Strata corporations of townhouses and condominiums exist all over Canada to maintain and operate common interests of the owners of the individual units. Some of these strata corporations have dozens of members. It would not be uncommon for such corporations to have funds that may need to be invested in order to maintain buying power in an inflationary environment. But no more, if the following comment by Michael is true:
I’m on a board of directors for a non-profit corporation (condominium corporation). We are a Canadian corporation, Canadian-owned, and can only invest in GIC’s that are CDIC-covered. Our investment institution (our bank – as well as all other Canadian Banks as I am lead to understand) is requiring us to fill out form W-8BEN-E, which seems to make no sense whatsoever since it is impossible for us to have exposure to US withholding tax. On top of that, it appears (although the full requirements too confusing for me to understand on 1st reading) that I need to list condo owners who may fit one or more of the following requirements: US citizens, have substantial US holdings, spend a significant amount of time in the US, have substantial US dealings through their corporations, etc. In my position, I don’t believe that I can gather that information.
I don’t want to be part of this witch-hunt; but if I don’t cooperate we won’t be able to invest our money anywhere to maintain its value for the corporation.
Under Canadian Law, does the status of my condo corp exempt us from filling out this form (regardless of what the Banks may want)?
I wonder if Stephen Harper had this in mind when his government signed the IGA with the USA.
In any case, I encourage Michael to refuse to fill out the W-8BEN-E. Resistance is not futile.
See also:
Is TD Bank overzealously ferreting out US persons?
The potential hazard of the over-zealous bank inquisitor
USCitizenAbroad,
The Russians call a spade a spade — they get the toxicity for their country in having US Persons.
Sputnik International, January 28, 2015, “Russian Banks Cancel US Contracts Over Demands to Reveal Taxpayers’ Data”
Recently I’ve been watch Canadian TV from outside of Canada and find Canada’s version of the Dragons Den entertaining.
Would a Dragon invest in a US Person? Probably not.
FATCA interferes even with something as simple as applying to pitch your business idea.
Yes, Don, any relationship with a US person will be complicated. Always proceed with caution when dealing with financial affairs involving US persons. Just as there’s a CDC for infectious biological diseases, maybe there should be an organization for preventing the spread of financial diseases such as CBT – say the “CPFC”, the Centre for the Prevention of Financial Control, dealing specifically with those with “US taint”? Price of inoculation? USD$2350.
CPFC WARNING: US PERSONS WITH STDs!
CPFC advises avoiding contact with all people having US “indicia” such as a US place of birth, US address, US phone number, US spouse, speaks with US accent, reads US newspapers, watches US TV shows, listens to US music, eats US food, etc.
All persons with such “indicia” are likely to be contaminated with STDs — that is, Slavery Transmitted Diseases. Before having anything to do with them, it is strongly advised that they show proof of having a clean of bill of health in the form of a CLN, that is, a Certificate of Loss of Nationality.
Lol, FromTheWilderness!
Blaze made a hilarious comment some while back about having “VD” (Voluntary Disclosure), which with my limited hunting abilities I unfortunately can’t find.
Or was that Em, sorry I can’t remember.
FromTheWilderness and bubblebustin,
Here was Blaze’s comment on the subject of *US Person* STDs / VD, prompted by a comment from JustMe: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/02/22/irs-is-bluffing-bad-faith-negotiations-in-the-ovdi/comment-page-1/#comment-9451
It was Blaze.
Thank you, Calgary411. As funny as the day I first read it. As a matter of fact, it was one of many comments that led me to consider contributing to Brock. I just felt like home, lol!
Not likely the best place for this, but…
What does all of this mean? Stateless except for US taxation purposes?
January 29, 2015 (Lexology): “Third Circuit holds that an American citizen domiciled in Germany is “stateless” and therefore does not satisfy any of the tests for diversity jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a) “
We are not all Greece YET. But SOON.
http://kingworldnews.com/paul-craig-roberts-eu-banksters-threaten-defy-us-will-destroy/
The last sentence is prophetic, I think, for what else is Greece to do?
From what is circulating, looks like Germany will be right ahead or behind depending on how swiftly things move.
In reading the article, it seems very clear the danger every individual on this planet is in. The incursion into sovereignty of a country to pillage and destroy has many faces and uses many tools to wrest good people of sovereign countries away from their financial assets and ruin their lives, just as they are ruining Greece and everything they touch.
Our lawsuit, if not appreciated in full before, should be seen as it is in light of this article: The Spartans at Thermopylae:
The impossible fight by a very few against an overwhelming horde.
The Spartans and the glory of Greece is long gone, more’s the pity. (unless the new government means what it says and seeks a way to wrest itself from the grip of the EU and Washington and the banksters, as suggested in the article)
Our lawsuit stands in the breach, just as the Spartans did. Though they did have help ( also betrayal) it was their staunch refusal to surrender their sovereignty to the hordes of Persia
Just as the threats to Greece are as raw and open as they can be,( the new government under withering assault immediately on their election) so are the threats to Canada, albeit seemingly more subtle and cloaked in the dishonesty and criminality of FATCA.
@Calgary411:
For purposes of diversity jurisdiction, “citizenship is synonymous with domicile.” Domicile is an individual’s “true, fixed and permanent home and place of habitation. It is the place to which, whenever he is absent, he has the intention of returning.” The court further cited Supreme Court doctrine implying that an American citizen not domiciled in a particular state is essentially “stateless” under 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a). These individuals cannot litigate in federal court based on diversity jurisdiction since they are not “citizens of a State,” or “citizens or subjects of a foreign state.”
Court ruling, upheld on appeal in the Third Circuit. ” Citizenship is synonymous with domicile ”
And THAT argument should go a long way toward killing any incursion into Canadian’s financial lives. I say SHOULD because even if it was seen as a valid defense it would be cast aside in any way or by any means available to the criminal enterprise we are fighting. As we have seen, all our reasonable and valid defenses have been dismissed out of hand while they steamroll over us and our country with the assistance of our own politicians.
As many around the globe are becoming aware of our lawsuit and Brock and ADCS they also become aware of how very little has been done to defend by their own countries and know that this lawsuit may be the only hope people around the world actually have to stop this in it’s tracks. And do it before all sovereignty everywhere is completely destroyed.
@Calgary411:
Court ruling, upheld on appeal in the Third Circuit. ” Citizenship is synonymous with domicile ”
And THAT argument should go a long way toward killing any incursion into Canadian’s financial lives. I say SHOULD because even if it was seen as a valid defense it would be cast aside in any way or by any means available to the criminal enterprise we are fighting. As we have seen, all our reasonable and valid defenses have been dismissed out of hand while they steamroll over us and our country with the assistance of our own politicians.
As many around the globe are becoming aware of our lawsuit and Brock and ADCS they also become aware of how very little has been done to defend by their own countries and know that this lawsuit may be the only hope people around the world actually have to stop this in it’s tracks. And do it before all sovereignty everywhere is completely destroyed.
Furious AC,
Thanks for your reply. Yes, I agree:
To All: we must continue the fight – donate as often as you can: http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/
ultimately the questionnaire will resemble the questions put forth by HUAC
are you now or have you ever been a US person?
do you now or have you ever associated with a US person?
what was the nature of your activities with these US persons?
kindly provide the names of friends and colleagues you suspect of having associated
with you persons.
This issue Petros raised about strata corporations sheds light on the bigger problem of CFCs and PFICs in general.
These two laws wreck absolute havoc on the lives of expat small business owners and DIY investors.
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society | Americans abroad & diversity jurisdiction of U.S. federal courts
@calgary411 & FuriousAC: to avoid derailing this thread (at least, any further than I already did with the CFC thing), I started a separate post on diversity jurisdiction:
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/01/30/americans-abroad-diversity-jurisdiction-of-u-s-federal-courts/
@FromTheWilderness I am personally in the same situation as many are with small businesses. I have worked for the same company for just over 10 years now. I am an electronics control instrumentation specialist. I have 3 journeyman certificates and am ready to start my own business. The plan was to start it 1 year ago. Since learning of the fatca complications, I would have to divorce my wife and start my business. If I did not divorce her, I would be at a competitive disadvantage with other companies in my line of work as they would not have the same accountant fees I would have. Fatca is putting the brakes on any new business plans for me and I bet a lot of others due to Canadians being tied to(married to) anyone with US taint. These problems were never considered when the Canadian government comitted treason and left us all for stupid.
Thanks, Eric.
@NativeCanadian
Can you elaborate on why your wife being a USC is holding you back from starting your business? I know there are issues for a USC owning a business, but I don’t understand the issue with a USC spouse – keep her name off the company and all should be well, no?
@Tdott. there are numerous issues with different types of small businesses models. Each one has it’s different issues. One of the plaintiffs in this challenge can tell you of the implications of running a business with her husband/partner. I believe hers is a “corporation” type company with several reporting from her “non resident alien” partner. The marriage ties you to bank accounts. If I started a sole proprietorship type model, I would be tied with working out 25% property taxes and other expenses on the American income tax filed by my wife and any business draws from the company would be reportable family income as a “non resident alien”. I have not consulted a professional, but from what I have learned here and seen from others, the reporting would all need to be done by professionals at an added cost. Just having separate bank accounts does not exempt you from the fbars. I would need a divorce to completely be operating with the same book keeping/ accountant costs as other businesses. This is just the tip of the iceberg….
Pingback: #Americansabroad will be subject to “economic quarantine” in a #FATCA world | U.S. Persons Abroad – Members of a Unique Tax, Form and Penalty Club
Folks:
Above in the thread is a discussion including statement ” Citizenship is synonymous with domicile ”
If this is true then every Immigrant to the US is NOT domiciled in the US and every Immigrant to Canada is NOT domiciled in Canada. This has to be a nonsense.
So all the folks in Boston with Irish Passports proudly held in their hands are Domiciled in … where exactly ?