photo from yesterday, day 1 of protest
PROTEST EVENING POSTMORTEM:
I know that this small protest did reach the FIsters attending the conference and put them on notice–because most refused to look us in the eye.
This protest happened because of the dedication of on-site protesters including Atticus, Marie, Northernstar, Peter, Tricia, and WhiteKat, those (including Blaze and James Jatras) who helped in preparation of the letter to the Canadian Bankers Association that was critical to the protest, and because of the others I am not certain that I can mention.
Amazing people, all.
On-site coverage from IRSCompliantForever :
15.54. A last goodbye from all of us to the banksters.
15:03. Banker from small bank who hates FATCA just signed petition.
14:24. AttIcus just explained FATCA to passerby. Response was “Well, the banks need a little (words deleted).”
14:14. Banksters we meet all express sympathy but insist that there is no way to prevent FATCA. So many passerbys wondering about this FATCA word.
13:18. Fellow from one of the major banks visited with us had a friendly chat and accepted the CBA letter. He asked that we not disclose the name of his bank. Banksters are also taking pictures of us.
12.55. Another passerby came up to us expressing concern that her daughter has a Green Card.
Reports and photos of earlier today and yesterday after the jump
12:53. A passerby just came up to us expressing concern that she was born to a US parent and asked whether FATCA applied. Atticus explained and the woman thanked us for being here.
11:23. Unexpectedly another protester arrived with signs. Someone we all know.
11:13. Police have arrived again.
10:51. Nice sunny day. One bankster inside gave us the thumbs up. We had a nice chat with two reps of a major FI who accepted the CBA letter.
***
Day 1 of Protest – Yesterday, 13 November
13:40. Stuck on a narrow curb.
13:07. New development. Head of security informed us that we had to move to the curb in which we must remain 18 inches from the street. I called the police to resolve. Three police officers came and tried to intervene with security, but security refused as walkway is technically on private property. Want to emphasize that police tried their very best to help us. We will try not to tip over on curb. Lots of interest from passerbys. Morale very high.
12:50
12:46
12:13. Above is a photo of four Brocker/Sandboxers taken by a sympathetic passerby. Note that the person holding the “Do not marry an American” sign is a guest Brocker who is a kindly non-US spouse of a US person. She strongly supports the message of the sign and wants to be known as @LauraSecord. Small group but morale is high.
11:09. Met a fellow working for a bank. He says FATCA is painful.
11:02. Tricia, Marie, NorthernStar and IRSCompliantForever just spoke to a very friendly and receptive journalist who will include mention of our protest in an article He also said that this is the first FATCA protest he is aware of. We cannot mention name of journalist. We are pointing signs at the conference room. Doors are closed now so that banksters cannot see us.
09:37. Peter is standing immediately in front of the conference meeting room. We can see them and they can see us. But we cannot enter.
07:33. Peter and I are on site. We were told us that we would be arrested if we entered building. Tried to leave CBA letters but conference organizer refused and noted that our comments on IBS about CBA were inflammatory.
***
The conference is “Canadian Institute’s 19th Annual REGULATORY COMPLIANCE for Financial Institutions” at the North Building of the Metro Convention Centre in Toronto which has been brought to our attention through the diligence of @Tricia. http://www.regulatorycomplianceforfis.com/
I previously tried to contact someone from the Calgary Raging Grannies by an email address I found. I see they have a Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/pages/Calgary-Raging-Grannies/149773808411499. I don’t do Facebook, but I just sent the following message to the Calgary Unitarian Church where I read they meet.
@northernstar,
“..The ripple effect can be very powerful. It takes just one word to make a difference in the message. It takes just one person. A snowball can turn into an avalanche…”
So very true. Bless you and the others.
And,
@blaze, re your very astute comment;
“So who and what is “inflammatory?” I think an invasion of the financial privacy of honest, responsible law-abiding Canadian citizens by by a foreign government in violation of Canada’s sovereignty, laws and Charter of Rights and Freedoms tends to “excite anger, disorder or tumult” in our lives..”…
Exactly. Canadian bankers and those in the financial and investment industry (ex. IIAC) – whose main concern is money, should be able to anticipate – if not understand, that anything that threatens Canadian accountholders and taxpayers savings will be met with a strong visceral reaction and pushback. FATCA is a direct punch to the gut for those who understand what it truly means for ALL Canadians – all accountholders hit with higher fees, and all taxpayers – tapped to pay for collecting and automatically remitting account information (which goes far beyond interest earned) to the US forever and ever. What could be more ‘inflammatory’? Elevating FATCA – a made-in-the-US law over our Canadian constitution and Charter is in essence an ‘inflammatory’ action.
The CBA and IIAC may not care about the Charter or the Canadian constitution, and may view those as merely inconvenient ‘hurdles’ to their end goals, but I wonder what that means to any claims they might make that they are ‘good corporate citizens’? (see CBA claim: …”…Banks are leading taxpayers, progressive employers and major purchasers of goods and services from Canadian suppliers as well as being good corporate citizens….” http://www.cba.ca/en/media-room/50-backgrounders-on-banking-issues/122-contributing-to-the-economy ).
I would be very interested in someone (a journalist?) asking the CBA and IIAC how lobbying for a FATCA IGA is consistent with being a ‘good corporate citizen’ and their social responsibility to Canadian society. Their answer will predictably refer to raising the spectre of jobs lost and bailouts (see CBA spokesperson in the recent CBA interview http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2013/11/13/fatca-under-fire-from-tax-experts-canadian-citizens/ ), but that is seriously at odds with their record profits and already documented actions laying off large numbers of staff, and offshoring http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/outsourcing-bank-jobs-is-common-practice-say-employees-1.1333814 .
We must study and anticipate more of the same as the CBA claims here:
http://www.cbc.ca/thecurrent/episode/2013/11/13/fatca-under-fire-from-tax-experts-canadian-citizens/
@badger
I have been trying to make the point on another thread that it is not like the Canadian financial services industry can treat FATCA compliance as optional. It is not. A bank or financial institution that does not participate to FATCA, either directly or by way of an IGA, would not only incur the risk of being withheld by US paying agents on all US-sourced income, but would also cease to be a risk-worthy counterparties for other FATCA-compliant banks. In short, a failure to comply would likely be an immediate terminal event for these banks.
Against this background, being a good corporate citizen means taking a balanced view of the interests of these banks’ various stakeholders: you and others obviously feel very strongly about the protection of your own interests (ie. your privacy), but the industry must also take into consideration those of its shareholders, depositors, creditors, employees and suppliers. Many of those are ordinary Canadians just like you, who would suffer extreme harm if the banks were subject to actions by the US government (by way of withholdings) that would effectively put them out of business.
You may also want to reflect on the impact of one or more banks failures for Canadian ordinary taxpayers.
I am not disputing that FATCA is a bad law, and neither are senior Canadian bankers if one believes their public statements, but I think that you are directing you anger and frustration at the wrong target.
@J.E. We will continue to direct our concern, fear and anger at any organization that attempts to violate Canadian sovereignty, laws, Charter of RIghts and Freedoms and our rights as Canadian citizens and residents.
Canadian banks are among those responsible for the anxiety, betrayal and pain we are feeling. We will let them know that.
However, I can assure you, we are also in constant contact with the Canadian government, Finance Minister, Finance Canada, Prime Minister, members of the opposition, lawyers, etc.
We are also in contact with a prominent Canadian constitutional lawyer, Canadian Civil Liberties Association and Canada’s Privacy Commissioner. Our fight is not directed just the CBA.
Here is an article from the Caymans Compass about the grassroots challenge to FATCA in Canada. It was their lead story this morning.
http://www.compasscayman.com/caycompass/2013/11/15/Grassroots-challenge-to-FATCA-in-Canada/
@Blaze
I still fail to understand how one can have feelings of betrayal on the part of Canadian banks. Those are commercial companies, and it should be pretty obvious that they will service multiple interests, not least those of their shareholders. The way they are addressing this situation is entirely rational, even though the treatment of the protesters in Toronto was probably too heavy-handed.
There is one obvious constituent that is missing from your list of targets: US Congress people and other US elected officials. Only US authorities, primarily Congress, have the authority to repeal the law or somehow stay its application. I would suggest that we should also contact your representatives in the US which as I understand it are those in our last US place of residence, and make them aware of the problems that the law is causing for their constituents. Is this being done?
@J.E.
You are flogging a dead horse. You are arguing pragmatism, and we are arguing principle. I appreciate your take on this and your points are made respectfully. You do concede that FATCA is a bad law — everyone outside the U.S. seems to concede that. The question is, at what point do you confront the bully? We think this is an appropriate line in the sand; if the world caves on this it might as well just accept that the “world” government is run out of Washington D.C.
And as far as directing it at the wrong players — there are no wrong players. I believe that trying to raise awareness of this issue with the people who are hell-bent on implementing FATCA will, if nothing else, remind them that their own customers are mightily PO’d at what they are doing. Before this little demo in Toronto, most of those financial types had given zero thought to the effects of FATCA compliance on their clients. Now they’ve been educated.
@Arrow
I respectfully disagree with your last point. Canadian banks, like others worldwide, are not hell-bent on implementing FATCA (it is costing them a fortune to implement), but the recognize that they have no alternative, as non-compliance essentially means going out of business. I believe they have carefully looked at the impact on their clients, but have looked at their entire customer base rather than the relatively narrow segment of the cursed US persons. In this context, an IGA is a much less onerous way for all clients to ensure compliance than a direct registration with the IRS.
@JEG,
To clarify, the letter to the Canadian Bankers Association details the following alternative:
bLaze , Dash There is nothing sinister about the Scotia McLeod account opening form.
Brokers and banks acting as brokers are REQUIRED to ‘Know your client’ Supposedly this protects the client as well because the broker is not supposed to put her into unsuitable investments. Say the client claims to be unsophisticated. Then options or short sales would not be suitable and so on.
Most mutual funds and many brokerage accounts are set up to have some US investments. In that case, the issuer needs to know whether or not to withhold taxes at source. Therefore a question as to whether or not the account holder is a US citizen- again nothing sinister
Now, imagine Jane Doe who is accidental American from age 6 mths and has had nothing to do with US since. What is she to do? Check ‘Canada’ Show driver’s licence. Open account. Full stop. Bob’s your uncle.
@JEG – The argument does not hold water. Do read @IRSCompliantForever’s post.
What is the old saying about evil taking root when good people say and do nothing?
The Canadian Institutions need to DEMAND that the Canadian Government inform the US that their overreach attempt is unacceptable and if necessary the Canadian Government should guarantee the Banks against damage that might be done by the US Government. The Canadian Government needs to immediately lodge complaints with the World Trade organization, the United Nations and inform the US that there will be offsetting penalties imposed on American enterprises in the event that the US imposes the absurd withholding. Period.
We learned in 1939 that appeasement does not work when bullies seek to dominate. The entire WORLD needs to rise up and say NO ! to FATCA.
@JEG – as for the risk worthy counter-parties …. deal with that later maybe by isolating American Financial Institution from the SWIFT system and World banking. Let the US (a bankrupt nation BTW) sulk in the corner by itself. Abandon the US$ as the world’s reserve currency and see how fast the Americans will push their Government into a more reasonable position when they find their store shelves empty.
I am not a lawyer but to my ageing eyes it seems that If the Banks go the FATCA route the class action law suit must be immediate. If the Government goes the IGA route then the Constitutional challenge must be immediate. In either case a class action lawsuit asking for an injunction prohibiting any participation in FATCA must be immediate.
@Arrow response to JEG – 12:21
Well put, but I would add the following:
JEG only believes that he is being pragmatic. He is wrong. If the Canadian banks surrender to IRS jurisdiction it’s only a matter of time before the USG and IRS take more and more and more and more until there is nothing left to take. What the bankers don’t understand (or say they don’t) is that FATCA is an act of aggression against the world. You note that the question is:
“at what point do you confront the bully?”
A question for JEG is this:
Do you confront the bully when you still have the strength and the means? Or do you wait until you have no strength. JEG claims that the Canadian banks have no choice. They obviously do have a choice. They are simply choosing compliance.
JEG, are you familiar with the words/warning of the German Pastor Martin Neimoller?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came_…
Goes something like this:
Truth is that the most pragmatic thing you could do is oppose FATCA.
Take a longer term view of all of this. What will you do when there is nobody left to stand for you?
I find it absolutely incredible that the ONLY group willing to take a stand against FATCA is Americans Abroad (or those who have had the good sense to renounce U.S. citizenship).
@USCitizenAbroad
From what I understand, the Canadian bankers have made their opposition to FATCA very clear.
However, they have also made clear that they have no choice but comply, and I happen to believe that this is correct, as the alternative would simply to go out of business. In essence, you can have a compliant bank or a bankrupt bank, but you cannot have a solvent non-compliant bank.
Lemmy get this right—I am a slow learner. The association that holds all of the assets of the country, which could partner with all of the banks of 189 out of 190 countries of the world, has no method to address the issue other than caving in. I am writing this so that I can remember.
JEG:
With respect – and I really appreciate your contribution to this discussion – I believe that you are wrong.
All that is required is for the world to “Just say NO.”. I will repeat “Just say NO”.
If the US wants they can attempt the 30% withholding. But that would be a formal declaration of what is already an informal declaration of war on the world. The U.S. won’t do it.
The U.S. is the greatest debtor the world has even known. The debtor does NOT set the terms of engagement with the creditor. That is the practical reality.
If the Canadian (and other banks) comply with all of this they are surrendering their sovereignty to what is essentially a lawless and rogue nation.
What you don’t seem to understand is this:
Compliance means that the U.S. wins.
Non-compliance means that they may not (and I don’t think they will ) win.
Why don’t you get your friends at the CBA to give it a try. What exactly do you have to lose?
I am going to try to get you to see this in another way.
FATCA is part and parcel of the so-called war on Offshore Tax Evasion (or so they say). The way the U.S. has been waging the war is by establishing programs of Voluntary Disclosure of foreign bank accounts. These are programs where ones cowers before the IRS begging them disclose whatever they want.
FATCA IGAs are just a voluntary disclosure programs for counties. That’s all they are.
It’s like this:
The Canadian banks, at their expense, are expected to seek and voluntarily disclose U.S. persons (a term that the U.S. can change at will) to the IRS – thus sending them for processing.
Individuals who entered OVDI regretted it. Countries who sign IGAs will regret it.
I simply can’t understand why you can’t see that the solution to this is to just say No.
The USG has got you imagining horrible results. Don’t you understand that the consequences of U.S. follow through are so damaging to the U.S. that it won’t happen?
Take a long term outlook. You know, the world existed a long time before the U.S. and it will exist a long time after.
There is reason that so few IGAs have been signed!
@JEG – you need to explain in verifiable DETAIL why you arrive at your conclusion that all the countries of the world EXCEPT the United States could not enjoy solvent non FATCA compliant banking. The US needs the world. The world is not dependent on the US. The US runs HUGE trade deficits every year funded by money that the WORLD lends to the US, invests in the US or that the US PRINTS. Who gets hurt the most if the World stops lending or investing in the US? Why does not Toronto bid in partnership with say Zurich, Capetown, Brazilia and say Hong Kong to be the new Financial backbone of the world?
@JEG: Maybe we haven’t been clear.Let me say it in simple words. We really don’t care what you think about how we are focusing our efforts.
We have and will continue to fight FATCA where we think we can make the most difference. We believe that is in focusing our efforts on the Canadian government, Canadian banks and financial institutions, Canadian laws, our Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian legal system.
You don’t understand or care about our system. We do.
We have and will be vigilant to ensure our government does not sign away our rights. I personally am confident our efforts are working. If the government was going to sign a standard IGA, wouldn’t they have done it by now?
Canada is holding out for something. Canada is not just rolling over and playing lapdog. I don’t pretend to know what is happening, but I personally believe our Finance Minister is doing everything in his power to protect Canada and to protect Canadian rights.
I’m not a Conservative and am not a fan of our Prime Minister. So, why do I believe that
First, because our Prime Minister and Finance Minister are both control freaks. They hate being told what to do.
Second, because our Finance Minister has been outspoken against FATCA since the beginning. Although he has been quiet for the past year, he has written letters to some of us. Not once has he backed away from his original position.
Third, because Canada has a long-standing effective information exchange agreement that could be a model for the world. That gives Canada some negotiating powers.
Fourth, because signing a standard IGA that violates our rights would be political suicide.
FIfth, because the banks and the government know a standard FATCA IGA would violate Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This particular Conservative government is no friend of the Charter, but they are pragmatic. They know a standard IGA would not stand up to a Charter Challenge. They know it , we know it and most importantly, they know we know it.
If I am completely wrong about that, I will be the first to admit it. Then, I will be on the phone to CCLA and a constitutional lawyer. There will be many more joining with me.
ok ok allow Brussels to be there too to keep the Euro folk happy and the fact that the SWIFT system is headquartered there. London should be a part of the new backbone IF the UK revokes their IGA discussions with the Bully.
@USCitizenAbroad
My point was not that one should not say ‘NO’ to FATCA (more on that later), but that is irrational to expect the banks to do it. You ask your self the right question: ‘What exactly do [Canadian banks] have to lose?’. The answer is ‘Everything’ and the risk of this loss crystalizing is uncomfortably high in the event of non-compliance. It is completely unreasonable to expect from the directors of these banks (acting as fiduciaries of the interests of their shareholders, depositors, creditors and employees) that they would accept to run that risk. It would be an enormous breach of their duties.
If somebody should say ‘NO’ it should be the government of Canada. I wish it would be easy to tell the government to have a ‘Love Actually’ moment with the US telling them to get lost, but I just do not know if it is (i) realistic, and (ii) in the very best interest of Canada. You use big words and make some heroic assumptions (sometimes based on loose facts), but I feel that the economic and political reality and balance of power is not in Canada’s favor. I would be happy to be convinced otherwise though.
@JEG – you are making dramatic statements without detail. Are you saying that the the Canadian banks are over exposed to US risk? What is the nature and extent of that risk? The biggest risk that is declared is that there will be 30% withholding on all remittances from the US to Canadian Banks. Yet you say the Canadian Banks would be bankrupted. Do explain.
NONE of this justifies sacrificing the Sovereignty of Canada and the Charter of Rights. Instead of running to bow and scape to the US, the Banks need to be conducting International political campaigns to inform the entire world what is going on. Thus pressuring Governments worldwide to stand up for their sovereignty and if necessary to make alternative arrangements for the financial security of the entire world.
@JEG
All my fellow Brockers voice my sentiments, especially USCitizen Abroad and Nervousinvestor when the refer to Gernany in 1939.
I feel so connected to that war and how it could have been prevented.
The nationw of the world could have stood up to the hitler bully then but they were concerned for profits. The USA is using bullying tactics now. IF They succeed with FATCA they will do even more controlling laws. Bullies never stop volunteeringly.
The Canadian banks should be lobbying the Canadian government to say NO to FATCA and they should be working with overseas banking associates to also do this and not sign this discriminating IGA. I do suggest you read the Irving Arbella book NONE IS TOO MANY.CANADA AND THE JEWS 1933 – 1948.
Are you going sacrifice APs for the profit of the banks?
It’s always the same old song isn’t it. Banks have to do what the banks have (actually want) to do so the banks don’t fail. People are forced to sacrifice their well-being for yet another temporary continuance of the well-being of the banks; ultimately until they have nothing left to sacrifice. Of course, behind all the banks, are the banksters whose well-being continues to swell to obscene proportions. The entire debt-based banking system, trading in faith-based (fiat) currency, is designed to fail eventually; only to be restarted again after the people have been completely stripped of everything they thought they once had. It is the biggest fraud ever perpetuated on mankind, so do I feel guilty about being “inflammatory” when it comes to the banks capitulating to the obviously sinister and totally aggressive behaviour of the U.S. government with its FATCA fueled CBT insanity? Not a bit!
There are people friendly solutions, like a debt jubilee and the implementation of a government controlled, debt-free, money system, but the banksters cringe at the thought. I could spit nails when anyone has sympathy for the “poor” banks who “have no choice but to be FATCA compliant”. Little they care about those who will be FATCA ravaged by their FATCA compliance. Maybe the banks are at a point now where they think they don’t need customer deposits anymore; all they really need is customer debts. Maybe the banksters think they can just keep on doing a derivative dance with all those cute little electronic debt digits they create for their own pleasure and plenty, right out of the ethereal money machine, conveniently located at the end of their Easy Street which ironically intersects with our Destitution Avenue.
Sorry for the rant but IMHO you did the right thing, in the right location, Brock protesters. I’d like to see more of the same.
@Em
Thank you for your rant! You want to know how much the banks are making? Someone I know at one of Canada’s largest investment firms called the cost of implementing FATCA the equivalent of a “rounding error” – of course all tax deductible in Canada as the cost of doing business!
@Em – I so agree with you …. rant on dear Brocker … rant on !
@bubblebustin – a rounding error to them is a Huge financial wipe out the the individuals involved. And what they call a rounding error today will be called a justification for massive increases in bank fees and charges down the road.