Searching \ for '[OT]:: US Non resident taxes' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=non+resident+taxes
Search entire site for: ': US Non resident taxes'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[OT]:: US Non resident taxes'
2007\08\23@125535 by Eoin Ross

flavicon
face
>>> spam_OUTpeteTakeThisOuTspampetertodd.ca 23 Aug 07 11:14:13 >>>
>>On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 10:20:24AM -0400, Eoin Ross wrote:
>> The whole world has been... sort of.... (Before people get too wound up
>> about that please read links/excerpts below)
>>
>> As an interesting aside to that... A US citizen or "green card holder"
>> is REQUIRED, no matter where in the world they live, to file a tax
>> return with the US government, Libya also does this. Pretty much every
>> other country doesn't :) Failure to do so results in arrest when trying
>> to enter the USA, & inability to renew their US passport until these
>> returns are filed. They do however, still get to vote in US elections.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>Big question...
>They have to file a tax return, but do they pay taxes?
>- --
>http://petertodd.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Depends!

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/international/article/0,,id=96739,00.html
"Under these treaties, residents (not necessarily citizens) of foreign countries are taxed at a reduced rate, or are exempt from U.S. taxes on certain items of income they receive from sources within the United States. These reduced rates and exemptions vary among countries and specific items of income."

http://www.irs.gov/publications/p54/index.html
U.S. citizens and resident aliens living outside the United States generally are allowed the same deductions as citizens and residents living in the United States.

If you are a U.S. citizen or a resident alien of the United States and you live abroad, you are taxed on your worldwide income. However, you may qualify to exclude from income up to US$82,400 of your foreign earnings. In addition, you can exclude or deduct certain foreign housing amounts. See Foreign Earned Income Exclusion and Foreign Housing Exclusion and Deduction, later.

NZ-USA tax treaty        http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/newzld.pdf
This paragraph is interesting/scary - I wonder who defines the purpose for giving up citizenship?

3. Notwithstanding any provision of the Convention except paragraph 4, a Contracting State
may tax its residents (as determined under Article 4 (Residence)), and the United States may tax
its citizens and United States companies, as if the Convention had not come into effect. For this
purpose, the term "citizen" shall include a former citizen whose loss of citizenship had as one of
its principal purposes the avoidance of tax, but only for a period of 10 years following such loss.




2007\08\24@123411 by Peter Todd

picon face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:54:36PM -0400, Eoin Ross wrote:
{Quote hidden}

- From their perspective, I wonder what would be a reason for giving up
citizenship that wasn't for avoidance of tax?


Another thought is surely the many people with US citizenship through
mearly being born there or a US parent aren't paying taxes. I mean, I
have Australian citizenship through my mom, but was born in Canada,
I'd be rather annoyed if Australia wanted me to start filing tax
returns.

- --
http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFGztKG3bMhDbI9xWQRAuPsAJ4lYElvJkN/DQuSwOAbZoHMU0IzjgCgshiR
9dDux5V6OtXHeMMhDD8euBU=
=xEoh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2007\08\24@143149 by Eoin Ross

flavicon
face
>>>> .....peteKILLspamspam@spam@petertodd.ca 24 Aug 07 08:43:50 >>>
>On Thu, Aug 23, 2007 at 12:54:36PM -0400, Eoin Ross wrote:
<snip>
>> NZ-USA tax treaty        http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/newzld.pdf
>> This paragraph is interesting/scary - I wonder who defines the purpose for giving up citizenship?
>>  
>> 3. Notwithstanding any provision of the Convention except paragraph 4, a Contracting State
>> may tax its residents (as determined under Article 4 (Residence)), and the United States may tax
>> its citizens and United States companies, as if the Convention had not come into effect. For this
>> purpose, the term "citizen" shall include a former citizen whose loss of citizenship had as one of
>> its principal purposes the avoidance of tax, but only for a period of 10 years following such loss.
>
>- From their perspective, I wonder what would be a reason for giving up
>citizenship that wasn't for avoidance of tax?
>
>Another thought is surely the many people with US citizenship through
>mearly being born there or a US parent aren't paying taxes. I mean, I
>have Australian citizenship through my mom, but was born in Canada,
>I'd be rather annoyed if Australia wanted me to start filing tax
>returns.

I guess technically they should be? It may be they are eligble to be, but are not considered a citizen?
Mind you - what can they do if you are in a foreign (Non US) country, have not applied for a US passport, and are not travelling into or through (Say in a transit lounge @ LAX on the way to London) the USA?

New Zealand doesn't ask non-resident citizens to file taxes unless they earn money in NZ. You can't vote there as a non-resident citizen though, unlike the US.


2007\08\24@151713 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
Quoting Eoin Ross <erossspamKILLspamchemstation.com>:

{Quote hidden}

Does the US even have transit lounges? (a place where passengers can
wait between international flights that does NOT involve passing through
US customs and immigration). In Miami perhaps? I've never seen one.
Canada->US flights are generally pre-cleared and become like domestic
US flights once they leave the airport.

> New Zealand doesn't ask non-resident citizens to file taxes unless  
> they earn money in NZ. You can't vote there as a non-resident  
> citizen though, unlike the US.

There are only a few countries which tax on the basis of citizenship..
IIRC the exclusive club consists of the USA, Iran and Philippines. The
latter two obviously would have less ability to enforce such a regulation
unless a person were to voluntarily visit.

Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..."                          "The Journey is the reward"
EraseMEs...spam_OUTspamTakeThisOuTinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com






2007\08\24@175635 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Peter Todd wrote:

> Another thought is surely the many people with US citizenship through
> mearly being born there or a US parent aren't paying taxes. I mean, I
> have Australian citizenship through my mom, but was born in Canada, I'd
> be rather annoyed if Australia wanted me to start filing tax returns.

You can be lucky that Australia doesn't have a draft :)

I know people in your situation (a 2nd citizenship through parents or
birthplace) who had to give up the other citizenship at around 18, or else
they would have to do military service in that country.

Gerhard

2007\08\24@180000 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> ... Iran.

> The latter two obviously would have less ability to enforce such a
> regulation
> unless a person were to voluntarily visit.


I'd be immensely wary of relying on that conclusion.


       Russell

2007\08\24@180001 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Mind you - what can they do if you are in a foreign (Non US)
> country, have not applied for a US passport, and are not travelling
> into or through (Say in a transit lounge @ LAX on the way to London)
> the USA?

Bites tongue. Decides not to suggest that 'they' can do almost
anything they want if they have enough desire.
Fails to even think about alluding to free international flights in
exclusive executive jets or all expenses paid Caribbean holidays. Goes
back to work ... .



       R

2007\08\24@190411 by Spehro Pefhany

picon face
At 04:53 PM 8/24/2007, you wrote:
> > ... Iran.
>
> > The latter two obviously would have less ability to enforce such a
> > regulation
> > unless a person were to voluntarily visit.
>
>
>I'd be immensely wary of relying on that conclusion.
>
>
>         Russell

True, Iran does have tax treaties with many countries such as Oman,
Ukraine, Spain, Germany, France, South Africa etc., so if they could
identify a citizen they could perhaps make a claim on them.

Best regards,

Spehro Pefhany --"it's the network..."            "The Journey is the reward"
speffspamspam_OUTinterlog.com             Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog  Info for designers:  http://www.speff.com



2007\08\24@202207 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>> > ... Iran.

>> > The latter two obviously would have less ability to enforce such
>> > a
>> > regulation
>> > unless a person were to voluntarily visit.

>>I'd be immensely wary of relying on that conclusion.

> True, Iran does have tax treaties with many countries such as Oman,
> Ukraine, Spain, Germany, France, South Africa etc., so if they could
> identify a citizen they could perhaps make a claim on them.

I guess you could take my comment to have meant something like that
:-)


       Russell


2007\08\24@220734 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 8/25/07, Gerhard Fiedler <@spam@listsKILLspamspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> Peter Todd wrote:
>
> > Another thought is surely the many people with US citizenship through
> > mearly being born there or a US parent aren't paying taxes. I mean, I
> > have Australian citizenship through my mom, but was born in Canada, I'd
> > be rather annoyed if Australia wanted me to start filing tax returns.
>
> You can be lucky that Australia doesn't have a draft :)
>
> I know people in your situation (a 2nd citizenship through parents or
> birthplace) who had to give up the other citizenship at around 18, or else
> they would have to do military service in that country.
>

Dual citizenship is an interesting issue. Singapore and China
do not recognize dual citizenship so I have to given up my Chinese
citizenship and passport when I became a Singapore citizenship
this year after staying in Singapore for more than 10 years.

Canada does recognize dual citizenship. So some Chinese people
still hold a Chinese passport even after getting the Canadian citizenship.
They can enter China with the Chinese passport but it will be hard
for Canadian embassy to protect them when they enter mainland
China with their Chinese passport.

US situation is a bit different. I believe a Chinese person has to
given up his Chinese passport before becoming a US citizen.

And it is said to be very hard to give up US citizenship for tax
reasons.

I paid US tax when I was holding a F1 visa. I need to file a tax
return through company appointed PWC tax speciallist
this year as well even though I did not earn a single cent from my
US host. The reason was that I was holding a J1 trainee visa
last year.


Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\08\25@215408 by Peter Todd

picon face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 10:07:32AM +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Interesting that China won't take away the citizenship. My mom, even
after living in Canada for nearly 30 years, still doesn't have Canadian
citizenship because if she got it Australia would revoke her Australian
citizenship. Though aparently that will (has?) recently changed.

- --
http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG0KEU3bMhDbI9xWQRAkuFAJ4uMeAoIweBnkfieJ3+N/LGuCtO0wCdEeFS
E9uflpKLhSj0kROPMTUc24o=
=Pvx9
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2007\08\25@215410 by Peter Todd

picon face
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 06:53:57PM -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Heck, while at a hostel this summer I met a girl from Isreal who
couldn't actually return just yet, because technically she would have
gone to jail for missing her service, but she said it was just a minor
buracratic mixup with her deferrment forms. She did say her applying to
immigrate to Canada was making it much more complex though.

But the weirdest was another guy I met who was simply
travelling for a few months around the US and Canada, and who's home
country (somewhere in the middle east, forget which one exactly, Jordan? he
said it was a near miracle he got a visa in the first place) had threatened
to take his citizenship away due to him missing military service, except,
he didn't have duel citizenship... They just *assumed* he was going try to
immigrate!

- --
http://petertodd.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFG0KBb3bMhDbI9xWQRAhdwAJ0Ve2M8Rwxw+2axIfPryn+4creNYACcDWR/
Ecy4/P3kICtEka1Xv4U5O8U=
=J5n/
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2007\08\25@223640 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 8/26/07, Peter Todd <KILLspampeteKILLspamspampetertodd.ca> wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 25, 2007 at 10:07:32AM +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > Canada does recognize dual citizenship. So some Chinese people
> > still hold a Chinese passport even after getting the Canadian citizenship.
> > They can enter China with the Chinese passport but it will be hard
> > for Canadian embassy to protect them when they enter mainland
> > China with their Chinese passport.
>
> Interesting that China won't take away the citizenship. My mom, even
> after living in Canada for nearly 30 years, still doesn't have Canadian
> citizenship because if she got it Australia would revoke her Australian
> citizenship. Though aparently that will (has?) recently changed.

By Chinese law, the person's Chinese passport is no longer valid
after becoming a Canadian citizen. So they are breaking the law
when they enter China with their no-longer-valid Chinese passport.

Apparently Canada government does not check whether
this person has renounced his Chinese passport or not.

Singapore and China apparently established a good mechanism
to check this situation.

Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\08\25@232401 by SM Ling

picon face
> By Chinese law, the person's Chinese passport is no longer valid
> after becoming a Canadian citizen. So they are breaking the law
> when they enter China with their no-longer-valid Chinese passport.
>
> Apparently Canada government does not check whether
> this person has renounced his Chinese passport or not.
>
> Singapore and China apparently established a good mechanism
> to check this situation.
>

I don't think it is easy to check another country citizenship database.

In this increasing interconnect world, those who have dual or multiple
citizenships are also more likely to be highly sought after individuals by
many other countries.  A pragmatic country do not want to risk these
talents, I think.

But the tax issue shall be a bigger headache to contend than doing a
zero-part programmer.

Ling SM

2007\08\26@005705 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Singapore and China apparently established a good mechanism
> to check this situation.

I was astonished to read comments some years ago by (I think it was)
Singapore's Prime Minister* to the effect that if you go and live in
another country and apply for citizenship then you are no longer any
son or daughter of theirs, they don't want you, go away, don't come
back, good riddance. [[These words are how I express it but the
intention was quite clear]].

In NZ if someone decides to migrate to say Australia and obtain
citizenship their we just feel pity :-).

Some decades ago a somewhat famous NZ Prime Minister was lambasted by
people leaving NZ to settle in Australia. He responded that they were
free to go, thereby improving the average IQ of both countries. I
imagine his speech writer had been saving that line up for some while.
[Not the sort of clever response that most can think of on the spur of
the moment].



       Russell

* If not the PM then a government spokesman in high office.


2007\08\26@051440 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 8/26/07, SM Ling <RemoveMEsm.ling11TakeThisOuTspamgmail.com> wrote:
> > Singapore and China apparently established a good mechanism
> > to check this situation.
> >
> I don't think it is easy to check another country citizenship database.
>

In the case of Singapore/China, it is easy. One has to provide the
letter from Chinese Embassy to the Singapore ICA (Immigration
and Checkpoints Authority) to show that he has already renounced
the Chinese citizenship. I think it is the same for other nationals
if he wants to become a Singapore citizen.

> In this increasing interconnect world, those who have dual or multiple
> citizenships are also more likely to be highly sought after individuals by
> many other countries.  A pragmatic country do not want to risk these
> talents, I think.

Then there is an old saying that is something like  "there is no boundary
for science, but there is a boundary for scientists". IMHO there is
no right or wrong answer to the question to allow or not allow dual
citizenship.

> But the tax issue shall be a bigger headache to contend than doing a
> zero-part programmer.

Yeah I think US government is very smart in terms of persuing tax
even though I heard that their machines are pretty old...


Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\08\26@083546 by SM Ling

picon face
>
> In the case of Singapore/China, it is easy. One has to provide the
> letter from Chinese Embassy to the Singapore ICA (Immigration
> and Checkpoints Authority) to show that he has already renounced
> the Chinese citizenship. I think it is the same for other nationals
> if he wants to become a Singapore citizen.


Remind me of a soccer player from UK that renounced his UK citizenship so he
can play for Singapore, only after he found out that he can gain back his UK
citizenship anytime as he was born to a UK parent.  Many countries view
citizenship as a birth right.

Ling SM

2007\08\26@100717 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Russell McMahon wrote:

>> Singapore and China apparently established a good mechanism to check
>> this situation.
>
> I was astonished to read comments some years ago by (I think it was)
> Singapore's Prime Minister* to the effect that if you go and live in
> another country and apply for citizenship then you are no longer any son
> or daughter of theirs, they don't want you, go away, don't come back,
> good riddance. [[These words are how I express it but the intention was
> quite clear]].

There are a few different attitudes towards dual citizenship. It's not a
simple question, actually, because a few laws make a distinction between
nationals and foreigners. In most cases, it's simple and the person is
treated as a national, having all rights and duties of a "normal" national.
But in some cases, it may not be trivial to decide whether a person is to
be treated as a national or a foreigner if both criteria apply.

Germany doesn't accept dual citizenship, in principle, and revokes the
German citizenship for any citizen who applies for and receives another
one. (And, AFAIK, requires applicants to revoke their previous
citizenship.) But there's a formal process to grant exceptions on request,
and when granted, that other citizenship is officially recognized.

The USA, OTOH, for all I know, doesn't really care whether their citizens
have other citizenships; they simply don't take them into account. A US
citizen is always only a US citizen before the (US) law.

Gerhard


'[OT]:: US Non resident taxes'
2007\09\05@163940 by Vitaliy
flavicon
face
Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> The USA, OTOH, for all I know, doesn't really care whether their citizens
> have other citizenships; they simply don't take them into account. A US
> citizen is always only a US citizen before the (US) law.

It's a funny thing, because during the naturalization process one has to
"absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to
any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or which
[they] have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"

However, at the same time in the naturalization FAQ it says something to the
effect that while the US doesn't recognize dual citizenship, some countries
do and it's OK for a person to be a citizen of another country, except that
they complicate life for themselves by possibly having to pay taxes to their
old country.

I was in a catch-22 situation last year, when the embassy of Kazakhstan
would not grant me a travel visa until I turned in my passport and formally
renounced my Kazakhstani citizenship. Except that I entered the US at the
age of 14, and therefore did not have a passport to turn in...

Most people find it easier to keep their old passport for travel, but as
another poster pointed out, it affects the US embassy's ability to get them
out of trouble.

Vitaliy

2007\09\05@171256 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Vitaliy wrote:

> It's a funny thing, because during the naturalization process one has to
> "absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity
> to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty, of whom or
> which [they] have heretofore been a subject or citizen;"

I've never felt that citizenship had much to do with "allegiance and
fidelity" -- after all, I wouldn't know to whom or what --, so renouncing
and abjuring what I never had is a no-brainer...

> I was in a catch-22 situation last year, when the embassy of Kazakhstan
> would not grant me a travel visa until I turned in my passport and
> formally renounced my Kazakhstani citizenship. Except that I entered the
> US at the age of 14, and therefore did not have a passport to turn in...

You could've contacted Borat. I'm told he has connections :)

> Most people find it easier to keep their old passport for travel, but as
> another poster pointed out, it affects the US embassy's ability to get
> them out of trouble.

Yes, if you enter a country as a certain national, you better not change
your mind while you're there. Showing all of a sudden a US passport without
entry visa/stamp could get you into even more trouble.

Gerhard

2007\09\05@185322 by Roger, in Bangkok

face
flavicon
face
The US Embassies do NOT get their citizens out of trouble in foreign
countries.  They will only contact relatives (if requested) or arrange for
medical evacuation if needed.  No legal or financial assistance will be
offered in any case.  If you are destitute they will buy you a one-way
ticket home, escort you to the airport and then seize your passport until
all expenses are repaid.

In many cases even government benefits such as VA (veterans administration)
pensions cease to be available.

Regards/Roger, in Bangkok


On 9/6/07, Vitaliy <spamBeGonespamspamBeGonespammaksimov.org> wrote:
>
> Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> ...


Most people find it easier to keep their old passport for travel, but as
another poster pointed out, it affects the US embassy's ability to get them
out of trouble.

2007\09\05@192010 by Piclist

flavicon
face
Then you get places like Brazil.  After I got my US citizenship, I
didn't bother renewing my Brazilian passport.  Then I found out the
Brazilian consulate would not give me a visa on my American passport to
enter the country to visit family.  I had to get a new Brazilian
passport.  Aparently, no matter what citizenship you have, if your
passport says you were born in Brazil, you can only go to Brazil with a
Brazilian passport.

What a load of crap.


-Mario

{Original Message removed}

2007\09\05@220646 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
piclist@mmendes.com wrote:

> Aparently, no matter what citizenship you have, if your passport says you
> were born in Brazil, you can only go to Brazil with a Brazilian
> passport.

Actually, in the case of the USA you don't have to be born in the USA. Any
US citizen has to enter the US with his/her US passport, no matter what
other passport they have. I'm not sure it's a felony if you use a different
one, but it's some sort of illegality.

If you had renounced your Brazilian citizenship (not sure this is possible,
but it probably is), then you wouldn't have had that problem :)

Gerhard

2007\09\05@221529 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 05:53 +0700, Roger, in Bangkok wrote:
> The US Embassies do NOT get their citizens out of trouble in foreign
> countries.  They will only contact relatives (if requested) or arrange for
> medical evacuation if needed.  No legal or financial assistance will be
> offered in any case.  If you are destitute they will buy you a one-way
> ticket home, escort you to the airport and then seize your passport until
> all expenses are repaid.
>
> In many cases even government benefits such as VA (veterans administration)
> pensions cease to be available.

Wow, on a completely different note, I've always found one of the lines
in the back of my Canadian passport "neat":

"Canadian government offices abroad provide Canadian citizens with
passport and other consular services. In countries where there is no
Canadian office, application may be made in an emergency to the nearest
British diplomatic or consular office."

I've always wondered if other commonwealth countries passports have
similar wording. And what about British passports, do they say you can
go to Canadian embassy in an emergency?

TTYL

2007\09\05@222903 by Piclist

flavicon
face
Yes, I must use my US passport to enter the US.  However, I can't
renounce my Brazilian citizenship if I intend to visite family and
friends there.  The minute I decide to go to Brazil, I need to have a
valid Brazilian passport, otherwise no entry is allowed.  So it is
possible to renounce, but only if you're never going to go back there,
for anything.

-Mario

{Original Message removed}

2007\09\06@065804 by Roger, in Bangkok

face
flavicon
face
This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you exit on
your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The US system will
showing you leaving but not having ever arrived anywhere ... yet all of a
sudden you have returned to US without an entry stamp!  I would go to the
airport VERY early and explain everything in detail to the US Immigration
officer there, so that there is at least a record with them indicating due
diligence on your part to comply with any or all regulations.

Things change rapidly, of necessity ... rapidly does not necessarily equate
to well thought out.

Regards/Roger, in Bangkok


On 9/6/07, TakeThisOuTpiclistEraseMEspamspam_OUTmmendes.com <RemoveMEpiclistspamTakeThisOuTmmendes.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, I must use my US passport to enter the US.  However, I can't
> renounce my Brazilian citizenship if I intend to visite family and
> friends there.  The minute I decide to go to Brazil, I need to have a
> valid Brazilian passport, otherwise no entry is allowed.  So it is
> possible to renounce, but only if you're never going to go back there,
> for anything.
>
> -Mario
>
> {Original Message removed}

2007\09\06@074243 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
piclist@mmendes.com wrote:

> Yes, I must use my US passport to enter the US.  However, I can't
> renounce my Brazilian citizenship if I intend to visite family and
> friends there.  The minute I decide to go to Brazil, I need to have a
> valid Brazilian passport, otherwise no entry is allowed.  

I don't think this is correct. For all I know, after you renounce your
Brazilian citizenship, you are a US citizen like any other and need a
Brazilian visa (and no Brazilian passport) for entering Brazil.

The requirement to enter Brazil with a valid Brazilian passport is only as
long as you are (also) a Brazilian citizen, like they write here
<www.abe.mre.gov.br/mundo/europa/reino-dos-paises-baixos/roterda/servicos/nacionalidade-brasileira/renuncia-a-nacionalidade/>:
"O Consulado-Geral não pode apor visto em passaporte estrangeiro possuído
por cidadão brasileiro". The moment you are not anymore a Brazilian
citizen, your US passport is no longer a foreign passport owned by a
Brazilian citizen.

Gerhard

2007\09\06@075015 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Roger, in Bangkok wrote:

> This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you exit
> on your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The US
> system will showing you leaving but not having ever arrived anywhere ...

How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
immigration services.

Gerhard

2007\09\06@080249 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/6/07, Gerhard Fiedler <listsEraseMEspam.....connectionbrazil.com> wrote:
> Roger, in Bangkok wrote:
>
> > This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you exit
> > on your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The US
> > system will showing you leaving but not having ever arrived anywhere ...
>
> How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
> immigration services.
>

Because the US customs keeps a good record of people come in
and out of US. So the US customs will know that the person has
already left US and not yet return. So if he would be caught with
other things he might be subjected to one more charge.

2007\09\06@081539 by Roger, in Bangkok

face
flavicon
face
The US system is linked to name + date of birth, the same as probably most
any other system.  They enter your name and DOB without regard to
nationality and the system pops up an image of your US passport on their
monitor, along with a full record of exits and enties ... been there, done
that many years ago before terrorism became a factor.

Regards/Roger, in Bangkok


On 9/6/07, Gerhard Fiedler <EraseMElistsspamconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\09\06@094654 by Eoin Ross

flavicon
face
>>> RemoveMElistsEraseMEspamEraseMEconnectionbrazil.com 06 Sep 07 07:47:28 >>>
Roger, in Bangkok wrote:

> This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you exit
> on your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The US
> system will showing you leaving but not having ever arrived anywhere ...

How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
immigration services.

Gerhard
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well - the airlines do forward passenger lists prior to your arrival in the USA - in fact I believe the US is requiring that this is done before the plane leaves the ground in the originating country now.

I don't know if they send passport info over - Before leaving NZ the passport is checked. I wonder if I can leave the US showing a US passport (Not that I have one yet) and enter NZ with an NZ one. Then Leave NZ with an NZ passport, and enter the US with the US passport.


2007\09\06@120537 by piclist

flavicon
face
> I wonder if I can leave the US showing a US passport (Not that I have
> one yet) and enter NZ with an NZ one. Then Leave NZ with an NZ
> passport, and enter the US with the US passport.

This is basically what I have to do.

Unless the person I spoke with at the Brazilian consulate office in Boston did
not know what they were talking about.  The short story was, if your foreign
passport (non-Brazilian) shows that your place of birth was Brazil, then you
will not be granted a visa to go to Brazil on that passport and the
only way to
go to Brazil is with a valid Brazilian passport.

-Mario

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



2007\09\06@121117 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Roger, in Bangkok wrote:

>>> This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you
>>> exit on your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The
>>> US system will showing you leaving but not having ever arrived
>>> anywhere ...
>>
>> How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
>> immigration services.

> The US system is linked to name + date of birth, the same as probably
> most any other system.  They enter your name and DOB without regard to
> nationality and the system pops up an image of your US passport on their
> monitor, along with a full record of exits and enties ...

That may be. But it doesn't show any data about how (using what passport,
as is the discussion here) you entered another country.

Gerhard

2007\09\06@121510 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Xiaofan Chen wrote:

>>> This "could" also pose a problem for you on returning to USA, if you
>>> exit on your US passport but return on your Brazilian passport.  The
>>> US system will showing you leaving but not having ever arrived
>>> anywhere ...
>>
>> How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
>> immigration services.
>
> Because the US customs keeps a good record of people come in and out of
> US. So the US customs will know that the person has already left US and
> not yet return. So if he would be caught with other things he might be
> subjected to one more charge.

Oh, now I got it :)

I didn't read the above correctly, but that's because entering the US witha
non-US passport is simply forbidden for a US citizen. You have to enter the
US with the US passport.

But this doesn't say much about how you enter another country. Which was
Mario's problem.

Gerhard

2007\09\06@122130 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Eoin Ross wrote:

>> How that? I don't think the US system is linked to Brazilian (or other)
>> immigration services.

> Well - the airlines do forward passenger lists prior to your arrival in
> the USA - in fact I believe the US is requiring that this is done before
> the plane leaves the ground in the originating country now.

The US seems to do that, but I don't think other countries do that a lot.

> I don't know if they send passport info over - Before leaving NZ the
> passport is checked. I wonder if I can leave the US showing a US
> passport (Not that I have one yet) and enter NZ with an NZ one. Then
> Leave NZ with an NZ passport, and enter the US with the US passport.

That's the point. When you leave the US for NZ, you show your US passport,
to both the airline and the feds. (If there are visa restrictions for US
citizens in NZ, you may have to also show your NZ passport to the airline,
so that they know you can enter NZ.) When you enter NZ, you show your NZ
passport to NZ immigration.

When you leave NZ for the US, you show your US passport to the airline and
your NZ passport to NZ immigration on the exit (if there is an exit
control).  When you enter the US, you show your US passport as required.

Gerhard

2007\09\06@135908 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 09:10 -0700, RemoveMEpiclistspam_OUTspamKILLspammmendes.com wrote:
> > I wonder if I can leave the US showing a US passport (Not that I have
> > one yet) and enter NZ with an NZ one. Then Leave NZ with an NZ
> > passport, and enter the US with the US passport.
>
> This is basically what I have to do.
>
> Unless the person I spoke with at the Brazilian consulate office in Boston did
> not know what they were talking about.  The short story was, if your foreign
> passport (non-Brazilian) shows that your place of birth was Brazil, then you
> will not be granted a visa to go to Brazil on that passport and the
> only way to
> go to Brazil is with a valid Brazilian passport.

Personally, I don't see the big deal. You leave the US showing your US
passport, you enter Brazil showing your Brazilian passport. You leave
Brazil showing your Brazilian passport, and you reenter the states with
your US passport. Seems simple enough to me. Am I missing something?

TTYL

2007\09\06@135952 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face

On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 08:42 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:
> RemoveMEpiclistTakeThisOuTspamspammmendes.com wrote:
>
> > Yes, I must use my US passport to enter the US.  However, I can't
> > renounce my Brazilian citizenship if I intend to visite family and
> > friends there.  The minute I decide to go to Brazil, I need to have a
> > valid Brazilian passport, otherwise no entry is allowed.  
>
> I don't think this is correct. For all I know, after you renounce your
> Brazilian citizenship, you are a US citizen like any other and need a
> Brazilian visa (and no Brazilian passport) for entering Brazil.
>
> The requirement to enter Brazil with a valid Brazilian passport is only as
> long as you are (also) a Brazilian citizen, like they write here
> <www.abe.mre.gov.br/mundo/europa/reino-dos-paises-baixos/roterda/servicos/nacionalidade-brasileira/renuncia-a-nacionalidade/>:
> "O Consulado-Geral não pode apor visto em passaporte estrangeiro possuído
> por cidadão brasileiro". The moment you are not anymore a Brazilian
> citizen, your US passport is no longer a foreign passport owned by a
> Brazilian citizen.

But how does one "give up" a citizenship? Just curious. TTYL

2007\09\06@144120 by piclist

flavicon
face
Quoting Herbert Graf <EraseMEmailinglist3spamspamspamBeGonefarcite.net>:

> On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 09:10 -0700, RemoveMEpiclistKILLspamspammmendes.com wrote:
>> > I wonder if I can leave the US showing a US passport (Not that I have
>> > one yet) and enter NZ with an NZ one. Then Leave NZ with an NZ
>> > passport, and enter the US with the US passport.
>>
>> This is basically what I have to do.
>>
>> Unless the person I spoke with at the Brazilian consulate office in
>> Boston did
>> not know what they were talking about.  The short story was, if your foreign
>> passport (non-Brazilian) shows that your place of birth was Brazil, then you
>> will not be granted a visa to go to Brazil on that passport and the
>> only way to
>> go to Brazil is with a valid Brazilian passport.
>
> Personally, I don't see the big deal. You leave the US showing your US
> passport, you enter Brazil showing your Brazilian passport. You leave
> Brazil showing your Brazilian passport, and you reenter the states with
> your US passport. Seems simple enough to me. Am I missing something?

The big deal is the burocracy one must go through.

For a US passport, you take pictures, go to the post office, fill out the app
and turn it in with your drivers license so they can see that it is
really you,
send it in and wait for the passport to arrive in the mail.

For a Brazilian passport, I have to take the day off to go to Boston.  
Stand in
line to get a number to stand in another line, this takes at least 3 hours.
Then you go home.  In a week or so, you need to take another day off, stand in
line, to get a number to stand in another line to pick it up.

Now here's the kicker, if you happen to have left Brazil before you
were 18 and
never signed up for their "draft" in order to get your passport renewed, you
have to take the day off, go to Boston, stand in line to get a number to stand
in another line, to pay a fine for not having signed up for the draft,
get back
in another line to fill out paper work and come back another day to make sure
that paper work has arrived from Brazil, only then can you stand in
line to get
a number to stand in another line to get the paper work to renew your
passport.

The other kicker, if you happen to be lucky enough to have left Brazil before
you were 18, not have signed up for the draft and ended up not remembering to
renew your passport before it expired, then that's another day off to stand in
a line to get a number to stand in another line.....

All in all, up to 4 days off just to get a stupid passport that I only need to
use in order to go visit family.

Every time I go there, the stupid paperwork for the draft fine thing can't be
found in their office, so they have to request duplicate copies from Brazil!
And that costs more money.  Then pay the fine, pay for the passport, etc.

The other great thing is that, even though they do recognize the fact
that I am
Brazilian from my American passport, they won't accept my American passport as
a valid id picture id, and neither will they take any other non Brazilian
picture id as proof of who I am.  So now I have to carry around a birth
certificate to the consul, request paperwork from Brazil that they can double
check it's authenticity (obviously this costs money too), then do the
paperwork
for the draft fine, so that I can then have two pieces of Brazilian id,
none of
them with a picture, so that I can then get a passport.  Every time you go
there, there are fees.

It is complete and utter horse manure.  As it is typical of any other
Brazilian
government agency, competent only at charging you fees.


-Mario

----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using IMP, the Internet Messaging Program.



2007\09\06@150611 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 11:46 -0700, piclistSTOPspamspamspam_OUTmmendes.com wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Ah, so the real issue is getting the passport.

Unfortunately, Americans are quite spoiled when it comes to passports,
your government has pretty much made it as easy as possible to renew a
passport.

Even here in Canada there is no such thing as "renewing" a passport.
Every 5 years we have to apply for a passport, whether or not one
currently has a passport only matters from a perspective of not being
allowed to carry two passports (you have to surrender it when you hand
in your application).

Every 5 years, I have to get the form, get it filled out by a
"professional who knows me" and 2 other people who know me. Then I have
to get the pictures, stand in line, hand in the form, along with my ID
(birth certificate or citizenship card, which I believe they still
keep). Then, a few weeks later, you get a letter to come pick up your
passport and ID, which yes, means another line.

To be fair, the process HAS improved, the lines tend to be shorter. And
it looks like they are strongly considering doing things the US way, but
for the last 3 passports I had to get, that was the process.

That said, while the US system is easy for US citizens, for others it is
the hell you describe with regards to getting your Brazilian passport. A
friend once needed to get a vistor VISA for the US. It meant a trip to
the consulate, lining up, paying fees, ending up in the wrong line, them
keeping the passport, then having to go down again, lining up, and
hoping all went well. In the end it did, but it sure was alot of work
just to visit the states.

And, on a completely unrelated note (prompted by a story I read out of
the UK), the moment the US (or any other country) starts imposing
biometric data collection (fingerprints, iris scans, even DNA, etc.) is
the day I will no longer visit that country. The US already does that
for many (most?) visitors, but not Canadians, yet.

I understand the purpose of the "false sense of security to placate the
public", but the moment they start treating me like a felon is the
moment they get off my list. Just a personal opinion. TTYL

2007\09\06@153451 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> But how does one "give up" a citizenship? Just curious. TTYL

In my mother's case, she wrote a letter ("I hereby give up my
citizenship..") and sent it to the embassy along with her passport.


2007\09\06@170249 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 12:34 -0700, Vitaliy wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> > But how does one "give up" a citizenship? Just curious. TTYL
>
> In my mother's case, she wrote a letter ("I hereby give up my
> citizenship..") and sent it to the embassy along with her passport.

Frankly I have my doubts that's enough for many countries.

A few countries I've heard that basically you CAN'T "give up" your
citizenship. For others there are time based rules (i.e. the US has
this).

Even with this letter and passport having been sent, what's stopping her
from must applying for another passport? Given the "efficiency" of
passport offices in my experience there's little doubt in my mind that
there's a good chance a passport app would get through without issue.
Anybody else have experience with "dropping" a citizenship?

TTYL

2007\09\06@194944 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Herbert Graf <EraseMEmailinglist3spamEraseMEfarcite.net> wrote:
> Frankly I have my doubts that's enough for many countries.
>
> A few countries I've heard that basically you CAN'T "give up" your
> citizenship. For others there are time based rules (i.e. the US has
> this).
>
> Even with this letter and passport having been sent, what's stopping her
> from must applying for another passport? Given the "efficiency" of
> passport offices in my experience there's little doubt in my mind that
> there's a good chance a passport app would get through without issue.
> Anybody else have experience with "dropping" a citizenship?
>

It is relative easy to give up Chinese citizenship/passport but very
difficult or impossible to re-apply for citizenship once you gave up.

It is also extremely difficult to get permanent resident status in China
unless your are the CEO of a Fortune 500 company invested
billions of dollars in China.

By the way there are efficicent government in the world, eg, Singapore.

Xiaofan

2007\09\06@214010 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> By the way there are efficicent government in the world, eg, Singapore.

:)

Considering that Singapore the city is also Singapore the country, I'm sure
there are many other efficient municipal governments.  ;P

I read a while ago that propaganda is used very effectively in Singapore
("One is enough", "Speak Mandarin", and later "It's OK to have two"). What's
the current slogan?

Vitaliy

2007\09\06@214724 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Herbert Graf wrote:
> And, on a completely unrelated note (prompted by a story I read out of
> the UK), the moment the US (or any other country) starts imposing
> biometric data collection (fingerprints, iris scans, even DNA, etc.) is
> the day I will no longer visit that country. The US already does that
> for many (most?) visitors, but not Canadians, yet.
>
> I understand the purpose of the "false sense of security to placate the
> public", but the moment they start treating me like a felon is the
> moment they get off my list. Just a personal opinion. TTYL

I'm curious, is it the idea or the methods that you object to? Say, would
you be OK if the data collection was non-intrusive in nature? For example,
most people seem to be OK with being videotaped at airports, etc.

Vitaliy

2007\09\06@220305 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Herbert,

On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 22:15:25 -0400, Herbert Graf wrote:

>...
> And what about British passports, do they say you can
> go to Canadian embassy in an emergency?

Nope!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\09\06@223148 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Herbert,

On Thu, 06 Sep 2007 15:06:09 -0400, Herbert Graf wrote:

{Quote hidden}

I'd heard all sorts of horror stories about the UK passport office, so when my old passport onlyhad 9 months to run (the maximum time you can pre-apply) I went for
it...  There were dire warnings about it taking up to 6 weeks, but you can pay extra to get it expedited.

You can start the process online, so that's what I did.  You fill in all your details, and then they send the form by post, with the details pre-printed, so you just
check it, sign it, attach two photos (if you don't look like your previous photo you have to get someone to vouch for you) and then send it back with the old
passport.  I did so on the Monday, my old passport came back cancelled on the Wednesday, and my new passport arrived on the Friday!  It was amazingly painless...
so I now have a passport that runs for 10 years and 9 months!  Very pretty, too - pictures of birds as the background for the pages, and a finely cut-through
(laser?) outline of a heron's head on the details page as an anti-counterfeit measure.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\09\06@225009 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 18:46 -0700, Vitaliy wrote:
> Herbert Graf wrote:
> > And, on a completely unrelated note (prompted by a story I read out of
> > the UK), the moment the US (or any other country) starts imposing
> > biometric data collection (fingerprints, iris scans, even DNA, etc.) is
> > the day I will no longer visit that country. The US already does that
> > for many (most?) visitors, but not Canadians, yet.
> >
> > I understand the purpose of the "false sense of security to placate the
> > public", but the moment they start treating me like a felon is the
> > moment they get off my list. Just a personal opinion. TTYL
>
> I'm curious, is it the idea or the methods that you object to?

I'd have to say both.

The idea is pointless to me, if someone REALLY wanted to get something
on a plane, they'd find a way, anything created by a human can be
defeated by a human. As a result, I find the "protection" we apply to
flying to be "all for show", it doesn't REALLY make things safer, it
just makes the public FEEL things are safer. Mythbusters recently had an
episode where they tried to fool a fingerprint reader. First they tried
one of those cheap ones you buy for a computer. It was a little
challenging, but a little trial and error and they had a method that
worked perfectly. They then tried it on a "professional" door lock,
turns out it was EASIER to defeat! And these guys are doing this for
FUN, imagine what someone who actually believes they have a "reason on
high" to do things can do.

The methods also are a problem to me. Being fingerprinted to enter a
country makes me feel like a criminal. We're supposed to live in a free
society, yet the worst dictatorships rarely did that sort of stuff. As a
related example, stores in my area have started posting people at the
doors who stop you on the way out, make you open your bag (the cashier
that put the stuff IN the bag is literally 10 feet away), and checks
each item against your receipt. It's pathetically sad, very obtrusive,
and it makes me feel like a criminal. When I can, I avoid all places
that do this.

>  Say, would
> you be OK if the data collection was non-intrusive in nature?

Whether biometric type information is collected intrusively or not
doesn't really matter, whether they ask me for my fingerprint, or pick
up the coffee cup I just threw away to get some DNA, I don't see the
difference. Actually, collecting it non-intrusively is probably worse
now that I think of it, with the current methods I at least KNOW what
they want to collect, even though I have no choice over whether they
will.

> For example,
> most people seem to be OK with being videotaped at airports, etc.

Unfortunately people are only OK with it since it was done so slowly and
incrementally that most people didn't notice it was happening. A recent
study I read determined that CCTV cameras don't really make the area
they cover any safer, so why are they there, what's their purpose?
Perhaps they help the cops figure out who the bad person was, but I
doubt that happens enough to make it worthwhile.

Although extreme, I do wish everyone read 1984, keeping that novel in
mind really opens your eyes to some stuff trying to be forced on the
public. An example of "keeping your eye on things" was a recent story
from California about the government banning companies from forcing
employees to be implanted with RFID tags. Can you imagine being fired
because you refuse to be implanted with a device? What are things coming
to?

TTYL

2007\09\06@225104 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 03:03 +0100, Howard Winter wrote:
> Herbert,
>
> On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 22:15:25 -0400, Herbert Graf wrote:
>
> >...
> > And what about British passports, do they say you can
> > go to Canadian embassy in an emergency?
>
> Nope!

Wow, and I thought us Canadians were nice? Don't worry, I'm sure we
wouldn't turn you away... :) TTYL

2007\09\07@074230 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Vitaliy <@spam@spam@spam@spamspam_OUTmaksimov.org> wrote:
> Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > By the way there are efficicent government in the world, eg, Singapore.
>
> :)
>
> Considering that Singapore the city is also Singapore the country, I'm sure
> there are many other efficient municipal governments.  ;P

Name a municipal government in any parts of the world
with more than 4million population and compare it to Singapore and
you will know that Singapore is pretty well managed.

> I read a while ago that propaganda is used very effectively in Singapore
> ("One is enough", "Speak Mandarin", and later "It's OK to have two").
> What's the current slogan?
>

Now it is "the more the better". ;-) You now get baby bonus in
Singapore.

"Speak Mandarin" and "Speak Good English" are still ON.

Xiaofan

2007\09\07@074844 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Howard Winter <spamBeGoneHDRWspamKILLspamh2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> so I now have a passport that runs for 10 years and 9 months!
> Very pretty, too - pictures of birds as the background for the pages,
> and a finely cut-through (laser?) outline of a heron's head on the
> details page as an anti-counterfeit measure.
>

Does your new UK passport have the biometric feature required
by US government for the visa waiver countries including
UK and Singapore? Mine is said to be valid only for 5 years
because of the biometric feature.

Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\09\07@082950 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
>  ... Singapore is pretty well managed.

>> I read a while ago that propaganda is used very effectively in
>> Singapore
>> ("One is enough", "Speak Mandarin", and later "It's OK to have
>> two").
>> What's the current slogan?

> Now it is "the more the better". ;-) You now get baby bonus in
> Singapore.


<Controversial topic warnings in force, please drive slowly>

The above alone suggests a bad degree of mismanagement. When
politicians dabble in "acceptable" numbers of children per family (or
as in other countries, the preferred sex of children) then they need
to be pretty sure they've got it right. Eugenics, if not actually a
guest in the house, may lurk at one's door in such cases.

A progression un living memory through:

   One is enough / It's OK to have two / The more the better / ...

suggests, given the length of a human generation, micromanagement that
is less than optimum.




           Russell


<Controversial topic warnings still in force, please still drive
slowly>

2007\09\07@101833 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Herbert Graf wrote:

{Quote hidden}

That depends on the country. As you say, with some countries you simply
can't. For Brazil, the link above contains instructions (in Portuguese, as
can be expected for Brazil :).

For Canada (just in case :), look here
<http://www.cic.gc.ca/ENGLISH/information/applications/renounce.asp>

Gerhard

2007\09\07@104131 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
piclist@mmendes.com wrote:

> For a US passport, you take pictures, go to the post office, fill out the
> app and turn it in with your drivers license so they can see that it is
> really you, send it in and wait for the passport to arrive in the mail.

This is if you are a US citizen in the US. Outside the US, it may be a bit
more complicated. You can't do it in the post office, and for all I know
not by mail at all. And you possibly can't do it in one visit to the
consulate either. For all I know, getting a Brazilian passport in Brazil is
almost as easy as getting a US passport in the US (if you are up to date
with your citizenship duties). So all in all not that different.

> Now here's the kicker, if you happen to have left Brazil before you were
> 18 and never signed up for their "draft" in order to get your passport
> renewed, you have to take the day off, go to Boston, stand in line to
> get a number to stand in another line, to pay a fine for not having
> signed up for the draft,

You can call yourself lucky. There are countries where you are considered
AWOL if you don't appear for draft duty, and you might have to do jail time
(or something similar) instead of just paying a fine.

This is about the fact that a citizenship includes rights and duties, and
if you don't like the duties (and have two citizenships), you can always
get rid of one.

> All in all, up to 4 days off just to get a stupid passport that I only
> need to use in order to go visit family.

But all that only because you remained Brazilian citizen. If you had
renounced the Brazilian citizenship, there would be no (Brazilian) draft,
no requirement to vote, no requirement to have a Brazilian passport, no
standing in line in the Brazilian consulate (at least not for the passport
:)

> The other great thing is that, even though they do recognize the fact
> that I am Brazilian from my American passport, they won't accept my
> American passport as a valid id picture id, and neither will they take
> any other non Brazilian picture id as proof of who I am.  

Neither do US officials accept your Brazilian passport. That's just the way
it is: if you're a US citizen, you have to provide US documents to US
officials. If you are a Brazilian citizen, you have to provide Brazilian
documents to Brazilian officials. If you are a ... you get the drift :)

> It is complete and utter horse manure.  As it is typical of any other
> Brazilian government agency, competent only at charging you fees.

I hear you :)  But the deal is really that you are Brazilian citizen (and
will be treated as such by Brazilian authorities) until you renounce. This
is something you control, something you can decide. After you renounced,
you may have to show your renonucement document when you file for a
Brazilian visa (so that they know that despite having a place of birth in
Brazil you are not anymore a Brazilian citizen), but that's it then. So
take it or leave it...

Gerhard

2007\09\07@212622 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Gerhard Fiedler <TakeThisOuTlists.....spamTakeThisOuTconnectionbrazil.com> wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Well said!

Xiaofan

2007\09\07@212928 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Russell McMahon <TakeThisOuTapptechKILLspamspamspamparadise.net.nz> wrote:
{Quote hidden}

2007\09\07@214206 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
{Quote hidden}

Oops wrongly hit the send button.

This is not controversial. This is about the progress of a small
country which progressed very fast so she has to adpat fast
as well.



Regards,
Xiaofan

2007\09\07@215513 by Rich

picon face
Hear Hear
----- Original Message -----
From: "Xiaofan Chen" <RemoveMExiaofancspamspamBeGonegmail.com>
To: "Microcontroller discussion list - Public." <spamBeGonepiclist@spam@spamspam_OUTmit.edu>
Sent: Friday, September 07, 2007 9:33 PM
Subject: Re: [OT]:: US Non resident taxes


{Quote hidden}

> --

2007\09\07@221750 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/7/07, Herbert Graf <mailinglist3EraseMEspamfarcite.net> wrote:
> > I'm curious, is it the idea or the methods that you object to?
>
> I'd have to say both.
>
> The idea is pointless to me, if someone REALLY wanted to get something
> on a plane, they'd find a way, anything created by a human can be
> defeated by a human. As a result, I find the "protection" we apply to
> flying to be "all for show", it doesn't REALLY make things safer, it
> just makes the public FEEL things are safer.

Isn't that very important? The public perception of security is
really important. And often the first line of defense is really key
to border security. So I can not agree that it is pointless.

> The methods also are a problem to me. Being fingerprinted to enter a
> country makes me feel like a criminal. We're supposed to live in a free
> society, yet the worst dictatorships rarely did that sort of stuff.

I do agree. And it should be apply both ways. If US requires people
to do fingerprinting to enter US, other countries should require
fingerprinting of US citizens to enter their countries. I know this
is not possible now as US is the only superpower. That being said,
I do understand the difficulity of being the world police and sometimes
we may need a world police but preferrably something like UN in
a better form.

2007\09\07@222233 by SM Ling

picon face
>
> The above alone suggests a bad degree of mismanagement. When
> politicians dabble in "acceptable" numbers of children per family (or
> as in other countries, the preferred sex of children) then they need
> to be pretty sure they've got it right. Eugenics, if not actually a
> guest in the house, may lurk at one's door in such cases.
>
> A progression un living memory through:
>
>     One is enough / It's OK to have two / The more the better / ...
>
> suggests, given the length of a human generation, micromanagement that
> is less than optimum.
>

Generally agreeable.  As we always see in every day's life, the biggest
danger comes from those that know just barely enough to be dangerous.

That was the prescription given by the UN technocrats to fight poverty, I
believe birth-control is still a standard UN prescription, but maybe now for
an additional reason - to fight global warming.

As much as I dislike it, but the logic behind birth-control is quite firm.
It is not more than a question of quality of life from infant, through
childhood, teenager time and adulthood.  But also the chance of survival.
And this also directly impacts the value of life, and the perception on
life.  Like it or not, life is cheap in a poor country.

Then again, it was an extreme measure for an extreme time, when Singapore
when kicked out of Malaya peninsular and one of the biggest employers, the
British Naval Base, was pulling out.  To fail at that time, or even now,  is
to submit to the racial-base system.

Ling SM

2007\09\07@222411 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Xiaofan Chen wrote:
>> Considering that Singapore the city is also Singapore the country, I'm
>> sure
>> there are many other efficient municipal governments.  ;P
>
> Name a municipal government in any parts of the world
> with more than 4million population and compare it to Singapore and
> you will know that Singapore is pretty well managed.

Xiaofan, you know I was just teasing. :) I've heard a lot of good things
about Singapore, for example that it's one of the freest economies in the
world, and I love the solution for the traffic jams (I wish they did that
here, instead of building more and bigger freeways that are grossly
under-utilized most of the time).

> Now it is "the more the better". ;-) You now get baby bonus in
> Singapore.

Funny, they started doing the same thing in Russia ($10k per child, starting
with the second child). How much are extra children worth in Singapore?

> "Speak Mandarin" and "Speak Good English" are still ON.

Wow, after how many years?

Vitaliy

2007\09\07@223239 by Vitaliy

flavicon
face
Russell McMahon wrote:
> The above alone suggests a bad degree of mismanagement. When
> politicians dabble in "acceptable" numbers of children per family (or
> as in other countries, the preferred sex of children) then they need
> to be pretty sure they've got it right. Eugenics, if not actually a
> guest in the house, may lurk at one's door in such cases.
>
> A progression un living memory through:
>
>    One is enough / It's OK to have two / The more the better / ...
>
> suggests, given the length of a human generation, micromanagement that
> is less than optimum.

Historically, as a nation becomes wealthier, population growth slows (in
some developed nations today, it's a negative number). So I agree that
instead of poking its nose into people's bedrooms to control the population
growth, the government should instead focus on doing everything it can to
improve their material well-being (in most cases, this simply means staying
out of people's way).

Vitaliy

2007\09\07@235627 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/8/07, SM Ling <RemoveMEsm.ling11EraseMEspamspam_OUTgmail.com> wrote:
> That was the prescription given by the UN technocrats to fight poverty, I
> believe birth-control is still a standard UN prescription, but maybe now for
> an additional reason - to fight global warming.
>
> As much as I dislike it, but the logic behind birth-control is quite firm.

I agree. In the case of China, there is no other ways out. Westerners
have some hard understandings of the logic but they will understand
when visiting some poorest areas in China. The birth control
policy is good but some execution method may not be correct.

> It is not more than a question of quality of life from infant, through
> childhood, teenager time and adulthood.  But also the chance of survival.
> And this also directly impacts the value of life, and the perception on
> life.  Like it or not, life is cheap in a poor country.

Good analysis.

> Then again, it was an extreme measure for an extreme time, when Singapore
> when kicked out of Malaya peninsular and one of the biggest employers, the
> British Naval Base, was pulling out.  To fail at that time, or even now,  is
> to submit to the racial-base system.
>

Thanks for teaching Singapore history to a new citizen. ;-)

Xiaofan

2007\09\08@023442 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Sat, 2007-09-08 at 10:17 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:
> > The idea is pointless to me, if someone REALLY wanted to get something
> > on a plane, they'd find a way, anything created by a human can be
> > defeated by a human. As a result, I find the "protection" we apply to
> > flying to be "all for show", it doesn't REALLY make things safer, it
> > just makes the public FEEL things are safer.
>
> Isn't that very important? The public perception of security is
> really important. And often the first line of defense is really key
> to border security. So I can not agree that it is pointless.

I suppose you are right, there is some value to placating the public, it
at least makes life a little easier for the authorities. That said, it
still annoys me when a mass of people are collectively fooled.

A perfect example was the "liquid bans" that were applied after that
"terror cell" was discovered in Britain. The danger was there allot
earlier then when it was announced, and the authorities KNEW the danger
was there, but it was only when the danger was made public that
"precautions" were applied. I doubt I'll be able to find better proof of
what I'm saying then that.

> > The methods also are a problem to me. Being fingerprinted to enter a
> > country makes me feel like a criminal. We're supposed to live in a free
> > society, yet the worst dictatorships rarely did that sort of stuff.
>
> I do agree. And it should be apply both ways. If US requires people
> to do fingerprinting to enter US, other countries should require
> fingerprinting of US citizens to enter their countries.

No, I have to disagree, it shouldn't apply at all. There's a line being
past with fingerprinting visitors, just because "everyone is doing it"
doesn't make it right IMHO.

An alien looking at our planet would no doubt conclude that there is no
war against terror, the war was lost long again; the terrorists won.
TTYL

2007\09\08@214036 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Xiaofan,

On Fri, 7 Sep 2007 19:48:43 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

{Quote hidden}

I think this is a misunderstanding - mine has an RF-readable chip, but all it contains is the same information that's on the details page - name, DoB, nationality etc,
and a digitisation of the photograph.  No biometric information (fingerprint, iris scan, or anything else) was collected from me.  I imagine to do so you'd have to visit
some place where they'd have equipment for the job, but my application was by post.

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\09\08@215733 by Xiaofan Chen

face picon face
On 9/9/07, Howard Winter <EraseMEHDRWspam@spam@h2org.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > Does your new UK passport have the biometric feature required
> > by US government for the visa waiver countries including
> > UK and Singapore? Mine is said to be valid only for 5 years
> > because of the biometric feature.
>
> I think this is a misunderstanding - mine has an RF-readable chip,
> but all it contains is the same information that's on the details page
> - name, DoB, nationality etc, and a digitisation of the photograph.

I am not exactly sure what is inside this new passport. It has
the smart chip inside (thick page) and that is why mine has only
5 years of validity and costs more than the normal passport.

> No biometric information (fingerprint, iris scan, or anything else) was
> collected from me.  I imagine to do so you'd have to visit
> some place where they'd have equipment for the job, but my application
> was by post.

I see. In Singapore we have the fingerprint on the ID card
so fingerprinting information is anyway collected.

I remember there is no national ID in US and UK and the driving
license is kind of defacto ID.

Xiaofan

2007\09\10@182307 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Xiaofan,

On Sun, 9 Sep 2007 09:57:32 +0800, Xiaofan Chen wrote:

{Quote hidden}

I think the main reason for it having the photo is so that it will be that much harder for counterfeiters to be able to produce a fake passport, or alter a real one for
use by someone else.  If you look like the photo on the page, but not the one in the chip, they've got you!

> I remember there is no national ID in US and UK and the driving
> license is kind of defacto ID.

Only in the US - here the driving licence doesn't even have a photo (you can now get a card to go with it that does have a photo, but you don't have to have it - I
haven't - and it's not valid on its own without the paper licence).  Nobody in the UK would ask to see a driving licence except when you're hiring a car or are
stopped by the police... and incidentally you aren't even required to carry it when you're driving!

And no, we don't have a national ID card - yet!  The present government are planning to spend a huge amount of money introducing it, to no benefit except to
those making money producing the cards...

The thing is, you very rarely have to prove your identity /per se/, it's usually in relation to something, such as being the legitimate holder of a credit card, which has
its own ID confirmation in the signature or PIN.  At one time one of my credit-card issuers gave the option to have your photo on their credit card, but it didn't last
long - I don't think many people took up the offer, which is a shame because it makes sense.  

When it comes to driving, the police can do an on-air check on the registration and insurance status of the car even before they stop you.  Then there's ANPR
(Automatic Number Plate Recognition) - video cameras in police cars (sometimes front and back) continually scan passing cars, use OCR to determine the
registration number, check it against a database of cars with "problems", and alert the crew if it finds one.  So if you're driving a stolen car, just driving past (or
behind) a police car may be enough to get you nicked!

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2007\09\11@002301 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Howard Winter wrote:

> And no, we don't have a national ID card - yet!  [...]
>
> The thing is, you very rarely have to prove your identity /per se/,
> [...]

So what's stopping me to open a line of credit in the name of Howard
Winter?

Gerhard

2007\09\11@005727 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
part 1 1302 bytes content-type:text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"; (decoded 7bit)

>> And no, we don't have a national ID card - yet!  [...]
>>
>> The thing is, you very rarely have to prove your identity /per se/,

> So what's stopping me to open a line of credit in the name of Howard
> Winter?

Sorry.
That question can only be answered on a need to know basis.
If we told everyone who wanted to know what was going to stop them
doing things we didn't want them to then it would make our job
tougher.

______________

We don't have a national ID card here either (in NZ).
Our driver's licence has become a defacto one to a large extent.
The authorities assured us that that wasn't it's intent and wasn't
going to happen.

The photo on the compulsorily carried when driving licence is a major
part of it being a defacto ID.

But, as being an ID is not compulsory or intended, mine isn't :-).
I usually have hair and no beard, moustache or 'sideboards'.
Here's my prior driver's licence photo.
Current one is "as good" but different.
Suffice it to say, my mother said "that's not you".
Bigger at -

   http://others.servebeer.com/misc/licencedtodrive.jpg

Lines are from licence plastic overlay.
Hair on top of head is flash catching the zero length razor cut
stubble.



       Russell












part 2 2428 bytes content-type:image/jpeg; (decode)


part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(decoded 7bit)

2007\09\11@054010 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>Then there's ANPR (Automatic Number Plate Recognition) - video
>cameras in police cars (sometimes front and back) continually
>scan passing cars, use OCR to determine the registration number,
>check it against a database of cars with "problems", and alert
>the crew if it finds one.  So if you're driving a stolen car,
>just driving past (or behind) a police car may be enough to get
>you nicked!

Not just stolen - it also flags up if the tax disk has expired or the MOT
expired as well, both 'excellent' reasons for stopping you.

2007\09\11@055001 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>> And no, we don't have a national ID card - yet!  [...]
>>
>> The thing is, you very rarely have to prove your identity /per se/,

> So what's stopping me to open a line of credit in the name of Howard
> Winter?

Nothing - that is a problem here in the UK, identity theft is rife. One of
the answers is to shred absolutely every document that you want to put in
the rubbish that has any details (even just name and address I do this) that
gives any details about yourself. In my case the resultant shredding is then
used to start the garden incinerator rather than go in the rubbish. There
are far too many stories of people who have had stuff stolen from mail and
had their bank accounts and credit cards hi-jacked.

2007\09\11@060054 by Steve Howes

flavicon
face
> Only in the US - here the driving licence doesn't even have a photo  
> (you can now get a card to go with it that does have a photo, but  
> you don't have to have it - I
> haven't - and it's not valid on its own without the paper  
> licence).  Nobody in the UK would ask to see a driving licence  
> except when you're hiring a car or are
> stopped by the police... and incidentally you aren't even required  
> to carry it when you're driving!

You have never been to a pub then, either that or you are 'old'.

2007\09\11@082259 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Steve,

On Tue, 11 Sep 2007 11:00:41 +0100, Steve Howes wrote:

{Quote hidden}

As a former card-carrying member of CAMRA (the Campaign for Real Ale) I object strongly to your first assertion!  :-)

On the second, yes, I'm in my second half-century.  But I've never been asked my age or refused service in a pub, even when I should have been...

Cheers,

Howard Winter
St.Albans (coincidentally the home of CAMRA, and I'll be driving past their HQ in about half an hour!), England

Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2007 , 2008 only
- Today
- New search...