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.
Jefferson D. Tomas,
We don’t know — we have only a “read receipt”. As you can read here, neither were telephone calls were successful in obtaining further information. Note that I am the “conduit” in the process, the person whose name could be used (because my name is public) to transmit the UN Human Rights Complaint. Muzzled No More may be able to comment further.
Victoria describes many of the facets involved when people consider taking a new citizenship, renouncing one, remaining a legal permanent resident, etc.
Her recently updated (and as always thoughtful) post demonstrates that citizenship and how we think about it is complex, and should not be prescribed or proscribed by anyone but the individual making the decision:
http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/2015/02/not-everyone-wants-to-be-citizen.html
Jefferson D: I’m afraid I can’t add anything more to Calgary’s response to you. It is frustrating, to say the least, to have absolutely no control over the process into which we have sent our Complaint. There is nothing on the UN websites anywhere to indicate how long a wait was and is to be expected. It appears that “waiting” is our lot in life on all fronts in this war.
The UN mentions discrimination in the context of taxation in this document:
‘United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention between Developed and Developing Countries’
See; ‘United Nations Model Double Taxation Convention: 2011 Update – English’
at http://www.un.org/esa/ffd/wp-content/uploads/2014/09/UN_Model_2011_Update.pdf
For example, see excerpts such as:
page 9
“Articles 4 and 5
Article 4
RESIDENT
1. For the purposes of this Convention, the term “resident of a Contracting
State” means any person who, under the laws of that State, is liable to tax
therein by reason of his domicile, residence, place of incorporation, place of
management or any other criterion of a similar nature, and also includes that
State and any political subdivision or local authority thereof. This term, however,
does not include any person who is liable to tax in that State in respect
only of income from sources in that State or capital situated therein.
2. Where by reason of the provisions of paragraph 1 an individual is a resident
of both Contracting States, then his status shall be determined as follows:
(a) He shall be deemed to be a resident only of the State in which he has a
permanent home available to him; if he has a permanent home available
to him in both States, he shall be deemed to be a resident only of
the State with which his personal and economic relations are closer
(centre of vital interests);
(b) If the State in which he has his centre of vital interests cannot be
determined, or if he has not a permanent home available to him in
either State, he shall be deemed to be a resident only of the State in
which he has an habitual abode;
(c) If he has an habitual abode in both States or in neither of them, he shall
be deemed to be a resident only of the State of which he is a national;
(d) If he is a national of both States or of neither of them, the competent
authorities of the Contracting States shall settle the question by
mutual agreement……”
and,
Page 27
“Article 24
Chapter VI
SPECIAL PROVISIONS
Article 24
NON-DISCRIMINATION
1. Nationals of a Contracting State shall not be subjected in the other
Contracting State to any taxation or any requirement connected therewith
which is other or more burdensome than the taxation and connected requirements
to which nationals of that other State in the same circumstances, in
particular with respect to residence, are or may be subjected. This provision
shall, notwithstanding the provisions of Article 1, also apply to persons who
are not residents of one or both of the Contracting States…………….”
I don’t know/understand enough about this document to interpret it. I am placing it here in case it is of relevance to use re the complaint already submitted.
Thanks for putting this here, badger! I’ll bring it to the attention of those who submitted the UN Human Rights Complaint.
Thanks calgary!
The information is spread throughout, and too technical for me. Perhaps Eric or ShadowRaider can see what it might mean for the UN complaint. And I doubt that the US has endorsed the document. Or if it has, it will cherry pick or just plain choose to ignore any conflict with its birthplace/parentage/citizenship based extraterritorial taxation.
the UN Model is just that— a model. Not an actual treaty. Most (probably all) US tax treaties have anti discrimination language; as you might guess, “citizens” are included within the definition of resident, and it is notoriously hard to invoke the discrimination provisions in any event but it is certainly something that should be studied by anyone trying to understand the implications of FATCA. You might find this paper of interest: http://www.yalelawjournal.org/article/what-is-tax-discrimination
@Badger & Prof. Christians: the other wrinkle is that plenty of U.S. treaties specifically define “same circumstances” to deny dual nationals the ability to claim that they suffer discrimination. I think the first instance of this was the 1982 treaty with New Zealand. Not sure how many treaties have this language. The U.S./Canada non-discrimination clause is a lot more complicated.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/05/14/us10000-non-filing-fines-for-committing-ordinary-personal-finance-and-the-oecds-generally-accepted-taxation-principles/#Nondiscrimination
Thank you so much for finding this, Badger, and Allison and Eric for your discussion. Calgary, thank you for alerting me.
It is gratifying, at least, to read that the UN already has this “model”. The US may like to include “citizens” in its definition of “residents” for the purpose of adhering to the principles of this model but I do not believe that that inclusion adheres to its spirit. Now, we can only hope that the UN will also see it that way.
posting this here as evidence that the US – via the State Department, is actively choosing which citizens abroad that it will serve, and to what extent – but presumably still defines them as ‘UStaxablepersons’ subject to FBARs and FATCA:
https://firstlook.org/theintercept/2015/04/10/trapped-yemen-americans-file-lawsuit-seeking-rescued/
“….For many Yemeni-Americans, their predicament is compounded by what they allege to be systematic denial of their citizenship and consular rights by the U.S. government. “A lot of Yemeni-Americans have been stranded like this since before the conflict even started; the U.S. embassy often declines to renew their passports or simply confiscates them when brought for renewal,” Masri said. “Many Yemeni-Americans have been subjected to extrajudicial exile. They’re not treated as full citizens.”
A 2010 State Department Office of the Inspector General report stated that “a large number of Yemeni-Americans reflect local standards of illiteracy and lack of education,” while characterizing Yemeni-Americans as having a tenuous or incomplete connection with the United States, despite their citizenship there. It has long been alleged that Americans living in Yemen are at risk of having their citizenship documents confiscated by American officials while seeking consular services, so much so that in 2013, the American Civil Liberties Union released a pamphlet advising Yemeni-Americans to be cautious when attempting to obtain such services while abroad.
Contacted by The Intercept for comment about the lawsuit, the State Department stated that it was not their policy to comment on pending litigation. Advisory messages posted on the website of the U.S. Embassy in Sana’a have suggested American citizens could seek help from the Indian government, while also stating that they “have no contact information for [Indian] vessels” and “cannot guarantee all citizens [can] be accommodated.”…”….
So, what will happen to those deemed to be US citizens when Yemeni banks and banking staff comply with FATCA and seek to identify all those with US indicia/status – and compile lists of Americans and their families? Creating more threat and danger to those in Yemen – while the State Dept. refuses to assist them.
@badger
FATCA creates a clear and present danger to Yemeni-Americans in Yemen.
@bubblebustin,
An entirely predictable danger. Which means FATCA = reckless endangerment.
May be some useful arguments here:
This upcoming webcast is a must:
http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2015/04/upcoming-event-on-delivering-tax.html
Monday, April 13, 2015
“Upcoming event on Delivering Tax Benefits through the Tax System
On April 24, the American Tax Policy Institute is live-streaming an all-day conference “Delivering Benefits to Low-Income Taxpayers through the Tax System.” The conference is organized by Les Book, Villanova University School of Law and Deena Ackerman, U.S. Department of Treasury.
Beginning at 8:45 a.m. (EST) on April 24, you can view the livestream conference webcast.
Prof. Allison Christians will be presenting on panel 4, “The International Approach to Delivering Benefits Through the Tax System.”
She says:
“….The premise I am studying: The inclusion of all US persons in the tax base regardless of domicile, juxtaposed with the blanket denial of eligibility for income support based solely on domicile, reveals the manifest injustice of citizenship-based taxation…….”..
The Human Rights Complaint is out. I am thinking we need some good marketing/PR in regards to this – to the point were Steven Kish (who signed it publicly) is asked for interviews about it. It should draw attention to the injustices from new quarters and peek new interest.
I’ll think about it. I have already tweeted the complaint a few times. It will be my new FYI that the injustices are real and need addressing.
And how many times do we hear the US speak out about Human Rights in regards to Russia and China etc. Well USA perhaps you need to attend a bit more to your laws in regards to human rights.
As pointed out by another commenter, no one predicted how fast the Berlin Wall came down.
Thank you, Calgary, for updating this post following the momentous release of our Complaint. It’s great to know that it is now available for all to read.
Congratulations @MuzzledNoMore and all who worked on this submission. I read it and re-read it. Wow!
Fantastic idea to have it included in the submission to the Senate Finance Committee.
Thanks, Badger! Thanks also for your encouragement last summer and for all the work *you* have put in over the past years finding information for us all to sink our teeth into! This whole thing is such a community effort. And yes, didn’t Stephen and John have a brilliant idea when they thought to include the Complaint in the SFC submission?! Sure did!
Another (much needing to see the light of day) Canadian human rights / equal rights obligation before the UN: http://globalnews.ca/news/1954775/manitoba-chiefs-ask-un-to-study-aboriginal-access-to-education/
Pingback: Congratulations to ALL Donors to the #FATCA Canada lawsuit – Looking forward to August 4/15 | Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society | Congratulations to ALL Donors to the #FATCA Canada lawsuit – Looking forward to August 4/15
Pingback: Congratulations to ALL Donors to the #FATCA Canada lawsuit – Looking forward to August 4/15 | Maple Sandbox
Pingback: @AUILR: mentions @ADCSovereignty, suggests CANADA (Not US) is committing #FATCA based Human Rights violations | Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty
Can I get my name added to the petition
May 15, 2015: UN Issues Scathing Assessment of U.S. Human Rights Record (Huffington Post)
I don’t see *our* UN Human Rights Complaint in the listings — but there are related issues — like *Privacy* — included in reference to several countries.
The report from the UN covered by the Huffington Post details the report of the Working Group on the Universal Periodic Review. Our Complaint has not even made it to a “Working Group” yet; at least we have not been informed of this one way or the other.
The recommendations contained in this report have all been submitted by United Nations member states. It is essentially a “peer review”. Our Complaint would not have been a part of this particular review so, in this context, the absence of our issue from the list doesn’t indicate that we are being ignored. However, after nearly a year of waiting for our concerns to be acknowledged by the UN we are more than justified in feeling that we’re being ignored!