Eduardo Saverin joins the stateless billionaires

By Felix Salmon
May 17, 2012
the only country in the world which applies the same tax regime to all its citizens, regardless of where they live.

" data-share-img="" data-share="twitter,facebook,linkedin,reddit,google" data-share-count="true">

The United States is the only country in the world which applies the same tax regime to all its citizens, regardless of where they live: nowhere else are nonresidents charged the same federal tax rate as residents. And this makes America’s plutocrats qualitatively different from every other country’s super-rich.

If you wanted to sum up Eduardo Saverin in three words, you could do a lot worse than Very Rich Eurotrash. He didn’t become a Facebook billionaire because of his hacking skills or because Mark Zuckerberg happened to be his roommate in college; he became a Facebook billionaire because he had cash, and Zuckerberg needed cash to get Facebook off the ground. Zuckerberg provided the valuable labor which went into creating Facebook; Saverin, for all the ideas he had, was basically needed for his money, and his ideas ended up going nowhere. Today, now that he’s dynastically wealthy, he says things like “it’s a misperception, especially the playboy. I do have a Bentley. I do go out.”

Saverin might have more money than the Italian boys with cashmere sweaters draped over their shoulders who flit from one global Cipriani outpost to the next. But when he talks of himself as “a global citizen”, he’s not lying: he’s just displaying a mindset which he shares with any number of well-heeled international jet-set types. They’re easy to find: just get on a plane to Cannes or Sao Paulo, turn left at the first Tyler Brûlé, and you’ll find them picking at a $30 salad while wearing shoes which cost substantially more than the waiter’s weekly income. They live a pampered and sheltered experience: they even have their own social network, to keep them from being forced to rub digital shoulders with the masses.

In January 2011, after moving to Singapore, Saverin decided that he wanted to give up his US citizenship. He didn’t live in the US, he was going to have lots of income going forwards, and he felt that there was no good reason for him — a citoyen du monde — to pay 35% of that income to the USA in particular. Not to mention estate and gift taxes for when he finally passes on his wealth to someone else.

If Saverin hadn’t been a US citizen, all of this would have been a non-issue: simply moving to another country suffices to relieve you of most of your tax burden in your country of nationality. But because he was a US citizen, he took the drastic step of renouncing that citizenship; the move became official in September. And then, in a fit of extraordinarily bad timing, from a PR perspective, the news came out just as Facebook was about to go public, and, faster than you can say “press conference”, Chuck Schumer decided that he was going to introduce something called the Ex-PATRIOT Act. (Geddit?) Under the act, people like Saverin renouncing their US citizenship for tax purposes would face fines so huge that they’d be better off not doing so at all.

The rhetoric, here, is that Saverin’s success is attributable to his American citizenship, and that therefore America deserves to be able to receive its condign tax revenues. And I half buy it, although frankly there’s nothing stopping any rich Brazilian kid from going to Harvard and funding a startup. Saverin didn’t need US citizenship to do what he did.

This is an issue which pops up occasionally: it’s already very onerous to give up US citizenship. Kathy Kristof had a good overview of the history of such laws in 2008: a 1996 law, for instance, forced former US citizens to continue paying taxes on their worldwide income for at least five years, and in 2004 that was extended to 10 years. In 2008, a new law forced people like Saverin to pay capital gains taxes on the assumption that they liquidated all their property the day before they renounced their citizenship. And indeed, that’s what he did.

Still, Saverin can still be considered to be saving taxes here, since Facebook now is worth substantially more than it was worth in September. At the same time, he’s facing a nightmare at US immigration — entering the country might well be impossible, and it could be extremely difficult just to change planes here. He’s not just another Brazilian any more: he’s the lowest of the low as far as US immigration is concerned, and they will never treat him with any respect at all. Since he doesn’t have much in the way of rights any more — he gave most of those up with his citizenship — he’d be well advised to avoid the USA pretty much for the rest of his life.

From a public-policy perspective, this is the kind of US exceptionalism I can get behind. There’s a corrosive class of global plutocrats, living by choice in tax havens like Singapore or Switzerland, and paying vastly less in taxes than Mitt Romney or any US billionaire. If you’re not an American citizen, and you become incredibly wealthy, there’s a good chance that you will choose to become a tax exile — thereby depriving your home country of the income taxes it should expect to be able to raise from its richest citizens. It’s a country-of-residence tax arbitrage which makes the ultra-rich feel no civic duty at all to their countries. And somehow the US has managed to avoid that problem: American billionaires, as a rule, remain American billionaires, as do their children and their children’s children. They — along with the Chinese — are pretty much the only billionaires in the world who don’t live a stateless existence. And even the Chinese ultra-rich are rapidly breaking free of their home country.

So yes, it’s a little bit unfair to Saverin that he’s suffering so much opprobrium right now when he would be getting none of this were it not for the accident of his US citizenship. But I can’t really feel sorry for him. And if the US succeeds in making an example of him, it will have managed to pull off something very important — which is to keep its billionaires part of the tax base. Very few other countries can say that.


We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see

No Fly List.

Posted by GRRR | Report as abusive

Felix, I read your stuff on Seeking Alpha, and normally you’re pretty sharp. But you’re way off on this one.

1. Saverin is not stateless. He is a resident of Singapore and probably still holds a Brazillian passport.

2. Zurich has a tax rate in excess of what any rich Nevada or Florida resident would pay. If you want discounted tax rates you have to live in the middle of nowhere in CH.

3. Are we at the point where the US owns its citizens in perpetuity? At what point should someone be allowed to leave, get a bank account with Deutsche Bank and not have to file forms with the State?

4. Saverin didn’t do it to save taxes, he did it to get out from under the thumb of the authoritarian police state.

Posted by johnnygault | Report as abusive

GRRR, given Saverin’s wealth, it’s unlikely he’s going to fly commercial. I guess they could force him to get on his jet and turn around if he ever landed in the U.S., though.

He’s been living in Singapore for the last 3 years, so it’s not like he just moved away. He doesn’t care to live here any more, so why should he pay taxes? Will the U.S. get taxes from Yuri Milner on his stake in Facebook? He’s investing heavily in US companies, why shouldn’t he pay taxes also?

Posted by KenG_CA | Report as abusive

Felix, I think you make some good points here, but you are ultimately off base. The problem is that the tax system is inherently unfavorable to US citizens and creates perverse incentives to expatriate or move assets offshore into tax havens.

The question is: why should Saverin be treated more favorably than Zuck or any other US-based investor? To me, the obvious solution is to tax US-sourced income equally for citizens/non-citizens, regardless of where they live. Why are we taxing US billionaires while giving “stateless” billionaires a free ride?

Instead of focusing on efficiently taxing the income/wealth created in the US (regardless of domicile of the investor), we have this bizarre system of tracking US citizen’s income and assets around the globe. Under the current system, if, hypothetically, Zuck and Saverin had started Facebook in Singapore, they would still owe the IRS just by virtue of citizenship. As a previous commenter pointed out, it seems as it the IRS “owns” its “citizens” regardless of what they do and where they do it.

Posted by Fscb | Report as abusive

Billionires should pay lots and lots of taxes… no reason to get bogged down in that debate.

It is worth thinking about that the United States is an outlier when it comes to taxing citizens living abroad.

Evil multinationals are an even larger story on this front. “Our” S&P companies make most of their sales and earnings abroad. It’s a bit immature to think that we can collect taxes on those earnings.

Posted by y2kurtus | Report as abusive

GRRR, you nailed it, Dude.

Felix, you too. You had us worried mid-way through, after a hopeful “euro-trash” start, that you were going to go soft at the end, but a good euro-trash trashing all the way through.

And Chuck Schumer! Never thought we’d start to like that idiot. Just goes to show, if you live long enough, some things might change…

…but one thing won’t: you’ll never see Eddy Eurotrash in the US again!

Posted by WeWereWallSt | Report as abusive

He isn’t dodging taxes. He paid all of his current taxes and will pay his tax debt to the US upon renunciation of his citizenship. Being a US citizen abroad with a real job has a lot of uncomfortable inconveniences due to the US tax code. Americans who live abroad, marry abroad, and intend to stay abroad have no reason to pay thousands of dollars in taxes and accountant fees to a country they only visit on holiday.

Most Americans have never worked as a professional abroad so they have no clue why somebody would do this. To make a clear it example, it would be like your birth state asking for an income tax return every year for the rest of your life even though you moved away years ago and haven’t been back to visit.

Posted by djlowballer | Report as abusive

Yeah, this doesn’t look like “ungrateful American leaves US to save on taxes,” it looks like “US makes citizenship so onerous that immigrant capitulates.” Like with US taxation of corporations, this is simply overreach into business that is not American business. If some guy in Singapore makes a lot of money, that’s not something properly of US concern; Singapore, contrary to IRS belief, is not with US jurisdiction. Singapore is welcome to tax activity within its borders as it sees fit; the US is not.

Posted by dWj | Report as abusive

WeWere WallSt, Saverin is from Brazil, and now lives in Singapore. Last I checked, neither country was anywhere near Europe.

How about all those “entrepreneurs” who start companies in CA, and get acquired, but move to Nevada so they don’t have to pay capital gains tax on the shares of the acquiring company that they sell? where’s the hate for them?

Posted by KenG_CA | Report as abusive

I think many people complaining of an overreaching IRS do not know of or neglect to mention two important details concerning taxation of US citizens residing abroad : 1) the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (IRS Form 2555) which allows deduction from income of the first $92,900 of wages and salaries earned in a foreign country and 2) the Foreign Tax Credit (IRS Form 1116) which allows a credit towards US taxes due for any income tax paid to a foreign country. In other words, if a US citizen moves to a country with a higher tax rate than the US, he will not owe anything to the IRS. Ever. On the other hand, if an American wishing to flee US taxation moves to a country with a lower tax rate, he will only owe the difference in the tax rates between the two countries, minus a free ride for any income below 93 grand.

As a US citizen living in Taiwan, I would love nothing better than the IRS to waive my requirement to fill out my yearly 1040. However, I don’t see anything inherently unfair about the current system and in fact see the resources the US dedicates towards protecting its citizens abroad (the 7th fleet patrolling the Taiwan Strait, for instance) as well worth a marginal taxation of my income over six figures.

Posted by cardinalrules | Report as abusive

Felix: do you think Saverin should pay taxes to Brazil as well as the U.S. and Singapore? If yes, who decides which country is entitled to how much? If no, what makes the U.S. special?

While I can in principle get behind the idea of taxing global billionaires more, I don’t think you have thought through the consequences of multiple overlapping and uncoordinated tax jurisdictions, which create a nightmare for non-resident U.S. citizens, few of whom are wealthy.

Posted by GRWar | Report as abusive

@cardinalrules: the tax provisions you mention (FEIE and Foreign Tax Credit) are highly flawed and reflective of the U.S.-centric perspective of the tax law.

The credit on foreign can only be applied to offset the “same kind” of U.S. taxes — so only foreign income tax can be used to offset U.S. income tax, for example. Many countries levy high taxes of other sorts — VAT, for example — or have hidden taxes in the form of government monopolies. The foreign tax credit is useless in this case.

The FEIE is fine, but it only applies to “earned” (e.g. salary) income and is limited to $93k or so of income. Amounts above this are double-taxed unless the Tax Credit works to fully offset all direct and implicit taxes. Also the $93k cap is completely arbitrary and makes no consideration for differences in cost of living and changes in exchange rates from year to year.

Posted by GRWar | Report as abusive

I don’t think you can call a Brazilian Euro-anything… and why should he not give up his US citizenship? It isn’t all that great having to report your earnings no matter where you are in the world, especially when he is really a Brazilian. As for US based billionaires, aren’t they the ones whose main income is share dividends which got a “double tax” sympathy law passed not long ago so that they are not taxed as income? Surely that loophole would be better taxed than a few expat Americans who might not have been in the US for decades?

The other loophole that needs closing would be the offshoring of multi-National income – loans to or from subsidiary companies should not be deductible for tax purposes, as they are usually tax dodges to minimise taxes charged in an expensive country and have them assessed and paid instead in a lower tax country eg Luxembourg at 0.5%.

It isn’t just on tax that expat Americans suffer from while abroad, what about banking and investing? Basically, no bank outside of the US will touch a US investor thanks to the SEC extending its reach. That makes it difficult for Americans to get sensible advice that understands the laws and opportunities available in the country in which they live.

Land of the Free? Yeah, right. In your dreams…

Posted by FifthDecade | Report as abusive

“Stateless”? – Hardly. He can claim Israeli citizenship anytime he wishes, as a matter of legal right. “Euro Trash” is hardly the right slur, is it?

Posted by MrRFox | Report as abusive

As someone who probably pays more taxes to the US than anyone I’ve read writing, so far, in this column, I’m not unhappy to do so. I got the advantage to make money by US-based incentives…Pell grants for me to go to college, low-cost federal student loans. I drive on nicely paved streets, I don’t have to worry about my security when I walk around, I don’t have to put broken glass and razor wire in all the walls/fences of my house. I get good access to top-notch health care, I eat well, have heat and hot water through infrastructure paid for by US tax money. Need I go on?

The rest of you justifying his act of renunciation are just selfish and un-American in my view and you should be ashamed of yourselves. Pay your taxes and shut the hell up about it already. You pay far less than you should in fact, for what you get. I’m tired of you people giving people like me a bad name. As Steven King said “Tax me for Fukk’s sake!”. If you don’t like what you’re taxes are spent on or if you don’t like the Medicare increases or unfunded war liabilities than stop voting for Republicans. But don’t blame our current issues on what happened on the current administration, or any tax laws on it. They didn’t write them, they didn’t decrease the rates so I could pay less than you proportionally of my income. Republicans do that. And if you’re all too stupid to actually think, then I’m happy to take a lower rate and NOT spend it on any of you or for anything to benefit you. Maybe I’ll take a vacation and spend it in the South of France. Unlike Felix, I know Eurotrash when I see it.

Posted by skyman123 | Report as abusive


Renouncing his citizenship over taxes?

Why no loyal citizen of this fair British Colony would ever do such a thing. We love high taxes, and we are founded on paying whatever taxes are asked of us.


So… who else is supporting the Tories in the upcoming Parliamentary election?

Posted by zehfuss | Report as abusive

I speak as one of those who renounced US citizenship and am on the list Q1 2012.

I left the US when Ronald Reagan was getting elected for the first time. I left because, after growing up (literally) on the wrong side of the tracks, I could not afford to go to either of the Ivy League colleges which had accepted me. So I went abroad for my university studies. It was my right to leave, just as it is other people’s rights to enter the US. I am glad I left.

After university, I met and married a non-American and took up residence in her country and after a few years took her nationality as well. I came to her country penniless. I was welcomed here. I worked and was – most of all – lucky and I am now prosperous. All of my wealth was earned and comes from my adopted country. None comes from the US. None. I would not have achieved anywhere near the prosperity that I have now had I stayed in the US. Morally, I owe nothing to the US, except the dirt that I would like to shake from my shoes.

I live in a high-tax country. Because of that, I owed no tax to the US. US citizenship did, however, make financial matters between my wife and me difficult, because she is not American. It would make my retirement more difficult. It made my life extremely stressful and miserable, because American tax law is complicated and subjects you to extreme punishments. Imagine a boot stamping on your face.

Most of all there is no joy being associated with a country composed largely of crazies. Crazies on the right, crazies on the left, crazies in the middle. If the country went mad when Ronald Reagan was elected, it has stayed there.

So I renounced.

I must admit that I despise people like you who write editorials about matters that you know little about. Eurotrash – oh that’s so clever when applied of a Brazilian. “Keep the billionaires off base” when it’s 2 million dollars to become a covered expatriate. Get a clue, Felix. Or go back under the rock from which you crawled.

Posted by axy | Report as abusive

Besides the fact that I found this piece rather meandering and in that sense pointless (it kind of reminds me of your Steve Jobs/Apple posts), I would note that the “35%” most likely does not apply to dear Mr. Saverin, since he seems to be making most of his money through cap gains, taxed at 15%. As such, why mention that percentage at all?

Posted by Foppe | Report as abusive

Couldn’t agree more axy! Born abroad to US father and non US mother, never lived there, visit about once every two years for maybe a week but still paying taxes.

One unfair thing I didn’t see mentioned is that capital gains are calculated on an usd basis so you can be liable for taxes even if you made a loss in the currency that matters to you. This also applies to simple currency transactions.

Posted by overtaxed_expat | Report as abusive

One thing that most people ignore is that it’s only citizens that are taxed when abroad. If you are smart, you will keep your earnings in your company, and only pay yourself the minimum possible. Your are not taxed on your net worth, but only on what you earn, whether through salary or capital gains….

Of course, this takes some foresight & planning, but it’s really not that hard to do. People like Saverin are really outliers in terms of tax as it would have been hard to plan for such an uncertain startups…

As for the difficulty of being a US citizen abroad – please, it’s not that hard. I did it for 17 years. And with so many loopholes in US taxes (particularly for business owners) you should never pay more than 20% taxes, possibly much less. Sure, it’s a pain, but doing any taxes is a pain….

Posted by ckm5 | Report as abusive

Read the article. Read cardinalrules response (May 17, 2012
11:28 pm EDT). Pretty much ignore the rest of the responses.

Posted by QuietThinker | Report as abusive

Since there is much angst about the epithet “Eurotrash” (which is traditional and evocative, but perhaps too provincial these days), let’s just agree to use “Tyler Brulé” instead. As in: “Did you see how that Tyler Brulé reduced his waitress to tears for not making sure there was a proper crema on his espresso? What a d*ck.”

I’d also like to thank Axy for taking his angst-ridden self overseas at an early age and removing himself from our national gene pool. We have enough privileged whiners as it is.

It sucks that American expats have to pay taxes back home but then again, most of them are only there for a few years and would like to return to a going concern of a country. Also, your tax burden is calculated into your pay rate, so quit your yapping or ask for more.

Finally, Chuck Schumer is an embarrassment to Americans and especially New Yorkers. He’s never seen a populist bandwagon he didn’t call shotgun on. And now when I see him I picture him in a long severe frockcoat a la Robespierre, consigning another lot of aristos to the guillotine. He almost makes me feel sorry for a Tyler Brulé like Saverin!

Good job, Felix.

Posted by LadyGodiva | Report as abusive

The real issue is the US tax code, which allows very rich people in the US (Romney, Buffet) to pay little or no taxes on their worldwide income, but makes US citizens living outside the US pay top rate. Saverin would pay far less taxes if he were to stay in the US, but he does not want to. And i sometimes get why.

Update the US tax laws to tax all income earned in the US (incl. by foreign individuals)instead of “owning” people…

Posted by GA_Chris | Report as abusive

So when we abolished slavery (one of the last countries to do so) we did not grant freedom for all, but more we transferred ownership from private to public ownership. THe US government “owns” every single one of us.

I live in the deep south, and laugh about how everyone says it’s the land of the free… It’s pure indoctrination, because few other countries control their people as much as the USA does

Posted by GA_Chris | Report as abusive

I’m guessing that Felix is making a distinction between those who live abroad because they can, and those who do so for opportunity, professional growth, wanderlust, or love (I know a lot in the latter group). A growing number of moderate to high wealth individuals are increasingly connected through common interests or beliefs rather than by location, and feel no particular location allegiance. Governments are based on physical location, and must continue to fund infrastructure and other needs, without the ability to effectively tax this type of wealth.

This trend is going to move down-market as the Internet culture continues to redefine us. Remember a few years ago when Bill Gates threatened to park a floating community of software developers off the 12-mile limit. I interact frequently with people in my profession in other countries, and may in time feel more allegiance to them than to my next door neighbor, who I barely know. This type of social tension will become worse as online communities become stronger. Speaking of Facebook.

Posted by Curmudgeon | Report as abusive

Good one, Felix!

Posted by krimsonpage | Report as abusive

First of all, he’s not stateless.
Second of all, he was (stress past tense) a naturalized, not native US citizen.
Third of all, how, precisely, does the US propose to collect the fines/taxes/etc from expats who renounce their citizenship if they have no US based assets? Most countries aren’t going to freeze the assets of their citizens at the behest of the USG just because the USG is pissed that they renounced their citizenship.
Finally, the USG doesn’t do diddlysquat for US citizens abroad. Been there. Done that.

Posted by majkmushrm | Report as abusive

If this guy was not rich, would anyone care? I glean from the story that he was rich when he moved here. Did anyone care then? As I understand the facts, he was cashed out of FB when he won his lawsuit–so he is not making his money from the IPO. If that is the case, then he paid his taxes on income earned in the US. If someone does not want to avail themselves of the benefits of living in, or having the option to live, in the US, then why do we bother caring about that person to begin with? I think Saverin is foolish, but I think that people getting agitated about his foolishness is a waste of energy. Do not give this fool anymore media coverage

Posted by JLRII | Report as abusive

If the onerous US tax rules applied only to billionaires, that would be fine. But the fact is they apply to any old schmuck — such as me, living here in Chile. The surge in renunciations by US citizens abroad isn’t primarily by billionaires. It’s by people like me, who have another citizenship, and are tired of having a status that is more cost than benefit.

As my father put it in his letter renouncing citizenship, it’s about the costs and benefits. What is the benefit of being a US citizen in Canada or Chile or the UK or just about anywhere? I like the US well enough, some of my best friends are Americans. But being a US citizen gets me what? Absurd stress if I want to travel to Cuba. Hours spent filing US taxes on income earned from a UK company while I’m living in Chile. I don’t even get free passage into the US. The last time I entered, I was interrogated as much as any European tourist, with the border guard even asking whom I planned to visit in the US, and threatening to detain me when I asserted my right not to answer. US consulates overseas are inaccessible fortresses that treat every citizen as a prospective terrorist — other embassies don’t make us leave our phones outside. If being a US is all cost, with no benefit, who can blame people for renouncing?

Long term, I think the US is going to suffer far more than Severin from this policy of claiming worldwide power over citizens. And countries like Chile, which make immigration a breeze, will benefit.

Posted by Setty | Report as abusive

I’ll add to Setty’s comments by noting that the “market” for US citizenship is drying up.

I’m an expat currently living in Beijing, and I can tell you that most Chinese talking about acquiring foreign citizenship are now talking about acquiring Canadian, British, or Australian citizenship, not US citizenship.

Posted by mfw13 | Report as abusive


Very nice bragging about loopholes that will keep your taxes below 20%, but that’s actually the nub of the problem.

Setty puts it right. It’s not even about the money. The problem is that the generally insane US tax code is absolutely odious towards US citizens living abroad and also to foreign residents living in the US but who have assets abroad. The cost of compliance is staggering, even for something as trivial as a bank account and the laws are so arbitrary and poorly written you can never know for sure you’re actually compliant. And that’s not a small problem. The penalties for non-compliance are extremely high. Because of Congress’ obsessions with “offshore tax cheats” and ever more draconian laws, even trivial errors or oversights on mere matters of a few dollars can expose you to penalties of tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars.

As usual, the ones getting scr*wed are neither billionaires nor poor immigrants but the broad middle who can’t pay for top notch accountants and international taxation specialists. And even the supposedly top notch accountants are oftentimes completely at sea. I’ve had the experience multiple times with reputable firms.

By the way, the Schumer-Casey proposal is probably self-defeating. By barring former citizens from traveling back to the US, he’s giving away the only carrot that prevents renouncing citizens from going ‘feral’, simply dropping off the radar without formally renouncing their citizenship.

Posted by Frwip | Report as abusive

“generally insane US tax code”

I would gladly vote for a Presidential candidate who promised to cut the tax code, even if the dollars I pay end up increasing. I’m more sophisticated financially than most, and even so have trouble answering even simple tax questions at this point. Guess, file, and pray you aren’t audited…

Posted by TFF | Report as abusive

First grain of salt applied to Felix’s opinion’ Felix if your not a US Citizen you are a hypocrite at the least.

Second; Says Felix “From a public-policy perspective, this is the kind of US exceptionalism I can get behind.” Need you be reminded that this type of envy of wealth and comments such as this is how Hitler got started. This anti-rich shtick is the first wave of a history repeat.

Thirdly; The IRS laws on this matter violate most every international treaty on the matter, but even the rich cannot afford to litigate it. That should make Felix more comfortable about the police state the US has become.

Fourth; To bring up the Jewish treatment again, remember when (in the 1940s to 1970s, most likely before you were born Felix) the USSR confiscated (ala Charles Schumer) almost all the Jews property when they wanted to leave the country and the West ridiculed this endlessly?

To use a medical analogy here, you are dwelling on the symptoms rather than the disease Felix. Please wake up before you write. Also envy is never pretty.

Posted by JP007 | Report as abusive

Cardinalrules has it correct.

Posted by LBK2 | Report as abusive

There is no reason for the US Government or other Americans to throw their tantrum on the people willingly renouncing their citizenship. We make those problems to happen. We allow people voluntarily renounce their citizenship. In order to prevent this craziness we have to change the law or join 1954 UN Convention Relating to the Status of Statelessness. Eduardo Saverin had double citizenship and by law he had rights to renounce one of his citizenship. But when we have person who does not posses another nationality and by allowing him to renounce US citizenship, we leave him in limbo, which means we promote statelessness, and that is human rights issue. Person who does not posses any other nationality or residency status from another nation should not be allowed to renounce his citizenship in voluntary basis. Period.

Posted by MikhailBenoit | Report as abusive