I’ve said it. Others have said it. We admit in the past supporting the Conservative government with our vote and, in some cases, with our donations. Now? We cannot vote for a party which fails to fulfill what is arguably the number one mandate of any government: to provide protection for the citizens of Canada. This government plans to hand over the financial information of loyal Canadian citizens to the IRS, a criminal branch of the foreign government laying in wait at our Southern border. This treachery will not go unpunished. Consider the following comment:
I know that we can’t expect any help from our Conservative government, but I am feeling a bit better today. I am a Canadian business owner with an accidental American spouse. I have always supported the Conservatives, occasionally with donations. I made a pledge a while back, after a phone solicitation, but did not send it in. A representative from the party called me to ask where my donation was, and I happily told her she wasn’t getting one, not now , or ever for that matter. She asked why and I told her it was because of the government`s position on FATCA. I had to spell it for her, but she assured me she would pass the info on.
Please make more comments like this. Please comment especially if you were voting conservative and now will refuse to do so. My wife is a business owner. But next election night, I am going to take Mrs. Petros out to dinner, buy her flowers, go to a movie, and thus completely distract her. So for every one former Tory voter who is a so-called US citizen, whose the government plans to commit extraordinary rendition of their bank account information, the Tory government will likely lose at least two votes.
@ dt804a
Consider foreign policy, for example. Our PM’s government answered the Russian assault on Ukraine with vim and vigour, punching well above our stature. Or consider the policy towards Israel, the one true democracy in the Middle East for hundreds of miles around.
Even more reason for me to NEVER vote for and actively oppose the Cons. Their foreign policy stinks to high heaven — in particular both cases you cite. And BTW I have never contributed to or been a member of any political party. (Although many years ago I did attend a Joe Clark rally out of curiosity.) I look at issues and FATCA is a huge issue with me.
@dt804a
He was such a good father, that we’re willing to overlook the fact that he occasionally abused one of his children.
@dt804a
I find Harper’s foreign policy disgusting. He seems to care more about the sovereignty of the Ukraine and Israel (and I am not defending Putin) than he does about defending thousands of Canadians in his own country against the criminal actions of the US. He is an appeaser (and he wants a certain pipeline too).
Beneath contempt. (I grew up in Etobicoke just as Harper did, around the same time) (And in my view both Obama & Putin are thugs)
@dt804a;
I will only raise a small subset of the many reasons related to issues raised on this site – that provide robust reason for why the Harper government and Conservative party well deserve defeat.
What do you think about a party and government who lauds their creation of the RESP, the TFSA, the RDSP as steps towards their own list of desirable social policy outcomes for our Canadian society; supporting the wellbeing of our children, family security, and economic security of disabled dependents, yet knowingly allows a foreign country to extraterritorially tax and penalize them as ‘taxable foreign trusts’? Treating their legitimate, legal, locally funded and owned Canadian education, disability and family savings and grants as a cash cow for the US? The grant portion is directly funded by the Canadian taxpayer out of our Canadian taxes – or the portion deemed tax exempt by our Canadian government.
The significant problems with the US extraterritorial treatment of Canadian registered savings was fully known by the Canadian Finance Minister and the Canadian government since the problems with US treatment of our RRSPs surfaced as an issue. This particular government has known of the US treatment of our registered savings since the US recalcitrance and insistence on treating RRSPs as fully US taxable and penalizable ‘foreign trusts’ – and the only concession that was eventually achieved was that with an annual treaty election and the annual filing of the 8891 per each and every RRSP account FOREVER – RRSPs would be exempt from US taxation and penalties. Any errors or omissions sees them still treated as fair game for US punitive extraterritorial taxation – even for Canadian citizens and residents – despite the Treaty. The penalties for not filing the correct (and complex forms) to report ‘foreign trusts’ to the US are confiscatory in scale and in application to assets which are not taxable in Canada – and which are funded primarily from wages which have already been taxed.
It has not escaped our notice that while publicly (and I am not doubting sincerely) wiping away tears at the creation and success of the RDSP http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/the-finance-minister-the-disability-assistance-plan-and-a-flood-of-tears/article2209747/ , Canadian citizen dependents and children whom the US asserts an extraterritorial claim to, were left to their own devices – still at the mercy of US extraterritorial taxation of their education and disability savings though they were created, funded, held and owned entirely within Canada. Similarly for the celebration of the anniversary of the creation of the TFSA and the announcements of same, made by the Ministry of Finance http://business.financialpost.com/2014/03/21/jim-flaherty-may-be-gone-but-tfsas-will-live-on/?__lsa=8d0f-866e.
The gaping flaws we identified and raised in correspondence re the current Canada-US tax treaty were not contested, but yet have not been fixed, and queries as to when they would be addressed received no specific answer or timeline or commitment http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/02/15/my-plea-for-clarification-on-the-rdsp-and-other-canadian-registered-savings-plans-are-these-now-for-purchse-only-to-canadians-who-are-not-us-defined-us-persons-in-canada/ .
What kind of government and party leaves their own children, disabled dependents, the retired, and families at the mercy of a foreign government? Knowing that not only will all Canadians pay to set up and maintain the FATCA reporting apparatus in the Canadian civil service, but, all accountholders will pay higher banking and investment fees, and all Canadians will pay to support those whose assets the US destroys – via its extraterritorial claims, taxes and penalties.
What kind of government and party lauds the application of an extraterritorial law (FATCA) on Canadian sovereign soil – which is NOT a bilateral treaty with terms negotiated for the benefit of both parties, and which contains only binding conditions for Canada but not the US? Only benefits for the US and NONE for Canada? What kind of government bends to extortion tactics by the US – and agrees to turn over the personal and financial information of any and all law abiding Canadians who the banks, insurance companies and investment plans – and the US identify as subject persons?
What kind of government and party agrees to alter Canadian sovereign laws to accommodate a foreign government’s demands – knowing that it puts the legal local already-CRA taxed savings of Canadian children, seniors, workers and families at risk of confiscatory and punitive actions by a foreign government? With no recourse. Counter to the Charter and our Constitution?
May I remind you that this law that we oppose, was also vociferously opposed in public statements by the very same Finance Minister of the current government http://business.financialpost.com/2011/09/16/read-jim-flahertys-letter-on-americans-in-canada/ – for which principled stand we applauded him.
Because the ruling party and government chose not to engage the Canadian public, voters, taxpayers and citizens in public debate on FATCA, or to inform them until after the deed was done – they chose to keep the ‘negotiations’ secret – except for regular updates to the CBA, IIAC and their kin, there has been no meaningful and democratic discussion and process on this matter. This government has chosen not to involve the Canadian citizen, taxpayer, accountholder and voter in one of the most important agreements signed during their tenure.
We know that in fact, the US FATCA law does not allow for ‘negotiations’ per se. It is take it or leave it. No one in Canada can change that. Only the US Congress has the power to – now and in future. The US can change the terms at any time – without notice or agreement by Canada.
All the opposition parties opposed the Omnibus bill. A form of undemocratic bill and cynical tactic that the current Conservative PM vowed was unacceptable when he was in opposition http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/in-praise-of-stephen-harper-the-opposition-mp-who-fought-omnibus-bills/article5661305/
A government and party which cannot or will not meet their obligation to meet their duty of care for their fellow citizens and residents, vulnerable children and dependents, taxpayers, accountholders, families, and voters, does not deserve to stand.
A government who discriminates on the basis of certain categories of national origin, birthplace or parentage does not deserve to stand. We would never assist Iraq or Afghanistan – or Eritrea in extraterritorially taxing Canadian children, seniors and families, so why would the Harper government ‘respect’ the US asserted ‘right’ to do so?
You may decide that this is congruent with your values and deserves your allegiance, but for the wellbeing and sovereignty of Canada, may you be in the minority.
@ All
What is CPC?
@Northernstar
CPC = Conservative Party of Canada.
@dt804a
I know them as PCs…. I guess I am not up to date. They are still the same and still right wing just a different name.
Had a Liberal or NDP government been responsible for this sell-out, I would still be angry but would have had more of a, “Whadya expect” attitude. That this could happen under the Conservatives brings an extra sense of betrayal for me. I agree with @dt804a that Harper has done many things I would support. Even after the income trust flip-flop, that decimated my children’s RESP’s just as my eldest was starting university, I voted conservative based on the governments rationale that giant corporations planned to convert to income trusts to avoid paying corporate tax. Government cuts affect my bottom line, but if I’m going to call myself a conservative I have to accept that those government cuts affect me personally the same as they do everyone else. I am not going to agree with every decision any government makes and I do not expect that to be the case. Having said that, some of my expectations of government are so fundamental that I cannot accept their violation by any government. As Petros stated in the original post, the number one mandate of government should be the protection of its citizens.
For several months now, I have been suffering from what I call “cognitive dissonance”. I hope I have not mislabeled it. To me, cognitive dissonance is that sick feeling in the pit of my stomach that will not go away because my long held convictions and beliefs are being challenged by what I am witnessing. I have beliefs about the role of government and what conservatism means. What I am witnessing from the Canadian Conservative government is at odds with my long held convictions and beliefs. I believe in small government. Every new law they bring in takes away a bit more of my freedom. The role of government to protect its citizens is fundamental and the current Conservative government has failed in this. Hence my cognitive dissonance.
In order for this cognitive dissonance to go away, one of two things has to happen. The first possibility is that as I evaluate the evidence, I come to the conclusion that I misread what was going on, that the Conservatives are not really going to allow the IRS to dictate Canadian law and that they are not going to arbitrarily uphold the Charter of Rights. There must be something I am missing and the Conservatives are going to do the right thing in the end. I held onto this belief for months, but each new bit of evidence reinforces that the Conservatives are throwing their citizens to the lions – the omnibus legislation passed second reading with unanimous Conservative support. The sick feeling in the pit of my stomach remains, even worsens.
The other way to get rid of this cognitive dissonance is to accept that the beliefs I once ascribed to are not supported by the evidence I am witnessing. I have to reshape those beliefs to match the clear evidence in front of me. I have to accept that the Conservatives will NOT protect their citizens and will not ensure that all citizens have the same rights. That the government I voted for has betrayed all Canadians, but particularly a specific subgroup. That the government I voted for no longer deserves my support or respect. Based on this, I stated in my previous post, “I will not vote Conservative in the next election.” I did not say never again, but this group has shown that they are not willing to stand for that fundamental principle of protecting their citizens.
I also sent the letter “Questions for my MP” to John Williamson, the MP for New Brunswick Southwest (where I grew up), a riding that is full of duals affected by this (including family members). I respect Williamson because I believe he is a conservative, but he concluded his letter by saying, “Thank you for communicating your concerns about U.S. taxation policy.” I was not expressing my concerns about US tax policy, I was expressing my concerns that the Canadian government was acting as an arm of the IRS in implementing US tax policy on formerly sovereign Canadian soil.
I take umbrage (I looked that word up) with @dt804a’s statement that, “If the agents of one or more of the 3 opposition parties wanted to demoralize CPC supporters, it could have no better strategy than organize five or six operatives to post derogatory comments on a blog such as this, and dismiss anyone who counter-posted.” From my first post here, and @Em’s first comment on it, I knew that we were diametrically opposed politically. I was not prepared to debate right and left or pro-Israel and anti-Israel at Isaac Brock. But I do not for one second think that @Em or any of the others here that I have little in common with politically are some kind of plants to make the Conservatives look bad. FATCA hits everyone equally hard, no matter what your political ideology or your party (Sorry @Em, I like to pick on you because we are so different).
As far as posting links to Ezra Levant, I like Ezra. And I like Mark Steyn. And lots of others with similar views. But I stopped watching Sun News. I never heard FATCA mentioned there. I saw one story in a Sun News paper that was basically a press release from the Conservatives, no real reporting. I got a little tired of hearing about the Keystone pipeline and “shiny pony” when the most important news that I can think of, FATCA, was being ignored. Sun News calls out the CBC for being politically left, which I believe they are. But it became clear to me that the purpose of Sun News is to support the Conservatives. That is why they do not report FATCA – how do you report it and make the Conservatives look good (unless they have reported on it since I stopped watching)?
I am not a plant but I came close to being put into a vegetative state when I found out about FATCA. Before I found the Brock site I thought I was the only one flattened by this incredible injustice … or at least the only one who cared. Besides, I’m not clever enough to have known 2 years ago to lay down the roots here for this anti-Harper plant role dt804a attributes to me. If I had that much foresight I would never have become a victim of the USA’s outrageous tax regime in the first place.
@Canadian Cop,
Thank you for sharing your thoughts and analytical process with us. Those here have experienced and expressed feelings of ‘cognitive dissonance’ as well – for ex. in relation to the US if we felt sentimental ties to it through family, or in relation to Obama if we voted for him from abroad, or from seeing that despite Flaherty’s initial statements and actions, in the end, the Conservatives were willing to do whatever it took to sign and implement the IGA despite the cost and burden to their law abiding fellow Canadian citizens, taxpayers, voters and accountholders resident in Canada. Or even in terms of the taxpayer and accountholder costs that implementation would entail forever. And that even apart from the FATCA IGA, they were not at all concerned (as my Conservative MP’s second hand responses as relayed to me, made clear) about the impact of even just the current flawed Canada US tax treaty terms, and what that does to disabled depenent Canadian’s RDSPs, Canadian children’s RESPs and Canadian family TFSAs – to name but a few of the ways in which we were betrayed by the government that has a fiduciary duty and duty of care to ALL those in Canada.
We have all had to confront contradictions and inconsistencies in our beliefs, or our worldview, and in how we ally ourselves with others (sometimes very unlikely fellows) or in what we are willing to do to cope with this situation, to protect ourselves, and to confront those responsible.
We have found that we have commonalities that we did not anticipate, or learned from each other, or are temporarily allies on this issue – and depart radically on others.
It has never been a boring journey.
How about the basic belief that a country should not attack it’s law abiding citizens? Multiply that by two!
@Canadian Cop. The two of us probably have much in common politically though separated by a great ocean. There are posters here that I would likely disagree with politically and theologically, or the absence of a theological basis.
But underlying all this is in fact a common thread with everyone here. That thread might just be that old American Ethos in which a nations people are above all else and we do not take too kindly a foreign power butting their nose in. On this we are all fierce defenders.
In the essentials unity, in the non essentials charity, in all else liberty.
In the spirit of that old America flag, “Don’t tread on me.
The more I explore the details of FATCA/IGA, the more the posts here mystify me (unless the object is merely to smear the CPC).
I have read the 47 pages of the IGA and didn’t find it particularly noxious, under the circumstances that I will spell out in the last paragraph below. If you read the post of the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA) at
http://www.cba.ca/en/consumer-information/40-banking-basics/597-fatca-and-the-canada-us-intergovernmental-agreement-iga-information-for-clients-
You will find two important “bottom lines”:
(a) “We have publicly opposed FATCA as the wrong way to go about it. However, as the U.S. government has no intention of repealing FATCA, the CBA believes that entering into the (IGA) was the best approach under the circumstances… Tax information sharing is nothing new and it is part of a new global reality… Canada and the U.S. already have a tax information sharing arrangement in place where Canadian tax authorities provide information to U.S. tax authorities on U.S. residents earning income in Canada, and vice versa.”
(b) Exempt from IGA are (inter alia): RRSPs, TFSAs, RRIFs, RESPs, etc. This info, taken from the foregoing source, clearly and unequivocally contradicts misinformation posted on this site. Of course, if the objective is to defame our government, then facts don’t matter, do they?
Trudeau Sr (not the substitute drama teacher who uses the same name) had an observation about sleeping with an elephant. Canada’s unfortunate fate has brought us all too close to the twitching elephant and there is little we can do about it – it’s like death, taxes and our weather. I believe that the government has done its best to get the best possible terms and the invective should be addressed to the US government, not to ours.
@dt804a
I was born in the USA. I am a Canadian citizen living and working here over 44 years. I do not consider myself an American. Why do YOU Want the banks to report on my bank accounts?
Did you ever hear of Chamberlain ? You remind me of him.
dt804a,
http://www.cba.ca/en/consumer-information/40-banking-basics/597-fatca-and-the-canada-us-intergovernmental-agreement-iga-information-for-clients-
To me and to others, the lauded “exemption” is as underhanded as the implementation of the FATCA IGA buried in the C31 budget implementation bill — just the fact that something that discriminates against a segment of Canadians by national origin is not debated fully on its on merit is shameful.
********************
From an earlier comment of mine:
@dt804a “I have read the 47 pages of the IGA and didn’t find it particularly noxious”
It is extremely noxious.
1.) The IGA was “negotiated” under a massive economic threat. The threat for non-compliance was not simply 30% withholding on a single depositors US Dollar transactions but rather 30% withholding on the banks entire US Dollar transactions. Civilized nations in the 21st century do not resort to economic threats and extortion with friends and allies.
2.) The CPC claims it engaged in extensive negotiations on behalf of the people of Canada. The truth is that the agreement was a boiler plate, literally fill in the blanks with Country Name, Date and a few other things. In fact the IGA is almost a mirror image of every other English speaking nations agreement.
3.) The CPC claims it negotiated special financial product preference. In fact the Canadian carve outs are identical product wise to those amongst other nations.
4.) In order to be lawful in Canada, the Canadian Government needs to pass legislation that this IGA legislation supersedes all existing privacy and discrimination laws on the books. Without that language, the Government knows its unlawful.
5.) All civilized western nations subscribe in principal to international law and in particular to the Master Nationality Rule. A person with multi nationality shall be treated as solely having a single nationality in the country of one of their nationalities. This means that a Canadian with clinging Iranian citizenship is solely Canadian. Likewise that a Canadian with clinging US citizenship should be solely Canadian.
The IGA treats two Canadian Citizens differently. A Canadian Citizen born in Boston, Mass will have their records handed over to the IRS. Wile a Canadian Citizen born in Boston, England will have no such concern.
6.) A Canadian Citizen who has formally relinquished any clinging US nationality, but has a US place of birth on a banks records, will still be subject to having their private records handed over to a foreign government. You should re-read the IGA, the language on this point as most politicians have not read it.
7.) A Canadian Citizen born in Syracuse to two Canadian Parents will have their personal records handed over to a foreign power whilst a Canadian Citizen born in Toronto to two US Citizens will be under the radar and have no fear of their records being handed over.
8.) The agreement is NOT recipricol in scope or penalties.
9.) The IGA is being approved by Parliament while the the US is not receiving Congressional approval. Ergo, this is binding on Canada but not as binding on the USA.
I challenge you to poke any holes in the above.
If after considering all the above, you do not consider it noxious I do not know what to say.
Lastly, would such an agreement be noxious if instead of USA it was with with Iran, China or Russia?
My guess is that the reason @dt804a is totally unconcerned about FACTA is because it doesn’t effect him in any way. He seems to be more concerned about the CBC (how is that relevant to anything I don’t know). In reality he is is not a “U.S. person” at all and is really a Harperite troll. Let’s not feed the trolls!
@George – I will respond at a later time; your post requires research and time to formulate a reply.
@Henry Hub – I will answer you right now, since a rebuttal hardly requires any effort at all.
(a) You are right when you say ” the reason @dt804a is totally unconcerned about FACTA is because it doesn’t effect him in any way”, but that is because the concern is FATCA, not FACTA; google to find the difference.
(b) I landed on this site because I was seeking advice concerning a tech problem involving renunciation. If you check this site, you’ll find the thread where I posted my question and received helpful and sound advice. Clearly, I am concerned about FATCA (not FACTA) and I am affected as a “not-by-choice US Person”. Thus, your statement that I am “really a Harperite troll” is juvenile name calling or slander or both.
(c) The allusion to the CBC was relevant to illustrate by example that I do have problems with the CPC, but I put things in perspective. As a Canadian, I find whining distasteful, preferring to light a candle (renunciation of US citizenship) rather than curse the darkness (FATCA).
Hope this answers your concerns as I will no longer respond to your posts.
@George, Way to go! Your posts require ‘research and time to formulate a reply’. You rock!
@Henry Hub, Its OK. We all go through the ‘FACTA typo’ phase at the beginning, until we get so immersed in the absurdity, that we could print FATCA 100 times on a blackboard, blindfolded, with no errors, while singing O Canada at the same time.
@dt804a I’m confused. Are you coming back to post at Brock or not?
dt804a,
Might you comment on the subject lack of responsibility for the Canadian government to protect their most vulnerable, as in:
Those with the automatic “gift” of US citizenship as for my son (born in Canada, raised in Canada, never lived in the U.S., never registered with the U.S., never had any benefit from the U.S.) and others like him, who happen to have a developmental disability (a “mental incapacity”), thus entrapped into US citizenship (and all that implies) as they cannot renounce and a parent, a guardian or a trustee cannot renounce on such a person’s behalf, even with a court order. (This could as well apply to someone with age-related dementia — not comprehending what citizenship is, including all its benefits and consequences). That’s what the U.S. law is.
(Beside the point is what I believe — that always it should be an ‘opt-in’ to US citizenship (or any other) if there are qualifications, rather than an ‘opt-out’ as is the case with US law. If there is a law that would entrap anyone into citizenship (in the case of my son, US), in my opinion it is very bad, even immoral, law.
Canada says nothing about his protection — the most they say about him is that he is “an American who happens to live in Canada” or “a US taxpayer resident in Canada” or “a US citizen resident in Canada”. He and others like him are second-class to any other Canadian who has a disability and will not benefit from the Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan that encourages families to save for the future needs of their disabled family member. In fact, as the Holder of my son’s RDSP, I paid US tax on grants and bonds the Canadian taxpayer helped the Canadian government contribute to that RDSP. Is this appropriate use of your Canadian taxpayer money?
@dt804a
May I bask in the glow of your renounced citizenship. Please… (whine)…
2dt804a re your comment: ” As a Canadian, I find whining distasteful, preferring to light a candle (renunciation of US citizenship) rather than curse the darkness (FATCA). ”
As a Canadian, I find lack of empathy for others caught in a situation where renunciation is not a viable option – whether economically, spiritually or emotionally – distasteful, preferring to light a candle (fight against the darkness of FATCA) rather than surrender to the curse that is FATCA.
There are no whiners here at Brock, only winners.
@WhiteKat
BRAVO!!!!!!! I am in your corner as I am with all the other Brockers ready to fight the darkness of FATCA. We will never surrender. We ARE winners.
@WhiteKat
And I believe Brockers and Sandboxers are even more strong because we have empathy, which is very absent in the CPC Harperites.