March 8, 2016 UPDATE: Legal fees paid — on to Federal Court for Charter trial contesting Canadian FATCA IGA legislation.
Canadians and International Supporters:
You came through once again: $594,970 for legal costs have now been donated and our outstanding legal bill is finally paid off.
Thanks especially to those who donated even though they never had any “spare” money to give, and despite this gave over and over and over again.
This last round of fundraising also shows that our Canadian lawsuit remains dependent on the kindness of our International Friends: There would be no lawsuit without their financial help.
Know that a very generous donation (today) from a supporter in the United States made it possible to pay off the remaining legal debt. Also please appreciate that there would be no lawsuit without the help of the Isaac Brock Society which has kindly let us use its website to solicit funds.
Our next step is the Constitutional-Charter trial in Federal Court.
For this we need more Canadian Witnesses, and my next post will be devoted only to a request for Witnesses willing to go public, like our Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen.
For the future: I want a win in Federal Court — and I want the new Liberal Government not to appeal that win.
Thank you all for your support,
Stephen Kish,
for the Directors,
Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty
Excellent letter, Lynne.
My thanks once again as well, Lynne. Good work and example.
Congrats Lynne ! A wonderfully succinct letter.
My computer is down today, but I will be writing a similar letter to Mr. Dubourg as soon as it is up and running. I encourage others to do the same. We have to keep the pressure on. Remember, at any point the Liberals can make changes to this legislation. They probably won’t, but we still have to keep the pressure on.
Just gave all of our information to Kevin Restoule at the Union of Ontario Indians. This is a new door to alerting ALL Native people’s in Canada that our government has breached our rights under the charter. Kevin, a huge thank you!
The chair of ADCS-ADSC says: “We also know, sadly, that there will not be enough donations from Canadian supporters to keep the expensive Canadian litigation moving — we need continued support from our international supporters…”
Sadly, some Canadian supporters much prefer a CBT(American) lawsuit rather than a FATCA-IGA(Canadian) lawsuit as they see CBT as the root of all their US problems, and thus their future donations will reflect this. Same holds true for international supporters. In other words, there is now competition for donor monies both from Canadian as well as international supporters.
Not to be Debbie Downer, but lets presume that despite that donors to the Canadian lawsuit are getting tired, some are being seduced over to the American lawsuit, and it is Christmas season – the 96K is raised. Everyone will be thrilled, and the Charter Challenge will be funded. However, this does not mean that more funding will not be required, regardless the outcome of the initial Charter challenge.
As such, I really have to wonder about the wisdom of a group of four people(who admit they are worried about raising enough $ for the Canadian lawsuit) wearing their Canadian hats on one website and their American hats on another website, trying to raise monies from ultimately one donor pool (despite failed (imo) attempts to argue that there are two mutually exclusive groups of donors).
Let the flogging begin. I’ll bend over to make it easier.
@SecondClassCanadian
It is a fact that a significant amount of the money raised for the Canadian suit came from international donors. They are to be commended for contributing to a cause that does not directly benefit them.
It is your perception that there is “competition.” I believe it is not helpful nor accurate for you to suggest this. The ADCT was not even set up to accept donations until exactly one week ago. The slowness in donations for ADCS has existed since approximately mid-July. That $500k has come from a small set of seriously committed donors; given the estimates of 8 million expats, it is clear the majority are contributing nothing.
I have only one hat. And it will be worn in as many ways as I have the energy to fight against the unfairness against expats.I find your comment extremely offensive and disrespectful. The amount of time we personally spend on this is not small and we personally cover expenses so that all donations go only to the legal fees (and the unavoidable accounting fee). To take on a second lawsuit because nobody else will is not something we take lightly.
There are other places where this is discussed outside of Brock and many have indicated they want a CBT lawsuit. There is also the Bopp lawsuit. Would it really be any different if the CBT lawsuit were launched by a different group?
If I understand you correctly then, until such time that the IGA lawsuit is concluded (because until that point, the total amount needed/collected cannot be known), likely 2-3 years from now, there should be nothing done about CBT?
2nd class citizen. I agree with you. We need to fight on one front only to conserve our resources.
This is not an either/or situation. Like me, you can be in both camps.
There are many others however who don’t believe that the US will ever repeal CBT, or they believe it won’t happen in their lifetime. All can benefit from FATCA going away.
I also believe that the defeat of FATCA in Canada will go along way in shining a negative light on the CBT issue, as it is the root of the problem.
There’re a enough donors out there to fund both efforts. Negative advertising won’t help the fundraising efforts of either.
HUH!
I look at it this way:
You live in a log cabin in early Canada, self sufficient , well armed and word has gone out that an attack is coming. The enemy is well armed and formidable.
You and your neighbours gather at the fort with all family, provisions and arms.
A small band against an overwhelming force. The attack begins and arms are put into play in defense.
A party of brave patriots form to attack from outside the fort.(The Bopp Lawsuit)
They need arms for this attack and everyone contributes. They set forth, with God’s blessings and the fort’s hopes for success.
Those at the fort send forth supplications for arms and reinforcement.
Reinforcement comes but is sparse so all arms are pooled for effective defense.
Another party has a strategy for attack in hopes of ultimate success with a sharp,strategic assault.
THIS attack could very well be the vanguard that would end the conflict, free those under assault to return to their homes and their lives, freedom for themselves and their families.
It is a risk, but MUST be undertaken to give every chance for success. They must succeed or they will be overrun, overwhelmed and their lives ended.
Much argument and discussion ensues and one stark fact emerges: IF they do not engage on every front, in every way they will not win the ultimate victory: Life and Liberty.
The brave little party at the fort decides on this new strategy (The CBT suit) hoping and praying that at least ONE of their three arrows of strategic aim hits their mark , any one of which will ensure victory. Especially Arrow Three.
Their arsenal is much reduced but it is decided to plead for reinforcement of arms and engage the third assault.
When all , everything we hold dear, is at stake people decide to take the risk to win an ultimate victory because NOT to do so ensures failure and the end of their cherished freedom and way of life not to mention their lives entire.
The little fort continues to plead for reinforcement !
The fight is long and arduous but the will remains and is strong.
If only reinforcement matched their WILL to survive with freedom and liberty restored!
http://ralphgoodale.ca/blog/fighting-the-long-arm-of-the-u-s-tax-man/
I just sent this link to Ralph Goodale asking how his government can do such an about-face on the issue.
Thanks, Marie, for doing that and for the link.
Trish,
I was considering responding as logically as possible to each point of your response to my earlier comment, but cannot help but focus on your words: “I find your comment extremely offensive and disrespectful.”
I find your inability to take constructive criticism( especially since the US lawsuit has not yet even been launched) and have an open mind to opposing opinions, without mud flinging (i.e telling me what I have written is “extremely offensive and disrespectful”) also extremely offensive and disrespectful.
Sorry to get you all excited, but not everyone agrees with the group of four’s decision to take on CBT, even though it is their decision to make in their self appointed roles as defenders of all those in the world who have US taint. Few will dare to disagree out loud for fear of public stoning.
@ Marie
Good find. Do we know for sure the Liberal government has actually done an about-face? Has anybody received a definitive response on where the Liberals stand on FATCA right now — other than it looks like they will not back down from the litigation? I know I haven’t had any response yet and maybe I won’t get any either. Parliament convenes today. We really need someone in the opposition to pose serious questions about FATCA. Obviously that means the NDP, since the Cons will not touch the subject. How do we persuade them to do this? One thing is for sure, we need to keep sending reminders that FATCA is STILL an issue and they must not ignore the plight of the million-plus, FATCA-affected here in Canada.
I’m for fighting this with everything we’ve got on every front we can find. Hopefully the synergistic effect of the three lawsuit will result in some movement. I’ve donated to both causes today and will continue to do so.
“….their self appointed roles as defenders of all those in the world who have US taint” I didn’t see the field crowded with any others having the courage to take on CBT, the root problem. I am beyond grateful that the Canadian “group of four” have what it takes to do the heavy lifting that everyone else seems terrified of. I cannot wait to see how the US defends the indefensible, they cannot be allowed to get away with this unchallenged.
EmBee,
All we know (via the Government lawyers) is that the new Attorney General and the new Minister of National Revenue have not given any new instructions to the Justice lawyers. The lawyers will advise Joe Arvay should there ever be any “about-face” in the future.
Your idea of encouraging someone in the Opposition to pose a FATCA question in Parliament to the Liberal Government is good.
Lynne Swanson already acted on this yesterday and contacted both Murray Rankin (NDP) AND Elizabeth May (Green Party Leader with U.S. indicia) in this regard. Both of these MPs have been very supportive of our cause. Others may wish to send emails/letters as well.
Here is the letter Lynne sent to Mr. Rankin (similar letter to Ms. May):
—Lynne included as an attachment a scanned copy of the letter Mr. Trudeau sent to her, proving that his pre-election statement had been made. The letter is part (page 4) of the Arvay letter to the Crown counsels: https://adcsovereignty.files.wordpress.com/2015/11/2015-11-09b-et-nygard-et-al_delivering-letter-of-same-date.pdf
@FuriousAC – I LOVE your analogy! 🙂
Lynne/Blaze (bless her maple leaf shaped heart) is in busy beaver mode. I can see the ripples in the water as she slaps it hard and says, “MPs of our 42nd Parliament: Pay attention to FATCA because we are NOT going away.” Bravo! I’m jumping into the pond as soon as I get my e-mails composed. All we want for Christmas is a good FATCA question posed in the House of Commons.
Second Class Canadian says:
“Trish,
I was considering responding as logically as possible to each point of your response to my earlier comment, but cannot help but focus on your words: “I find your comment extremely offensive and disrespectful.”
I find your inability to take constructive criticism( especially since the US lawsuit has not yet even been launched) and have an open mind to opposing opinions, without mud flinging (i.e telling me what I have written is “extremely offensive and disrespectful”) also extremely offensive and disrespectful.
Sorry to get you all excited, but not everyone agrees with the group of four’s decision to take on CBT, even though it is their decision to make in their self appointed roles as defenders of all those in the world who have US taint. Few will dare to disagree out loud for fear of public stoning.”
SecondClassCanadian:
In trying to find the succinct sentences with which to respond, I was unable to find, within your post anything at all that I found in any way agreeable.
First, one could not find anything that was not an attack on the entire effort undertaken here at IBS
“Self appointed roles as defenders” “Sorry to get you all excited” While proceeding to do just that.
One wonders where you have been through the struggles that have brought us to today.
I do not presume to question your experiences that brought you here but I DO presume to OBJECT to the post you willingly created because it appears you disagree with funding necessities for two lawsuits.
It is your choice whether engaging in donations to either or both are of interest or concern to you.
Undermining deliberately the idea that bringing to bear any and all tools to effect success in our struggle is ALSO your choice. One is free to do as they wish or feels is of importance to them.
What you DO NOT have the right to do is to malign both the effort and those engaged in the struggle to effect success in a fundamental struggle for sovereignty and individual freedom.
I find it almost impossible to believe that ANYONE who has been brutalized by FATCA could in any way find fault with those who have dedicated their entire lives to freeing those entangled even at their own risk and financial impact.
“Inability to take constructive criticism” Hmm. I didn’t see those comments as constructive criticism at all.
Nor are you correct in that the Bopp Lawsuit has yet to be launched. They have already gone to court once and will be doing so again.
This is a long , arduous struggle, expensive and may take years to complete. There are a few brave souls who are headlining this effort at their own expense and at great impact on their personal lives.
They deserve our support and respect REGARDLESS how one views the issues and decisions.
I found your post ignorant of the facts and background of the issues as well as the people who are helming this effort. Not to mention our Plaintiffs.
“I cannot wait to see how the US defends the indefensible”
Whether it’s CBT or anything else, the way they do it is by making up whatever lies they need, and sometimes by misleading with the truth.
Example of lie: Saying that the IRS rejected a particular tax return, where the IRS continues to insist that they accepted it.
Example of misleading with the truth: Saying that the IRS’s letters give instructions on how to phone or write letters to the IRS. Yes the instructions are there, but the IRS contracts with ATT to block victims’ attempts to obey the IRS’s instructions for phone calls, and the IRS ignores letters.
Example of misleading with the truth: Saying that a filer reported “SSN applied for, ITIN rejected” instead of reporting an SSN. Yes the filer did report those true statements instead of fabricating an SSN. The Federal Circuit agreed, and that’s how we now have the requirement that filers have to fabricate SSNs when the SSA hasn’t granted or rejected an SSN application and the IRS has rejected ITIN applications.
Example of lie: Saying that a copy of a document was sent to the opposing party with first class postage prepaid.
Example of perjury: Declaring in accordance with 28 USC section 1746 under penalty of perjury that a copy of a document was sent to the opposing party with first class postage prepaid.
More serious examples of perjury were IRS settlement officers’ declarations signed in accordance with 28 USC section 1746. In one case the IRS withdrew the declarations in between calendar call and continuation of the trial, but the perjured declarations remain present in the IRS’s motion for summary judgment. In the other case the IRS avoided trial by settling for penalties totalling $0.00 after a subpoena for documents was served after calendar call.
@Marie
The following is on Twitter:
Tom Dooley @JahMekAWail 1m1 minute ago
Thank you Mr Goodale MP-please continue to rally this resistance. Bad law is not Just.
http://ralphgoodale.ca/blog/fighting-the-long-arm-of-the-u-s-tax-man/ …
Read http://www.isaacbrocksociety.ca
Nervousinvestor,
When I went to the link you provided my heart skipped a beat because I thought that this was a post-election October 2015 quote from the now Minister Goodale — but the quote was from 2011.
Stil… very strong quotes including:
“There may be one topic upon which all Members of Parliament in all political parties can agree – i.e., the United States should not try to enforce its tax laws against law-abiding Canadians!”
@Stephen
Exactly …. these folks (MPs) need to be held to their words. THEY need to PROVE to “we the people” that they have not merely lied to get our votes.
Minister Flaherty’s pre FATCA IGA word’s still burn hot in our memories:
http://business.financialpost.com/news/read-jim-flahertys-letter-on-americans-in-canada
http://www.anwalt.de/rechtstipps/betroffene-des-fatca-steuerabkommens-werden-alleine-gelassen_075890.html
FATCA awareness is picking up in Germany. A German lawyer asks what to do about his client’s FATCA letter from their large German bank.