[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).
Pingback: What would Ronald Reagan advised #Americansabroad about #FATCA? | U.S. Persons Abroad – Members of a Unique Tax, Form and Penalty Club
@Domino
Thank you for your great comment. I was particularly inspired by this line you wrote in reference to Nelson Mandela:
“He reasoned that to unite his divided country he’d have to champion that which the Afrikaners held dear; to the extent that it wasn’t inconsistent with his own cause.”
Until Americans abroad become an asset to be protected by the US government and it’s people, our message will be drowned out by their disdain for us.
Unlike Teddy Roosevelt and John F. Kennedy, Reagan didn’t actively encourage harsh tax policies towards citizens abroad; however, the tax treatment of citizens abroad deteriorated a lot under his administration. Think of the treatment of non-resident alien spouses and PFICs. The last president with any kind thoughts for citizens abroad was probably Hoover.
As a long-time lurker, it feels great to be a first-time poster. My story in a nutshell: born in the US, moved to Canada at age 22 when I married a Canadian (no, it wasn’t to evade taxes), never filed a single thing after that with the US (who knew?), OMG moment in 2012, became Canadian citizen in 2013, shed US citizenship in August 2014, will make final filings in 2015.
At this time of thanks-giving, I would like to express my profound gratitude for and constant admiration of the people who are core at Isaac Brock and Maple Sandbox. It is a rare day that I do not check in to see the latest in this lamentable saga whose source is the United States policy of Citizenship-Based Taxation.
The admirable work done by those involved with the Canadian legal challenge has made me wonder if now would be a good time to do an email/twitter blitz, similar to the one started here on IBS in February 2013 to the members of Canadian parliament. Only this time it should be two-fold: to the members of the US Congress, and to the US media. Keep it short and sweet, along the lines of:
To: US lawmaker
From: Citizen of the world
Subject: FIX IT – switch to RBT (residence-based taxation)
Dear US lawmaker, please answer one question. What is fair or justifiable or even profitable about the US policy of citizenship-based taxation? Nothing! Fix it – switch to residence-based taxation like the rest of the world.
For the US media, my question would be: Who will be the first to directly challenge US lawmakers on this unique-to-the-US policy of CBT and demand answers? The time for half-hearted commentary is over.
Looking at the impressive amount of money that has been raised for the legal challenge, it is obvious to me that this web site reaches a huge audience. If the citizens of the world SWAMP the US with this message, maybe now they will start to listen. The door has opened a crack thanks to the exertions of IBS and others, now let’s bust it down. BLITZ them, DELUGE them!!
There are likely thousands (millions?) around the world who monitor this site, who are itching to take action. It is time to mobilize. The key would be for posters to this web site to provide lists of email addresses/twitter handles of US legislators and media. Then lurkers unleash!
@Unleashed.
That is an inspiring message. I have also wondered how many are the “thousands (millions?) around the world who monitor this site”. I know it is possible to insert code in a web page to count the number of daily page views and from where in the world they come. Do the administrators of http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/ do that? Do they know how many “hits” there are per day on this site and the number of unique people reading it? I do hope it is many thousands.
Hi Unleashed … welcome to the ranks of those who comment; those of us in the front lines around the world need all the help we can get. I am NOT an administrator but I note that there is a gross page view counter at the bottom of the page … it currently reports some 12.187 million page views. To this must be added about 600,000 page views from the first version of this web site (figure was quoted by Petros I think some time ago and stuck in my head) … so we are nearing 12.8 million page views. It seems to me as an outside observer that the number of page views is accelerating. This does not report unique visitors nor the countries visited from … though the administrators might possibly be able to get to this information … I myself prefer to just monitor the gross page views as I do not like too much loss of privacy. It would be amusing however to monitor visits from Government (any Government) controlled IP addresses.
@foo
I’m just sharing what the dude wrote in an email list. Contact old Freddy
http://www.frederic-lefebvre.org/
flefebvre@assemblee-nationale.fr
for legal citation.
Thank you, Stephen, for your latest update on funding the claims made in Canada by the two Plaintiffs, Gwen and Ginny. As you have said “inch by inch will get us there.” We have done incredibly well to raise this with the dedication of the donations of “Regular Joe’s and Josephine’s”, including repeat donors who are committed to this fight. Let’s achieve that November 1 payment to be able to continue with the next phases.
Everyone reading here can update themselves with the Amended Claim for the Canadian legal suit that is posted at: http://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/from-the-desk-of-john-richardson-co-chair-adcs-adsc-ca-amendments-to-statement-of-claim/.
To keep up to date on the Canadian litigation, please bookmark so you can refer to and comment at the ADCS WordPress site above . We’re doing this so we can keep everything we’re discussing on the Canadian litigation in one location.
@calgary411 – I am a little concerned that the amended complaint refers too frequently to persons while they are “citizens” of Canada …. are not Landed Immigrants, Political Asylum seekers and other permanent residents (legal or otherwise?) of Canada similarly protected by our Charter of Rights. Am I off base?
nervousinvestor,
Can you also pose your question at http://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/from-the-desk-of-john-richardson-co-chair-adcs-adsc-ca-amendments-to-statement-of-claim/? You have a good point regarding the ALL to be protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
Article in the Financial Post is worth reading and maybe commenting on:
http://business.financialpost.com/2014/10/10/two-women-fighting-fatca-expand-lawsuit-to-include-revenue-minister-as-defendant/
@calgary411:
inch by inch will get us there
…I tried to get LPR and move to Canada because persons in Canada are allowed to enjoy the metric system. Inches are for USA.
@Unlreashed: Welcome and Congratulations on coming out of the shadows.I hope you will continue to participate here and join us at Sandbox.
At this time of thanks-giving, the very best way you can express your “profound gratitude” is to donate to the lawsuit. I hope others will do that as part of their Thanksgiving celebrations.
Also, do you have any suggestions about how we can reach other lurkers and encourage them to both participate and donate?
Tom Alciere,
Thank you for the link to an article that results from the new Press Release announcing the Amended Claim!
It will be helpful if persons can direct comments to the article regarding the Amended Claim to http://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/from-the-desk-of-john-richardson-co-chair-adcs-adsc-ca-amendments-to-stateRement-of-claim/.
[Re “inch by inch” — My dad (originally from Ontario but moved to New York State with his family as a child), who was a machinist in the Puget Sound Naval Shipyard for many years after we moved to the west coast, could never figure out why the US would not change to the metric system! You’re correct that inches are for the USA.]
@Blaze
Let’s have a ‘free renunciation fee’ lottery 🙂 $100 per chance to win!
What a great idea, bubblebustin — and Blaze — and Stephen — and ADCS-ADSC.ca!
Would there be any US tax implications? Do we have to put that question to anything we do?
@Calgary411 – tried … twice … did not see it appear. If you can make it happen then please do …
Thanks, nervousinvestor. I’ve reported the problem and posted your question.
Of course there’s probably all kinds of legal hurdles to jump over to hold a contest like this, but it’s fun to think about. Relinquishers or conscientious tax objectors can take the cash equivalency, of course.
@Calgary: I am certain there would be U.S. tax implications. US taxes lottery winnings. Canada doesn’t.
I love the idea, but I think there are major regulations and laws on holding a lottery. I have no idea what the rules are.
@nervousinvestor @calgary411
I agree that the ADCS blog is the better place for very specific questions about the lawsuit but the conversation there has not really taken hold yet–so let me re-post the response I gave to @nervousinvestor here as well:
“My understanding is that the NEW claims are not related to the Charter–although the existing claims which still are being pursued to related to the Charter. The new claims refer to Canadian citizens because the existing US-Canada Income Tax Treaty does, in fact, convey certain rights to Canadian citizens that permanent residents, political asylum seekers, and unlawful residents do not enjoy. See the following quote: “8. No assistance shall be provided under this Article for a revenue claim in respect of a taxpayer to the extent that the taxpayer can demonstrate that (a) Where the taxpayer is an individual, the revenue claim relates to a taxable period in which the taxpayer was a citizen of the requested State…” from the Treaty (http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-trty/canada.pdf). My only minor concern–that I assume Arvay and Gruber will address–is that the amended claims now make the plaintiffs’ Canadian citizenship a material fact. In describing the plaintiffs, no mention is made as to whether the plaintiffs are Canadian citizens or not.”
Hopefully this discussion can move to:
http://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2014/10/09/from-the-desk-of-john-richardson-co-chair-adcs-adsc-ca-amendments-to-statement-of-claim/
soon.
Was the donor from Prague in the Czech Rep? Great place spent 6 weeks there. At the time I mentioned FATCA to English teachers in Prague 4, the reaction then was the USG can’t force Czech banks to give info to the IRS.
Quite a few USCs there in Prague.
The teachers responded like I had two heads.
@Dash1729 The claim amendment refers to the section of the tax treaty on information exchange.
@JC
The section on information exchange is certainly relevant but that’s not the part I was quoting. I was quoting from Section XXVIA, “Assistance in Collection”. This section IS directly referenced by the Plaintiffs/Arvay/Gruber in the amended claims:
“to the extent that the Accountholder Information relates to a taxable period in which the accountholder was a citizen of Canada pursuant to Article XXVIA of the Canada-US Tax Treaty”
The treaty affords other protections that extend to non-citizen residents of Canada, but the specific protection I was quoting and that Arvay/Gruber reference is limited to Canadian citizens. That’s why there is some mention of Canadian citizenship in the new claims.
(claim 96a near the bottom of page 18 of the amended claims refers to Canadian citizenship in reference to Article XXVIA of the treaty, which also specifically singles out Canadian citizens).
http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.com/2014/10/swiss-category-2-banks-reportedly-get.html
“Hardliners have taken over the leadership of DOJ, mentioning Tamara Ashford, Acting AAG Tax, who is awaiting confirmation to the U.S. Tax Court…..”
The message: there will be no mercy for Americans living in Switzerland or anywhere else for that matter.