BHL Bogen

BHL Bogen
BridgehouseLaw LLP - Your Business Law Firm

Friday, May 31, 2013

U.S. Companies Increasingly Refusing to Conform to German Labor Practices

Retrieved from:
It’s no secret that U.S. and German labor practices are quite different. The U.S. is noticeably stricter on the rights and benefits of employees, whereas Germany seems to favor more employee prerogatives. A recent study even showed that the U.S. is the only wealthy nation in the world that does not have legally mandated vacation days for employees as well as no legal requirement that holidays come with extra pay. On the other side, Germany requires that employees have at least 24 paid vacation days along with 10 paid holidays.

Recently, there have been a number of occurrences where U.S. companies in Germany have had difficulty accepting Germany’s “social partnership” that exists between employers and employees. Last week even, workers for Amazon from the two largest distribution centers in Germany walked out in protest as Amazon company management failed to come to a wage agreement with its employers, instead opting to its American policy in which employees have no reliable guarantee for their income.

U.S. fashion chain Hollister, which is owned by Abercrombie & Fitch, is another example of a company who has refused to conform to German labor practices. Ignoring German data protection guidelines, Hollister used video cameras to monitor its employees and searched them after every shift, treating them like potential shoplifters.

Such occurrences have even caused some companies to fail in Germany. Wal-Mart, for example, misjudged German labor laws by urging employees to permanently smile and disallowing employees to flirt and engage in romantic relationships with one another. All of these violated the personal rights of the employees and Wal-Mart didn’t understand why. Many U.S. companies view employee rights guaranteed in Germany’s Works Constitution Act as inconveniences that need to be avoided.

It seems that most U.S. companies approach this issue in a way that as some companies supply an identical product worldwide; they also want to incorporate the same personnel policy worldwide.

Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte

Thursday, May 30, 2013

German Vice Chancellor Calls for Change to German Law Concerning Dual Citizenship

Amidst an “integration summit” on Monday at the Chancellery in Berlin, German Vice Chancellor Phillipp Rösler demanded that newcomers to Germany be allowed to maintain their citizenship in their home country. Rösler hopes that this will help Germany to attract skilled immigrants from countries outside the EU. His position on the issue directly challenges the beliefs of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Retrieved from:
Under German law, a person is not allowed to have more than one citizenship unless he/she is born with both, meaning that a child born to an American parent and a German parent acquires both American and German citizenship at birth, regardless of place of birth. Neither country requires a person born under these circumstances to choose between American and German citizenship. They may keep both for life.

A child born in Germany to two American (or other non-EU member nation's) parents, however, may also become a dual national at birth. But under German law, the child has to choose between American and German citizenship before turning 23.

Also, if a person from a country other than Germany becomes a German goes through the naturalization process, he or she must renounce his/her former citizenship. Rösler believes that these laws are discouraging skilled workers from migrating to Germany.

Rösler claims that “securing experts is one of the greatest challenges facing the German economy”. He believes that adopting the ability to acquire dual citizenship in Germany could provide an additional incentive to attract qualified specialists to Germany and help establish a more welcoming culture in the country.

Despite studies suggesting that recent immigrants to Germany are more often better educated than Germans, conservative members of Merkel’s party refuse to even consider dual citizenship. General Secretary Alexander Dobrindt of Bavaria’s Christian Social Union has even stated, “We say a clear no to dual citizenship. German citizenship is not a junk item to be hawked cheaply”.

Increasingly though, conservatives have indicated a willingness to revisit the law on dual citizenship, including members of the Social Democrats and the Greens. However, on Tuesday, Chancellor Merkel personally gave her opinion on the matter, favoring to keep the current law that requires a decision on a single citizenship to be made by the age of 23.

Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte 

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

N.C. General Assembly Proposes Tax Reform for North Carolina

The N.C. General Assembly has introduced a massive tax reform that would affect income, sales, and estate tax throughout the entire state. The goal of this tax reform is to reduce tax rates on investment and produce a net tax cut. This tax reform is similar to one introduced by the N.C. Senate last week.

Provisions of this reform include:
  • Broadening the base of NC’s income and sales tax, while reducing their marginal rates
  • Converting the state’s income tax into Flat Tax
  • Reducing marginal tax rates on corporate income and franchises
  • Eliminating NC’s inheritance tax

In regards to reducing the marginal rate of sales tax, the reform is set to reduce combined sales tax from 6.75 percent to 6.65 percent. The reform also plans to apply this sales tax to a wider range of services than it is currently applied to. The Senate reform plans to expand the use of sales tax as well but to a much broader range of services than the House plan.
Retrieved from:

The House’s proposed reduction of corporate income tax is to make it 6.75 percent from the current 6.9 percent. The Senate’s is much steeper, which plans to bring corporate income tax down to 6 percent in three years. The Senate wants to keep North Carolina profit tax in par with the other states in the region. Both Virginia and Georgia currently charge 6 percent corporate income tax, Tennessee is at 6.5 percent, and South Carolina is the lowest at 5 percent. With the House’s proposed reform, although reducing current rates, would still keep North Carolina as having the highest corporate income tax in the region.

In all, the Senate plan is most likely to register as a $1 billion cut from the revenue baseline over a period of three years. The House plan would register as nearly half that over a period of 1-2 years and exceed the Senate cut amount in 4-5 years.

With tax reform proposed in both the N.C. House and Senate, the two governing bodies will now work to combine the two plans. They anticipate a deadline of June 30th for putting the new budget in place.

Author: Sean Foley, Legal Trainee, Bridgehouse Law Charlotte

Status of Several NC Bills

Some interesting and controversial bills are being passed around House and Senate this month. Here is a short overview:
  • Anti-LEED Bill (House Bill 628) On May 13, 2013, the NC House of Representatives passed the third reading of the Anti-LEED Bill. House Bill 628 with the title Promote/Protect Lumber is intended to protect North Carolina timber producers by requiring that "sustainable building standards not disadvantage or forbid the use of building materials produced in this state" for major public facility construction and renovation projects. At the same time this is the end of the rating system LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design), because the tree farms aren't FSC-certified (Forest Stewardship Council). 
  • The “Tesla” Bill (Senate Bill 327)This bill intends to block car manufacturers from selling vehicles directly to the consumer online or by phone. It's quite obvious that this bill shoots against the electric car manufacturer Tesla, because it does not have a license or a dealership and does not fall under the protection of the Department of Motor Vehicles. The bill unanimously passed the Senate. 
  • Speed Limits Bill (Senate Bill 709)This bill zoomed trough the committee and the full Senate 45-1 without big debate. Republican Senator Neil Hunt proposed to raise the top speed limit on North Carolina highways to 75 mph. He knows first hand what it means to go faster than the law allows, judging by his five speeding tickets between 1988 and 1998. At least the new legal limit might help him and other speed demons escape the radar gun. 
  • Workers Bill (House Bill 872)
    This bill wants to prohibit state contracts requiring (sub-)contractors to hire union labor. The goal is to protect the right to work of any workers in North Carolina. It just passed the House and is likely to approved by the Senate as well. 
Some of the bills already found their way through the House and the Senate and became law by the signature of the Governor. For example, the “Federal Health Care Law” was one of the first bills this year to pass the House and Senate and was signed by the Governor. This new law prevents the state from adding more low-income people to Medicaid and blocks the implementation of a state-based health insurance exchange under federal law.

Another example is Gov. Pat McCrory's “Unemployment Insurance Reform Bill”, which the House and Senate quickly approved in order to pay down the state's debt more quickly. This bill cuts unemployment benefits in two ways: it reduces the amount of weekly benefits, as well as the duration that these benefits are paid. 

We will continue to keep you updated on the status.

Autor: Leonie Hochstetter Legal Trainee/Rechtsreferendarin BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Thursday, May 16, 2013

Arizona-Style Einwanderung auch für North Carolina?

Der sog. “Reclaim N.C. Act” beinhaltet die Forderung nach einem begründeten Erlass für eine umfassende Gesetzgebung zum Thema Einwanderung in North Carolina. Der Gesetzesentwurf kombiniert Führerscheinprivilegien und neue Einschränkungen für illegale Einwanderer.

Die konkreten Bestimmungen der Gesetzesvorlage sind:
  • die Erlaubnis aller lokalen Exekutivorgane (sprich: der Polizei), den Einwanderungsstatus abzufragen 
  • die Versorgung illegaler Einwanderer mit zeitlich begrenzten Führerscheinen 
  • das Erschweren für illegale Einwanderer, in den Vereinigten Staaten aus dem Gefängnis frei zu kommen 
  • das in Rechnung Stellen der verursachten Gefängniskosten für illegale Einwanderer 
  • die Einstufung des Verkaufs oder Herstellens von gefälschten Identifikationsdokumenten als Verbrechen 
  • das Verbot für Städte und Bezirke, Geschäfte mit (Sub-)Unternehmern zu tätigen, die nicht an dem “E-Verify” Verfahren, das Mitarbeitern die Bestätigung des Einwanderungsstatus gestattet, teilnehmen 
  • das Erschweren illegaler Einwanderer, Kaution zu hinterlegen, auch bei Verkehrsvergehen 
Der wohl größte Kritikpunkt an dem Gesetzesentwurf hängt mit der Erlaubnis der örtlichen Polizei zusammen, den Einwanderungsstatus abzufragen, da hierfür lediglich der Eindruck des Polizisten entscheidend ist. Der Gesetzesentwurf lässt einen begründeten Verdacht ausreichen und versäumt es, weitere Bedingungen an die Abfragung zu stellen, obwohl diese Maßnahme einen erheblichen Eingriff in die Privatsphäre darstellt und vor allem die Tür für mögliche Diskriminierungen weit öffnet.

Das Gesetzgebungsverfahren in den USA sieht, ähnlich wie in Deutschland, eine Art Filtersystem vor, das Ausschüsse beschäftigt, die darüber entscheiden, ob der Entwurf überhaupt der ganzen Kammer, also dem Repräsentantenhaus bzw. dem Senat vorgelegt werden soll. Der “Reclaim N.C. Act” befindet sich derzeit im Repräsentantenhaus, hat demnach die erste Hürde der Ausschüsse bereits genommen, steht allerdings noch ganz am Anfang des Gesetzgebungsverfahrens, da auch der Senat noch zustimmen muss. Letztlich wird erst ein Gesetz aus dem Entwurf, wenn sowohl Repräsentantenhaus und Senat zugestimmt haben und der Gouverneur des jeweiligen Bundesstaates den Entwurf unterzeichnet hat.

Neben den Kritikpunkten sind jedoch auch entscheidende Vorteile für illegale Einwanderer erkennbar. Viele haben das dringende Bedürfnis nach eine irgendwie gearteten Erlaubnis, Auto fahren zu dürfen, da dies meistens Voraussetzung für die Anstellung in einem ordentlichen Unternehmen ist. Nachdem die Regierung im Jahr 2006 das Einwanderungsrecht geändert hat, ist der Erwerb einer Fahrerlaubnis für illegale Einwanderer in North Carolina jedoch nicht mehr möglich.

Wenn dieses Gesetz tatsächlich in Kraft treten sollte, wäre North Carolina der fünfte Bundesstaat der USA, der eine Fahrerlaubnis für Personen erteilt, die keinen Wohnsitz dort nachweisen können. Sowohl in Kalifornien als auch in Maryland werden ähnliche Maßnahmen vorbereitet.

Autor: Leonie Hochstetter Legal Trainee/Rechtsreferendarin BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Wednesday, May 15, 2013

German Family Denied Asylum by U.S. Court of Appeals

Retrieved from:
A Christian family who fled Germany due to fears of prosecution for home-schooling their children were denied asylum by the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. The court claimed U.S. immigration laws did not designate the family to qualify for asylum.

Homeschooling has been illegal in German since 1918, when normal school attendance was made compulsory. The Romeike family chose to attempt to homeschool their children anyways in 2006 and they were faced with fines and threats of legal action from the government. Such legal action included a potential loss of custody of their children.

In an attempt to escape this legal action, the Romeike family fled to the U.S. in 2008 and they were granted political asylum in 2010. They established their new home in Tennessee. Under U.S. Law, the family may qualify for asylum if they are being persecuted because of their religion or because they are part of a certain “social group”.

In 2012, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement challenged the ruling that granted the family asylum, claiming that Germany’s strict policy against homeschooling did not necessarily constitute prosecution. The original ruling was overturned, on the basis that homeschoolers did not belong to a particular social group.

The family appealed this decision to the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals. This court ruled that the family did not thoroughly establish the prerequisites of an asylum claim, which includes a well-founded fear of prosecution on account of a protected ground. This time, the family constituted this protected ground as religious freedom.

In court documents, however, it was stated that the Romeike family did not belong to any particular Christian denomination and that the parent’s objections to the German schools were quite vague. One parent claimed that a school textbook suggested you could “receive help from the devil, but not from God”, although unable to recall a title or author, and that the schools taught witchcraft.

Many American evangelical Christians and homeschool families have supported the cause for the Romeike family to be granted asylum, as a White House petition on behalf of the Romeike family has already gathered over 123,000 signatures.

Author: Sean Foley - Legal Trainee BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

AZ-Style Immigration for North Carolina

After the Supreme Court approved the controversial provision of an Arizona immigration law last year, four House Republicans of the General Assembly of North Carolina, led by Rep. Harry Warren of Salisbury, filed the RECLAIM N.C. Act, short for “Reasonable Enactment of Comprehensive Legislation Addressing Immigration Matters in North Carolina”, with comprehensive immigration enforcement measures. This act would combine driving privileges with new restrictions for unauthorized immigrants.

Although the legislation drew sharp criticism from both sides of the immigration issue, there are also several advantages for so called “undocumented aliens” living in North Carolina for a minimum of one year (starting April 1, 2013).

The bill's concrete provisions are as follows:

  • allow local law-enforcement agencies to check immigration status 
  • provide unauthorized immigrants with a special limited driver's permit 
  • make it more difficult for unauthorized immigrants in the U.S to get released from jail 
  • bill unauthorized immigrants for prison expenses 
  • make the sale or manufacture of false ID documents a felony in most cases 
  • prohibit cities and counties from doing business with (sub-)contractors that do not use E-Verify, a system that allows employers to verify immigration status 
  • make it harder for unauthorized immigrants to post bail, including for traffic violations 
One of the criticisms refers to the authorization of local law-enforcement agencies to check on the immigration status, because this could lead to racial profiling. The law is based on a law-enforcement officer’s “reasonable suspicion” of an unauthorized immigrant. This raises the question of what an officer would do with such a driver’s permit? What happens to the passengers? The “show me your papers” requirement of the bill seems to be arbitrary.

There are also great advantages for illegal aliens in the U.S. For one, they could get a license and insurance, which hasn't been possible since 2006 when the government amended the immigration law. Some unauthorized immigrants might be in desperate need of some kind of driver's permit in order to keep or get a proper job. Although this bill addresses this need in our community for such permits, even immigration attorneys see a chance for unauthorized immingrants to come out of the dark.

If this bill passes, North Carolina would become the fifth state to grant driving privileges to those who are unable to prove legal residency – joining New Mexico, Washington, Illinois and Utah. California and Maryland are considering similar measures.

Author: Leonie Hochstetter Legal Trainee/Rechtsreferendarin BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Tuesday, May 14, 2013

Spars Between Business Groups and Organized Labor Emerge Over Immigration Bill's H-1B Visa Program

Amidst a high-skilled worker program, incorporated in the Senate’s proposed immigration bill, differences have arisen between business groups, who want to make it easier for companies to hire people from abroad, and organized labor, who aim to ensure that American tech workers get the “first crack” at a job.

Prior to a hearing Tuesday of the Senate Judiciary Committee, a coalition of business groups, including the Chamber of Commerce and the National Association of Manufacturers, wrote a letter to the committee appealing for changes to the H-1B visa program. Although this coalition agrees with the bill’s increase in the cap of high-skilled workers in this program from 65,000 to 110,000, they want to make changes to the requirements, claiming the recruiting process can be burdensome. Senator Orrin Hatch proposed several amendments that would soften requirements that previously ensured Americans get the “first crack” at the job and many business groups agree with these amendments.

Labor organizations, such as the AFL-CIO, disagreed with the business groups proposed amendments. The AFL-CIO claimed that Americans who have invested in the skills of the technology industry deserve a fair chance at any job. They also stated that any proposal to deny American workers a shot at the jobs of the future is “not good politics, not good policy, and isn’t going to pass”.

As the bill stands now, it would:
  •  Tighten border security
  •  Provide a 13-year path of citizenship to illegal immigrants
  •  Revamp visa programs
  •  Require employers who want to use to high-skilled workers program to first advertise jobs on a government-run website and offer these jobs to Americans
  •  Require companies to agree to not replace American workers with foreigners for 90 days before and after the company applies for work visas
Although business groups and organized labor are at odds over the H-1B visa program, a deal has been made between the Chamber of Commerce and the AFL-CIO over the bill concerning the “W-visa” program, which concerns low-skilled workers. The W-visa program would allow a certain number of people to work in the country temporarily in low-skilled jobs, such as a janitorial position or hotel position.

As the bill for low-skilled workers would put strict restrictions on the number of construction workers who can attain these visas, the construction industry is supporting to expand the low-skilled worker program. Senator Mike Lee has even proposed an amendment to double to number of visas for low-skilled workers.

It is in the hopes of business groups that, if the immigration bill passes in the Senate, a call to increase the number of visas for low-skilled workers might find favor in the House.

Author: Sean Foley - Legal Trainee BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Thursday, May 09, 2013

Der “große Lauschangriff” auf Facebook und Google

Ein Gesetzesverstoß des FBI sorgte gestern für Aufmerksamkeit, weil damit der gesetzliche Rahmen für die Online-Überwachung in den USA ausgeweitet werden soll. 

Die US-Regierung möchte Abhörmaßnahmen für Chat-Anbieter gesetzlich regeln um die Kommunikation im Netz besser überwachen zu können.

Eine Neufassung der Überwachungsmaßnahmen erscheint dem FBI dringend nötig zu sein, bereits in 2010 zeigten sie großes interesse an einer solchen Regelung. Der rasante technische Fortschritt, der auch vor der Kommunikation von Terroristen und Kriminellen untereinander nicht Halt macht, erfordere eine juristische Anpassung, so die Rechtfertigung des FBI für die strengen Regelungen.

Tatsächlich würde das für Anbieter von Kommunikationsdienstleistungen im Internet, wie z.B. Facebook und Google, bedeuten, dass ihnen Bußgelder drohen, wenn sie der Aufforderung der Behörde nicht nachkommen ein “Hintertürchen” in ihr Programm einzubauen. Durch diese spezielle Programmierung soll der Chat-Anbieter gewährleisten, dass sich die US-Behörden in mündliche Gespräche und schriftliche Chats einschalten können. Es werden Bußgelder von bis zu $ 25.000 pro Tag diskutiert. Das könnte vor allem für kleinere Unternehmen, die ihren Service in den USA anbieten, problematisch werden, da sie in der Regel nicht über die finanzielle Marktmacht der großen Anbieter verfügen.

Fraglich ist zudem, ob der angestrebte Zweck die Fähigkeit der Strafverfolgungsbehörden sicherzustellen zur Rechtfertigung solcher gravierender Maßnahmen ausreicht. Die Kritik, dass dadurch die Internet-Kommunikation allgemein unsicherer und anfälliger für Hackerangriffe und Identitätsklau wird, scheint unter den gegebenen Umständen durchaus berechtigt. Eine weitere Folge könnte möglicherweise auch sein, dass Innovationen im Ausland umgesetzt und weiterentwickelt werden, da dadurch die USA als Standort nicht mehr attraktiv sind.

Selbst die Tatsache, dass nach wie vor eine richterliche Anordnung für die Überwachung erforderlich bleibt, erscheint da nur als ein kleines Trostpflaster. Genau wie die Tatsache, dass eine neue Überwachungsbehörde nicht notwendig ist.

Autor: Leonie Hochstetter, Legal Trainee/Rechtsreferendarin BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Wednesday, May 08, 2013

Supreme Court Rejected Alabama’s Immigration Law

Alabama has asked U.S. Supreme Court to consider the portion of the immigration law to legally harbor or transport undocumented immigrants. On April 29, 2013 the Supreme Court denied Alabama’s writ of certiorari with Justice Antonin Scalia disagreeing.

The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals has issued a ruling against the controversial Alabama immigration law. The lower court ruled several sections of Alabama's law were preempted by federal
immigration law. It also ruled a provision ordering schools to check a new student's immigration status unconstitutional.

Alabama’s immigration law is protesting and criticizing in the business world and has generated considerable debate in the court. Last year immigration opponents were rallying against state tourism.

Author: Aleksandra Chesnokov, Legal Assistant, BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Tuesday, May 07, 2013

New Arrival/Departure-Record for Non-Immigrant Visitors

On April 30, 2013 Customs and Border Protection (CBP) has started the electronic rollout of I-94 arrival/departure-record process for foreign visitors arriving in the United States via air or sea. Form I-94 provides foreign visitors evidence they have been lawfully admitted to the United States which is necessary to verify alien registration, immigration status, and employment authorization.

Passengers arriving by sea or air will no longer complete a paper Form I-94. Within 24 hours of entry into the United States, a traveler will be able to retrieve an electronic Form I-94 online at:

CBP officer will stamp the travel document of each arriving non-immigrant visitor. The admission stamp will show the date of admission, class of admission, and the date that the traveler is admitted until. On arrival travelers will also receive a flier warning them to go to for their admission record information.
Upon exiting the United States, visitors will not need to do anything differently. Visitors previously issued a paper Form I-94 would surrender it to the commercial carrier or to CBP upon departure. If visitors did not receive a paper Form I-94, CBP will record the departure electronically via manifest information provided by the carrier or by CBP. If travelers would like to have a hard copy of the Form I-94 or other evidence of admission, they can print it out from the website

Once the travelers leave the country, they will no longer have access to the admission information. Therefore it is strongly recommended that all foreign visitors and their U.S. employers (if applicable) print a paper record of their admission as soon as possible after arrival. This will help re-construct an individual’s immigration history and U.S. presence if necessary in the future.

CBP will continue to issue a paper form I-94 at land and border ports of entry.

The implementation of the new automated process at air and sea ports of entry is phased in four weeks.

This streamlining process will improve entry procedures for travelers, facilitate security and reduce federal costs. Automating the I-94 and going paperless will save time both for travelers and CBP officers. CBP anticipates that the new automated process will save the agency an estimated $15.5 million a year.

The implementation of the new Form I-94 at air and sea has started in Charlotte- Douglas International Airport, Orlando International Airport, Las Vegas Airport, Chicago O’Hare, Miami International Airport and Houston Bush Intercontinental Airport that week, continuing across the nation through May 21.

We expect more guidance from CBP and USCIS in the coming months.

Author: Aleksandra Chesnokov, Legal Assistant, BridgehouseLaw Charlotte

Neues Wahlrecht für Auslandsdeutsche in Kraft

Am 3. Mai 2013 ist die Neuregelung des Wahlrechts für Auslandsdeutsche in Kraft getreten.

Demnach können jetzt gemäß der neuen Fassung des § 12 Absatz 2 Satz 1 Bundeswahlgesetz (BWG) auch diejenigen Deutschen wählen, die am Wahltag außerhalb der Bundesrepublik Deutschland leben, sofern sie

  1. entweder nach Vollendung ihres 14. Lebensjahres mindestens drei Monate ununterbrochen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland gelebt haben und dieser Aufenthalt nicht länger als 25 Jahre zurück liegt oder
  2. wenn sie aus anderen Gründen persönlich und unmittelbar Vertrautheit mit den politischen Verhältnissen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland erworben haben und von ihnen betroffen sind. 

Hinsichtlich der tatsächlichen Ausübung des Wahlrechts bleibt es für wahlberechtigte Auslandsdeutsche bei den gewohnten Abläufen:

Beide oben genannten Varianten setzen jeweils einen Antrag auf Eintragung in das vor jeder Wahl neu zu erstellende Wählerverzeichnis der zuständigen Gemeinde im Inland voraus. Die unter 2. genannten Auslandsdeutschen müssen darüber hinaus die Tatsachen glaubhaft zu machen, die eine persönliche und unmittelbare Vertrautheit mit und Betroffenheit von den politischen Verhältnissen in der Bundesrepublik Deutschland belegen.

Der Antrag auf Eintragung in das Wählerverzeichnis muss bis spätestens zum 21. Tag vor der Wahl (1. September 2013) bei der zuständigen Gemeinde in Deutschland eingehen. Das Antragsformular für die Eintragung in das Wählerverzeichnis kann jedoch erst nach Inkrafttreten der Bundeswahlordnung (BWO) – voraussichtlich Mitte Mai 2013 – zur Verfügung gestellt werden. Es ist empfehlenswert den Antrag inklusive der Glaubhaftmachung so früh wie möglich zu stellen, da eine Fristverlängerung nicht möglich ist.

Author: Leonie Hochstetter Legal Intern, BridgehouseLaw Charlotte