The following nuggets extracted from a singular academic essay may help to further inform persistent Brocker campaignist tendencies toward LTA (lobbying the authorities) and DTM (doing the media).
Americans in Canada are not loved by their vassal state, and never will be. When the empire claims its own, the emotional juices of schadenfreude have to overwhelm narrow rational self-interest.
Just watch those Americans get what they deserve. What a delightful spectacle. The increase in my Canadian banking fees due to FATCA is less than I spend on watching hockey goons smash each other up, and the show is way more fun.
Sauve qui peut.
Streambed where nuggets were found:
Kim Matthews and Vic Satzewich. “The Invisible Transnationals? Americans in Canada,” p. 164-179 in: Transnational Identities and Practices in Canada. Vancouver : UBC Press, 2006.
US-based scholars seem to have been generally disinterested in why Americans might want to leave their country of origin. … For many Americans who believe that there are endless numbers of people clamouring to get into their country, it is truly surprising that native-born Americans might want to leave the country at all. (164-165)
In one of the few studies that systematically examines emigration from the United States, American emigration to Canada is portrayed as little more than a form of internal migration to the fifty-first state. (165)
This large, socially significant, yet relatively invisible component of Canada’s immigrant population. (165)
Data suggest that American immigrants to Canada are relatively well off compared to other immigrant groups and to the Canadian population more generally. (167)
As of 1991, only 55% of all immigrants from the United States who were eligible to apply for Canadian citizenship had become Canadian citizens. (168)
Americans with dual citizenship who circumstantially assert their Canadian identity and underplay their American origins and citizenship do so in situational contexts where they believe that this will be beneficial. (169)
All of the individuals with whom we spoke affirmed that they felt anti-American sentiment in Canada. (169)
Americans in Canada, who enjoy the status gains of being from an economically dominant country, have the added security of knowing that Canadians are generally assimilated into their culture and that Canadian political deference to the United States is both common and necessary. (170)
Capital flows both ways, and there is a transnational capitalist and professional class that moves between the two countries to help manage these investments. (178)
@George. Yeah, she’s a “US citizen habitually resident in Canada”, LOL!
@Maz 57, “These new Canadians will discover they can use this occasion to simultaneously relinquish their US citizenship, thereby saving themselves US$2350.”
I think it would be wise that when USC apply for Canadian Citizenship that they state in the “Other” section of the naturalisation application that they intend for this application to be a relinquishing action. Why? After they naturalise they can request an official copy of their application and it will show they intended to relinquish!!
“Yeah, she’s a “US citizen habitually resident in Canada”, LOL!”
IF everyone else did not become bycatch I would cheer on FATCA as rightly taxing all those “American Citizens Abroad.”
I have become a great Bad Will Ambassador!! Its actually pretty simple to point out all the US problems and why I got me and my family out of that rat hole.
Both the US and Canada did not recognize dual citizenship until later into life. It meant renouncing. Children cannot apply for citizenship on their own. Some came to Canada as a baby or very young child. If one’s family is on both sides of the border, giving up one status for the other meant potentially permanent separation. It is not always so clear where an individual or family will end up. It is natural to want to be able to be with one’s family – and not to have to choose or guess what future events might or might not intervene. I don’t prescribe other people’s citizenship choices and what is ‘right’ for them – and I don’t expect them to prescribe it for me – after all, it is a universal human right to choose;
UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 15.
“(1) Everyone has the right to a nationality.
(2) No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.”
There are many mixed couples and mixed Canadian or US families where one person has US status, or is a dual, and the others are Canadian only, or one child is US status and one is Canadian. This is not a simple and straightforward issue. Marriages break up. Same sex sponsorship and marriage wasn’t possible until more recently. People die. People move. Then one is left stranded away from all family and supports. Governments can make family reunification and sponsorship difficult if one member/dependent has one of various disabilities http://www.ccdonline.ca/en/socialpolicy/access-inclusion/hawking . As we know, one cannot renounce US status on behalf of a minor or someone deemed legally incompetent. Healthcare can be a problem. There are far more variables than just a prescription to naturalize as soon as possible (which by the way has been getting longer and longer, with more and more hoops to jump).
I. Quality of nuggets. This is not gold, this is a rare earth mineral. Almost no deposits exist. Otherwise put, this 2006 paper, whatever else it does, says there is very little academic research on the topic. That could be taken as the main point of the paper. If knees can stop jerking long enough to stand still and think a bit, this is a point worth considering.
II. Calgary. Nothing against Calgary or Calgary411. Some data digging could probably quantify Calgary as the most Americanized large city in Canada bar none, with the consequence that American residents there would encounter the least ethnic hostility.
III. Not sure why the anti-American theme raises such hackles. Sociologically it is out there. I poke away at this tender spot because it feels like a Freudian-type locus of denial. Why so many seem to want to diminish this factor in the equation should be a topic for long rumination.
IV. Statism. USA is a state. Canada is a state. All states have the same tendencies to render (as in meat factory) their serfs. Some have more power to do so. Some have more incentive. Some have fewer wits. Render unto Caesar, the archetypal head of the archetypal demonic state.
V. Check out Encyclopedia of Diasporas. We do not exist.
We have been disappeared (bona fide US refugees included). We know ourselves only as beset wraiths.
Re: “Not sure why the anti-American theme raises such hackles.”
Really? Do you also wonder why homosexuals’ hackles are raised due to anti-gay themes, or women’s hackles are raised due to misogynistic themes? No one likes to be stereotyped in a negative way.
Also, Re: “I poke away at this tender spot because it feels like a Freudian-type locus of denial. Why so many seem to want to diminish this factor in the equation should be a topic for long rumination.”
Who is diminishing it? I think we all know its out there. Personally, I first experienced it in grade 4 when I had an Egyptian teacher who HATED the USA, and spent many a class seeding that hatred into the minds of my fellow classmates. I was scared death to tell the other kids I was born in the USA.
USX and Whitecat:
If my family is any indication, much of this (way overstated from my anecdotal perspective) anti-American sentiment is now coming out of the mouths of “US Persons” since we’ve learned a bit more about what the USA really is re:CBT and FATCA. Not that this is anything new, but important to note. (this makes me think: What ever happened to “Chears Big Ears” anyway?)
And yet, paradoxically, many of us who grew up dual in Canada, also encountered envy, and the ‘lucky you for being born in the USA’ theme.
I’ve seen several comments on various FATCA/CBT articles revealing this attitude with statements like ‘you all thought you were king shit having dual citizenship. I’m happy you have to pay now’ (not those words exactly, but that was the gist).
@Pierre, yes good point. It was always there, but now even the ‘Americans in Canada’ are expressing it.
Whitekat: Yes, I guess even I got to experience this “envy” in a way. I remember in the few weeks after I returned to Canada (from California) an older, long time neighbour of mine told me “you moved back here? Are you NUTS!
No regrets on my end!
Another thought – if you think that some of the pure Canadians dislike ‘Americans in Canada’ now, just wait until we win the lawsuit, and the 30% withholding threat becomes a potential reality.
Thank you for seeing the complexities in taking out/renouncing citizenship. It is not a black and white issue, and yes, it sometimes is all about family ties. If a tax paying, hard working Permanent Resident has every single family member in the US, what is it to George or anyone, if such a person decides not to burn his bridges? What if your children live in a state ten hours away by car and you face old age and perhaps serious disabiity? Would you not be a fool to limit your options? It doesn’t mean one loves Canada less, far from it. Every November I feel blessed to live in a country which honours its veterans the way Canada does. Every few years I cheer on Canada’s Olympic athletes over the Yanks and remind my Canadian daughters living in the states of the Canadian medal count. This land is home even though my family goes back to the New England of 1650. Anyone who doubts the long-term PR’s dedication to this country just doesn’t get it or sees life without nuance or complexity. As Badger said,have we learned nothing through this shared ordeal?
@LakeSuperiorGuy and @Badger:
Absolutely correct. Thanks to both of you for making your points as you have.
And I think most of us can see the game that is afoot. The same one that goes on south of the border right now: Divide and Conquer.
Cast aspersions, make ridiculous arguments that foment imagined slights, or long ago slights that may have been fostered by such as the teacher who hated the USA and spewed his hatred to infect the young minds of children who did not know any better, making a young school mate feel self conscious and afraid.
Yet, the meshed society that is Canada, is a good and decent land.
We must be mindful though that there are those coming into the country who do not like us and intend to change the country to something THEY want instead of assimilating into OUR society.
OUR traditions and free society must be defended anywhere and everywhere we come into contact with those who would divide.
Both your posts, to me, are perfect examples of EXACTLY what to say when this nonsense rears it’s ugly head.
We have been an excellent example of a good and fair society, one in which no emphasis has ever been put on ethnicity, particularly American or Canadian , except in good natured rivalry. Many families blended with no thought of ethnicity ever. Until this criminal attempt to extort and thwart free individuals from living their lives as they had always lived them. In harmony, good will and law abiding.This all from the lawless!
It is my fervent hope and prayer that this lawsuit goes a long, long way toward returning us whole to our lives and society as it was.(not that any of us will ever be the same again)
Our society in Canada is not perfect, of course, but as good as it gets and superior in many ways to what passes for democracy south of here.
I only have to point to the examples here at IBS to make my case.
In the meantime we certainly need no more of this attempt to paint life in Canada for Americans as something it has never been, EVER!
I was wondering how this book chapter defines American and how they found the Americans they studied. The reason I am asking is that the 2006 STATCAN data do not suggest that the U.S.-born population of Canada is particularly wealthy, but the U.S. government would consider almost all these people to be American, since there were few relinquishments and renunciations prior to then. According to STATCAN, the U.S.-born population of Canadian seems to have been quite settled in 2006, with lots of people who had lived in the country over fifteen years. They don’t really fit the footloose transnational stereotype.
How did the authors find these Americans to study? Because even the U.S. government finds it hard to find overseas Americans (see abandoned attempt at a census), often these studies involve methods that are going to pick up a certain type of American rather than others.
@LakeSuperiorGuy, “If a tax paying, hard working Permanent Resident has every single family member in the US, what is it to George or anyone, if such a person decides not to burn his bridges? ”
It is NOT “burning bridges” to become a Citizen of Canada without intending to voluntarily relinquish US Citizenship.
I could understand your argument in Germany or Japan because to naturalise there you must lose your USC.
So again I have to say and believe I am right to question in my home country when US Citizens come here, become permanent residents and do NOT take out citizenship but remains solely USC.
This whole discussion makes me shake my head. When you have a power imbalance between two neighbouring countries, and the one with more power continually acts as a bull in a china shop throughout the WORLD, how can you NOT have anti- sentiment? Is there not anti-Chinese sentiment in Hong Kong? Anti-Russian sentiment in Ukraine? Anti-German sentiment for decades in France and other European countries?
Finding anti-American sentiment in Canada seems a no-brainer to me, as a Canadian. I can’t imagine anyone surprised by it can be aware of the multiple events that have caused generational waves of it. My husband’s Canadian grandfather was vehemently anti-America, stemming from his time during WWII. Now his great grandchildren are vehemently anti-American due to FATCA.
There are significant numbers of Canadians who emigrate abroad and who do not naturalize there – for any number of reasons;
Many Canadians move abroad temporarily or permanently, for work, school, marriage, retirement, etc. but who do not – for any number of reasons, become duals or renounce Canadian citizenship for that of the country they move to. Some do not know if they will ever return to Canada, or when. Life happens. Circumstances change.
The movement of peoples globally, and citizenship is complex. Reading people’s stories here over the last 4 years tells me that there is no single uniform narrative. People contribute to their communities wherever they are – in taxes and in many other ways.
Our commonality is that we chose to make a home in Canada, or chose to stay. We demonstrate our commitment to Canada in different ways.
I would like to focus on what we have in common – and that is that we all – whatever our story and origins, are working to oppose the attempts by the US to impose extraterritorial rule over Canada, and seek to assert Canada’s sovereignty over those who live within its autonomous borders. In this, both citizens of Canada, and PRs are demonstrating commitment to Canada, and our fellows.
Those of us who are not either Canadian residents or citizens, are also demonstrating their dedicated opposition to US extraterritorial attempts to override the laws and human rights in other countries by asserting dominion (or even ownership) over individuals who have no economic connection with the US. There is a larger point being made. What happens in Canada re FATCA has significant implications for other countries.
What usxcanada points out in part is that the relationship between those with US status – however acquired, derived or inherited, AND THOSE WITHOUT, has implications for how this is playing out. And that is true globally.
As an addendum regarding the question of citizens and PRs. There are many Canadian citizen snowbirds and ex-greencard holders who spend/spent far more time in the US, rent/own property, work, conduct business, go to school, etc. who may be solely Canadian citizens, and who have much more significant contact and presence in the US than Canadian resident PERMANENT Rs of US origin (whether they have been PRs for decades or for a few years). There are Canadian citizens who have much more extensive relationships, contacts or economic ties to the US than some PRs may have. PRs cannot even be out of Canada in in the US for too long, because it can jeopardize their PR status.
That is why I think that trying to prescribe and proscribe behaviour in matters of citizenship and quasi-citizenship status or permanent resident status is fraught with pitfalls and deadends.
Shall we focus on what we all have in common?
Often time the route to finding what we have in common is knowing our differences.
I came to Canada in 1986, went to Europe in 1991-94, and then returned to Canada on minister’s permit until Immigration Canada made me fill out pages and pages of paperwork–paid a fee and landing poll tax. Then, in about 2007, I filled out more paperwork and another fee to renew my PR card–and this was the second time I had to do that. I determined at that point to become a Canadian before the next time I had to fill out the PR card–five pages, and pay yet another fee.
Of course in 2010, I realized I needed Canadian citizenship so that I could renounce my US citizenship. I didn’t want to become stateless. So I filled out another 10 pages of paperwork and paid some more fees, and then jumped through the other hoops and now I no longer have US citizenship and am a serf of the Canadian government–which I deemed as better than being the serf of the US while living in Canada.
Seems to me like territory that has been covered and discussed extensively before. For me, it doesn’t change the core goal of supporting ADCS to pose and win a legal challenge to FATCA in Canada. I thought our commonalities had been well and thoroughly discussed and identified – and despite our identified differences, some strategies have been identified and are in progress – like the international Human rights complaint, the Canadian legal challenge, the efforts to continue to bring individual, public, media and political attention to the issues, the offshoot efforts in the US, the fundraising, the information sessions, etc.
The post is an interesting reference, but from what I can see of it on google books, it also shows one of the key problems: the researchers talked to self-described Americans. This policy is going to hit a lot of Canadians hard because they don’t even realize that the U.S. government considers them to be Americans.
I think that one of the problems with this policy is that doesn’t recognize our differences and assumes that all U.S. citizens abroad are Eduardo Saverin. This policy is so unfair to so many groups of people, it just makes sense to hang together or we will all hang separately.