If clicking on a link brings you to the wrong page of the comment thread, CLICK HERE to get to its current page.
UPDATE December 23, 2017: Please see the following post for the latest information: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2017/12/15/un-human-rights-complaint-quadruples-its-signatures/
UPDATE November 28, 2017:
Also, see MuzzledNoMore’s updated post, United Nations Human Rights Complaint: Seeking Advice and Additional Signatures
**************
UPDATE November 23, 2017:
UN Complaint Final July 29 2014 – updated links November 23 2017
**************************
UPDATE JANUARY 10, 2017:
From MuzzledNoMore:
Just letting everybody know that we’re still waiting to hear from the UN about the status of our Complaint. With any luck we’ll have the matter taken care of within the next few months by the new Republican administration in Washington. Who knows? Maybe the UN is watching and waiting to see what happens as well. In any regard, the UN has informed us that it can take up to three years for a Complaint to reach the stage at which it will be considered or rejected.
If a “domestic” solution is possible, there will be no need for the UN to address the issue. When we filed the Complaint nearly two and a half years ago we could never have believed that repealing FATCA and switching to residence-based taxation would have made it to the 2016 Republican Party Platform. Now it remains to be seen if the party will follow through with its promises.
**************************
UPDATE MAY 21, 2015:
Today we received official confirmation from the United Nations Human Rights Council that our Complaint has been received and is in the queue pending approval (or not) for admittance into one of the Working Groups. The next session of the Working Group on Communications is scheduled from 17 to 21 August 2015. Further information will be shared with us after that date.
**************************
UPDATE NOVEMBER 6, 2014:
From MuzzledNoMore:
We have finally received confirmation that our Human Rights Complaint against the United States has been received by the United Nations. This is great news! But let’s not pop champagne corks just yet. There is no indication that the Complaint has been read or considered for acceptance into the complaints process in any way. That is all yet to come. But we have made a huge step forward! That deserves a few cheers all round … even without the bubbly!
UPDATE OCTOBER 27, 2014:
Permission has been given a university researcher to access to our UN Human Rights Complaint to analyze ethical assumptions on FATCA. That access will be used for academic purposes, content not to be released (as the UN has not yet acknowledged receipt of this UN Human Rights Complaint).
We view as a significant step that this document will be studied for moral dimensions and ethics. We continue to anticipate the time we will be able to publicly release contents of the Complaint, likely AFTER the next scheduled meeting to review such complaints, sometime in April 2015.
*********************
UPDATE SEPTEMBER 10, 2014:
“JC” commented, and he’s right:
Whenever that text for the human rights complaint comes out that, I believe, will be a big help at raising awareness.
The text of the Human Rights Complaint will be published when we know the UN has received and considered it. There has been no confirmation that our submission was considered for the meeting in August (…our submission was sent just before the August meeting so, just by number of other submissions received before ours, our Human Rights Complaint may not have been considered in the time allotted). It looks like the next UN meeting to consider Human Rights Complaints is scheduled for April of 2015 — that Committee meets twice a year.
In the meantime, our fundraising must be pinned to its stand-alone legal claim and importance which absolutely addresses our human rights issues.
Donate Now: http://adcs-adsc.ca/
***********************
August 7, 2014 UPDATE:
The Human Rights Complaint has been submitted. Thank you to those who worked on the document and made this happen. A very special thank you to all who came forward to put your names on this important document. We had a total of 41 signers, representing the countries of Canada, Germany, Japan, the UK, Australia, New Zealand, Denmark, Estonia, Switzerland and Belgium.
****************************
August 5, 2014 UPDATE:
Note: there is a confidentiality clause in the document that your name / nationality / country be kept confidential. My name and address will be the only one that might not be confidential. I wanted to share with you two notes waiting for me this morning:
Hi Carol,
I am very disappointed that more people did not come forward and sign this document, I do not understand why people are afraid to speak up for what they believe. People are so afraid of the bully acts of the USA, We must stand together, I am asking all people that the US government deem US citizens to step forward and stand up against the US and the Harper government for allowing FATCA into the Canadian banking system.
I am not on facebook or twitter. I give you permission to post this.
Disappointed
XXX
Hi Carol,
I am surprised that so few people have signed. This makes me uneasy. People must be frightened. Do you expect repercussions against the signers? At the moment I don’t have the strength to deal with any more troubles. Would you please put a hold on my name until I can evaluate your assessment of possible repercussions.
Thank you,
YYYY
I answered YYYY:
Absolutely. I can take your name off the list of signers if you are not comfortable with that — you must be OK with your decision. We will probably be sending the Complaint on Thursday, August 7th .
No, we don’t expect any repercussions against any of the signers. We will ask for confidentiality in one of the clauses.
As with everything else of this with this (persons on blogs, getting together for protest, etc.), people are afraid to step forward. The US weapon toward its people always is FEAR. That is what we see here. That is our biggest obstacle and what may defeat us in the end.
Dr. Stephen Kish, Chair of the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty signs his name on behalf of the millions of *US Persons* Abroad who are afraid to sign.
Thanks, YYYY.
FEAR: the most effective tool the USA has at its disposal is at work in all we see regarding US Persons Abroad coming forward in unison to fight the good fight. If anything defeats us, it will be our FEAR.
As you all know, I fear too for my son’s name to be out there as it is my duty as a parent to protect his best interests. Because of my own fear, I went through all the complex back US tax filings through use of professionals in the US compliance industry. That was my choice as I could absolutely not do it myself and I so wanted this behind me, to stop the leak of my hard-earned retirement funds to be passed to the US IRS. I’m still in this game. I replied to a commenter at Isaac Brock yesterday and Stephen Kish picked part of what I said to update the ADCS-ADSC Charter Challenge post yesterday:
UPDATE August 5, 2014 (http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/06/01/its-time/)
Carol, an ADCS-ADSC Board Director, explains why she donated to this lawsuit:
The purpose of the lawsuit, to me, is to stop the obscene injustice of all of this, regain rights waived by the Canadian government’s implementation of the US FATCA IGA, thereby putting the financial institutions before individuals and families who are being criminalized!
I’m in for that just as I’m on this blog, hoping people learn from all of the stupid mistakes I made along the way — I don’t want others to make those same mistakes.
It’s about people getting their lives back, along with their dignity and their mental and physical health and to stop the the handing over to the US a good portion of what they’ve saved for their retirements.
It is about wanting Canada to remain a sovereign country, not taken over by the USA. It’s about what I think is right and not wanting to silently stand by and let this happen. It’s because I believe in free speech and don’t want to be shamed into not speaking out, at this point especially for other families who have a family member with some developmental disability or some other ‘mental incapacity’.
My update for now and my regards to all,
August 2, 2014 UPDATE:
Thank you very much for everyone who has corresponded to me at calgaryfouroneone@gmail.com to request the password and give permission for your signatures to be added. Your supportive emails are wonderful.
He is what we have for signers to the Human Rights Document:
18 – Canada
2 – UK
1 – Australia
1 – Belgium (US/Dutch Citizen)
1 – Denmark
1 – Germany
1 – Japan
1 – Switzerland
Note that one of the Canadian signers is Dr. Stephen Kish (Canadian, US)–signing personally, and on behalf of the “Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty” Board of Directors, and the millions of U.S. persons living abroad who are too frightened to sign this document.
Also waiting to hear back from 4 in Canada (one from Quebec) and one from New Zealand.
*********************
July 30, 2014 UPDATE:
Here is the FINAL Human Rights Complaint, available to those that are considering signing. To access the password for this document, contact and request from calgaryfouroneone@gmail.com.
Each person sending a request will receive a copy from calgary411 “in Confidence” with the CLEAR understanding that it is NOT to be published. For anyone who wants to have another person read/sign the document, that other person also needs to obtain it through the Isaac Brock Society or Maple Sandbox channels. Signatures will only be accepted from those who have gotten the document through calgary411. This stipulation is necessary to keep some lid on the proliferation of this information.
We will announce when we know the timing for the agency committee looking at this document for review. We will update on this post any feedback from the agency as it is received.
This document is the collaboration of contributors to both blogs and took over a month to write, discuss and edit in consensus with a group of 15 who have vetted and approved it in its entirety. It stands as presented to them. Bloggers can have their say but there will be no further changes to the document. It is what the agency says that matters.
Sign if you are in agreement and can do so by providing to calgaryfouroneone@gmail.com your name and your nationality and/or country of residence. The Human Rights Complaint will be submitted electronically. Submitters’ names and nationalities will be typed onto the lines provided on page 1. No physical signature is required.
If you are not comfortable with the document, you do not have to sign.
TIME IS OF THE ESSENCE.
*******************
Two dedicated individuals who participate at both the Isaac Brock Society and the Maple Sandbox blogs have prepared a comprehensive Human Rights Complaint that will be submitted on behalf of all *US Persons Abroad* the world over. Others offered suggestions on how that information should best be presented in the constraint of number of pages allowed for the Complaint. We appreciate the legal eye and suggestions for going forward with this Complaint from Professor Allison Christians.
The document now complete, I have been asked to post an announcement on their behalf. Unfortunately, because of their personal situations, they cannot lend their names to the document and this will be the end of Phase I, produced for all of us, with their great care.
I so appreciate the incredible work that has gone into this on behalf of all of us. Here is what they say:
A group of writers from the Isaac Brock Society and Maple Sandbox blogs has prepared a document that challenges citizenship-based taxation (CBT) as a violation of internationally recognized human rights. This document will be submitted as a formal complaint to a major international human rights organization within the next ten days.
Any readers who would like to support this effort by “co-signing” (having their names added to the list of those filing the complaint) should so indicate by sending an email to: calgaryfouroneone@gmail.com.
****************
The Canadian writers of the complaint hope to make this a truly international effort. Bloggers from all over the world are welcome to lend their names to this historic document. Signers do not have to be US Persons.****************
Signers should feel comfortable with using their own names (pseudonyms are unacceptable in this instance) and should provide their nationality and/or country of residence as well.
@calgary, you and the others have made this a practical reality that goes beyond words. For that I am very grateful.
As posted on another IBS thread, one of the biggest FATCAnatics demonstrates that US gross hypocrisy and unethical behaviour knows no bounds – Senator Schumer urges the creation of a US tax free savings plan for those with disabilities living inside the US, while disregarding and supporting the US extraterritorial taxation and penalizing of the disability savings and benefits (ex. Canadian RDSP ) of those resident OUTSIDE the US with NO US economic connection or US benefit. This is just a continuation of the US gross unethical behaviour which justifies the punitive US extraterritorial taxation and ‘foreign trust’ treatment of deemed “taxable USP” children’s education savings plans like the Canadian RESP – while simultaneously urging that families inside the US avail themselves of US education savings tax exemptions https://studentaid.ed.gov/types/tax-benefits
See;
http://www.autismspeaks.org/advocacy/advocacy-news/schumer-urges-congress-move-quickly-tax-free-savings-plans
@ badger
RE: the Australian FATCA implementation bill
I hope Harper doesn’t read any of those weasel words because he has been know to plagiarize Australian speeches.
http://www.ctvnews.ca/harper-s-plagiarized-speech-makes-worldwide-headlines-1.329118
It looks to me like US agents had a heavy hand in writing both the Australian and Canadian betrayal bills. Just one hand though because the other was holding the 30% pistol to make sure our “consent” was certain.
@badger @EmBee
FWIW the New Zealand government used very similar arguments to justify the overriding of the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act and the New Zealand Human Rights Act. It does not stand up to common sense scrutiny, but the Government and the Justice department just railroaded it through nevertheless. When questioned by letter (from several known sources), the New Zealand Attorney General simply cited the Ministry of Justice opinion that the legislation was “consistent with the New Zealand Bill of Rights Act”. Utter bullshit, they know and and we know it, but there we go ……
It is interesting that Australia does seem to have thought through the human rights implications of this law–unlike Canada–but seems to have come up with pretty feeble excuses for justifying it. In part they seem to base it on the ICERD convention:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/bill_em/tlaotfab2014510/memo_0.html
This convention does explicitly authorize a state to treat citizens and non-citizens differently:
http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CERD.aspx
However what FATCA proposes to do is to treat citizens and dual citizens (or alleged dual citizens) differently. I can’t imagine that such behavior is something that the CERD intended to support. Otherwise anyone whose nationality was that of a country that makes it difficult to renounce could be discriminated against on the basis of national origin, and I find it hard to believe that CERD intended that.
@Dash and @Osgood, As I have said before this is a Citizenship issue NOT a tax issue.
An Australian, Canadian or New Zealand Citizen resident in their respective countries can have no other nationality than that respective nationality.
Especially with respect to Australia which has signed The Hague Contention on Certain Questions relating to the Conflict of. Nationality Laws.
There is NO such thing as being a “Dual or Tri or Penta Citizen.” I would like to find a single country on earth that recognizes Dual Citizenship or even defines it in law!!
Anyways Dash is extremely correct that any Canadian resident in Canada dispute any other nationality attributed to them by ANY foreign power!
I am missing where the complaint is on the page. It was not disclosed previously for reason that it was not delivered. But not delivered.
The Human Rights Complaint is delivered (August 7th) but not yet put out for publication, JC. That decision is up to others. We are also waiting for acknowledgement of receipt. Stay tuned.
@Dash1729. Thanks for digging this out. No doubt I need to focus a bit more on this and get a law degree figuring out what it says and its weak points. Perhaps it may be useful to any Human Rights claim against the USG in terms of what arguments need to be shot down in regards to FATCA.
Australian Tax Law Amendment for implementation of FATCA in Australia:
http://www.austlii.edu.au/au/legis/cth/bill_em/tlaotfab2014510/memo_0.html
Lets remember our Human Rights Complaint is not just about FATCA but CBT, and all the compliance, extra tax, and over the top penalities for those living abroad.
Here is a weakness in the analysis provided: the document only deals with the collecting of US citizen account information and providing to the IRS – in terms of human rights violations. It does not deal with: (1) the equity of the 30% withholdings penalty, especially for Australian residents; (2) the potential detrimental career impacts for USP gaining positions of account signators and then their companies having to report all the account information to the USG and risk big penalties if not done right; (3) detrimental impact of USP entering business partnerships where then all the business information of the partnership will have to be reported to the USG; (4) Reporting account information causing other consequences such as forcing reporting and taxation and potential onerous over the top penalties for other forms not reported – all without consideration if the persons are resident in the country or not.
Another key weakness is that the legislation states that the FATCA requirement is a “legitimate aim”, and as a “legitimate aim” differential treatment in regards to privacy, discrimination, and human rights is justified. However, there is a big assumption here that the FACTA requirement in itself is ok on privacy, discrimination, and human rights grounds. Circular argument?
Re: Chapter 2 Statement of Compatibility with Human Rights
impairs the enjoyment
of human rights. [that is what we need to prove]
Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination (ICERD
Committee) stated its view that, differential treatment based on
citizenship or immigration status will constitute discrimination if the
criteria for such differentiation, judged in the light of the objectives and
purposes of the Convention, are not applied pursuant to a legitimate aim,
IRS to reciprocate by
providing corresponding data to the ATO – enhancing the integrity of the
Australian tax system [we know that data provided will not be corresponding as U.S. financial institutions are not asking if people have Australian citizenship].
legitimate differential treatment [this term sounds important]
Certain Non-Reporting Australian Financial Institutions may be
required to close the accounts of US citizens or US taxpayers who are not
Australian residents. [this is the only part in it that deals with Australian residents, the rest seems to assume most of those in question are living in the U.S. and have an Australian account.]
@Badger, looking a bit further back in the thread I owe you the thanks for outing the Australian justification of FATCA implementation. It addresses Human Rights implications.
@JC, it was a happy find. It might have been posted on IBS before and only rediscovered, but it was germane to this thread, and worth examining closely by as many people as possible – Australians or not, for its enumeration of human rights issues raised under FATCA.
Sweden’s comment was that it wasn’t discrimination as long as the discrimination had a legitimate purpose. (not exactly those words, but)
The Treasury hacks, first Dick Harvey, traveled around and played hardball with every govt. The first thing big Dick did was to tell them that they were only talking about FATCA and that what the US did with its own citizens was only US business.
These discussions would not have allowed for any dissent. These Treasury people and ambassadors implementing this have instructions from the top, and become really scary people.
JC:
Further to Calgary’s comment above, the group of bloggers that wrote the Complaint have been advised not to publish the document until it has been reviewed by the Human Rights Council at the UN and until we have been notified as to whether or not it has been accepted into the process.
The Human Rights Council meets Aug. 18 – 22. We will know sometime after that.
Applicable to the extraterritorial human and civil rights offenses of FATCA extortion?
Gallant, Michelle M., AML: Maintaining the Balance between Controlling Serious Crime and Human Rights (July 8, 2014). Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=2463806
Australia has a Race Discrimination Commissioner, a Human Rights Commissioner, and a Human Rights Commission that has the responsibility for investigating alleged infringements under Australia’s anti-discrimination legislation. How about Canada?
I’ve read the Australian examination of human rights issues pertaining to FATCA, and have a few thoughts on issues that might have been overlooked in that analysis:
Firstly, as Dash1729 has already pointed out, the CERD convention does allow a state to distinguish between its citizens and non-citizens, yet the Australian analysis makes no mention of the treatment of Australian citizens who are also considered US persons. Furthermore, the Australian regulations apparently make no provisions attempt and identify and exclude such persons, so unless the Australian IGA makes such provisions, there might be a violation of CERD.
Also, CERD allows distinctions between citizens and non-citizens; presumably as groups. Could it be argued that searching for US persons among non-citizens is an act of discrimination?
The Australian opinion justifies the discriminatory identification of US persons under CERD only; not under CCPR. CCPR provides protection from discrimination on additional factors such as sex, religion and, notably, birth. CCPR is not subject to limitation based on citizenship, like CERD is; it can only be limited if Australia declares some form of national emergency and advises the UN thereof. Legislation requiring FFIs to search for a “Place of birth” indicium might be a violation of CCPR.
Paragraph 2.16 suggests that the Australian opinion considers the identification of “US citizenship or nationality” in terms of its human rights implications, and that it can be justified in terms of the legitimate goal of US tax compliance. However the FFI agreements mandate the reporting of those with US indicia, recalcitrant accounts and nonparticipating FFIs. What if US persons only represent a small fraction of the numbers being reported through FATCA compliance. This is of particular relevance to the privacy right mandated in the CCPR.
Maybe there are valid human rights objections to FATCA, in spite of the Australian opinion, but I’ve noticed when it comes to taxation, the states, legislatures, courts and even juries are ruthless on the individual. Only the most egregious violations of an individual’s rights result in a ruling in their favour. On the other hand, protection from discrimination is massively enshrined in the constitutions and treaties of these same sovereign states, so perhaps the human rights issue is the legitimate arena to battle FATCA.
Could any ACA, FAWCO and AARO members please ask if this and the ADCS legal challenge be featured on their sites to publicize it more widely?
badger,
I certainly hope ACA, FAWCO and AARO will publicize these efforts that will / should / can , hopefully, encourage other countries as well! Our Canadian efforts have other *US Persons Abroad* in mind no matter where they live outside the US.
Good morning Calgary as the sun never sets on ibs
A beautiful sunrise here
Wonderful — glad you’ll be keeping the store open. It’s pitch black and I’m about to shut down this computer while it’s still August 15th here. Cheers and good night until that same sun rises in my east window!
I too love that The Sun Never Sets on Isaac Brock Society!
Badger: Once we have been notified as to the status of our Complaint at the UN we will definitely make sure the organizations you mentioned are notified as well.
@Calgary411 and others
Do you think that we might get some support from one or more of the US Taxpayers Assn groups?
LM,
Personally I don’t place much hope in getting help from any US Taxpayers Association groups. Which ones do you have in mind? I believe a lot of them would be firmly in the mindset of ‘expats = tax evasion’, but I may be wrong. I am no longer a US citizen, so my work has to be in Canada. Perhaps others have ideas along what you’re thinking though.
@ Calgary 411 – I know little about the US Taxpayers Associations except that they too are not friends of the IRS and I sense that they tend towards the Republican (and maybe TeaParty) side. I’ve thrown out this option to see what others might know. I just wonder what they would do with our Human Rights submission (once it has gone through the channels of being reviewed by the HR organization in the next little while). If they (Taxpayers Assn) represent all US taxpayers, might they not have a bit of an OMG moment looking at what the IRS is doing to it’s sons/daughters who live outside the US borders?
LM, this may have some relevance in what we know is happening — it has Americans for Tax Fairness backing.
http://www.newsmax.com/Finance/IRS-US-tax-foreign/2014/08/06/id/587148/?ns_mail_uid=92171968&ns_mail_job=1580479_08062014&s=al&dkt_nbr=v9hfe6td puts it all together and White House betting ’14 midterm elections on economic patriotism