UPDATED
I was born in the States and lived half of my growing-up years (with many good memories) on each of the East and West coasts. The present U.S. is not the country I grew up in however. I am retired from the work force and presently 71 years old, wanting to live a simple life without the stress the issue of U.S. citizenship has brought.
My then-husband and I moved to Canada in 1969 and both became Canadian citizens in March 1975, completely believing (as we were warned of it at the time by the U.S. Consulate) that we relinquished our U.S. citizenship by taking the Oath of Allegiance for our Canadian citizenship. We chose to live and work in Canada, pay our taxes in Canada and, especially, raise our children (born here) in Canada.
In 2008 I was made aware that the rules had changed (without anyone in the U.S. giving me any notification or a choice to opt in or opt out) — I was still a U.S. citizen and was not in compliance with filing U.S. tax returns — I am NOW compliant for years 2005 through 2012. The Canadian accountant that I had used for so many years and who knew that I was born in the States referred me to a Calgary cross-border accounting firm as he was not trained or licensed to deal with doing my back U.S. returns. It was confirmed by that respected cross-border accounting firm that I was required to back file and so at that time they helped me make a ‘quiet disclosure’ for three years of returns and (Foreign Bank Account Reports) FBARs. In November 2012, I renounced my US citizenship, having paid US tax lawyers, US tax accountants and US immigration / nationality lawyers over $42,000 in compliance fees, accounting and advice regarding the possibility of my son being able to renounce an automatic U.S. citizenship because of his birth in Canada to U.S. citizen parents.
Besides the U.S. legal and accounting professionals I hired for U.S. tax compliance and filing final Form 8854 after my 2012 renunciation, I paid $3,661 in actual US taxes — all related to the Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) that I hold for my adult son who has a developmental disability. The Canadian tax payer helps pay for bonds and grants that are contributed to RDSPs by the Canadian government, so Canadian taxpayers have indeed had some of their Canadian taxpayer money as well go to the US IRS.
My biggest concern is for my adult son for whom I hold the RDSP (and others like him!). Since the U.S. considers the RDSP a foreign trust (as they do the Canadian Registered Education Savings Plan and Tax Free Savings Account), gains are subject to tax and this negates for him the same benefit that other Canadian citizens with a disability receive under these same plans. Neither of my children were ever registered by their parents as U.S. citizens with a U.S. Consulate. I never considered them anything but Canadian citizens. I also do not want the IRS to take one penny of my kids’ inheritance that I have worked and saved so hard for – in Canada.
Here is the advice I got from US Department of State, Legal: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/06/01/its-time/comment-page-72/#comment-3097016
From: Kavaler, Howard
Sent: Wednesday, May 07, 2014 9:55 AM
Subject: RE: Question re US Citizenship never registered with the US
Ms. Tapanila:
If your son was born in Canada to two U.S. citizens, at least one of whom had a residence in the United States prior to his birth, your son is a U.S. citizen pursuant to Section 301(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act. Your understanding of U.S. citizenship law is absolutely correct. U.S. citizenship is a status that is personal to the U.S. citizen and may not be renounced by a parent or a legal guardian. If your son seeks to renounce his citizenship, it will be incumbent upon him to demonstrate that (a) his action in renouncing his U.S. citizenship is the product of his own free will and (b) that he fully understands the consequences attendant to the relinquishment of his U.S. citizenship.
…which agrees with the information from an immigration / nationality lawyer in Washington, DC, to confirm my son’s US status and give possibilities for his renunciation. The result was that my children were US citizens from the moment of their births. The following is information from that lawyer based on his conversations with the US Department of State: DOS persons have “sympathy” for such cases. However, the developmentally disabled person will have to have FULL understanding of what he’s doing; if any question of lack of comprehension and grasping meaning and importance of ramifications, they could NOT approve such a case. From DOS point of view, US citizenship is precious and they have therefore established fundamental requirements for “compelling reason”. Even though there is the risk that a person’s financial resources could run out before his/her life was over, they will never approve a renunciation for financial / economic reasons. DOS has NEVER had such a renunciation case approved due to “compelling circumstances”. I could sue but persons this immigration / nationality lawyer talked with at DOS are SURE no one would ever win such a case as the courts view the discretionary action that DOS has would take precedence.
My Canadian-born son, never registered with the US (didn’t have to — he was US-defined US citizen from his moment of birth to two then US citizen parents, which we had no idea of), never lived in the US, never had any benefit from the US and cannot renounce because of his lack of requisite ‘mental incapacity’ to understand the concept of citizenship. The U.S. Department of State states that a parent, a guardian or a trustee cannot renounce on such a person’s behalf, even with a court order. He and many others without ‘requisite mental capacity’, including others perhaps with a brain injury from accident or stroke, age-related dementia, etc. are effectively ENTRAPPED into U.S. citizenship and the consequences of that with U.S. citizenship-based taxation law (while the rest of the world, save Eritrea, tax based on residence). The only way not to be so entrapped would be for the U.S. to practice residence-based taxation. Some say, they never will (so, though never may not be, it will likely not be in my lifetime this will change).
Support / continue to support the Canadian litigation: http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/.
Intelligent forum conversations at IsaacBrockSociety.ca and MapleSandbox.ca with other U.S. citizens in Canada and around the world have helped me retain some degree of sanity in all of this. I am grateful for the perspectives of others in similar situations in helping me make necessary decisions that will lead me back to a normal life – one where I can again be a contributing member of Canadian society.
I will continue to support Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty in a suit brought against the Canadian government for signing an intergovernmental agreement with the US to allow foreign (US) law to override Canadian laws, including the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, making US-defined *US Persons* in Canada second-class to any other – no matter what their or their parents’ or grandparents’ national origin.
Help fight this injustice for one million so-called *US citizens* in Canada plus their children and their business partners, etc. — and about 7 million US citizens around the world. http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/
Cecilia. If I can offer my sympathetic 2 cents worth.
Your daughter is Canadian. She was born in Canada. She has a TFSA and a RDSP. Read between the lines of what the consul told you. The US gov and the IRS will have no future interest in your daughter. Once you have renounced, forget all about them and you can safely move on.
@KalC, @Cecilia.
That is correct. Being born in Canada, their birthplace is not flashing in neon lights on their passports (and my son was never registered with the US so would not be identifiable except through my yearly FBARs to the US).
I am willing never to cross the border again with my son; i.e. “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” if I can be sure that he can indeed retain his RDSP and TFSA when FATCA is in place and after I have successfully renunciated my US citizenship, no longer having to report my son’s accounts on FBAR (and 8938?). As I am the trustee for my son’s financial affairs, I have signature authority on his TFSA and am the Holder of his RDSP.
I would much rather have this issue made just and non-discriminatory for all disabled here (some of whom will have a Canadian passport that identifies their birthplace as somewhere in the US). But, if the mountain to climb to get there is insurmountable and will take much more of my retirement funds, I can live with my Plan B.
I just would rather that no one has to work around the insanity of their parents, their trustees, their guardians not being able to renounce on their behalf.
@Nobledreamer — your idea of presenting this to the Taxpayer Advocate Service is something I haven’t thought of, so thanks — I HAVE DONE SO.
@calgary411
I hadn’t thought of it either. I asked my sister if she knew of an ombudsman at the federal level (having had DOS in mind) and she of course, mentioned TAS (she’s a CPA). So I looked around a bit:
http://www.irs.gov/advocate/article/0,,id=212313,00.html
9. TAS also handles large-scale or systemic problems that affect many taxpayers. If you know of one of these broad issues, please report it to us through our Systemic Advocacy Management System.
http://www.irs.gov/advocate/article/0,,id=117703,00.html
How can you submit an issue? Click on the button at the bottom of the page. You’ll be asked a few questions to determine whether your submission qualifies as an advocacy issue. If so, you’ll be directed to our SAMS Issue Submission page, where you’ll be asked to briefly describe the issue and provide a few details about yourself, such as your name and email address. However, we want the email address only to communicate with you about the issue (so please notify us if your email address or account changes after you’ve submitted an issue). Do not submit any taxpayer information such as your social security number!
I would imagine that your son would meet criteria
3 & 4 as he grows older.
http://www.taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov/userfiles/file/TAS_change_case_criteria.pdf
Most TAS cases fall into one of two general categories: (1) Economic Burden cases (TAS Criteria 1-4):
Criteria 1 – The taxpayer is experiencing economic harm or is about to suffer economic harm;
Criteria 2 – The taxpayer is facing an immediate threat of adverse action;
Criteria 3 – The taxpayer will incur significant costs if relief is not granted (including fees for professional representation);
Criteria 4 – The taxpayer will suffer irreparable injury or long-term adverse impact if relief is not granted.
@nobledreamer
Thanks to you — and to your CPA sister — for the additional information. I have addressed these points at http://www.taxpayeradvocate.irs.gov/Home/Contact-Us, and will do the same at the Advocacy link.
This is not just about my son or someone else’s daughter or son — it needs to be policy for ALL disabled affected — whatever I gain in what I am doing for my son’s issues I want translated to everyone. It is outright discrimination if this is not addressed properly by 1) the US, and 2) Canada and every other country — there have to be a lot of families affected. (i.e., these situations should not have to have special treatment for individuals — that’s how people “fall through the cracks”.
There needs to be compassion; there needs to be someone in charge with the common sense to see that what is in place is bad policy.
Much appreciated!!
Thanks to all who have posted kind responses and support to my situation and the inability to renounce for my handicapped adult daughter. This website is truly wonderful, informative, compassionate, and last but not least, enpowering!
Calgary 411 and others with children born in Canada with developmental disabilities: I thought I’d found an important section of the U.S. Department of State Foreign Affairs Manual Volume 7―Consular Affairs but I see you’ve already posted it on Dec. 15, 2011 at 8:08.
From: http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/120538.pdf
Have you pursued the option in section e.? It seems to provide the consulate official the prerogative to exercise some flexibility in seeking further guidance to resolve this issue if there is a compelling need.
“e. Parents, guardians and trustees cannot renounce or relinquish the U.S. nationality of a citizen lacking full mental capacity: A guardian or trustee cannot renounce on behalf of the incompetent individual because renunciation of one’s citizenship is regarded, like marriage or voting, as a personal elective right that cannot be exercised by another. Should a situation arise of the evident compelling need for an incapacitated person to relinquish citizenship, you are asked to consult CA/OCS/PRI for guidance.”
I don’t know how CA/OCS/PRI operates but surely, any official who has the authority to take this discretionary measure to help a family with a compelling need to protect their children would go to CA/OCS/PRI. If your current Consulate is unwilling to do so perhaps you should check out another Consulate that would consult CA/OCS/PRI to see how s/he can help resolve your dilemma
@ladybug- I wish to thank you for taking the time to read and send this matrial. I did try to renounce on behalf of my son, using the section that you have cited. The Consular official did send my request to the Department of State but, as he warned me it would be, the response was to stand by the stated policy.
I do not believe that the outcome would be any different if I were to try at another office, because in each case it is the State Department that makes the decision. You can be sure that the people making the decision are pretty well the same people each time.
I am sure that Federal workers are picked based upon their willingness to adhere by the rules. So I don’t believe that we can ever expect “policy” to be rewritten or challenged by anyone IN the system.
Hi, Ladybug. Thanks for looking out for this segment of the ‘US persons’ without a voice!!!!!
I’ve been told this issue is not something that can be determined at the “Consulate” level. I have engaged an Immigration/Nationality lawyer in Washington, DC to look at “compelling need” — not just for my family, but for all such families as mine. I am using retirement savings to try to advocate for this ‘US’ population. I shouldn’t have to use my retirement savings for this, but I can and it is more important than any other thing in my retirement to have peace of mind that my son will be OK when I am no longer here. So many other families don’t have such to draw on!! Perhaps there is some hope with this one aspect of the IRS law, compelling reason. The Consulates say we cannot renounce on behalf of our developmentally delayed family member, even with a court order. At least three of us trying to renounce on behalf of our developmentally-delayed family member here in Alberta have encountered this with the Calgary US Consulate.
I posted yesterday:
As I submitted to TAS Office of Systemic Advocacy, February 26, 2012:
Parents/guardians/trustees of developmentally delayed dependent adult children cannot renounce US citizenship on their family member’s behalf. That dependent adult does not have the capacity to understand either the benefits of US citizenship or consequences of its renunciation.
Parents/guardians/trustees make all day-to-day decisions, some of life or death, for their family member’s well-being. They need to live in the same country as their family, without the prohibitive stress and monetary cost of yearly US tax and reporting compliance.
Most countries have better rights for developmentally disabled persons, better health care benefits, better tax-assisted savings plans for retirement. They are discriminated against by the persons looking after their well-being not being able to renounce their US citizenship on their behalf to end unnecessary administrative costs (by their government funding) for US tax returns with $0.00 owing and possible prohibitive penalties resulting regarding FBARs.
Because of additional health problems most of these developmentally delayed persons have, it makes no sense for them to live in the US where they would not have the health care insurance or benefits they have in their family’s country.
Who will administer the responsibilities of their US citizenship when the US parent is either incapacitated or deceased? To have an executor carry on this pointless yearly exercise is a further expense charged to their government disability benefits.
This is discrimination on the basis of citizenship, i.e. our dependent children have additional compliance requirements, additional expense of administration, all for $0.00 owing to the US, because they are considered US citizens in addition to the citizenship of their birthplace.
These dependent individuals are denied health care assistance from the US in the country where they live. It appears they are denied access to benefit of legal tax laws provided by their country to save for retirement in their resident country.
Let those of us who look out for our developmentally delayed dependent family member’s well-being EVERY DAY be allowed to renounce that US citizenship on their behalf and continue in the important things like ensuring the quality of life for our sons, our daughters.
This is from the ‘Americans with Disability Act’ which doesn’t address a lot of the discrimination for Registered Disability Savings Plans (RDSPs), etc. for Canadians with developmental disabilities (and the like).
But I did glean the following portion, which talks about discrimination ‘economically’. (My comments are in CAPITALS.)
The US Congress finds that:
(1) physical or mental disabilities in no way diminish a person’s right to fully participate in all aspects of society, yet many people with physical or mental disabilities have been precluded from doing so because of discrimination; others who have a record of a disability or are regarded as having a disability also have been subjected to discrimination;
(2) historically, society has tended to isolate and segregate individuals with disabilities, and, despite some improvements, such forms of discrimination against individuals with disabilities continue to be a serious and pervasive social problem;
(3) discrimination against individuals with disabilities persists in such critical areas as employment, housing, public accommodations, education, transportation, communication, recreation, institutionalization, health services, voting, and access to public services;
THESE INDIVIDUALS HAVE EMPLOYMENT, HOUSING, PUBLIC ACCOMMODATION, EDUCATION, TRANSPORTATION, COMMUNICATION, RECREATION, HEALTH SERVICES!!!!!, VOTING, ACCESS TO PUBLIC SERVICES IN CANADA — THAT IT WOULD BE DIFFICULT TO PROVIDE FOR THEM IN THE US (WITHOUT THEIR FAMILIES WHO ARE ALSO LIVING IN CANADA).
(4) unlike individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of race, color, sex, national origin, religion, or age, individuals who have experienced discrimination on the basis of disability have often had no legal recourse to redress such discrimination;
(5) individuals with disabilities continually encounter various forms of discrimination, including outright intentional exclusion, the discriminatory effects of architectural, transportation, and communication barriers, overprotective rules and policies, failure to make modifications to existing facilities and practices, exclusionary qualification standards and criteria, segregation, and relegation to lesser services, programs, activities, benefits, jobs, or other opportunities;
(6) census data, national polls, and other studies have documented that people with disabilities, as a group, occupy an inferior status in our society, and are severely disadvantaged socially, vocationally, economically, and educationally;
THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE DISCRIMINATED AGAINST ECONOMICALLY; I.E. THEIR CANADIAN BENEFITS ARE DIMINISHED IF THEIR PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES ARE NOT ALLOWED TO MAKE A DECISION FOR THEIR BEST INTERESTS TO RENOUNCE THEIR US CITIZENSHIP, WHICH THEN BECOMES A SEVERE ECONOMIC HARDSHIP FOR THEM LIVING IN CANADA OR ANOTHER COUNTRY. IF THEY HAVE IN THEIR NAME A CANADIAN REGISTERED DISABILITY SAVINGS ACCOUNT OR A TAX-FREE SAVINGS ACCOUNT, IT DOES NOT GIVE THEM THE SAME VALUE FOR THOSE LEGAL TAX-SAVINGS PLANS AS A CANADIAN WITH A DEVELOPMENTAL OR OTHER DISABILITY COMPARED TO THE SAME CANADIAN WITHOUT AN ADDITIONAL US CITIZENSHIP AND ITS RESPONSIBILITIES.
(7) the Nation’s proper goals regarding individuals with disabilities are to assure equality of opportunity, full participation, independent living, and economic self-sufficiency for such individuals; and
THESE INDIVIDUALS CANNOT HAVE ECONOMIC SELF-SUFFICIENCY — IT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH AN EXTRANEOUS (TO THEIR CANADIAN OR OTHER COUNTRY CITIZENSHIP) US CITIZENSHIP.
(8) the continuing existence of unfair and unnecessary discrimination and prejudice denies people with disabilities the opportunity to compete on an equal basis and to pursue those opportunities for which our free society is justifiably famous, and costs the United States billions of dollars in unnecessary expenses resulting from dependency and nonproductivity.
THIS IS, FURTHER, UNFAIR AND UNNECESSARY DISCRIMINATION BY NOT LETTING THE PARENTS / GUARDIANS / TRUSTEES OF DEVELOPMENTALLY OR OTHERWISE DISABLED CANADIANS RENOUNCE US CITIZENSHIP ON THEIR BEHALF, WHICH DENIES THESE INDIVIDUALS THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMPETE ON AN EQUAL BASIS (IN THE COUNTRY WHERE THEY RESIDE AND HOLD CITIZENSHIP), THEREBY CREATING MORE DEPENDENCY AND MORE RESULTING EXPENSES. THE COST OF ADMINISTRATION OF THEIR EXTRANEOUS US CITIZENSHIP IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) CREATES LITTLE, OR IN MOST CASES $0.00, FOR THE US. IT DOES GIVE MONEY TO CROSS-BORDER ACCOUNTANTS AND US TAX LAWYERS IN CANADA (OR ANY OTHER COUNTRY) — NOTHING FOR ANY SERVICES IN THE US.
WHAT ARE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THESE INDIVIDUALS FOR WHICH THE US IS JUSTIFIABLY FAMOUS THAT IS BETTER THAN WHAT CANADA, IN THIS CASE, PROVIDES?
@ recalcitrantexpat I wonder what they consider to be compelling need.
@Calgary411 If your submission to the TAS office doesn’t show compelling need for all those you speak for, then nothing can. I just hope TAS can get the attention of guys that make the rules on this.
To both of you and Cecelia and others dealing with this issue, keep up the good fight. We’re all rooting for you.
Does anybody know of any US federal court cases regarding the renunciation of US citizenship for a mentally disabled individual by his or her guardian? I wanted to look it up myself but the US Pacer system requires that you register and pay for each page you call up. If you know the docket or case number that would be great.
TIA
@Deutsch-American,
I am copying to you my reply to a recent comment by Roger Conklin on another thread. I can give you the name of the Washington, DC immigration/nationality lawyer referred to me by my Calgary US tax lawyer. I paid him a flat fee of $US6,000 to determine that there had been no previous successful case like my son’s and that my being able to renounce on his behalf because of “compelling reason” (read life or death) was determined not to be likely. My decision is to not register my son with the US (he was born in Canada) and go forward as “don’t ask / don’t tell”. I have had my renunciation appointment. I hold an Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP) for my son. I hope that he is not identified as a US citizen by my bank through this account that I hold for him.
Thanks for that calgary411. I have the FAM information from a previous post of yours and as I see from your note, your lawyer in DC said there aren’t any cases. I’m interested in the details of the lawyer and what he said. Does this board have a private message system?
The home page of the Isaac Brock Society has a link at the top to the Forum where a private message can be sent. (I don’t go in there regularly, but I do from time to time.) I also have access to your email address as I go in from time to time to delete spam (your address safe with me). I could send you a regular email if you wish, giving you that lawyer’s contact info if you want to contact him.
*Calgary Glad to see you have resolved what to do in your mind. You have nothing to fear concerning whether the US will bother your son. He is indeed fortunate to have such a wonderful caring mother in a difficult situation.
Thanks, Duke of Devon. I also have the backing of my US tax lawyer (in Canada) who says he will represent my son pro bono for any action against my son by the US — and it is my opinion he would probably like the opportunity should the US be so stupid.
Hi Calgary411 – yes, please send me a msg on my private email. Thanks!
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society
If Canada follows this you may not have worry about 50 K
“NZRFIs obligations for identifying and reporting on certain accounts held by entities as at 30 June 2014
Accounts that you don’t have to review, identify or report on
You don’t have to review, identify or report on accounts with the balance or value of USD $250,000 or less unless you elect to do so.
However, if the balance or value of these accounts later exceeds USD $1,000,000, you will need to review, identify or report on these accounts using the review procedures. ”
http://www.ird.govt.nz/international/nzwithos/fatca/nzrfi-oblig-entity-preexist.html#02
Hi Calgary
Hope you are feeling well.
Please note that the above comment about $250,000 was for entity not person.
Hi Calgary
Did you ever have a chance to talk to a Financial planner so your son will have adequate income when you are not here?
I just talk to a friend who mad a lot of money in his life now he faces the fact he may have to work after he retired.
Goerge3rd,
If I am able to continue contributing to the Canadian registered RDSP that I hold for my son, without it being subject to reporting OR TAXATION to the US IRS, as well as what will remain of my RRSP/RRIF, sale of house when I die, my son should have adequate income after I’m no longer here. I do not want one penny of any of it to go the the US IRS.
Is your friend who, although he made a lot of money in his life, have to work after retirement because of financial planning or some connection to the USA?
My friend has no US connection. He had a mortgages and line of credits on the house as well. I just know a lot of people who made a lot of money, but do not have a lot of saving and investment. When they retire they have to drastically cut back.
When you are not here, will your daughter be your son guardian? Is there a contingency guardian?
I only needed that part of statement include.
My understanding is that the CRA will only pursue people, who have USA employment income. Can you confirm that?
The can you confirm is the important part.
It goes from a statement to a question.
I remember seeing someone post this a while back describing what taxes the Conservatives were willing.
This is important for USA citizen who are long term permanent resident of Canada,
If the government will not collect from a USA citizen, who is a permanent resident of Canada for Canada income they should know this before filling and paying USA taxes.
I know you are on this website all the time do you remember if some from the government confirmed this at a hearing?
FATCA and FBAR Reporting by Individuals: Enforcement Considerations from a Canadian Perspective
Andrew Bonham*”
page 334
Assistance in Collection
It may well have been the decision of the Supreme Court in Harden that led the United States to push for the adoption of article XXVI A of the Canada-US tax treaty.125 Article XXVI A is entitled “Assistance in Collection” and was added by article 15 of the third protocol to the treaty, signed on March 17, 1995.126 The protocol provided that article XXVI A was to apply retroactively; as a result, the assistance-in-collection provisions applied to claims dating back as far as November 10, 1985.127
In the words of one commentator,
[t]he entry into force of these provisions will effectively override the otherwise firmly entrenched principle of international law described above. No longer will a US citizen be permitted to move to Canada and avoid his or her US tax liabilities as in Harden.128
Indeed, a reading of the assistance-in-collection provisions appears to confirm the commentator’s statement—unless the US citizen is also a Canadian citizen. Paragraph 8 of article XXVI A provides that no assistance in collection will be provided for a revenue claim in respect of a taxpayer if the taxpayer was a citizen of the requested state at the relevant time. Accordingly, the treaty is of no effect in the case of dual US-Canadian citizens.
Another important limitation in the article is a provision that affirms the minister’s discretion to refuse a request for assistance in collection.129″
This is part of the reason I think the Conservatives may not collect from USA citizens for Canadian income. Please note it was the Liberal Party that signed this 1995 Treaty and why I think they would have negotiated a worse deal than the Conservatives. I do not know of any other country that signed a 1995 similar deal to this. We would have signed a damn European Fatca, if the Liberals were in power.
If the Conservative have made the pledge not to collect from USA citizen (Canadian income) who are permanent resident we should demand the same of the Liberals. I do not think the NDP will ever win a majority, but we should demand from them, that they will not support a Liberal minority government that is worse on USA taxation then the Conservatives.
I haven’t been able to find anything in a search. Perhaps someone else remembers, GeorgeIII.
My original reply was the relationship of what Justin Trudeau stated in answer to my question regarding FATCA at his Okotoks, AB “Meet and Greet” meeting some time ago. I, at the time, thought that completely out of left field. He quickly changed the subject. I was just relating to his statement.