Yep, he cared not a bit about my Cuban roach.
Got that right. When I was travelling to Singapore, Indonesia, Malaysia, et al, back in the early - mid 80’s, every immigration form that I filled out for those countries had a big warning in bright red letters:
DEATH FOR TRAFFICKING IN DRUGS IN (country)
And they damn well meant it. When I was in Singapore, an American college student was caught with some pot. Not a whole helluva lot, either. He was arrested, tried, convicted, appealed, conviction upheld and hung in less than a year.
Acsenray, a quibble: Cardinal Mindscenty was given asylum in the US embassy in Budapest for 15 years after being sentenced to life by the communists for the “crime” he committed in that country. Its a frequent theme on TV for police not to be able to arrest a criminal in a foreign embassy, in addition to diplomatic immunity. Embassies are treated as soil of their home country - extra-territoriality - right? The cardinal was not an American diplomat.
No, it’s not a principal of extraterritoriality at work. The government agreed in a treaty with another government not to enter the embassy without permission. They refrained from doing so not because they wanted to avoid invading the territory of the United States but because they thought it better not to violate the terms of the treaty.
It is illegal for Norwegians to purchase sexual favours while abroad, even if its not a crime in the foreign countries. According to the law a significant benefit conferred is enough to be in violation of law, say buying somebody a present.
nm
A favor, sir. Since you have access to the PROTECT Act, could you post a cite or excerpt. I was under the impression that the law prohibited leaving the U.S. for the purpose of having sex with anyone under 18, regardless of the age of consent in one’s state of residence or destination. There was quite a lot of noise about the law when first passed, more along the lines of “how can the U.S. criminalize an act committed outside its borders?” than objection to the law’s content.
Even an interspace tøøthbrush? Mehbee it wasn’t a møøse that bit my sister after all . . .
Adding to the zombie thread…
It is illegal for US citizens (whether residing in the US or abroad) to have more than US$10,000 (sum total) in a foreign financial account(s) without informing the IRS of the balance and account details.
So, I can have my retirement plan here in Cayman (indeed it is mandatory under the law) in relation to work I performed in Cayman and I do not need to disclose the current balance, account number, or pension plan name to the Cayman government. But if I fail to disclose those details to the IRS in a FBAR filing then I am in violation of US law and subject to civil and/or criminal penalties.
And where do you get the idea that it is in any way common? AFAIK, the US is the only country that does this. There may be others, but I don’t know of any. Perhaps you could give a cite. I am certain that Canada doesn’t.
It is true that foreign taxes paid become a tax credit so that I don’t pay any US taxes. However, until the Bush tax cut, the foreign tax credit was on the line preceding the alternate minimum tax and I had to take an extremely favorable view of my pension (specifically how much was return of capital) in order to avoid double taxation, in total violation of the tax treaty between the US and Canada. If the cuts expire in January, I imagine I will have the same problem when I file a 2013 return.
What about handguns?
When driving across, I think there are signs at the Mexico and Canada border crossings that say to declare all firearms. What happens if you do? Would you also need some pre-gotten paperwork of some sort?
And, what happens if you don’t declare them?
And, what about flying to other countries? If I ever visited the Philippines, for example, I would want a gun with me given the kidnappings and violence in the southern areas. Mexico too.
If you bring a handgun into Canada without the proper paperwork and without declaring it, you can expect to face a Canadian fine for failing to declare plus prison in Canada for up to five years, and if you knew you were not supposed to bring it into Canada, then 5 to 10 years.
I do not know what the USA penalty would be for illegally bringing a firearm into Canada would be.
If you don’t have the right paperwork but you declare it to the Canadian border official, what happens? Do they tell you that you are not permitted to bring it and let you turn around and come back later without it, or do they arrest and/or cite you right then and there? E.g. is it an offense in Canada to have contraband at the border even if you declare it and are willing to dispose of it if requested by the official, or is it only a problem if you attempt to sneak it in?
IIRC, if you declare the gun, they will take it away and dispose of it. If you don’t tell them - well, some guy recently made the news, he got a prison sentence for failing to declare. A couple of months.
Anywhere outside of the USA, carrying a gun is not a trivial item; despite what Hollywood seems to show. In Canada, there are a significant hurdles for permits for local residents. Not sure what the paperwork is for hunters from the USA, it’s not impossible, but you can’t just bring in pistols.
The vast majority of firearm crimes in Canada are committed with unregistered, illegal firearms.
I suspect taking a firearm anywhere else in the world probably takes some serious paperwork too.
If you declare it but it is contraband, they turn you back.
What about gambling? Isn’t it illegal for US citizens to play foreign lotteries?
There’s a casino in Amsterdam’s Schiphol Airport; at the entrance is a prominent sign “SHOW YOUR PASSPORT.” I didn’t try to go in, but if I had, would they have turned me away for being an American?
That sounds like a local law, because why would a casino in Amsterdam care about enforcing US law? Also passports are the most common form of ID in places with lots of foreigners like airports.
I cannot imagine any country giving a rats anus about what another country says it’s citizens can and cannot do abroad.
This is not so much illegal but a bizarre bit of tax law I have noticed.
The US requires citizens with income over the reporting threshold to file tax returns even if they reside abroad, and if you are married you must file jointly or married filing separately.
Seeing the problem yet? Both options require your spouse, who isn’t a US citizen or resident with no US sourced income to file tax returns with the IRS and perhaps pay US taxes! If your foreign citizen spouse wants no part of that WTF do you do, lie and file single?
Apparently there is a danger and tax burden even in marrying a US citizen!
I remember discussing this with people who were planning to work overseas. I think it goes like this:
Canada has some wording to the effect of “severed ties” or you had really moved overseas, you are not keeping one foot in Canada. This was determined by whether you for example, you still owned a car or house here, you still did your banking here, still had all your furniture etc. in storage here, own and direct businesses here, etc. You could come back for visits, but not extended stays.
If you satisfy this, then the calendar years in which you earn money outside of Canada, you do not have to pay Canadian taxes on foreign income. If you had no income from Canada you do not even have to file. You just file for the year you partially lived in Canada and left, and the year you resumed Canadian residency.
Of course, if you are receiving Canadian income (i.. pension) you file and pay Canadian taxes - just on it. Typically, this is deducted from the taxes due in your country of residence. (A quick way for any country to drive away foreign workers, usually technical experts, is to double-tax their other income.) So in effect, you pay the taxes due in the higher tax rate country.
my father gets a Canadian pension, and thanks to the tax treaty, he can apply Canadian deductions (like old age exemption) to taxable income from Canada before he calculates US taxable income where he resides. He deducts Canadian tax paid on his pension from tax due in the USA. I think that results in a zero balance, since Canadian tax is probably higher. (never asked)
The USA is unique in requiring its citizens, and even green-cards and other former residents, to file tax returns and pay taxes on income when they do not reside in the country and did not earn the money in the country.
Similary, I had a French teacher in high school who was from France. he mentioned that since he lived in Canada, he did not have to pay French taxes. However, he had his name on a waiting list for a government job; in the 70’s a French civil service job was the route to a cushy life and excellent pension. Anyway, to keep his name active on the list he had the option of paying those taxes, which basically said he considered himself still a resident of France too. he never said whether he deducted Canadian taxes, but considering that paying two complete taxes would gobble up a hug chunk of his salary, I assume Canadian tax on Canadian income was deductible.
(Halfway through one school year, he dropped evrything to take an embassy position in Guyana, IIRC. He said if he turned that down he would not get another offer. Breaking his teaching contract meant “you’ll never work in this town again”, but that was not a big deal.)
Here’s one to add:
A man named Viktor Anatolyevich Bout was arrested in Thailand for agreeing to sell rocket launchers to people who claimed to be representatives of the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), and then he was extradited to the United States where he was sentenced to 25 years.
But here’s the kicker: Bout was a Russian citizen, and had never even visited the U.S. before.
No guns or rocket launchers were found, but the arrest was based merely on the fact undercover agents alleged that he had said he would sell them weapons. That’s right, he was arrested because of words.
A little bit of background is required to understand this though.
Bout had been suspected by many of facilitating arms shipments into conflict zones around the world, but there was never adequate evidence.
The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Columbia (FARC) is a rebel group in the country of Columbia that’s on the U.S. “Foreign Terrorist Organization” list, but it should be pointed out that it’s not a exactly a terrorist organization in the same sense that Islamic terrorist organizations are. Under section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965, the U.S. Secretary of State may add any foreign organization to the list that he deems to be engaged in “terrorist activities”, and it then automatically becomes a crime to provide “material support” to that organization in any form.
Nevertheless, all this raises some potentially very troubling legal questions, and was viewed by many in Russia as a jurisdictional overreach on the part of the U.S. government.
So to repeat again, a Russian citizen in Thailand was arrested under U.S. law.
The people Bout was accused of making the agreement with were undercover DEA agents (working for the U.S. government) that had been sent to Thailand to conduct the sting operation. Bout’s former business partner, Andrew Smulian, also testified against him in exchange for a greatly reduced sentenced. Smulian was released from Federal prison merely 100 days after the date of Bout’s sentencing on April 5th 2012, despite the fact that Smulian had to have been just as guilty as Bout, if his testimony was to be believed. This type of plea bargain creates a very strong incentive for criminal witnesses to say something incriminating against the defendant, even if it is not true. During the sentencing, Bout was also issued a fine of $15 million.