Hacker News Reader

Comment by lisper | Hacker News Reader

The whole system of citizenship is bizarre. I am a citizen of two countries, neither of which I have ever pledged fealty to. I am a citizen of Germany because I was born there and my parents were citizens at the time, and I am a citizen of the U.S. because my parents were naturalized when I was a minor. And I am keenly aware that there are millions of people who would literally risk their lives for either of those citizenships.

And then there are horror stories like this one:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/11/25/virginia-...

Next year I am going to renew my U.S. passport. For some unknown number of weeks I will be in limbo, unable to legally leave the country, at the whims of the mail and some unknown bureaucrat who may or may not decide to grant my renewal or decide that the photo I've submitted is not quite the right size or whatever. The whole system sucks big fat honking weenies.

View on HN

> unable to legally leave the country

Just a small distinction: you are free to legally leave the US at any time. The US has no exit controls[1]. They do not even monitor who leaves at all, so they have no real idea or care, about who is leaving the country. It is perfectly legal to leave the US without a US passport, or any type of passport or ID.

Now the countries that share borders with the US, may not let you enter through a legal port of entry, but the US is not stopping you from leaving.

---

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Border_control#Exit_controls

This freedom should not be taken for granted, as countries accross the entire spectrum of tyranny do monitor exits - from China to the Schengen Area countries, and many in-between.

And if you want to see it taken a step further, scroll down to the exit permit system, where it would be illegal for you to leave your own country, unless you have an exit visa.

> the US is not stopping you from leaving

That's true, but it doesn't help much because I can't just leave. I have to go somewhere. No airline nor cruise ship will allow me to board an international flight or cruise without a passport, nor will Canada allow me to enter without one. That leaves Mexico. So yes, I suppose I could go to Mexico, but then I could not return.

you don't have a passport from Germany?

Why can’t you enter Canada on your German passport?

Probably, but then I couldn't come back.

This is quite the recent removal then. I recall browsing a US government website around the start of the covid pandemic where one could check your entry and exit record.

They do keep track of when you leave by commercial air or sea, and I think there are data sharing partnerships with Canada/Mexico as well. Not sure if they keep track for citizens though, since there's no immigration enforcement reason for that.

They're working on an "entry data is automatically sent to other country as exit data" system with Canada. I'm not sure they've got any decent partnership with Mexico currently, though I know they've been negotiating.

Any US citizen HAS to leave the US with their nationality. That’s the law.

U.S. citizens must use a U.S. passport to enter and leave the United States. This requirement is outlined in the U.S. Code of Federal Regulations, specifically 22 CFR 53.1. It states that a U.S. citizen must possess a valid U.S. passport to depart from or enter the United States unless they meet certain exceptions. This law ensures that U.S. citizens are properly documented for international travel, facilitating legal entry and exit from the country.

While the law does indeed state that, there are no penalties whatsoever defined for breaking the law, so there are literally no consequences for doing so.

https://travel.stackexchange.com/questions/85389/what-is-the...

It's completely unenforced. When exiting the US no American authority checks what passport you are using to leave, and when entering they are legally required to let Americans reenter the country. At worst the border guard will be cranky and give you a stern lecture about how you are supposed to use your US passport.

Right, but the only punishment for failing to comply is reprimand and delay at the entrance while trying to verify citizenship. The latest publicly available CBP Inspector's Field manual is unequivocal that if the Inspector is convinced the entrant is an American citizen they cannot stop them from entering.

The law really exists as a way to avoid delays at entry as a US citizen having a valid US passport can be processed in much faster than one who does not, and it minimizes the risk of being stuck with an immigration agent that does not belive your claims of being an American citizen due to lacking convincing records and documents.

American Citizens are not the only ones with an unequivocal right to enter. American Indians born in Canada who have are at least 50% American Indian by blood "cannot be denied admission to the United States". They are required to prove to the inspector that they meet this criteria, but if they do, they don't need a passport or anything. (But they probably needed some documents to convince the inspector of their status as a 50%+ native born in Canada.)

In Costa Rica, anyone can request information on your entrance and exits to the country. It is considered public information.

An odd thing: Canadians can enter the Turks & Caicos islands (a British Overseas Territory) without a passport. I know that because my partner discovered that her passport had expired, the night before our trip. It took some time at the immigration desk (both coming and going), but in the end she was able to travel.

https://archive.is/2023.11.28-214421/https://www.washingtonp...

Although as described, the story doesn't quite add up. The government is denying citizenship because his father was a diplomat at the time he was born, but he says his father only took a temporary job at the embassy, which would usually not qualify for diplomatic immunity.

FTA:

  the doctor did not receive a new passport; instead, he received a letter from the State Department stating that he should not have been granted citizenship at the time of his birth because his father was a diplomat with the Embassy of Iran.

> unable to legally leave the country

I am having a hard time understanding why, help me out. I’m not sure about airports, but the US doesn’t check passports on the way out at land borders, so you could walk from the US into Mexico without the US side checking, and then when the Mexican official asks you, you could just present your German passport. Of course American citizens are obliged to reenter the US on their American passport, but if you are getting the new US passport back by post, couldn’t you have a family member DHL it to wherever you are outside the US?

> you could walk from the US into Mexico

Yes, but I wouldn't be able to come back. And Mexico is the only place I could go.

So strictly speaking I overstated a bit when I said I could not leave the country. I could leave, but I would not be able to travel freely like I can now.

It's effectively a legally enshrined global class system.

While I don't think it's practical to just abolish the concept overnight, I do think it's ultimately the direction we should try and move in. The freedom of movement the EU offers is a step in this direction, and something I'd like to see more of.

I strongly disagree. The citizenship is a set of mutual rights and responsibilities between the citizen and their country, and a country should be under no obligation to allow people to live there that refuse to partake in their responsibilities. Should it be easier to immigrate? Probably. But the moment a country gives up the ability to govern their membership, they cease to be sovereign.

That doesn't require passports and controlled movements.

Wherever you are today, you have to conform to all local laws regardless where you came from yesterday or go to tomorrow.

I don't see any honorable excuse not to give anyone the same rights and expect the same responsibilities.

Every problem you can state has an infinity of possible solutions, not just that one.

I've never had a problem with passport renewal in the USA. If you do it abroad, it is even expedited by default. It is really hard to mess up the photo, though the places that can do it reliably are increasingly small (you are better off going with an app these days and then using photo printing).

Earlier this year I had to cancel a trip to the south Pacific because, it turns out, four months is no longer enough time for an "expedited" passport renewal. Appointments for urgent-travel renewals are not available in the US no matter how many hours you spend in the State Department phone system. It has gone downhill in a big way.

Bonus lesson that I learned too late: if you're in need of an urgent passport renewal, complain to your senator; I got an appointment within a week once I did that.

I got an urgent travel appointment for my toddler about a month ago with little trouble, though I suspect it would be more difficult in the summer. We got her (first ever!) passport on the same day as the appointment, 1 week after calling to make it and 4 days before our planned trip to Canada. It's probably easier if you don't apply for your passport ahead of time because you can get your appointment up to 14 days before. I am lucky to live a few blocks from a passport center though, it's not really practical for everyone, and of course, there's no guarantee that an appointment would have been available.

What would the system be as an alternative? You are born stateless and have the ability to declare (or in harsher terms, need to audition for) citizenship to a country of your choosing? At what age?

The notion of having no state is kind of an impracticality, do we accept that as a given?

That's a great(?) dystopian movie scenario.

All pregnant women are moved to Region0. They give birth and then moved back to their place of origin right after the birth. The babies stay there and are raised for 18+5 years (pre-school, school, Uni) and then they audition for their 10 countries of choice (kKinda like the 'draft' in the NBA)

> What would the system be as an alternative? You are born stateless and have the ability to declare (or in harsher terms, need to audition for) citizenship to a country of your choosing?

That sounds like a fine plan to me. "Auditioning" could consist of military or other volunteer service.

> At what age?

18, unless you're an orphan or emancipated, in which case you can do it sooner. Before that you inherit the citizenship of your parents or legal guardians, but only until you turn 18. Then you have to choose. Most people would choose to retain the citizenship they grew up with, but it would have to be an affirmative decision. I don't think it's right to be a citizen of a country to which you have not pledged allegiance as an adult.

I think Starship Troopers explored this a bit, but I only saw the movie and never read the book.

The movie satirically pokes fun at this sort of system. The book takes it seriously.

> For some unknown number of weeks I will be in limbo, unable to legally leave the country, at the whims of the mail and some unknown bureaucrat who may or may not decide to grant my renewal or decide that the photo I've submitted is not quite the right size or whatever.

Agreed that the system sucks and is generally antiquated. That being said, if you travel frequently and need to avoid that limbo state, you may be able to maintain a second US passport: https://travel.state.gov/content/travel/en/passports/have-pa...

One especially bizarre part of US citizenship is you can "accidentally" be a citizen without knowing and be required to pay income tax to the US regardless of where you live/work. What's more is it costs money to give up your US citizenship and you can only do it if you have no outstanding tax to pay.

Worldwide taxation is practically an operational necessity for the worldwide reserve currency issuer.

I see zero basis for such claim

The US has no moral right to ask for tax for people who haven't stepped inside its borders all year.

Of course it does if they have willingly chosen to participate in its ledger game and use its services.

> be required to pay income tax to the US regardless of where you live/work.

While technically true, you are only really required to file, and then exempt your income via the foreign earned income exemption or the foreign tax credit. This one simple trick means 95% of all Americans working abroad pay no US tax.

Apparently if one is a sole proprietor in a country that does not have the respective tax treaty with the US, one can be obliged to pay US Social Security and Medicare out of foreign income. I lack any expertise in this domain, but friends of mine who have returned to Romania (which lacks a treaty) after living in the US long enough for citizenship, have complained about having to set up a corporate structure and pay themselves via annual dividends in order to avoid this taxation.

> Apparently if one is a sole proprietor in a country that does not have the respective tax treaty with the US, one can be obliged to pay US Social Security and Medicare out of foreign income.

China lacks a treaty with the USA, which means Americans working in China pay to Chinese social security/medical and they are not transferred to the American equivalents. But ya, you pay SS/medicare on your stock dividends and even your sales to pay taxes (consequently, which you might also pay Chinese payroll taxes on).

Just clearing up some terminology: You're talking about Social Security "Totalization Agreements" [1], which are separate from tax treaties. Romania, for example, does have a tax treaty with the US [2] but not a totalization agreement.

Setting up a corporation suggests that the business should pay the worker "wages" or a "salary". [3] One key difference is that wages are considered earned income, allowing the taxpayer to use the foreign earned income exclusion, while dividends are not.

[1] https://www.irs.gov/government-entities/federal-state-local-...

[2] https://www.irs.gov/businesses/international-businesses/roma...

[3] https://ustax.bz/how-to-structure-your-non-u-s-business-or-p...

It also means that we Americans working* abroad are radioactive for anything financial beyond a simple bank account or mortgage. Absolutely no one in Germany wants to deal with a brokerage account for me.

Though my husband was all for adding me to his accounts, I’ve carefully kept our finances separate to prevent the nightmare scenario of a bank deciding its American customers are no longer worth the trouble and neither of us being able to get at our money, which happened to some Americans when FATCA was first introduced, and also so at least one of us can buy ETFs in an uncomplicated manner.

* As in, not wealthy enough to be well beyond having to work

> Absolutely no one in Germany wants to deal with a brokerage account for me.

I lived outside for 11 years, but in Switzerland before the crackdown on American accounts. China was no problem, even with FACTA, they just didn't care much, even for investments.

If your husband has a USA permanent resident or on an immigrant visa, the same that applies to you applies to him as well, FACTA applies to all US citizens as well as residents.

Neither is the case for him... when we were first talking about the long term, he was willing to consider living in the US for at least a few years, since he's always enjoyed his visits. Then I talked to enough acquaintances who had Green Card drama for German citizen spouses who had only ever lived in Germany that I dropped the idea.

People complain about German bureaucracy, but I've found the residence permit process to be relatively straightforward and well-documented, and reasonably priced. They were clear about what documents they needed from us and when, and even helped me out when I nearly got stuck here because I applied for a renewal a bit too close to a trip to the States.

US green card for a spouse to come over as an immigrant is also pretty easy, we didn't even need a lawyer for it, just one trip to Guangzhou.

Limit on excludable amount

  The maximum foreign earned income exclusion amount is adjusted annually for inflation. For tax year 2022, the maximum foreign earned income exclusion is the lesser of the foreign income earned or $112,000 per qualifying person. For tax year 2023, the maximum exclusion is $120,000 per person. If two individuals are married, and both work abroad and meet either the bona fide residence test or the physical presence test, each one can choose the foreign earned income exclusion. Together, they can exclude as much as $240,000 for the 2023 tax year.

https://www.irs.gov/individuals/international-taxpayers/figu...

And some German banks refuse to work with you if you have a US passport because of the taxation requirements. When I opened my last bank account I had to confirm I'm not a US citizen.

That's why Boris Johnson renounced his US citizenship.[0] He's a British politician who was their Prime Minister from 2019 to 2022 but he was actually born in New York so he was a natural born US citizen.

The US really should adopt a territorial tax system for individuals like the rest of the world but it might be reasonable to apply the system we currently use for individuals to corporations that do business in America to stop them from stashing cash overseas to dodge taxes.

[0]: https://americansoverseas.org/en/news/boris-johnson-american...

And I want to renounce my current citizenship and live as a stateless person, which would be preferable compared to my current citizenship. Unfortunately, there isn't a way to do that, unless you already have some other citizenship, which I don't.

Can you share what country you want to give up citizenship from? It's hard to imagine that being stateless would be preferable in most cases.

Russia.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com