Trouble in Canada, Latest Commentaries in the U.S. and Abroad
The major political asset FATCA (the “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act”) has always had going for it is silence. Enacted in the dark of night in 2010, the vast majority of those who would be negatively impacted by its implementation – which is just about everyone – have no idea FATCA even exists nor the costs this ill-considered law would inflict on them. Continued silence about how destructive FATCA’s implementation would be has particular consequences for the U.S. Treasury Department’s efforts to cajole foreign governments into IGAs (“intergovernmental agreements”) requiring them to enforce FATCA on (or more properly, against) their own institutions, effectively as deputies of the IRS.
At this juncture, the initiative remains with Treasury, which on November 15 signed an IGA with Denmark. (The only other IGA signed thus far is with the UK.) Treasury is doing everything possible to sign as many IGAs as possible, as quickly as possible. A snowballing sense of inevitability, they calculate, will itself impel additional countries to sign IGAs, thus avoiding the train wreck attempts of unilateral FATCA enforcement would trigger.
Trouble in ‘the True North Strong and Free’
One of the priority countries identified by Treasury as a must-have signatory on an IGA is Canada. It would be a sharp setback for FATCA if Canada were to refuse to agree to an IGA or to allow extraterritorial enforcement of FATCA against Canadian institutions. At the same time, given the high degree of overlap between the U.S. and Canadian economies (including the financial systems of the two countries) and the large number of U.S. citizens resident in Canada (many of them dual nationals), FATCA’s enforcement against Canada – whether with an IGA or without one – promises to be particularly expensive and invasive.
While Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has been blunt in expressing his negative opinion of FATCA, his Department of Finance recently asked for public comments on a possible IGA amid reports from both Ottawa and Washington that a deal would be finalized soon. This news prompted circulation of an Appeal against FATCA and a U.S.-Canada IGA by The Isaac Brock Society (IBS), in cooperation with Repeal FATCA. (The full text of the IBS Appeal follows this commentary, below).
As is clear from the comments on one site posting the IBS appeal, Canadians who support FATCA or an IGA are few and far between. When the silence about FATCA is broken, and people can assess what is being imposed on them, FATCA comes up short.
The question is, will enough Canadian patriots get the facts before it’s too late – and will the Canadian media stop ignoring this assault on their country’s sovereignty and prosperity?
New Commentaries Breaking the Silence on FATCA
A spate of recent opinion pieces from diverse quarters also suggests that the silence that protects and sustains FATCA is breaking down, opening prospects for resisting its implementation and achieving its repeal. (The following are excerpts, with full texts available at the sourcelinks, emphasis added in bold):
by [Andrew F. Quinlan, co-founder and president of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, “Coerced Foreign Tax Compliance Is Killing American Jobs,” Forbes, Nov. 20]
“Without authorization from Congress, Treasury has embarked in setting a new course for international tax policy and relations. They are selling promises to deliver for foreign governments the same information FATCA demands from foreign institutions – meaning Treasury wants American banks to comply one day with the same onerous rules that Congress placed on FFIs, only instead of monitoring and reporting on citizens from one country our institutions would have to do so for all. . . . [G]overnments are doing themselves and their financial industries a disservice by contemplating entering into FATCA agreements with the U.S. Backlash against the law is growing, and Treasury is in a race against time to lock it into place before a repeal effort can gain steam.
As Treasury continues to set new policy behind the backs of Congress, and further drag domestic banks into the FATCA crosshairs, opposition to the law will hopefully grow. But it is necessary for financial institutions, both foreign and domestic, to stand up against the law, and for Congress to step in, rein in the Treasury Department, and undo a mess that they are ultimately responsible for creating. The worse thing industry can do is meekly accept FATCA’s dictates as so many consultants and compliance industry experts are advising. They are interested in feathering their nests, as one compliance company’s representative revealed when stating that, ‘Everyone’s trying to make money on FATCA.’ FFI’s and their governments should ignore self-serving advice and instead resist this arrogant U.S. foray into fiscal imperialism by demanding respect for their sovereign rights. U.S. lawmakers in turn should immediately repeal FATCA and replace it with a pro-growth agenda to simplify the tax code and lower rates. In so doing they can achieve the original FATCA goals of increasing both tax compliance and revenues, but in this way will do so by growing the economy instead of smothering it.”
Br [Nigel Green, CEO at the deVere Group, “US Treasury should be called to account on ‘economy-damaging’ FATCA,” www.nigel-green.com, Nov. 16]
“The U.S government owes it to Americans to explain why it remains committed to implementing the highly controversial and potentially damaging Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). . . . FATCA will dramatically reduce foreign investment in the US– at a time when the economy is teetering on a knife edge – due to the threat of the IRS withholding 30 per cent of their funds. Investors will simply take their money overseas. Indeed, David Schwartz, the executive director of the International Bankers’ Association of Florida recently observed that “several hundred million dollars have left Florida for foreign jurisdictions” between April 19th, when FATCA regulations were passed, and the end of July.
The potential revenues that FATCA could generate will be outweighed by huge foreign investment losses. In addition, FATCA will adversely affect US businesses operating in global markets because they have to have foreign bank accounts to facilitate payments from foreign clients and to pay local charges. However, many foreign financial institutions are rejecting American firms as clients – even if they have worked with them for years – because becoming ‘FATCA compliant’ is too burdensome and far too expensive.FATCA does very little to actively target tax evaders and it has a potentially devastating effect on the American economy. The U.S government owes it to Americans to give public, in-depth justifications on why it remains committed to this highly controversial piece of legislation.”
By [Simon Culhane, Chartered FCSI and CEO of the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (CISI), “US ‘a bully’ because of FATCA,” SPEAR’S, Nov. 20, 2012]
“The Americans have slipped in an extra territorial requirement that will impose significant costs on all asset and investment managers and banks. This US requirement is resulting in a double whammy. It is completely extra-territorial and seeks global compliance while imposing significant additional costs of compliance on virtually every financial organisation globally. It has resulted in many financial organisations, including private client and wealth managers, turning away clients simply because they have a link with the US. That strategy alone will not get a financial institution out of the net. . . . No one is advocating tax evasion, but putting the costs on the UK is unfair and our Government should have the courage to say so.”
The above comments speak for themselves. FATCA’s a bad deal for the United States, and it’s a bad deal for other countries as well. As silence about FATCA continues to break, two things are essential: (1) foreign governments being enticed and pressured by Treasury need to say No! to signing an IGA; and (2) American and non-U.S. industry need to stop acting as enablers and support an active effort to spread the word about this damaging law and help get it repealed.
Jim Jatras
+1.202.375.1007
The above is on-the-record and may be posted or published with attribution; inquiries welcome.
Full contacts at the end of this message.
The Isaac Brock Society Appeal text follows:
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 from Canadian residents deemed U.S. taxpayers by the IRS. Such disclosure would violate 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 the people whose rights would be abrogated 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 abridgment 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 at the Isaac Brock Society and Repeal FATCA!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
James George Jatras, Esq.
Email: james.jatras@squiresanders.com
Office: +1 202 626 6248
Mobile: +1 202 375 1007
Reception: +1 202 626 6600
Profile: http://sspa.squiresanders.com/professionals/professionals_detail.aspx?attorney=6014
Squire Sanders (US) LLP
1200 19th Street, NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
*I believe that failure to disclose that you have a sexually transmitted disease to a marriage partner is a crime in Canada.
Perhaps the law should be extended criminalize the failure to disclose the fact that one partner is a US citizen since, this not only adversely affects the non-US citizen partner but also any and all children of that marriage.
@Roger
…perhaps we may see children suing their parents for registering them as US births abroad?
Pingback: Is Resistance to ‘FATCA’ Starting to Build? « Freedom from the tyranny of U.S. citizenship-based taxation for U.S. and dual citizens outside the U.S.
*@bubbllebustin, registration of the foreign birth of a child to a US citizen parent is not the “act” that transmits US citizen to the child. It merely is written confirmation of such citizenship.
It is the act and fact that such a child has born that confirs US citizenship on the child. The child is a US citizen from the moment of birth in exactly the same way that, if born in Canada it is born with Canadian citizenship. With US citizenship, whether registered or not, that child “enjoys” all of the rights, privileges and subjections to US income tax of US citizens, just as if he or she was born within the borders of the US.
There are direct and very negative consequences for both the spouse and children when a US citizen marries a foreign citizen and they reside outside of the US.
@Roger
You are on to something here. Perhaps the issuance of a marriage license should be dependent on disclosure of US citizenship. Since marriage is on the way out, perhaps consumer protection laws should require disclosure of US citizenship at dating services. Whereas there is a cure for most diseases, there is no easy cure for US citizenship.
Honestly, you owe it to your future children to NOT pass this on to them.
Here is series of blog posts where this issue is considered:
https://renounceuscitizenship.wordpress.com/?s=marriage
@Roger
Don’t physical presence tests and wedlock play a part in whether US citizenship is transmitted to that child?
http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_5199.htm
As I posted on another thread:
“Mama don’t let your babies grow up to marry Americans.” (Petros, get your ukelele out) Just as what the banks will require under FATCA, any suitor showing indicia of US personhood should produce a CLN, and further proof that they haven’t subsequent to the issuance of the CLN received permanent residency in the US before they would be considered a good candidate for marriage.
@jim jatras, just me
Thank you for this post. I am in process of sending now, but unfortunately moving to iphone the rest of the day.
@All
FYI, I have forswarded this entire text to the following: ‘mwente@globeandmail.com’; ‘vpalmer@vancouversun.com’; ‘bmckenna@globeandmail.com’; ‘jamie@jamiegolombek.com’; ‘Jamie.Golombek@cibc.com’; ‘cdobby@nationalpost.com’; ‘news@caribjournal.com’
At the top, I have flagged for them:
The question is, will enough Canadian patriots get the facts before it’s too late – and will the Canadian media stop ignoring this assault on their country’s sovereignty and prosperity?
Please note, the following commentary now has been posted at: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/11/21/is-resistance-to-fatca-starting-to-build/ .
I have noticed a few more cites have picked up the Appeal, despite the disappointing CNW results. Far from viral but maybe starting to get around. What’s really needed is for some Canadian journalists and commentators to pick up on this story: not only the Appeal but the pending IGA sellout and FATCA itself. It’s amazing how something like this could be happening so quietly, with so little attention.
@Jim
Appreciate all of your efforts.
My feeling is that some Canadians may bristle and treat with suspicion the word “patriot” as it’s better associated with the US, and all of their obnoxious patriotism, Patriot Act, blah blah blah. Sorry to be so blunt. Ironically, the last thing we need out there to think is that we’re supporting an American agenda with references that are recognizably American.
@Jim, our experience with b, j, and m–well let’s just say that only God can help us if we are counting on those three. One plagiarizer and two water boys for the IRS.
And where is our national broadcaster – the CBC?
One would almost think that the deafening silence was deliberate, though I think it is just a combination of a topic too complicated to grasp, and the shuffling off by those with only one citizenship of the concerns of account holders and those tainted by a US connections.
On the other hand, where are the flag waving Conservatives, upholding this pledge:
“I am a Canadian,
a free Canadian,
free to speak without fear,
free to worship in my own way,
free to stand for what I think right,
free to oppose what I believe wrong,
or free to choose those
who shall govern my country.
This heritage of freedom
I pledge to uphold
for myself and all mankind.”
— John Diefenbaker
13th Prime Minister of Canada
June 21, 1957 – April 22, 1963
”
http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/resources/publications/discover/quotes.asp
and where are the opposition MPs and spokespersons?
The CBA and its brethren are laying low – with crossed fingers, and baited breath, waiting to pass on the burden to the whole of Canadian society to out all those Canadian citizens and Canadian residents who also have the unwanted ‘US double taxable person’ curse; so that they and the investors can get on with making a profit accessing US markets.
I am concerned that we’re dealing with confusion about our issues with FATCA vs. Canada’s efforts to catch Canadian taxpayers who aren’t paying Canadian taxes to the CRA, using money held in ‘offshore’ accounts – which is not the equivalent of the US persecution of our local everyday Canadian bank accounts, but which are eminently confusable when the US deliberately taints us all with the ‘tax evader’ brush.
Maybe to make things clearer, we can start referring to ” ‘US double-taxable persons’ in Canada” instead of any other designation.
*@bubblebustin,
Indeed there are minimum US residence requirements for a born-abroad US citizen in order to pass citizenship to a child born abroad. In fact it can somethimes get rather complicated as can be seen from this link
http://www.state.gov/documents/organization/86757.pdf
I suspect that the IRS may take a more liberal view of who born abroad is subject to US tax which might not always coincide with some others in the US Government. There are different standards for who is a citizen for tax purposes for the IRS is who is for other purposes.
@jamesjatras, at this rate, we might not even get any media coverage if we paraded en masse, in front of a US consulate burning our FBAR and FATCA forms.
James, thanks for you work on this!
@bubblebustin
Thanks for the tip on “patriot.” Will avoid in future.
@bubblebustin, that’s why in Canada we call “Patriot Fries”, “Poutine sans le gravy et sans le cheese”.
I’ve sent this story idea (once again) to a few media outlets via their “viewer comment/story idea” section on the websites. CBC The National, Global News Toronto, and CBC News. Maybe if we rally together and contact as many news agencies as possible, we might get someone/anyone, interested in reporting this.
*
Has anyone seen this site before? This was just tweeted to me this morning, and I think it is relatively new… A new ally in the fight for Canadian Sovereignty or an Isaac Brocker making an additional effort on the side? It is good to have another blog reference.
http://stopfatca.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/the-war-of-2012-has-begun-us-attacks-canadian-sovereignty/#more-6
Canada’s being invaded and there seem to be nary a care…
*@Bubblebustin,
I can think of no more striking example of this than the case of the disabled son born in Canada to a US citizen mother. He is unable to renounce US citizenship on his own and his mother, his legal guardian under Canadian law, cannot renounce his US citizenship on his behalf. He has never lived in the US nor held a US passport and, as far as I know has never visted even once the US, which requires him to turn over part of his disability benefits to the government of that country. He receives no benefits of any kind from the US Government.
He receives Canadian tax free disability benefits as a citizen and resident of Canada. But because he is a “US citizen,” under US citizenship laws, these “foreign” disability benefits are fully taxable by the US. Since it is not earned income, the limited Foreign Earned Income Exclusion (FEIE) does not apply, since disability benefits are considered to be unearned income. The result is that the disabiliity payments he receives from the Canadian government are “pillaged” by the IRS on behalf of the US Treasury. Funds provided to him by the Canadian government to sustain life are in effect seized by the US government by means of its extrateritorial tax policy which subjects all persons it considers to be its citizens to US taxation no matter where in the world they reside.
It happens in other countries as well. There is a similar situation of a US citizen in Switzerland with a born-in-Switzerland disabled dependent child of a US citizen parent who ives there which has been reported by ACA.
I do not believe that I am in any way an unpatriotic American citizen in pointing out what I consider to be the very unjst consequence of the US policy of citizenship based taxation. I cannot remain silent. And I challenge anyone to be able to find any justification of any sort in this kind of a tax policy.
I am an American and not a Canadian, so far be it for my opnion to have any weight as far as what is right and what is wrong with this the Canadian point of view.
There is no kind of reciprocal indignity on the part of the US government over any foreign country subjecting tax free US disability benefits to a dual nationality US citizens resident in the US to their tax laws, because no country, other than the US, exerts extraterritorial jurisdiction by claming the right to subject its citizens who live in the another country to home-country citizenship-based taxation.
@Just Me
Interesting find. Their half-finished website (still filled with WordPress template text) appears to be sponsored by the Progressive Canadian Party, a Red Tory spinoff from the old Progressive Conservative Party which later merged with the old Reform/Alliance Party to become today’s Conservative Party – ain’t Canadian politics fun!
Most notable is the forum they’ve planned for December 15th, as follows:
Attend a Fact Finding Forum to keep Canada a FREE and independent nation!
When: Saturday, December 15, 2012, 9:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.
Where: University of Toronto – Room TBA (click for updates)
Who: The Honourable Sinclair Stevens, The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party leader,
Dorian Baxter, The Progressive Canadian (PC) Party President (289) 221-2687
Subject: FATCA
Victims: The so called agreement will result in excess of one million Canadian:
– families forced to turn their retirement savings over to the IRS;
– families being incapacitated from retirement planning;
– families being denied basic banking privileges!
– having their private financial information turned over to the IRS in total violation of Canada’s privacy laws
We should find out more about this group and perhaps coordinate with them directly – Petros?
Roger,
I think you may be referring to my son’s situation. Thank you for mentioning it. I’ll just make a few observations regarding our facts. It is not just about my son and I’ve figured out and am clear in my mind what I will do about his case. The bigger concern to me is that there will be many, many, many such cases as mine in the millions of US Persons in other countries — most of them don’t know what will hit them.
My son has very infrequently visited the US as we have relatives there. I have just renounced and, hopefully, will in due course receive my Certificate of Loss of Nationality (CLN). My “Accidental American” son, though, will never have one of those important documents. He was born in Canada, raised in Canada, never registered with the US (i.e., no social security number ever), never lived in the US, never had any benefit from the US. To this point, I have never prepared on his behalf a US tax return so right now no Alberta disability funds are being used to have prepared and sent 1040’s and FBARs for my son. I will continue this practice. After I receive my CLN and am clear to travel in the US?, I would be reluctant to visit relatives there or be a tourist as it would be too easy during such a trip over the border for the nice border guard to look at my Canadian passport with a US birthplace (and my CLN) and then ask my son, sitting beside me, (who has a developmental disability), “Is this your mom?” Where would it go from there?
This is what the US Consulate told me:
***********************************************************************************************
These individuals, by virtue of their US citizenship status in Canada, are denied the same benefit as any other Canadian of a Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan (RDSP), one of the tax-saving registered accounts that the Canadian Government encourages its citizens to take advantage of. The cost of US compliance of tax returns by competent professionals, year after year, so 3520 and 3520A forms required for “foreign trusts” (they are not foreign to us – we live in Canada) are filed correctly, negates the value of the RDSP from that of any other disabled citizen of Canada (no matter if originally from any other country than the US). The Parent / Guardians / Trustees of these children, as well as all of the other of US Person Canadians should be warned as well about the folly of taking part in other legal registered tax-savings accounts: (Registered Education Savings Plans (RESPs) for their children or Tax-Free Savings Accounts (TFSAs) for themselves or their children.
***********************************************************************************************************
I do believe that it is discrimination and a human rights issue (my comments in CAPS):
This is from the ‘Americans with Disability Act’ which doesn’t address a lot of the resultant discrimination for RDSPs, etc. for Canadians with developmental disabilities (and the like).
But I did glean the following portion, which talks about discrimination ‘economically’.
The 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?
**************************************************************************************************
Finally, this was a comment, the likes of which we often see from people within the US on articles, many of which you so eloquently comment on, Roger. It is a comment borne of ignorance of the subject but, as I say, “Let me renounce on behalf of my son, and the people who feel this way will have no argument from me.”
Stacey York Morris 5 days ago
OK, Stacey, I’ll allow that for my son — my “Accidental American” son should also, with no equity in the US, have no citizenship in the US. Talk to your Congressman about your views on this!
I went to the big APricot today and met with the office heads of one Congressman and one Senator. FATCA is a hard story to bring across—it has to be cut down. It is also so unbelievable it is hard to communicate. But I had a reasonable audience and if I follow up about 5 times I may get something out of them. I owe minutes of the meeting asap and I was assigned to do a one pager.
On the way home, I took a hike on a trail where a mountain lion had passed an hour earlier.
Thanks, Mark, for your taking this on.
Yikes — stay invincible and away from those mountain lions. We need you.
Appreciate your work @Mark Twain.
The hike must have been a welcome break from the unrelenting unreality of this.