Dear Supporters,
Many of you probably predicted that I would not be saying this today, but this message is not a dream: You came up with yet another $100,000 payment — now making a total of $400,000 provided to the Arvay team.
In the last twelve days you actually donated more than $40,000 — an amazing achievement for small donors. This accomplishment proves to all those people who want us to fail — that we are very determined.
You gave until it hurt and then you gave a lot more. It’s hard not to get teary-eyed over the generosity of our supporters, who have come through every time.
We know that the pace of your litigation is painfully slow, and this is unfortunately as expected. The Government will continue to do its best to slow down the process, but we now have the assistance of a case management judge to help keep the process moving more fairly.
We filed in August 2014 and it has taken a very long time (one year) before we are finally into a (summary) trial (August 4-5, 2015). We cannot predict the outcomes of this trial, based on only part of our arguments and, with your continued support, we will prepare for all possibilities.
[Happy birthday Gwen!]
Thank you for your trust,
Stephen Kish,
ADCS-ADSC Chair,— on behalf of Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, their families, and the ADCS-ADSC Directors
——————————————————————————————————-
Chers amis et donateurs,
Certains d’entre vous avaient probablement pensé que je ne pourrais pasvous annoncer une si bonne nouvelle aujourd’hui. Mais voilà : ensemble, nous avons réussi à ramasser un autre montant de 100 000 $, ce qui fait un total de 400 000 $ à remettre à l’équipe de MeArvay.
Dans les 12 derniers jours seulement, vous avez donné plus de 40 000 $, un exploit tout à fait extraordinaire pour des « petits donateurs ». À tous ceux qui souhaitent nous voir échouer, cette réussite prouve que nous sommes des plus déterminés. Et que nous réussirons.
Vous avez donné jusqu’à ce que ça fasse mal, puis vous avez donné encore. Difficile de rester insensible devant une si grande générosité.
Nous sommes bien conscients du fait que notre litige avance de façon péniblement lente. Malheureusement, tout ça est normal. Le gouvernement continue à ralentirle processus, mais on nous a maintenant attitré un juge responsable de la gestion de notre dossier qui veillera à ce que le processus progresse de façon plus juste.
En août 2014, nous avons engagé une poursuite contre le gouvernement canadien. Près d’un an plus tard, nous avons enfin la date pour notre procès sommaire : les 4 et 5 août 2015. Impossible de prévoir le dénouement de ce procès, basé uniquement sur une partie de nos arguments juridiques. Mais avec votre appui, nous serons prêts pour toutes les possibilités.
(Bonne fête, Gwen !)
Au nom de nos deux plaignantes, Ginny et Gwen, de leurs familles et des directeurs de l’ADCS-ADSC, je vous remercie de votre confiance.
Stephen Kish,
Président de l’ADCS-ADSC
@Dreamer and @Blaze, all I can think is that if the worst happens, I’d just have to simplify my finances as much as much as possible and only hold cash savings rather than investments. I’d move my pension fund into an annuity ASAP. I have no children so it wouldn’t make that much difference to me at the end of the day, especially as I’m growing more risk averse now that I’m getting older….I could then probably file quite cheaply since I wouldn’t.be holding complicated investments.
Unfortunately governs can be bullies. They may punish us by keeping us as ‘tax citizens but without the right to live there as full citizens since we’d be deemed apostates….though they might be ‘gracious enough to let us come back once again if they were to restore our citizenship….Yves try to make out that they were doing us a favour! 😛
@Dreamer, I’m just sort of joking around with the ‘moaner Lisa’ business 😉 *lol*
I might sound like I’d be giving in too easily if the worst happened but it’s because I still have many ties over there plus a probable future inheritance, so I’d have to behave.. everyone else plebe keep fighting!!
@calgary411
the government is attempting to trick Canadians and ram the bill through Parliament
I agree that that is a fair way to assess the similarities between the two bills C-51 and C-31.
I also do feel that certain NDP MP’s showed considerably more respect for our side, during the Parliamentary debate on C-31, than did the Conservatives. But if that is the best that can be said for the NDP–and I fear it is–doing better than the Harper Conservatives is not a very high bar to meet. As you say, they have moved on and that disappoints me.
Elizabeth May has definitely championed opposition to both C-31 and C-51. Kudos to her–but the Greens have no chance of forming the next government. Maybe the NDP don’t either but the odds seem less remote for the NDP than for the Greens at this time.
Dash,
I agree with all you say.
Here’s what is said in a comment to another post: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/04/23/fatca-fuels-growing-threats-to-personal-data-security/comment-page-2/#comment-6012995, bolding mine.
Yes, the suits of politicians should give full disclosure of just who they represent — because they (or at least mine or any in Calgary) do not represent me / us. There is full and good reason for our cynicism.
The only way forward is litigation as *our
government representativespoliticians* probably knew and perhaps discussed all along, too shallow to take responsibility and truly represent and stand up for the people – those whose only worth to them is the votes they may garner.@”moanerlisa1776″ – I realize that it was probably a slip of the typing finger, but I thought it apt (and funny) that you wrote “plebe keep fighting”
LOL…it’s quite true…the Plebes are fighting!
I’m going to say something that will not be very popular. I’ve been wondering if it wouldn’t be better to take all this money and instead of a legal challenge in Canada, use it to bribe American politicians in Congress to change the FATCA law in the U.S. After all most Congresspersons and Senators are blatantly for sale to the highest bidder. As Eric Margolis said “It’s often cheaper to buy a legislator than a second-hand car.”
@ Henry
Before FATCA took hold there were those who suggested it would be cheaper for the banks to pay an annual set extortion fee rather than spend millions of dollars gearing up for and maintaining FATCA reporting. Common sense did not prevail.
@Henry. I understand your point but little people like us can’t afford to bribe (er, contribute to the campaign funds) of Congress critters. While it is true they are always open for business, the big bucks required to buy a little influence are only available to large corporations and extremely wealthy people.
It’s way more than the cost of a good used car, I’m afraid. It really is cheaper to sue them. (Not to mention way more satisfying!) Come to think of it, I’m going to send my May donation right now and see if I can warm the thermometer a bit.
I have a few questions, one that I know was discussed before but as usual I can’t find it nor remember.
1. Might the lawyers be going after an injunction also in August? My theory is if we can get an injunction until our case is decided, the US elections will be looming, the repubs have a 50% chance of getting in and they will repeal FATCA just to protect the US’s status as a tax haven and the US banks from reciprocity. (I think).
2. The OECD’s CRS will be viable in January 2016. Can a universe exist where the G19 have a CRS and G1 has FATCA? One involves sharing the other extortion.
3. If the US does NOT join the CRS will it fail?
4. If the US does join will they be forced to conform to universal standard of RBT or can they be part of the group as an outlier?
5. If indeed the US repeals FATCA before our case is decided can we then change direction and launch an appeal of Cook v. Tait?
Unfortunately NO ONE is going after CBT, the root illness.
Related, from http://www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/AEOI-commitments.pdf, 6 March 2015, exceptionally:
“The United States has indicated that it will be undertaking automatic information exchanges pursuant to FATCA from 2015 and has entered into intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with other jurisdictions to do so. The Model 1A IGAs entered into by the United States acknowledge the need for the United States to achieve equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic information exchange with partner jurisdictions. They also include a political commitment to pursue the adoption of regulations and to advocate and support relevant legislation to achieve such equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic exchange.”
@Calgary
This would have to be by executive order as the Republicans hold both houses at the moment. Would this effect the LLC’s that are maintained in the US? So the OECD will accept FATCA and the 30% withholding from the US while other nations do NOT have this threat yet share information? Really? I guess it is ALL speculation as to what will unfold next, how long countries will tolerate no reciprocity, and what can they do about it if indeed it NEVER happens.
Damn, this all makes my head hurt. I just wish I was reading about this in the history books rather than living it. I guess what I really do not understand is if the G19’s combined power has any influence against the US. The AIIB/BRICS are a hope for the future but a long way off.
February 14th’s litigation update indicated that Joseph Arvay was to apply for an injunction, a legal proceeding to prevent the government from reporting financial info until the trial was underway. Is that proposal still on the table? There has been no mention of it since.
Blaze: “Remove any reference to a CLN and just have banks report on anyone born in the U.S.”
On the application for RBC’s Self-Directed Investment Account there is a line for citizenship and a line for birthplace. There is nothing that says: “If born in the U.S.A. check the box if you have a CLN.” Already, a CLN is of no consequence at RBC if you’re opening certain investment accounts.
@Marie
From Litigation Update:
https://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2015/02/21/from-the-desk-of-john-richardson-co-chair-adcs-adsc-ca-responding-to-the-government-delay/
“Justice delayed is justice denied!”
“What will ADCS do about this?”
“We have made the decision to:
Instruct Mr. Arvay to begin a legal proceeding in Federal Court to prevent the government from disclosing the banking information that it will be collecting from the banks to the U.S. government. Mr. Arvay’s position is that if this application is successful that it will be a better outcome than seeking an injunction since an injunction will only be effective until trial. It is possible that there may be an extra cost resulting from this application.”
@calgary, I agree with you and want to echo Maz’s comment that you quoted; “Governments have taken the decision that protecting the interests of their financial institutions is a far higher priority than protecting the rights of their citizens and the sovereignty of their tax base. This is because the large financial institutions have the ear of politicians whereas the voting public does not. It is a matter of who makes the biggest campaign contributions. http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/04/23/fatca-fuels-growing-threats-to-personal-data-security/comment-page-2/#comment-6012995
Witness the fact that the previous New Brunswick premier David Alward – a Conservative MP, born in the US, and dual citizen, who was caught up in the OVDI of 2011 ( http://hodgen.com/new-brunswick-premier-is-in-the-ovdi/ http://intltax.typepad.com/intltax_blog/2011/10/new-brunswick-premier-caught-in-us-tax-net.html ), has just renounced/relinquished his US citizenship ( http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/david-alward-named-canadian-consul-general-in-boston-1.3047614 ) in order to take up his reward for service to the Conservative party – made consul general posted to Boston Mass. US – but has not spoken up against FATCA, against US extraterritorial CBT and its harmful and unethical application to Canadians even after his own personal experience with it. The fact that he had not filed US taxes and then backfiled to 2003 shows that his fellow Cons’ comments re the FATCA IGA ( http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/Parliament.html ) were entirely false and disingenuous. Are we to believe that his fellow Cons were not aware of his experience? And his path to US compliance may very well have been smoothed out – sensitive to Canada-US relations because of his political profile – (as perhaps was that of London’s mayor Boris Johnson).
Ordinary people are being forced to do this to protect their families and their home country ( http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-debate/irs-wants-canada-to-nab-us-tax-cheats-why-we-should-care/article6994760/ ) since their elected ‘representatives’ – in this instance the Cons, are acting only in their own narrow perceived interest and the interest of the Banksters ( http://www.cba.ca/en/media-room/65-news-releases/702-canadian-bankers-association-statement-on-fatca-canada-us-intergovernmental-agreement ), obeying the commands of the US overlord.
This is why it is so critical that people DONATE NOW to ADCS http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/DonateADCS.html
There is no other remedy or recourse. We are it.
Off topic, but on topic (equal rights!): we need to get rid of the OLD politicians and OLD (Civil War — Discrimination?) thinking and have young persons determine the fairness of US citizenship-based taxation: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TJxnYgP6D8.
In the meantime, we have litigation. Please donate — IT IS CRITICAL — http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/DonateADCS.html!!!
The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms SHOULD mean the same for ALL persons in this country (and similar in other countries), no matter their national origin or that of their parents. Just substitute the phrase *US Person* (abroad) for *gay* or any other discriminatory term, perhaps *without requisite mental capacity*. There is a reason kids are our future! They’re smarter than we are.
You can just skip and listen to the last kid in the video (15:43):
@ MuzzledNoMore RE “On the application for RBC’s Self-Directed Investment Account there is a line for citizenship and a line for birthplace. There is nothing that says: “If born in the U.S.A. check the box if you have a CLN.” Already, a CLN is of no consequence at RBC if you’re opening certain investment accounts.”
Just wondering – might filling in those lines lead you to a further page (or a phone call/letter) asking if you could provide demonstration of loss of citizenship (CLN or not)? Or do you know for sure that you would automatically be forbidden from establishing such an RBC account?
If the latter, then this too has to be mentioned to Arvey (like the small on-line bank in western Canada that had absolutely closed it’s doors to USPersons).
@Charl
Apparently you did not see this:
SFC Submission Main p8
April 15, 2015 ‐ Request for Residence Taxation –
Litigation action to be taken if necessary:
We appreciate the difficulty of enacting tax reform legislation.
However, given the extent of harm caused to U.S. non-resident citizens, should residence based taxation not be enacted in a timely manner, the undersigned will have no choice but to initiate legal proceedings in U.S. Federal Court against those Congressional tax laws that force Americans to abandon their U.S. citizenship and which, in this important respect, violate their constitutional rights.
https://app.box.com/s/yn25x1gketbzrkqp2ghu5sbce7mqoynu/1/3445133780/28814622792/1
@ Trish
THANK YOU, yes I did miss that! This is fabulous! Brilliant to make a constitutional challenge on the forced abandonment issue. I have pondered how this could be challenged on a constitutional basis and thought a challenge of Cook v. Tait was the only option. The ADSC team is just the absolute best! I am excited, when do we start? A timely manner for me is if they do not act in the next five minutes, lets go get ’em.
How they try and defend this atrocity will be fascinating to watch. (I’ll bet they do no better than the black-op helicopter folks, it is impossible to justify the unjustifiable).
Time’s up.
@Calgary
OK, I’m ready. Got the addy where we file? I just did the paper work! Do you think this will suffice?
Chief Justice Roberts: “Leave us the Hell alone!”
I think you might have his ear, Charl.
@calgary & Charl
You guys are too funny!
Not to worry, this was the whole point! Demonstrate and then sue….
Everything has it’s place in time…. 😉
Here is another reason to donate to legal action.
Early news from AARO is that the Senate Finance committee is considering a crack down on US persons overseas over the child tax credit.
https://www.facebook.com/aaro.org/posts/825930857497226
There was hope of a loosening of the noose, yet could go other way as hinted by the article.
One must not assume the US Senate Finance committee reasonable. Legal action is something that would get attention/ results. Donate to ADCS today!
Another hint I heard from International work group was about some tax break for US multinationals to repatriate offshore cash hoards to help finance infrastructure in the US. Nothing about US persons overseas and their tax and compliance conundrums.
Barbara says
April 27, 2015 at 2:08 am
@JC: The child tax credit issue is also an indication that CBT remains Holy Writ.