Does anyone else see the connection between this article and FATCA? If you are against internet surveillance, you are for child pornography. If you are against FATCA, you are for tax evasion.
Jess Kline at National Post writes:
In trying to defend the government’s lawful access legislation last year, then public safety minister Vic Toews said that Canadians can either “stand with us, or with the child pornographers.” Given that the proposed Internet-spying legislation was incredibly unpopular, this statement didn’t sit well with many people. Surely law-abiding citizens could object to living in an online surveillance state without siding with child pornographers.
Indeed, the backlash against the Tories’ lawful access legislation was so harsh the last time around, they eventually promised the shelve the idea for good.
“We will not be proceeding with Bill C-30 and any attempts that we will continue to have to modernize the Criminal Code will not contain the measures contained in C-30,” said former justice minister Rob Nicholson in February. “We’ve listened to the concerns of Canadians who have been very clear on this.”
Well, that wasn’t exactly true. The Conservative strategy appears to have been to lay low for awhile, pick another cause de jure and reintroduce the legislation under a different name.
Read the full article here: http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2013/11/26/jesse-kline-tories-bully-canadians-into-accepting-internet-surveillance-bill/
I believe WhiteKat made the post clearly relevant by asking the question:
“Does anyone else see the connection between this article and FATCA?
I am extremely worried about all this NSA style spying. Every person should be concerned about this. I’d be critical of that no matter which government did it. FATCA is part of it as it is gathering very sensitive data on every person to be shared with god knows who.
Pierre, it’s a fine line isn’t it? I’ve seen it said that many on this site are left leaning…I am. However, at times I’ve felt it was a little right leaning..lol. I think we have to ignore such as it detracts from purpose but, I also think it is okay to be critical of an official government representatives actions. We’ve been critical here of McQuaig AND Harper. Two very different people.
My MAIN objection to FATCA is the spying and dangerous nature of any government having that kind of information and sharing it over borders. They may say the stated purpose is to catch criminals but, they can and probably will use it to do all sorts of things that should not happen in any free society. Almost anyone on earth could have data used against them. This is what totalitarian regimes do. They know everything about everyone and should you not tow the line they can use what they already have to shut you up. No citizen should trust government to that degree. Aren’t they supposed to answer to us? Do WE have that sort of data on them every day? Are they going to make public their phone calls, emails and bank records? “If they’re doing nothing wrong, why not?”
Because it’s not what free societies do. We’ve already lost so many of our privacy protections. Something like this bill could have horrible consequences and yes White Kat I see the connection with FATCA.
It is good to be reminded here that part of ‘standing on guard’ for Canada means standing on guard against the erosion of civil and human rights that originate from within your home country http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2013/11/26/Canadian-Web-Snooping/ http://www.michaelgeist.ca/content/view/6870/125/ http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/07/03/google-and-bell-deny-roles-in-mass-surveillance-of-canadians/ as well as from from without (ex FATCA http://motherboard.vice.com/blog/the-us-surveillance-dragnet-extends-to-foreign-bank-data-too ) .
FATCA fits into a larger political, social and economic pattern of behaviour. Canada’s federal government is sometimes inspired to enact legislation similar to that of the US.
Great links all. Thanks for all t his info.
The right to free speech and peaceful protest is also under threat when the powers of the government (paid for by taxpayer dollars), and secret surveillance of citizens is used to further the agenda of private industry.
http://www.vancouverobserver.com/environment/harper-government-under-fire-spying-environmental-groups
One would almost think that citizens are considered useful as far as they are taxpayers, but considered by the state to be otherwise inconvenient creatures – particularly when they assert the right to information and to question, and to be consulted, and to protest as per the Charter http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/Const/page-15.html#h-41.
Wow, thanks all for some honest feedback. I just felt that this was all getting a bit too “fringy” a discussion and distant for what we’re all here for. Thanks, Petros and Atticus especially, as we have met, and you seem to understand. Yes, I am born and raised Canadian, not unlike Atticus’ husband, married to a USC. I did however live in the USA for 30 months ending 22 years ago, and never “turned in” my expired green card.
One thing I can add, is that during my meeting to discuss this subject with my MP, he suggested that the current prime minister had an understanding that “we need sometimes to stand side by side with the Americans, so that sometimes we can stand toe to toe with them.” I’m really not that partisan, but I hope we’re on the right side of that dichotomy.
@ Pierre D
We’re both in the kryptonite card club but your relatively short residence in the USA should be a plus factor for you. I don’t have any allegiance to any major political party but I have what might be called a “soft spot” for the underdog Progressive Canadian Party. They were right about FATCA, right from the beginning.
Since you are talking surveillance on this thread, here is another way free google tools are being used
HMRC Goes To Google In Bid To Smoke Out Tax Cheats
Eagle-eyed tax inspectors have turned to Google for help in spotting taxpayers who may be hiding their true income and living a lifestyle seemingly beyond their means. HM Revenue & Customs has turned to Google Street View to zoom in on suspected tax cheats to look for evidence that they might be failing to declare their true earnings. – See more at: http://www.iexpats.com/hmrc-goes-google-bid-smoke-tax-cheats/#sthash.yuFIQwUY.dpuf
@badger
“One would almost think that citizens are considered useful as far as they are taxpayers, but considered by the state to be otherwise inconvenient creatures – particularly when they assert the right to information and to question, and to be consulted, and to protest as per the Charter…”
So true. This is the definition of tyranny.
@all
I think we should muskateer this FATCA law to our government. They must make it fair and ALL Canadians bank accounts be given yo the USA. Perhaps then there would be more interest by all Canadians in FATCA.
We are all for one and one for all.
@Pierre D,
re the PMs philosophy as passed on by your MP that; ” “we need sometimes to stand side by side with the Americans, so that sometimes we can stand toe to toe with them.” ”
A pretty expansive and elastic philosophy. I can’t find any comfort or clarity in it. The devil is in the details. How can we know which side of that we can count on Prime Minister Harper……. to fall on regarding our Charter rights and the wellbeing and security of our families? Will he stretch to stand ‘side by side’ with the US on this one so that he can stand toe to toe with them on something he considers more important than the financial security and legal local savings and assets of > 1 million Canadian citizens, taxpayers, voters, families, joint accountholders and business partners of those deemed to be ‘US taxable persons’ living in Canada?
I and others here have repeatedly applauded the early clear, strong and forthright statements of Finance Minister Flaherty regarding FATCA. It came too late to help some of us, but for those who only came to this later, the letter helped to alert some Canadians to the problem, to stake out an early clear position vis a vis the US, and to help some decide how to proceed. That took real guts on Minister Flaherty’s part, and I admire and appreciate him for it. But later, that clear and forthright stance became muddied by subsequent events and communications (or lack thereof) – like the continued information that an IGA was in negotiation and was considered to be ‘imminent’ and the inclusion of the US tax information sent to those who had already renounced or had relinquished years ago when the law of the time automatically stripped them of US status. The Streamlined program only helped some unknown numbers of those affected who fit the very limited conditions. The IRS has never bothered to offer any public clarifications or answers to many of the questions that Streamlined posed – despite it being almost 1 1/2 years later. Many Canadians still don’t know about the very real US tax and penalty threat to their legal local savings, their estates, etc. Others spent needless thousands and tens of thousands of their hard earned Canadian wages and family savings in order to do whatever they thought they had to in order permanently sever all ties with the US as best they could as individuals with no expertise in US tax law.
However, I don’t think it is partisan to say that I can’t get past the fact that the current government (which just happens to be the Conservatives) already had to have known of the already existing and significant deficiencies in the US-Canada tax treaty ( http://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/usa_-eng.asp ) – for ex. they had to have known far before we did that the TFSA, RESP and RDSP – their valued creations which were intended to fulfill important Canadian social and economic goals – were considered by the US to be ‘taxable foreign trusts’ – with all the penalties and complexities that entails. I can’t get past the fact that several Canadian governments up to this one knew that the US considered that the sale of our Canadian principal residence was subject to US capital gains tax, etc. And later, witnessed the treatment of Canadian mutual funds as PFICs. So what did those responsible for the treaty think would happen when they saw the FATCA and ‘foreign account’ train wreck coming, with so many ordinary Canadians already directly in the aggressive US extraterritorial taxation path? The tortured and punitive history of the US treatment of our RRSPs as ‘taxable foreign trusts’ should have been a clear and potent indicator to those in the know, that with the other non-retirement registered savings, the issue would only become more dire as regard to the ordinary savings of ordinary Canadian tax residents. It was never really resolved by the treaty election, and many Canadians who temporarily moved to the US are no doubt still caught up in trying to fix the past failure to make the election.
The Harper government might take the position that dual citizens and the far broader group of ‘US taxable persons’ (with all the variations and contradictions and complexities those expansive categories include) should be able to keep track of the status of the tax treaty, and all the variations and changes in US citizenship and tax law and all the conflicts between the systems of the two countries. Ultimately though, the treaty is negotiated between two autonomous countries, on behalf of the best interests of their citizens. We neither have the skills, the knowledge, the access to information or the power to follow or directly influence the treaty contents or process, and so it comes down to the current government to take responsibility for protecting us from the current issues and treaty deficiencies that we have discussed here. It took all of us to identify those. I hardly think that could be expected of an average resident citizen/taxpayer.
The involvement and alignment of Canada with the US on citizen surveillance (via internet, communications, border tracking, etc. is a very troubling adjunct to these extraterritorial tax issues. Those civil and human rights issues are being resisted by US citizens from inside the US as well. Where is the line in the sand? Will there be any Canadian sovereignty left if the rights of Canadian citizens and legal residents are sacrificed to US interests, US aggression and US might makes right?
Ambassador Jacobson was only the latest to state that what was good for the US was good for Canada. That tells you that the US will decide what ‘good’ is, and for whom. Read his exit interview:
http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/06/20/exit-interview-with-u-s-ambassador-david-jacobson/
..”I think the U.S. has a position in the world that is different from Canada’s—we are a much bigger country that, quite frankly, has more influence in the world—and that affects the ways Canadians and American think. One of the things I’ve learned is to attempt to be very aware of those differences…”
He has also said that when the US prospers, then Canada will. Keep in mind that Jacobson is now an integral part of the CBA member BMO (and soon to be FATCA collaborator? ); ” vice-chairman of one of Canada’s largest banking groups after his diplomatic appointment ends in July.” http://infotel.ca/newsitem/BMO-Jacobson/CP23443389 , at Bank of Montreal http://business.financialpost.com/2013/05/21/bmo-taps-outspoken-u-s-ambassador-to-canada-for-vice-chairman-role/ . Side note: if you have to hold an account with one of the CBA, then banking with the BMO is helping to pay the salary of the ex. US Ambassador to Canada.
Unfortunately, that is the only way FATCA won’t be discriminatory for just ‘US Persons’ in Canada. It is insane — would ALL Canadians think it insane if their financial private information was handed over to the US?
@calgary,
re; “would ALL Canadians think it insane if their financial private information was handed over to the US”..
All for one, one for all?
@Badger
I agree that the Canadian government has done a half-assed job in protecting the interests of Canadians. After all, it’s not like we don’t HAVE a treaty, like some nations don’t. Had I known I would have a tax liability by selling my home in Canada, I certainly would not have incurred one. Any realtor worth their salt who knows this should also be informing their US clients if this potential tax liability, IMO.
On the subject of Streamlined, our lawyer just recently told us that the IRS has without solicitation, moved 25% of his OVDI clients over to since it was introduced. Bear in mind that these are taxpayers the IRS has deemed to qualify, and not those entering Streamlined on their own accord.
Thanks for your comment, badger.
Just what does that mean?
To me, it is more obfuscation; more non-communication with those of us involved. I need to know exactly what that means before I can swallow it.
This comment from Pierre D’s MP is in the same file as the MP you described previously and which I asked my last correspondence with my government representatives:
…AND Mike’s earlier comment:
…AND perhaps they all need to read Patricia’s submission to the Ways and Means Committee: http://waysandmeans.house.gov/uploadedfiles/patricia_anderson_daddario.pdf
@bubblebustin, that is very interesting about the IRS removing substantial numbers out of OVD and into Streamlined. And at the Townsend site there were some comments about those opting out being consolidated at the Milwaukee office, and then another comment that some were not. It is a mess.
@all,
better look at this and should be a new thread – http://www.iexpats.com/canadian-banks-throw-towel-fatca-fight/ wherein the CBA is spinning their powerlessness to resist FATCA, AND the article adds -…”Despite intense pressure from lobbyists..” and, “despite the protests from US expats living in the country.” –
Of special and pressing note is the reference to FATCA necessitating changes in Canada’s constitution …”Joining FATCA is likely to see amendments to the Canadian constitution to overcome difficulties in reporting personal information to a foreign government.” http://www.iexpats.com/canadian-banks-throw-towel-fatca-fight/#sthash.7mxui7x2.dpuf“.
See http://www.iexpats.com/canadian-banks-throw-towel-fatca-fight/#sthash.7mxui7x2.dpuf
The CBA also sends Canadians this message: “Wrobel also warned anyone in Canada who even refused to confirm that they were connected with US could face their non-compliance reported to the IRS. “
Sounds like double talk to me. That said, I DO know that if I was spearheading Canada’s diplomatic efforts concerning FATCA, the US would have nuked us by now.
As the saying goes, their own words will hang them.
@BADGER
A good reply to Pierre D and to all of us.
In another post I did bring up that if our Government goes through then All Canadians are to have their banking information given to the IRS. Especially the MPs. ALL FOR ONE AND ONE FOR ALL.
I am trying to refrain from saying something explosive here. I feel as upset as Bubble bustin and agree with her responses iii.
@Bubblebustin,
My first thought was, USA would never nuke us because to do so would be even more suicidal than to FATCA us! However, they are stupid enough to FATCA us, so never say never!