UPDATE SEPTEMBER 19, 2015: SEE ALSO DISCLAIMER AND LITIGATION UPDATES.
[This post, which began in May and having over 1000 revisions and 2000 comments, is being retired from service and updates. It lived through the success of reaching a total of $500,000 in donations from our kind, dear supporters who had little money to give, the hope and disappointment with the summary trial decision, and the certainty that we are now finally moving on to the Charter trial.]
CANADIAN CHARTER TRIAL UPDATE:
— We have instructed the Arvay team to prepare for the “Constitutional-Charter” trial. This means that our focus now, as it was in the beginning of our lawsuit, is on the Charter trial.
Unless there is a new expense in the future that we have not anticipated, the monies from your donations will be sufficient to take us through the “constitutional-charter” trial in Federal Court. However, to pay other legal bills we will need additional donations from our supporters, and a request for donations will appear on another post soon.
OUR LITIGATION HISTORY:
One year ago, on August 11, 2014, Litigator Joseph Arvay filed a FATCA IGA lawsuit in Canada Federal Court on behalf of Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty (en français), and all peoples.
Because of a Government delay we initiated a “summary trial”, using a portion of the arguments, which offered the possibility of preventing private banking information from being turned over to the IRS before September 30, 2015. See Alliance’s Claims, our Alliance blog, and AUGUST 4-5 SUMMARY TRIAL FILINGS in LITIGATION UPDATES.
@nervousinvestor
Sorry for your loss.
@dash1729
Not responding to your comment about the Queen is somehow hiding? What an interesting conclusion to come to. You can add her to the list of traitors as far as I’m concerned.
nervousinvestor,
My condolences are among those for you and your countrymen in the loss of your best friend. What a tragedy.
Is there a compromise position the judge can take to protect both the bank’s and the plaintiff’s interests, at least temporarily? I mention the “bank’s” interests, as I see the Canadian government as only the middle man here, for without reciprocity from the US, there’s only the illusion of something in FATCA for the Canadian government.
Yes, there’s definitely a stench in the air, and it’s the so-called deal Canada got for itself.
@Bubbles and Calgary
Thank you.
@Bubbles, “Is there a compromise position the judge can take to protect both the bank’s and the plaintiff’s interests, at least temporarily? ”
Nope………
The banks have a hard deadline under FATCA.
But………if the plaintiffs lose and the Judge does not grant an injunction pending appeal, the plaintiffs will suffer irreperable harm that can not be made right.
The 2014 data that the banks need to hand over can still be handed over late, but the plaintiffs data can never be brought back.
Three scenarios……
1. Plaintiffs win, data transfer blocked.
2. Plaintiffs lose, data transfer blocked pending appeal.
3. Plaintiffs lose, data transfer not blocked. (WORST SCENARIO)
I didn’t thinks so…
Re #2 sounds like the closest thing to a compromise. Is the blocking of data something the judge would initiate with his decision when it’s contingent on the plaintiffs making an appeal?
@Deckhard,
Thanks for pulling out and highlighing those quotes from the EU official from “In’T VELD – PART II – Decision – Part II. Catherine Day, writing the decision of the European Commission Secretary-General to Sophie In’t Veld’s access to information request” in your post above
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/03/99929-needed-in-94-more-days-to-make-the-100000-august-4-2015-payment-for-canadian-fatca-iga-lawsuit-il-nous-reste-99929-a-ramasser-pour-notre-poursuite-judiciaire/comment-page-72/#comment-6402493
Your observations are very significant; “..this reply clearly contradicts to the US Administration’s assertions that FATCA IGA’s are not international treaties and therefore not requiring Congressional review and ratification. Ms. Day most unequivocally refers to them as “international tax treaty negotiations.”..”
That is potentially useful to the legal challenge team. I hope they are passed on. There might also be other part of the documents that MEP in’t Veld obtained that might contain other gems of a similar telltale gleam. I think that Allison Christians might also find it interesting because they support her assertions. And perhaps they might interest those mounting the US challenge as well.
For those interested in reading the originals, the links are here:
http://sophieintveld.eu/download/getFile/1987
from
http://sophieintveld.eu/commission-discloses-documents-on-us-tax-agreements-with-eu-member-states/
@USCitizenAbroad, I really appreciated your observations here and the truth of the Gandhi quote;
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/08/21/august-20-2015-bloomberg-bna-article-canada-court-ruling-could-put-brakes-on-fatca-is-a-storm-ahead/comment-page-1/#comment-6405091
It becomes increasingly clear how this fight against FATCA is not just for the rights and sovereignty of Canada and Canadians. So many issues are raised that have universal implications. The comments to MEP in’t Veld above, by “Catherine Day, writing the decision of the European Commission Secretary-General” show that what happens re FATCA in one jurisdiction can inform what happens elsewhere. I hope that someone from the ADCS will contact MEP Veld and alert her to the ADCS lawsuit (and the UN complaint) if she has not already been apprised. The privacy and government secrecy and civil/human issues apply wherever in the world FATCA is being applied – and we know that FATCA was designed to apply to the entire globe (talk about US overreach).
If as has been stated that Canada considers the IGA a foundation to facilitate the OECD CRS process, and that the CRS was founded on FATCA (not as clear a claim as the US pretends), then there is significant reason to be wary of the ways in which our fundamental rights as humans and citizens are being deliberately disregarded and circumvented by those who conduct themselves in ways deliberatedly intended to bypass the very people who have ‘elected’ them and who supposedly (in the case of civil servants and officials) are tasked with safeguarding our wellbeing and who have a fiduciary and duty of care towards us.
The issues raised by the extracts that @Deckhard highlighted from “Catherine Day, writing the decision of the European Commission Secretary-General” in the reply to MEP in’t Veld clearly illustrates to me that there are vested interests that governments protect which are clearly at odds with the wellbeing and rights of the average person and citizen.
And,
here is another indication that FATCA is not entirely endorsed as necessary and “success” by in the US, no matter what the US imported compliancers in Canada say:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/intfinlaw/2015/08/is-the-irs-indicating-that-fatca-isn.html
“..It appears that the strategy for bringing non-compliant taxpayers into compliance is hodge podge, without thought to the ramifications of each, as a whole, and without addressing underlying problems, like taxpayer education and easy to file FBAR. At least Treasury modified the FBAR date to coincide with the 1040 filing date. But the forms are still uncoordinated with different questions, different filing procedures, different penalties. Just not good administration techniques”
@ badger
Good stuff, as always. I’d like to highlight this, “I hope that someone from the ADCS will contact MEP Veld and alert her to the ADCS lawsuit (and the UN complaint) if she has not already been apprised.” She’s been on the right side of this FATCA fiasco from the beginning so I’m certain she would want to know about these actions. She’s a very sharp person, quite tweet savvy, so the chances are good that she has already spotted one of the many linked tweets our supporters have put out there.
@ nervousinvestor
I too am very sorry that you lost your best friend, George Thomas, so suddenly, so tragically. This article features a joyous photo of him … focus on that one and try to blur out the others.
http://falmouthpo.com/pictures-prominent-montego-bay-lawyer-killed-in-ironshore-car-crash/
@nervousinvestor;
Condolences on the death of your friend.
@NativeCanadian;
Bravo for confronting Harper! He has to have noticed that though you appeared to be only one individual, you actually spoke for many – and this is an election year. FATCA isn’t going to continue to fly under the radar as they hoped it would.
How can I get one of your t-shirts?
@Badger I will post the finished T-shirt on here as soon as I get word they are done. It will be later today from what I was told last week. Getting the word out is of utmost importance for this whole thing to be blown wide open to the public. I have had 100% public support once they hear the complete story on Fatca. The Canadian government’s defense being ” The USA made us do it” will not hold water with Canadians. It is downright disgraceful. When I tell this to immigrants, I do let them know they might be next to lose their rights and that the charter can be used for toilet paper as it cannot be enforced as the government has taken away funding that made the charter equal on both sides.
A STORMS A BREWING, according to Bloomberg BNA article.
But the fundamental problem is that the Conservative government opted to shield the banks from the US bully instead of protecting basic freedom of Canadian citizens guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Roy Berg is just another tax condor trying to make more money from FATCA. OMG do you think the financial institutions might be inconvenienced by our lawsuit!
On the question of royal assent
Some people have commented here that they feel betrayed by the Governor General for giving royal assent to the legislation enabling the FATCA IGA. (The same has been said of the Queen.)
In fact, the Governor General has no choice but to give royal assent on the request of the prime minister. To do otherwise would be to provoke a constitutional crisis. The last time this happened was in 1926 when Lord Byng, Governor General of Canada, refused a request by prime minister Mackenzie King to dissolve parliament and call an election. The “King-Byng” affair appears in every textbook on Canadian politics. King-Byng, you will note, had to do with the making (and dissolution) of a parliament, where the Governor General arguably has reserve powers. It is unimaginable that he would refuse to give royal assent to an ordinary piece of legislation. If the legislation is unconstitutional, that is for the courts to decide
So, there is really no point in feeling betrayed by someone who could not have acted other than as he did.
@Northern Shrike.
Yeah sure. The “I vas jusst following orrdas!” (Read that in a German accent” worked so well at Nuremburg.
@nervousinvestor. Sincere condolences in regard to the loss of your dear friend.
@Embee, I am hoping that MEP in’t Veld will be someone that EU residents and citizens can contact re their concerns – holding up this ADCS challenge as an example. And the EU appears to have better safeguards in place than we do in terms of concerns for data and privacy protections and methods for appealing lack of transparency. Maybe we can learn from each other.
@NativeCanadian;
looking forward to my anti-FATCA shirt!
: )
@nervousinvestor: I join others in offering my sympathies in the loss of your friend.
You asked where is the Privacy Commissioner. I just posted my letter to the Privacy Commissioner’s staff reply to me at Maple Sandbox. I don’t know how to upload it on this site, but you can find both here:
http://maplesandbox.ca/2015/disappointing-response-from-privacy-commissioner/
Essentially,Canada’s Privacy Commissioner has said “Don’t bug us.”
@NorthernShrike
When it comes to provoking a constitutional crisis, that is precisely what I was in Vancouver to do. Sorry to see that the GG and the Queen weren’t up to the challenge. I still hold out faith, though, for Gwen, Ginny and, I hope, Justice Martineau. Use the Force, Luc!!
As I recall the Privacy Commissioner testified at The Senate Finance Committee hearing. Basically stating the law and making it plain that the IGA would supercede that law. She seemed complacent and matter of fact. I think she was to be replaced soon after her testimony.
So, too, the questioning of Law Enforcement from Ontario who stated that probable cause and getting a warrant was certainly the law. When asked if he would prefer he did not have to ‘follow those rules’ he said it would certainly make their lives easier, but it IS the law.
I know the Senate Finance Committee hearing is on site here somewhere. It is a very revealing video well worth watching all the way through. One finds out just how this sausage was made.
@FuriousAC
It will take nothing short of a Canadian constitutional crisis to overcome this “law”.
@ Dash 1729
I’ve signed!
http://democracywatch.ca/campaigns/democratichead/
Blaze / nervousinvestor / All,
Here’s your a cross-post of the MapleSandbox post: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/08/22/privay-commissioners-information-office-says-dont-bug-us-in-disappointing-response-to-questions-about-canadian-privacy-rights/
The Interim Privacy Commissioner speaks at about 9:22 after Professor Arthur Cockfield at 9:02. Chantal Bernier again speaks at at 10:31, discussion with NDP National Revenue Critic, Murray Rankin.
[from Wikipedia re Murray Rankin…
OECD
While at Harvard Law School Rankin did his graduate thesis on freedom of information and national security matters and in the 1980s worked at the Organization of Economic Cooperation and Development in Paris on Transborder Information Flows.[12] Rankin was later integrally involved in the consultations leading up to the enactment of the federal Access to Information Act and Privacy Act (Canada). For his efforts, Rankin received the House of Commons Award of Merit for his contributions to the development of freedom of information and privacy.[12]
Rankin was later retained as a special advisor to Colin Gabelmann, the former Attorney General of British Columbia and was a key architect of BC’s own Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act.[4][13] ]
Below is the compilation version of the Senate Finance Committee Meeting testimony. Let me know if you also want the full videos and I will find and post.
Late to the game, but I have as well (just now). http://democracywatch.ca/campaigns/democratichead/
Thanks FuriousAC! You just gave me an idea. We should have an Audio/Video archive page. We have one for Presentations and Submissions by Brockers — eg, Lynne’s presentation to the Senate Committee is there. But quick access to a/v material by any party would come in useful, as well radio/tv coverage and interviews, etc., that have been posted on the site. I’ll get going on that tomorrow.
Calgary, you always amaze me with your knack for quickly coming up with a video or link to a comment that someone refers to!