Cross-posted from ADCS-ADSC blog
First, congratulations are in order. Once again your donations have allowed the Alliance For The Defence of Canadian Sovereignty to achieve your funding goals. The third $100,000 cheque is on its way to your lawyer. There are some (mainly in the compliance industry) who had hoped for a failure of funding. You have not been deterred. Your funding of this lawsuit has been an “island of positive hope” in a “sea of negativity”. You have also sent a message that your lawsuit will not fail because of a lack of funding. Congratulations!
I want to reemphasize that your funding goals have been achieved because you have focused on what YOU want to achieve. You have not focused on the obstacles or on your detractors. We are in a marathon and not a sprint. We need to stay focused on OUR GOALS. We must not focus on those who want us to fail.
Your FATCA lawsuit is historic and is setting an example for people in other countries. I predict that organized opposition to FATCA will begin in Europe. Organized opposition to FATCA is essential. But, we cannot let our focus on FATCA obscure the need to bring an end to U.S. citizenship-based (AKA “place of birth”) taxation. After all:
FATCA is the tool to enforce U.S. citizenship-based “place of birth taxation”. Therefore, a separate goal is to bring an end to “place of birth” taxation. Think of how unfair it is to levy taxes on people based on their “place of birth” (and this is going on the 21st century).
“It’s unjust. It’s inhumane. I never chose where I was born!”
Meanwhile, back in the Homeland …
In previous posts, I have drawn attention to the fact that tax reform is under serious consideration. It is necessary. It is going to happen. I have noted that Senator Orrin Hatch is now the Chair of the Senate Finance Committee and that the “tax reform train is leaving the station“. I remind you that an earlier report by the Republican wing of the Senate Finance Committee stated that Americans abroad should be taxed according to the principles of “residence based taxation”. On January 25, 2013 Senator Hatch in a speech at the Brookings Institution stated that U.S. corporations should be subjected to “territorial taxation”. How could the environment be better than this? To date, Americans abroad feel they have not been heard. To date, Americans abroad feel they have been victimized by Homeland politicians who neither understand nor care about the difficulties they face. Senator Hatch has divided the Senate Finance Committee into various sub-committees.
Update: @GOPSenFinance Forms Tax Reform Working Groups http://t.co/TxK2sBeemf – #Americansabroad get chance to educate @SenSchumer
— Citizenship Lawyer (@ExpatriationLaw) January 17, 2015
The great news is that the sub-committee includes some of the Homeland politicians who are in the greatest need of our educational guidance!
We must commit ourselves to the goal, of ensuring that the reality of “U.S. Citizenship Abroad” is understood in the legislative process. We must take the positive and affirmative steps of educating the Senate Finance Committee. Our goal is to guide the Committee to recommend “residence-based taxation for DNA American citizens abroad. There are some who believe that this is NOT an achievable goal. There are some who say that the U.S. will NEVER abandon “citizenship-based taxation”. They can think what they want. They can say what they want. They can attempt to discourage you if they want. Their only purpose is to distract you from achieving your goals. You achieved your ADCS funding goals by focusing on YOUR objectives and not thinking about your detractors. Similarly, to persuade the the U.S. to move to “residence-based taxation” you must focus on YOUR objective and not worry about the detractors.
As the great American industrialist Henry Ford was fond of saying:
Likes the quote: "Whether you think you can, or you think you can't–you're right." http://t.co/vwOaVCoLXy via @goodreads
— Citizenship Lawyer (@ExpatriationLaw) January 26, 2015
As was expressed in the following comment at the Isaac Brock Society:
We have nothing to lose by trying to influence the Committee. I don’t know about you but if corporations manage to get RBT and we do nothing, I for one, would feel miserable and regretful for not having tried to get the same for us, our kids, and future generations.
The opportunity is there! The situation is urgent. As the recent interview by Keith Redmond indicates, U.S. citizens abroad are being forced to renounce their citizenship! For those who haven’t heard Mr. Redmond’s interview, I highly recommend that you listen to it here:
Next steps, moving forward, educational outreach to the Senate Finance Committee …
Why do I have the sinking feeling that we’re going to be forgotten once again? This speech by Sen. Hatch is strictly about tax relief for corporations. Does he mean a territorial taxation system across the boards or just territorial taxation for corporations? Everything I read here seems to point to the latter. I am very happy that Sen. Hatch is bringing up the subject but he carefully qualifies what he is talking about by the use of such as phrases as “reforming our business tax system” and “What we mean by a territorial tax system is not taxing foreign-source business income ….” . Well, what about *our* pension income and *our* mutual fund earnings and *our* income from “foreign” health benefits, registered savings funds, etc., etc.? Are we the proverbial chopped liver?
That’s exactly why we must make the case directly. Nobody will do it for us. Our goal is to provide evidence to the Senate Finance Committee. We must demonstrate the harm that the complete “citizenship-based taxation” regime is inflicting on Americans abroad. Our goal is to provide evidence that the harm inflicted on Americans abroad is forcing them to renounce their U.S. citizenship. If we achieve this educational goal, we have set the stage for Congress to legislate appropriate changes. If, after having made our very best case, and provided our very best educational efforts, Congress does not make the required changes, we will seek relief in the U.S. courts. (In fact, work on this initiative has already begun.) I repeat, we WILL be seeking relief in the U.S. courts.
How you can and MUST help …
I do not believe that that Congress is either malicious or vindictive. I do believe that they are ignorant and have been seduced by the “Myth Of The American Abroad”. The opposite of the truth is NOT the lie. The opposite of the truth is the “Myth”. Therefore, we must dispel the myths. We can achieve this only if you are willing to share your story. We can achieve this only if you can convey your pain, your fear, your terror, and how the policies of the U.S. Government have destroyed the lives of you and your families. They must understand that people are being forced to renounce their U.S. citizenship to protect themselves and their families from the tyranny of the U.S. government. The deadline is February 14, 2015.
February 14, 2014 – You are invited to come to Toronto, Canada, where …
There will be a forum where you will be invited to speak directly to the Senate Finance Committee. You will have the opportunity to appear on camera. You will have the opportunity to describe in detail how difficult it is to both comply with the U.S. laws governing U.S. citizens abroad and have any kind of life. In other words, our goal is to create a number of video testimonials. (For those who are fearful of revealing your identities arrangements will be made so that your faces are obscured.) Each video testimonial will be paired with a written statement. We strongly urge you to participate in this. At the very least, Congress must understand that people are forced to renounce their U.S. citizenship as a defensive measure.
To put it simply: Congress must understand how the community of U.S. citizens abroad (the best ambassadors that America could ever have) is being destroyed. This is not about tax compliance. It’s not about accountants and lawyers. It’s not about academics. It’s not about partisan politics. It’s not about class warfare. It’s certainly not about tax evasion and offshore accounts. It’s not about a bunch of theoretical garbage. It’s about people.
It’s about people with real lives, who are trying to exercise their constitutional liberties to pursue happiness in the form they desire. Instead they are being forced to renounce (either formally or informally) their U.S. citizenship. It’s about the right of people to live normal lives. It’s about being able to “live as a U.S. citizen abroad”.
If you don’t’ want to appear on video or if you don’t want to come to Toronto, you can prepare your own video testimonial and forward it to us. If you don’t want to appear on on video, we still want your written statements.
Please do NOT assume that your contribution doesn’t matter! Your contribution does matter!
Everybody matters. Therefore everybody has an obligation to contribute! Don’t get me wrong. I don’t mean “equal contribution”. I do mean that I want you to do what you can! We need your story. There are (apparently) 7.6 million Americans abroad. That’s a population bigger than many U.S. states. The votes of Americans abroad are believed to have made George Bush president in 2000. You can make a difference.
What about all the previous submissions that have been made?
We will also be organizing all previous submissions made to the House Ways and Means Committee. Many of these submissions have been discussed here.
Dr. Kish and I have made earlier submissions to the U.S. Senate Finance Committee on Citizenship-based taxation (discussed here). We expect to update these submissions (with appropriate revisions).
Harvesting comments on various internet posts …
Some people have invested considerable time in posting “educational comments” on various blogs (especially Robert Wood’s blog). I suggest that the comments of some of the most prolific commenters should be organized and included. In many cases, the comments on the blog posts are actually better than the posts. If you are one of those commenters, we need you! We need you to organize your comments by theme. We need you to help identify who are the consistently best commenters. Those comments need to be organized and become part of the record.
We need your logistical help and support …
As you can see, we are embarking on a big project. We need your stories. We need your support. We need your positive energy. We need your logistical help. If you are willing to help us please let us know. What I need to impress on you is that we have approximately 2 weeks to accomplish this! Contact us directly if you are willing to help. We will be providing additional information in the next few days and will be asking for specific help with specific tasks. In the same way that the Senate Finance Committee has its “sub committees”, we will have our “sub committees”.
Some closing thoughts motivated by President Obama …
On January 20, 2015 President Obama delivered his annual “State of the HOMELAND Union Address“. It was full of the usual platitudes. But, there was one comment that (at least for me) really confirmed the difficulties of “U.S. Citizenship Abroad”.
The President explained:
Seven years ago, Rebekah and Ben Erler of Minneapolis were newlyweds. (Laughter.) She waited tables. He worked construction. Their first child, Jack, was on the way. They were young and in love in America. And it doesn’t get much better than that.
Our goal is to ensure that in a future “State of the Union Address” a future president will say:
“They were young and love AS AMERICANS. And it doesn’t get much better than that.”|
Keep your focus. Keep your faith. Keep your enthusiasm. Believe in our goal. This is about YOU. It is NOT about them!
P.S. In my first post on the Alliance blog, I reminded you that:
But, when it comes to opposing injustice, the simple truth is that:
Some people make things happen.
Some people watch things happen.
Some people ask “What happened”?
You are in a position to “make things happen”.
Please use my submission to the Ways and Means Committee.
@Bubblebustin
by all means!
“Our goal is to provide evidence that the harm inflicted on Americans abroad is forcing them to renounce their U.S. citizenship.”
IMHO for the intended audience (the Senate Finance Committee) it will be more persuasive if people emphasize the former, not the latter, in the above. Play up the harm inflicted but not so much the renunciation. Make it clear that Americans abroad face tax and other compliance burdens far exceeding those of ‘homelanders’ (this is completely true). The implication of this–renunciations–is also completely true but less likely to be a persuasive message for this audience. Emphasizing the latter will make it sound like witnesses are less than loyal Americans. That may actually be very accurate but it is more likely to be persuasive if you emphasize that people are doing their best to be loyal Americans while abroad but the current regime makes it virtually impossible.
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society | $99,750 more needed in 94 days to make the May 1 2015 payment for Canadian FATCA IGA lawsuit/ Il nous reste 99,750 $ à ramasser pour notre poursuite judiciaire
@Dash,
I disagree with what you wrote. Expats are in fact being forced to renounce in order to survive. It has nothing to do with loyalty. In fact, many of those who have renounced, including myself, are far more loyal to America’s original principles than many of those living within the Homeland. So why downplay the truth?
Moreover, it is the renunciations that gets their attention. It is very embarrassing for the US to have its citizens renounce what virtually every single American has been programmed from birth to believe is the greatest citizenship on earth.
Dash, are you an expat or a homelander?
@FromTheWilderness
“So why downplay the truth?”
Because you need to emphasize another aspect of the truth that hasn’t gotten enough airtime yet.
“Moreover, it is the renunciations that gets their attention.”
Yes, but unless you get also get their attention about the level of injustice that led to the renunciation, it won’t get their attention in a good way. They’ll put you in the same category as Saverin–someone who is perceived to have used America to get rich and then run away to avoid paying taxes. I don’t think the message of the level of injustice that middle class expats have to deal with has really gotten out there. I don’t think talking about renunciation is going to be well received.
“Dash, are you an expat or a homelander?”
It’s none of your business 🙂 . The only thing that is any of your business is whether I am right or wrong–and I can live with being wrong if it turns out I’m wrong–it wouldn’t be the first time. I am making a suggestion to try to help. If I’m right, then I’ve added value–and even if I’m wrong I’ve still invested a little of my time to try to help. But whether I’m an expat or a homelander is simply not germane to the discussion. The FATCA laws apply to all so-called ‘US persons’ whether expat or ‘homelander’–and are equally unjust for each group–so this distinction is totally irrelevant.
As I’ve stated before, I don’t post on here to debate. I post on here to try to help with something I believe in passionately. If I present a position with which the majority of people on here disagree, it is because I am respectfully trying to encourage people to consider a viewpoint that may help with success but may be being overlooked.
@FromTheWilderness
“Expats are in fact being forced to renounce in order to survive.”
Yes, and it’s the struggle to survive part–not the renounce part–that needs to be emphasized here IMHO. I don’t think that part of the message has been adequately communicated yet.
“This is about YOU. It is NOT about them!”
Who specifically is the “you” here that is distinct from the “them”? I think if you truly believe–as you stated earlier in this post–that Congress is not being intentionally vindictive, then it is best not to divide things into “you” vs “them”.
“Them” means people who try to discourage positive efforts; expats with negative attitudes, compliance condors etc. Not Congress.
@ Dash
Thank you for your suggestions, but I fully endorse the approach ADSC-ADCS is taking. They are expats with real skin in the game. If you were a middle class or lower middle class expat who was forced to renounce, you would understand. Nobody wants to renounce their citizenship but CBT, FATCA, FBAR, PFIC, CFC, Double T, bank account closures, mortgages called in, marriages broken etc, are forcing people to do it.
Now is not the time to be pussy footing around with nuances of perceived political correctness. We don’t have that luxury. It is time to tell it like it is.
Most of the people we video-interview on February 28 might be, like our two Plaintiffs, people who never wanted to be, or expected to be, U.S. citizens. But I also hope that there will be some who have always wanted to be American but find that life overseas is intolerable — and are willing to detail that harm.
Both “loyal” and Americans-without-consent must be represented in our submission.
@Stephen, re:
You say this, as though many ‘accidentals’ rejected their American birthright even before they became aware of the ‘FATCA hunt’.
While some ‘accidentals’ knew they were, or suspected they might be US citizens, I think that most did not mind being considered as such, at least technically, even if they did not identify as ‘American’ socially or culturally. In fact if anything, we were told it was a very lucky thing to have dual citizenship with the ‘greatest country in the world’; who in their right mind would not want this? Remember that, pre-FATCA, virtually no ‘accidentals’ knew they were US taxpayers.
Discovering that US citizenship equated with US taxpayer status was what changed the attitude of many (if not most), ‘accidental Americans’ (along with lots of other US citizens residing outside USA). The rejection of US taxpayer status, is a lot different than rejection of American citizenship, and a point that seems to get glossed over by shocked US taxpayers claiming post-FATCA that they never wanted to be US citizens in the first place.
Lets be honest – it used to be special to be dual, before we knew what that really meant.
@FromTheWilderness
If you’ve renounced and draw attention to that fact, no US Senator in their right mind is going to perceive you as having “skin in the game”. You can’t vote and you can’t donate to their reelection campaign. I spent some quality time with a senior US Senator just two weeks ago. She’s already focused on her 2016 reelection campaign. I have “skin in the game” because I vote and I’ve indirectly (through my employer) donated to her. If you are renouncing and draw attention to the fact, you are exposing the weakest card in your hand. Terrible poker strategy.
@Tricia Moon
Thanks for clarifying. Not sure I’ve seen many expats with negative attitudes. I agree compliance condors are a huge, huge problem here.
Very well-said WhiteKat
Remains true for some of us who have renounced as well. It is still special that I grew up there and I am really, just as American as the day I was born.
@WhiteKat
Both plaintiffs are women. Although it is likely not possible to change the set of plaintiffs at this late date, an important demographic is excluded here: men. It is true that pre-FATCA there were few if any known obligations for expat women. Not so for expat men who have always had to register for the draft.
@Dash, good point. However, I suspect that the majority of male ‘accidentals’ also thought they were lucky because had a golden opportunity to easily be able to take advantage of career opportunities in the USA if they wanted to. At the same time, if they were considered about being drafted, being dual, meant they could leave the USA (if they even moved there in the first place) and go back to their other country more easily than draft dodgers who were American only. In other words, duals had more choices – both males and females.
@Tricia Moon
Really, really confused here. You’ve taken the oath of Canadian citizenship here right? Expressing loyalty to the Queen? How can you claim to be as American as before?
I myself have taken the oath of US citizenship. I do not claim to be as Canadian as before. I do claim the right to criticize the US government when the US government is wrong. And the US government is wrong when it comes to FATCA/CBT/FBAR/etc.
ughh…excuse all the typos…time for bed!
@Dash, the career opportunities card was the really lucky one that most of us with any ambition grew up hearing about whenever we mentioned to anyone where we were born.
@WhiteKat
Yes it is true that in the past dual citizenship offered more options to both genders. Not so any more for anyone.
@Dash, I meant ‘good point’ about the draft issue being a male concern, not your suggestion that men should have been included as plaintiffs – I have no comment on that.
@Dash,
That is true but like everything in life, nothing can be perfect. We have to trust that Mr Arvay knows what he is doing. I mean no disrespect but I doubt a CDN court would care about registering for the draft.
That said, this post is not about the IGA suit.This is about making submissions to the US Senate Finance Committee. And anyone can be involved in submitting, especially if they had done the right thing by registering for the draft.That is something members of Congress would expect amd we would encourage anyone including that in their story.
@Trish, thanks for pulling us back on course! I’ll help with the comment gathering.
@Dash
I see no contradiction. I was a dual. I could see your point if you were talking about countries who are enemies but not the UK, Canada and the US. My family is originally British anyway.
What I am talking about is not a matter of oaths. I am talking about my core, where my values were formed, the social evironment I grew up in. That cannot be removed.I cannot “decide” to be less of an American and more of a Canadian. I lived in the US until I was 27 years old. Sure, I have some characteristics that are also Canadian because I have lived here. I see it as having the best of both worlds (in terms of influence, not whether one has a passport, can work anywhere, get benefits, and so on).
I see my reaction to this whole situation as being indicative of American behaviour as opposed to Canadian, That is the utter irony of the situation.