[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).
@EmBee,
When you feel low you can think about this:
1) I am compliant and it cost me a large amount of money to get there
2) I was at my lowest points in my life while trying to comply.
3) Complying was the most horrible 2 years of my life
4) Even after you comply they stick the knife in by sending you weird tax forms and changing the rules.
5) After complying you still have to fill in these junk FinCen 144 and 8938 forms each year or risk starting it all again.
6) You worry about their next trick to make you non-compliant so they can take your stuff again.
If I had the choice again I don’t think I would enter their program.
Neill,
You mention that you were at the lowest point in your life when you were trying to comply with the IRS.
Was this low point caused by the difficulty that you had with the IRS?
@Steven,
It was the endless requests for stuff. Statements, description of accounts, arguments over the taxation etc and of course the changes in the rules that just got dropped on me. All the time the professional fees rack up.
So yes that’s due to the IRS and their ‘cheap for them’ plan.
I don’t think you should feel bad if you haven’t come into compliance because you sure will feel a whole lot worse while trying to come into compliance and afterward and you look back on the process. As bad as somebody might think it is now it’s probably a whole lot worse in the program.
Neil – Are you recommending that its best not to become compliant thru the OVDP (Streamlined program)? Then my fear is they will impose penalties (300%?) and may commence criminal proceedings. Btw, did I understand you correctly in that it took two years for IRS to process your tax obligations. Tks
@Liu Zhen ,
Yes it took 2 years to go through OVDP. The streamlined program didn’t exist at the time. 5% would have been a better penalty but they would apply that to more accounts (the compliant ones). I assume I would have been better off with 5% but don’t know as we had a lot of accounts excluded because they were compliant. I think it’s very telling that they don’t offer this retro actively. This is in line with them dropping stuff on us like not allowing a refund in 2008 because of the statute of limitations for refunds (the refund is fake created by their mark to market tax rules creating fake gains earlier that they of course want you to pay).
They will threaten you with criminal prosecution and tell you can’t really comply with their tax laws so just take their M2M deal. Take too long in OVDP and they will just keep the money you paid already even if that isn’t correct.
So my advise is understand the penalties you could face and the tax etc completely before you enter (assuming you do). Be careful about trusting your professional as mine got a bunch of stuff wrong (like the 2008 refund) and it costs a lot of money. Don’t trust the IRS.
Make your own decisions. If I was to do it again and realized they were going to take the gains of 10+ years of some pension accounts + a big chunk of the principle and it would be so horrible to do I wouldn’t do it.
@Neill
Absolutely true that IRS doesn’t give one hoot about your legal fees and courier costs when you have to replace important documentation they’ve mishandled when going though the OVD haystack looking for a needle. Really pathetic how the NTA’s taxpayer bill of rights especially doesn’t apply to US taxpayers living outside the US.
Neil – I feel your pain and am sure u will appreciate the angst of those who are deliberating long and hard about this. Are you recommending not to enter? What is the downside/repercussions if I don’t become complaint? Criminal charges and penalties that would bankrupt and make me suicidal?
@IRSBurden,
I can’t really tell other people what to do. I wanted to let somebody who was feeling bad about not complying know that I have complied and I feel really bad that I did.
You can describe how I felt during the OVDP process as ‘suicidal’. Now I am just incredibly bitter.
@Neill, it took some doing for you to share the above. Hey, it took some time for me to admit that FATCA had turned me into an alcoholic. So in a way, I get everything you are saying.
Thanks for sharing, it will help some people.
@ Neill
Wow, I’m so sorry for what you went through. Just this morning I was asking my husband what should I do if I get a “brown IRS envelope” in the mail someday (besides the heart attack, that is). There was only silence. All I know at this point is that I’m never going across the border and I cling, perhaps foolishly, to a dead man’s promise (i.e. Jim Flaherty). As for my husband, he mentioned recently that it had been 6 weeks since he sent in his exit papers (no word back, of course). I said he’d have to wait 6 years to know for sure he was off the hook entirely.
Might we have an “official” response from Stephen, Ginny, and/or Gwen to this piece in National Post?
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/08/18/canada-u-s-dual-citizens-could-be-worse-off-if-fatca-lawsuit-succeeds/
I cannot even bring myself to read that traitorous article right now, let alone comment on it. This guy interviewed me for 10 minutes a few weeks ago and “seemed” sympathetic to our plight but obviously he’s a pure shill for the banking industry. I cannot even go there today….I will end up saying something I will regret. Perhaps tomorrow when I have been able to breathe a bit more. >:( grrrrrrrrrrrr
@EmBee
No need to worry that you have only a “dead man’s promise”
Mr. Flaherty is quoting the Revenue Rule, which at least to date, is still functional here as well as in the US.
@GwEvil
I don’t blame you!
In my opinion, this article deserves a response in the form of a letter to the editor. You folks would be the best ones to write it.
NorthernShrike,
Jim Jatras just sent a good letter to the editor on the Melnitzer article which is in moderation.
I will try to send in a letter but it is unlikely to be accepted as the National Post just recently printed my letter (last friday, August 15) and will probably not take another letter from me on the same subject.
Obviously, my letter and the article by Marni Soupcoff in the Post had no influence on Melnitzer.
I am so sick of articles like that one and the commenters too! “just renounce, just renounce, just renounce” is the mantra. FATCA has made us hated here and hated back in the U.S. It has made me question if I should have married my spouse and moved here 34 years ago. It has made me wonder if even after relinquishing if I”ll be accepted anywhere ever again. I cannot believe the blindness and insensitivity of this author to Gwen’s situation and I wonder if some of these comments can be used to sue the U.S. who illegally is forcing renouncing on some. That’s what we’re told to do over and over and over and the lack of understanding as to what is involved in that process is astounding!! I am sick to death of this whole thing and wish I had never heard of FATCA. So I “just renounced” and thanks a lot Canadian citizens and Americans for putting my family through that those of you who championed it, I’d love to meet you face to face and have you say that to me. I’m not afraid are you? Keep donating people, I don’t care the backlash we’ve all been through it for three years, we’re tougher than they are.
MB . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z54-QHEZN6E
@ KalC
Thanks! 🙂
George and Neill,
It will help others here, be sure of that!!! And, it is the reason for litigation to challenge all of this. My deep thanks as well, Neill — and George!!
GwEvil,
That he interviewed you is sleezy. That fact further makes his own ethics and sense of morality more relevant:
from Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julius_Melnitzer
From the National Post article:
i.e. the Canadians of this country and their rights WILL NOT BE as important as that of the Canadian banks to function in U.S. markets — and as well in the U.S. itself, with more bricks and mortar banks there for some than in Canada?
@NorthernStrike. This article looks like another propaganda piece. It appears to be an attempt to undermine the fund raising for the Charter Challenge and to put more personal pressure on the plaintiffs as if it is not stressful enough for them. It also appears to be Mr. Berg’s attempt to bolster the position he took in the Parliamentary committee and to attract more ‘clients’.
In all, I suspect he has read the complaint and KNOWS it has merit and is worried it will make him as well as Harper look foolish. He needs to undermine the Charter Challenge.
@ calgary411
Julius plugged Roy Berg’s law firm in his “piece of ____”. I plugged ADCS in a comment. Dare we plug Julius by sneaking in the wikipedia link (with dots to divert moderation, of course)?
Northern, I just sent a short letter to the Editor of the FP on the Melnitzer article and Jim Jatras sent in a much better letter.
All, If any of you are comfortable releasing your name publicly, go to this link, click on subject line for the print edition, and send in a letter. Send in lots of letters: http://www.nationalpost.com/contact/letters/index.html?name=Financial+Post+Letters&subject=FP+Letter+to+the+editor
You can’t expect all of the press to be on our side. We just had a great article a few days before by Marni Soupcoff in the same newspaper. The argument Melnitzer uses against us (Ginny and Gwen will personally destroy the economy of Canada) will be used by the Government of Canada in the lawsuit.
Consider what “Only a Canadian” above says: Maybe we are finally drawing a bit of blood and the opposition is getting worried about these two women from Ontario.
I’ve been there and have put a comment (or two or three) up — it remains there re Julius’ credibility given the ethics of his past.
Way to go calgary411. You didn’t just put the wikipedia link in you quoted from it. And it’s still there! My computer is having trouble getting into Brock today. When that happens I always wonder if this is a DOS (Denial of Service) attack … likely culprit will go nameless.