. FATCA Fact Finding Forum Report Part III
We took a break after Professor Christians’ presentation and began again with a brief talk by Anglican Archbishop Dorian Baxter who is the President of the Progressive Canadian Party. He related a very funny story of a conversation with an older member of his congregation who lamented that we no longer had Steve Jobs, nor Johnny Cash or Bob Hope. They talked a bit about this and then applied to current state of Canada – we have no jobs, no cash and no hope!
He emphasized that we need to hold the CDN govt accountable to the standard of the Westminster model of Parliamentary Democracy. This relates to a core principle of the Progressive Canadian Party and the illegal “merger” of the Canadian Alliance Reform Party (aka “CRAP”). This provoked much laughter. Then he applied the Westminster ideal to the fact that FATCA is an invasion of CDN Autonomy as well as the Canadian Treasury as it is a money grab of millions of dollars from Canadian families, their children and their children’s children.
Next we heard from James Jatras who had travelled all the way from Washington to be with us. He has a completely different approach than what is commonly being expressed, even by Brockers. We all speak of FATCA as if it will happen; “resistance is futile.” He feels there is very much that can be done to defeat FATCA.
*FATCA is not equivalent to NAFTA, WTO, etc. Most Homelanders are completely unaware of it. Including a high-level aide to a Senate Finance Committee
*FATCA amounts to a UNILATERAL, extra-territorial law which says if you don’t obey us, we will punish you with sanctions.
*Instead of an IGA, Canada should pass a tax treaty override; what we have now is the CDN govt and the FFI’s collaborating against CDN citizens.
*US: “we are generously allowing you to change your law.” This is no partnership.
*Article 2 of the IGA “foreign partner; subsection A is unequal to subsection B and Art 6 US will “eventually” adapt to partner level This will never happen.
*like a preemptive war where one commits suicide to avoid death
*China will not; expects Brazil will not; Russia? It is CRUCIAL that Canada say “NO” This will set the stage for others to do the same. Powerful influence since we are such a major partner of the US, if we can do it, so can others
“Never seen such a bad law similar to the Catastrophic Recovery Act of 1989 or the Dubai Ports Law, which were repealed
*FATCA stands to cost the world $1 trillion dollars what with the tax lawyers, accountants and the IT depts. required to make it work
*CBA letter to US Treasury – take 1% of the money spending to implement FATCA and use instead, to repeal FATCA
*We need $50k – $100k a month for 12 months in order to deal with repealing FATCA; ads in “Roll Call; etc, you can’t just ask Congress to do something, there’s a process
*EXTORT EMBARRASSING DETAILS/ MAKE AN ORGANIZED EFFORT
*Treasury is in a rush to get IGA’s signed before the repeal forces rise up
*Where on earth are the CDN media, the NDP, the Lib Party, the Conservative Party –(just at this point, Mr Gullon mentions a newcomer is a member of the Green Party)
*FATCA = a US Discriminatory Trade Infraction
*Canada: We will hit you with law suits, trade actions, etc. Legislation after FATCA-we will withhold 30% of all income of Americans in Canada; ask our PFFI’s to collect waivers, etc
*Seek out those spending millions now and get a tiny portion of that towards PR to repeal
*Discussion of who has signed – UK, Denmark, Ireland, Mexico, Switzerland; UK has to clear Parliament; the Honorable Sinclair Stevens suggested that we emphasize any aspect that UK has yet to clear – this could have an impact on Canada. Not sure it was clear why – i.e., an American might not understand the Canadian attitude toward England in parliamentary matters.
*Are the IGA’s “Executive Agreements?” or “Competent Authority Agreements?” Is Treasury overstepping by not getting Congress to approve IGA’s? Treasury says they have to promulgate regulations and that they have the legal authority to do so. Do they?
*UK-signed Sept 12, 2012. They still have to implement the legislation allowing for FATCA and now, son of FATCA
*There are those who make things happen, those who watch things happen and those who ask “what happened?” We need to be of the first category.
*You must require the government to JUSTIFY why they are doing this
*Bring back 2003 when PM Chretien said NO to attacking in Iraq; very similar to the “coalition of the willing” notice again, the UK is the first to sign on
*Recapture and recreate the 2003 movement
*The Green Party representative, Erik (sp?) Jacob Hawkins is a Critic in the Shadow Cabinet, is from Barrie and works directly with Elizabeth May; Parliament recessed; however, with a petition with at least 25 signatures, a member can force Parliament to examine an issue. The Honorable Sinclair Stevens, Prof. Allison Christians and Jon Richardson immediately drafted a petition which we all signed to present ASAP and hope no IGA is signed before Parliament resumes in January.
*There should be bilateral agreements without any bizarre sanctions
*Banks themselves should have reasons to instigate movement against FATCA; likely banks have pressured Flaherty who clearly did not like, did not agree with and did not want FATCA
*Discussion of possible actions in near future re: Op Ed’s, etc. (more on this later and please don’t ask for now)
At this point, Petros asked me to drive Prof. Christians to the airport to catch her plane so I left and do not know what happened after this point though Jon Richardson mentioned there would be several more speakers after the break and Petros had prepared something, so hopefully, he will have more to report and was able to deliver his comments.
********
Generally, the audience composed of about 5 members of the Prog. Canadian Party including previously named speakers; Abby Desham, Allison Christians, James Jatras, Petros, Deckhard and myself (I don’t know if there were other Brockers) and the rest were duals with their non-US partners. I spoke to a lady who said she was an Accidental remaining in “full ostrich;” she has been following since ExpatForum and reads IBS. The lady sitting next to her had to go but also came due to Brock. I spoke to a couple and a man who said Peggy Nash had told him about the meeting; another set of 3 who knew via Brock and 2 more who also knew via Brock. One fellow was conversant with many concepts but I did not get a chance to speak with him. At least 11 attendees were not Brockers or speakers or Party members
Is there any way to mount the text of the presentations somewhere, whether here or elsewhere?
@NorthernShrike, I am pretty sure that all of the speakers spoke without using a manuscript. Thus, the text would have to wait the video record of the proceedings, and at that point, if someone has time to make a transcript, there would be a text.
nobledreamer –
Since you connected with Allison Christians as chauffeur, she might consider providing an outline summary of her indicia analysis for Brock?
Petros is right. I was very close to the speakers; some approached the podium with notes or perhaps, a tablet but no one used them once they got started.
@Tim,
Thanks. Interesting and some things I do remember now.
Can you offer a few names of people Flaherty/Finance is talking to regarding the signing of the IGA’s?
If you let me know which speakers you would most like to have a transcribed text of, let me know and I’ll see what I can do around Christmastime. I’d be happy to do it, but as the seminar was several hours long, it will take some time to do it all, so let me know what you’d like text of first, I’ll start with that/those.
@pacifica,
I’d be glad to lighten the load by taking some of it to transcribe too.
Not much on this campaigning stuff, but I couldn’t pass up this opportunity to tell the CBC what it is and does — and doesn’t.
Dear CBC –
The most overlooked political story of 2012 has to be FATCA implementation looming on the near Canadian horizon.
This “overlooking” signals the reason I have come to have little expectations of and almost no respect for CBC so-called reporting. You are paid big money by the government to manufacture Canadian mythos, and this story gets disappeared because it does not promote that defining agenda.
The desire of the United States to impose its Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act on the Canadian banking system will cost each major Canadian financial institution that becomes “compliant” up to $100 million, based on their own estimates.
This is one of the reasons I ditched US citizenship in 2012. Just one.
A profound antiAmericanism that is warp in the Canadian woof may indulge in facile sniff-off that the “problem” will be suffered only by those recalcitrant dual citizens who should have become only-Canadian long ago. Well, surprise for you. This cost is going to come out of the pockets of all Canadians, not the banks. Enjoy paying your direct share for seeing Canada slide even further toward becoming a colonial appendage of the United States.
You will doubtless hear from others about epiphenomena such as human rights encroachment. You have already contributed to that atrocity by your nonreporting.
I choose pseudonymous solidarity with the hundreds of thousands of deemed “US persons” in Canada who have been left to lurk in fear, partly because I value privacy. You should be able to report on issues like this without getting hamstrung by the difficulties of finding personal faces to attach to the story. That sort of journalism aspires to the squalor practiced by People magazine.
usxcanada
@Calgary, Super, I would imagine there’s quite a bit, so this way we can get more of it available more quickly.
For a very long time we, here in the U.S., have not sent our brightest or best to government and they in turn have chosen some duller than they, to administer the unworkable laws they passed, so we have the stupid leading the dumb, sent by the idiots (us) to do harm to the world.*
I am hoping every country in the world refuses to comply with the IRS, remembering they were chosen by the first group I mentioned.
Personally, if there is video of the presentations, that is fine for me. I wouldn’t ask anyone to transcribe the proceedings. Although there were not many present evidently, maybe video can be more widely available. Youtube?
Video is enough for me too. I’m just grateful someone did it and we do have the notes. Calgary and Pacifica already do so much for this site and this is a busy season so I’d like to think of them taking time for themselves and their family. They so deserve it.
Whatever works for showing what transpired at Saturday’s FATCA forum, including the feel of it, getting to more people’s critical thought processes.
You’re right — we all deserve taking time for ourselves and our families in this holiday season. In the midst of fighting for the rights of ourselves and our families within the countries we now live in, it’s another example of our time wasted, time that could go to valuable contributions to our countrys’ societies and the simplicity of valuable time spent with our families in the holiday season.
Thanks, Em and NorthernShrike.
@Christophe
Sorry to be so late commenting on this:
What is Treasury’s interest in implementing FATCA so fast? They have a mandate to implement congress’s voted legislation, but surely, people working there must understand the extra-territoriality, and other issues with this bad piece of legislation. Some people in treasury must understand that financially it does not make sense to ask the world to spend 1 trillion dollars to bring in less than 1 billion a year, and in the process have other countries hate the US and their policies even more. And that’s not talking about the negative consequences that this law is going to have on US people abroad and to exports in general.
I don’t understand that rush from Treasury to put FATCA in place, just for the sake of curbing tax evasion. Jim, would you mind commenting? Do you have some elements of answer to explain this rush. Why are they so eager to shoot themselves in the foot? Actually, this looks more like suicide.
You know, at the George Mason seminar, the other Treasury presenter (on the second panel, not with me and Jesse Eggert) was William Holmes, International Data Management Office, Internal Revenue Service. He’s a data guy involved on the compliance side. I spoke with him briefly as we were leaving the building, after all the presentations. At one point he asked me, with sincere and decent puzzlement: Why was I against FATCA? He genuinely could not understand, even after all the discussion, why anyone would oppose this obviously good law . . .
To address Christophe’s questions. First, why so fast? Because Treasury is smart enough to know that FATCA as enacted is unenforceable. The only way they can make it fly is if they can bamboozle enough other countries to enforce it on themselves. To accomplish that, they need for a maximum number of countries to sign IGAs. But to get governments to sign the IGAs, they have to give the impression the world is already flocking to do so and compliance is inevitable. It’s a snowball: the more countries that sign IGAs and the more quickly they do so, the larger number of additional countries that are likely to sign. Conversely, the more countries that drag their feet or – let us hope – refuse to sign IGAs, the fewer other countries will get on board — which would then force Treasury back to the option they most dread, that of having to try to enforce FATCA directly, on an extraterritorial basis, at the risk of a total meltdown of the global financial system.
This is why – and I can’t overstate this – while IBS participants offer lots of great back and forth on lots of issues, I suggest for the next few weeks the need to focus like a laser on one issue: that CANADA not sign an IGA with the US before the Commons has come back in session to address this issue. While comments to the Finance Department are important, they are unlikely to sway what Minister Flaherty’s people are already planning. What’s needed is to get Canadian media and MPs (both Conservative and Opposition) to pick up on a simple message: “Hey, this is important. There’s lot at stake here. Canada should not rush to sign something with only a few weeks’ public review and before Parliament has debated the merits of such an agreement. Let’s fully digest the comments, let the Department prepare a report, and let Parliament evaluate it. Then and only then can Canada make an informed decision.” (NOTE: At this point, for the reasons I indicated above, what Washington needs above all are signatures on IGAs from as many countries as possible – at this stage, CANADA above every other country. The prospect that an IGA may later be disapproved by Parliament is at this stage irrelevant. What Treasury needs now is that signature.)
So, to the extent people can, please keep hammering away at those Canadian parliamentary and media contacts on this issue.
As to “I don’t understand that rush from Treasury to put FATCA in place, just for the sake of curbing tax evasion” — I think I’ve already explained the “rush.” It’s either “rush” or “not at all.” Literally, the rush is to save FATCA, pure and simple. Which then relates to second part of the question: Why are they so determined to save FATCA? Is it just for “curbing tax evasion”?
I think the answer to that question has two parts. First, to cite my chat with Mr. Holmes, yes, to some extent they do see it as curbing tax evasion. But this is seen not so much in terms of actual revenue “raised” (as to for costing $1T to “recover” $1B – hey, what do they care, it ain’t their trillion – someone else will have to pay that, and there are a lot of tax lawyers, accountants, and software purveyors into whose pockets most of that trillion will go who are cheering them on!) but from a bureaucratic law enforcement perspective: Information is good. We want to know everything about everyone. Cost (to you) is not our problem. The more we know, the less anyone can “get away” with anything. Why would you object – what have you got to hide? During Peter Dunn’s moving presentation of at the Forum on Saturday, and the terrible stories of the hell IRS has put some people through for negligible revenue gain, you clearly see this mentality at work.
The second factor is one the outside world mostly misses, especially those from parliamentary systems. In the American system, when Executive Branch agencies are given an enforcement task, their job is not to go back to Congress and tell them they’ve been given a stupid or unachievable assignment to enforce a “bad law.” They almost never do that. Rather, perhaps influenced by the “information is good” factor noted above, they put on their thinking caps as the intelligent and methodical bureaucrats they are and ask themselves: We’ve been given the task of enforcing a badly conceived and unenforceable law, the goals of which we nonetheless share. How can we make this work? That’s where they get inventive. The answer: IGAs.
As for “And that’s not talking about the negative consequences that this law is going to have on US people abroad and to exports in general.” Simple: Collateral damage is not our problem. Congress should have thought of that. Our job is to enforce the law, however we can.
As for “and in the process have other countries hate the US and their policies even more” — I’m glad to see you haven’t lost your sense of humor. Being exceptional means never having to say you’re sorry.
@Jim Jatras
Thanks for again pointing out how the US Treasury’s use of propaganda is resulting in a self-fulling prophecy of increased IGA’s.
The unofficial buzz is that Canada is waiting for the final FATCA regulations to be released before signing an IGA, and then from that point require that the banks be allowed 18 months to comply. If FATCA is unenforceable, will this not be reflected in the final regulations (or lack there of)? Or are the final regs insignificant? It’s perplexing how many governments are clamouring to sign when they don’t even know what it is they are agreeing to, unless they believe signing an IGA will provide them with some sort of safe harbour.
Jim, thank you so much for your long answer. It helps me understand better how the system works, and the mentalities there. You point out what I think are huge cultural differences on how things works here in the US versus other countries.
Regarding the cost and “it ain’t their trillion”. This might not be true if reciprocity is implemented. Are foreign governments aware that there won’t be the same level of reciprocity, to use the words from Treasury in their response to Rand Paul? I wonder if that changes their vue on IGAs, or if they just don’t care, because they’re not especially interested.
@bubblebustin
Waiting for the regs before signing an IGA is something of a paradox and just pathetic. Technically, a country that signs an IGA would enact and enforce its own domestic FATCA-oid laws and regs (in Canada, for data collection and reportring to CRA), not those issued by the IRS for direct FATCA enforcement (to the IRS). Ottawa is basically saying, “Let’s wait until IRS gets around to telling us what kind of CRA regime we will be obligated to copy from the IRS before we commit to doing it.”
No, the final regs are not insignificant. As above, that’s what will provide the blueprint for copycat “partner country” laws and regs. Also, when push comes to shove, it’s likely Treasury will have to move forward, with clenched teeth and bated breath, to pull the trigger on unlilateral enforcement of the regs on holdout countries when the time comes — especially if enough countries have signed onto IGAs and IRS thinks unilateral enforcement agains the holdouts won’t upset the global applecart.
*usxcanada has inspired me with their letter to CBC. I’ve sent e-mails to a few of the national shows and a few newspapers asking why this story is not on the front page.
CBC The National, W5, Fifth Estate, Global News, Financial Post, National Post, Toronto Star, Globe and Mail. These were all off the top of my head. Can anyone else think of who we should be contacting???
I’m also going to re-send my concerns to Rae and Mulcair to ask where the opposition is in all of this.
*I am trying to think if I can add something else at the moment. One place to look at when you have a chance is here.
http://www2.isda.org/functional-areas/protocol-management/protocol-adherence/9
To actually describe what that list is for is fairly complex but just understand that for Treasury to actually allow FATCA to go into effect without a complete trainwreck there needs to be tens of thousands of names on that not 389. Even the Dodd Frank protocol which is also highly extraterritorial and controversial has over three thousand names not three hundred(And the DF rules as of Friday are being delayed again).
http://www2.isda.org/functional-areas/protocol-management/protocol-adherence/8
The letter below was sent to Mr. Flaherty today. Similar letters were sent to other elected officials including provincial sector. The intention here is to make some traction.
Honourable Jim Flaherty,
It would be wise to buy some more time to analyze the implications to Canada in the signing of an IGA with the United States. All indications are that this process is being done too hastily, without thought, and without the input of Parliament just to save a bad piece of US legislation. (Canada is signing something where they do not have the full text of the law which is currently being written in the US.)
Canadians will be the collateral damage of bad American legislation.
A direct response to this short letter is justified because I feel it is the right of Canadians to know our fate and not to be in the dark.
I and my family attended a current FATCA information session at University of Toronto with the realization that Canada and it’s financial system are under attack. (A panel of distinguished guests spoke for seven hours on the subject of IGA and FATCA.) The meeting was truly a wake-up call. I initially was concerned for myself and my family but now I fear Canada’s fate. Politicians and the media must no longer take this subject lightly.
Hi all,
Well, I’m safely back from Toronto now after navigating a few harrowing hours of freezing rain last night on the 401 and 416. Besides my own safety, obviously, all I could think of was my precious cargo of four 32GB memory cards containing a very important historical record. I now have a small mountain of work ahead of me to process, package and upload nearly seven hours worth of truly excellent presentations from Saturday’s FATCA Forum.
I’ve taken a quick look at what was recorded and I have no doubt that these sessions will prove invaluable for our educational outreach and advocacy efforts. They will immediately become the best online video resources for critical analysis of FATCA and of the many economic and social consequences of this ill-conceived and destructive legislation.
I promise to work on this as quickly as possible, though my day job will slow the process a bit. We’ll post the links and contextual notes as soon we can. I guarantee that your patience will be well rewarded. Cheers.
@Deckard1138
Glad you are back home safe and sound with those precious memory cards. Please know that we all appreciate your effort in getting to Toronto and your effort to come which will provide us all with an invaluable video resource. Thank you! My hope is that sometime in the near future we will see “sound-bites” from the forum appearing in the mainstream media. This message has just got to get “out there” and SOON!
Thank you @Deckard1138. I am really looking forward to seeing what I missed last Saturday.
Thank you Deckard1138 for your efforts.
*
Hi, Deckard,
Thanks so much for your trip to Toronto and back in bad winter weather and your and nobledreamer’s background work at the Toronto forum on Saturday.
The video you obtained will be such a great resource for this site, second best to being there.
Besides all the hard work, I hope the Brockers there were able to meet one another, as well as the other resource people, includng Petros!
As noted last night to Pacifica, I, too am able to help with anything if you can throw it my way. Cheers and thanks again!