On July 2 2014 my understanding is that Canada’s banks will be asking (at least) new account holders questions and employing a variety of approaches to establish U.S. personhood. These questions will violate Canada’s Charter Of Rights and other laws. Many of us also wonder whether the Silent Majority out there feels that such questions have no consequence.
Coming to a Canadian bank near you?
We need to know the actual questions and approaches and are focusing first on questions about U.S. personhood that will be asked by Canada’s major banks when Canadians open a NEW PERSONAL CHEQUING account after July 1. I suspect that different banks may ask different questions.
When you have this information, please provide in your comments these questions to be asked and I will update the top of this post.
[Please also read the disturbing comments below from @Pollyanna, who reports that one Canadian bank actually used information provided in casual conversations with the account manager to help establish whether the account holder is a U.S. person.]
My local Canadian bank branches provide this information on U.S. questions asked or not asked when opening a new account (this info may all be incorrect; please correct):
SCOTIA BANK: “Are you a U.S. person for tax purposes?”
http://www.scotiabank.com/ca/en/0,,6098,00.html
TD BANK CANADA TRUST: “Are you a U.S. citizen” AND “Where were you born?”
TD’s web information page: http://www.td.com/fatca/index.jsp
See: LM Correspondence with CustomerCare, TD for others to consider in relation to their own FFI’s web information and their relationship with their FIs.
HSBC CANADA: “Do you hold multiple citizenship” AND “What is your place of birth”
http://www.expat.hsbc.com/1/2/hsbc-expat/services/expat-tax/tax-matters/fatca?WT.ac=HBIB_14_5_29_home_small_pro_FATCA_Find_out_more
NEW HSBC information consent
CIBC: Local branch will receive info July 2.
Note: the link below is for CIBC World Markets, which deals with Wholesale Banking (Corporate & Institutional) as opposed to Retail Banking (Personal & Small Business). We have yet to see a CIBC FATCA page specifically written for Retail Banking clients. Perhaps as of July 2, once local CIBC branches receive info, there will be such as page on the CIBC website.
http://www.cibcwm.com/cibc-eportal-web/portal/wm?pageId=fatca&language=en_CA
BMO: “Do you have any other citizenships” (tentative per @Anne Boleyn)
http://www.bmo.com/home/about/banking/foreign-account-tax-compliance
RBC ROYAL BANK:
http://www.rbc.com/aboutus/fatca.html
I would be very skeptical of this information:
“If you open a new account and provide two pieces of ID that are not U.S. tainted and do NOT INCLUDE A CANADIAN PASSPORT (e.g., Canadian driver’s license and social insurance number are ok) and the bank has no other evidence to indicate that you are a US person (e.g., you never told the bank by mistake) no U.S. questions will be asked.
However, should you PRESENT A (TOXIC) CANADIAN PASSPORT at the time of opening an account, YOU WILL BE ASKED whether you do or do not have a U.S. place of birth.”
The way to stop the questions from being asked is to go to:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/billfrezza/2013/10/15/the-international-monetary-fund-lays-the-groundwork-for-global-wealth-confiscation/#34c731e06dde
That one’s only 4 years out of date.
@DoD
That is where the information originates from what I understand.
And there is legitimacy to Forbes, I would think.
Although the IRS and US Treasury insist that FATCA and FBAR reports are only needed to double check that US taxpayers have paid taxes on all income derived from their investments and deposits, it does seem pretty convenient for them to have all that information in their databanks should they ever decide to implement a “wealth tax”. Therefore, I’d say Pat Canadian’s heads-up post is quite relevant to IBS. You don’t have to believe the FATCA/FBAR road leads to what amounts to wealth confiscation but hurling words like claptrap and bullshit at this theory is pretty overreactive and unnecessary.
@EmBee
I remember the immediate response to form 8938 was to assume the purpose was to have a record of assets. With confiscation in mind.
@Patricia Moon and EmBee:
The information I posted about IMF and FATCA is difficult to find and a bit dated. I certainly hope that wealth confiscation is not the case but I fear otherwise. We don’t know for sure but thanks for keeping an open mind about this. It’s simply something that I thought should be looked at.
@Norman Diamond:
Perhaps you need to learn more about keeping your eyes and ears open and your mouth closed.
@DoD: same for you as for Norman Diamond
Norman points out that the article you referred to is anti-semitic and claptrap. I agree with him. We are told to shut up. So much for free discussion at IBS.
The Forbes article doesn’t allege that the Rothschillds own the IMF.
@Norman,
Exactly.
@PatCanadian
Many of those who’ve predicted some of the things that have become reality may have easily been accused as “catastrophizing” when they made their predictions. There’s little that seems far-fetched to me when it comes to the actions of those desperate to control.
@Norman and DoD
I am not anti-Semitic and was simply trying to point out the possibility of confiscation by the USA debt ridden government. This is “suggested” by IMF. Here is another source which also mentions the Forbes article on possible future confiscation by debt ridden governments.
http://www.globalresearch.ca/the-imf-proposes-global-wealth-confiscation-the-appropriation-of-household-savings/5440347
No one is telling you to shut up just suggesting to keep an open mind. Of course, confiscation of tax payer money is not going to be highly publicized and sources are limited.
@Bubblebustin
Again, I’d hope to be wrong about confiscation. Just pointing out the amount of debt incurred by USA government is “catastrophic” and the possibility this may happen down the road is there. When I left the US and moved to Canada back in 2004, I never imagined FATCA.
I wonder if articles like this laid the foundation for the more common thinking nowadays, of viewing US actions as confiscatory. Rather than viewing the article as being out of date, it points to the source of the information, which is the report, link below.
Some small excerpt phrases from forbes article
OCT 15, 2013
The International Monetary Fund Lays The Groundwork For Global Wealth Confiscation
“…… goes on to build a case for drastic measures and recommends a series of escalating income and consumption tax increases culminating in the direct confiscation of assets.
“……. That means that all households with positive net wealth—everyone with retirement savings or home equity—would have their assets plundered under the IMF’s formulation.
From the report directly:
“There is a surprisingly large amount of experience to draw on, as such levies were widely adopted in Europe after World War I.”
The IMF is a puppet organization of Western govts and I would tend to think, if they are stating things like this, there should be no surprises if they come to pass.
We need to analyze this report.
@Patricia Moon
Thanks for this link to original report from IMF.org (107 pages). I’m going out now for the day but will read through this in coming days. Will report back with any findings of interest. I hope others will have a look at this as well. At the very least we can become more informed about IMF:
As you have said, “The IMF is a puppet organization of Western govts and I would tend to think, if they are stating things like this, there should be no surprises if they come to pass.”
OK I scanned the report. It is a little too complex for all but policy wonks. It details the house of cards on which most of the world’s economies are built. It lists various taxing regimes and some of the tax avoidance schemes in use around the world.
It points out that most countries are running unsustainable deficits and suggests various tax increases or spending decreases that could be employed.
We are familiar with almost all of them. Politicians are congenitally unable to reduce let alone hold the line on spending-it’s in their DNA. Demand for government spending will always exceed supply. Think health care- unlimited; welfare-unlimited; legal costs-unlimited; infrastructure-unliited; education-unlimited, restitution for past and present wrongs-unlimited and so on.
So they come up with new taxes every one of which is unpopular. The direct confiscation of assets- a capital tax- gets a tiny amount of discussion in the report. Which tax is ‘better’ depends solely on whose ox is being gored.
A capital tax is no better and not much worse than an income tax, a capital gains tax, a value added tax, a property transfer tax, a sales tax, a carbon tax and on and on.
Don’t get all excited about one tax over another. They are all taxes. Some are more ‘fair’ than others. Some serve a perceived political or economic goal. Most have unintended cosequences.
The USA’s ‘exit tax’ is the direct confiscation of assets. B.C.s new property transfer tax (15%!) is the direct confiscation of assets.
You may or may not approve of the IMF. it is not owned or operated by Rothschild banking interests.
@ DoD
You left out war-unlimited. It is too significant (and devastating) to be relegated to “and so on”.
I agree with concerns about confiscation. In fact we’ve already seen confiscation and can expect more. We’ve also seen confiscation based on race, religion, economic or social stratum, etc., etc., etc., etc. There’s still no call for pretending that the Rothschilds own the IMF.
“2 + 2 = 4, Obama founded ISIS, and FATCA was created by Lord Kitchener” doesn’t stop 2 + 2 = 4 from being true but stops sensible people from listening to the speaker.
What portion of FATCA reporting costs, and FATCA-friendly lobbying costs are the Banksters passing on to ALL accountholders? They are very active lobbyists ( see ex. 12-Month Lobbying Summary for Canadian Bankers Association / Association des Banquiers Canadiens
https://lobbycanada.gc.ca/app/secure/ocl/lrs/do/clntSmmry?clientOrgCorpNumber=15307 ).
Any update on what FATCA implementation was purportedly costing FIs recently?
And what about the OECD CRS GATCA costs? What will ALL of us be paying for that?
Stealthy use of rising banking fees erode our savings;
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/banking-fees-profits-1.3629701
@DoD
Thanks for the synopsis. While the idea of confiscation may not figure as prominently in the report as some taxes, as you say, the Exit Tax is confiscatory as is that BC property transfer tax.
It runs in my memory that some of the bigwigs at OECD have been connected to IMF in a big way. To me, a bunch of banksters who couldn’t possibly have our best interests at heart.
Pity the poor Greeks. It looks like they might become the first little lambs to be fleeced by a wealth tax. This plan is just plain bonkers.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-08-15/wealth-tax-looms-greeks-forced-declare-all-assets-tax-authority
Wikipedia doesn’t think Greece will be first.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wealth_tax
Historical examples[edit]
Iceland had a wealth tax until 2006 and a temporary wealth tax reintroduced in 2010, for four years. The tax was levied at a rate of 1.5% on net assets exceeding 75,000,000 kr for individuals and 100,000,000 kr for married couples.[citation needed]
Some other European countries have discontinued this kind of tax in the recent years: Austria, Denmark (1995), Germany (1997), Finland (2006), Luxembourg (2006) and Sweden (2007). In the United Kingdom, property (real estate) is often a person’s main asset, and has been taxed – for example the window tax of 1696, the rates, to some extent the Council Tax, and a new Mansion Tax proposed by some political parties.
The rise and fall of wealth taxation:
an inquiry into the fiscal history of the American states
Volume One
by
Monty Hindman
https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/handle/2027.42/78949/montyh_1.pdf?sequence=2
I looked over the IMF report which DoD has already summarized for us:
“OK I scanned the report. It is a little too complex for all but policy wonks. It details the house of cards on which most of the world’s economies are built. It lists various taxing regimes and some of the tax avoidance schemes in use around the world.
It points out that most countries are running unsustainable deficits and suggests various tax increases or spending decreases that could be employed.”
Not being a financial or legal expert, the following stands out to me as being relevant. Here are some exerts from the report which may indicate IMF support for confiscation to reduce debt or at least pay the interest:
2. Taxing Our Way Out of – or into – Trouble
Box 6. A One-Off Capital Levy?
“The sharp deterioration of the public finances in
many countries has revived interest in a “capital levy”—
a one-off tax on private wealth—as an exceptional
measure to restore debt sustainability.1 The appeal is
that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance
is possible and there is a belief that it will never be
repeated, does not distort behavior (and may be seen
by some as fair).”
“There is a surprisingly large amount of experience to
draw on, as such levies were widely adopted in Europe
after World War I and in Germany and Japan after
World War II.”
“The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to
precrisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt
ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of
15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent
on households with positive net wealth.2”
DoD says, “You may or may not approve of the IMF. it is not owned or operated by Rothschild banking interests.”
Norman Diamond says, “I agree with concerns about confiscation. In fact we’ve already seen confiscation and can expect more. We’ve also seen confiscation based on race, religion, economic or social stratum, etc., etc., etc., etc. There’s still no call for pretending that the Rothschilds own the IMF.”
There are many theories out there about the Rothschilds and other wealthy families. For example, it has been said that the World Bank/IMF is owned and controlled by NM Rothschild & Sons plus 30 to 40 of the wealthiest people in the world.
Officially the United Nations is the parent organization of the IMF. I’m not concerned with theories and rumors as to who controls the IMF. My main concerns being FATCA and confiscation. As DoD has mentioned, confiscation is already happening with the US Exit Tax.