Cross posted from: https://adcsovereignty.wordpress.com/2015/07/08/cbtlawsuit-first-report-of-senate-finance-committee-brings-citizenship-taxation-lawsuit-one-step-closer/
#CBTLawsuit – First report of Senate Finance Committee brings citizenship taxation lawsuit one step closer
As reported at the Isaac Brock Society, the “International Taxation Committee” has released it’s report on tax reform. In spite of the fact that more than 3/4 of the submissions were from Overseas Americans, the committee, acknowledged, but failed to address the intolerable treatment of Americans abroad.
As barely, a footnote, the Committee ended with:
F. Overseas Americans
According to working group submissions, there are currently 7.6 million American citizens living outside of the United States. Of the 347 submissions made to the international working group, nearly three-quarters dealt with the international taxation of individuals, mainly focusing on citizenship-based taxation, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).
While the co-chairs were not able to produce a comprehensive plan to overhaul the taxation of individual Americans living overseas within the time-constraints placed on the working group, the co-chairs urge the Chairman and Ranking Member to carefully consider the concerns articulated in the submissions moving forward.
What does this mean?
At a bare minimum it means that:
1. The “International Committee” views its purpose as dealing with “corporate interests” and not “individual interests”.
2. The “International Committee” views DNA Americans as less important than “Corporate Americans”.
3. The “International Committee” has acknowledged the urgency of the situation “for the international taxation of individuals, mainly focusing on citizenship-based taxation, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), and the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR).”
Remember that many of the same submissions that were sent to the “International Committee” were also sent to the committee focusing on “Taxation of Individuals”. It’s difficult to see how this could not be addressed further by that Committee.
In terms of where to go from here …
1. There will (in the very near future) be a lawsuit launched in the United States against the most egregious aspects of U.S. TAX policy, as they relate to ALL PEOPLE deemed to be “U.S. persons” who reside outside the United States.
2. The lawsuit is likely to, in addition to issues of taxation, include issues related to the “forced imposition of U.S. citizenship” on people who do NOT regard themselves as U.S. citizens or “U.S. persons”. Can the United States deem people to be “U.S. persons” when they believe that they are not?
3. The lawsuit will NOT be run by or through the “Alliance For The Defence of Canadian Sovereignty” (which will “stay at home” dealing with our FATCA lawsuit). It will be run by and funded by a different organization.
4. We hope for the support of all the various groups deemed by the U.S. Government to be “Americans abroad”. “If Americans abroad do NOT hang together, they will hang separately“.
Evaluating your personal situations …
It’s obvious that “U.S. citizenship abroad” lies somewhere between “difficult and impossible” (depending on your personal circumstances). The report from the “International Committee” suggests that the “plight of Americans abroad” is NOT likely to get better soon. This reality raises the obvious question of whether it’s safe to retain U.S. citizenship in a FATCA and FBAR world.
P.S. Here is the report from the International Committee.
Bubblebustin re: ” Of course any switch to RBT would only be acceptable if it were thorough, but if you believe that a government can have a personality disorder only associated with human beings, then I suppose we could have something to worry about,”
Hey, was that a dig against my post: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/24/does-the-usa-have-a-personality-disorder/ ? 🙂
I guess you didn’t get the point I was trying to get across when I wrote that.
No doubt(wink, wink) USA will be “thorough” as you put it, in a switch to RBT, and since USA is not a real person (therefore cannot be compared to a narcissist), then as you say, “we could have nothing to worry about”. Maybe if I keep repeating this to myself, I will eventually believe it. LOL.
@Bubblebustin, ooops…rather than,
” as you say, “we could have nothing to worry about””
I should have wrote,
“as you say we would not “have something to worry about””
They both mean the same thing, but I misquoted you in the first statement. Gosh, an editing function would be nice.
Speaking of having nothing to worry about.
This line of discussion reminds me of when I had my OMG moment. I tried explaining FATCA and CBT and FBARS and the potential implications to my financial life, to my husband and friends and family. Every one of them said(and most still do), “DON”T WORRY ABOUT IT! You are being irrational. USA would NEVER do that to you.”
A few links to review…
A fellow Brocker sent me a meditation video. I just watched it and feel much better now! 🙂
A perfect way to set one’s head on straight just before the start of this lovely, sunny weekend.
I thought I’d share it with the rest of the Brockers. WARNING: there are ‘F-words’.
“According to judicial precedence, taxation is deprivation of property and therefore requires due process and equal protection, which prohibit discrimination based on a classification that is not rationally related to a legitimate purpose. My argument is that CBT is unconstitutional because citizenship has no relation to the purpose of taxation.”
Is that really true? The 16th amendment allows taxation of income without due process. Did courts really rule the way you say after the 16th amendment was enacted? Do you have cites?
“Monetary penalties are also deprivation of property”
Yes, that’s true. That’s why the IRS pretends to pay lip service to the 5th amendment by pretending to hold collection due process hearings. Of course the IRS still gets to violate the law with impunity, but at least they admit that due process is supposed to be available for penalties.
The Supreme Court also ruled that penalties aren’t taxes under the Tax Anti-Injunction Act, National Federation of Independent Business v. Sebelius, 567 U.S. ___ (2012), No. 11-393, http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/11pdf/11-393c3a2.pdf
“even if the ADCS lawsuit is against the Canadian government, it’s an assault on a US law”
Not really. US law will still be US law even though it will hopefully be illegal for Canada to violate Canada’s constitution in Canada.
@Norman, It’s not without due process, that would be absurd. The 16th amendment allows taxation of income without apportionment among states according to their population.
Requiring due process for every imposition of a tax would be absurd. That is why original articles of the US constitution allow some kinds of taxes and the 16th amendment allows another kind of tax. If due process were required for every imposition of a tax, other clauses would not be needed for imposition of a tax.
Penalties are different because they aren’t taxes. I’ve already cited ways in which this difference was shown true.
I think it’s despicable for Japan to impose sales taxes on rice, doctor bills, clothing, and other necessities of life that are tax exempt in Canada[*], but that’s because I think there should be some recognition of necessities of life, not because there should be a court case every time I buy groceries. I don’t even think there needs to be a court case every time an employer pays monthly salaries, though a different kind of court case is suitable when they don’t.
[* Well, I recall Ontario taxing clothing but exempting books. Maybe I should wear books. But in Japan, clothing and books are taxed equally.]
Yes really, ADCS lawsuit is an assault on US CBT. Have you read the claim and documents for the 4 August hearing? The injustices of US CBT will very much be on trial. Did you read the submission from Allison Christians about Tax Treaty Gaps?
@Shadow Raider. Nice work on unconstitutionality of CBT. John and Stephen had intended their “Main” submission to the Senate Finance Committee to form the basis of their further assault on CBT: https://app.box.com/s/yn25x1gketbzrkqp2ghu5sbce7mqoynu/1/3445133780/28814622792/1 I provided input on how this may be strengthened:
Sorry, I have not read the actual claim and documents. You haven’t read mine either.
Nonetheless, this assault on the injustice of CBT can only affect whether Canada’s constititution will be upheld in Canada. It can affect whether Canada is ruled by US law. It cannot affect whether US law is US law.
I did read Allison Christians’ submission about tax treaty gaps. I’ve seen more gaps myself than the ones I saw her comment on (I think I’ve been subject to about 5 tax treaties and have read 4). But I don’t think it matters. Where a treaty neglects to address some matter, each country’s law should remain effective domestically in each country. Only where a treaty does address some matter, there can be ambiguity about the conflict between a treaty and a constitution.
@Norman Diamond – please direct me to your documents.
My documents now would fill about 6 suitcases.
The ADCS suit is filed.
The Bopp suit against FATCA/IGAs/FBARs is now filed.
It’s time for Strike 3…. Let’s hear that the CBT suit is filed.