HI all- here is a potential new concern for some of us. Can anyone provide more insight into the bill (Exclusive Citizenship Act of 2025) that was introduced this week by Bernie Moreno, US Rep, Ohio.
Seems to be nearly impossible. Is this political theater?
I found this to be helpful as it seems extremely difficult logistically.
This covers the same issue. They didn’t seem to think it would actually happen, but I’m not a US citizen.
i would have to agree that this is performative.
What’s the use of this thread for a Portugal GV?
I brought it here to understand if this is a legit concern or just a distractor. And since this is a well-informed group I thought that I would find other insights on this. If there is a better place, please let me know and I will bring it there.
You may not be aware of this, but many Americans participate in the program, in pursuit of Portuguese citizenship. Although this proposed law does not seem to carry any momentum, it would certainly be relevant to American participants if the United States banned dual citizenship.
Is there a rule against creating new threads to discuss new topics?
I’d say it’s a populist distraction and not going anywhere. A republican senator looking for his 10 minutes of media attention. This would be an incredibly difficult reform to implement and oversee in an immigrant heavy country like the US.
Besides, Melania and Barron Trump are both dual citizens 
Perhaps the general Residencies and Citizenships feed would be a better place for this question? This law could affect people seeking citizenship elsewhere, not just Portugal, plus a large percentage of PTGVers are not affected by US politics. (FWIW I think it’s pure theater.)
i am not sure @gwytb - i will delete it if necessary, I just thought this group may have some knowledge on the topic.
I would guess the odds of this being passed are close to zero.
Agreed. There’s too many constituencies whose members are going to get upset for various reasons. The right would fracture badly along a couple of fault lines I can see if it were to be seriously debated, which in the current environment means it won’t be.
There is also no practical purpose for the law. The US already taxes globally. This is just a political statement without much real purpose for passing it. I think we can safely ignore this for now.
Thanks for posting. This is a relevant topic for many of us US citizens, who are pursuing Portuguese GV with the expectation of dual citizenship.
If the purpose of the law is to prevent disloyal foreigners from naturalizing in the US (paraphrasing the legislative intent), wouldn’t a better approach to the law be to require those seeking to naturalize in the US to renounce their foreign citizenship, rather than requiring US citizens to renounce their second citizenships? I’m just saying that it seems to me they are approaching this law entirely backwards.
Since the USA is the only country in the world to tax citizens resident outside the country, I think we should go the opposite direction and declare everyone in the world to be US citizens … so we can tax them 
You’re critiquing this proposed law as a rational, purpose-driven instrument of public policy. I don’t think that’s an applicable lens.
I respectfully submit that nationalistic, populist legislation usually has different motivations: spreading fear, inflaming emotions, marginalizing outgroups, instigating violent xenophobia, promoting patriotism, and inevitably normalizing greater authoritarianism coupled with a loss of freedom. The angry mob of vigilantes wants “something” done, and the rule of law is always getting in the way.
Amusing quirk: if this law passed, it would be impossible for native-born Argentinians to remain US citizens, since they can not renounce (though naturalized citizens can). But this law won’t pass; it’s performative. Influential people won’t tolerate this unless they’re exempted, and it would be a chaotic calamity of unintended consequences.
Is this also “performative?” Will I have to declare my NG account? 
“According to a notice published in America’s federal register on Tuesday, foreign tourists would need to provide their social media from the last five years.”
Actually, in the 80’s that was indeed the case: those seeking to naturalise in the U.S. had to renounce all other allegiances and relinquish their other passports. My college friend has lost her German citizenship in that fashion that she couldn’t have regained later, without living in Germany for 7 years.
Wasn’t that a provision in German law, not US law? Germany has only allowed dual citizenships in the last year or so. I know the US was suspicious of dual citizenship in the 80s, but I don’t think the US ever formally required you to renounce (as aside from taking the oath).
That I don’t know. She indicated that it was the U.S. who demanded the renouncement.