Why would the Canadian banks even consider selling out their “US citizen” clients? The banks are aware of the privacy laws and the charter rights, are they not? Well, they understand that their majority clients who are not US persons would be greatly inconvenienced if their banking institutions refused to become FATCA compliant. Billions of dollars are at stake. So I quite understand why they are playing fast and loose with Canadian privacy laws and our beloved charter rights. It’s about money. A lot of money.
But what is the price of an innocent man or woman who has committed no crime? Are they worth one million dollars? a billion? a trillion? If the entire economic system as we know it is at stake, is it right to hand over an innocent person?
Nearly 27 centuries ago (=2700 years), the prophet Amos, as spokesman for the eternal God, critiqued Israel (Amos 2:6-7; RSV) :
For three transgressions of Israel,
and for four, I will not revoke the punishment;
because they sell the righteous for silver,
and the needy for a pair of shoes—they that trample the head of the poor into the dust of the earth,
and turn aside the way of the afflicted;
The Book of Amos makes it clear that it is wrong to sell a person’s life for money. Yet the Canadian government and the banks are in negotiations to sell out nearly one million people, handing their private information to the IRS and exposing them to utter financial ruin. These people who are either in Canadian government and financial institutions, need to go back to grade school and take some lessons in basic civics. It is never right to sell the righteous for silver. Human rights trump money. It always has and it always will.
fatca.investorsamerica.eu is a really informative It has several articles from IBS and Righteous Investor posted on it. Perhaps a link can be made to it.
Even with full US tax compliance, the taxpayer cannot be trusted and requires full and continual surveillance of their bank accounts and assets through FATCA. Compliance will be rewarded with a complete loss of personal banking privacy and the threat of even greater demands from the IRS in perpetuity. A class of citizen unto their own, with fewer protections and benefits than those of their fellow countrymen of either country and facilitated by the governments of both countries of which she is a citizen.
*@Bubble, yes, I feel that the UK has essentially thrown even its dual UK/US citizenship under the bus. They even have a concept of dominant citizenship and they seem to still consider it to be my US citizenship, especially as I’m considered tax domicile in the USA in spite of being tax resident in the UK.
I will thus have no protection if the IRS harass me. It will be interesting to see what will happen after facts takes full effect. Perhaps the IRS will just focus on egregious cases involving whales though, while using their scare tactics to bludgeon minnows into compliance.
I don’t know if this has ever been brought up, but this was the particulars of the House of Commons; Standing Committee on Finance session on FATCA. Needless to say, the whole gist of the meeting was not very promising. http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=4937782&Language=E&Mode=1
This is February 8, 2011
Mrs. Shelley Glover in particular bringing out her law enforcement mantra of “being harsh on tax cheats”…quoted as follows: ” I have to say that my juices got flowing as I was listening to some of
these testimonies. My background is that I’m a police officer on a leave
of absence, so as I was listening to you, Mr. Michel, make your
statements about how we might provide more leniency to those who frankly
are cheating their countries out of taxes that are owed, I thought I
was going to have the big one.”
I think a barrage of letters aimed at Shelley Glover needs to be sent with lawsuits based on her libel of those of us who pay taxes properly to Canada and were not aware of IRS filing requirements. That’s a big brush that she’s tarred expats with.
I agree with you, Animal. Thank you for bringing this lovely Mrs. Shelley Glover to my attention! I will do more research on why she, a police officer, offers her advice police enforcement, not leniency, is needed on those of us ‘cheating our countries (the USA!) out of taxes owed!’ She needs some larnin’.
*Shelly Glover to be fair later changed her tune. This is also Shelly Glover below in the infamous we won’t collect FBAR speech.
Thanks, Tim. I have yet to research all of this. I’m sure it will be an interesting story.
*You bring out a fair point. There was a definate change in tune over the course of 2011. Those hearings on tax evasion back in the winter and spring of 2011 were not particularily impressive.
The question is what the heck is their tune now? I would dearly love to know how much sovereignty/autonomy Harper and Flaherty are preparing to cede to the USA and if/when it will happen. I would dearly love to know if the following statement is about to be tossed into the trash bin or not. I based a very important decision on Flaherty’s “promise”.
“Penalties imposed under FBAR will not be collected by the CRA: The Canada-United States Income Tax Convention contains a provision which allows for the collection by a country of taxes imposed by the other country, including civil penalties. This provision does not apply to penalties imposed under laws, such as the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, that impose only a reporting requirement (as opposed to those that impose taxation along with reporting requirements). Also, the CRA does not and will not collect the U.S. tax liability of a Canadian citizen if the individual was a Canadian citizen at the time the liability arose (whether or not the individual was also a U.S. citizen at that time).”
__ Finance Minister Jim Flaherty
Thank you for finding that committee session transcript. I found an absolutely vital bit of information in there, quite by accident.
Has anyone thought about taking up the FATCA and FBAR issues with the Office of Human Rights with the UN?
I don’t exactly think the US cares too much about human rights, just their own voting base. Ask all of the innocents who were “collateral damage” over the past 200 years.
‘Nothing I ain’t heard before out of the Conservative party pundits. They’re flappin’ their gums and yet negotiating a IGA behind our backs. How soon are we to expect the IRS knocking on our doors seeking extradition of those who haven’t paid up their taxes or have committed what the IRS so lovingly calls “form crime”? I place no trust in Shelley Glover and still have half a mind to read her the RIOT ACT if I ever come across her; her law enforcement background BE DAMNED!
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society