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
Putting this letter from my post into “Comments” so that it is archived:
Thank you for posting this, Stephen.
The Canadian litigation, as this one son acknowledges with his donation, is for the injustice shown by the US in his *American* mother’s taint on her family.
The carnage of shame and stress upon innocent persons and their families continues.
@ Stephen Kish
It’s why we do what we do, isn’t it. We’ll never know how many nervous breakdowns there have been already. We need litigation, here, there and everywhere, to attempt to prevent future stress and to halt the uncivil forfeiture of foreign assets by the USA.
Stephen thank you for archiving such a very sad story. Heartbreaking to read. If only the USG cared about what they are doing to people. I won’t say they don’t know because it is clear they do and don’t care.
We however do care about the impact on lives. Which is why we are doing this. We really need witnesses though to document and explain to our Canadian Court just how draconian the results are for people just trying to live their lives outside of the damn USA.
All we ask is for our freedom from the USA and protection from our own governments where we live. It is so simple really. They only want to make it complicated. The irreparable harm is incalculable.
And far more than the money we are trying to finish raising. Please let’s get there as soon as possible. Too many people are being hurt to let this continue any longer. We need to stop the HURT. This is the reality.
THIS INCLUDES BUT IS NOT LIMITED TO CANADIANS WHO: are or would be a covered expatriate (exposed to U.S. exit tax) if they renounce citizenship; committed expatriating act after 2004 but never obtained CLN; committed expatriating act before 2004 but never obtained CLN; can testify that they are “scared of” what might happen to them as result of FATCA, or suffer from psychological stress or feel betrayed by the Canadian Government because of FATCA; have approached a tax accountant and have been told that they have a huge potential US tax liability and that it will cost a large amount to obtain a CLN and come into compliance with US law — A person in this situation might possibly testify as to feeling distressed by this circumstance.
Is there any hope of getting some witnesses who have suffered some more tangible harms? My take away from the three rulings we incurred against us in September is that the judges are going to want to see some more tangible harms before taking this matter too seriously. Examples of tangible harms include:
Someone is denied a bank account or brokerage account in Canada.
Someone’s bank account or brokerage account in Canada is closed against their wishes.
Someone suffers employment harm due to the ‘US person’ status. We’ve definitely had Brock posters who have considered having to give up certain employment–for example handling money for their Canadian employers–due to ‘US personage’.
Someone has been contacted by the IRS due to data handed over last September.
It shouldn’t be that hard to find witnesses who’ve suffered this kind of real damage. Someone who is technically a ‘US person’ but never got a US social security number goes to their bank or brokerage in Canada. They admit to both the ‘US personage’ and the lack of a social security number and I’m sure the account would be denied and they’ve now suffered a real harm that they can assert in an affidavit or in court.
There is too much gnashing of teeth here about damages people might suffer in the future and not enough documentation of damages people have already suffered. The courts in my experience deal more with the latter and are skeptical of the former.
On Friday evening, 5 February 2016, I had better luck at Lancaster Elementary School in Salem, New Hampshire.
Tom Alciere: Senator, you know what it’s like to find out that you’re classified as a citizen of another country, under their laws. What do you think about imposing U.S. income taxes and bank account reporting requirements on people in other countries who happen to be clasified as U.S. citizens under United States laws, who are not even in the United States?
Ted Cruz: Well, look, I don’t think that makes sense. I think we need to focus on the United States of America.
Furthermore, my son recorded it on video.
Good work, Tom and video taping son! Thanks for following this candidate around and asking the specific questions you have.
@ Tom Alciere
Good question. I hope by “focus on the United States of America” he meant stop targeting US citizens/persons living outside the US borders. After all, Canada never put him in its sights and graciously granted him a release from his Canadian citizenship. Glad your son captured this.
The Ted Cruz video is simply brilliant – keep these videos coming.
That video could be very useful, not only for documenting where Ted Cruz stands, but in pushing for repeal of CBT and CB-FBAR. A Congresscritter spends less than one minute watching the video, reading the transcript, and understanding the issue. They won’t read a book, because they’re too busy not reading the bills they vote for.
Before watching the video, they think of “Americans,” but after the video, they think of persons overseas who are no more “Americans” than Cruz was a “Canadian”.
BTW before Cruz arrived on stage, I asked a Wall Street Journal reporter in the room to get an answer to the same question. The reporter can ask Cruz’s campaign and/or Congressional staff, get an answer, and write a newspaper article about it. I did this because I was not sure I’d have any luck posing the question.
Oh, yes, and a credit to the videographer:
http://non-fatca-banks.com/images/louis-and-cruz.jpg
EmBee,
Like you, I also feel that the Court must encounter statements from Witnesses who have suffered “actual” harm that cannot be disputed as being speculative by Crown attorneys. I have added some of your suggestions to the list (growing and still not inclusive) on my post.
You say that “It shouldn’t be that hard to find witnesses who’ve suffered this kind of real damage”. I really want you to be correct.
I will keep a sentence on my post asking those who will not volunteer, to help us contact others, their friends, colleagues etc. who might.
Bravo to you and your son, Tom! Great video …. brilliantly done!
Thanks Tom! Cute kid.
@Tom
It wouldn’t surprise me if Cruz initially thought you were going to lace into him about not being a natural born citizen. Good recovery on his part, if that’s the case in that he quickly recognized the extraterritoriality of what the US is doing. Great question.
Saturday morning, 6 February 2016, at Cruz headquarters in Manchester, New Hampshire, I dropped off a note with a link and transcript of the video, asking the worker to alert the campaign that the Democrats might even attack him politically about his now-documented position. I want him to have time to prepare a defense of his comments. (Canadians would say defence but he’s not one of them.) Now, if it becomes a campaign issue then it will raise public awareness.
@Tom, you handled that brilliantly every step of the way.
May I suggest that someone at Brock download it and put it in the Brockives.
Kudos to you Tom!! Thank you for your actions with Ted. Ted’s reaction was like ours. It is completely unreasonable at best. Lets see where this goes. When I shook our ex prime minister’s hand and gave him an earful, we now see where he is, defeated! I’m curious how this will play out. Thanks again Tom!
@ Stephen Kish
“It shouldn’t be that hard to find witnesses who’ve suffered this kind of real damage.”
That is actually a quote from Dash1729. See above:
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-66/#comment-7171372
For me the harms come from ‘gRips’
It’s all about Relationships with your Government, Institutions, People, and Security.
Government (your)- Examples: Not being able to take full advantage of Canadian Government tax breaks (like cap gains free sale of house, taking part in some tax breaks or government benefit become taxable) in the US’ eyes. Also the Canadian Government’s approval of the IGA putting a subset of resident Canadian citizens with burdens other don’t have such as $2300 US renunciation fee, and US compliance costs, and US fines/penalties/or the cost of defending federal criminal prosecution, once again not a level playing field.
Institutions – Examples – open/close/refused/frozen accounts or having to fill in/provide information other customers don’t
People – Examples – joint account problem, signatory authority on business accounts, giving one Canadian citizen leverage over another because of a US person’s US tax status, denial of job opportunities or promotion because of US personhood, death tax to heirs.
Security – being exposed to being on a ready made list of US persons that can be stolen/hacked by bank employees, contractors, or external hackers and all the potential possibilities that entails.
Not have a level playing field vis-à-vis other resident Canadian citizens.
If the above qualifies as ‘a Canadian being a Canadian a Canadian’ then the definition has changed.
I don’t know if this a harm, but FATCA also puts some Canadians at a disadvantage crossing the US border or engaging any other organisation the USG wishes with to share that data.
So a resident Canadian is the border, and Homeland security has all that FATCA data right there on the screen, they know how much money they have etc etc.
Snowbirds in FL get pulled over and the local yocal sheriff can see the FATCA data on his screen in the cop car etc etc.
Basically the testimony of fear from the dog’s barks will carry more weight if at least a few can testify to pain from the dog’s bites.
@Dash Are you saying that for this to be deemed unconstitutional one of us actually has to lose our life savings. We can’t be protected until we’re already hurt financially. That makes no sense to me and I hope it isn’t true. The stress from all of this is real harm. It isn’t all about money at least not for me. Being a 2nd Class Canadian is a huge harm for me. If Canada stood up for me and somehow the U.S. took a bunch of my retirement savings I’d be mad as hell but I wouldn’t be as harmed as I am right now knowing I am not a “real” Canadian.
Suppose the Charter argument about discrimination against some Canadians due to national origin would include the clause in tax treaties where Canada allows a country of national origin to tax a Canadian in the same manner as though the treaty didn’t exist.
I was subjected to that while I lived in Canada, though the harm was relatively mild. Usually two Forms 1116 per year caused more stress than anything else that happened during the year, usually though not always. But I was young and survived.
I was subjected to the same thing again while living in Japan. Though I am not Japanese and have no wish to be, the tax treaty clause is the same. For several years two Forms 1116 per year caused more stress than anything else that happened during the year, usually though not always. But then IRS employees started violating US laws, starting with public displays of social security numbers, later by corruptly altering IRS records to embezzle US withholding from victims, and then by framing victims for fraud. The stress of being accused of filing frivolous returns and being framed for fraud, while the IRS continued to refuse to explain the reasons for the accusations, injured my heart, requiring surgery. Even after renouncing US citizenship, the ongoing stress from lies continuing to be told by IRS, US Department of Justice (even more corrupt than the IRS), and courts (even more corrupt than the IRS), continues to injure my heart and will likely lead to a relapse.
If the Charter challenge on discrimination against some Canadians due to national origin would include the clause in tax treaties where Canada allows a country of national origin to tax a Canadian in the same manner as though the treaty didn’t exist, instead of just FATCA, I would sure like to be a witness.
@Cheryl
In another lawsuit (unrelated to this matter) in which I recently submitted an affidavit, yes I lost my life’s savings. I have since rebuilt a bit which is why I’m donating to this effort.
I don’t see that it is needed to show catastrophic harm though. I just get the sense that a small realized harm will be more persuasive than a potential future harm.