A fellow ‘US Person’ in Canada sent the following to the Fraser Institute:
Re: The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act
I find it hard to fathom that your group has not commented on the deleterious nature of this US imposed law soon to be enforced in Canada. The enabling legislation for this is labeled as an Inter Government Agreement and is buried in the omnibus bill C-31. An agreement “negotiated” under threat of economic sanctions by the United States. Regardless of how it is presented it is about gathering data, taxing and penalizing Canadian citizens, on money earned in Canada and taxed in Canada. These Canadian citizens will be identified by one distinguishing characteristic, place of origin or other indicia that the US Treasury department will unilaterally decide with a laundry list of characteristics to identify a new class of person, including spouses and children of such “persons”. A US Person For Tax Purposes, not a citizen, rather a person or property of the US. There is no benefit to Canada. I am aware of the pressure exerted by the Canadian Bankers Association on this file, however their own very limited response was the litmus test that precipitated this un-defendable extortion by the US. As the late Jim Flaherty stated, this is not how partners negotiate agreements…by threat of sanctions, if you do not do as we tell you. (paraphrased).
It is estimated that upwards of one million Canadian citizens of US origin will be thrown under the FATCA bus. I suspect the number is much larger due to the aforementioned kin of these “persons”.
It’s astonishing that the main stream press has not reported on this issue. Perhaps because the issue is seen as a tax issue relating to Americans in Canada only? This is not the case. It is an affront to Canadian sovereignty and likely offends our privacy legislation, our electronic reporting protections and most importantly the Charter Of Rights and Freedoms. It most certainly will impact the Canadian treasury, potentially on a massive scale. This issue will be tested with a Charter challenge.
Where is your group on this file?
Thank you for your time.
I followed up on that with:
Members of the Fraser Institute:
I understand that you have replied to another affected ‘US Person’ who has brought the FATCA IGA implementation to your attention that you will flag this subject for future consideration. ‘US Persons’, who are CANADIANS and now referred to by the Harper Government as “Americans who happen to live in Canada” or “US taxpayers resident in Canada”, request your prompt consideration of this subject. The July 1, 2014 implementation in the process of approval by legislation HIDDEN in Bill C-31 is almost upon us. May I encourage you to move this to the top of your agenda as it will set a dangerous precedent of discrimination by national origin and loss of human rights by a segment of Canadians who will no longer have the same protection of all other Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Many of these Canadians chose to become naturalized Canadian citizens, for myself in 1975 — they are Canadians.
Many of these Canadians were born and raised in this country, never registered with the US, never lived or worked in the US, never had any benefit from the US — only Canada. One of those (and many just like him) Canadians born in Canada to US citizen parents is my 40 year old son. My son happens to have a developmental disability and as he would not understand the concept of “citizenship” (as in US citizenship-based taxation), he cannot renounce his so-called automatically acquired US citizenship and must not have the influence of anyone else to do so. The U.S. Department of State / US Consulate regulation is also that for a person with a ‘mental incapacity’ (which would also include someone with age-related dementia), a parent, a guardian or a trustee for that person does not have the RIGHT to renounce U.S. citizenship on that person’s behalf, even with a court order. This segment of Canadians is ENTRAPPED into U.S. citizenship and the responsibilities and cost of administration for U.S. tax returns and account reporting each year at great U.S. professional tax accounting (and often law) expense.
Many of these Canadians were born in the U.S. to Canadian parents, returning to Canada with their parents days later, infants, or as children and they have always been what should be only – Canadians.
That the government of Canada will not stand up to protect these fellow Canadians is deplorable. Canada is saying they are second-class to any other Canadians, discrimination by “U.S.” national origin. They are saying Canada is no longer a SOVEREIGN country that makes its own law and does not allow the law of a foreign country to come in to take precedence over Canadian law.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comments/comment-page-15/#comment-1511471 poses a serious question:
Will the Harper government agree to similar “lawful requests” for financial information on “Chinese-Canadians” by Bejing?
ties in nicely with http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/04/21/report-on-alberta-information-session-edmonton/
…This will set a precedent that the rights under the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms be waived for a segment of Canadian society. They will be second-class Canadians to any other, no matter the first-class Canadian’s national origin or the national origin of their parents / grandparents. Who will then be the next country able to bring their law into Canada to search for Canadians of another national origin?
My hope is that this gets in front of every Canadian person who will decide such action is absurd and wrong and join us in the Canadian Charter Challenge to either stop or reverse implementation of the US FATCA IGA law in Canada. I hope that others will agree that implementation of the FATCA IGA could be buried in Bill C-31 omnibus bill without debating on its own merits and with the citizens of Canada is appalling.
Should Canada remain a SOVEREIGN nation with a Charter of Rights and Freedoms that mean the same for all Canadians?
Another comment at http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/new-information-sessions/comment-page-3/#comment-23459
The article in the Edmonton Journal is just a rehash of information we have heard before. There is nothing new there.
The media in general seems to fear taking any editorial stance that would make the American government, and therefore its head, look bad. The Canadian media was not shy about editorializing against Johnson, Nixon, Reagan, and either of the Bushes, but so far Obama appears to be a protected species.
Apparently our editorial writers dare not criticize the anointed one. Where are the likes of the CBC and the Fraser Institute on all of this?
Can ‘US Persons’ in Canada count on the Fraser Institute to give priority to this important matter that criminalizes a large segment of the Canadian population, as well as Canadian spouses, their children, their Canadian business partners, etc.?
I sincerely thank you for your attention to this.
Carol Tapanila
Calgary, AB, Canada
You better start send you submission to the Senate Banking Committee for Bill-C31. See below:
Mr. XXX
The Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce is receiving written submissions on Bill C-31. You may send your submission in either Official Language to the Clerk of the Committee. With respect to a deadline, I would suggest that you send your submission soon as the Committee is starting its deliberations on May 1, 2014. The Committee has until June 19, 2014 to submit its report but it may report earlier than that date. Please contact me if you have any further questions.
Barbara Reynolds
Committee Clerk/Greffière de comité
The Senate/Le Sénat
Tel: 613-990-6081 | barbara.reynolds@sen.parl.gc.ca
Toll Free/Sans frais: 1-800-267-7362
Another post and request by Brockers and MapleSandboxers for more submssions. Thanks so much for bringing this to our attention, Tim!
Can a submission be e-mailed? These deadlines keep getting tighter and tighter. Cripes I didn’t even know there is such a committee. Here’s what I found for contact information:
For more information, please contact:
Clerk: Barbara Reynolds – (613) 990-6081
Administrative Assistant: Brigitte Martineau – (613) 990-1101
General Information: (613) 990-0088 or 1-800-267-7362
Fax: (613) 947-2104
Email: banc@sen.parl.gc.ca
Mailing Address:
Senate Committee on Banking, Trade and Commerce
The Senate of Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada, K1A 0A4
@Em
Yes I believe they can be. You might want to do up a Word Document and then send it as an attachment.
Thanks Tim. So I guess send it to banc@sen.parl.gc.ca — right? I think I can tweak my last Fin. Can. submission for this. Are there any rules like including your postal code or something?
Not that I know off. I would just tweak your Finance Dept. submission.
Excellent email to Fraser Institute! I look forward to hearing how, and whether, they respond to this.
UPDATE from Tim:
Sorry folks. I think this committee is not the right place to send it. (another submission, see http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/04/22/another-important-submission-this-one-to-the-senate-committee-on-banking-trade-and-commerce-on-omnibus-bill-c-31-which-allows-implementation-in-canada-of-the-fatca-iga/)
I got the part of the Bill that deals with FATCA mixed up between Part 3 and Part 5. I probably won’t find out for sure where to send this until tomorrow.
I think it will be the Senate National Finance Committee instead. Luckily that committee doesn’t look it is moving as fast on Bill C-31 as the Banking Committee so we have some more time. Additionally the chairman of the National Finance Committee is NOT a Conservative so that might be to our advantage.
Great work calgary. And thank you Tim for keeping us updated on where to make our submissions to the Senate.
Awesome Carol
Please see my comment in reference to the Fraser Institute:
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2013/01/12/jamie-golombek-of-the-financial-post-continues-to-carry-obamas-water/comment-page-2/#comment-144237
My email exchanges with the editor of Business in Vancouver go back a couple of years now. At one point Mr Renshaw said he’d be meeting with his business writer to discuss how they’d be covering FATCA. That was over a year ago now, so I can only assume that they are choosing NOT to cover FATCA, in spite of being informed by me that their competitor, BC Business, has covered it in at least two articles by Don Whiteley.
I’ve also been in recent contact with Mark Milke, a Senior Fellow at the Fraser Institute who has a regular opinion column at the Calgary Herald, asking him to cover FATCA – with no luck.
The silence from the Fraser Institute is deafening.
Previous discussion at Brock about the Fraser Institute, initiated by Badger, starts here:
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2013/01/12/jamie-golombek-of-the-financial-post-continues-to-carry-obamas-water/comment-page-2/#comment-144149
Interestingly, the Fraser Institute is a registered charity for federal tax purposes; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fraser_Institute
and,
this mentions ties to a former chief advisor of Harper’s;
http://www.desmog.ca/time-audit-fraser-institute
“…… Senior fellows have included prolific Calgary Herald op-ed contributor Barry Cooper and the University of Calgary’s Tom Flanagan, Stephen Harper’s former chief advisor and a key part of the Wildrose Party’s recent ascendance. Academic and former Alberta MLA Ted Morton was also a Fraser Institute fellow before he took office (and may end up back there given his loss in the recent Alberta election). Preston Manning was there, too, as was King Ralph Klein himself.
Even Ezra Levant, the political right’s unapologetic mouthpiece, cut his teeth with the Fraser Institute, writing Youthquake (a treatise arguing for smaller government, including privatization of the Canada Pension Plan) while a student intern in 1995.
Given these connections, it’s not surprising the Fraser Institute held its 30th anniversary gala at Calgary’s Hyatt Regency Imperial Ballroom, where then-Alberta premier Klein told 1,200 adoring libertarians and conservatives that, “The Government of Alberta is proud to adhere to the public policy direction of the Fraser Institute.”
But what of its purported political activity? Does the work of the Fraser Institute, a registered charity, contravene the Income Tax Act or CRA policy?”……”
See also:
http://blogs.ottawacitizen.com/2013/04/04/sunshine-listing-the-fraser-institute/
Interestingly, the right wing/libertarian US Heartland Institute http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Heartland_Institute follows FATCA and has written about it:
http://heartland.org/policy-documents/research-commentary-foreign-account-tax-compliance-act
http://news.heartland.org/newspaper-article/2014/02/04/rnc-backs-repeal-foreign-account-tax-compliance-act
And, the Heartland Institute also follows the Fraser Institute reports on topics like ‘economic freedom’ – see the many links to Fraser Institute reports from the Heartland website, like this one; https://heartland.org/policy-documents/economic-freedom-north-america-2013
So, in terms of think tanks on the far right with similarities, why is the Heartland Institute in the US critical of FATCA, yet the Canadian based Fraser Institute silent on it?
Something else the Fraser Institute and the Heartland Institute have in common is that they both have received funding http://planetpov.com/2013/06/02/think-tanks-and-foundations-supported-or-funded-by-the-koch-family/ from the Koch brothers http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/the-koch-brothers-who-are-they-and-why-do-democrats-hate-them-1.2617472 http://www.vancouverobserver.com/politics/2012/04/25/%E2%80%9Ccharitable%E2%80%9D-fraser-institute-accepted-500k-foreign-funding-oil-billionaires http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/04/26/koch-brothers-fraser-institute_n_1456223.html http://www.salon.com/2013/02/01/koch_brothers_donated_big_to_alec_heartland_institute/ .
Interesting to know why the two thinktanks with significant areas of philosophical accord, appear to differ on FATCA – at least in terms of what is offered up for public consumption:
The US thinktank (Heartland) seems to oppose FATCA, and the Canadian thinktank (Fraser) has chosen not to take a public position – as far as we can tell? It seems unlikely that the Fraser Institute and its supporters are unaware of, or have NO position on FATCA. So, what is their position and why have they not made one known to the public on something as significant to the Canadian economy, Canadian sovereignty, financial sector, taxation, etc. as FATCA?
See also this report written by the Fraser Institute, and linked from the Heartland Institute:
https://heartland.org/sites/default/files/economic-freedom-of-north-america-2013.pdf
‘Economic Freedom of North America 2013’
Fraser Institute
http://www.fraserinstitute.org
http://www.freetheworld.com
“Purpose, funding, and independence
The Fraser Institute provides a useful public service. We report objective information about the economic and social effects of current public policies, and we offer evidence-based research and education about policy options that can improve the quality of life.” from page 84,
And a funding acknowledgement;
“The authors would like to thank the Charles Koch Foundation and the Searle Freedom
Trust for their support of this project” page 81
Again, I cannot fathom why a 2013 report by a Canadian thinktank, on the topic of the ‘Economic Freedom of North America’ (see page 1, Chapter One for definition of ‘economic freedom’) makes no mention of the enhanced effects of the peculiar institution of US extraterritorial taxation as asserted and extraterritorially enforced via legislation- which is as significant to Canada as the US FATCA IGA is as applied on Canadian soil, to Canadian citizens and residents, their legal local family savings, Canadian financial AND non-financial institutions, and the Canadian economy. Particularly when initially, the Canadian federal Finance Minister of the day opposed it in public letters to US newspapers and then reversed course.
Read the whole paper (which cannot be reproduced here in any substance), for content like this that is tailor made for a critique of US extraterritorial CBT and FATCA; “Taxes that have a discriminatory impact and bear little reference to services received infringe on economic freedom even more……” pg. 8, Chapter One.
They use this definition of “economic freedom” which I think is incompatible with FATCA:
“Individuals have economic freedom when (a) property they acquire
without the use of force, fraud, or theft is protected from physical
invasions by others and (b) they are free to use, exchange, or give
their property to another as long as their actions do not violate the
identical rights of others.” from ‘Economic Freedom of the World, 1975–1995’, by James Gwartney, Robert Lawson, and Walter Block https://www.fraserinstitute.org/research-news/display.aspx?id=12990
As usual, you are so thorough and right on — excellent your research efforts and what you’ve now commented on re the Fraser Institute. “Economic freedom” for all?
I did see a column for Prof Jack Mintz of the University of Calgary who is known to lean Conservative who did criticize both FATCA and CBT in passing. It came out last weekend let me see if I can dig it up again. Mintz is not part of the Frasier Institute but is associated with that side of the political spectrum.
That didn’t take long.
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/04/21/keystone-delays/
Keystone is not the only irritant in Canadian-U.S. relations in recent years. “Buy America” policies limit the purchase of iron, steel and manufactured non-U.S. products in transportation projects. Even the Windsor Bridge, which requires Canadian funds to support U.S. logistics, gets caught up with this legislation. The discriminatory U.S. country-of-origin labelling program does not exempt Canada or Mexico, requiring a costly segregation of “foreign” and domestic cows. Canadian depositors and borrowers have also had to absorb enormous compliance costs with U.S. tax legislation to enforce citizenship taxation that no country in the world uses except the United States.
@ badger
You nailed ’em. Good digging! There seems to be no limit and no place in the world that the “influence” of the Koch brother’s money and meddling does not reach. (Search “Koch Brothers Exposed” on youtube.) The Fraser Institute is an echo chamber for whatever rattles around in the heads of the rich and powerful. I doubt that we can look there for any empathy for how FATCA affects the “little guy”.
RE the fact that the US Heartland Institute opposes FATCA and the Fraser Institute is silent on the subject:
I suspect it is more than coincidental that FATCA is an Obama-administration policy, and the Heartland Institute supports right-wing Republicanism and opposes pretty much anything Obama and his admin do and say. Fraser, on the other hand, generally (but not always, viz. the income-splitting discussion) supports Harper and his government, which as we know signed the IGA. So I think the stance of both organizations is more likely related to partisan political orientation rather than political or economic philosophy per se. Which of course then raises the thorny question of why Fraser should be getting charitable tax status, when most other partisan organizations don’t. Something to do with the fact that it’s the Harperites who currently decide on these things, and Fraser supports them and other organizations (CCPA, Council of Canadians, etc) generally don’t. Dear me, there I am, being cynical again. Or is it realistic again?
I continue to wonder what the quid pro quo is for the FATCA IGA. Is it specific – as in approval of XL, or is it a general stance of US appeasement at any cost to Canada and Canadians? Not to mention the incalculable cost to our environment and endangered species like the humpback whales http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/editorials/why-is-the-humpback-only-special-now-that-gateway-beckons/article18113453/ http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/humpback-whale-losing-threatened-status-amid-northern-gateway-concerns-1.2617633
It wasn’t enough to throw > 1 million Canadian families under the FATCA bus, Harper is throwing in anything else that might be an obstacle to his plans. What price is he not willing to make Canada pay? What won’t he sacrifice for his goals?
We also have business interests in Canada which are busy lining things up for their own benefit – no matter what sovereignty issues might arise – such as the US wanting their border guards to operate on Canadian soil but seeking to be exempt from Canadian laws.
Like the border integration initiatives which are to result in ‘harmonization’ of Canada’s border with the US – using US standards – eroding Canadian sovereignty and autonomy. The planning for that is years old.
Ex:
““…..For companies, workers, and travellers, this plan represents solid progress toward a smarter, more efficient Canada-U.S. border,” said The Honourable John Manley, President and Chief Executive Officer of the CCCE. “It will break down barriers to trade, reduce costs and improve the flow of goods and people between our two countries.”
The CCCE is the senior voice of Canada’s business community, representing 150 chief executives and leading entrepreneurs from all major sectors and regions of the country….”
http://www.ceocouncil.ca/news-item/canada-u-s-border-action-plan-will-reduce-costs-boost-trade-and-create-jobs-ceos-say
Read the article and then look at the spin at the bottom of this:
http://beyondtheborderobserver.org/2013/07/31/canadian-press-obtains-rcmp-nxtgen-legal-memo-revealing-nxtgen-hurdles/
vs. this http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/u-s-wants-cross-border-officers-exempt-from-canadian-law-1.1359107
Today in the Ottawa Citizen: Mark Milk, Senior Fellow with the Fraser Instiute, offers the organization’s perspective on taxes.
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/touch/story.html?id=9767726
You can contact Mr Milke through the Fraser Institute.
@ bubblebustin
That’s another facebook plug-in comment site. Would someone with that profile please ask why the Fraser Institute has been silent on FATCA? Psssst, Badger has lots of good material to pilfer. 😉
@Em
I wrote to Mark in care of the Fraser Institute and he got back to me through his direct email. After a couple of exchanges, I asked him specifically if he’d write a column on FATCA, but this was prior to Canada’s IGA. Perhaps if he heard from others…