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
@MuzzledNoMore
Yes I hear you that fundraising is taking priority right now. It is understandable. It is the American way and many of you have American roots. A focus on the almighty dollar is entirely understandable for Americans. It is how you were raised.
But if you truly believe in Canadian sovereignty I would ask you to shift gears over the weekend even at the last hour.
@Dash Yep. Stephen is so motivated by money that he has been paid a $0 salary for “the job he’s “been paid to do” for the endless days and hours he has given and expenses he has paid himself.
@Stephen and et al. at ADCS. Thank you for all your entirely volunteer unpaid work on behalf of all of us, and for your patience. It must be very stressful at times like this when so much is contingent on the constructive participation and donations of others.
I and many others DO appreciate the often unsung heavy lifting you and the others have been doing for so very long.
Here is a heartfelt thank you.
And a plea to my fellow readers to help us pay off the last bit of this fee so the challenge can continue –
Don’t let the US and Canada succeed in punishing us with FATCA just because we’re little guys and they are the Goliaths persecuting us WITH OUR OWN TAXPAYER FUNDS !!!!
The US and Canada are hoping that we will fail because they control our tax agencies and our federal tax dollars, whereas we have only the POST-tax dollars from our own honest daily work and our retirement savings.
WE CANNOT AFFORD TO LET THEM WIN – AND CONTINUE TO ABUSE US AND DENY OUR CHARTER AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS – USING OUR OWN TAX DOLLARS!
Remember, FATCA IS FOREVER – and so are the costs to ALL TAXPAYERS.
Let us proceed and slay this Goliath.
My personal feeling (which really is irrelevant) happens to be that Dash, who from the very beginning has offered himself as a Plaintiff and Witness, is being constructive.
He is only trying to put maximum pressure on ADCS to find quickly the Witnesses we need to make the Charter trial a success.
Once again I offer a hearty thank you to both dash and Stephen kish.
If there were a way of reaching the 600 people who have donated so far to ask them to give another $56.59 each, we could reach the goal. Even if we had a full roster of witnesses, we cannot move forward unless the bill is paid. My fairly regular donation should have been received this past week. However, I will mail $56.59 on Monday….
This is why this lawsuit’s success is so very important.
@calgary411 says;
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comments-part-3-of-3/comment-page-14/#comment-7144597
And the article referred to by both calgary and JC http://www.keepcalmtalklaw.co.uk/accidental-americans-the-us-citizenship-conundrum/ cites the VERY REAL HARM suffered by ourselves as compliant taxpayers of Canada and all the other countries of the Globe – because Canadian taxpayers and those of all the other countries like Canada who implement FATCA pay FOREVER for implementing the US FATCA IGA free lunch at our own local taxpayer (and accountholder) expense, as well as facilitating a direct pipeline to the US Treasury of our own local taxpayer and taxpayer-funded benefits siphoned off by the US to pay off the US national debt:
“…..The negative financial effects are not just restricted to the ‘Accidental Americans.’ Their countries also suffer, as FATCA represents a raid on resources which European states have encouraged their citizens to save so as to be able to be financially independent in old age. The double tax treaties do not recognize European tax breaks, so the financial support which European governments give their citizens will now be transferred to the US coffers. The burden of filling things such as pension gaps will fall to the European states in which these people are resident and to which they have contributed. Commonwealth countries are also being adversely affected in a similar way, among them Canada and Australia….”….
FATCA is the US robbing the rest of the globe of their own local taxpayer funds and locally produced and sited assets while it also solidifies its own position as the biggest ‘offshore’ tax haven in the world.
@anne bolyn. I grew up in the day watching the jerry lewis telethon on a black and white TV.
I match your donation and will post monday
Stephen: Please add a small one from me to your tally. Will post on Monday.
@muzzled I tell my children you are judged by the company you keep.
I am indeed in good company
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/p5187.pdf
https://www.irs.gov/Affordable-Care-Act/Individuals-and-Families/ACA-Individual-Shared-Responsibility-Provision-Calculating-the-Payment
https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i8965.pdf
Another reason to give to IBS, if you spend more than 30 days in the US, you may be responsible to make the “Shared Responsibility Payment” (SRF) to fund Obamacare.
Here’s how it works. If you happen to stay in the US for more than 30 days during the calendar year, the IRS now mandates you should have had US health insurance cover.
The SRF jumps from $95 per adult in 2014 to $325 in 2015 to a whopping $695 in 2016. To be liable to this charge you must be above the IRS’s minimum filing threshold which is determined usually by your marital status.
But yet again it requires someone to fill in silly IRS forms or go through the 19 pages of form 8965 worksheet to prove that you don’t owe a SRF payment.
If my interpretation is correct, if you live abroad the US considers you to have minimum health insurance coverage (isn’t that nice of them) thereby you are exempted paying the SRP.
However, if a US person decides to go holidaying in the US for more than 30 days a year (even though they have their own foreign US health coverage), they become liable to SRP.
About becoming liable for SRP the IRS is following the same rules for Section 911 or the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.
So if the IRS audited an individual abroad and found out you were in the States for more than 30 days, for 2016, they would add another $695 to your tax bill because you didn’t have US health coverage
It’s true you may be able to reduce this figure somewhat, however, as always it involves claiming an exemption and filling in time consuming complicated IRS forms.
And again it begs the question, if I spend the other 10 months etc outside of the US, why should I?
This will affect ‘US Persons’ from Canada who for example want to spend a couple of months in Florida.
The worksheet is complicated. It also depends which state you theoretically resided in as well.
U.S. Citizens Living Abroad
How does the Affordable Care Act affect U.S. citizens living abroad?
U.S. citizens living abroad are subject to the individual shared responsibility provision. However, U.S. citizens who are not physically present in the United States for at least 330 full days within a 12-month period are treated as having minimum essential coverage for that 12-month period regardless of whether they enroll in any health care coverage.
In addition, U.S. citizens who are bona fide residents of a foreign country (or countries) for an entire taxable year are treated as having minimum essential coverage for that year. In general, these individuals qualify for the foreign earned income exclusion under section 911.
Individuals may qualify for this rule even if they cannot use the section 911 exclusion for all of their foreign earned income because, for example, they are employees of the United States. Individuals that qualify for this rule need take no further action to comply with the individual shared responsibility provision during the months when they qualify.
They will report their status with their federal income tax return on Form 8965.
See Publication 54, Tax Guide for U.S. Citizens and Resident Aliens Abroad, for further information on the foreign earned income exclusion.
U.S. citizens who do not meet the physical presence or residency requirements must have minimum essential coverage, qualify for a coverage exemption, or make an individual shared responsibility payment when they file their federal income tax returns. Note that minimum essential coverage includes a group health plan provided by an overseas employer.
…further to SRP
https://www.irs.gov/Individuals/International-Taxpayers/Foreign-Earned-Income-Exclusion—Bona-Fide-Residence-Test
The IRS refers to anyone that is a bona fide resident of another country isn’t liable to SRP.
However, read through the IRS’s bona fide resident test. Once again it’s full of hurdles and trip ups at every stage along the way.
‘if you spend more than 30 days in the US, you may be responsible to make the “Shared Responsibility Payment” (SRF) to fund Obamacare.’
That seems to be only if you’re a US citizen. Green card holders, US non-citizen nationals, and non-US persons don’t seem to have this risk.
‘About becoming liable for SRP the IRS is following the same rules for Section 911 or the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.’
It is not. There seems to be a large amount of overlap but there are some important differences.
‘Individuals may qualify for this rule even if they cannot use the section 911 exclusion for all of their foreign earned income because, for example, they are employees of the United States’
That’s one, but here’s another important difference:
‘However, U.S. citizens who are not physically present in the United States for at least 330 full days within a 12-month period are treated as having minimum essential coverage for that 12-month period regardless of whether they enroll in any health care coverage.’
So if a US person spends 330 full days total in non-US places such as other countries, international waters, and outer space, they don’t have to worry about SRP, but they can still be trapped by not qualifying for FEIE.
Someone who spent 330 full days in non-US places such as Hong Kong and international waters lost a lawsuit because international waters don’t count towards eligibility for FEIE.
@Norman Diamond – The risk for non ‘US Persons’ to use IRS’s definition is that if you satisfy the US’s residency test then you would indeed be legally liable to the SRP.
As with all these IRS things, it’s a set of traps and the risk is getting entangled in one.
So you’re Canadian snowbird overstaying the 6 month rule (however that’s US defined) and at the same time going back and forth to Canada trying maintain Canadian healthcare status, all I’m saying it keeps getting messier and messier.
Legal bill is due tomorrow (February1).
Your $25 donations will help.
http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/DonateADCS.html
About $30K to go so it looks like this funding drive is going into extra laps. Everyone on the ADCS team must be so tired of this. They really want to focus their time and energy on the litigation drive. I think we all want to start talking about the trial and put behind us the talk about raising the money to make the trial possible.
https://americansabroad.org/news-and-events/aca-s-voice-in-the-news/
The language the ACA uses is still to ‘work with’ the US Government. They commented in a recent article how to ‘fairly implement’ the new passport revocation law. Fairly? Give me a break.
With all that’s happened in the last few years, raising the renunciation fee to $2350, passing the passport revocation law, is the US Government really a credible partner for US ex-pats. The next outrage will be the US trying to mimic the IGA experience by coercing foreign governments to sign Collection Assistance Agreements.
IMO opinion the ACA should be assisting US ex-pats with advice to obtain second passports from more friendly governments to negate the US passport revocation law.
With a hostile US Government, I believe the ACA’s original mission to protect US ex-pat’s citizenship and Social Security rights has been made redundant.
The only language the USG will understand is seeing the IGAs and banks being sued in foreign courts to stop the flow of data to the IRS.
The ACA should change its mission to something more relevant like protecting ex-pat’s EU citizenship rights.
______________
Al Jazeera (January 29, 2016)
“The cost of not paying taxes in the US”
“Americans’ passports could be seized if they owe more than $50,000 in taxes, but could this law be unfairly applied? …
“Marylouise Serrato, an executive director of American Citizens Abroad, an advocacy group, said she was ‘very concerned’ about the new rules and is working with the IRS and State Department to ensure they are implemented fairly.
“‘Whatever systems are put in place, they must certainly take into consideration how they affect Americans overseas and ensure those people are not negatively impacted,’ Serrato told Al Jazeera.
“‘It would be tragic for somebody who is trying to get out of a dangerous zone internationally and discovers that, for some reason, their passport is revoked or denied.'”
I hope that everyone can follow anne boleyn’s plan today to pay off the bill.
Unfortunately we can’t “work with” a government whose official stance is that our problems are “self-inflicted”.
We need to pay this bill today…. if we don’t… the US wins…
We are unable to bank & invest since the world does not want to have the stink of us… Anything that requires money to pass our hand or signed for… even if its not our funds or held jointly…
US passports are being held hostage… if they think u owe… they may take your passport… if u are a resident in a foreign country…
not a citizen… without a passport… you are screwed
We are 2nd class citizens with less rights then 1st class citizens & we have no privacy… All govts are helping the US with nothing in return… if u are relying on your gov’t who say they will not collect…. with all the info the US has…. they can just help themselves & bypass our govts to collect… who will stop them… no one
If we do not stop this…. what other laws will the US slide in & treat all *US persons* like crap on the bottom of their shoes & our gov’t does nothing but help them… if the gov’t sends info about a non-US-person by mistake… u will be screwed like we are… how do u fix that? U can’t… u become unwanted like we are…. now we all deny we are US persons… its a secret we hide… to add salt to the wound… some have passed this to our next generation
Please donate what u can today. We must band together & say loudly to the gov’ts… NO…. do not let the US win because we are unable to raise the last of the amount…. We must force our gov’t…. protect our rights and privacy. We have no one to rely on but ourselves
Yes, Mr. A.
Anne Boleyn gave us a solution to raising the remainder of the funds needed for the Canadian litigation: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/09/20/we-need-69521-by-january-1-2016-to-pay-the-canadian-fatca-lawsuit-legal-bills-and-keep-our-litigation-moving-forward-il-nous-reste-69-521-a-ramasser-pour-notre-poursuite-judiciaire/comment-page-63/#comment-7144815
A few of that 600 down and, hopefully, many more to agree to that extra donation to push this ahead. New donors to this cause to do the same will work as well.
You need to direct EVERYBODY to the adcs-adsc.ca website and instruct EVERYBODY to donate 25 CAD, considering that almost 20 million hits show on the hit counter.
Well I certainly hope I’m not going to hear that that “status update” request from the CM judge to the plaintiffs is in any way related to the outstanding bill (currently @ $30,962). That “status update” is dated Jan 28. The ordinary way things work is that one works out a payment agreement with one’s attorney. If the bill is late, and no revised arrangements can be made with the attorney, then the attorney can petition the court to be removed from the case on the grounds that the client isn’t paying.
But no way should the court be getting involved in the private financial relationship between the attorney and the client until after there is a late bill. So something smells wrong to me about the court asking for a status update on Jan 28. Yes the bill was getting close to being late on Jan 28 and given that it is now Feb 1 with $30,962 still to pay by this afternoon there is certainly a risk it will be late. But I don’t understand why the court would be getting involved in the bill payment on Jan 28.
I trust therefore that the “status update” the court requested was related to something other than the bill.
If our Ginny is around today maybe she can explain this “status update” thing. We were late for the August 4, 2015 payment (it took an additional 13 days to bring in the remaining $25K needed) and yet the Arvay team continued to work on the litigation. I’m hoping this is the case now too. Meanwhile I’ve met Tom Alciere’s challenge (it’s in the mail) and I’ll do the same for Anne Boleyn and then there’s Ginny’s “birthday suit” challenge too. We can get this done … it’s just going to take a bit longer.
@EmBee
Yes I’m aware that Arvay continued to work on the case for awhile while the Aug payment was late and I hope we can appeal to his sense of patriotism to do the same at least for a short while now. At the same time I do understand that if Arvay takes a hard line (I hope we can persuade him not to) he could go to court on Feb 2 and ask to remove himself from the case on the grounds of having a client who isn’t paying their bills.
What is harder to see is why the court would involve itself in such matters in advance of the Feb 1 deadline.