UPDATE 2: This post has been upgraded to a press release at newswire.ca and digitjournal.com. Thanks go to Jim Jatras.
UPDATE: Jim Jatras has provided an revised Word Version of the text below for mass distribution.
The following is a message from Jim Jatras:
Friends
Please review that following and submit comments. I hope it’s more or less self-explanatory.
As indicated in a previous comment, it’s in effect a kind of ad or statement inviting people to contact Harper, Flaherty, MPs and oppose FATCA/IGA. Ideally, it’s the kind of thing that would be posted online or even in print publications as an ad, if there were money for that. (If Canadian industry weren’t spending money trying to get the “best deal possible” from the Americans under an IGA instead of fighting.) Certainly individual comment letters to the Finance Department should be sent, but let’s not kid ourselves they will pay much attention them. What we need is a groundswell of outraged Canadians to contact Harper, Flaherty, and MPs as soon as possible with a simple message: NO!
I realize that it’s always risky to hang a draft out where anyone can take a whack at it, but feel free. Also, any ideas on where and how it can be posted and distributed are welcome.
BTW, this is the kind of thing that routinely gets placed in DC in publications like Politico, The Hill, Roll Call, and other pubs aimed at Congress. Picture a similar message aimed at Congress but making an American argument against FATCA, as this makes a Canadian one. That’s how we get things done – if we had someone with money and willing to fight.
Best
Jim
Call or email Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, and Your MP Today!
Call or email Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, and Your MP Today!
STOP an Impending Massive Handover of Canadian Sovereignty to the United States!
Tell the Government: Canada Must Say NO
to the United States on ‘FATCA’
Recently the Department of Finance invited comments on what was characterized as “an agreement to improve cross-border tax compliance through . . . the provisions enacted by the United States commonly known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).” This eleventh-hour invitation came as sources in both Ottawa and Washington announced that they were close to finalizing an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) that would, in effect, deputize the Canadian government to enforce this American law in Canada.
The Department’s invitation is to “persons whose interests are affected by the provisions of FATCA” but does not spell out that each and every Canadian citizen would suffer from FATCA and from an IGA to implement it:
Canadian citizens have an interest in preserving Canada’s sovereignty against US encroachment. However it is disguised, FATCA is a unilateral U.S. initiative. The U.S. didn’t negotiate a global tax scheme with Canada and other countries but instead enacted an unprecedented extraterritorial law and demands that Canada comply and bear the costs. An IGA simply puts a Canadian glove on the hand enforcing American law.
Canadian taxpayers have an interest in a tax policy that benefits Canada’s needs, not America’s. Sold under the guise of “reciprocity” and “partnership,” an IGA in reality would be a costly one-way street imposed by the U.S. Given the differences between the two countries’ tax systems, FATCA would accelerate a zero-sum game that siphons wealth from Canada and robs the Canadian treasury.
Canadian consumers have an interest in avoiding foreign schemes that impose costly non-economic regulations on Canadian firms (banks, insurance companies, pension funds, stock and investment companies) – who will then pass those costs on to consumers. With or without an IGA, FATCA’s costs will be in the billions of dollars (for example, one major bank alone would pay an estimated $100 million in FATCA compliance!) These costs would be non-productive as regards the Canadian economy and a waste of human and material resources. Imposing these costs on Canadians supposedly is justified by the unproven hope that FATCA may trip up American “tax cheats,” even though FATCA does little specifically to catch such people.
Canadians as human beings have an interest in ensuring their rights are protected under sovereign Canadian law. FATCA demands extraordinary disclosure of private information of U.S. citizens in Canada in violation of Canadian laws, such as the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, whose application Canada would be forced to alter under an IGA. Many of these resident Americans are Canadian dual citizens who would be denied protection of Canada’s laws to appease the U.S. Once it’s established a foreign government can demand abrogation of such rights, even of Canadian citizens, where’s the limit?
So why is the Government considering an IGA with the United States? Because of the very real fear that Washington otherwise would unilaterally impose FATCA on Canada at ruinous cost, especially a 30% withholding penalty on Canadian firms’ U.S.-derived revenue. Simply put, this is a threat of U.S. economic sanctions against Canada.
Finance Minister Flaherty and industry leaders publicly have talked a good fight on FATCA while in private negotiating Canada’s capitulation under an IGA. Canadians must not let that happen! Instead:
Contact Prime Minister Harper and tell him No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Contact Minister Flaherty and tell him No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Contact your Senators and MPs and tell them No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Get the FATCA facts! Find more information at [Isaac Brock Society and Repeal FATCA]
@Jim
Excellent just excellent. Thank you for this. In 1812 an American invasion of Canada was rebuffed. On the 200th anniversary of that work, the US is again attempting an invasion of Canada. The question for Canadians is simple:
Do you want Canada to continue to exist as a sovereign country? Or do you want to exist as an administrative region of the IRS that is north of the 49th parallel?
Those who think that FATCA just affects US citizens in Canada are wrong. FATCA affects everybody and is every bit as much an attack on the sovereignty of Canada as was the war of 1812.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/06/20/june-18-1812-june-18-2012-u-s-citizenship-based-taxation-and-other-less-expensive-ways-to-wage-war/
Say no to FATCA. Send a message to Harper, et al that they must not surrender the country.
huffingtonpost.ca? if the Canadian media aren’t interested in this?
*Warren Kinsella
of http://warrenkinsella.com/
http://www.calgarygrit.ca/
http://bcinto.blogspot.com/
Dave Climenhaga of
http://albertadiary.ca/
All of the above are left of center bloggers
For equal oppotunity I will try to get some right of center bloggers too.
*Imagine what the USA’s response would have been if the Nazis tried to impose a FATCA-type regime on German immigrants who came to America during the 30s?
Imagine what the USA’s response would have been if Castro tried to impose a FATCA-type regime on Cuban immigrants after the communist revolution there?
Imagine what the USA’s response would have been if Stalin, Khrushchev, and Brezhnev tried to impose a FATCA-type regime for the Russians who came to America?
Imagine what the USA’s response would have been if the Vietnamese Communist government tried to impose a FATCA-type regime on the boat people who came to our shores?
Imagine – in short – what ALL Americans who immigrated to America would tell our government to do if the rest of the world tried to impose a FATCA-type regime on those of us living in the USA!
FATCA is the most UN-American think created since the loyalty oaths and blackballing during the Red Scare of the McCarthy era. “You live overseas? What are you – a traitor?”
“If you’re an American you should pay taxes – even if you are overseas. What you already pay taxes to the host government overseas? Well, why do you live there then?”
These are common responses from homelanders whenever I explain the case. If they are Irish or Italian I normally asked them how they would feel if those governments started sending them tax bills? “But I’m not Irish/Italian and I don’t live there.” Well, I explain that as far as their laws are concerned if they trace a male ancestor back to those country they are permitted instant citizenship – and therefore should pay taxes.
Mostly, however, since Americans are very mobile, I ask where they’ve lived in America. When they explain typically having lived in two or three states, I ask them how they would feel if the previous states where they lived started threatening them to pay taxes or they would fine them and threaten their banks with penalties if they didn’t cooperate?
Not only is FATCA absurd but it is built on an absurd structure of citizen-based taxation in general. ONLY the USA (and Eritrea – some comparison!) tax their citizens no matter where they live. There’s a reason for this: The purpose of taxation is NOT a function of citizenship, but to pay for services provided by the government to the people within the borders of that sovereign area. Inside the USA we understand this. That’s why when people move from California – a high income tax state – to Nevada – a state with no income taxes – they are not harassed by California and made to continue to pay taxes there even though they no longer reside there. EVERYONE inside the USA understands this; somehow they don’t quite understand it once an American leaves the country for whatever reason.
We used to pride ourselves as being the free-ist country and people in the world. With citizen-based taxation and now FATCA, and other nefarious regulations the Obama administration have dreamt up, we are worse than Nazi Germany and Stalin’s Soviet Union!
What the hell happened??!!
*To Stephen Harper: on his FB page – “Mr. Harper, Please don’t let this happen. Don’t back away from opposition against FATCA/FBAR. Not if you value Canada’s sovereignty. http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/11/13/jim-jatras-stop-an-impending-massive-handover-of-canadian-sovereignty-to-the-united-states/ 1 million (1/34th of Canada’s total population) US/Canadian duals are relying on you to protect them. That is why US citizens are getting their Canadian citizenship and renouncing their US citizenship in droves. Please don’t give up Canadian Sovereignty in favor of tighter US ties. Let the US sink its own financial ship.”
*This is amazing. Thank you.
This is great. Just included it in letters to the editors at the Vancouver Sun, National Post and the Globe and Mail.
This is super! I just made it into a Word document. I’m going to drop some off at coffee shops tomorrow here in downtown Ottawa. If you want distribute some hard copies, here’s the link to it: FATCA handbill UPDATE: Nov. 14th. We revised the handbill today. If you use this link, it will bring you to the revised handbill.
@ jim jatras, and @All:
I suggest we refrain as much as possible in our communications with the media and with politicians from using the phrase ‘US citizens’ or ‘US persons’ to describe those primarily affected. That is a more US-centric phrase – emphasizing the US part of who we are, which might make those in Canada immediately shut off. What we are asserting in this instance, is that what is most relevant to us inside Canada, is the relationship we have with Canada, not the relationship with the US. The nature of the forced and oppressive relationship with the US is the problem – which we are effectively being prevented from changing or rejecting – whether through the effective inability to renounce, or inability to comply with US citizenship-based extraterritorial taxation without significant harm. Many single citizenship Canadians might say – well what’s the problem? – just renounce or “they should just become Canadians”. It ‘s too complicated to explain properly.
As we discussed on earlier threads at IBS, it is possible that Canadians (with single citizenship only) will in a knee-jerk response dismiss this as being mainly about US-born adult citizens who moved here recently – which they will not really care about. And, they will say things like ‘if they’re US citizens, they should pay US taxes’ – not knowing how the asset reporting and penalties work – because we have no equivalent. Or, not realize how many of their fellows born here are ‘accidentals’, who inherited US status unwanted and unasked for from a parent who lives here in Canada, or in a border hospital, or born during a short temporary stay in the US, or who came to Canada as babies and have been here for decades, or who renounced, and then are under threat of being reclaimed.
They have no idea of the complexities and spectrum of this. And they’re not going to sit still long enough to hear from us about all the categories and permutations. So we have to simplify if we want their attention via a petition, or a letter in a newspaper – or else they’ll just think it has no effect on them or anyone they know.
So, we could use only phrases like Canadian-born and Canadian-naturalized citizens and Canadian-permanent residents. OR just Canadian citizens and Canadian permanent residents. Emphasize the CANADIAN part, (vs. the emphasis of the US on USCITIZENS – which ignores the true non-US residency and the non-US dominant nationality of those the IRS forcibly claims ). Including ‘snowbirds’ is probably good, because those are so common here, that we’re all familiar with Canadian-born citizens, who retired, and who spend some vacation time in Florida – and Canadians will be more likely to be outraged if because of a few extra days, the US seeks to force them to report all their Canadian held accounts, and possibly tax and penalize their Canadian accounts and Canadian held assets.
I don’t dismiss the plight of green card holders, or of those who moved to Canada more recently – all of us are equally victims of the unjust US system of extraterritorial taxation. I just think we need to emphasize that within Canadian borders, on sovereign Canadian soil, we are all first and foremost in Canada, either Canadian citizens, or Canadian permanent residents. That is our most salient claim to the assistance of the Canadian federal government, and most salient claim to the support of our Canadian fellows. In Canada, duals are first and foremost Canadians.
So, we could say Canadian-born and naturalized citizens, and Canadian permanent residents who the US claims as US taxable persons, or something along those lines, vs. US persons or US citizens in Canada?
sorry, just an addendum – we could also say Canadian citizen and resident taxpayers – to emphasize that we already register with, and report our assets to, and pay taxes to the CRA – in the country where we actually live and earn.
@badger
These are great suggestions, but the more ways an editor receives the information from different sources, the more legitimate is becomes I would imagine, but I agree that the main framework should be as Canadian-centric as possible for the reasons you said.
@ badger
I’ve been using “residents of Canada with US connections”. The phrasing is a bit awkward but this whole thing is awkward to explain to everyone, no matter which side of the border they live on. Nevertheless, when in Canada’s sphere of influence (do we even have such a thing where the US is concerned?) keeping it Canada-centric is a good idea. Reverse gears when trying to get through an American’s “exceptional” skull though. You’ll never get to them just saying, “Imagine you live in Canada and …
@ Jim Jatras
I’ll just repeat this from another thread. I would happily contribute to the cost of any anti-IGA campaign — all I need is an address to send a cheque to.
*This is specifically what Flaherty said in June of this year:
“Nevertheless, we will continue to advocate on behalf of Canadians on such issues with the U.S. government, including the implementation of FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act),” said Minister Flaherty”.
And in September of 2011:
But put frankly, Canada is not a tax haven. People do not flock to Canada to avoid paying taxes. In addition, we have existing ways of addressing these issues with the United States through our Bilateral Tax Information Exchange Agreement. As I said, we share the same goal of fighting tax evasion and we already have a system that works.
To rigidly impose FATCA on our “citizens” and financial institutions would not accomplish anything except waste resources on all sides.
Good point, Badger. “US citizen “can be misleading, especially to the casual reader.
Thanks for considering that @all. When you consider that the IRS is willing to impose FATCA and reporting fines on unlucky children born in Canada who are only subject to US arrogance because 1 or more parent had US citizenship, its enough to make your blood boil – only wish we could convey that best example of US overreach and injustice to Harper and the rest of Canada. It is so insane that Canada should let the US claim those born in Canada. If you offer up to the IRS the RESP and RDSP accounts of Canadian born children, then what will you not give up as a country?
@james jatras
I’ve sent your message to the Canadian Bankers Assn, Canadian Medical Assn, the Investment Funds Institute of Canada, Canadian Life and Health Insurance Inc. I hope you hear back from them.
*Pacific777
In terms of posting in Ottawa which to be fair you probably know better than I. I would consider perhaps targetting the area around 140 O’Connor Street(also known as the L’Esplanade Laurier Building) where the offices of the Department of Finance(Flaherty, Ernewein, Shoom) are located. Hit all the places they might go to lunch for example. Send a very direct message. Just a thought. The L’Esplanada Laurier is actually a pretty big building if remember correctly. I am looking at it right now on Google Street View.
*I would be happy to send to all media outlets in BC at my own cost. Petros, can u provide me with a brief press release?
@Tim, Thank you for the tip. I do know Ottawa well, but I didn’t realise the significance Esplanade Laurier has for us. I’ll target that area tomorrow morning. If you think of any other significant locations, just let me know.
http://www.vg.no
http://www.dn.se
http://www.gp.se
http://www.aftonbladet.se
and others
subject: Sweden is selling the farm to USA
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Pages/tg1759.aspx
Hey, did you know that SWeden is an offshore tax haven? People travel from all over to hide their assets in low-tax Sweden.
This is an agreement where Sweden’s banks are forced to implement expensive software to find US persons—this includes Swedish citizens with US green cards (visas), Swedish children born in USA, Swedish children of US citizen fathers or mothers, or dual citizens.
Did you know that those persons are required to file USA taxes?
Did you know that those persons, if they volunteer to be treasurer for the soccer club, must report their soccer club assets to the USA IRS?
Did you know, that if a chief financial officer of Volvo or Ericsson was born in the USA, that he is obligated to report each and every financial account of the company to the IRS?
Did you know that, if Sweden doesn’t sign this agreement to turn in the private financial information of its residents to the IRS, that their banks will have 30% of their transactions with held in USA?
Call Mark if you have questions,
Mark from
I am preparing my submission for Mr. Shoom.
I am also concerned on why the NDP caucus and most especially the finance critic has been so silent on this most recent development. One of my sons is very close to an NDP MP from Ontario. I have asked my son to contact him and ask why the silence from the opposition. They were not silent last spring. I realize our present government has a majority but the opposition needs to make some noise about this.
@tiger,
am looking up tweet addresses and found out Denise Savoie NDP MP Victoria, who responded to many of our initial concerns, retired from the Commons last August, citing the need for a healthier lifestyle. She definitely was aware of FATCA and was becoming disappointed as I recall, at the lack of CDN gov action.
@nobledreamer
I remember Denise Savoie was very vocal about FATCA last year. Too bad she is no longer a Member of Parliament.
I had a very nice response to a letter I wrote to Elizabeth May’s dated March 12, 2012. She added a personal P.S. in her own handwriting at the end of the letter and asked that I keep in touch “on any changes in your situation”. I will be sending off another letter tomorrow to her. In that letter she asked that any correspondence I send be sent to the Constituency Office rather than her office in Ottawa.
That address is: Ms Elizabeth May, Member of Parliament, 1 – 9711 Fourth Street, Sidney, BC V8L 2Y8
@badger, bubblebustin, In my message to Mr. Shoom, I used the term “Canadian residents of US origin”, and “Canadian citizens now living in the US”. These are the people who are endangered, without prejudice with regard to citizenship. This is a “race” issue, where race = nationality = ethnicity, and thus FATCA would clearly violate Charter rights.
@Em, please note the following:
Financial Contributions
I.e., Mr. Jatras is a great ally because he is an American who understands that FATCA is very damaging for the interests of the United States–remember, he is a Washington lobbyist who is looking for large contributions, preferably from banks and so forth that are seeking to have Congress repeal FATCA. People are free, of course, to send their Isaac Brock contributions to Washington lobbyist, but that would primarily focused on helping America.
We have done fund raising here to keep this site going. While I cover most of my costs for operating this site, I certainly don’t make a living from this venture, by far.
Jim says that if we had someone with money and willing to fight, there would be enough for both his lobby and for Isaac Brock. Unfortunately, Jim hasn’t raised any money, and Isaac Brock has only raised enough just to pay for this site and its administration. I also am able to accept funds for Petros Research, my corporation, and I could devote a corresponding amount of my time to this fight. As it is, I am a essentially a volunteer, as are all the rest of you. In a way, however, this has helped me to maintain a uninterested stance–in the sense that the many people I have spoken to on the phone know that I am talking to them to try to help them sort out this mess, not because I’m going to receive compensation.