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
Today’s Canada Throne Speech from new Liberal Government.
Government says it will “not resort to omnibus bills to avoid scrutiny………..” [Marie, sorry about the curious typo.]
AND
“The Government will strengthen its relationship with allies, especially with our closest friend and partner, the United States…”
— I have always felt that a relationship between two sovereign nations should not be based on a unilateral threat of economic harm.
Good! We’ve had enough “bull” to last a lifetime.
If the Trudeau Government is so keen on a strong relationship with the US, IMO, that relationship must be give and take rather than appease the US Government on issues it chooses unilateralism over compromise like FATCA.
As most people know, law suits can take years to make their way through the courts. We also must remember that we may not be successful with the FATCA law suit. Instead of wasting years sitting by waiting for the FATCA suit to be settled, it makes perfect sense to launch a second front to increase our chances of being successful. The CBT is absolutely necessary so we don’t put all our eggs in one basket. I think once word gets out, funding shouldn’t be a problem. There are so many people around the world that are waiting for a CBT law suit. Well done by the organizers.
If I were a deep pockets donor, I would fully fund both lawsuits. Sadly, that is not the case…. I hope some such person might come along eventually.
Meanwhile I plan to donate as much as I can to the Canadian lawsuit because I want FATCA out of Canada; The US government can go to hell. I no longer really care what they do down there because I’m no longer “one of them”, but I don”t think there’s much hope that a Homelander judge in a Homelander court will strike down CBT. They are all drinking the same Koolade.
Phil, I agree that a CBT lawsuit is a noble pursuit. I just don’t think it should be championed by the same group that is championing the Canadian lawsuit for the simple reason that this COULD imply risk to the success of the FATCA lawsuit.
The Canadian lawsuit needs single minded focus and devotion by those wearing Canadian hats at all times imo. The dangers in simultaneously pursuing a CBT suit in the USA by the same 4 individuals include a potential negative effect on funding the Canadian lawsuit (see my prior comment), and also a not so helpful public image of the group representing the Canadian lawsuit (i.e. it is so hard to fight that ‘Americans living in Canada having their cake and eating it too’ stereotype).
The degree of risk to the Canadian lawsuit may seem slim to some who yearn for CBT and really is unknown, but not worth it I don’t think, as the Canadian FATCA lawsuit is of paramount importance. An ‘Americans Abroad’ type group should be taking a CBT lawsuit on, not Canadians living in Canada trying desperately to be seen as Canadians only by the Canadian government, Canadian judicial system and Canadian public.
@SCC
Are you some kind of saboteur sent by the US government to derail both legal efforts?
Huh!!?? 2nd class citizen is clearly in favour of the ADCS lawsuit.
@BB, No. Just a second class Canadian deemed US person.
Regarding your reference to saboteurs though, I bet the US government is thrilled ADCS-ADSC has morphed into ADCT part-time, and is hoping that as more balls get juggled, they all get dropped.
I don’t see how discrediting the directors behind either cause will help the other.
Why is it that when people cannot formulate a logical rebuke, they resort to either playing victim(I am mortally offended by what you said) or outright attack(you must be a US government sabetour). Pathetic really.
Bubblebustin, how exactly was I discrediting anyone? Again, resorting to the victim ploy, and derailing off the main argument.
@SCC
I will add that the two plaintiffs in the anti FATCA Canadian lawsuit have nothing to do with the US anti citizenship tax lawsuits.
@ Bubblebustin
If I may say so, how is Second-classCanadian’s position any less of value than anyone else’s? He/she is expressing an opinion. I like to read what everyone has to say here, because it helps me. I think it is a fair thing to recognize we all don’t share the same outlook. I am very Canadian centric and have made no secret about that. That is my personal focus. I know others have their interests as well. I think the team approach has its benefits and I don’t want to stifle anyone’s voice. If I don’t happen to agree, I have a couple choices. My preference is just to scroll past the comment. I try not take any comments personally. Others may take a different view, which is fine with me. We really just have the same goal, at the end of the day. I care very much about everyone, wherever they live who is being affected by this nightmare, in whatever country they are located. That is our commonality and why we are in this together. And you and others are the ones helping us so much. Thanks.
Regarding Ginny’s comment to BB(much appreciated by the way):”If I may say so, how is Second-classCanadian’s position any less of value than anyone else’s? ”
The answer is: it gets in the way of what BB desires most: CBT.
Ooop, obviously I meant RBT. Bubbles desires RBT so she can keep her US status without having to continue to file with the US every year (and all the other restraints we all know so well) while living in Canada as a Canadian. Nothing wrong with that. Just her bias. We all have one. Even SCC.
@SCC
The only way that the ADCS ball could be dropped is through insufficient donations. Let’s have faith that the funding will come through. I wholeheartedly agree that the ADCS lawsuit is the highest priority for any Canadian deemed a “US Person”.
I think that the ADCT action is also very worthwhile, but all Canadians targeted by the US should put the ADCS first (all should read John Richardson’s ADCS blog on donating to the ADCS vs ADCT).
And hopefully the much valued international supporters of the ADCS will continue their support.
It does not bother me that the same four people are organizing both legal actions. We should all be very grateful for these four (among others). The stereotypical perception of “Americans of Canada” is a problem, but I think that what will ultimately matter is how the Supreme Court justices view the Charter violations of the Canadian plaintiffs Gwen & Ginny.
@Mr. A. Thanks for your positive comment. I hope you are right and am I over worrying the risk factors.
@Duke, this is where you are supposed to come in, and tell everyone we worry too much and are imagining fears that are not really there. You know, like the born in Canada person with an American parent who is freaking out even though no one knows where his parent was born. Yet you agree with me that ADCS-ADSC should be focusing on the Canadian lawsuit for now. This makes me worry even more – i.e. that the non-worrier gets my worries.
Nobody was stepping up to the CBT plate. Somebody needed to do it, sooner not later. Somebody did. I applaud them for it and I’m happy to see another front opened up in the battle for justice. That’s just my opinion and I honestly don’t mind hearing others. We all have to keep our sticks on the ice though and keep shooting for that goal — freedom from CBT/FBAR/FATCA tyranny. Sorry for mixing up metaphors … or whatever I just did.
SCC re your response to Bubblebustin; “Why is it that when people cannot formulate a logical rebuke, they resort to either playing victim(I am mortally offended by what you said) or outright attack(you must be a US government sabetour). Pathetic really.” and ” Again, resorting to the victim ploy, and derailing off the main argument.”
And the constructive “main argument” or helpful opinion there is?
@Badger, Just tried to express an opinion not agreeable with the ‘in crowd’ without attack or pity ploy defense. Not possible I know. But one can dream.
@Badger re: ” And the constructive “main argument” or helpful opinion there is?”
Nothing. Absolutely nothing. I am a total idiot, obviously. Ask BB. I have an agenda. See my goal is NEVER to see my US inheritance. I want CBT so US can fuck me up the arse, No really!
And the “constructive “main argument” or helpful opinion” in the last two comments were …?
@Badger, seriously re: ” @Badger re: ” And the constructive “main argument” or helpful opinion there is?””
I am worried that the new group (same as the old group) is taking on too much, and it will be to the original group’s demise. I hope I am wrong, but I feel strongly worried enough to take on the flack of making my voice heard. How can that effort of speaking out loud hurt anyone, other than myself? You all should respect that, as that is what we all have been doing for several years now – speaking out loud, unafraid of the payback.