As announced on another thread, there was a public meeting organized by Paul Dewar MP (NDP, Ottawa-Centre) to discuss FBAR and FATCA on the evening of March 26. I attended that meeting, along with at least two other Brockers (Deckard and Pacifica).
I am attaching in PDF format my two-page summary and impressions of the meeting. I delayed posting this until Deckard and Pacifica both had a chance to look at a draft and give me some comments on it. However this is my summary, from my own notes and memory, and they certainly are free to exapnd on or disagree with anything in it.
I am posting this on a new thread because the previous one seems to have wandered off into other areas, and I didn’t want this summary to get lost in the shuffle.
As mentioned in the report, Pacifica printed, and we distributed at the meeting, some business cards containing the Isaac Brock Society web address. I would like to offer a special welcome to the Brock Society website to any new visitors who are here by virtue of having picked up one of those cards.
Members of Democrats Abroad or any US citizen eligible to vote from Canada in a Democratic primary are urged to read the information on the second page of this report.
Schubert’s report on March 26 2012 FBAR-FATCA meeting in Ottawa
I am curious if you wouldn’t mind sharing what the “speculation” was during the meeting in Ottawa as to how Canadian Institutions will comply with the FATCA. I am curious if for anything in terms of just how off base it was.
@omghesstillanamerican, oh my dear Isaac Brock friend, I think you misunderstand me. I think the US government is mostly ineffective in its wars on ( Drugs, Poverty, Terrorism, Women’s reproductive rights, Offshore Tax evasion, no name it.) because it too often approaches the problem with “shock and awe” mentality without any regard to the unintended consequences and collateral damage of its actions.
Unfortunately, when it comes to this FATCA regime, most governments in the world are probably more than happy to join the “coalition of the willing” due to their particularly dire budgetary and fiscal problems right now. I would hope that I would be wrong. I would love to see an “axis of opposition” coalesce around Canada and would kill this war in its tracks. However, I think I am seeing a trend here that might be unstoppable. Instead we have an axis of 5 EU countries signing up to the US promise of reciprocity regime to replace FATCA FFI reporting to the IRS, and more are countries concluding that they should “complain but comply” or join the 5 nation pack.
However, I have been wrong before, so willing to concede to you that “that the world ‘could’ unite against the US to stop FATCA”. I just don’t see the evidence, except in Canada right now. The world’s masses aren’t marching in the streets against FATCA. They are marching and rioting against austerity and government budget cuts, and wanting more taxes from the 1% . “Tax the rich” is an easy rallying cry to get behind FATCA! Do your own word association test with any man in the street you meet. Say “offshore account” and what will the response be? I would bet it would be “rich evading taxes!”
That is the reality we are dealing with.
I have some clients in this situotian also.However, opting out of the VDP and paying the FBAR penalties rather than the 20% VDP penalty still leaves a lot of uncertainty. For one thing, there is the difference between the wilful versus non-willful failure to file FBAR penalty. There’s no certainty that the IRS will stop at only the non-willful penalty ($10k/year). Further, there are a host of additional penalties that the IRS might tack on if the taxpayer leaves the VDP, including failure to file penalty, filing a false return penalty, fraud penalty, penalty for failure to file a related return (e.g., if the foreign funds were held in the name of a foreign corporation or trust), etc.I’m not saying that the 20% penalty is the better deal; it may or may not be. I’m suggesting that at least the 20% gives the taxpayer a cap, whereas leaving the VDP can have very serious consequences. At a minimum, a full-scale audit. And of course, criminal consequences are no longer off the table if the taxpayer leaves the VDP.