Meghan Markle: Citizenship and Religious Conversion

[Ista]

Here's my issue with that. The law and regulations of the land is taking course if she does not renounce. The law of the land is allowing dual citizenship. Even at high levels of government, apparently. And that is a choice of the government. So, in terms of expectation, who is it from? It's obviously not from HM or the government.

The difference, I suspect, lies in the difference between being a member of government, and being member of the BRF. The law allows for dual citizenship, but there are emotional and symbolic considerations that might affect perception.

And I distinctly remember comments that it would be nice if Boris could be shipped back to the US, so even members of government don't get a pass in public perception.

 

[muriel]

Here's my issue with that. The law and regulations of the land is taking course if she does not renounce. The law of the land is allowing dual citizenship. Even at high levels of government, apparently. And that is a choice of the government. So, in terms of expectation, who is it from? It's obviously not from HM or the government.

The law of the land may well allow dual citizenship for its subjects, but the overall message to the people of the land is that this is not somebody who is willing to fully commit to her role as a Princess of the UK, and probably does not see it as a permanent home. This may not be the message that Meghan wants to put out. It just does not pass the sniff test.

 

[Mbruno]

There is no way she agreed "to serve the Uk and the Uk above all else". She is still an US-American and her baby will be one as well. Her baby will be a member of the BRF, but that's something else entirely. When it is time to accept the British citizenship, she mighjt or might not get rid of her Us-American passport, but till then she is US-American and has a right to stay that till the end of her life.


Btw - couldn't Harry have applied for an US-American citizenship, now that he is married to an US-American?

I don’t think so . He would have to be a permanent resident in the United States first before applying for citizenship.

 

[jacqui24]

The difference, I suspect, lies in the difference between being a member of government, and being member of the BRF. The law allows for dual citizenship, but there are emotional and symbolic considerations that might affect perception.

And I distinctly remember comments that it would be nice if Boris could be shipped back to the US, so even members of government don't get a pass in public perception.

I'm assuming it's when they are against whatever he's saying at the moment when those comments are made. I wouldn't exactly hold petty comments as the view of the government. The view of the government is that this isn't a problem.

The law of the land may well allow dual citizenship for its subjects, but the overall message to the people of the land is that this is not somebody who is willing to fully commit to her role as a Princess of the UK, and probably does not see it as a permanent home. This may not be the message that Meghan wants to put out. It just does not pass the sniff test.

I find it interesting that people seem to think it's enough of a commitment when someone who, at the minimum, has influence over laws that can affect its citizens' lives, but not when it's someone who carries out official business only as she is told by the government. But my point is, you were on the law of the land, and that where I was. You can't use the law of land as a standard to say something is ok, and then turn around and say it's not enough.

And just to be clear, you are free to hold your personal opinion, but we are talking about what we think the government or BRF's expectations are.

 

[Mbruno]

The law of the land may well allow dual citizenship for its subjects, but the overall message to the people of the land is that this is not somebody who is willing to fully commit to her role as a Princess of the UK, and probably does not see it as a permanent home. This may not be the message that Meghan wants to put out. It just does not pass the sniff test.

Boris Johnson was a dual citizen and he felt he had to renounce his US citizenship , so I suppose most people would expect the same from the Duchess of Sussex.

 

[jacqui24]

Boris Johnson was a dual citizen and he felt he had to renounce his US citizenship , so I suppose most people would expect the same from the Duchess of Sussex.

He only renounced because the IRS sent him a tax bill that he called outrageous. Not because the position he held in government. In fact, I'd argue it played a very little, if any, part at all in his decision. He was a government official long before he renounced.

Btw - couldn't Harry have applied for an US-American citizenship, now that he is married to an US-American?

He would be able to apply for residency if they decided to live in US. Obviously, they aren't, so he'll never be eligible for US citizen unless something drastically changed and they moved here. Naturalization requires a number of years of residency first. At this point in time, 3 years since it'd be through his marriage to a US citizen.

 

[muriel]

But my point is, you were on the law of the land, and that where I was. You can't use the law of land as a standard to say something is ok, and then turn around and say it's not enough.

I think my position was perfectly clear, but let me articulate this for you one more time. The law of the land determined that it would take 5 years for her to become a British subject. The sniff test, or the court of public opinion, will determine what message it sends out if, longer term, a working Princess who carries out engagements on behalf of the Crown and government, is unwilling to solely be a UK subject.

 

[MARG]

To be honest, with the theoretical but ewuallu mind blowing tax consequences and possibility of shall we say 'information requests' Meghan could already be a fast-tracked UK citizen once the Treasury Office, Foreign Office, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Office, and Prime Minister realize the implications of her citizenship.

 

[Mbruno]

To be honest, with the theoretical but ewuallu mind blowing tax consequences and possibility of shall we say 'information requests' Meghan could already be a fast-tracked UK citizen once the Treasury Office, Foreign Office, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Office, and Prime Minister realize the implications of her citizenship.

I think we would know by now if she had been fast-tracked, so I find it unlikely.

 

[jacqui24]

To be honest, with the theoretical but ewuallu mind blowing tax consequences and possibility of shall we say 'information requests' Meghan could already be a fast-tracked UK citizen once the Treasury Office, Foreign Office, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Office, and Prime Minister realize the implications of her citizenship.

I think once it's announced that they won't fast track her citizenship. They need to stick to that, or if there are circumstances that has caused the decision to change, they need to announce it.

 

[Ista]

I think my position was perfectly clear, but let me articulate this for you one more time. The law of the land determined that it would take 5 years for her to become a British subject. The sniff test, or the court of public opinion, will determine what message it sends out if, longer term, a working Princess who carries out engagements on behalf of the Crown and government, is unwilling to solely be a UK subject.

Exactly. The law is clear, and no one is debating that. How the public perceives it if the Duchess of Sussex continues to hold dual citizenship, is a whole different matter. It might be an issue, it might not.

This is something that continues to come up over and over. There are many, many things that royals do that are perfectly legal, and that they have a perfect right to do. There will be commentary on it, however, because they are not, strictly speaking, private individuals. That's the trade-off: a life of incredible privilege and luxury, hopefully meaningful work, a platform to advocate for things that are important to you, and so on, but with it you accept that because part of your function is symbolic, there will be opinions, lots of them, about what you do, wear, say, and who you spend your time with. That's the way it works. If you want to have complete freedom and privacy, being a working member of the BRF is not the right life path for you.

 

[ACO]

Meghan is going to be an American citizen serving the crown for the next 5 years. In 5 years time if she says she (and her children) will maintain their dual citizenship will people really be angry? Who knows. At that point people will be quick used to her status.

 

[Ista]

Meghan is going to be an American citizen serving the crown for the next 5 years. In 5 years time if she says she (and her children) will maintain their dual citizenship will people really be angry? Who knows. At that point people will be quick used to her status.

That's entirely possible. The tax implications, however, will be interesting.

 

[Mbruno]

Meghan is going to be an American citizen serving the crown for the next 5 years. In 5 years time if she says she (and her children) will maintain their dual citizenship will people really be angry? Who knows. At that point people will be quick used to her status.

I am pretty sure it will be very controversial if she doesn’t renounce her US citizenship, but I believe she will unless her marriage to Harry is already strained five years from now.

 

[jacqui24]

That's entirely possible. The tax implications, however, will be interesting.

It's not as big of issue as some have made it out to be considering she's not working a typical wage paying job. Beyond that, the disclosure aspect is annoying, but it's nothing more than carving out a little bit of time to provide information to accountants on an annual basis and keeping track of things. We have to remember we aren't talking about average person who tries to file their own taxes through Turbo Tax here.

OTOH, if she does renounce, there is exit tax that has all kinds of issues as well. They can still put her under audit for all the years she's been a member of the BRF as well if they wish.

 

[ACO]

I am pretty sure it will be very controversial if she doesn’t renounce her US citizenship, but I believe she will unless her marriage to Harry is already strained five years from now.

I am sure she will as well but a lot can happen in 5 years and a strained marriage doesn't have to be the reason for it.

 

[Lady Marlboro]

To be honest, with the theoretical but ewuallu mind blowing tax consequences and possibility of shall we say 'information requests' Meghan could already be a fast-tracked UK citizen once the Treasury Office, Foreign Office, Chancellor of the Exchequer, Foreign Office, and Prime Minister realize the implications of her citizenship.

As we know, as an avowed feminist, Meghan was not quiet about her political opinions back in 2016 and Mr Trump does not forget his enemies.

The bold part (mine) above is something I have been wondering about. I know enough about the US tax code to file my taxes and that is about it. Is it possible there could be a number of Freedom of Information requests by the press and others to get a look at Meghan's taxes (and any children) or are there privacy provisions that would prevent or at least deny the requests.

 

[jacqui24]

The bold part (mine) above is something I have been wondering about. I know enough about the US tax code to file my taxes and that is about it. Is it possible there could be a number of Freedom of Information requests by the press and others to get a look at Meghan's taxes (and any children) or are there privacy provisions that would prevent or at least deny the requests.

No. By law, her tax returns are confidential.

FOIA only applies to government records that are not otherwise not protected from disclosure. So not going to happen.

The Freedom of Information Act (FOIA)Opens this website http://www.justice.gov/oip/amended-foia-redlined-2010.pdf in new window. generally provides that any person has the right to request access to federal agency records or information except to the extent the records are protected from disclosure by any of nine exemptions contained in the law or by one of three special law enforcement record exclusions.

 

[Lady Marlboro]

No. By law, her tax returns are confidential.

Thanks. I really didn't think it could happen but there have been a lot of things happening lately that I would have said the same thing about.

 

[Curbside]

Federal tax returns are confidential, and I do not think the IRS is in the habit of providing this information to anyone who asks. It's part of the reason why people running for office here have to voluntarily share their tax return information.

 

[Ista]

Federal tax returns are confidential, and I do not think the IRS is in the habit of providing this information to anyone who asks. It's part of the reason why people running for office here have to voluntarily share their tax return information.

Or not. ?

 

[Somebody]

Meghan is going to be an American citizen serving the crown for the next 5 years. In 5 years time if she says she (and her children) will maintain their dual citizenship will people really be angry? Who knows. At that point people will be quick used to her status.

I agree. While I would recommend her to give up her American citizenship once she holds British citizenship (and would have preferred that they would have fast-tracked the whole procedure given her situation - as I've stated before), anyone who is not concerned about a foreigner representing the British sovereign both within the UK and in foreign countries right now, shouldn't have an issue with a British subject who also happens to hold a second nationality representing the sovereign in several years time.

 

[Curbside]

Or not. ?

Ha! The point is, tax returns are private. The taxpayer has to agree to having them being made public.

 

[Mbruno]

I feel I am qualified to answer this question as I have received my oath of citizenship less than a week ago and have been in the process of applying and receiving citizenship for the last year and a half.

I am going to assume that you have applied for and received a permanent residence card of Canada. After you move to Canada as a PR (permanent resident) you start fulfilling your requirements for Canadian citizenship.

Once you have fulfilled your residence requirements, (which was roughly 1095 days out of the last 5 years) you can apply for citizenship.

The application consists of a detailed form (a residency questionnaire and personal details form) that requires you to list the days out of the country, prove residence for each day that you lived in the country and list places resided while in the country. This, along with photographs and other required documents, needs to be mailed into the citizenship processing centre in Sydney, Nova Scotia.

Once they have received a complete application with the fees and documents they begin processing and it can take anywhere between a few months to a year until you get invited for a test. Once you pass the test and the interview you are processed for an oath. You can get invited right away for the oath or it can take up to 8 months or more (the time between my test and my oath was a few days shy of 8 months).

If you get through all these steps you should successfully be a citizen of Canada!

tl;dr
It takes a long time and a lot of document collecting. But from the stories I have heard about other countries it is a relatively streamlined process.

*I began the application in June 2014; the rules have changed now apparently making it harder to become a citizen.

Just out of curiosity, what is the test about and is the oath you take the oath of allegiance to the Queen ?

 

[Purrs]

Just out of curiosity, what is the test about and is the oath you take the oath of allegiance to the Queen ?

The test is a test of Canadian civics and history (fairly basic). Here's an example: Online Canadian Citizenship Quiz - CitizenshipCounts.ca

Yes, you take an oath of allegiance to the Queen of Canada. Here's the oath:
"I swear (or affirm) that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II, Queen of Canada, Her Heirs and Successors, and that I will faithfully observe the laws of Canada and fulfil my duties as a Canadian citizen."

https://www.canada.ca/en/immigratio...me-canadian-citizen/citizenship-ceremony.html

(My mom got hers a few years ago and my son-in-law is currently applying for his.)

 

[Mbruno]

Will the Earl of Dumbarton’s birth be registered at the US embassy ?

 

[wyevale]

^If it is it will only be as '**** Mountbatten-Windsor', Americans having 'no truck' with Titles...

 

[Mbruno]

^If it is it will only be as '...Mountbatten-Windsor', Americans having 'no truck' with Titles...

Good point. The US doesn’t recognize titles of nobility or list them in US documents.

There is some confusion though about names. There are rumors ( only rumors) that Princess Leonore was issued a US passport upon birth under the name O’ Neill , but her brother, who was born in Sweden, has a ( confirmed) Swedish birth certificate under the family name Bernadotte only. And Princess Estelle, like the Cambridge kids, has no family name listed on her birth certificate.

In Meghan and Harry’s case, it is very likely that, if their son gets a US ID document, he will bear the family name Mountbatten-Windsor. Adding the mother’s family name ( Markle) is still uncommon in the US and Mountbatten-Windsor is the boy’s legal family name in the UK.

 

[Tatiana Maria]

There is some confusion though about names. There are rumors ( only rumors) that Princess Leonore was issued a US passport upon birth under the name O’ Neill , but her brother, who was born in Sweden, has a ( confirmed) Swedish birth certificate under the family name Bernadotte only. And Princess Estelle, like the Cambridge kids, has no family name listed on her birth certificate.

Are you thinking perhaps about the Swedish passports of Princess Madeleine's children, which were issued with Bernadotte O'Neill listed in the column "surname"? The confusion occurred as prior to 2017, double surnames technically were invalid in Sweden, and under the Swedish law O'Neill would have been considered the surname and Bernadotte would have been considered the middle name according to what was listed in the passport. However, the Royal Court claimed that the children did not really have a surname, and that "Bernadotte O'Neill" was listed to minimize problems at passport control.

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...ril-2014-june-2015-a-36799-3.html#post1670534

You are right that in his Swedish birth certificate, unlike the passport, Prince Nicolas was registered under the surname "Bernadotte".

http://www.theroyalforums.com/forum...ussion-and-questions-8936-14.html#post2066160

 

[Lunawalk]

Will the Earl of Dumbarton’s birth be registered at the US embassy ?

Probably just his name and no titles. I think Meghan's new baby will have to wait until 18 to renounce American citizenship.