treated as having received the present 1 Gains from the deemed sales must value of the accrued benefits the day Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008 (P.L. 110-245, June 17, 2008), section 301(a). 2 be taken into account for the tax year of prior to expatriation. Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of the deemed sale. Deemed losses are Interests in nongrantor trusts (domes - 2008 (P.L. 110-245, June 17, 2008) (expatriation treated under the existing Code and tic or foreign). These are subject to 30% after June 16, 2008); American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-357, October 22, 2004), section Regulations. withholding at source and an irrevoca - 804 (expatriation after June 3, 2004). See Liss and Basis step-up. For purposes of ble waiver of any right to claim any Basha, “Expatriation: Opportunities in a Mist of Uncertainty,” 25 JOIT 45 (December 2014). 3 determining the tax imposed, a stepped- reduction in withholding under any Sections 877(e)(2), 877A(g)(2). 4 up basis rule applies to property that an treaty with the U.S. Section 877(e)(2). 5 individual held on the date that he first Specified tax-deferred accounts. For $161,000 for 2016, $160,000 for 2015, $157,000 became a U.S. resident alien (within the these accounts, the individual is treat - for 2014, $155,000 for 2013, $151,000 for 2012, $147,000 for 2011, $145,000 for 2010.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • I. Effect of Expatriation on Tax* 1 Individual Must First Be Considered an “Expatriate” and 1.01 Ceasing to Be Taxable in the U.S
    In order to be subject to the “mark to market” tax, an I. Effect of Expatriation on Tax* 1 individual must first be considered an “expatriate” and 1.01 Ceasing to be Taxable in The U.S. then must meet one of several tests to become a or Canada 1 “covered expatriate”. (a) Revoking U.S. Citizenship or Long Term U.S. Residence 1 (ii) U.S. Citizen Expatriates: (b) Leaving Canada - Canadian Taxation of Non Residents 2 A U.S. citizen becomes an “expatriate” on the earliest of the following dates: - The date U.S. nationality is renounced before a U.S. consular officer; - The date the individual provides a written statement I. Effect of of voluntary relinquishment of U.S. nationality which Expatriation on Tax* is accepted by the State Department; - The date the State Department issues a certificate of * Copyright ©2009 by Mark T. Serbinski, C.A., C.P.A.. loss of nationality; or Mr. Serbinski is a Chartered Accountant licensed in - The date a U.S. court cancels a certificate of Ontario and a partner in the firm of Serbinski Partners naturalization. PC, Chartered Accountants, Toronto, Ontario as well as a Certified Public Accountant licensed in Illinois (iii) Long Term Resident Expatriates and a practitioner in the firm of Mark T. Serbinski Certified Public Accountants in Chicago, Illinois. Admitted to practice before the Internal Revenue An individual is considered a “long term resident” of Service, Mr. Serbinski practices international tax and the U.S. is a person who was a lawful permanent acts as a consultant to the profession.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Newsletter
    2019 Fall tax newsletter PKF Worldwide Tax Update | December 2019 | 1 This publication is available on pkf.com - www.pkf.com/publications/quarterly-tax-newsletters and in the PKF365 tax newsletters library. PKF Worldwide Tax Update Welcome Contents In this 2019 fourth quarterly issue, the PKF Worldwide Tax Update Austria newsletter brings together notable tax changes and amendments » Administrative High Court recognises from around the world, followed by a PKF commentary. This interposition of a Luxembourg holding provides further insight and information on the matters discussed. company. PKF is a global network with 400 offices, operating in over 150 Belgium countries across 5 regions, and its tax experts specialise in providing » New Belgium company law rules impact high quality tax advisory services to international and domestic cross-border seat of management. organisations in all our markets. » Impact of new statutory seat rule for Belgium tax purposes. Featured articles in this issue include : Botswana • Higher and Supreme Court case law in Austria and Germany » New Transfer Pricing Bill came into effect • Transfer pricing developments in Botswana, Bulgaria, Mexico, from 1 July 2019. Portugal and the UAE Bulgaria • Digital tax in the Czech Republic and the USA » New rules for transfer pricing • VAT developments in Hungary, South Africa and the UAE documentation. • Double tax treaty updates in Italy, Spain and the USA • Recent comprehensive tax changes in Jamaica, Kenya, Qatar and Chile Switzerland. » IRS rules on tax effects for breach of Law on timely payment. We trust you find the PKF orldwideW Tax Update for the fourth quarter of 2019 both informative and interesting.
    [Show full text]
  • The Current State of Expatriation
    The Current State of Expatriation Michael G. Pfeifer I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Section 301 of the Heroes Earnings Assistance and Relief Tax Act of 2008 (“HEART” or the “Act”)1 dramatically altered the playing field for individuals who relinquish their U.S. citizenship or terminate their long-term U.S. residence (i.e., U.S. persons who “expatriate”). It did this by adding new sections 877A and 2801 to the Code,2 which, respectively, impose “mark-to-market” and “succession tax” re- gimes on such individuals. Prior to HEART’s enactment, expatriates generally were subject to a 10-year “alternative tax” regime on U.S.-source income, as defined, that was first introduced by the Foreign Investors Tax Act of 1966 (“FITA”).3 These rules were contained principally in sections 877, 2107 and 2501 of the Code. In the intervening four plus decades, the alternative tax regime was modified twice, first by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 19964 (“HIPAA”) and then by the American Jobs Cre- ation Act of 20045 (“AJCA”). Both of these Acts generally strengthened the income and transfer tax rules applicable to expatriates under the alternative tax regime. However, despite these enhancements, the U.S. rules applicable to tax expatriation remained the subject of a continuing Congressional debate that began in 1995, when the Clinton administration proposed 1 Pub. L. No. 110-245 (2008). 2 Except as otherwise indicated, all section references are to provisions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (the “Code”), as amended, and to the Treasury regulations issued thereunder.
    [Show full text]
  • Citizenship Overreach, 38 MICH. J. INT'l L. 167 (2017)
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by University of Michigan School of Law Michigan Journal of International Law Volume 38 Issue 2 2017 Citizenship Overreach Peter J. Spiro Temple University Law School Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil Part of the International Law Commons, Legislation Commons, Taxation-Transnational Commons, and the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Peter J. Spiro, Citizenship Overreach, 38 MICH. J. INT'L L. 167 (2017). Available at: https://repository.law.umich.edu/mjil/vol38/iss2/2 This Symposium Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Michigan Journal of International Law at University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in Michigan Journal of International Law by an authorized editor of University of Michigan Law School Scholarship Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected]. CITIZENSHIP OVERREACH Peter J. Spiro* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTERNATIONAL LAW : A RIGHT NOT TO HAVE CITIZENSHIP ............................................ 173 A. Constraining Citizenship Allocations................. 174 B. Letting Citizens Go ................................. 179 II. U.S. CITIZENSHIP: TOO EASY TO GET, TOO HARD TO SHED ................................................... 182 III. CORRECTING CITIZENSHIP OVERREACH ................. 186 IV. CONCLUSION: AMERICANS ABROAD, LAYING LOW ...... 190 London mayor Boris Johnson was born in New York City in 1964 to British parents. His father studied at Columbia University and subsequently took a job at the World Bank in Washington, D.C. In 1969 the family returned to the United Kingdom where Johnson has lived as a British citizen since.
    [Show full text]
  • Surviving a Heart Attack: Expatriation and the Tax Policy Implications of the New Exit Tax Steven J
    The University of Akron IdeaExchange@UAkron Akron Tax Journal Akron Law Journals 2009 Surviving a Heart Attack: Expatriation and the Tax Policy Implications of the New Exit Tax Steven J. Arsenault Please take a moment to share how this work helps you through this survey. Your feedback will be important as we plan further development of our repository. Follow this and additional works at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Arsenault, Steven J. (2009) "Surviving a Heart Attack: Expatriation and the Tax Policy Implications of the New Exit Tax," Akron Tax Journal: Vol. 24 , Article 2. Available at: https://ideaexchange.uakron.edu/akrontaxjournal/vol24/iss1/2 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Akron Law Journals at IdeaExchange@UAkron, the institutional repository of The nivU ersity of Akron in Akron, Ohio, USA. It has been accepted for inclusion in Akron Tax Journal by an authorized administrator of IdeaExchange@UAkron. For more information, please contact [email protected], [email protected]. Arsenault: Surviving a Heart Attack: Expatriation and the Tax Policy Implica SURVIVING A HEART ATTACK: EXPATRIATION AND THE TAX POLICY IMPLICATIONS OF THE NEW EXIT TAX Steven J. Arsenault* I. Introduction .................................................................... 37 II. Overview of the U.S. Tax System ................................... 38 A. The U.S. Income Tax System ................................... 39 B. The U.S. Estate and Gift Tax System ...................... 42 C. The Incentive To Expatriate ..................................... 43 III. Existing U.S. Law Applicable to Expatriates .................. 45 A . Pre-2004 .................................................................... 45 B. After 2004 Amendments ........................................... 48 IV. Recent Changes to U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Taxation of Foreign Nationals by the US—2016 Taxation of Foreign Nationals by the US—2016
    Taxation of foreign nationals by the US—2016 Taxation of foreign nationals by the US—2016 2 Taxation of foreign nationals by the US—2016 Contents Executive summary 5 Chapter 1: Resident aliens 7 Chapter 2: Nonresident aliens 17 Chapter 3: Filing requirements 20 Chapter 4: Foreign investment in real property 22 Chapter 5: Other taxes 28 Chapter 6: Tax planning 33 Chapter 7: Immigration, visa, and nationality considerations 39 Appendix A: Key figures 48 Appendix B: US Federal tax rates 49 Appendix C: United States income tax treaties 51 Appendix D: Family-based immigration categories 54 Appendix E: Employment-based immigration categories 55 Appendix F: Countries whose citizens may be eligible for the Visa Waiver Program 56 Appendix G: Nonimmigrant (temporary) visa categories 57 Appendix H: Countries whose citizens may be eligible for E Treaty Trader (E-1) or Treaty Investor (E-2) visas 62 Appendix I: IRS forms and statements location information 65 3 Taxation of foreign nationals by the US—2016 4 Taxation of foreign nationals by the US—2016 Executive summary A foreign national may be subject to one Tax treaties and other foreign investments should, of two drastically different systems of For many nonresident aliens, the burden of therefore, be reviewed before beginning taxation by the United States depending on US tax is reduced by tax treaties between or ending an assignment in the United whether he/she is classified as a resident or the United States and their home countries. States. Additionally, the United States has a nonresident alien of the United States. The Further, treaties may modify US income a large and sophisticated body of rules determination of residency status is critical.
    [Show full text]
  • Articles Citizenship Taxation
    ARTICLES CITIZENSHIP TAXATION RUTH MASON* The United States is the only country that taxes its citizens’ worldwide income, even when those citizens live indefinitely abroad. This Article critically evaluates the traditional equity, efficiency, and administrability arguments for taxing nonresident citizens. It also raises new concerns about citizenship taxation, including that it puts the United States at a disadvantage when competing with other countries for highly skilled migrants. TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION ..................................................................................... 170 I. CITIZENSHIP TAXATION AND NONRESIDENT AMERICANS .. 177 A. INTERNATIONAL TAX PRIMER .................................................. 177 * Hunton & Williams Professor of Law, University of Virginia School of Law. I would like to thank Kerry Abrams, Alice Abreu, Reuven Avi-Yonah, Cynthia Blum, Allison Christians, Michael Doran, Michelle L. Drumbl, Kimberly Ferzan, Daniel Gutmann, Andrew Hayashi, Brant Hellwig, Richard Hynes, Young Ran (Christine) Kim, Michael Kirsch, Marjorie Kornhauser, Rebecca Kysar, Julia Mahoney, Susan Morse, Shu-Yi Oei, Gregg Polsky, Ekkehart Reimer, Bernard Schneider, Wolfgang Schön, Ayelet Shachar, Daniel Shaviro, Gladriel Shobe, Jarrod Shobe, Alan Viard, Philip West, Ethan Yale, participants at the Tax Citizenship and Income Shifting Conference held at the University of Notre Dame London Global Gateway, and workshop participants at the Max Planck Institute for Tax Law and Public Finance in Munich, the Taxation and Citizenship Conference at the University of Michigan School of Law, the Mid-Atlantic Tax Conference, New York University School of Law, Tulane Law School, University of British Columbia Faculty of Law, Université Paris 1 (Panthéon Sorbonne), and Washington & Lee School of Law. Lee Barkley, David Ryan Hart, Jasmine Hay, Mohammad Pathan, Declan Tansey, and Pauleen Truong provided valuable research assistance.
    [Show full text]
  • Changing U.S. Tax Jurisdiction: Expatriates, Immigrants, and the Need for a Coherent Tax Policy
    Fordham Law School FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History Faculty Scholarship 1997 Changing U.S. Tax Jurisdiction: Expatriates, Immigrants, and the Need for a Coherent Tax Policy Jeffrey M. Colon Fordham University School of Law, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Jeffrey M. Colon, Changing U.S. Tax Jurisdiction: Expatriates, Immigrants, and the Need for a Coherent Tax Policy, 34 San Diego L. Rev 1 (1997) Available at: https://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/faculty_scholarship/402 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. It has been accepted for inclusion in Faculty Scholarship by an authorized administrator of FLASH: The Fordham Law Archive of Scholarship and History. For more information, please contact [email protected]. Changing U.S. Tax Jurisdiction: Expatriates, Immigrants, and the Need for a Coherent Tax Policy JEFFREY M. COLON* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION ....................................... 003 II. U.S. INCOME AND WEALTH TRANSFER TAXATION ................ 008 A. Income Tax ..................................... 008 1. Citizens and Residents-Residence Basis Taxation ....... 008 2. Nonresidents-Source and Trade or Business Basis Taxation ................................ 010 B. Wealth Transfer Taxation: FederalEstate, Gift, and GenerationSlapping Taxes ........................ 012 1. Citizens and Residents ..........................
    [Show full text]
  • The Tax Regime for Individual Expatriates: Whom to Impress?
    THE TAX REGIME FOR INDIVIDUAL EXPATRIATES: WHOM TO IMPRESS? Andrew Walker* TABLE OF CONTENTS I. Introduction.556 II. Why Expatriate? The U.S. International Tax Regime for Individuals.558 A. The Income Tax.558 B. Wealth Transfer Taxes.562 III. The Prior Tax Law Regime for U.S. Expatriates.564 A. Income Tax?Section 877 Prior to Its Amendment.564 B. Estate Tax?Prior Law Section 2107 . 569 C. Gift and Generation-Skipping Transfer Tax.570 IV. An Overview of Expatriation Provisions in the 2004 Act and Competing Expatriation Proposals.571 A. The 2004 Act.571 B. The Exit Tax Proposal.572 C. Essential Features of Prior Law and the Proposed Alternatives.575 V. Legal Limits on the Imposition of a Special Tax on Expatriates.576 A. Constitutional Limits.576 B. Limitations Imposed by International Human Rights Law. 579 C. Limitations Imposed by Treaty Obligations.580 VI. Tax Policy Parameters.582 A. Tax Neutrality.583 B. Equity and Fairness Considerations. 584 C. International Equity and International Comity.587 D. Administrability and Enforcement.589 E. Estate and Gift Tax Policy Concerns.591 F. Conclusions.593 VII. A More Rational Regime.594 Partner, Milbank, Tweed, Hadley & McCloy, LLP, New York, New York; University of Cape Town, South Africa, B.A., 1990; M.A., 1991; Harvard Law School, J.D., 1994. The author is grateful for the research and assistance of his colleagues Drew Batkin, Alan Schwartz, and Benjamin Yu. Tax Lawyer, Vol. 58, No. 2 555 556 SECTION OF TAXATION I. INTRODUCTION The American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (the "2004 Act")1 includes provi sions to amend the tax regime for individual expatriates.
    [Show full text]
  • Us Taxation of Foreign Nationals
    US TAXATION OF FOREIGN NATIONALS Be adventurous. Making your tax world easier to travel. SEE ALSO OUR BOOKLET “TAXATION OF US EXPATRIATES” https://www.gtn.com/files/Taxation_of_US_Expatriates.pdf gtn.com C O N T E N T S Introduction 1 1. Residency 3 • Lawful Permanent Resident Test 3 • Substantial Presence Test 5 • Which Test Prevails? 9 • Special Considerations 9 2. Case Study Background 11 3. Income Taxation of Residents 13 • Income Tax Overview 14 • Filing Status 15 • Gross Income 15 • Deductions from Gross Income 16 • Itemized Deductions / Standard Deductions 16 • Exemptions 17 • Tax Credits (Foreign Tax Credit and Other Credits) 18 • Filing Requirements and Procedures 23 4. Sourcing Rules 23 • Personal Services Income 23 • Interest Income 24 • Dividend Income 24 • Rental and Royalty Income 25 • Income from Sale of Personal Property 25 • Income from Sale of Real Property 25 • Partnerships 25 5. Taxation of Nonresidents 25 • Trade or Business Income 26 • Passive Income 29 • Filing Requirements and Procedures 32 6. Dual-Status Taxpayers 33 • Overview 33 • Joint Return Election 37 • Filing Requirements 38 7. Other Taxes and Filing Requirements 39 • General Application of Social Security Tax 39 • Totalization Agreements 40 • Other Benefits 40 • State Income Taxes 41 • Gift and Estate Taxes 41 • Expatriation Tax 43 • Filing Requirement on Departure 43 • Foreign Bank Account Reporting Requirement 44 • Specified Foreign Financial Assets 44 • Form 5471 45 • Passive Foreign Investment Corporation (PFIC) 46 8. Income Tax Treaties 46 9. Other Income Tax Considerations 48 • Exchange Rate Issues 48 • Moving Expenses 49 • Foreign Earned Income and Housing Exclusions 49 • Capital Gains 50 • Dispositions of US Real Property Interests 51 • Sale of Principal Residence 51 • Rental of a Residence 53 • Investments in Foreign Corporations 54 Appendix A.
    [Show full text]
  • Will the Reunification of U.S. Citizenship Still Be Worth Some Tax Savings - an Analysis of the Recent Reform on the Taxation of Expatriates Emmanuelle Lee
    Santa Clara Law Review Volume 37 | Number 4 Article 6 1-1-1997 Will the Reunification of U.S. Citizenship Still Be Worth Some Tax Savings - An Analysis of the Recent Reform on the Taxation of Expatriates Emmanuelle Lee Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview Part of the Law Commons Recommended Citation Emmanuelle Lee, Comment, Will the Reunification of U.S. Citizenship Still Be Worth Some Tax Savings - An Analysis of the Recent Reform on the Taxation of Expatriates, 37 Santa Clara L. Rev. 1063 (1997). Available at: http://digitalcommons.law.scu.edu/lawreview/vol37/iss4/6 This Comment is brought to you for free and open access by the Journals at Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Santa Clara Law Review by an authorized administrator of Santa Clara Law Digital Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. WILL THE RENUNCIATION OF U.S. CITIZENSHIP STILL BE WORTH SOME TAX SAVINGS? AN ANALYSIS OF THE RECENT REFORM ON THE TAXATION OF EXPATRIATES. "Over and over courts have said that there is nothing sinis- ter in so arrangingone's affairs as to keep taxes as low as possible. Everybody does so, rich or poor; and all do right, for nobody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands: taxes are enforced exactions, not voluntary con- tributions. To demand more in the name of morals is mere cant."' I. INTRODUCTION Michael D. Dingman, chairman of Abex, a New Hamp- shire-based maker of aerospace and industrial products, and a Ford Motor Corporation director, is now a citizen of the Ba- 2 that of a few hamas.
    [Show full text]
  • The Exit Tax: a Move in the Right Direction
    William & Mary Business Law Review Volume 3 (2012) Issue 2 Article 3 April 2012 The Exit Tax: A Move in the Right Direction William L. Dentino Christine Manolakas Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmblr Part of the Tax Law Commons Repository Citation William L. Dentino and Christine Manolakas, The Exit Tax: A Move in the Right Direction, 3 Wm. & Mary Bus. L. Rev. 341 (2012), https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmblr/vol3/iss2/3 Copyright c 2012 by the authors. This article is brought to you by the William & Mary Law School Scholarship Repository. https://scholarship.law.wm.edu/wmblr THE EXIT TAX: A MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION WILLIAM L. DENTINO * CHRISTINE MANOLAKAS ** ABSTRACT Citizenship-based taxation was first enacted during the Civil War, in large part to express congressional disapproval of wealthy individuals who fled abroad to avoid bearing the financial and physical burdens of the war. A century later, motivated by a desire to encourage foreign invest- ment in the United States, Congress passed legislation in 1966 that offered significant tax incentives to nonresident aliens, thereby creating an oppor- tunity for tax abuse. To discourage U.S. citizens from expatriating to avoid U.S. taxation, Congress contemporaneously enacted I.R.C. section 877, which taxes expatriates on certain U.S.-source income for a ten-year peri- od after expatriation. Congress, and the nation, viewed these tax-moti- vated expatriates as “economic Benedict Arnolds.” This Article follows the history and evolution of I.R.C. section 877—the alternative tax re- gime—as Congress addressed the weaknesses of this provision, and the politics of the replacement by Congress of this provision with I.R.C.
    [Show full text]