Okay, I understand your point. But I'm going to also add that this taxpayer owns real estate (a primary residence) in France and is liable to pay taxes to France because of the taxpayer's domicile in France. The taxpayer has been living there for years.

So under article 1 it indeed says,

"This Convention shall apply only to persons who are residents of one or both of the Contracting States, except as otherwise provided in the Convention."

But it also states under article 4 pg. 1,

"For the purposes of this Convention, the term "resident of a Contracting State" means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax therein by reason of his domicile, residence, place of management, place of incorporation, or any other criterion of a similar nature. But this term does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect only of income from sources in that State, or of capital situated therein."

It doesn't seem to use citizenship of either country as a criterion in article 4. I think so far the argument is stronger that the taxpayer is a France resident because the green card test doesn't seem to be a factor.

Going further, actually, it says in article 4 pg. 2(a),

"a) France shall consider a U.S. citizen or an alien admitted to the United States for permanent residence (a "green card" holder) to be a resident of the United States for the purposes of paragraph 1 only if such individual has a substantial presence in the United States or would be a resident of the United States and not of a third State under the principles of subparagraphs (a) and (b) of paragraph 3."

So it actually seems for the purpose of this treaty the taxpayer is a France resident, and not even a US resident because while the taxpayer is a green card holder, the tax payer does not have a substantial presence in the USA, so I do acknowledge that I unnecessarily discussed the tiebreaker test in article 4 pg. 3 previously, so I apologize for including that information needlessly.

However, I do think there's a very strong case that this taxpayer is classified as a resident of France for the tax treaty's purposes, so I think the taxpayer is covered under the tax treaty.

Do you agree?

Because if so then I'd like to figure out whether I'm correct in excluding the US interest income from the tax payer's US tax return while disclosing the treaty position with an 8833.