PREP Podcaster - ”Success Favours The PREPared Mind”

Dan Duggan and Roger Ver Extradtions: When Does A U.S. Citizen Lose Citizenship?

July 24, 2025

This is a recording of a discussion an “ X.com Space” hosted by U.S. immigration Parviz Malakouti. I (John Richardson) contributed to the discussion.

When exactly does a U.S. citizen relinquish U.S. citizenship?

 

X.com Handles:

Parviz Malakouti - @ParvizMalakouti

John Richardson - @ExpatriationLaw

Renunciation vs. Relinquishment Of U.S. Citizenship - Why The Difference Can Matter

July 21, 2025

This is a recording of a discussion an “ X.com Space” hosted by U.S. immigration Parviz Malakouti. I (John Richardson) contributed to the discussion.

X.com Handles

Parviz Malakouti - @ParvizMalakouti

John Richardson - @ExpatriationLaw

Unraveling the Hidden "Saving Clause" in Global Tax Treaties

This AI generated podcast is based on a paper written by Professor Leopoldo Parada. Although a “saving clause” has been a feature of U.S. tax treaties for years, the OECD Model Treaty did not have a “saving clause” before 2017. Interestingly, the OECD commentary suggests that the purpose of the “saving clause” was to allow for the taxation of controlled foreign corporations. The U.S. treaties exploit their version of he “saving clause” as a mechanism to employ U.S. citizenship taxation. The abstract of Dr. Parada’s paper includes:

“The 'OECD Saving Clause': An American-Tailored Provision Made to Measure the World

Rivista di Diritto Finanziario e Scienza delle Finanze, LXXVIII 1, I, 13-52 (2019)

41 Pages Posted: 18 Jul 2019

Leopoldo Parada

King's College London

Date Written: July 1, 2019

Abstract

This article argues that the “saving clause” provision introduced in the 2017 OECD Model conflicts with the entitlement to double taxation relief under Article 23 OECD Model, especially in cases involving the use of hybrid entities. Although this issue is pragmatically solved in the new paragraph 11.1 of the commentaries on Articles 23A and 23B OECD Model, which provides no obligation for the Contracting States to relieve double taxation to the extent that taxation is based exclusively on the residence of the taxpayer, it leaves the taxpayer in the residence state with a potential permanent double taxation status. The foregoing may be however avoided with an optional “reverse saving clause”. Such an option seems to be not only more coherent with the traditional object and purpose of tax treaties (double taxation relief), but it also reflects the tax treaty practice already in force in some countries around the world.”

AI generated commentary:

"In this episode, we delve into the intricacies of global tax agreements, focusing on a fascinating provision known as the 'saving clause.' Introduced in the 2017 OECD Model Tax Convention, this provision allows countries to maintain their right to tax their own residents, even in the presence of a tax treaty with another country. We explore the surprising conflicts it creates with the goal of double tax relief, especially in the context of hybrid entities.

Our discussion highlights the United States' historical use of the saving clause and its motivations rooted in unique taxation policies. We also contrast this with the 2017 OECD Model's approach and the issues it presents, particularly concerning hybrid entities that can lead to double taxation.

The episode offers insights into potential solutions, like the 'reverse saving clause,' which aims to mitigate double taxation and promote fairness. Join us as we navigate through these complex dynamics and consider the implications for global business and personal financial planning."

Unraveling the Green Card's Hidden Tax Obligations Triggered By Abandoning The Green Card

This AI generated podcast is from a John Richardson presentation about “Green Card Abandonment”. The presentation - “Understanding The Green Card (if you can)” - took place on May 1, 2024 on the IRS Medic Podcast.

AI Description:

 

"Think you know everything about a green card? Think again. In this episode, we explore the less-discussed side of holding a U.S. permanent residency: the lifelong tax obligations it entails. We uncover surprising insights with expert John Richardson, highlighting how a green card can bind you to U.S. tax requirements wherever you live. From understanding the divergence between immigration and tax statuses to navigating complex pre- and post-immigration planning, this episode acts as your guide through potential financial landmines.

Discover the implications of worldwide taxation for green card holders, the criticality of pre-immigration planning, and the reality of holding foreign assets and income while living in the U.S. Understand what being a 'treaty non-resident' means and the tools available to those living abroad or looking to sever ties with the U.S.

Hear about the criteria that determine 'long-term resident' status and the intricate processes involved in expatriation, including the looming threat of exit taxes and compliance with U.S. tax obligations. This episode provides a comprehensive guide to the myriad challenges that accompany a green card—far beyond just being a right to live in America."

How U.S. Citizens Abroad Are Subject To A More Punitive Tax System Than Are U.S. Residents

This AI generated podcast is based on an article written by John Richardson on March 12, 2019 at Citizenship Solutions. It was republished on March 13, 2019 post at Tax Connections. The Tax Connections version received a lot of comments. You can find the article on Tax Connections here. The comments are extremely interesting.

What follows is an AI generated description of the article.

 

"In this episode, we delve into the complexities of the U.S. taxation system imposed on its citizens living abroad. The discussion sheds light on how the U.S. tax code enforces a distinct, often more burdensome tax framework on American expatriates compared to their domestic counterparts. Through various examples and an insightful exploration, the episode reveals the challenges faced by these individuals, from punitive taxation on foreign income to the legal obstruction in utilizing foreign financial schemes meant for savings and retirement.

We explore the multifaceted issues arising from citizenship-based taxation, where Americans abroad not only pay their local taxes but also grapple with unique U.S. tax rules that arguably disadvantage them. The episode highlights the disparity in tax treatment based on residency and the implications it holds for fairness and equality within tax legislation. Additionally, we look at the complex compliance requirements that place excessive burdens on these citizens, often prompting controversial discussions around renouncing citizenship.

Join us as we examine the broader implications of these tax policies and their impact on global citizenship, raising questions about the intersection of identity, location, and global responsibilities in today's interconnected world."

A Simple Regulatory Fix For Citizenship Taxation

In November of 2020, SEAT members John Richardson, Karen Alpert and Laura Snyder published “A Simple Regulatory Fix For Citizenship Taxation”. This was the first article (and possibly suggestion) that the problems of Americans abroad could be solved through regulation.

We participated in a video podcast with Robert Goulder at Tax Notes.

Here is the AI Description of the article.

A Simple Regulatory Fix For Citizenship Taxation

1 source

This Tax Notes Federal article by John Richardson, Laura Snyder, and Karen Alpert examines the complex challenges faced by U.S. citizens living abroad due to America's citizenship-based taxation system. The authors argue that this system disproportionately burdens expatriates with duplicative and intricate tax compliance, often leading to double taxation and hindering their ability to engage in normal financial activities in their countries of residence. They propose that the U.S. Treasury has the regulatory authority and moral imperative to implement a "qualified nonresident" status, which would exempt these citizens from U.S. taxation on non-U.S. source income, thereby alleviating burdens on both expatriates and the IRS. Additionally, the article suggests several alternative regulatory changes to reduce specific compliance issues, such as those related to foreign bank accounts, retirement plans, mutual funds, and small business filings, highlighting that the IRS currently lacks the resources and expertise to effectively administer global tax enforcement.

 

What follows is the AI description of the podcast generated by Poedbean ...

 

"In this episode, we delve into the complex world of U.S. citizenship-based taxation and how it uniquely and often unfairly impacts Americans living abroad. Discover what it means to be caught between two tax systems and why the IRS is just as much a victim as the taxpayers themselves. We explore the persistent myths surrounding U.S. expats and the political challenges of enacting change. The episode highlights a potentially transformative regulatory solution that doesn't require congressional approval, aiming to ease the burden on both expatriates and the IRS. Tune in for a comprehensive discussion informed by a detailed study published in Tax Notes Federal, providing not only a sharp critique but also actionable solutions to a longstanding issue."

If A U.S. Citizen Is Stripped Of His Citizenship, Will He Be Subject To the Exit Tax Regime?

July 12, 2025 - Participants include:

 

Virginia La Torre Jeker - @VLJeker

 

John Richardson - @ExpatriationLaw

_________________________________________________

Introduction:

The Trump administration has served notice of its focus on stripping certain U.S. citizens of their citizenship. This comes on the heels of increased aggression toward Green Card holders. Both citizens and Green Card holders are subject to punitive taxation on the loss of their status.

Today (July 12/25), Virginia published a fascinating article in Forbes where discusses what could happen if a naturalized citizen is denaturalized. The immigration consequences are understood. What are the tax consequences of a U.S. citizen being denaturalized. What are the tax consequences of a a Green Card holder losing his/her immigration status?

This raises questions of great interest. This podcast is a supplement to Virginia's Forbes article describing how this could work.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/virginialatorrejeker/2025/07/12/bombshell-denaturalized-citizen-forced-to-exit-cant-escape-exit-tax/

 

AI Description:

 

"Welcome to our latest podcast episode where tax attorney Virginia LaTorre Jeker joins John Richardson to discuss a pressing issue: the U.S. government's efforts to revoke citizenship of naturalized Americans. While this may initially seem like an immigration issue, Virginia highlights the intertwining of tax and immigration laws, focusing on the possible tax implications for those who face denaturalization.

The conversation navigates through the complexities of what losing U.S. citizenship means under expatriation (877A Exit Tax and 2801 Covered Gift) rules, exploring how these individuals face potential exit taxes. Virginia sheds light on how the tax code distinctly imposes punitive taxes on the  loss of U.S. citizenship, raising intriguing questions on the potential financial burdens, not just for those being denaturalized, but also for their families."

We delve into real-world scenarios, legal precedents, and hypothetical situations to provide a comprehensive look at this multifaceted topic, tailored for both tax professionals and the general audience. Tune in for insights that may redefine the way you see the intersection of immigration and tax laws."

Why U.S. Citizens Abroad Should Be Exempt From Reporting Their Local Accounts To FINCEN (Financial Crimes)

July 11, 2025 - "Why non-resident U.S. citizens should be exempted from FBAR"

 

Introduction:

This is an AI generated podcast which is based on a submission I made in April of 2024 explaining “Why non-resident citizens should be exempted from the FBAR”

What follows is the AI description of the podcast ….

AI Description:

 

"In this episode of The Deep Dive, we examine the controversial world of the Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Report (FBAR) and its impact on U.S. citizens living overseas. Discover why the seemingly outdated FBAR rules, which mandate U.S. citizens to disclose their local bank accounts to the U.S. Treasury, are under renewed scrutiny. We'll explore whether these regulations still serve their original purpose and delve into the arguments advocating for a reconsideration of whom these requirements should apply to in our globally connected era.

The discussion sheds light on surprising exemptions within the FBAR rules that often conflict with the heavy demands placed on expatriates. The episode raises pivotal questions about the role and meaning of American citizenship today, especially as it pertains to financial reporting. Join us for a thoughtful exploration of how FBAR is stirring debates and prompting some to contemplate renouncing their citizenship altogether."

Unveiling the Secrets of Homeless Income: How Multinationals Exploit Global Tax Treaties

This is an AI generated podcast of a 2014 paper written by Professor Bret Wells and Cym Lowell titled: “Income Tax Treaty Policy in the 21st Century: Residence vs. Source”

Why this is important:

The Trump administration recently proposed (as part of the “OBBB”) a provision that would impose tax penalties on residents of countries that had DSTs (“Digital Services Taxes”). The U.S. objection to DSTs is largely based on the provisions in tax treaties which give the “source country” (where the profits are generated) the right to tax those profits only if the corporation as a PE (“Permanent Establishment”) in that country. Of course, Google, Microsoft, et al do NOT have a “permanent establishment” in Canada, UK, India, etc. As a result many countries (because they cannot tax the income of U.S. multitionals) have enacted DSTs which are a tax NOT income but rather on revenue.

Yes, the standard tax treaties (which are 100 years old) deny the source country taxing rights (absent a PE). But, why is this? Does it make sense in 2025 to deny the source country taxing rights over income?

I came across a FANTASTIC article written by Professor Brett Wells and Cym Lowell which provides some historical perspective on this issue:

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2380241

I then ran it through AI and here is the summary. The AI description is:

Income Tax Treaty Policy: Residence vs. Source

1 source

The provided text explores the historical evolution of international income tax treaty policy, focusing on the shift from source-based taxation to residence-based taxation following World War I. It highlights how the League of Nations' model, which favored residence countries (often capital-exporting nations) and introduced the concept of Permanent Establishment (PE), largely superseded an earlier International Chamber of Commerce (ICC) proposal for profit-split methodologies. The text argues that this historical policy choice, coupled with the later rise of "interim holding companies," inadvertently led to the creation of "homeless income"—profits that escape taxation in both source and residence countries. Ultimately, it suggests that a re-examination of these foundational principles is necessary to address current global tensions surrounding multinational corporations' tax planning strategies and to foster more balanced and equitable international tax policies for the 21st century.

 

 

 

_______________________________________

 

AI description of PODBEAN podcast:

 

"In this episode, we explore the intriguing world of international tax treaties and uncover why some of the world's largest multinational corporations seem to pay surprisingly low tax rates. Delve into the history and evolution of these tax agreements, tracing back to post-World War I Europe, and understand the critical decisions that continue to shape modern global tax systems. Learn about the concept of "homeless income"—profits not taxed effectively in any country—and the controversial mechanisms allowing companies to shift profits to low or no-tax jurisdictions.

We reveal the stark contradictions and outdated policies that have left governments and corporations dissatisfied with the status quo. Discover how historical economic theories and deliberate policy choices have led to today's contentious base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS), a practice under scrutiny by international bodies like the OECD.

Join us as we discuss the changing economic power dynamics between traditional "imperial" countries and emerging economic giants. Explore the future challenges in international tax reform and consider the complex interplay between national interests, corporate strategies, and global economic fairness. This deep dive provides valuable insights into the mechanics and potential reform of a tax system nearly a century in the making."

"Citizenship and Taxation: The Twin Destinies Shaping Global Mobility"

June 12, 2025 - Participant includes:

John Richardson - @ExpatriationLaw

 

On June 12, 2025 SEAT members Laura Snyder and John Richardson separately gave presentations at the Migration Conference held at the University of Greenwich in London, UK.

A complete description may be found on the SEAT site here.

A brief outline of John's presentation (and the slides used) may be found in the blog post here.

This podcast is a recording of John's presentation.

AI description:

 

"Join lawyer John Richardson from Toronto, Canada, as he delves into a vital yet overlooked issue impacting global mobility: taxation as destiny. This episode explores the rarely discussed concept of exit taxes, which pose significant barriers to emigration for people seeking to move from their country of citizenship. John sheds light on how these taxes affect individuals, especially middle-class citizens, preventing them from pursuing new opportunities abroad.

Through his experiences from attending various international conferences, John highlights the importance of establishing multilateral treaties to address this growing concern. He argues for the rights of middle-class individuals to move freely without the fear of punitive taxes on their hard-earned pensions and assets. With examples from history, John draws attention to the urgent need for international cooperation in mitigating these financial barriers, advocating for fair and just treatment of migrating populations worldwide."