UPDATE: Saturday, November 21, 2015
Please see the following post from John Richardson which explains how the FATCA IGA and the CBT lawsuits have different donor bases as well as a specific request regarding donations to ADCS.
As posted today by John Richardson at citizenshiptaxation.wordpress.com:
The #CBTLawsuit rollout is beginning – we need YOUR support
This post is to:
– announce the “roll out” of a lawsuit filed in the United States
– against the Government of the United States
– to strike down the most egregious aspects of U.S. “place of birth taxation”
– and provide relief for those who reside outside the United States and are unjustly, unfairly and unlawfully burdened by the attempt of the United States to impose its laws on the residents and/or citizens of other nations.The lawsuit will require a large amount of funding including an immediate injection of $25,000.
For those who only want to contribute the funding are invited to go here. Those who want to understand what we are doing read on.
ADCT-
I am hoping that this evolves more along the lines of the organized and resolute appearance of the ADCS website or FatcaLegalAction, which I believe will assist in the collection of donations. A formal webpage instead of just wordpress, and I believe a formal URL may be run from a wordress platform.
I think an aspect missing with ADCS is description of those behind it to help give confidence to those donating – yet it might be done for ADCT. The Bio would be quite impressive. Of course on the other side of this I may understand that some may wish to keep a low profile. Putting a face or faces to the cause would help. I believe most other fundraising operates this way whether it is the principals involved or they select someone to represent the cause. I kind of thinking more of a family as representative. Or is it George Washington Kish, or George Washington Richardson, or Georgina Washington Moon? together? Hurray for these Canadians!
I see Carol is an added board member. Great addition. However, should there be a few more to share the load?
On the homepage of the new site I suggest a single page billboard that has description, quotes, a few pertinent videos (show the video and not just link to it), links etc – more along the lines of the aborted press release for the human rights claim. A central place – which gets missed a bit with IBS as new posts push down older ones.
Should there be a post at Brock asking for ideas on promotion and fund raising?
Regards, JC
JC
We are working on the website.
There will not be any direct promotional efforts on Brock by ADCT.
The board will remain the same (Carol was not “added” – it has always been exactly the same make-up)
Maybe ADCT should reach out to Kyle Pomerleau, with the Tax Foundation. He’s supportive of the US abandoning CBT – at least that’s what he’s told me. In an article posted by the Tax Foundation today, he wrote in response to passport revocations as a revenue offset under HR22:
“Taxes and spending associated with the Highway Trust Fund are based on the benefit principle of taxation. This principle states that the taxes one pays to the government should be connected to the benefits one receives. This principle is seen as an equitable way to finance government projects—in this case, roads and infrastructure. Those who drive on roads and cause wear are the ones who should pay for future repairs. This type of taxation also sets a price for driving on the road in order to prevent overconsumption in the form of congestion. As such, any increases in funding for the trust fund should come from these types of taxes, such as the gas tax.
Instead, this plan uses transfers from the general fund and other completely irrelevant revenue raisers such as revoking the passports of U.S. citizens abroad who are currently tax delinquent to pay for U.S. roads.”
Kyle can be reached at http://taxfoundation.org/staff/kyle-pomerleau
Or tweet him at: @kpomerleau
I have spoken with Kyle along with Keith and DeeDee. Not about the ADCT lawsuit though.
Thanks Trish. Nice to have an ally in the homeland who has a good grasp of the issues. We should capitalize on that wherever we can!
“This principle states that the taxes one pays to the government should be connected to the benefits one receives.”
In the case of highway funding, the benefit principle would be accomplished better by a gasoline tax than by an income tax, even RBT. Furthermore the gasoline tax would be collected when tourists use the roads too, making it really fair.
However, ordinarily, the benefit principle isn’t a very good principle. For example welfare recipients would pay taxes to receive welfare benefits, and non-recipients would not pay for it. No matter what your opinion is about welfare, a progressive income tax as imposed in numerous RBT countries is a good way to fund it.
@Norman While the recipients of government welfare may be influenced by incentives and disincentives, road funding is more generally recognized and accepted to very much include the concept of user pays. Tolls have been around since before the “turnpike”. With some roads, they would not be built without private funds and future tolls to attract such funding. With gas tax no need for tolling infrastructure.
@ADCT
information@cbtlawsuit.ca
Noted donations may be made if YOU have a PayPal account. As if transferring between two individuals. That is moving forward. Next level would be like on ADCS taking donations not only via PayPal(if you have an account) but credit cards as well.
While http://www.cbtlawsuit.ca is in the works, a single information page may be whipped up.
“road funding is more generally recognized and accepted to very much include the concept of user pays”
Yes it is. Out of the two paragraphs I wrote in my previous posting, please read the first paragraph (not counting the quotation).
“Noted donations may be made if YOU have a PayPal account.”
That depends on what country you’re in. The Japanese government even blocks PayPal from accepting donations for Wikipedia.
What is the problem?
We have not had any so far that I know of.
the website is NOT
http://www.cbtlawsuit.cait is citizenshiptaxation.ca
the email address information@cbtlawsuit is linked to the papal account
@Tricia Moon Looking Good. I’ll try to draw attention to it. Keep on expanding content. I had one image of a “Chinese Democracy Wall” of letters from US persons impacted.
You have cbtlawsuit.ca (and are using an e-mail address for this) then redirect this web address to citizenshiptaxation.ca
http://www.citizenshiptaxation.ca Just practicing.
I’ve brought this topic up in the past, but the conversation never really went anywhere.
Many think the end of CBT will solve all their US tax and reporting problems (and hopefully it will), but I am wondering if anyone has any insight as to what would/could happen to FATCA and FBARS in the event that they are both (god forbid) still in force, but CBT gets defeated.
Does an end to CBT mean an automatic end to FBARs and to FATCA for a US citizen living outside USA? Could we perhaps find ourselves in a situation where we are still subject to outrageous penalties for not telling the master how much gold we have in our local (foreign to USA) bank accounts? What if we went through all the expense and grief of killing CBT only to find out that we will be penalized into bankruptcy anyway because most of us (even those who are tax compliant) have not been filing FBARS?
Hopefully this is just a dumb question.
@WhiteKat
Well I think it means that expats wouldn’t owe any money, at least. Isn’t that major?
@Polly, You mean tax money. I am wondering about FBAR penalties which as we know is where USA really makes out like a bandit.
@Polly, and yes, it would still be major if there was no CBT.
The thing is, we know of no one, in four years, who has been penalized with FBAR penalties outside of the OVDP/OVDI programs. The other thing is, unless Canada totally lets go of the Revenue Rule, no collection due to Title 31 issues are not covered in the Tax Treaty.
@Patricia, so in other words, the death of CBT does not mean the death of FBARs or FATCA for US citizens abroad.
@ Patricia re: “The thing is, we know of no one, in four years, who has been penalized with FBAR penalties outside of the OVDP/OVDI programs. The other thing is, unless Canada totally lets go of the Revenue Rule, no collection due to Title 31 issues are not covered in the Tax Treaty. ”
Don’t get me wrong, what you are saying no doubt offers comfort to many, but this is the same kind of stuff we hear from those who tell us that FATCA is not likely going to hurt us. Yet we are trying to kill it with two lawsuits.
What I would conclude from this is that the CBT lawsuit is more for those who are compliant with FBARs as opposed to those who are not. In other words, the vast majority of US persons are better off supporting the FATCA lawsuit if they have limited funds and want to get the most bang for their buck.
Am I missing something?
I don’t know. Sorry but I am extremely tired and absolutely have to study. I was not thinking about CBT at all when I made the comment. I just hate to see people get scared over and over again. That’s all. Nothing more than that.
That is OK Patricia. You give so much of your time for nothing in return. I hope you do well on your test and get some much needed rest. I hope my comment didn’t scare people.
@WhiteKat Certainly FBAR penalties have hurt even though they have not been extracted. Just ask @Patricia Moon – caused her sleepless nights, no doubt compliance and renunciation costs, stress on marriage. Also lets not forget I believe @Anne#1 bookkeeper had employer problems due to FBAR requirements, forced to comply/renounce to keep job.
Also you look to the past where the IRS did not have FATCA data they do now and will increasingly have in future. I heard some goal that for areas they know they have noncompliance they try to get 95% compliance.
You rightly point out those not complying and those trying to comply. Don’t comply then don’t seem to get bothered yet their accounts will be reported. Those trying to comply mostly find it unfathomable then they go to the tax condors and then that is where the penalties, compliance, and costs come into play. And if you go to a condor do you only partially comply where they may insist on full compliance?
Thanks WK. Appreciate your kind comments. Hope all is well with you and yours.
@Patricia Moon,
Thanks, yes all is well with me and mine. Do take care. We need our ACDC team to stay healthy!
For you (sing to David Bowie’s, “We can be Heroes”)
I, I will be angry
And you, you will be seen
Together we’ll drive them away
We can beat them, just for one day
We can be Heroes, just for one day
And you, you can be seen
And I, I’ll drink all the time
‘Cause we’re fighters, and that is a fact
Yes we’re fighters, and that is that
Though nothing, will hurt us forever
We could steal time,
just for one day
We can be Heroes, for ever and ever
What d’you say?
I, I wish we could win
Like gamblers, like gamblers can win
Though nothing,
nothing will hurt us forever
We can beat them, for ever and ever
Oh we can be Heroes,
just for one day
I, I will be angry
And you, you will be seen
Though nothing will drive them away
We can be Heroes, just for one day
We can beat US, just for one day
I, I can remember (I remember)
Standing, by the curb (by the curb)
And the bankers above our heads
(over our heads)
And we smiled,
as though nothing could fall
(nothing could fall)
And the shame was on the other side
Oh we can beat them, for ever and ever
Then we could be Heroes,
just for one day
We can be Heroes
We can be Heroes
We can be Heroes
Just for one day
We can be Heroes
We’re crying, but crying won’t help us
Better we’re trying,
than having to pay
But we could be safer,
just for one day
Oh-oh-oh-ohh, oh-oh-oh-ohh,
just for one day