13 thoughts on “An interesting story of the penalties for National Origin Discrimination in America”

1. This gets really fun when one calls different agencies around the US and asks them about this in relation to Americans living abroad. Each an every time, one is told that such discrimination is acceptable since it is performed outside of US jurisdiction.

2. Massachusetts is an interesting case study. It is the only US State(1 of 50) to have a Canadian style Access to Basic Banking law/program for Massachusetts residents using Massachusetts State Chartered Banks(Notably this excludes the Bank of America’s, TD Banks etc). Most concerning is the minimum indentification requirements required by MA State law are totally incompatible with FATCA and any type USFI FATCA reciprocity. Of course US Federal law can pre-empt Massachusetts State Law even in the case of Massachusetts State Chartered Banks.

   http://www.basicbanking.org/

   Massachusetts is the most “European” of American states ala only state with universal health care so this not shocking behavior for Massachusetts.

3. Massachusetts still hasn’t signed up to the Federal Government’s REAL ID programme, it’s one of only two states from memory that does not participate in the Driver’s Compact, recently I believe certain police forces were pulling out of the illegal immigrant witch hunt game, Massachusetts has been given a ‘poor’ grade by MADD for not enacting stricter drink drive laws, the last two speakers of the Massachusetts have been convicted for corruption and voting against Mitt Romney in the last presidential election.

   Yes it’s a interestingly little state from time to time bucking the national trends which definitely punches above its weight.

4. @swisspinoy,
   We shall see if in Canada and elsewhere, on and after July 1st (Canada Day!) pursuant to the FATCA IGA, actions by our local banks seeking to identify and report resident accountholders who the US defines as ‘US taxable persons’ can lawfully be discriminated against based on their ‘ancestry’, ‘national origin’, ‘the country from which his or her ancestors came’ or ‘the country from which you or your forebears came’, or parentage. It may very well be that we will be successful in proving that the FATCA IGA rests on a discriminatory basis which is in conflict with our Charter and Constitution. Parentage and National origin are not in and of themselves usually a ‘taxable event’.

   As you point out, this is considered discrimination in the US, as in;
   …”8. The term “national origin” shall, for the purposes of this article, include “ancestry.”
   http://www.dhr.ny.gov/law

   ..”…The term “national origin,” on its face, refers to the country where a person was born, or, more broadly, the country from which his or her ancestors came”2
   footnote 2 See, e.g., Minnesota State Act Against Discrimination, Minn.Stat. § 363.01, subd. 6 (1971), defining “national origin” as “the place of birth of an individual or of any of his lineal ancestors.” https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/414/86/case.html#F2

   “…the court observed that the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that the term “national origin” includes “the country from which you or your forebears came” http://www.ogletreedeakins.com/publications/2012-06-01/seventh-circuit-rejects-national-origin-discrimination-claim?device=mobile0

5. How many of us are have experienced fear, anxiety and sleeplessness over the last three-year period? This woman was able to file a claim for discrimination for that, rather than for not being able to rent the property because of her ‘national origin’. Would that happen in any other state?

   We in Canada are being told that we cannot claim any kind of discrimination with FATCA until we actually experience some harm — like bank accounts being closed. Some have already had OVDI/OVDP penalties assessed.

6. Here’s the UK version

   “The Race Relations Act 1976 makes it unlawful to discriminate on the ground of race. It is unlawful to refuse a service, or to not give the same standard of service extended to others, on the grounds of race, colour, nationality or ethnic origin.

   It is direct discrimination if a firm refuses to lend money because of the applicant’s racial origin. But indirect discrimination is also unlawful. It would, for example, be indirect discrimination where a lender refused to lend money on properties below a certain value – if such properties were located in an area that was largely populated by a particular racial group – unless the refusal was justified on non-racial grounds.”

   http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/37/banking-equal-access.htm

   My contention is that a suspected ‘US person’ is not receiving the same ‘standard of service extended to others’ by being subjected to a witch hunt and being made to fill in IRS forms based on nationality.

   Seems to be breaking this Act as well.

7. But by FATCA logic, it would have been alright if she was asked where she is a citizen.

8. Don,

   I have personally experienced renting an apartment in both Boston and New York City. In NYC renting an apartment for whatever reason is like going thru a FATCA style AML/KYC process(In NYC they specifically wanted to know the source of the funds I was using to pay for the rent). In Boston renting an apartment in my case was basically almost no questions asked as long as the rent check clears. Additionally my apartment in Boston was in a fairly high profile part of the city not out in the Readville boondocks.

9. @Tim – Readville now you’re getting into the nooks and crannies of Boston. I’m impressed. FYI they have converted a well known ex-factory in that area into condos which has close access to the Commuter Rail. To put your mind to rest, I didn’t grow up in Readville.

10. Very inconsistent. This is the crooked US law.
    Canada should protect their citizens regardless, based on the Canadian constitution, etc. so many things.

11. Prolly not the right place to post this.. But how is fatca going to affect native peoples such as the Kootenais? Their lands are on both sides of the border!

    The Kootenai Tribe, also known as Kootenay, Kutenai and Ktanaxa, live in an area around the Columbia and Kootenay Rivers. Part of the tribal areas are in present day Idaho and Montana in the United States and most of the tribal areas are in present day British Columbia, Canada.

12. Maryanne,

    Here’s one post on Canadian aboriginal people: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/02/26/canadian-aboriginals-and-the-irs/

13. @Don
    Thanks for the reminder of UK law. I notice a company call ‘Nutmeg’ is refusing US citizens, so I have sent them an email which got a rather lame response.
    —————————————
    To: support@nutmeg.com
    Subject: account opening

    I noticed that you do not allow US citizens (even UK/UK duals) to open an account.

    How does that fit with the current law as I understand it: “The Race Relations Act 1976 makes it unlawful to discriminate on the ground of race. It is unlawful to refuse a service, or to not give the same standard of service extended to others, on the grounds of race, colour, nationality or ethnic origin.” ?
    ——————————–
    Hello Mark

    Many thanks for your email.

    We are not able to offer Nutmeg to US citizens due to the US governments tax reporting requirements. It is certainly not to do with discriminating against US citizens.

    I hope this helps to clarify your question but if you need anything else just let me know.
    —————————————

    So I have responded with:

    Thanks for the response. But you are apparently breaking UK law by refusing a service to UK citizens (who happen to also have US citizenship) in the UK. As far as I remember the UK is not one of the 50 States of America, so the US reporting requirements are nothing to do with UK law and you are therefore breaking “the Race Relations Act 1976. I trust you will be reviewing your guidelines and opening up for all UK citizens and not refusing a subset of British citizens who happen to also have US citizenship for whatever reason.