Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
If there is a "treaty" agreement stipulating this is possible then one must assume the U.S. agreed to it because they desired a similar reciprocal arrangement.
Shouldn't that be obvious or are you folks all completely ignorant of the far reaching nonsense your IRS engages in regarding foreign nationals?
Surely there is a reciprocal agreement with the Germans to ensure compliance by them with IRS or other U.S. Federal agencies attempting to recoup losses of revenue from American ex-pats living in Germany for years.
The US IRS does not go after anyone who doesn't have income earned in the US. That has nothing to do with this case.
I second the idea to contact an appropriate US congress person. Not enough people avail themselves of constituent services. This kind of situation is exactly where they can be very useful.
A little free publicity never hurts either, a local newspaper or TV station might find this story interesting.
If all else fails, a community "pass the hat" campaign could fund this man's comfortable travel, including a nursing aide, to the nearest consulate.
Yeah, I'm really wondering if a US federal court or state court would ever really order the US Marshals or County Sheriffs (respectively) to arrest him.
Yes, I read "...German money judgments are enforceable in the United States (which requires prior recognition by a court in the U.S.)...," but I suspect that was intended to apply to multi-national corporations or at least individuals who have actually conducted their own affairs in in that country.
And I don't ignore that phrase "which requires prior recognition by a court in the US." A US court is not going to recognize a foreign obligation just because that foreign law said it existed. For instance, a young boy born in South Korea immigrates legally to the US with his parents. According to South Korean law, that boy is still a citizen of South Korea and is still obligated to mandatory military service. If he should ever go back to South Korea for a visit, they will nab him...but no US court is ever going to order him back.
I think that you've hit the nail on the head in this instance.
The liability is under German law jurisdiction, if it were to be heard in the US it would be heard according to US inheritance law (not German).
If it's heard under German law in Germany, the court could issue a judgement, however it's unenforceable unless the person actually goes to Germany (where they can be apprehended at the border for failing to abide by the terms of the judgement). However it's a non-extraditable offense, the US extradition treaty is solely for criminal offenses, and solely for offenses committed in the country the treaty provides for with an equivalent criminal offense (and not violating the persons rights according to law) in the US, so murder, robbery, rape, fraud (and no it would not be fraud, there is no prior intent to defraud, or even prior knowledge of the inherited debt), etc. So the net result is the judgement could be issued, but it would be ordering him to pay, or they would order him to pay again.
Contract law doesn't apply, because it's not an explicit contract with a governed by clause, or jurisdiction limits.
That said the person being discussed is elderly and disabled, if they have any future beneficiaries, they may be liable for the debt (and may live in Germany too). In that instance they could experience the full weight of German law.
I second the idea to contact an appropriate US congress person. Not enough people avail themselves of constituent services. This kind of situation is exactly where they can be very useful.
A little free publicity never hurts either, a local newspaper or TV station might find this story interesting.
If all else fails, a community "pass the hat" campaign could fund this man's comfortable travel, including a nursing aide, to the nearest consulate.
Or forcing them to come to him. Imagine all the negative press that could be stirred up against Germany. Hell maybe even get Trump to mention it. LOL.
I think that the issue here is whether a US Court would enforce German law and that will depend on the terms of the Treaty between the two countries. It would be messy and defending the case would be expensive. However, Germany might choose to make it a test case and especially if they are under pressure by German opinion due to the US imposing disclosure requirements on German financial institutions.
No need to be nasty about it. Why would most of us even know this kind of thing? I don't agree with the joking around about it since it's apparently a very real problem for this elderly gentleman, (which means he's not the only one), but you act like this makes complete sense. What a stupid treaty, and it makes no sense to me...of course I'm only given the limited information and regardless of how many sites I looked up to find more information, they just repeat each other with nothing further. You even say, "If" so settle down.
Oh, my I'm so sorry. I responded to a a post suggesting a poor elderly American was being "EXTORTED" by a foreign government.
In my world "extorted" is a nasty word.
I'm NOT acting like it makes sense. I'm telling you it doesn't have to because your government obviously agreed to it for reasons of reciprocity. That point seems to be where you folks have a deficit of understanding.
I think that the issue here is whether a US Court would enforce German law and that will depend on the terms of the Treaty between the two countries. It would be messy and defending the case would be expensive. However, Germany might choose to make it a test case and especially if they are under pressure by German opinion due to the US imposing disclosure requirements on German financial institutions.
This is substantive foreign law, not private, or contract. I don't think that the US courts could cede US citizens legal rights to foreign law without permission of the parties, it sets too high a precedent, and opens the door to a whole bunch of really nasty legal scenario's that could severely alter the application of constitutional rights.
Oh, my I'm so sorry. I responded to a a post suggesting a poor elderly American was being "EXTORTED" by a foreign government.
In my world "extorted" is a nasty word.
I'm NOT acting like it makes sense. I'm telling you it doesn't have to because your government obviously agreed to it for reasons of reciprocity. That point seems to be where you folks have a deficit of understanding.
All Germany is doing is enforcing German law. The big issue is whether it is enforceable in the US and that would have to be tested in court.
This is substantive foreign law, not private, or contract. I don't think that the US courts could cede US citizens legal rights to foreign law without permission of the parties, it sets too high a precedent, and opens the door to a whole bunch of really nasty legal scenario's that could severely alter the application of constitutional rights.
You may well be right. The enforceability would have to be tested in the US courts.
The US IRS does not go after anyone who doesn't have income earned in the US. That has nothing to do with this case.
Yet another error!
The U.S. certainly does go after foreign nationals for federal tax on income NOT earned in the U.S. and every one who has spent the allowable 'assumed visitor visa' time or somewhat less (according to a formula) over a period of years in the U.S. is aware that:
Your simple presence called "substantial presence" in the U.S. for a prescribed period of days that equate to far less than the allowed visa time of 180 days per year entitles by treaty agreement the U.S. to require them to pay income tax on ALL income earned regardless of source. The onus is on the individual to provide proof of a closer connection to a foreign country, upon demand, by providing the following:
Proof of citizenship in foreign country.
Proof of bank accounts in the form of current statements in the foreign country.
Proof of income taxes filed " " " .
Proof of property owned/leased in a foreign country in the form of lease agreement or property tax receipts.
Copies of current utility bills paid on property owned in foreign country
Proof of origins of income in the form of statements of earnings from all sources.
Copies of titles of cars and insurance paid on cars wherever titled have even been requested upon occasion.
Failure to comply and the foreign country with whom the U.S. has these treaties in force and effect is compelled to enforce collections of all taxes deemed applicable by the IRS.
The IRS certainly do go after foreign entities for taxes on income earned from sources other than U.S. should they spend any amount of "allowed" time in the U.S. over the course of successive years.
Finally: It has everything to do with this case, if as it is being suggested, this is TREATY stipulated.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I responded to a a post suggesting a poor elderly American was being "EXTORTED" by a foreign government.
