Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Posted on by Posted in Featured, Issues regarding US persons abroad 42 Comments

This is excerpted from a post at RenounceUScitizenship.

He who has the gold, makes the rules!

Yesterday, I was talking to Bay Street Investment banker (think big bucks). I described the FATCA problem. His eyes glazed over and said to me:

“I am extending you a courtesy just by listening to what you are saying!”

The complexity and sheer audacity of FATCA is beyond the ability of people to comprehend. Make no mistake about it. A FATCA IGA with the US will end Canada’s fiscal sovereignty. Ever hear the saying:

He who has the gold makes the rules

If Canada allows the US to have control over its banks, and the gold is in the banks, it will give the US control over Canada’s gold. Got the picture?

Why would any country enter into a FATCA IGA with the US Treasury?

Leaving aside the technicalities of U.S. threats, there is one simple answer.

The answer is: No country should enter into a FATCA IGA with the US Not now, not in the future. Not ever. The time has come to imagine a world without the U.S  and to start  behaving accordingly. The time has come to gradually build a world financial system that is not “US centric”. Here are ten objective reasons explaining why Canada MUST say NO TO FATCA!

Reason 1: The Importance of Canada As A Sovereign Country

Any country that enters into an IGA with the US is surrendering its fiscal sovereignty – control over its finaces – to the US Furthermore, to agree to an IGA is to become a division of the IRS in Canada.

Therefore, when Canada considers whether to sign a FATCA IGA, it must ask herself one simple question:

Do we want Canada to continue to exist as a sovereign country?

If the answer is NO, then sign the agreement. History will remember Prime Minister Harper as the man who, on the 200th anniversary of the War of 1812, surrendered Canada to the U.S. What then, would the War of 1812 have been for?

If the answer is YES, then simply tell the US that there will no FATCA agreement. Not now. Not ever!

Now, it is true that many Canadians don’t care. Few of them know about this. Of the few who do know, fewer still understand it. That said, if you don’t want Canada to become the “Administrative Region of the IRS north of the 49th parallel” you don’t sign!

Reason 2: The IGA Proposed By The IGA Is Unfair Because it Gives Everything To The US and Nothing To Canada – Furthermore, the US Treasury is attempting to offer what it has no authority to offer

Most discussions about FATCA are complicated by detail, technicalities and the sheer complexity of the regulations. Let’s look at the part of the agreement that defines what Canada gets. It’s found in Article 7.

Article 7

Reciprocal Information Exchange
Consistent with its obligations under the Convention, the United States shall continue to cooperate with [FATCA Partner] to respond to requests pursuant to the Convention to collect and exchange information on accounts held in U.S. financial institutions by residents of [FATCA Partner]. In addition, when and to the extent [FATCA Partner] seeks to collaborate with the United States to implement FATCA based on direct reporting by [FATCA Partner] Financial Institutions to the [FATCA Partner] Government followed by the transmission of such information to the United States, the United States is willing to negotiate such an agreement [on a reciprocal basis] on the same terms and conditions as similar agreements concluded with other Partner Jurisdictions, subject to the Parties having determined that the standards of confidentiality and other prerequisites for such cooperation are fulfilled.]

A. The most that Canada can POSSIBLY get out of the deal is information on bank accounts held in the U.S. by Canadian Residents. Canada (like the rest of the world) imposes taxes based on Canadian residence and NOT BASED ON CITIZENSHIP. Hence, although Canada may have an “interest” (no pun intended)  in accounts held by Canadian residents in the US, I suspect the interest is “Not Much”.

On this point see the interesting comment by Todundsteur which confirms that Canada has little to gain:

B. Note that I use the word “possibly”.  The proposed agreement does not guarantee that Canada will even get this information. Look carefully at the wording. The agreement does NOT say that Canada will get the information. Rather the agreement states that:

“the United States shall continue to cooperate with [FATCA Partner] to respond to requests pursuant to the Convention to collect and exchange information on accounts held in US financial institutions by residents of [FATCA Partner]”

Unless there is a specific law requiring US banks to provide the information, you can bet that they won’t. Why would they? If it becomes known that U.S. banks are providing information about bank accounts to foreign governments, customers will cease to use those banks.

Will Congress be able to pass a law requiring US banks to report to foreign governments? I doubt it. The banks have a strong lobby. There is currently no existing law. Hence, any country that enters into an IGA has no assurance that it will receive any information from the US about US accounts held by their residents. On the other hand, they are still required to turn over the banking information of US Residents AND US PERSONS!

Reason 3: From the perspective of Canada an IGA with the US is a legally binding treaty, from the US perspective it is at best an an “Executive Agreement” falling far short of being a Treaty

This was confirmed in an interesting collaborative exercise among Tim, Just Me and Jim. What is important to understand is the under the Canadian Parliamentary system, an IGA is likely a “Treaty”. A “Treaty” requires the consent of Parliament (making it a very serious undertaking and a lot of work). From the US perspective, the US Treasury is just “promising the world”. It is possible that the US Treasury does not even have the legal authority to make the promises they are.

At a bare minimum, entering into an IGA is a much more serious matter for Canada than it is for the US.

At the end of the day, an agreement is only as good as the person you enter into the agreement with.

Reason 4: The US Treasury has confirmed that a FATCA IGA will not require US banks to do anything that they are not already doing and will not give FATCA Partners the same kind of information that the US receives

This issue is well described by Calgary411 in the following comment:

To many just learning of FATCA, the above would seem ridiculous, but not to those of us who have been following what is happening.

Should we trust the US?
We certainly see how they will wangle out of any real reciprocity with other countries in their negotiations re FATCA. From October 12, 2012 Department of the Treasury, Mark J. Mazur, Assistant Secretary (Tax Policy)http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/wp-content/uploads/2012/11/12SE001798-SIGNED-Paul.pdf

“The Information that the United States would agree to exchange under the reciprocal version of the Model Agreement differs in scope from the information the foreign governments would agree to provide to the IRS.
…
While the reciprocal version of the Model Agreement includes a policy commitment to pursue equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic exchange in the future, no additional obligatons will be imposed on the US financial institutions unless and until additional laws or regulations are adopted in the United States.”

Would it not be prudent for all countries into IGAs with the US to make sure that the reciprocal agreements the US offers to enter with other countries includes the statement that the US will create additional laws or regulations in the US so there is NOT different scope for the US IRS and US financial insitutions than for that which the foreign governments will agree to provide to the United States?

Reason 5: By retaining the ability to amend the definition of “US Persons” the US can use the IGA as a means to steal more and more from the Canadian economy

Reason 6: “US Persons”, the injustice of Citizenship-Based Taxation and fact that Canadian citizens are included as US Persons

The law which requires U.S. Persons to submit worldwide income to US taxation must be changed. It is unfair, it makes no sense, and it has a chilling effect on commerce, jobs creation, and free trade. Perhaps more importantly, our world image has suffered enough over the last few decades. People over the world who have been on the fence about whether America has lost its mind can only be convinced with this new compliance initiative which removes all doubt.

Former IRS lawyer Steven J. Mopsick

… it is the citizenship-based taxation that is the root of all this evil, and he sees very little chance of that ever changing.

As is the case in all countries, U.S. residents are subject to U.S. tax laws. But, the US goes further. It is not just US residents who are subject to US tax laws. The US requires all “US Persons” to be be subject to US tax laws. This is true regardless of where they live. So, what’s a “US Person”?

US Persons include:

– residents

– citizens (regardless of where they live in the world)

– Green Card Holders (whether they live in the U.S. or not)

– those who spend too many days in the U.S.

It is understood that there are approximately one million U.S. citizens who are residents of Canada. Therefore, for Canada to sign an IGA is to agree to turn over the banking information of NOT ONLY U.S. residents who have bank accounts in Canada, but Canada/US dual citizens who reside in Canada (and therefore have bank accounts in Canada). If you are not following this means that under the agreement that:

– The U.S. would receive the banking information of both US residents and Canadian residents; and

– Canada would only get the information of  Canadian residents (if they even will get that).

Hence, it is clear that the proposed IGA is grossly unfair and one sided and should not be entered into.

Reason 7: Effects of  US Citizenship-based taxation on Canadian Sovereignty

When great powers begin their decline into eventual irrelevancy, it is rarely just one thing that historians finger as a root cause. But for the US, this may well be it.*

http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/06/06/phil-hodgen-why-people-expatriate/comment-page-1/#comment-21107

Although not the main topic of this particular post, it is clear that the U.S. use of citizenship-based taxation is in effect a convenient way to steal from the Treasury of other countries. The horrible details have been amply documented in previous posts.

The bottom line is that:

Through double taxation in some circumstances (example capital dividends), deeming income never received to have been taxable (Subpart F and PFICSs), and treating retirement vehicles as “Foreign Trusts”, citizenship-based taxation has disabled  approximately one million Canadian citizens from investing and retirement planning. Should this have an effect on Canadian immigration policy? Does Canada want to allow immigrants who are disabled by U.S. tax laws from retirement planning? It is becoming increasingly clear that US citizenship should be viewed as a disability.

There is no other major country in the world that uses a system of citizenship-based taxation. Citizenship-based taxation presupposes that the citizen is the property of the government. This notion is contrary to modern human rights laws which clearly assumes that citizenship is a voluntary arrangement entered into with a country. Furthermore, the taint of US citizenship is transferred to unsuspecting children, who are born outside the United States to U.S. citizen parents. It is repugnant to the ideals of justice that a person should be born as the property of any country.

Reason 8: Citizenship-based Taxation As A Violation of  Human Rights

The U.S. takes the position that citizenship-based taxation is allowed by the U.S. constitution. That however does NOT mean that all aspects of citizenship-based taxation are constitutional. For example, to arrest someone is constitutional. But to arrest someone  without probable cause may be  unconstitutional. To put it simply: the time has come to seriously question whether citizenship-based taxation as practiced by the U.S. is:

1. Constitutional under the constitution of the United States;

2. If so, what aspects of it may be unconstitutional under U.S. law;

3. If constitutional under U.S. law, does it nevertheless violate international law by either:

A. Violating the rights of U.S. citizens abroad? After all, if one can’t:

– plan for retirement;

– have access to normal financial services

– be discriminated against because of U.S. tax laws

there may be a problem.

B. Violating International Human Rights Treaties:

– which seem to imply that citizenship does not imply that the government does NOT have a property right in the person;

– violate specific international human rights treaties

C. Violate International Law by invading the sovereignty of other nations:

– Citizenship-based taxation steals from the Treasuries of other nations.

Reason 9: To Sign  A FATCA IGA Is To Endorse Immoral  U.S. Conduct – If Not For Eritrea then  Not For The US

The true purpose of FATCA is to enforce US citizenship-based taxation. Citizenship-based taxation may violate certain laws and/or conventions. That said, it’s impact, application and enforcement (think of the outrageous behavior of the IRS in OVDI and OVDP)) mean that is absolutely immoral. The Government of Canada took a hard line on the African nation of Eritrea when it tried to enforce citizenship-based taxation inside Canada. The time has come for Canada to take a hard line against citizenship-based taxation form the US Furthermore, the time has come to seriously consider whether citizenship-based taxation in either intent or application is legal.

If Canada signs a FATCA IGA with the US, Canada is endorsing the immorality of citizenship-based taxation!

This is part of the message that needs to be understood by the Government of Canada.

Reason 10: Canada Is The Most Important Outpost In the US Attempt to FATCAize The world!

In 2003, President Bush was trying to get world support for his invasion of Iraq. Prime Minister Chretien announced in the House of Commons that Canada would not be part of the “coalition of  the willing”. Canada’s refusal was hugely significant in the battle for world opinion. The same is true in relation to FATCA.

If Canada refuses to allow the US to use FATCA to enforce the immorality of citizenship-based taxation, then other countries are sure to take notice.

Prime Minister Harper is in a position where he will surely impact the future of world freedom!

 


42 thoughts on “Ten reasons Canada MUST say NO TO FATCA! – updated”

  1. Well done. FATCA is reckless for the USA to impose, even more reckless for any country to even consider implementing. With so many within the US itself now questioning the wisdom of inflicting FATCA on itself and the world, why would Canada now even consider an IGA on FATCA? 

    With the kind of poorly thought out and one-sided policies coming out of the US in their desperation to keep afloat, the entire world must not allow themselves to be pressured into putting all of their worldly possessions on the USSS Titanic, and more importantly surrendering their sovereignty to it with FATCA.

  2. *@renounce

    “A. The most that Canada can POSSIBLY get out of the deal is information on bank accounts held in the U.S. by Canadian Residents. Canada (like the rest of the world) imposes taxes based on Canadian residence and NOT BASED ON CITIZENSHIP. Hence, although Canada may have an interest in accounts held by Canadian residents in the U.S., I suspect the interest is “Not Much”.”

     

    This is not quite accurate.

     

    Right now Canada is the only country for whose residents American banks are required to report bank and portfolio interest to the Internal Revenue Service which then passes it on to the CRA.  In other words, with respect to interest income FATCA would add nothing to what Canada is already getting but that is already more than any other country gets.

     

    Besides interest, dividend and other “Fixed or Determinable Annual or Periodic” income earned by NRA (including Canadians) is required under existing US reporting to be reported to the US government under Chapter 3 of the Internal Revenue Code and, of course, on income tax returns filed under Chapter 61.  Chapter 3 information includes dividends, capital gains, interest, pension, rents, gambling winnings, scholarships, compensation of artists and athletes, etc.; i.e. the whole schmear.

     

    Although the US is not obligated to automatically share Chapter 3 or Chapter 61 information with its treaty partners, there are strong – but never publicly confirmed rumors – that the US Treasury for many years now has been routinely, i.e. automatically, reporting Chapter 3 information on CD ROM to its treaty partners; gratis.  Return information under Chapter 61 (e.g. a 1040NR filed by a Canadian NRA) is not routinely shared but can be shared on request under the terms of the information sharing articles of most existing double taxation treaties.

     

     

    So, Canada does stand to gain some tax relevant information that it did not have before but . . .

     

    The only information the US is promising under its reciprocal model IGA is information that US Financial institutions already are set up to provide.  In other words, unless the FATCAT partner insists on full reciprocity, the FATCA IGA would impose no real material added cost to US financial institutions or the US treasury.  They already have paid for the IT systems that capture this information.

     

    The real reason why FATCA offers potential partner countries less even less than the information the US already collects is attributable to the lax standards imposed on US banks for determining who is a NRA.

     

    Although the US has strict KYC (Know Your Customer) rules for account openings, etc. it allows customers to self-certify their foreign citizenship/residency status for US Chapter 3 withholding/reporting purposes.

     

    FATCA imposes no comparable duty on US financial institutions to sift through their databases to look for indicia of foreign partner state tax residence.

     

    Unlike most countries on the planet, the US not only has no national identification card it also has no national or state system of residency registration. By and large, the US has only a limited grasp of who its own citizens are much less where they are located. Where foreigners claiming favorable treaty residence might actually live is similarly beyond its grasp.

     

    In most countries, if you want to claim residence in a foreign country to avoid source withholding or obtain reduced rates of tax on various investments in that country you ordinarily have to produce something called a “certificate of residence” issued by the authorities of the country in which you claim tax residence.

     

    Thus, the IRS will – for a fee, of course – provide US citizens with such a certificate so that they can obtain the benefits of non-residency in whatever place on earth they have invested in. The US, however, does not require such evidence of foreign residency.  It allows but does not even require self-certifying NRAs to provide – much less confirm – their foreign tax identification number(s).

    Nor – unless you’ve been bad/delinquent – does the US ever require “backup” withholding on FDAP income for people who (self-)certify that they are US citizens or residents.  Thus, a lot of foreigners – a few Canadians among them, no doubt – can open US bank or brokerage accounts and so long as they keep their reportable earnings below a certain threshold can earn several thousands of USD “tax-free” and unreported every year.

     

    FATCA imposes no requirement on the US to correct this sorry state of affairs.  Note that the UK IGA does not require the US to provide the UK tax number of any UK resident whose income it reports to the UK under FATCA.

    Why? Because it would cost a lot of money and further discourage investment in “Tax Haven, USA”.

    The PATRIOT Act passed after 9/11 spooked many US banks and financial institutions away from allowing any foreigner to open account who could not proved US residency.  But it wasn’t just the new and more extensive KYC requirements that motivated them. When American banks were faced with the requirement to modify their account holder information databases to accommodate foreign identification numbers that did not fit into the XXX-XX-XXXX of the US Social Security Number/ITIN format, many of them simply stopped offering accounts to foreigners rather than make the expensive IT changes.
     

     

  3. @todundsteuer —

    That was very interesting – thanks for posting it. No wonder Treasury is offering reciprocity; they know there isn’t a chance in hell that they’d ever be able to deliver on it. And my guess is US banks, etc. would simply ignore any directive that they should collect this info because there’s no way they’d ever be caught out. It will be a “wink, wink – nudge, nudge” enforcement policy on the part of Treasury.

    I wonder if all those countries looking to sign IGAs on the reciprocity angle have a clue about any of this. I bet they don’t know, or maybe don’t care. Anything to pacify the bully.

  4. @Todundsteuer

    Thanks for the additional insights on how the reciprocity will provide little new of value to Canada.

    Then there is the comment, I received from a bank auditor about these programs.  The reality is, many of the US banks, and the FFIs, I suspect, will just pay the audit game. They will say they are compliant, and then wait for an audit to prove differently…

    My experience with US tax compliance is that Treasury comes down looking heavy handed with regs for banks that largely go unaudited (or audited only in part) for years. Don’t quote me on this, but I get the feeling the same will happen with FATCA…when pressed, how does Treasury respond to questions surrounding actual ENFORCEMENT of the agreements? 

    If IRS doesn’t have staff to audit hedge and equity funds and the banks that hold these accounts here in USA, how can they expand internationally and what will happen if international banks do NOT comply? 

    Here in the US, when banks are audited and compliance is found to be lacking, fines and fees are levied by IRS, fines which ultimately wind up costing the bank less $$ than the actual withholding amounts would have originally been, because the fines and fees are outdated due to IRS bureaucracy. (I think it’s the 3rd largest Fed agency, but would need to check this out). 

    And then, I’ve never seen the IRS then go after the hedge funds, individually, and pour through the reams of W-8IMY’s on master-feeder funds. It hasn’t happened, as far as I know, however someone would need to fact-check this. Most audits have been on 1099’s only. IRS claims they are hiring 50 new staff in the future to take care of auditing the 1042S forms and NRA accounts. But can you imagine asking Congress to approve enough $ for ramping up staff to audit the world? Laughable. 

  7. How about then a similar statement in the IGA (in reverse):

    “Canada (any other country) shall continue to cooperate with the USA to respond to requests pursuant to the Convention to collect and exchange information on accounts held in Canadian financial institutions by residents and citizens of Canada who also happen to be US citizens.”

    i.e., no change in how things are now done?

    OR

    “If the US fails to honour their agreement of reciprocity, this agreement will be null and void.”

  8. @renounceuscitizenship

    Unlike the Bay Street investment banker you spoke to whose eyes glazed over, the Howe Street Vice-President of a prominent investment firm I occasionally email back and forth to wrote: “FATCA is a mess” effecting many friends and clients of his. 

  9. He who has the gold makes the rules

    Canada has practically no gold and the US has more than any other country.  The US uses the power of the “worlds reserve currency” to twist Canada’s arm now.  Later, if this global tax corralito that the world’s elites are building falls apart and the dollar collapses, the US will still have Germany’s, Netherland’s and many countries gold at the NY Fed.  Meanwhile Canada has practically nothing.  The US empire makes the rules but the elites of Canada, Switzerland, Japan, and the EU are in on it.  Your masters despise you, slave.  Pull harder.

  10. @CH, true that Canada has no gold, but apparently, numerous experts believe that much of the US gold has been leased to the East and that the East (China, India, etc.) has taken physical delivery. Thus, the bullion banks have leased the US gold and sold it to China, and all the US has is a bunch of paper claiming ownership of gold.

    Canada has no gold, but Canada is full of oil and other resources that the people with the gold (i.e., China, etc.) want. So we don’t need the US, we need a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific, and we need a natural gas liquification plant on the West coast.

  11. @petros, there are many prominent gold bugs that insist that the US gold is there, Jim Rickards for example.

    But even if one is willing to concede that the majority of the US gold is gone or hopelessly encumbered, does this in anyway mitigate Canada’s lack of gold reserves and her possession of vast amounts of US dollar reserve currency backed fiat denominated sovereign debt?  I think not.  I think that Canada, like most of the EU, is suicidally tied to the Bretton Woods/dollar reserve currency system, and I think there is group of very rich people who deliberately wanted this.  I think that these are the same people who want FBAR’s, FATCA, wealth taxes and citizenship based taxation imposed across the planet.  I think they want to make sure that those foolish enough to openly recognize their own enslavement realize the consequences of crossing the empire.  Think of the ex-patriot act or all the calls to exile those who would sign a petition of secession. 

  12. Petros — Canada does not need a pipeline from Alberta to the Pacific, much less a frack-based liquefaction plant on the west coast. How about instead requiring that multiple new nuclear power plants encircle Toronto and provide “clean” subsidized electricity to the rest of Canada while centralizing the ugly unacceptable risk right where it belongs?

  13. Pingback: How the term “US person” will give the US “de FATCA” control over other nations « Freedom from the tyranny of U.S. citizenship-based taxation for U.S. and dual citizens outside the U.S.

  14. Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society - How the term “US person” will give the US “de FATCA” control over other nations

  15. Pingback: The Government of Canada: Toward a #FATCA IGA – Mass renunciation as a solution « Freedom from the tyranny of U.S. citizenship-based taxation for U.S. and dual citizens outside the U.S.

  16. Pingback: #FATCA and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms « Freedom from the tyranny of U.S. citizenship-based taxation for U.S. and dual citizens outside the U.S.

  17. I am already looking beyond the IGA. Supposedly (though negotiations are secret) we are to believe it will be the Canadian banks job to “find” US born Canadians and other US persons who hold deposits etc,, with their institutions, and hand that info over to Revenue Canada, who will hand it to the US. Personally that doesnt threaten me  
    (even though I find even that reprehensible) , a Canadian who has lived as a Canadian since I was 10 years old. What would threaten me personally, however, is if Canada “helps” out by exposing my past by telling the US who I am  (something the banks do not know since I deal with them exclusively as a Canadian). What is to stop Canada’s other agencies and departments from fingering these Canadians to the US? That list would be far more lucrative for the US. And Harper might even get the IRS reward.

  18. @msd

    You mean the Canadian government would  have an active campaign to hunt down US persons while at the same time welcome US immigrants? 

  19. *msd, you address the key question I have.  If a person has always presented as a Canadian to his/her banks, has never lived or worked in the USA, has never filled out a US tax  return, has no social security number, how are the banks going to even be able to fill in the blanks for the IRS to identify such a ‘US person’?  What a scam.

    Then as you say, Harper might just provide Canadian citizenship and passport records to the IRS, so they can see that you took out the Canadian citizenship you were entitled to once you were an adult, but never knew there was any reason to bother ditching your US citizenship.  Then the IRS could conceivably start running targeted searches for accounts matching your name and d.o.b. and SIN.  This is so completely unjust and insane!  The USA does not deserve one cent from such people!  It is impossible to satisfy this mob, it is extortion.  There is no point in ‘coming clean’, as for one thing you are guilty of nothing! and secondly, it is just impossible to satisfy the IRS.

    Well, enough said but I figure there will be millions just riding this out and saying, ‘Come and get me.’ to the USA.  Harper better not be helping the American government with this racket.  Really makes you hate the USA.

     

  20. @ marj

    In their efforts to comply with FATCA, the banks in Switzerland are requiring ALL bank account holders to complete the five questions below to determine whether they are US Persons. Unless the Canadian government says “no” to FATCA, it could come to this in Canada too:

    “Declaration of Status of Customer as Non US-Person or US-Person (ID)

    1. Are you a US Citizen? Yes/ No
    (You must answer with “Yes” in the event that you possess more citizenships including US citizenship)

    2. Were you born in the USA (or in one of the US Territories)? Yes/ No

    3. Are you in possession of an American “Green Card” (independent of expiry date)? Yes/ No

    4. Do you have residence in the USA from a US tax perspective? Yes/ No

    5. Irrespective of the above Substantial Physical Presence Test are you resident still in the USA? Yes/ No

    The customer is obliged to inform the bank immediately if his status as a
    Non-US Person changes per US tax law. The customer acknowledges and
    accepts that the neglect to inform the bank immediately of any change in
    his status as a Non-US Person, respectively, any misrepresentation in
    connection with his status as a Non-US Person, is justification for the
    bank to cancel the bank relationship without notification.”

    Below is the UBS form used in Switzerland (in German):
    http://isaacbrocksociety.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/ubs-ch-acct-opening-form-p1.pdf

  21. @ marj   Yes, Citizenship taxation is a sham, and you and the millions who are just trying to ignore this by riding it out could help get it changed by signing the petition. It is a small action, but we need more to be at least willing to do this small act to help change a BAD law.  

    With the BIG DATA, the increasing power of the surveillance state we are in the midst of a mega Trend. I don’t know how long the option of riding it out will be a viable one. People are going to be forced to take action. Complain, Comply and Warn, or Complain, NOT Comply and Renounce.  Head in the sand is becoming less and less viable as time passes. 

  22. As promised – from the Green Party of Canada – hot off the presses…!!!!

    http://www.greenparty.ca/media-release/2013-01-28/irs-tax-collection-evasion-us-or-invasion-canada

    Backgrounder : Canada and FATCA

    28 January 2013 – 2:10pm

    ‘IRS Tax Collection: Evasion of the US or Invasion of Canada?’

    ” The Green Party of Canada is calling on the government of Canada to
    stand on guard against the demands of the United States (US) for
    extraterritorial enforcement of an American law: the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).
    The Government of Canada must protect our citizens and residents from
    FATCA’s invasive violations of individual privacy, and refuse to make
    Canadian consumers and taxpayers pay the significant costs to enforce a
    unilateral American mandate that does not benefit Canada in any way.”…………

    Now, where are you Liberals? And Conservatives?

  23. @Badger

    Great news and a nice step forward.

    The Green Party Finance critic (if this is the person in the video) was at the Toronto FATCA Forum

  24. The Green Party press release (delivered as promised) is very well worded and much appreciated. And as Badger says, now where are the other parties? TEN (plus) reasons to say NO to FATCA but we need the voices of all FIVE sitting parties to say it.

  25. It’s hard to get the other 4 parties to say anything on FATCA when they’ve all got their heads up Obama’s rear-end going: “The US IS OUR FRIEND…THEY WON’T DO ANYTHING TO HARM US…AFTER ALL…JFK SAID…”BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH! YAY YAY YAY!!!”

    Reminds me of this feller from Crank Yankers.   

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: