From the CRA website (FAQs– FATCA):
6. Will my financial institution be asking me if I was born in the U.S.?
A financial institution complying with the Agreement will not be required to ask its account holders about their place of birth.If a financial institution, applying the due diligence rules of the Agreement to its accounts, discovers any records connected to the account that have an unambiguous indication of a U.S. place of birth, the financial institution may treat the account as a reportable account or follow up with the account holder to obtain documentation that shows the account holder is not a U.S. resident or U.S. citizen.
A recent posting to IBS from BC Doc (from around the same time the servers went down):
RBC Direct Investing: The US Persons Round-Up:
I was helping a family member open an on-line investment account with RBC Direct Investments today. I couldn’t help but notice the many different ways RBC DI is trying to identify so-called “US Persons.”
Here are the questions asked by the on-line application:
Are you a U.S. Citizen or a U.S. resident for tax purposes?
If you answer yes, the next prompt is:
To comply with regulations, you will be presented with a W9 form with your application package.
Enter your US Social Security Number (SSN).
If you answer no, the next question is:
How many countries are you a resident of for tax purposes?
You are then asked:
Country of residence for tax purposes.
Next up is:
Enter your City of birth.
Followed by:
Enter your Country of birth.
Next up is:
Are you, the co-applicant, a U.S. Citizen or a U.S. resident for tax purposes?If you answer yes, you are prompted to enter your US Social Security Number (SSN).
You also get the statement, “To comply with regulations, you will be presented with a W9 form with your application package.”
If you answer no, the next prompt is:
How many countries is the co-applicant a resident of for tax purposes?This is followed by:
Co-applicant’s country of residence for tax purposes.
Co-applicant’s city of birth.
Co-applicant’s country of birth
Are you married or do you have a common-law spouse?
Is your spouse the joint applicant?
I think we can consider this a sign of things to come from Canadian banks and investment firms in the coming months. Forewarned is forearmed.
One more thing. A W-8BEN for is a part of the package. RBC-DI requires completion of the W-8BEN form so that Canadian citizens are given the more favourable 15% tax withholding by the US on their dividends (versus the standard 30% I believe if a W-8BEN is not completed). New on the W-8BEN are two questions:
City of Birth
Country of Birth
I have banked with RBC-DI since 2007. Prior W-8BEN forms did not ask city and country of birth.
The net has been cast!
My questions for today:
Why is RBC DI asking for country of birth if this information is not required by CRA?
If this information is not required, is it illegal for RBC DI to ask for it?
The questions about city of birth and country of birth on the W-8BEN appear to have been added by RBC DI. I don’t see these questions on the official IRS version of the W-8BEN.
Again, if this information is not required, is it legal for RBC-DI to ask?
I think anyone who refuses to submit their place of birth to a bank has already a legitimate case for becoming a litigant in the coming law suit. I was really quite disappointed that when I opened a new chequing account yesterday at one of the five majors, I was not asked my country of birth or whether I was a US citizen. They asked me all kinds of very personal financial information legitimate in trying to establish my credit worthiness–which I answered.
But had they asked me my nation of origin, I would told them off. I brought my citizenship card. That’s all they need to know.
I hate my bank, (love my credit union) but I think I will keep my nominal vestigial account with the Banksters in order to see if they start asking for my place of birth or other citizenships, etc. I have my CLN, but I resent having to prove that I am or am not a US person.
The assumption that one would have a SSN is a curious new wrinkle too. Unless you’ve lived in the US as a USC, why would you? A move to push USP’s to get a US tax id#?
It’s just Canadian banks do the legwork for the US as they hunt down their diaspora. Clever but in a way that leaves a bad aftertaste and no doubt in anyone’s mind that the USG considers Canada it’s vassal (though if you are paying attention to the current emissions nonsense in the news, you already knew that the USG expects Canada to jump when told.)
@YogaGirl:
It is clear the current admin in the US intend the entire world to cave and knuckle under.
Bilderberg just wrapped up. Their agenda is set and it includes world wide compliance on tax information to the UN via OECD and as soon as possible. ( implementing GATCA by Sept of this year)
Includes increases in ways to monitor all individuals and neuter any privacy laws and concerns. Their aim is to override all countries sovereignty and privacy laws in favour of the OECD global tax regime.
And what does the IGA Canada signed with IRS say?
“complies with OECD guidelines”
@ Yoga Girl,
Looks like Bill C-31 will have a $100 fine if the person doesn’t get a SSN.
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6495200&File=104#14
Note: the English translation of (b) is missing from the text I found on-line. So, I pasted the French version of (b), followed by my English translation of it.
Thank you for your fine editing and for posting the material calgary411. Based on the CRA material, RBC DI seems to be in overreach mode. In the interest of “knowing their client” for FATCA, will they also ask about my race, my religious preference, and my sexual preference? The answer to this latter question is no of course, but I am very offended that RBC appears to be going above and beyond IGA requirements to ask about my country of origin. As the information isn’t required, it feels discriminatory.
Apparently, here is what is coming:
http://www.jmccanneyscience.com/
“June 02, 2014 posting … in the upcoming economic collapse that is planned for the United States it is very important for the bankers to do 2 things … 1) destroy private ownership of property and 2) assure that EVERYONE is buried in IRS debt … the phony national debt … based on the foreign war debt … Obama care with its collection arm that goes to the IRS when you can not pay your bills (you ain’t seen nothing yet folks) … the economic destruction of the medical workers middle class (doctors – technicians – nurses – etc) … along with the 1099 reporting for the massive numbers of house loans that will foreclose in the coming months … couple that with the HR 2847 that places all foreign entities (banks businesses individuals) related to americans under complete IRS control that has already put any foreign business in absolute grid lock … with these chess moves in place the all encompassing eye seen on the american dollar will reign in economic chaos on the world … and oh by the way … everything including water will be controlled by LLC corporations with the nameless bankers at the helm … i hope you are ready … jim mccanney”
Found this little ditty while surfing the web, look what the Swiss Bankers Association proposed in April 2012!!
It makes a lot of sense.
“The SBA proposes that the definition of specified U.S. person is modified to exclude
from such definition:
any dual citizen of the United States and another country who resides on a
permanent basis outside the United States and has resided outside the United
States for the last 10 years;
any lawful permanent resident of the United States (e.g., a holder of a green
card) that no longer physically resides in the United States, maintains a tax
home outside the United States and whose green card has expired; or
any individual that is a resident of the United States by reason of the substantial
presence test but who maintains a closer connection to a foreign country under
the rules provided in Treas. Reg. § 301.7701(b) 2 without regard to satisfying
the filing requirements associated with notifying the IRS of such closer connec-tion
http://www.swissbanking.org/20120420-4760-bri-fatca_draft_comment_letter-cvo.pdf
Concerning form W-8 Ben, it appears that the official US form does not ask POB;
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw8ben.pdf
Firms MAY create a substitute W-8 Ben likely under the influence of compliance jackals. That substitute
form is probably what RBC has created.
Here is a sample I found;
https://www.sfcu.org/system/files/323/original/Updated_FORM_W-8BEN.pdf?1313601912
I do not know about others but I think asking place of birth is highly discriminatory in many countries.
If I remember LLoyds Group was sued and said they do not ask that information!! Which is a lie, they do and more so.
Asking citizenship….maybe….but place of birth…..stinks of discrimination. Besides FATCA and IGA agreements do not require asking it. Further this is confirmed by CRA.
Why is RBC DI asking for country of birth if this information is not required by CRA?
If this information is not required, is it illegal for RBC DI to ask for it?
1. When I first posted at Sandbox that CRA guidelines said financial institutions were not required to ask for place of birth, someone (I think it may have been GeorgeIII) quickly pointed out that not required is very different from must not ask.
2. Good question about whether it is illegal. Until the implementation act was introduced, I believe the answer to that question was it was a violation of Human Rights laws. However, the implementation act prevails over all other Canadian laws except the Income Tax Act. So whether it will be illegal now is not as clear.
What would be interesting would be for someone to try to open an account there and refusing to answer that question. If the person was refused an account for that reason, the next step they could take would be to file a Human Rights complaint and see what decision the Human Rights Commission makes. You do not require a lawyer to do that.
However, Human Rights Commissions are notorious for having a backlog of complaints and long delays in addressing the complaints.
In addition, I’m not certain whether this would fall under the Canada Human Rights Commission or a provincial Human Rights Commission.
The reason for my confusion on that is that banks fall under Canada Human Rights Act. Credit unions are under the jurisdiction of provincial Human Rights Codes.
At first glance, I think it would likely be Canada Human Rights. However, I don’t know if because it is the investment arm of RBC whether that would make a difference. I do know investment accounts are treated differently than bank accounts–even though I don’t completely understand why.
I am wondering whether my bank and, in turn, CRA will assume I am a US citizen based on my place of birth and then forward my banking information to the IRS. I renounced in 2012 and am therefore clear of all of this. If CRA then forwards my financial info mistakenly, therefore, breaching my privacy rights, it seems I should be able to sue them for that breach.
Common sense tells me that CRA should ask before sending any information to the US.
If you’ve lived in the same city for numerous years, possibly the path of least resistance might be to list the city of the banking institution as your place of birth?
@Blaze, “Why is RBC DI asking for country of birth if this information is not required by CRA?”
Simple, someone told them to.
Who told them? The transnational accounting firm that they employ who has a compliance arm and bills lots of $$$$$ for.
Georges observation from my side of the waters?
Some firms have gone hypercompliance even though the IGA does not require it.
Other firms are business as usual using existing KYC/AML onboarding.
Someone is right and someone is wrong.
IF it is proper in the spirit of FATCA to ask for client place of birth, it is equally proper to ask for parents place of birth. IF you have two US citizen parents the child is a US citizen regardless of how little time in the US the parents ever spent.
The firms that have not changed onboarding also are showing up as registered with the number……
That tells me that the IGA was meant to be business as usual EXCEPT if you discover a US place of birth as part of routine processing you need to do something.
But again I believe this is a compliance industry problem.
I think this is a good thread to keep going. Folks who are good with Twitter should send off to politicians, financial blogs– “Over-Reach by RBC– A Sign of Things to Come Under FATCA?” Perhaps someone who is not a client of RBC-DI or at least someone without US “indicia” (unlike me) can contact them and ask the “why” question. It would be good to make one of the big banks squirm over this (fear of a human rights lawsuit).
@BC_Doc. They have definately gone ultra vires and this is an important thread.
Also sounds like a Substitute W-8 Ben where they added there own questions.
What will be added next?
I no longer laugh that the next question will be citizenship of parents or parents place of birth.
FROM CRA WEBSITE: The CRA has not developed a prescribed form for Canadian financial institutions to use to collect the information they are required to collect under the agreement. Instead, financial institutions can design solutions that are tailored to their particular businesses as long as they get the required information.
So, it appears the banks can use whatever form they want and RBC seems to be “designing solutions that are tailored” to ask the question they are not required to ask–but are also not prohibited from asking.
FROM IGA: 4. Notwithstanding a finding of U.S. indicia under subparagraph B(1) of this section, a Reporting Canadian Financial Institution is not required to treat an account as a U.S. Reportable Account if:
a) Where the Account Holder information unambiguously indicates a
U.S. place of birth, the Reporting Canadian Financial Institution
obtains, or has previously reviewed and maintains a record of:
(1) A self-certification that the Account Holder is neither a
U.S. citizen nor a U.S. resident for tax purposes (which
may be on an IRS Form W-8 or other similar agreed form);
(2) A non-U.S. passport or other government-issued
identification evidencing the Account Holder’s citizenship
or nationality in a country other than the United States; and
(3) A copy of the Account Holder’s Certificate of Loss of
Nationality of the United States or a reasonable explanation
of:
(a) The reason the Account Holder does not have such a
certificate despite relinquishing U.S. citizenship; or
(b) The reason the Account Holder did not obtain U.S.
citizenship at birth.
Once again, the language is the financial institution is “not required.” It does not say “must not.” In other words, it seems to be up to the financial institution to decide if they will report or not even with a CLN or other reasonable explanation of why someone does not have one.
I have no idea what they will actually do. Remember, however, the call Johnnb got from ScotiaMcLeod–and they have had his CLN on file for over a year.
Don’t worry, we’ll be able to come under compliance without the threat of penalties:
http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2014/06/irs-to-unveil-compliance-program-for-us.html
From Lydia Beloud at Bloomberg’s Daily Tax RealTime:
U.S. citizens abroad who are noncompliant with their tax obligations but aren’t willfully evading taxes may be able to come into compliance under a new program to be announced by the Internal Revenue Service in a matter of weeks, IRS Commissioner John Koskinen said June 3. “We are well aware that there are many U.S. citizens who have resided abroad for many years, perhaps even the vast majority of their lives. We have been considering whether these individuals should have an opportunity to come into compliance that doesn’t involve the type of penalties that are appropriate for U.S.-resident taxpayers who were willfully hiding their investments overseas,” Koskinen said during an Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development forum in Washington. Koskinen told reporters following the event that program details will be issued in the next few weeks.
This said, immigrants are still screwed. They’re U.S. residents willfully evading their investment overseas.
I am always suspicious when they mention compliance IRS and OECD in the same sentence. Colour me cynic!
OECD makes a big deal of ‘getting them in any way we can , tell them anything to get their info and then we can do what we want’.
I am not kidding. They actually say that.
@noone, that would be rather promising.The problem is that millions of expats are TERRIFIED of what the US would do. Streamlined may have been their solution but expats remained TERRIFIED.
What do I think would work?
1.) Needs to be shown as a true amnesty using the A word.
2.) File six years FBARS and guaranteed no penalties if accounts did not have funds that were illegally obtained, which was the intention of Congress when it enacted the law 40 years ago.
3.) File X number years of returns, pay the tax due, pay interest due and maybe a penalty but only on the amount of tax due. Guarantee the audit risk is no greater than for timely filed returns.
4.) Better yet simply require a copy of the foreign return for so many back years and a US return for the recent year.
Heard on the radio while out driving today: Conservative government made a big deal out of Canadians not having to fill out the long form census. Saying it was a privacy issue.
NOW they come out with Bill C-13- means apparently they can get the information without your permission ,gather the data without your knowledge and there, now.. no messy long form for you to fill out, we will do it for you.. poof goes your privacy.
GEEZ!
John McCombe is on CKNW right now discussing Bill C-13 with lots of information and very pertinent questions.
Access here:
http://www.cknw.com
53 pages in the bill 7 of which deal with bullying. The rest talks about getting the private data without the bother or formality of getting a warrant.
Sound familiar?!
Open Media is keeping it’s eye on this and now remarking about how many people are speaking out against this, including Stockwell Day and the Conservative’s own Privacy Commissioner nominee is speaking out against it.( and his nomination is controversial as well because of his involvement in the “Canada’s data sharing scheme with the US” ) Split the bill to one in which cyberbullying is dealt with and the rest of the bill dealt with summarily ( meaning scrap it)
There are so many just screaming about this I would think they would also re-think IGA ( also mentioned in the broadcast) and the question is asked by Jon: WHY does the government come back again and again with these bills that guarantee a violation of Canadian’s privacy rights? What is going on?
http://www.openmedia.ca David Christopher was the spokesman speaking with Jon McComb.
Previous bill was C-30 which was withdrawn because “hundreds of thousands of Canadian’s shouted it down”
I have heard from a reliable source that Meridian Credit Union will be asking anyone who applies to be new member and open account if they were born in the US or are a US Citizen.
@down the rabbit hole, this is on the Meridian page:
http://www.meridiancu.ca/meridian/legal/FATCA/FAQ/Pages/default.aspx
Those of us with CLNs can tell them to take a big hike – if we wanted to be subjected to discrimination against based on our birthplace, we can easily achieve that at any other FATCA compliant FI and CBA member. So why would a US person or ex.-US person pick Meridian then? And their FAQs aren’t the least bit sheepish or regretful about FATCA, or critical.
I will be curious to see what they do with pre-existing accts.
@mracer– I took out my Canadian citizenship over a decade ago. My standard response to the types of questions RBC DI is asking is “Canadian citizen born in Canada. Place of birth is Anytown, Canada. Not a dual. No US ties.” I’ve used the W-8BEN ever since I became Canadian– have never used the W-9.
@noone/@George: I’ll add a number 5 to your list, George.
5. Change to residence based taxation like the rest of the world an stop harassing people who no longer live in the US.
Even if a so-called true amnesty were offered, I wouldn’t bite. I live and work in Canada. I am Canadian. My taxes will stay here in Canada. The US needs to adapt, not the rest of the globe.