[We now have a NEW POST taking us up to February 1, 2015. This post will be retired from service.]
THE AUTUMN 2014 UPDATE
Dear Donors,
Together, we reached our goal of $100,000 to pay the November 1 legal bill 11 days ahead of schedule!
Thank you Canadian donors from coast to coast and our friends from around the world for your generosity, support and determination — and especially for not being afraid.
The name of our non-profit corporation is the “Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.”
We were very deliberate in including in our name the word “sovereignty”, which forms a cornerstone of our Claims against the Government of Canada.
Canada and dozens of other countries throughout the world gave into a bully because their “leaders” were afraid of harm caused by a trading “partner” — and they gave their sovereignties away.
Help us convince by example the Leaders and Governments of all countries worldwide that they should return their sovereignties back to their Peoples.
Please continue to support our lawsuit.
“Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much.” (Helen Keller)
— Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, and the ADCS-ADSC team
Chers donateurs,
Ensemble, nous avons atteint notre but d’amasser 100 000 $ pour payer notre facture légale du 1er novembre 11 jours d’avance !
Un gros merci à vous, donateurs canadiens, et à nos amis de tous les coins du monde pour votre grande générosité, soutien et détermination. Et surtout pour votre courage.
Le nom de notre organisme sans but lucratif est « l’Alliance pour la défense de la souveraineté canadienne ».
Nous avons choisi délibérément le mot « souveraineté » puisqu’il constitue la base fondamentale de nos revendications envers le gouvernement du Canada.
Le Canada et des dizaines d’autres pays se sont pliés devant l’intimidation des États-Unis parce que leurs « leaders » ont eu peur des menaces de notre « partenaire » commercial. Ils ont donc vendu leur souveraineté à rabais.
Aidez-nous à convaincre les dirigeants et les gouvernements de tous ces pays qu’ils se doivent de remettre leur souveraineté à leurs peuples.
S’il vous plaît, continuez à soutenir notre cause.
« Seuls, nous pouvons faire si peu. Ensemble, nous pouvons faire beaucoup. » (Helen Keller)
— Ginny, Gwen et toute l’équipe de l’ADCS-ADSC
DONATE to www.adcs-adsc.ca (ADSC en français).
@ George
I don’t see how even winning in the lower courts will end our headaches. So we win round one and the Cons miraculously fold, the IGA is toast but FATCA still stands. Now the banks will report us directly and we will have to take them to court. NO? Will winning stop that from happening?
@JC @Eric
The way things are now, I can’t see Americans in the U.S. generally being convinced enough to switch parties. The best bet is getting rid of the worst Democrats in the primaries, but the primary season is half over. Rangel, the author of FATCA, came within 2,000 votes of not getting re-elected, even though the polls put him clearly in the lead. The sad thing is that there are a lot of voters and residents from the Dominican Republic in his district and many of them are only now waking up to the reality of FATCA and what it is going to do to their bank accounts back in the Dominican Republic, where many plan to retire.
charl,
As I see it, it won’t end our headaches, no. But, the “foreign financial institutions” in Canada will not have the legal authority to remain arms of the IRS and discriminate on basis of national origin and other rights we *US Persons* should have in Canada the same as any other Canadians. Will it then be a further, but different, fight?
What a shame that justice is a matter of paying for it.
How then are the poor ever to have any justice?
On the first appeal for money, I went into my retirement savings and donated far more than I expected I would. Then made a second donation half again as big. So it scares the hell out of me to think that I might have to donate many many times more than I have. Perhaps more information will be coming down the line, but part of the challenge for me at the moment is that I am completely in the dark as whether I am taking my share of the load. I understand the need to keep the opposition in the dark, but by virtue of this blog, anyone wanting to estimate how we are doing can make some shrewd guesses. It would be helpful to know:
– how much has been raised
– how many donors
– the average and median donations (preferably totals for individuals)
I know it may not be possible to share this information.
I would like to say as well that it seems to me a priority to broaden the donor base. I have tried to help with this, by publicizing ADCS to the faculty association of the University where I used to work. More needs to be done.
I VERY much appreciate the hard work and dedication of the committee behind this operation. I don’t want to undermine their work.
$400,000 is certainly achievable, in fact, it would be travesty if it would achieved.
1,000,000 affected persons / $400,000 that’s only $2.50 each. If only 1% gave that’s $250 average each. It’s still cheaper than paying H&R Block their $400 minimum fee.
If I set something up in the EU, it would be worth looking at crowdfunding Gofundme.com on top taking the money direct.
As for corporate donors, there must be some dual citizen CEOs out there somewhere.
Don,
Do you mean: $400,000 is certainly achievable, in fact, it would be travesty if it would (or could not be) achieved. ? If so, I can change for you — because I, too, think it would be a travesty.
400 k to carry this through the first court! Those are serious legal fees. I sure hope someone is auditing the bills from the high priced lawyers. Our pockets are not bottomless.
Okay, now I have to admit the giving will get harder, unless we can find some deep pocket people to help. I thought I didn’t know a deep pocket person and then I remembered the brother of a past neighbour — multi-millionaire sports celebrity now living in the USA (homes both sides of the border). The trouble is I never actually knew him, only his sister who passed away many years ago. I found what I hoped was his address and sent him a letter. I got no response but at least the letter didn’t come back marked “return to sender”. People such as this have everything handled by experts so there are no OMG moments for them and they probably cannot relate to tiny pocket people who cannot afford to extricate themselves from the consequences of FATCA. They already have adapted to a certain amount of lack of privacy as part of their celebrity status so whether or not the loss of their financial privacy bothers them is pretty much a toss up. It will either be a shrug (okay, just one more thing) or a shriek (oh no, not one more thing). I’m just saying it’s always worth taking a shot, even if it misses the target.
I haven’t got much, if any, enthusiasm for doing any of the things or acquiring any of the things that most people would consider part of enjoying their retirement years. I’m content to just be where I am and have what I have. However I do need some hope and that’s what ADCS gives me. Truthfully I’ve come to realize that it’s those brave souls who have agreed to be plaintiffs on our behalf that are giving the most. So I’ll continue to donate — it’s only money and hope has more value to me right now. Also, I’m determined that not a penny of mine will ever go to the extortionists across that border.
Belated comment from me on the likelihood the “Harper government” will appeal if ADCS wins the first court round: I completely agree with Stephen; one can guarantee they’ll appeal if they lose at a lower court. First, they’re playing with our tax money, not their own money like we are. So it costs them nothing. Second, Harper is the nastiest, most mean-spirited, most vindictive prime minister in Canadian history. Of course he’ll throw a hissy fit and appeal if he loses. Third, if the Charter challenge wins, the banks (who are major funders for the Tories) will be back between a rock and a hard place and will be screaming like stuck pigs. And they have very deep pockets if they decide they want quietly to help fund an appeal against an unfavourable (to them) ruling.
This issue isn’t going to get settled cheaply nor at all easily. And my advice to my friends who are affected remains — contribute to this charter challenge as you can, because the Charter is vital and this court challenge is vital to defend our Charter. But also vote strategically to defeat the Tories in the next federal election. And finally, if you can, for your sake and your families’ sakes, get a CLN and ditch your US person-hood as quickly as possible. I’m not at all optimistic the US is going to repeal FATCA or give up on this one, no more than Harper will. Do you really want to remain a citizen of that country to our south, no matter which party is in power, if you actually are committed to living in Canada as a Canadian citizen? Why?
I’m reserving some of my spare cash for political donations next year to the NDP (incumbent in my riding, if the incumbent were Liberal the money would go to them instead), because the paramount issue for all Canadians has to be to get rid of Harper and his crowd, not only for FATCA. Plus I get a tax receipt, to a point, for those donations so my money goes further. I’m still planning to donate to ADCS again, as and when I can, but there is also a larger battle to be fought here. At least larger from my non-US-person perspective.
@all – We appreciate every donation that has been given to date. Everyone should give what they are able to give and not worry about how many other people are giving or who is giving what amounts. We know what our goal is now, and we must do our best to achieve that goal.
Also, just know that the team is working feverishly behind the scenes to do everything and anything we can do and by all means at our disposal to disseminate the information about ADCS to the Canadian public. Everyone can participate in getting the word out by whatever means they have at their own disposal and within whatever time they have to do so.
Remember, we have been trying to push this giant rock up the hill but unlike Sisyphus, our rock will not roll all the way back down the hill. Every push counts and every inch matters. We MUST prevail and we WILL prevail! Back in November, FATCA had not even been mentioned by the mainstream media. Look how far we have come since then! That is only 8 months. We can do twice as much in another year!
If the famous five could take on the Canadian government all by themselves with almost no public support, I think that 1 million of us can and better do so, as well!
So the bottom line is contribute what you can. That is all anyone can do.
@GwEvil
Here are a few suggestions:
– Getting this in a court with Joe Arvay at the helm will generate exposure and publicity. The key is to be positioned to take advantage of it. There will be press coverage so be prepared to make the most of it thru Twitter, links, letters to editor, etc. To generate news coverage, concrete action is essential.
– Will part of the first court action include seeking an injunction? That could get a lot of publicity.
– Getting some MPs from opposing political parties to join in as plaintiffs would be very helpful.
– Keep this issue in front of your local MP. Don’t rest until they at least comment or acknowledge.
– It’s essential to allocate some of the budget to “marketing” the action, even if it’s a small amount.
For example, a newspaper ad seeking plaintiffs and support.
– Inexpensive marketing materials can include: graphic posters, postcards to hand out en mass, stickers.
– Have a propaganda poster contest on-line to dramatize the theme of “2nd class Canadians” and “human rights crisis”
– Try to get an interested journalist “embedded” in the movement, following it on a long term basis.
– While the Harper Cons are obviously complicit, its important to keep the Charter Challenge “above” partisan politics and focused on fighting against the human rights harm that the FATCA IGA causes. Also, many people who are potential supporters may be “small c” conservatives and some may have been Conservative Party supporters.
– Adapt the tactics that labour unions successfully use – such as lobbying, information days, leaf letting, etc
– Gotta keep the website up to date, even if it means streamlining it. Maybe have a blog section for current news.
– Reporting on the action’s progress in an on-line newsletter of blog (when possible without tipping strategy or violating privilege).
@Wondering
“- Getting this in a court with Joe Arvay at the helm will generate exposure and publicity. The key is to be positioned to take advantage of it. There will be press coverage so be prepared to make the most of it thru Twitter, links, letters to editor, etc. To generate news coverage, concrete action is essential.”
Yes and we do have Twitterers galore out there doing just that, as well as reporters that many of us have been in touch with, who will be apprised of this once the lawsuit has been announced. Everyone can do this.
“- Will part of the first court action include seeking an injunction? That could get a lot of publicity.”
The strategy is in the hands of Joseph Arvay and he will decide the best course of action on this sort of thing
“- Getting some MPs from opposing political parties to join in as plaintiffs would be very helpful.”
again this is the bailiwick of Joseph Arvay
“- Keep this issue in front of your local MP. Don’t rest until they at least comment or acknowledge.”
definitely within the pervue of all who come here. This has been done and will continue to be done.
“- It’s essential to allocate some of the budget to “marketing” the action, even if it’s a small amount.
For example, a newspaper ad seeking plaintiffs and support.”
our advertising budget is non-existent. All monies we gather will be going to the legal challenge and incidentals. However, we have a benefactor who has helped by donating directly to the Google Adwords and Facebook advertising campaigns that have been ongoing
“- Inexpensive marketing materials can include: graphic posters, postcards to hand out en mass, stickers.”
Some of this has been done in the past and new ones are being created for the future.
“- Have a propaganda poster contest on-line to dramatize the theme of “2nd class Canadians” and “human rights crisis”
if someone would like to take this on…please do so
“- Try to get an interested journalist “embedded” in the movement, following it on a long term basis.”
we have connections to some reporters but no publication or station feels that this is “newsworthy” enough to have someone on full time. Perhaps a reporter who is a US person may be interested to try to do this on their own time, but they all have to make a living, so this is a tough one. If someone can persuade one of these people to do so, I hope they will!
“- While the Harper Cons are obviously complicit, its important to keep the Charter Challenge “above” partisan politics and focused on fighting against the human rights harm that the FATCA IGA causes. Also, many people who are potential supporters may be “small c” conservatives and some may have been Conservative Party supporters.”
not sure what to say here…but yes, ok”
“- Adapt the tactics that labour unions successfully use – such as lobbying, information days, leaf letting, etc”
this is not in my bailiwick so perhaps someone who has lobbying experience, who visits IBS, might want to step up
“- Gotta keep the website up to date, even if it means streamlining it. Maybe have a blog section for current news.”
working on this as well, while trying to keep up with my real job (!)
“- Reporting on the action’s progress in an on-line newsletter of blog (when possible without tipping strategy or violating privilege).”
anyone willing to write an ongoing newsletter please step forward. I can do the layout.
@Wondering
“2nd class Canadians”
Just to sadly tell it like it is–but I’m afraid if “US persons” in Canada think this, they are overestimating what the Cons gov’t thinks of them. They aren’t 2nd class Canadians in Stephen Harper’s estimation. They are 3rd class Canadians in Stephen Harper’s estimation.
Here is how the Cons gov’t current sees it:
1st class Canadians: resident in Canada with only Canadian citizenship and no other citizenship
2nd class Canadians: dual citizen, but NOT a US person–ie a dual citizen with a 3rd country. Possible risk of loss of Canadian citizenship but no risk of data being turned over to the IRS
3rd class Canadians: Canadian citizen and a “US person” in Canada. Possible risk of both loss of Canadian citizenship AND of data being turned over to the IRS
4th class Canadians: Canadian citizen resident in the USA. No rights to do business in Canada at all (this is my situation)
@Polly,
Yep, welcome back to the Middle Ages….
GwEvil and Wondering,
That is a good overview of all the work that has been happening on an ongoing basis by lots of people, including those of ADCS-ADSC — plus opportunities that others here could take on. Thanks for outlining and highlighting what will be important going forward.
To all — if you only knew all the work that GwEvil has done behind the scenes, including her interviews with journalists and all of the brilliant ideas she offers, you’d wonder aloud how she does it in addition to the job for pay she has and that of her family roles of wife and mother.
Gwen rocks.
@ Calgary411
Yes, GwEvil is amazing and you are too. In a solemn ceremony in my mind I just dedicated half of my Twig#3 to you and the other half to GwEvil. It’s in the mail so I couldn’t pass incense over it, chant and do a stately dance of dedication — but it’s the thought that counts, right? 🙂 There are so many others to thank and there will be more twigs to dedicate to them as well. We are so fortunate to have people with valuable talents and enormous amounts of true grit (even when “winged”) who have got us to where we are and will carry us forward.
Surgite! Push on! I’m taking credit/blame for stealing that motto (supposedly Sir Isaac Brock’s last words) from Brock University in St. Catharines. Does anyone know a Brock U. faculty member, graduate or current student? If so, maybe you could stir up some interest and support from them.
http://www.brocku.ca/about/history
@Schubert1975
Agree with much of what you say, but note that banks are not donors to the Conservative Party or any other party. Only individual citizens can donate to political parties:
Canada Elections Act
404. (1) No person or entity other than an individual who is a citizen or permanent resident as defined in subsection 2(1) of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act shall make a contribution to a registered party, a registered association, a candidate, a leadership contestant or a nomination contestant.
As well, individuals can donate no more than $1200 in aggregate to parties and candidates at the federal level. (I say this from memory; can’t verify at the moment.)
@Calgary411 – It’s certainly more than achievable and the $400K figure should be met well before August 2015 if more of the one million affected Canadians donate. $250 a head for 1% of the million, it’s probably an underestimate.
It’s a numbers game and perhaps a certain amount of the money collected should be re-invested to get more of the 1 million to donate. Among the 1 million affected is there anyone who is experienced in raising money perhaps for a political campaigns?
In terms of political campaigns $400,000 is not a large sum of money.
The ADCS is a political campaign as much as a fundraiser for legal action. Doesn’t the NDP have any experienced fundraisers to advise the ADCS if they haven’t already?
The question is, Don, where are all those other one million affected Canadians who could make the raising of $400,000 for litigation a piece of cake?
Do they think they will not be affected and this is not their problem?
Do they think that the Canadian government was correct in waiving their rights for the good of the Canadian financial institutions.
Do they believe that this “little” amount of collateral damage to regular *US* folk is a price that must be paid?
Do they actually not know about any of this?
Sorry(no, I’m not sorry), these are the questions I can’t find answers for.We need to find these people — for their own good and for the good of this legal action.
The Canadian media should be helping in this regard. I see that as their important job.
Other than the remainder of the one million *US Persons* to find, as well as their families, their friends, their business partners, there should be other good Canadians outraged that the US is able to come into this sovereign country and take over Canadian law, little by little by little. US creep — any definition of that think appropriate.
Yes, we should be able to do this!!!
bubblebusin,
Gwen rocks; she sure does!
EmBee, thanks — my next donation will be, then, dedicated to EmBee who enriches the pot with the equivalent of her Old Age Security monthly cheques. One step at a time in our important challenge to make the Charter Challenge happen.
Thanks, everyone!
@calgary411
“Do they think they will not be affected and this is not their problem?”
Yes I think this is a common scenario. Most do not consider themselves to be US persons and would not refer to themselves, or allow anyone else to refer to themselves, as a US citizen, US person, or dual citizen. They answer ‘no’ when asked if they are a US person or US citizen. They do not participate in any ‘voluntary’ IRS programs. In most cases I assume that strategy is successful. In the cases where it is NOT successful it is of course a huge human rights violation–that is needless to say a big part of this litigation–but I suspect only a small percentage of that one million US persons have been directly affected. That’s definitely an issue when it comes to fund raising–it seems to so far be affecting specific people in a huge way, but only certain sporadic people get hit. So most people do indeed think it doesn’t affect them.
There have been some situations on here where a bank has on their own initiative singled someone out and asked them where they were born, and then discriminated on that basis–but the more common routine question the banks seem to be asking is if someone is a “US person” and I assume most people are answering ‘no’ to that one.
The final decision on plaintiffs seems to be up to Mr. Arvay but I would think a very good plaintiff would be someone who has had a Canadian bank (as opposed to a US agency like the IRS) take adverse action (closing an account, violating privacy, etc) against them despite their protestations that they are not a US person. This is a scenario that seems to be happening in sporadic cases in Canada but routinely in Europe–finding the specific victims in Canada would seem to make for good plaintiffs.
Thanks Bubblebustin, Calgary and EmBee 🙂
1.) Over the next 12 months, I need to do what I did over the last 2 months but increase it by 60%.
Its definitely more challenging but doable. So I have gotten over the gulp moment.
2. Dash1729 has nailed it, most affected Canadians have yet to be affected because they do not think anyone in their right mind considers them to be a US Person!! The critical mass for that group might take a few years to develop. It will only develop when a new account is opened AND if they are asked place of birth, otherwise they will open an account with a DL and if asked nationality will state Canadian.
3. Great idea ” Doesn’t the NDP have any experienced fundraisers to advise the ADCS if they haven’t already?” Getting plugged in with the NDP to raise funds would be brilliant.