My advice I would get moving on submissions this weekend. I did talk to the committee clerk who said there is no formal deadline but the sooner the better will be better for them.
2. Subject-matter of Bill C-31, An Act to implement certain provisions of the budget tabled in Parliament on February 11, 2014 and other measures. Part 5 (Clauses 99 to 101)(FATCA)
Witnesses
Department of Finance Canada
– Brian Ernewein, General Director, Tax Policy Branch
– Kevin Shoom, Senior Chief, International Taxation and Special Projects
– Ted Cook, Senior Legislative Chief, Tax Legislation
I posted a comment on the news link and told Doris to seek help with Fatca. Obviously, if her bank finds out where she was born, they will send he to the US for prosecution while the Canadian government sits and watches….
@Tim: Thanks for the heads up about the time frame! I sent my letter to the Committee a few minutes ago and attached a copy of my Feb. 17, 8-page submission to the Finance Department. Since it was completely ignored the first time I’m glad that all my work could get a second airing!
@Wondering: Since we know that there are a lot Canadians directly affected but we don’t know exactly how many I usually just state that this involves a “significant” number of Canadians. If the members of our government were doing their jobs they would realize that if only one Canadian were affected by this it would be one too many.
@Blaze
RE David Alward, I recall reading a couple of years ago that he decided to become compliant. I don’t regard the following as authoritative, but it confirms my recollection.
http://expatsinca.wordpress.com/2011/10/12/new-brunswick-premier-david-alward-caught-in-fatca-nightmare/
Why has he not spoken out? Can’t answer that.
@Kathy: Your question is not “stupid.” If you have the questions, others probably also do.
The submissions do not have to be in any particular format or on any particular form. Most people have submitted theirs via e-mail with an attached pdf or Word Document to the submission. It may also be possible to put the entire submission in an e-mail. You can also send it via snail mail, but considering the short time frames, it may reach the Senators too late (Why didn’t they ask for the ones already submitted?!?)
We had a thread at Maple Sandbox where a few people shared their letters. You will find Petit Suisse’s submission by clicking on the here link in the thread. There are links to others in the Comments.
http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/a-place-to-share-our-letters/
The important thing is to let the Senators know how FATCA affects you and make suggestions about what you think the government should do. It is important that it is in your own words and that it describes your own feelings and views.
You can also read here what I sent to the Senators Tuesday and yesterday.
http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/proposed-amendment-idea-sent-to-ndp-liberals-on-finance-committee/comment-page-1/#comments
I apologize our formatting to block quotes or highlight is not working at Sandbox right now, so it all seems to run together.
@NorthernSrhrike: Yes that is part of what I remember reading. It was in an article in a NB newspaper around August or September of 2011, but that article does not still seem to be available on line. The publication may have been the Telegraph-Journal, but you need a subscription to access their content.
Does anyone in NB subscribe to their on line publication?
@Kathy: P.S. Be sure to include your name, address and other contact information. In the links to the submissions at Sandbox, this has been excluded, but this was included in the submissions themselves.
@Blaze
Thanks for the info and the links. I’ll mail mine out this weekend.
@ Kathy
Yes, they are just letters with no particular requirements. It’s important that the committee gets more than testimony from the government’s and the banking industry’s side. Most of us are just ordinary people so we’re not likely going to be able to write anything really formal. Adding a pdf attachment to your e-mail is probably a good idea as Tim has suggested. Obviously if the committee is going to read these things before the meeting date then snail mail is not going to make it there in time. I’m not sure if the committee will read our comments but I think we should try anyway because we’re running out of opportunities like this. I’m following up my “submission” to the clerk with a separate e-mail for each of the committee members asking them to take testimony from those affected by FATCA or from those who are familiar with our concerns and can present these concerns to the committee (John Richardson, Dr. Kish, knowledgeable professors like Hogg, Christians, Cockfield and of course our blazing star Lynne).
@Blaze
Doris was attempting to get her children visas in the US. Was this woman never issued a birth certificate. Getting a SIN and medical card without supporting documentation used to be very easy back in the day. Now you can’t get photo ID without photo ID.
Re submission, everyone’s going to do such a good job covering everything I’m sure, so I’ve decided that I’m going to do something different. I’m just going to send our government every negative statement they’ve made about FATCA that I can find (emphasis on Minister Flaherty’s). Let them eat their own words – and his.
@ Em
Thanks. I saw the email addresses for the committee members, but I’m not sure about the submission to the clerk. Is that nffn@sen.parl.gc.ca ?
@ Kathy
Yes.
@ bubblebustin
YES with a thumbs up. 🙂
@Bubblebustin Please post them here. You may want to conclude with Weston’s “thrilled” comment.
@BB:In addition to government, you may want to include comments from Terry Campbell, President Canadian Bankers Association: ” FATCA is the poster child for the problem of extra-territoriality…It’s hugely unworkable. It extends U.S. territoriality into Canada. It threatens to erode Canadian sovereignty.”
http://business.financialpost.com/2012/08/02/canadas-banking-system-very-strong-canadian-bankers-association-head-terry-campbell/
And: “The challenge with FATCA (the U.S. law) has always been it is an extraterritorial application of U.S. law which conflicts in many regards, including privacy, with Canadian law,” Campbell explained. “Secondly, it is an intrusion of U.S. authority into the Canadian space and it is administratively a very, very burdensome exercise.”
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/canadian-banks-wary-of-u-s-tax-disclosure-law-1.1263659
@BB: More from Terry Cambell at Vancouver Board of Trade: “Imagine that, to open a bank account, you have to prove you are not a U.S. citizen before we’ll open the account. It’s kind of a nightmare situation…I would encourage everyone in the room to find out about FATCA. The more you learn, the more concerned you will be. I encourage you to make your voice known.”
FATCA begins at about 20.12 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wosK05ynMX4
@ Bubblebustin and Blaze
Wow, this is really a great idea. How about including the former US Ambassador’s “reassurring” words to Canadian grannies and the fact that the new Ambassador hasn’t any words for them at all — not yet at least.
http://canada.usembassy.gov/ambassador/news-and-speeches/18-october-2011-ambassador-jacobsons-remarks-to-the-canadian-club.html
18 October 2011: Ambassador Jacobson’s Remarks To The Canadian Club:
QUOTE
So you could have a situation where some 70-year-old grandma:
* was born in the US;
* moved back to Canada as a young child;
* never earned any money in the US;
* has no assets in the US; and
* dutifully paid all of her taxes in Canada.
She didn’t file a US return because she didn’t think she had to. And because she didn’t owe any US taxes. Nonetheless, grandma could be theoretically subject to serious penalties. To my knowledge we have never gone after a grandma in those circumstances.
But there has been a lot of press about this lately and people are worried that we will come after them.
When I read all of this I was concerned. So last week I called the Commissioner of the United States Internal Revenue Service to see what we could do. I explained the problem to him.
The result is that both he and I are sympathetic to the concerns. We are going to work together to see if we can’t find a way to accommodate grandma — and others — here in Canada. But we have to figure out a way to do it without letting the person who is trying to evade taxes in the Cayman Islands off the hook.
My message on this one is to sit tight. We are not unreasonable. We are not unsympathetic. We are not irresponsible.
END QUOTE
@Kathy (and all) – it is politically VERY important that everyone get something in to the Senate Committee. Two reasons. Firstly, short of a non-stop campaign carried by the media, pretty much the only way politicians know what Canadians care about is when WE tell them. Most of us are, by nature, fairly quiet and unassuming. Squeaky wheels get the (political) grease. Let them know we are here, we are numerous, this is an issue we care a lot about (and, by extension, will impact things like voting intentions). There is nothing cynical about it – politicians of all stripes genuinely WANT to hear about issues that concern voters. For sure they’ll apply their own optics to viewing the matter, but it a crucial first step to getting a political solution is getting a profile. In our case, we have a LOT positive to say and we have a pretty simple solution that should annoy but not outrage the US (our proposed amendment to the statute excluding Canadian citizens and permanent residents) and thus offer a fairly easy “win-win” opportunity. This is JUST the sort of thing the Senate loves to chime in about when acting as a chamber of sober second thought. Which brings me to my next point.
Second Reason – the Supreme Court in yesterday’s Senate Reference decision will have inflated the egos of these folks quite a bit in terms of underlining their constructive role in the formation of good legislation (i.e. something beyond crass snorting at the trough which is the unfortunate reputation they have developed recently). This actually IS their job – pointing out unanticipated consequences of legislation and proposing practical solutions that might solve them. They are not meant to dream up or even contradict broad brushes of government policy, but they can legitimately suggest other means for government to achieve their policy while inflicting less collateral damage.
As I have noted before, there are well over 8 million page views on this site – almost a million in the last 6 weeks alone. Obviously many people check in several times a day, but even 50,000 people taking the trouble to write even a SHORT note to the Committee in their own words and expressing their own perspective will be hugely influential. If we can persuade the Senate – and through them the House – to adopt the amendment, it will be a whole lot simpler, faster and cheaper than the Charter Challenge. Please – everyone – take twenty minutes to compose something and send it in this weekend.
PS – while many have been cynical about the impact of sending submissions in, I think we HAVE made an impact already. I submitted a comment to the Finance people in response to the initial request for comments on the draft legislation decrying the fact that banks could elect to notify without telling their customers and without giving them an opportunity to demonstrate that they are not US citizens. The revised draft legislation appears to have tightened the optional language in the IGA somewhat which is a good thing. Small victory I grant you, but I would bet that that tweak arose from our comments being considered. I am not as cynical as some – I think we have already made a positive difference and have an opportunity here to do more.
That’s great everybody, thank you for the suggestions and links! Please, if anyone can think of any more anti-FATCA comments from those who are now pro-FATCA, please post them here. I’ve got my work cut out tomorrow (have a houseguest to entertain until then). Should I conclude the submission with “What’s changed?”
@ Anne Frank
Just to get things somewhat in one place I’m going to put your amendment suggestion here too:
“Notwithstanding any other provision of this Act or the Agreement, for all purposes related to the implementation of this Act and the Agreement, “US Person” and “Specified US Person” shall not include any person who is a Canadian citizen or legal permanent resident who is ordinarily resident in Canada.”
I assume that the amendment suggestion has been e-mailed to the Senate committee members, right? And maybe the Department of Finance too? I didn’t include it in my “please consider all sides to the FATCA issue” e-mails. If someone who hasn’t written yet wants to include it what do they say? I have recently read of an excellent suggestion …. or something like that?
I just emailed my submission to the Senate Committee on National Finance at nffn@sen.parl.gc.ca with copies to all the relevant Senators (thanks Blaze for providing the list). I urged them to recommend Anne Frank’s proposed amendment to the IGA enabling act and copied my general letter of concern about FATCA that I submitted to Finance Canada back in early March.
I had initially thought that we should be asking the Senate to remove the IGA enabling act from Bill C-31 but after reading Blaze’s submission I agree that lobbying for Anne Frank’s amendment is the best strategy.
With the proposed amendment would there be merit in quoting the master nationality rule
@ George
Yes, absolutely. And maybe paramount allegiance too.
Under international law, the Master Nationality Rule requires that “when a dual citizen is in the country of one of his two nationalities, that country has the right to treat that person as if he or she were solely a citizen or national of that country. This includes the right to impose military service obligations, or to require an exit permit to leave.”
From the US Dept of State, 7 Fam 080, the formal and OFFICIAL US Position.
“It is a generally recognized rule, often regarded as a rule of international law,
 that when a person who is a dual national is residing in either of the countries
 of nationality, the person owes paramount allegiance to that country, and that
 country has the right to assert its claim without interference from the other 
country.”
Em I would guess that most politicians have never heard of what you wrote
Canadian Cop –
Here’s the citation for the Campobello story:
http://usxcanada.wordpress.com/2011/10/01/2011-oct-1-iype/
[Organized data is rapidly retrievable, not much like groping through wetware fog for vague recollections.]
PS No apologies for dead links; I didn’t kill them.
Thanks for trying, USX. Looks like your website and Brock (and it seems Maple Sandbox too) all linked to the same newspaper/s that no longer have the Telegraph article online, so the only Campobello article we’re aware that is accessible of is the St. Croix Courier one.
We knew the links that we had to the Telegraph article had been cut a year or so ago and I know a few of us wished we’d kept a copy because it was such a terrific article. So, much appreciate your checking to see if possibly you had a link to a site that still had the Telegraph article up, because it was a super article really showing how ridiculous and nasty the US is making life for innocent people.