Let’s Get Republican Presidential Candidates On the Record for FATCA Repeal!
RepealFATCA.com has asked each declared candidate for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination to endorse the 2014 and 2015 Resolutions by the Republican National Committee (RNC) calling for repeal of the “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act” (FATCA), and opposing “global FATCA” (a/k/a “GATCA”)!
The full text of the RepealFATCA.com “Statement in Support of FATCA Repeal and Against Unauthorized International Agreements” can be found here, with the requested endorsement, as follows:
As a candidate for the 2016 Republican nomination for President of the United States, I HEREBY STATE THE FOLLOWING:
I endorse the 2014 and 2015 Resolutions of the Republican National Committee calling for FATCA’s repeal and for the other measures described in such Resolutions to mitigate the damage caused by FATCA pending its repeal; as president I will use my constitutional authority in accordance with such Resolutions.
The RepealFATCA.com request letter to candidates can be found here. As of June 11, 2015, the RepealFATCA.com request has been sent via their public campaign sites to the following candidates, listed here by date of declaration:
Mark Everson (announced March 5, 2015)
Ted Cruz (announced March 23, 2015)
Rand Paul (announced April 7, 2015)
Marco Rubio (announced April 13, 2015)
Ben Carson (announced May 4, 2015)
Carly Fiorina (announced May 4, 2015)
Mike Huckabee (announced May 5, 2015)
Rick Santorum (announced May 27, 2015)
George Pataki (announced May 28, 2015)
Lindsey Graham (announced June 1, 2015)
Rick Perry (announced June 4, 2015)
Jeb Bush (announced June 15, 2015)
Donald Trump (announced June 16, 2015)
This list will be kept updated as further candidates declare and as RepealFATCA.com receives word that candidates have endorsed – or rejected – the statement in support of the RNC Resolutions.
You can help! Contact the candidates via their websites and ask them to endorse the RNC Resolutions. Also, if you have any personal ties with any of the candidates or his or her staff, donors, or key supporters, please get in touch with them, forward them this message, and request:
And please help get the word out and fight FATCA by making a contribution to RepealFATCA.com at the “Contribute” button!
James George Jatras
Editor, RepealFATCA.com
202 375-1007
Note from poster Mark Twain:
It would be helpful if someone could make a parallel effort with the democratic candidates
http://2016.democratic-candidates.org/
Good to see James out on the anti-FATCA trail again.
I would not vote for any single one on this list – regardless of position on this issue. I expect less disingenuousness in your posting of this motely crew. Potential ‘friends’ of the Sir Isaac Brock community? My ass.
But, Terence, dear, nothing in this article suggested you vote for anyone. You can still try to influence these candidates to speak out on the issue of FATCA. It needs to become part of the mainstream debate.
Or are you simply having too much fun being a cute little troll here?
Please acquire the same information from the Democratic candidates
http://2016.democratic-candidates.org/
Two pertinent points from Lindsey Graham’s track record:
Voted in favour of passport revocation just last month
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/14/orrin-hatch-passport-revocation-bill-passes-senate/
Co-sponsored a 2002 bill which attempted to banish all renunciants (not just those with tax issues)
https://www.congress.gov/bill/107th-congress/house-bill/5013/
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/12/09/bipartisan-attempts-to-exile-former-u-s-citizens-20022008/#Safer
terence,
Your vote is not solicited.
As a family affected by the absurdity and loss of rights, I want full disclosure for all candidates’ positions on FATCA law overriding laws in other countries of whatever political stripe, in whatever country, including the USA and my country, Canada. I expect the candidate, wherever, that I vote for to work for me, for my family, and will vote accordingly on their stated position.
(As you say you are a US citizen carrying a US passport, but permanently reside elsewhere and do not have a SSN number, I don’t understand that you don’t have that same interest.)
UPDATE (6/16/15): Jeb Bush and Donald Trump Sent RepealFATCA.com Request for Endorsement of RNC Resolutions against FATCA
Source: http://www.repealfatca.com/index.asp?idmenu=4&idsubmenu=160&title=update-61615-jeb-bush-and-donald-trump-sent-emrepealfatcacomem-request-for-endorsement-of-rnc-resolutions-against-fatca
On June 15 and June 16, 2015, respectively, RepealFATCA.com sent newly announced candidates Jeb Bush and Donald Trump a request for their endorsements of the 2014 and 2015 Resolutions by the Republican National Committee (RNC) calling for repeal of the “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act” (FATCA), and opposing “global FATCA” (a/k/a “GATCA”).
The full text of the RepealFATCA.com “STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF FATCA REPEAL AND AGAINST UNAUTHORIZED INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENTS” can be found here, with the requested endorsement, as follows:
As a candidate for the 2016 Republican nomination for President of the United States, I HEREBY STATE THE FOLLOWING:
I endorse the 2014 and 2015 Resolutions of the Republican National Committee calling for FATCA’s repeal and for the other measures described in such Resolutions to mitigate the damage caused by FATCA pending its repeal; as president I will use my constitutional authority in accordance with such Resolutions.
The RepealFATCA.com request letter to candidates can be found here. As of June 16, 2015, the RepealFATCA.com request has been sent via their public campaign sites to the following candidates, listed here by date of declaration:
Mark Everson (announced March 5, 2015)
Ted Cruz (announced March 23, 2015)
Rand Paul (announced April 7, 2015)
Marco Rubio (announced April 13, 2015)
Ben Carson (announced May 4, 2015)
Carly Fiorina (announced May 4, 2015)
Mike Huckabee (announced May 5, 2015)
Rick Santorum (announced May 27, 2015)
George Pataki (announced May 28, 2015)
Lindsey Graham (announced June 1, 2015)
Rick Perry (announced June 4, 2015)
Jeb Bush (announced June 15, 2015)
Donald Trump (announced June 16, 2015)
This list will be kept updated as further candidates declare and as RepealFATCA.com receives word that candidates have endorsed – or rejected – the statement in support of the RNC Resolutions.
You can help! Contact the candidates via their websites and ask them to endorse the RNC Resolutions. (Links to their websites can be found here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republican_Party_presidential_candidates,_2016#Candidates_featured_in_major_polls .) Also, if you have any personal ties with any of the candidates or his or her staff, donors, or key supporters, please get in touch with them, forward them this message, and request:
“Please endorse the RepealFATCA.com “Statement in Support of FATCA Repeal and Against Unauthorized International Agreements”!
Source: http://www.repealfatca.com/index.asp?idmenu=4&idsubmenu=160&title=update-61615-jeb-bush-and-donald-trump-sent-emrepealfatcacomem-request-for-endorsement-of-rnc-resolutions-against-fatca
Imagine what Donald Trump might have to say about FATCA. As an obsessive birther, he’d probably at least give “accidentals” a free pass since he would never consider them to be True Americans™. Witness his long-standing doubts about Obama, and now fellow Republican Presidential candidate Ted Cruz:
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/236651-trump-cruz-faces-hurdle-for-canadian-birthplace
Nevertheless, I suddenly have this weird fantasy about The Donald calling John Koskinen onto the Oval Office carpet, staring him in the eyes for several seconds, then icily proclaiming, “YOU”RE FIRED”.
This could get horrifyingly interesting, like a freight train colliding with a flaming short-bus full of clowns. I hope Rand Paul is sitting near the emergency exit.
@Deckard1138
No kidding.
That campaign slogan “Make America Great Again” is pretty interesting. One might think that homelanders are getting a little worried about America in relationship to the rest of the world. Oops, that’s is if they give a sh!t, which we know they don’t – just as long as they tell themselves they’re great, and support it with evidence fed to them that they are right, what does it matter to them that they are falling behind on so many issues? America needs its bubblebusted!
updated post.
(spacing doesn’t come out right, but oh well)
If you go to the Republicans Overseas FB site you will see some commenters pointing out that it is not only FATCA but also citizenship based taxation that should be repealed.
For those interested in trying to change bad U.S. laws through the U.S. political process, you might want to challenge the candidates on both FATCA and CBT positions.
I agree with Mark Twain: ask the Democrat candidates for their position as well.
@Stephen Kish, we should also create a question on making it easier to get rid of USC.
That would be a great question to ask Tom Cruz.
@George,
Re: ” we should also create a question on making it easier to get rid of USC.”
Agree 100%! People keep complaining about CBT and claiming that as the root problem (as opposed to FATCA), but for many of us, we would be happy just to ditch the citizenship which would get rid of ALL our problems – FATCA and CBT. Now I get what you mean about it being primarily a ‘citizenship problem’. Of course this is only true for those who really don’t give two figs about having US citizenship. CBT would still be an issue for the rest.
@WhiteKat: A lot of us are stuck with US citizenship, whether we like it or not. If you’re a long term non-dual (or dual, for that matter) resident of such countries as China, Russia, Saudi, or many other places, it is neither easy–nor a particularly attractive prospect–to trade one’s US passport for a local one. My polite request to those who might bombard these candidates with issues, is to treat USC renunciation as a separate issue, not necessarily tied to CBT and FATCA.
(Waiting to be flamed by mobs of dual US-Canadians for this remark…)
@Barbara, re: “My polite request to those who might bombard these candidates with issues, is to treat USC renunciation as a separate issue, not necessarily tied to CBT and FATCA. ”
But the reality is that until FATCA enforced CBT raised its ugly head, many (am wary of using the word ‘most’ lately) Canadians (and others) deemed US persons were not bothered by their clinging US nationality and were able to mostly ignore it and live normal lives as citizens of the countries they actually live in . So the issue of how to get rid of US citizenship at this point in history is most definitely tied to CBT and FATCA.
I’m sorry for those who do not have other citizenship, but do not see why that should be used as a reason to hold back those who do from an opportunity to easily dump US citizenship (thus freeing themselves from FATCA enforced CBT) without going through expensive compliance hoops on top of an outrageous renunciation fee.
@WhiteKat……..
First when I look at your avitar I think you have a “Good Kitty” side of your personality and also a “Bad Kitty” side of personality…..
Down to business……
A major problem is that the US Courts started stripping away all the ways to get rid of US Citizenships thinking they were doing the right thing!!!
To be honest, lets have a flashback to the law of the land in 1975……think That 1970s Show…
I have a hypothesis that CBT is workable in a pre-1975 Citizenship legal framework.
The problem is that the demands of CBT actually grew while the ways to get rid of US Citizenship dropped.
I would state that if US Citizenship law had remained unchanged for the last 40 years that Brock would not exist!!!
As much as I empathize with Americans that are Abroad, they are just that Americans who are abroad. Sadly their government and it is their government can and does make demands of them.
I am in this campaign because;
1. I do not want the USofA to have any ideas of reclaiming me
2. My children who are foreign to the USA and have the nationality of where they live should not have to live under fears and demands of a FOREIGN government.
George and WhiteKat,
John Richardson often says (I hope that I am paraphrasing him correctly): “Look, you don’t have a tax problem, you have a CITIZENSHIP problem”.
Asking politicians whether they would correct U.S. citizenship laws by addressing, for example, the problems of non-consenting non-meaningfuls, might be a very good way to make a strong point, but (in my opinion) there is zero possibility that any political party would support a change that makes it easier to “abandon” or negate U.S. citizenship (I have raised this issue without success). The only way I see U.S. citizenship laws corrected is through litigation.
Many deal with unwanted U.S. citizenship and “obligations” by undertaking a lengthy and costly U.S.-approved renunciation process. Some others however (like our Plaintiffs) take the simple position that U.S. citizenship cannot be imposed or retained without consent. Without consent, there is no “compact”. This thinking is actually supported to some extent by comments made in a recent U.S. D.C. District Court ruling.
WhiteKat, yes I have always wondered how many US persons overseas (95%?) would be willing to retain their U.S.citizenship if there were no CBT, or if CBT were repealed today and replaced with RBT.
As a disclosure, which I have made many times on this site, I confirm again that I am a U.S. citizen who wants to retain that citizenship.
@WhiteKat, “without going through expensive compliance hoops on top of an outrageous renunciation fee.”
I will not rest until my children can get rid of their unwanted by USC by signing a single page form, placing it in an envelope with a single stamp and mailing it from a post box!!
ANYTHING beyond that is an infringement on their supposed rights under the so called US Constition.
@Barbara, IF the US Government was to pass a law that stated a dual national, living outside the USA for three consecutive years, who is not complete with US tax filing obligations shall lose their US Citizenship…….I would be good with that and say HOORAY!!!
@All….the problem as shown by homelanders is that they say…..”if you do not want to pay your fair share then get out and renounce.”
The problem is that it is too damn difficult to renounce!!!
The USA has put up far more barriars to renouncing than any other western nation.
George,
Indeed, Ted Cruz should be asked if he would support renunciation of USC to be the same process as that he used to rid himself of his accidental and *non-meaningful* Canadian citizenship. And, other candidates if the same process that Mr. Cruz experiencing ridding himself of Canadian citizenship might be a fairer system for the USA.
George and WhiteKat and Stephen,
To me, it should for all be about CHOICE. Our choices will have various definitions. None should have the consequences of the present, continuing, escalating outrageous costs of compliance and taxation of CBT if we reside outside the US. With Citizenship Taxation (the US digging in their heels to never change that exceptionality), for those who are *accidental* / *non-meaningful* and fairness to them, there should only be OPT-IN to US citizenship if their facts allow, with requisite mental capacity and with full disclosure of all benefits and consequences to make their CHOICE, never an OPT-OUT of something acquired without their knowledge or CONSENT.
My choice in 1975 was to become a Canadian citizen, making my life going forward only Canadian. I didn’t *register* my children as US births abroad. I, of course, was naive and did not know the actual law was not what I considered only common sense.
George said…
Those, too, are my reasons / MY CHOICE (with the additional one of the very real continuing entrapment into US tax and reporting compliance of those without *requisite mental capacity* to be allowed to renounce or a parent, guardian or trustee to act on their behalf) for regular donations to the http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/ litigation. I agree that this litigation is the ONLY way we may see justice and fairness of law and get on with our lives.
My daughter’s choice was different than mine and she has, as I, renounced the US citizenship that she (and I) thought she had claimed when she decided to live and work in the US but then, by choice, return to Canada nine years ago — though we now know from Department of State / Legal that the US citizenship was NOT a choice, but indeed acquired by birth to two US citizen parents in Canada. My 1975 choice to become a Canadian citizen with the warning that I would lose my US citizenship was negated and complicated by my own ignorance and missteps decades later. In the end, it was my choice to draw down on my retirement savings to stop the insanity of US tax and reporting compliance for year after year after year after year. My son, without *requisite mental capacity*, though, has NO CHOICE.
@George, re: “First when I look at your avitar I think you have a “Good Kitty” side of your personality and also a “Bad Kitty” side of personality….. ”
If I ever manage to extricate myself from US citizenship (which I want to do regardless whether or not FATCA and/or CBT become history), I’ll change my avatar to an all white cat.
@Stephen Kish
“Without consent, there is no “compact”.”
That is why a win by Ginny and Gwen is not expected to do anything to end CBT, and may even make ending CBT that much more difficult if the US also recognizes this and is willing to take the unconstitutional step of allowing accidentals not accept US citizenship.
This conundrum doesn’t deter me however from fully supporting the lawsuit as it’s the right thing to do – even as a “US citizen who wants to retain that citizenship” without a continued tax and reporting burden.
The argument should not be that because we in many ways enjoy the benefits of citizenship that we should be taxed – taxation-based citizenship – but how that taxation creates barriers to enjoying the benefits of citizenship if those barriers prevent us from exercising the ability to integrate with the rest of the world (leave the US) without renouncing.
@Bubblebustin re: “That is why a win by Ginny and Gwen is not expected to do anything to end CBT, and may even make ending CBT that much more difficult if the US also recognizes this and is willing to take the unconstitutional step of allowing accidentals not accept US citizenship.This conundrum doesn’t deter me however from fully supporting the lawsuit as it’s the right thing to do – even as a “US citizen who wants to retain that citizenship” without a continued tax and reporting burden. ”
Hear Hear Bubblebustin! I presume this also mean you have changed your mind about not supporting letting ‘non-meaningfuls’ loose from US citizenship ( the ‘modified Obama proposal’ that Mr. Kish was inquiring into) while CBT remains in place? As I recall, you expressed in the past that you were worried that such a scenario (letting some of us free from the chains of US citizenship) might jeopardize further efforts to get rid of CBT. It is nice to see that you have changed your opinion on this issue.