Posted on May 7, 2014 by Tim Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 85 Comments When: Today, Wednesday, May 7 at 1:45 pm Where: Ottawa Centre Block Link: http://www.parl.gc.ca/sencommitteebusiness/Notice.aspx?parl=41&ses=2&comm_id=13&Language=E&meeting_id=15043 Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:Like Loading...
They are talking about two things at one hearing.
I have mute on during the OPP guy although the tried to ask him what the OPP thinks what FATCA to which he just pretended not to hear.
Waiting for the Bank guy to get asked questions.
Try this link:
@WhiteKat, on the page
There’s a line that says “General Information” and then in green “Now Playing”. Just below that is a link “View This Clip”. Click on that.
It downloads. Click on your downloads on your computer or in Google. Then click on the file.
Its breaking up on me
There is no “view this clip” under “now playing” on that link for me….must be something wrong with my PC.
OPP detective makes it clear CRA cannot under section 241 of the criminal code release information to ANYONE , even if they know it is from a criminal enterprise unless and until there is a warrant and a charge, basically.
Lib Sen from Quebec asking if there is any protection from criminals for CRA employees.
On issue of privacy, many e-mails with concerns:
Ok, I have lost the feed. Will return.
@Furious I know what you mean, I did this yesterday with no problem…today there is no “View this clip” to trigger the download.
I give up…maybe this is a hint from the universe that I am too FATCA obsessed.
CBA Hannah now saying it is a far better alternative to have info from FIs sent to CRA than directly to IRS. Thinks if they did nothing it would destroy Canadian economy.
Thanks Furious for the play by play.
The CBA guy is being quite rude to the Senators in my opinion. He is quite exasperated.
CBA says they respect the US’ sovereign to tax its citizens.
CBA really doesn’t care how many Canadian citizens this effects.
CBA Hannah: Consequences of NON compliance are far more than any costs of compliance. Answer to Joseph Days question regarding cost to FIs in Canada.
Question now as to how many. CBA Hannah has no way of knowing or verifying accuracy of the 1 million number of those affected in Canada.
Det Inspector: Fintrac. CRA. Police Force, OPP in this instance.
This legislation allows information for Income tax from CRA to be sent to a police agency before a charge is actually laid.
OPP Det. thinks this is so much better than bothering to go through the requirements set out in section 241 of criminal code in which they must have cause before they get the information.
FINTRAC however does analysis and sends information unsolicited to police about ‘suspicious’ transaction, but police do not send or request information to FINTRAC.
Access to information based on reasonable grounds. This is similar to a ‘warrant’
Several. Section 487 Search warrant.
Needs officer to determine from the criminal code whether it is allowable under the Charter regarding unreasonable search and seizure. Must have reasonable grounds to determine a crime has been committed.
Day: asked to pass this legislation without guidance and we were hoping to get that information from you, det.
Det says he cannot resolve the differences in the IGA from the current criminal code.
what test is FINTRAC using to send information about banking transaction to police unsolicited. Large amounts of cash transaction. CRA information does not come from FINTRAC.
Amount of money, frequency of transaction in bank accounts.
FINTRAC does not send names, but upon investigation, they (police) get names.
The testimony of Mr. Hannah from the Canadian Bankers Association was just what one would expect: The banks would much rather report account information on their “US person” customers to the CRA than directly to the IRS. So he is quite happy with the proposed legislation and sees no problems with it.
The meeting tonight may be more interesting, because Finance Minister Joe Oliver is to be a witness:
So I switched computers, this time I see the blue ‘view this clip” button, but having problems with media player….weird how button shows on one PC and not the other.
ARGHHHH. I hate computers.
The schedule for the meeting tonight shows an impossibly long list of witnesses for a two-hour session, meaning that there will be no time for serious questioning about anything in the omnibus bill. Of course that was the Harper government’s intent.
Upshot in my view:
Proposed legislation will by pass any need to get a warrant for probable cause and the protections in the Charter be damned.
CBA Hannah simply does not care one way or the other.
“US Persons” as determined by IRS is ok with him. Collateral damage , don’t you know.
What irks me is NO mention of the associated damage to Canadians all.
Yet this was very useful: ADMITTED that the IGA will override the protections in the Charter regarding unreasonable search and seizure.
Charter protections in Canada and 4th Amendment protections in the states. If US persons and their Canadian spouses are targeted, both have protections both Charter and Constitution. However , if IGA is passed, it OVERRIDES and nullifies those protections. ERGO: Canadian who has earned living in Canada , paid taxes to Canada with no involvement with US whatsoever will have his/her information turned over to IRS who share with CIA, NSA , FBI and anybody else they want to share it with. WITHOUT Charter or Constitution protections.
This will destroy whole families in Canada. Not to mention unwarranted targeting mistakenly by those who travel to the US , have vacation homes in the US , bank in the US but are Canadians who otherwise would have NO US “indicia” . CBA Hannah thinks this is just fine.
Banks are protected and shielded but Canadians and Residents are thrown to the wolves.
My video froze where Darren Hannah (interim CBA president) says: “It is a much better alternative given the stakes.” Yeah, we get the stakes through our retirement savings, Canada gets a stake through the heart of its sovereignty, while the bankers continue to enjoy their high-priced steaks. I do not like this man’s now frozen steely gaze that he is giving the senators.
“It is a much better alternative given the stakes.” Yeah, we get the stakes through our retirement savings, Canada gets a stake through the heart of its sovereignty, while the bankers continue to enjoy their high-priced steaks. I do not like this man’s now frozen steely gaze that he is giving the senators.”
Right on, Em. I agree completely!
You know what? I’m tired of the bankers having their say. They got invited to meetings we had no access to. They’ve had pull and influence while we were being thrown under the bus. They’ve had their say as stake holders and it’s time for this government to tell them they have had enough to say and enough influence. It’s our turn to speak up. It’s our government too and we have a right to have just as much input as they have had all along. I’m sick of listening to bankers parrot the same old tired defensive baloney. They were bailed out, that’s the bottom line. I don’t even see an apology for the way they sought to sell us all out, their customers. So it’s time for the senate to tell the bankers they’ve had their turn.
It does seem as though Conservative Senator Booth of Manitoba is much more sympathetic to our cause than the Conservative MP’s in the House of Commons.
Important to remember and keep in mind.
My take on OPP D.I. Paul Beesley’s testimony is that he probably thinks it would be peachy-keen if they could just get anybody’s tax information willy-nilly in order to make it easy-peasy for them to catch money launderers and drug dealers. He thinks the current regime is really burdensome for them because they have to produce evidence that a crime has been committed before getting tax information.
The OPP guy really had nothing to do with FATCA. Somehow they had him their at the same time although I do have some issues with what he said outside of FATCA.