11 thoughts on “Queens’ law professor discusses matters of interest”

1. Thanks, usxcanada.

   Excellent — Queen’s University tax law professor, Art Cockfield, gives the opinion of FATCA bank costs being passed on to ALL Canadians and that the Canadian Government needs to be even stronger in its stance to protect Canadian privacy laws for Canadians’ financial information.  And, it is on major TV — CTV.

   An aside, I have not yet seen any major Canadian media coverage on the latest IRS Instructions.  Has anyone — this further IRS insult to US Persons in Canada should be news.  We need the kind of outrage that many Canadians are showing toward the US Republican ad campaign by an Ontario woman spokesperson, trashing the Canadian health care system.  (IMO, Yes, we do have problems with our health care system, but for Americans to be fed this garbage is dirty politics.)

2. Art Cockfield, the law professor, appears to have no idea about the magnitude of what he is dealing with.  Illegal under NAFTA, bwaaaa.  The entire income tax is unconstitutional and is nothing more than theft by thug government.  He’s probably just another clueless Canadian liberal.  Canada is the US’s patsy on Iran while Obama’s drone fleet flies around blasting innocent families.  Just look at these headlines:

   Canada’s Decision To Cut Diplomatic Ties With Iran Caught A Lot Of People By Surprise

   At Least 10 Civilians Have Been Killed By A US Drone Strike And No One Is Responsibile

3. @calgary –  agreed! I can vouch for BNS; was told directly that “of course that is how the costs will be handled.”  I have not seen this GOP ad but doubt any USC, brainwashed by exceptionalism as well as the idea that Canada is a “socialist” country, will get it no matter how loud of a protest we might manage to produce.

   @CH

   I don’t know what Prof Cockfield is referring to with regard to FATCA however, the Bonham paper referenced a few posts ago, is quite clear about the fact that Canadian law will have to be changed before it is legal to collect for FBAR/FATCA:

   “Despite the increasing trend toward judicial comity, the revenue rule and the penal/public-law are still the law of the land. With respect to the enforcement of FBAR fines and penalties, since the BSA is not a taxing statute, the revenue rule would not apply, and ultimately any application or action brought by the United States for FBAR enforcement in a Canadian court would be barred by operation of the penal rule. A similar action brought for enforcement of FATCA claims would be barred by both rules.”

   Sorry, will have to go through posts to find a link for the paper, I saved it.

    In spite of your assertion that Canada is the US’s patsy for cutting ties with Iran, from the link you posted:

   “Canada’s position on the regime in Iran is well known. Canada views the Government of Iran as the most significant threat to global peace and security in the world today.”

   Canada hadn’t had a full ambassador in Iran since 2007, after an Iranian-Canadian photographer was tortured and killed in 2003.”

   The murder of Ms.Kazemi was deeply felt by all Canadians and has nothing to do with the US. The Canadian delegation routinely has left the room when Ahmedinajad has addressed the UN. Please provide some kind of proof of connection for your assertion that Canada’s action of cutting ties with Iran is due to US drone strikes in Yemen. Are you implying that Canada should feel responsible for what the US does?

   Similarly, I fail to see a connection between your assertion that Cockfield is “probably just another clueless Canadian liberal,” with the links you posted.

    

    

    

    

4. http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/09/07/ottawa-shutters-embassy-in-iran-expels-all-iranian-diplomats-in-canada/

   “While an official said the timing of the decision was the result of a culmination of Iranian abuses, Ottawa was also facing a legislative deadline next week. In March, the federal government passed the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act, which allows terror victims to sue state sponsors of terrorist groups.

   As part of the law, the Cabinet has six months to compile a list of states that are designated as sponsors of terrorism. Those on the list lose their immunity, allowing terror victims to go after them for damages. The deadline for compiling the list was next week.”

    

5. You may find the timing a coincidence, but I don’t.   Plus I loved this:

   “Canada’s position on the regime in Iran is well known. Canada views
   the Government of Iran as the most significant threat to global peace
   and security in the world today.”

   Anyone who thinks Iran is the “most significant threat to global peace
   and security in the world today” and doesn’t mention the guys who are running the vast majority of satellites, drones, aircraftcarriers, seal hit teams, nuclear submarines, etc is really quite naive.

6. *ConfederateH

   the professor is refering to Chapter 14 of NAFTA which governs trade in financial

   I believe that FATCA can be challenged under NAFTA, chapter 14 financial services.

   FATCA imposes reporting obligations on Canadian and Mexican financial obligations which places them at a competitive disadvantage in competing for and providing cross-border financing in the NAFTA area, and constitute a non-tariff barrier to trade in financial services. The lack of reciprocity for similar reporting requirements, makes the US a tax haven to Canadian and Mexican authorities.

   A similar challenge should be possible at the WTO under Sector 7, finances.The US successfully challenged the Belgian income tax practices. The information below is easily accessible from the WTO website.

   2 November 1976 INCOME TAX PRACTICES MAINTAINED BY BELGIUM

   8. The Belgium income tax system is based on the principle of world-wide taxation of residents and on the source principle as far as taxation of non-residents

   The US argued that Belgium tax practices, placed US institutions at a competitive disadvantage

    

7. @ patricia,

   Thanks for the illustration to back up the statement on NAFTA — for showing how FATCA might be challenged under Chapter 14 of NAFTA by Canada and Mexico. After all, as you also show, the US challenged the same with Belgium tax practices in 1976 and won (good information).

   It would be similar to the hypocrisy of the US on FATCA repricosity with Florida (Just Me’s DATCA) leading the crys of “we should not have to give up information on our foreign account holders”.

8. @ConfederateH

   I don’t understand what you see in the timing – could you explain?

   I think that Canada viewing Iran as the greatest threat, etc, is simply what is presented in public, in this case, via the Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird. This does not mean that all Canadians are naive which is what you seem to be implying.

9. @Patricia:  color me unimpressed, Canada can sue the US under NAFTA but I am certain it is a tootheless threat.  Seeing as how lawyers run both countries I sincerely doubt that this will stop FATCA, especially within the time remaining.

   @nobledreamer:  what part of “lacky” don’t you understand.  The US has forced a world wide embargo on Iran, with Canadian participation, an act of war, by Canada as well.  Now the US is supporting the “rebels” [Al Queda] in Syria against Assad by supplying logistical and intelligence and perhaps even drone support.  Iran just sent special forces to Syria, Russia too.   And now you believe the Canada has broken diplomatic relations over a Iranian-Canadian journalist who died in 2003?  Where is your liberal Canadian fury about the murder of the 16 year old cousin of the Yemeni-US citizen who, although never charged with anything, was murdered by Obama and his drones in 2011?    Has Canada ebargoed and broken off diplomatic relations with the US over this?  Has Canada added the US to its list for the Justice for Victims of Terrorism Act?  Or is Canada going to use the Nuremburg defense of “we were just following orders”? 

10. @Confederate H

    I merely asked you to explain further, why you were linking the events. Thank you for filling in the blanks.

    I am unclear why you think the world should not do something about the problem of Iranian leadership. I have several Iranian friends here who indicate there is no way the people of that country support any of what is going on there. Most of them are truly afraid for their families.

    I wonder how much experience of Canada you have? It is not the sort of country that engages in the sort of action you seem to expect. What other countries have taken the actions you describe? Your comment about the Justice for Victims of Terroism Act is completely unwarranted. What do you gain by being so insulting?

    I was in fact, as an American, a Canadian and a human being, outraged at the invasion of Pakistani airspace, the murder of the young man in Yemen and other actions of the US and have said so in several posts. I fail to see how personal attacks such as yours do anything to create better understanding of facts involved, or build feasible ways to deal with such problems.

    I can see that nothing positive will be gained by continuing this conversation. If you need to think there is something wrong with Canadian liberalism and have a need to see us as “lackeys,” I am sure there is nothing I could say to change that, so I will not say anything more.

    Have a good day.

     

11. Anyone in Montreal  next Monday (Oct 15)?  Art Cockfield  is giving a talk.  Allison Christians says “open to all”  I would go if I were there!

    http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2012/10/next-monday-art-cockfield-on-fatca.html