30 thoughts on “National Post opines: American expats feeling less free as draconian tax law kicks in”

1. @WhiteKat

   Thanks for the heads-up about SR. I just responded to him:

   “SeniorResearcher, given your obsessive support for “the rule of law”, no matter how flawed or immoral that law may be, how exactly would YOU reconcile the United States condemning Eritrea at the United Nations for its practice of citizenship-based taxation when that is precisely what the US imposes upon its own expats – and at a FAR higher tax and penalty rate than the Eritreans? Is the rule of law only sacrosanct for American laws?

   Here again, for the record, is exactly what Susan E. Rice, U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations, said after the adoption of Security Council Resolution 2023, on December 5, 2011:

   “As we heard again this morning, we have continually received evidence of Eritrean support for extremist groups in the region…Eritrea is financing all of these activities through illicit means, including threats and the extortion of a “diaspora tax” from people of Eritrean descent living overseas.”

   If the U.S. considers threats and extortion of a “diaspora tax” to be “illicit means”, then by what standard do they make this judgment? By the standards of Eritrean law? By international law? By U.S. law?

   Why don’t we just cut to the chase: America simply says one thing and does another – because it can. This has nothing to do with “the rule of law” and far more to do with the law of the jungle. Might makes right, and the U.S. believes it can impose unilateral, extra-territorial laws like FATCA simply because it can.

   You may believe that there is no place for soft, chewy concepts like morality or human rights when it comes to the crafting and enforcement of laws, but I doubt that many people with even the slightest working conscience would agree with you. Especially after all the state-sponsored horrors of the last century which have proven over and over again how laws can be used as as mere instruments of control, repression and far, far worse.

   So, please enlighten us once more with your spirited defense of “the rule of law”. I’m sure I can speak for everyone here when I say that I simply can’t wait to hear your illuminating reply.”

2. Stalking is what is against the law. He’s got it in his mind that he is the voice of the “law” accusing people of “crimes” they haven’t committed based upon assumption. Threatening to follow people, to falsely “report” them, to hack into websites, to expose everyone. Well, following around innocent people, accusing them of things they have not done, saying “In memory of” which is a veiled threat, threatening to hack into websites to stalk people. All of that can be considered a crime. This person doesn’t know your actual situation but, posts as if they do. Also, copy pasting and quoting you by changing your words to something you did not say is slander. Taken as a whole I’ve saved the posts and reported to the police who indeed did tell me it was stalking.

   This person has been banned from other websites. I know what he’s doing is stalking and have said to stop once. That’s all I need to do. The police can ask the websites he’s posted on for an ip address and his service provider can be contacted. If I’m followed,lied about, told I’m being reported on for things I have not done, told ” I will be found” or any further contact I do not wish to have then the police have told me to contact them again. I am going to do it.

3. @AtticusinCanada, thanks for reporting it. I’ve updated the FBI with the latest stalking. I can only make 3 updates to the complaint, so the next time that the crime reoccurs, I’ll open up a new FBI complaint and reference the other one.

4. @calgary411 as to UBS. I don’t understand the quotation about UBS retirement accounts (3rd pillar) being closed as of September. Retirement products are specifically excluded from FATCA coverage in the Swiss IGA. Does this have to do with retirement accounts that in turn are invested in securities and not in a general “fondation” / “stiftung”? At any rate, the choice of securities is limited for 3rd pillar transactions and they are always under the auspices of the 3rd pillar foundation (whether it be at UBS, Credit Suisse, or an insurance company). Again, the beneficiary has no direct signature authority and can only withdraw funds under specific circumstances and with the permission of their spouse.

5. I don’t know why UBS could do this, but apparently they have. Below is “wondering’s” comment on “NotThatLisa’s” comment quoted.

   http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2013/09/26/via-bbcnewsmagazine-why-are-americans-giving-up-their-citizenship-simple-answer-fatca/comment-page-1/#comment-555060

   http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2013/09/26/via-bbcnewsmagazine-why-are-americans-giving-up-their-citizenship-simple-answer-fatca/comment-page-1/#comment-555498

   This is far more than the bank simply “protecting itself”.
   This is retribution. This is an embargo. This is an opening salvo in the upcoming FATCA trade war (unwittingly?) declared upon the world’s financial institutions.

   War begins with threats and demands. The threats of payment withholding and the demands that banks must violate their own country’s laws, and countries must degrade their financial privacy laws to comply with FATCA, has launched a trade war. The logical initial response is embargo.

   And the prognosis for the next few years is worse. Wait until the first time there is some documentation controversy (or a simple screw-up) and US funds are withheld from a legitimate foreign payee they are due to. Wait until the first time a FATCA IGA’s so-called “reporting reciprocity” is refused by recalcitrant US bankers and lawmakers. If these events co-coincide with the Fed’s inevitable abandonment of its quantitative easing policy, and Congress manages to kick the debt-ceiling can down the road for another year, it could create “perfect storm” conditions for financial melt-down.

   Anybody stockpiling food and buying gold yet?.

   Can the same happen in Canada and other countries with their equivalent retirement investments? Can any bank, anywhere get away with this?