27 thoughts on “New FATCA written questions from Liberal MP Scott Brison”

1. Those questions, all run together, look familiar,…

   https://twitter.com/FATCA_Fallout/status/395036108007813120

2. The procedure.

   http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/House/compendium/web-content/c_g_questions-e.htm#3

3. @ Just Me
   The questions are similar to Q-121 but not quite the same. The Green Party took a strong stance right from the get-go; the NDP has recently made its position clear; and now two liberals are presenting excellent FATCA questions. FATCA is crawling out into the light of day and we all know what daylight does to monsters. My favourite Brison question …

   (dd) has the government assessed the possibility of not acceding to FATCA in any way and, if so, with what conclusion and with what cost to Canada or to Canadians when compared to accession;

4. Fantastic!

5. Here are the questions from Scott Brison in a more readable format

   With regard to the United States (U.S.) Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA):

   (a) when was the government first made aware of this legislation and how;

   (b) what steps has Canada taken since the legislation’s introduction in the U.S., broken down by year;

   (c) during the consideration of this legislation in the U.S., did Canada make any representations to the U.S. government and if so, (i) when, (ii) by whom, (iii) to whom, (iv) on what dates, (v) by what authority (vi) with what desired effect (vii) and with what outcome;

   (d) how many individuals in Canada will be affected;

   (e) how was the figure in (d) calculated;

   (f) how many Canadian citizens residing in Canada are U.S. persons under FATCA;

   (g) how many Canadian permanent residents are U.S. persons under FATCA;

   (h) how many applications for permanent residency is Canada currently processing from persons who are or will be treated as U.S. persons under FATCA;

   (i) broken down by province and territory and status, how many persons in Canada are projected to be affected by FATCA;

   (j) how was the figure in (l) calculated;

   (k) how many Canadian financial institutions will be impacted by FATCA;

   (l) how was the figure in (k) calculated;

   (m) how many non-financial Canadian entities will be impacted by FATCA;

   (n) how was the figure in (m) calculated;

   (o) what consultations has the government undertaken with respect to FATCA’s impact on persons resident in Canada;

   (p) what consultations has the government undertaken with respect to FATCA’s impact on financial institutions;

   (p) what consultations has the government undertaken with respect to FATCA’s impact on non-financial entities;

   (q) what estimates and studies have been undertaken with respect to the consequences of a 30% withholding of U.S. sourced income to financial institutions;

   (r) when did the studies in (q) occur and what were their conclusions;

   (s) how much has been spent evaluating FATCA’s impact on Canadians; (t) broken down by department, how was the figure in (s) determined;

   (u) what estimates have been undertaken with respect to FATCA’s cost to implement for Canada and with what conclusions;

   (w) for the five years starting 2014, how much is FATCA implementation expected to cost (i) Canada Revenue Agency, (ii) the department of Finance, (iii) the department of Justice, (iv) other government departments, agencies, boards, or tribunals; (x) broken down by year and cost from 2010-2020, what is the total financial impact of FATCA implementation expected to be on Canadian taxpayers;

   (y) how were the figure in (x) obtained;

   (z) what outside legal opinions has the government sought with respect to FATCA’s compatibility with Canadian law;

   (aa) when were the opinions in (z) sought and at what expense;

   (bb) have unsolicited legal opinions been sent to the government regarding FATCA;

   (cc) how many opinions in (bb) have the government received, (i) on what dates, (ii) with what conclusions, (iii) with what impact on the Government’s actions;

   (dd) has the government assessed the possibility of not acceding to FATCA in any way and, if so, with what conclusion and with what cost to Canada or to Canadians when compared to accession;

   (ee) how much has been spent on negotiations surrounding FACTA, broken down by year and expense;

   (ff) which individuals from the government have negotiated on Canada’s behalf regarding FATCA;

   (gg) what has the Minister of Finance’s personal role been with respect to FATCA negotiations;

   (hh) what has the Minister of National Revenue’s personal role been with respect to FATCA negotiations; (ii) what has the Minister of Foreign Affairs’ personal role been with respect to FATCA negotiations; (jj) what plans or strategies has Canada developed regarding enforcement of any FACTA related agreement with the United States;

   (kk) what penalties will there be for U.S. failure to meet any of its negotiated obligations;

   (ll) has the litigation risk regarding any FATCA implementation agreement been evaluated and, if so, (i) how, (ii), when, (iii), by what means;

   (mm) broken down by department and agency, and with specific record numbers and titles, what briefing materials and files have been developed regarding FATCA;

   (nn) what measures are in place to assess the lawfulness and legality of any implementation of FATCA in Canada;

   (oo) have any future public consultations with respect to FATCA implementation been planned and, if not, why not;

   (pp) what is the projected impact of FATCA on the Bank of Canada;

   (qq) what efforts has the government made with respect to informing financial institutions of their obligations under FATCA;

   (rr) what efforts has the government made with respect to informing non-financial entities of their obligations under FATCA;

   (ss) what efforts has the government made with respect to informing individuals residing in Canada of their obligations under FATCA;

   (tt) has Canadian non-compliance with FATCA been assessed as a possibility and, if so, to what extent;

   (uu) has FATCA been raised in discussions between Canada and countries other than the U.S. and, if so, (i) with which countries, (ii) at what level(s) did the discussion occur (iii) on what dates (iv) in what forum (v) and with which individuals from Canada participating;

   (vv) have any studies or analysis taken place with respect to FATCA’s impact on immigration to Canada by persons subject to this legislation and, if so, with what conclusion;

   (ww) has the Canadian Ambassador to the U.S. raised the issue of FATCA in any discussions and if so, (i) which discussions, (ii) on what dates, (iii) with what desired goal;

   (xx) has the American Ambassador to Canada raised the issue of FATCA in any discussions and if so, (i) which discussions, (ii) on what dates, (iii) with what outcome;

   (yy) has the government considered the correspondence of Peter Hogg regarding FATCA and if so, (i) with what impact on policy development, (ii) with what conclusion; and

   (zz) what steps will the government take to minimize any infringement of Canadian Charter rights by any implementation of FATCA?

6. I’m sure anyone can easily find Scott Brison’s email address. But to save a minute, here it is

   scott.brison@parl.gc.ca

7. Sent Mr. Brison a quick thank you email. Now if we could just get JT to stand up and query during a question period – that would be awesome.

8. And here is his twitter account…
   https://twitter.com/scottbrison

9. From James Jatras who is traveling to the Ukraine…

   What’s really great — and new — about these questions is that they’re NOT about the IGA, they’re about Fatca itself. Note the last question (zz) about how would Fatca — not the IGA — violate the Charter.

   Especially note:

   “(dd) has the government assessed the possibility of not acceding to FATCA in any way and, if so, with what conclusion and with what cost to Canada or to Canadians when compared to accession;”

   Gosh, you mean the government should have given thought to not obeying a foreign law at all? Amazing!

10. @Tim –

    In Word: search-replace (Ctl-H)

    for: ; (
    replace: ;^p(

11. I think that asking 52 questions, some multipart , many of which would take hours and hours to answer or are unanswerable, is not designed to clarify the situation . Rather it is merely meant to embarrass the government. It would appear that neither Dr. Tsu or Mr. Brison has heard of the KISS principle. Muddies the water.

    r. Brison

12. Sorry, Dr. Hsu

13. Let me add a couple questions. For those with Twitter accounts, feel free to tweet them or email them to your representatives:

    – How many Canadian citizens, living in the US are affected by FATCA?
    – Has the government considered their possible bankruptcy by the US, due to unreasonable FBAR fines and penalties if FATCA if an IGA is signed?
    http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/01/28/us-column-feldman-immigrants-idUSBRE90R10Q20130128
    http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/patricia_anderson_daddario.pdf

    – How does the government plan to protect these citizen living abroad if FACTA is enacted?
    – Do the Canadian consulate/embassies in the US warn Canadians residents in the US of the requirement to file FBAR and the possible ruinous consequences if they don’t.

14. There is still scope for more questions, which I’ve suggested to the NDP and the Greens, particularly– what assurances can the government (possibly) give Canadians that their private financial details and personal information, if provided to the IRS, will be protected from loss or theft and resulting identity theft? What studies and consultations, if any, has the government conducted on that issue?

    This isn’t moot. The IRS has leaked personal data, whether by hacking or corrupt employees I have no idea. The IRS is known to have used tax return information to “target” people unpopular with the administration, which is a blatant abuse of power and contrary to US law even if those data were provided in the US by American residents, never mind data provided on Americans outside the US provided by foreign governments or financial institutions.

    I don’t have any problem with the depth of these two questions. FATCA and an IGA are complex, their impacts are complex and scary, and I think it’s absolutely legitimate to demand of the government information on who (if anyone) they’ve consulted on some of these issues, by extension then who they haven’t consulted (e.g., ordinary affected Canadians; the CBA and Big Five get lots of grease and attention, but what about the folks who are actually going to have their family finances affected — nada, as far as I know), and what if any studies they’ve conducted on the various legal and economic ramifications. Failure to have done such consultation and analysis would IMO constitute a huge failure of public administration and a huge disqualification for re-election or even to continue to govern (though that can’t happen until an election, obviously).

    Yes this is scoring points off the government and harassing them — but they deserve it. Everyone on this website has been harassed for months and months, and some cheap, thoughtless media and other commentators have tried scoring points off people by claiming they are “tax cheats.” It’s time that what has gone around, come around squarely against the government (which should never have even begun these discussions with the US), and also the CBA and the banks.

    If they don’t like the heat, they damn well should have stayed out of the kitchen.

    Kudos to the Liberals on both questions. It has taken a long time for them to move on this issue, but they’ve done well. Bravo, Dr. Hsu and Mr. Brison!

15. I won’t speak for anyone else, but I feel an ever so slight weight being lifted off of me and on to our elected officials – FINALLY, where it SHOULD be. Whether it’s to shame the government or to actually benefit 3% of Canada’s population and their families, I view it as a possible tipping point of no return (to mix metaphors). Thank you, thank you, THANK YOU to everyone who made any effort – big or small – that’s have gotten us to the point where we’re finally being publicly acknowledged by our government.

16. @Kalc…

    I agree about KISS, on the other had, 52 questions are designed to tie up the Bureaucrats time in answering them all.

    And, I would have like to see something about data security in the questions asked.

    As you note there was nothing in this long list of questions deal with data security by the IRS, CBA, or Canada Revenue, and nothing about liability if data/identity is stolen either side of the border. If you had your bank account details along with address and social security stolen, someone can wipe out your account – who is going to make you whole?

    and, as we know, the IRS has no ability to deal with ID security and fraud…

    IRS Verification Processes Lead to Potentially Fraudulent Tax Refunds

    TIGTA: IRS Made $133 Billion in Improper EITC Payments in Past Decade, 25% Error Rate Violates Executive Order

17. I agree Schubert. It doesn’t matter to me that the government has been deluged with questions because if the government is forced to admit it hasn’t done its due diligence into researching ALL of the ramifications of FATCA (not just what affects the Big Five) then I think that will work to our advantage. My greatest concerns about FATCA are a) the intrusion into what should be private financial records and b) the transmission of those records to a foreign government which has an extremely poor track record in keeping personal information safe. Needless to say I have sent my thanks along to both Dr. Hsu and Mr. Brison.

18. I too have written to Mssrs Hsu, Cotler (Hsu said worked in conjunction with Cotler) and Brison:
    Thank you for addressing the FATCA issue along with Mssrs….
    FATCA will indeed cause problems for any Canadians who are arbitrarily considered to be ‘US Persons’, however tenuous the link, by the U.S. that has citizen-based taxation rather than territorial-based taxation, an aberration they share with Eritrea. It will also impact no-link-what-so-ever spouses and children of these ‘U.S. persons’ since joint accounts must be reported.
    What is our Canadian government doing? Who knows. Are they negotiating an IGA? Will they fall into the reciprocity trap? If they don’t sign an IGA, the problem reverts back to the banks – be in compliance (rat out the U.S. Persons’ directly to the I.R.S.) or else lose 30% of U.S.-based income. Whether the banks are reporting the banking information to the Canadian Government acting as an American I.R.S. agent or playing the role themselves as I.R.S. agents, they will still have to invest in discovering the U.S. Persons using their services and itemizing all of their assets. The banks aren’t likely to absorb the costs involved and will pass them on to all of their clients. So, all Canadians will pay for this, some more than others.
    How can we accept this extraterritorial law that demands that Canadian banks, or the Canadian government with an IGA, ignore the Canadian Charter of Rights and send private information to the I.R.S.? Will we let the government or the banks break Canadian privacy laws? What can be done to protect Canadians from this American invasion of Canadian sovereignty?

19. Thanks, Voyons. Great thank you letters the Messieurs Hsu, Cotler and Brison.

    Those words of yours are ones we could use to start a conversation with anyone wanting to know more about FATCA and US Citizenship-Based Taxation.

20. Good one, Voyons! Written concisely and hits the main points precisely.

21. About the petition concept as suggested by Ted Hsu:

    The Eastern Ontario Region of the Liberal Party of Canada is holding a meeting to adopt/prioritize resolutions on November 9. People from 15 riding associations will be there. It would be a good place to be with the petition since Ted Hsu is also from the region and is well known and liked.

    I have already talked to the Eastern Region President (who is also president of Kingston and the Islands) and there is no problem with having the petition there. It is best to submit the petition ahead of time to make sure the vocabulary meets parliamentary standards. Apparently all sorts of words can be deemed inappropriate.

    So now what? Are some people already working on a petition? I saw in some of the comments that some might and I saw somewhere that AtticusinCanada might be willing to trot around Kingston (with difficulty). Is there a way to have more direct communication?

22. Hot off the Press (duplicate post from another thread)
    Hat tip to Tim

    New U.S. foreign account crackdown could hit unsuspecting Canadians: Alini

    FATCA raises a lot of questions

    http://www.canadianbusiness.com/blogs-and-comment/ted-hsu-and-scott-brison-have-questions-about-the-coming-u-s-foreign-account-crackdown-good-questions/

23. Now the story is picked up by McCleans

    http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/10/31/think-sharing-bank-data-with-the-u-s-only-affects-canadian-americans-think-again/

24. Yes, it is gratifying to see some opposition members take the government to task. But we still have Trudeau’s deafening silence and that mental midget Linda McQuaig.

25. Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society