[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).
@Badger
in the video the woman had to pay the Cdn government $37 k “for the same mistake’ I do not understand this.
Dash,
The Jim Bopp and Jim Butera efforts (I strongly support both) are entirely independent. The Bopp kill-FATCA-in-the-U.S. effort is essential. I have advised Republicans Overseas what we are up to with our own very small U.S. “litigation” effort.
There is no possibility that any U.S. political party would or could ever advocate to change U.S. laws to make it easier to renounce U.S. “citizenship”. We are trying to address a a special need.
Patty Murray’s staffer was very sympathetic but we are now many months later, still have CBT and the Department of State actually made it even more difficult for Accidental Americans to renounce.
@EmBee,
My gratitude goes to the the donors and to Jim Butera, who has spent a lot of (free) time sorting out possible strategies. By the way, Mr. Butera is representing the Texas and Florida Bankers Associations in a lawsuit against Treasury at the DC Court of Appeal level.
@northernstar
The commentary says the CRA charged the $37K “on the same estate”.
You appear to have mis-heard this as “the same mistake”.
Oh yes, gratitude to Jim Butera too. Absolutely! And thank you, Stephen, for exploring other avenues. I don’t think we tell you often enough that your dedication to this cause is outstanding and you do it even though you are IRS compliant forever.
@Shovel
Thank you for the answer…. I am deaf on one ear and have 40 percent hearing on the other ear…with a hearing aid. I misheard. even with head phones. Transcripts are great in my case. LOL
Thanks again.
I think there should be another lawsuit for “accidental taxpayers” – people who were aware of their American citizenship and PR status, but due to gross negligence by the US were unaware of their tax filing obligations.
@Bubblebustin May I suggest that it was the USG that contributed to confusion with use of their words in tax treaties of ‘preventing double taxation.’ So the misconception has been that if you live in a relatively high tax country – such as Canada – and there is a tax treaty to protect from double taxation that there would be no taxes owed. And what did the US do to dispel this misconception?
While most everyone interprets “preventing double taxation” as above as a very broad definition, the US Treasury interprets it vary narrowly. For each category of income and tax they are taxed no more than the highest tax rate of either country, with Canada getting first right to tax on Canadian source income. Earnings: Canada tax rate higher than US so no US tax owed. Any tax the US has that Canada does not sails right through the treaty without any credit allowed by the Canadian government against Canadian taxes. The US has a number of significant taxes Canada does not, so tax to be owed. And also where were the notifications by the USG of tax obligations – even for those with US passports?
Perhaps another lawsuit should be against the Canadian government for the Canadian-US tax treaty that does not broadly prevent double taxation.
I agree. The gaps in the tax treaty has left us extremely vulnerable. Who would ever think that you would owe the US tax on the sale of your home in Canada – even if you have heard that the treaty prevents double taxation, and ESPECIALLY if you had no idea of your tax paying obligations to the US. What reasonable person would think they would?
Just recently we heard the interview between the Canadian radio talk show host and Gwen who for years has been sending his 1040’s to the IRS with only “income earned in Canada” scrawled across them. No income disclosure, let alone FBAR’s or 8938’s! Did the IRS ever get back to him and tell him he was doing something wrong? Seems like wilful negligence in their part, wouldn’t you say?
Bubblebustin,
I agree so much with you that there should be other lawsuits in the U.S. for people who might not be defined as “Accidental Americans” but we don’t have the hint of money to pay for such a lawsuit. Who will pay for the effort? We will have a tough time keeping our own Canadian FATCA lawsuit going which I do not want to compromise. My mention of the U.S. effort was purposefully “buried” as an update in the post on the FATCA lawsuit — our primary aim.
We just want to get our “foot in the door” in our U.S. “litigation” and are focusing on a subgroup of innocent people in which we might have some small chance of success of saving. We are lucky to have a U.S. attorney who likes us. Maybe if we have some success with Accidental Americans we can also change some minds on CBT.
I hope you didn’t take it as criticism, Stephen. It wasn’t meant that way. I look at everything as being good if it brings the right kind of attention to our issues. I also know the advantages of presenting the most egregious cases as plaintiffs first and how that can lead to a broader understanding of the issues over time.
Regarding the Global News video, I don’t get how this was enforced. Did she just agree to pay? What happened here? Did she just say”OK IRS, here you go?” HOW WAS THIS ENFORCED? I didn’t know this had happened yet. I just plan to ignore such IRS requests and never cross the border again.
Does anyone at IBS know Ms. Jack?
Bubblebustin, no — I did not take this as criticism. My mini-rant was only that more money for more lawsuits would really be helpful. We are in the right and we will be ok.
@ PierreD
Good question. I wish Sharon Jack would drop by here and explain further. I can only speculate that when the brown envelopes with the demand letters arrived she, having been a law abiding citizen all her life, felt she had no choice but to comply. This could have happened before there was any information available (no mention in the video of when). It was only 2 years ago that we all scrambled hard everyday to find just a mention of FATCA in the media, whereas now FATCA articles are almost a dime a dozen. It would be helpful to have more details.
@Embee,
I can’t stand to look at him either. I even hesitated to post the video because I don’t want to give him any airtime, but the story told by the Canadian victimized by the US was too compelling not to share.
@northernstar, unbelievable what she had to pay to the US. It is sick. And the Harper government not only provides no remedy, with the FATCA IGA and enabling legislation, it victimizes us further. Holding the door open and inviting the extortionist inside our home.
Thank you Stephen, Laura Secord and anyone else who helped arrange and fund the effort to find a humane path to the release of Accidental Americans.
Sorry, meant also to include thanks to the anonymous donor who helped make the Butera effort possible. Thank you Anonymous donor!
The Global news story doesn’t add up. FATCA reporting hasn’t begun. It certainly hadn’t begun when this lady filed estate taxes, if that’s what she in fact paid. There isn’t enough info to know what or why she paid.
It is more likely that she ran afoul of a compliance condor who advised her to file something in the US.
However, if her husband were solely Canadian then AFAIK, there would be no estate tax due to the US because estate taxes in the US are paid by the Estate not the heir. There is also a 5 million lifetime exemption.
Perhaps the estate had US assets. Who knows? But the Global story doesn’t make sense.
@ Duke of Devon
I agree. The Sharon Jack story can’t be directly pinned on FATCA … those stories are yet to come. We don’t have the whole picture and for many who come here trying to make sense of an incomprehensible situation it would be interesting to know more. I did find this …
http://www.rbcds.com/taxes-at-death.html
The Global news video was still valuable for correctly making the Harper government look bad to the general viewing public.
I wish to echo the thanks to Stephen, the anonymous donor and Mr. Butera etc. for this new US litigation.
I am putting together a package of a letter and FATCA/CBT injustice information that a relative of mine will deliver to US Senator Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut – he is Democrat, a former Attorney General of Connecticut and appears to portray himself as a strong supporter of civil and human rights issues. I think that I will also start sending letters to other US Senators as well.
Leave it to the media to distort the facts. They just want people to notice what they write, and actually they have no accountability except for those who answer to their blogs. I also had doubts about how this person could be extorted by the USA. It seems very extreme. More distorted stories to come, but the more distorted the better for us.
@EmBee, unfortunately I believe your source is not correct in regards to estate tax. The example given is for a nonUS citizen who dies yet has US assets and these would be subject to US estate tax. The U.S. is all about global asset taxation and that would apply to global assets upon death with complications if the spouse is not a U.S. citizen. http://www.zarembalaw.com/pdfs/Estate-Planning-Issues-for-the-Non-Citizen.pdf. This one has some nasties in regards to jointly held property.
Where is good protection from the Canadian-US tax treaty when you need it! The family home, retirement funds, insurance payouts and greater amounts should be exempted.
@ JC
It’s definitely time for Canada to renegotiate that treaty … except with the current leadership we could end up losing ground. Harper and his minions sure weren’t willing to stand their ground against the FATCA assault. Sovereignty took a far backseat to the interests of the banks.
Can somebody tell me what is the definition of an “accidental American?”
@ Bullwinkle
From the latest ADCS press release:
@EmBee Canada has a better treaty deal than most countries: CRA will not collect IRS tax debts, exemption from retirement fund tax, if send in form every year. But still lots more to go. If the treaty is not seen as broke by politicians then could not be fixed. ADCS focuses on existing lawsuit for now.