Use Of Citizenship Research Articles

Seeking Better Life Chances by Crossing Borders: The Existential Paradox and Strategic Use of Italian Citizenship by Migrant Women

Based on long-term ethnographic fieldwork carried out in Naples (Italy) in the period 2014 to 2020, this article focuses on the rearticulation of the migration–citizenship nexus through a gender perspective. The article questions how migrant women exercise their agency despite the structural constraints that prevent their full inclusion and how they are able to cross and transgress the boundaries of citizenship and national belonging in search of better life opportunities. The data analyzed show the existential paradox linked to the migration–citizenship nexus that affects the lives of migrant women in Italy and their use of citizenship as a strategy to react to a blocked destiny, to follow one’s aspirations, and to rebalance gender relations. The article refines an integrated approach that considers the relationship between agency, aspiration, and capability as a broader theoretical framework within which to jointly study the dynamics of gender, migration, and citizenship as closely related, beyond the boundaries of fixed and opposite categories.

Revisiting the Tax Treatment of Citizens Abroad: Reconciling Principle and Practice

In an increasingly mobile world, the taxation of citizens living abroad has taken on increased importance. Recent international administrative developments—most notably, the weakening of foreign bank secrecy and expansion of global information sharing norms—have further raised the profile of this issue. While U.S. law traditionally has taxed U.S. citizens living abroad in the same general manner as citizens living in the United States, a number of scholars have proposed abandoning the use of citizenship as a jurisdictional basis to tax. In its place, they would apply residence-based principles (i.e., exercising full taxing rights over U.S. citizens only if the citizens reside in the United States). Citizens residing outside the United States would be taxed in the same limited manner as noncitizens residing outside the United States.This Article examines the impact of the recent international administrative developments on proposals to eliminate citizenship-based taxation and replace it with residence-based taxation. It also discusses a number of substantive concerns with the residence-based taxation proposals. While the Article concludes that the United States should retain its citizenship-based taxation regime, it acknowledges that a number of practical steps could be taken to ameliorate unnecessary burdens faced by overseas citizens.

Citizenship and Tax

Since the time of the ancient Greeks and Romans, citizenship has defined the membership of an individual to a polity. Despite being a central pillar of national states and a supranational institution like the European Union, the importance of citizenship has progressively declined due to globalization and increased cross-border mobility. Indeed, citizenship has almost been abandoned as a connecting factor for establishing a state’s tax jurisdiction. This article, however, argues that such a perception is partly misplaced. Far from being a relic of the past, citizenship still maintains relevance in today’s international tax arena. Citizenship can serve, at times, either to extend or restrict a state’s taxing rights over an individual’s income. And yet, the use of citizenship for tax purposes is often instrumental and does not reflect the effective participation of an individual in a polity, which might ultimately suggest abandoning citizenship altogether as a relevant connecting factor in jurisdictional tax matters.

Crafting the “Well-Rounded Citizen”: Empowerment and the Government of Counterradicalization

In recent years, counterradicalization work has come to focus on empowering vulnerable communities and individuals through programs implemented by local governments and welfare services. This article examines this new regime of counterradicalization, focusing on how such programs seek to immunize people allegedly susceptible to radicalization by making them active citizens. In contrast to the stated ambitions of these programs and much scholarly work on prevention, we do not see counterradicalization by empowerment as a way of giving back power to the communities where terrorism emerges. Rather, these programs are set up to manage the self-image and behaviors of individuals perceived as risky, which means that they operate by shaping subjects. Undertaking an in-depth analysis of two programs of prevention through empowerment, we outline the rationalities underpinning this new way of countering radicalization, showing how they make use of citizenship as a political technology. (Less)

Political representation and non-citizenship: the impact of excluded subjects on democratic frameworks of representation

Participatory democratic models fail to acknowledge that ‘citizenship’ emerges within a repressive context that has at its foundations a necessity to exclude. Hamilton’s argument that freedom is power through political representation takes for granted that citizenship is (i) inherently democratic and (ii) the best framework from which to conceive of freedom and power. Contemporary challenges of increasing non-citizenship have exposed the limitations of arguments that still conceive of freedom as citizen-power. The paper critiques Hamilton’s uncritical use of citizenship and the consequences thereafter for its relevance to a contemporary democratic project.

Is it time to retire Nottebohm?

[N]ationality is a legal bond having as its basis a social fact of attachment, a genuine connection of existence, interests and sentiments, together with the existence of reciprocal rights and duties. It may be said to constitute the juridical expression of the fact that the individual … is in fact more closely connected with the population of the State conferring nationality than with that of any other State. Scholars of migration and citizenship will recognize the famous passage from the judgment of the ICJ in Nottebohm and perhaps be able to recite it from memory. But Nottebohm is nearing sixty-five, and so the inevitable question arises: is it time to retire the case? One impetus for the project of global migration law is the recognition of “current structures as historically contingent artifacts of a sovereignty-based global system in need of reform.” No artifact does more work in sustaining the current configuration than the use of citizenship (or nationality) as the technology for regulating transnational movement. Sooner or later, a conversation about the emergence of global migration law must grapple with international law's position on nationality, which brings us back to Nottebohm.

The Taxation (or Non-Taxation) of Citizenss Foreign Income: Distilling the Competing Normative Arguments

Modern developments raise significant questions about the future importance (or non-importance) of formal citizenship status. For example, while many have interpreted the European Union project, with its emphasis on the free movement of individuals, as portending the decreasing relevance of nationality, recent developments, such as the “Brexit” vote, suggest that national identity remains an important factor for many individuals. While much of the public debate over citizenship focuses on areas, such as immigration, that are more obviously tied to formal citizenship status, this debate also impacts cross-border tax policy. Over the past decade, several scholars have addressed the use of citizenship status as a jurisdictional basis upon which to tax the foreign-source income of individuals who live outside of their country of citizenship. Some writers have defended the United States’ use of this citizenship-based taxation (“CBT”) to tax the foreign income of citizens living abroad, while a more significant number of scholars have rejected it and proposed that the United States tax the foreign income of U.S. citizens only if they reside in the United States (residence-based taxation, or “RBT”). This Article considers the competing normative arguments surrounding the use of citizenship as a jurisdictional basis to tax, and distills the strengths and weaknesses of each. In so doing, it highlights the most salient factors upon which the debate hinges, and illustrates the importance of difficult-to-measure predictions of how both individuals and society will react to different regimes. The Article ultimately concludes that the debate between CBT and RBT often overemphasizes the subjective circumstances of particular individuals, and underemphasizes the broader impact of the alternative regimes on social cohesion within the United States. When coupled with the significant residence neutrality concerns that may arise under an RBT regime and the resulting potential to create a permanent class of wealthy U.S. citizens living abroad who would not be subject to taxation, these social cohesion concerns suggest that the United States should continue to exercise citizenship-based taxing jurisdiction. However, the Article acknowledges that such a CBT regime can only be defended in practice if the IRS and Congress are willing to address the significant practical compliance concerns faced by many citizens living abroad.

I forestieri e il debito pubblico di Firenze nel Quattrocento

This essay aims to analyze the relationship between the Florentine public debt ( the comune) and its creditors during the 15th century, focusing in particular on the role of non-Florentine investors. According to Florentine laws, bishops and cardinals, great merchants, Italian lords and foreign rulers could purchase notable sums of titoli di Monte to gain regular interest on their capital. Such a choice generated a complex system of relations with Florentine finances, which involved the use of citizenship as a tool to strengthen the links between Florence and its creditors. For that reason the practice of foreign investment allows us to study the political strategy of Florence and at the same time the Italian capital market during the Quattrocento.

Americans Abroad and the Uses of Citizenship: Paris, 1914-1940

AMERICANS, QUINTESSENTIALLY described as belonging to a nation of immigrants, are rarely seen as emigrants. Yet large numbers of American citizens have settled abroad, increasingly so since World War II. Today, the Association of Americans Resident Overseas estimates that over five million Americans live outside of the United States. A transatlantic flow eastward began in the nineteenth century and picked up with earnest after the Civil War. Paris was one of the prime destinations for those who went to Europe for work or play, and by the late nineteenth century, Americans had created a large resident “colony,” as they called it, the largest group of Americans abroad. Although Americans abroad have never considered themselves immigrants and do not fall under our usual conception of the immigrant and ethnic history of the North American people (the Journal of American Ethnic History’s raison d’etre), they are a fitting topic for immigration historians in several ways. First, they push us to think of ourselves as we think of others who have come to American shores. The history of Americans in Paris, with their clubs and churches, is a study of community formation and interaction with the locals that is familiar to all historians of immigration. But the experience of those who left the United States may also, in turn, be used to ask questions about immigrants to the United States (and elsewhere). In particular, by focusing on their relation to the consulate, we can ask new questions about citizenship and transnationalism. To what extent do citizens abroad call upon their home states in time of need? By looking at the U.S. Consulate in Paris and examining a particularly insistent transnational use of citizenship from afar, we can suggest the importance for more comparative historic research on the consular intersection for other nationals within the United States or elsewhere. Americans abroad are not your average immigrant largely because of the way we have defined immigrants as impoverished workers. Those Americans who go abroad for substantial periods of time, from months to years to a lifetime, may be called elite emigrants, a category that in itself deserves

The role of anomia on the relationship between organisational justice perceptions and organisational citizenship online behaviours

PurposeAnomic feelings (AFs) are predicted to play a moderating role in the relationship between organisational justice perceptions and the citizenship use of the organisation's internet access, or cybercivism. The purpose of this paper is to hypothesise that, just as AFs are supported in prior research as able to intensify the negative effects of organisational justice (OJ) on cyberloafing, they will also intensify the positive effects of OJ on cybercivism.Design/methodology/approachData were collected from 270 (17 per cent) of the 1,547 respondents at a public university.FindingsExcept in the case of procedural justice, the results support that AF act as a moderator of the OJ‐cybercivism link because, among employees with comparatively less AF, the perceptions of the OJ under study (distributive, procedural and interactional) had a stronger impact on cybercivism.Research limitations/implicationsTo generalise from a convenience sample of 17 per cent to the entire University is unfeasible, let alone the “public sector” as a whole for a whole culture/country. Therefore, the paper only aims to be an early exploration of actual phenomenon, and to provide new insights necessary to understand the impact of pervasive new media and information and communication technologies (ICTs) on individual behaviour in virtual work settings.Practical implicationsThe findings contribute to an improved understanding of the influence of OJ on cybercivism. As a moderator, anomia is supported in our sample as one of the key “controllers” of the OJ predictions on cybercivism and sets a new scenario in seeking electronic business effectiveness. By encouraging convincing values and equity in the workplace, organisational management seems be on the right path to create the proper context for cybercivism to occur.Originality/valueEmployee AFs are shown to be a moderator in the relationship between OJ and cybercivism. This is the first empirical test of this interaction.

Earnings Prospects for People With Migration Background in Germany

Less than half of the people with migration background living in Germany possess foreign citizenship. Hence, using citizenship to analyze economic issues of immigration may be problematic for two reasons. On the one hand, a quite substantial share of persons with migration background is neglected in the group of interest, and, on the other hand, the reference group (native Germans) may be contaminated by effects from naturalized immigrants. This paper utilizes a wider definition covering all persons with migration background to analyze the earnings prospects. To shed light on differences to the common use of citizenship, estimates are presented in comparison to foreigner and German citizens. The results show that persons with migration background have similar earnings prospects to foreigners. Moreover, earnings prospects for native Germans do not differ much from those of German citizenship. Therefore, using citizenship to approximate natives and non-natives when analyzing earnings issues seems to be reasonable. A second question of the paper is whether degrees obtained in Germany lead to better earnings prospects compared to degrees obtained abroad for persons with migration background. Independently of gender and skill level, the estimates affirm higher earnings to educational attainment in Germany.