From today’s ipolitics.ca article Lynne Swanson is also quoted. Here is part of the article:
“…Members of the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee voted unanimously Tuesday to invite Lebouthillier to appear along with Privacy Commissioner Daniel Therrien and Marie-Claude Juneau, privacy coordinator for the CRA…
While prominent Liberals, including Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, criticized the information sharing deal before the election, Lebouthillier has defended it. “Minister Lebouthillier wants to reassure Canadians that all exchanges of information are subject to strict confidentiality rules,” reads the e-mail sent by Lebouthillier’s office…
Lebouthillier’s position has angered groups that have been fighting the deal such as the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty, which is asking the courts to declare it unconstitutional.
Meanwhile, two Liberal cabinet ministers who had criticized the deal to transfer banking records in the past are no longer calling for it to be scrapped or changed.
Speaking on the way into a cabinet meeting Tuesday, Treasury Board President Scott Brison and Transport Minister Marc Garneau rallied behind the position adopted last week by Lebouthillier.
Brison, who sharply criticized the deal and tried to have it amended when he was Liberal finance critic, said the Liberal government has to work with the agreement negotiated by former Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservatives.
“The previous government negotiated with the Americans on this and we have certainly inherited the situation we have,” Brison told iPolitics. “At the time, the previous government could have negotiated more effectively. The question is where are we now and it is a difficult one to deal with retroactively.”
In 2014, Garneau accused the IRS of trying to get the Canada Revenue Agency to “do its dirty work” through the deal – a deal he now supports. “I take the position that our government is taking now and has been expressed by the minister of revenue,” he said Tuesday…”
elizabeththompson@ipolitics.ca
@No To Tyranny, I agree with you. It’s not just about violations of privacy. Our Canadian Government, through the FATCA/IGA, is assisting the U.S. Government in finding Canadian assets that the U.S. claims a right to tax. Why does our Canadian Government not only tolerate but also assist the U.S. in taxing income and capital gains produced by our economy?
@Marie. I am working on becoming a witness. My wife strictly says no. This is the woman, who, 3 years ago ripped the phone wire right from the wall when she heard me calling and talking to the office of Jim Flaherty. The look of sheer terror in her eyes was incredible. An innocent Canadian scared to death that her birthplace will be uncovered and a foreign government will help itself to what she worked her entire life for. She now lives with a clear case of clinical depression and will not talk to anyone or get help as she doesn’t trust anyone who might find out where she was born. These government criminals have no idea how this is affecting Canadians. With lying government officials, and the help of biased media, the government has kept this a secret. If I have to spend the rest of my life walking down the streets to educate people, I will. The lies, corruption and this train wreck Canadian political system, must be stopped and completely rebuilt. Canada is doomed as it is now. Looking at how Trudeau lied, and could care less about my family, makes me sick! This is why I am working hard to become Canada’s first Aboriginal witness with a lot to say!
It is so mind-boggling that one suggest that the privacy of the account holders is being protected when the very act of passing along the account information to the IRS is already a violation of said privacy. Just mind boggling! America is turning everybody into hypocrites.
But I keep asking myself what IS the alternative? Would Canada by saying no to FATCA actually turn into a second Iran? Iran could not use the dollar, had a stagnating economy, was isolated, and had to send middlemen out to get dollars for them secretly- which probably isn’t even possible anymore and perhaps a reason why Iran has decided to negotiate with America now. Is this really what Canada would face for saying no- the end of the whole banking system? Economic isolation? Because that is a pretty big club to hold over somebody`s head and one that surely other Canadians wont want to pay the price for.
Mr. Speaker, our government takes privacy very seriously. We will continue to work with the United States to ensure that all security safeguards are being followed.
We remind members that our countries have a long tradition of responsible fiscal co-operation dating back to 1942. I assure all Canadians that any exchange of information with the United States is done in compliance with privacy laws.re in English is what the Minister said in her statement (from Hansard)
@NativeCanadian
Good for you. My husband has thrown his name in as well, more so for me than for himself. It would be a great tragedy if the charter challenge is not successful because we could not get enough witnesses to come forward.
@Polly
Is this really what Canada would face for saying no- the end of the whole banking system? Economic isolation?
=====
You ask what IS the answer.
From Canada:A simple carve-out amendment which exempts any ‘tainted’ Canadian citizen or permanent resident of Canada.
If the US wants to go after Homelanders hiding assets in Canada, (as if!!) help themselves as they have done elsewhere. Leave bona fide Canadians, us tainted types, alone. US law has no place being imported into Canada by Canadian politicians or policies.
What the US can do is: honour the fact that they told people they would lose their US citizenship when they became Canadians. Stop changing their laws retroactively to recapture such people after they acquired another citizenship.
The above comment is what the Revenue Minister said (from English Hansard from yesterday)
Ummm Minister. It may comply with privacy laws–because the Con Cons changed the law to “make space” for CRA to do “dirty work of transmitting the information to the IRS.”
The Lib Cons could reverse that. But they won’t. Instead, they reversed their own position.
I hope Elizabeth Thompson can get a statement from LeBouthillier’s Parliamentary Secretary who was one of the strongest opponents to FATCA. Emmanuel Dubourg probably understands it and the implications better than anyone in the Liberal Party. He is an accountant from Haiti with an MBA and over 20 years working for CRA.
http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/emmanuel-dubourg-an-attack-on-our-privacy
Does anyone know if the Black man sitting behind LeBouthillier is Dubourg?.
I was sure Dubourg would be named Minister of National Revenue because of his phenomenal background and his experience as Revenue Critic. I now wonder if the reason he did not become Minster is because of his strong opposition to FATCA.
I suspect Dubourg has been ordered by Trudeau to keep his mouth shut on FATCA–even though Trudeau has directed MPs to be a “strong voice” for constituents.
Kinda hard for them to be a “strong voice” when they won’t even meet with us. Again, I suspect that is on the direction of Trudeau.
LeBouthillier is a social worker.
@CanadianGinny
Sounds so good and so simple!!
@Polly: It IS simple.
The amendment would allow both Canada and U.S. to save face. Other countries could do the same.
Canada is choosing not to “protect its citizens when foreign governments are encroaching on their rights.” Ditto for other countries.
As the Minister of Revenue said, Canada has a 74 tear history of effective information exchange with IRS. FATCA is something very different.
The exchange between the two countries could be a global model for combating true offshore tax evasion. It could be done effectively and economically.
The US does not understand simple for one simple reason. They don’t want to. Canada and other countries are enabling them at the expense of their own laws, constitutions, rights, citizens, residents and sovereignty.
I don’t think it is Emmanuel Dubourg behind Ms. LeBouthillier.
http://www.emmanueldubourg.ca/en/
Might it be Liberal MP Greg Fergus — http://gfergus.liberal.ca/ [ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VeJGVJCcyDI ]
Social work is an honourable profession, but does her experience as a social worker qualify the Minister of National Revenue for the important position she holds?
Consider the Liberal assurances and examine the lines they are using now in light of the earlier Conservative and Finance pretense that the information ‘exchange’ via the FATCA IGA is essentially ‘similar’ to what has been exchanged historically by the US and Canada. Look at the wording very carefully, as Con MP Allen feeds the lines to Brian Ernewein General Director, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance. Con MP Allen and Ernewein pretends that the FATCA IGA is basically the same as what already exists – but downplay the fact that the FATCA IGA arrangement differs in its emphasis on US citizenship/birthplace indicia and factors other than the actual residency status of the pre-existing tax treaty:
Read exchange that starts here;
https://openparliament.ca/committees/finance/41-2/31/mike-allen-8/
CON Mike Allen Tobique—Mactaquac, NB:
“………….How does this compare to existing provisions within our tax exchange agreement?”
Ernewein then goes on to answer NDP MP Rankin’s critical questions re information exchanged and protection of the data:
Ernewein says “……………The conditions for provision of information—whether it relates to individuals or to entities—is that the information can only be used for tax purposes, and not otherwise.”
https://openparliament.ca/committees/finance/41-2/31/brian-ernewein-43/
And the exchange goes on:
5:10 p.m.
General Director, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Brian Ernewein;
“………The conditions for provision of information—whether it relates to individuals or to entities—is that the information can only be used for tax purposes, and not otherwise.”
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin Victoria, BC
“That’s what the document says, but once it’s in U.S. hands, Canada has no control over how it may be used in the United States.”
May 1st, 2014 / 5:15 p.m.
General Director, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Brian Ernewein;
“That’s right. There’s a question of—as I say—the reliability of our treaty partner. We do take the view that we can rely on the U.S. to limit it’s use of the tax information as, indeed, they rely on us.”
5:15 p.m.
NDP
Murray Rankin Victoria, BC;
“Indeed, so it might be that information could well find itself…as we’ve seen in other contexts with the United States taking our information. There’s the USA PATRIOT Act, there are a number of other statutes where the information on Canadian/U.S. persons could well find its way into other entities. We’re just relying on their statement that they’re not going to do that.”
5:15 p.m.
General Director, Tax Policy Branch, Department of Finance
Brian Ernewein;
“Yes. That would be inconsistent with their commitments to us and their legislation, so it would only be on the basis that they were violating the agreement that it could happen.”
So when the Liberals tell us; “….Minister Lebouthillier wants to reassure Canadians that all exchanges of information are subject to strict confidentiality rules,” reads the e-mail sent by Lebouthillier’s office.
“The CRA ensures that tax cooperation with its foreign partners is done in a manner fully consistent with privacy rights in Canada. It is important to note that Canada and the United States have a long history of exchanging tax information in a fair and responsible manner, going back to 1942.”
They are just parroting an almost exact version of the lies by omission that MP Rankin clearly called the Con’s con on during the hearing on May 1st, 2014 before the Finance Committee.
The Privacy Commissioner and Finance clearly know that they are willfully feeding the public misinformation – because Arthur Cockfield told them repeatedly, that the US Patriot Act will control the information once the US has it, and not Canadian laws; “..As previously noted by Canadian policy reports from the Office of the Privacy Commission of British Columbia and other privacy commissions, any personal information about Canadians that is sent over the U.S. border may be accessed by U.S. authorities under the Patriot Act, without a warrant or notice.27…”
“27 See David Loukedelis, “Privacy and the USA Patriot Act: Implications for British Columbia Public Sector Outsourcing” (October 2004), online: http://www.oipc.bc.ca/special-reports/1271 ”
from pg. 37 ‘FATCA and the Erosion of Canadian Taxpayer Privacy’ by Arthur J. Cockfield, Queen’s University – Faculty of Law, April 1, 2014, Report to the Office of the Privacy Commissioner of Canada http://ssrn.com/abstract=2433198 , http://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/how-the-us-pulled-off-the-great-canadian-privacy-giveaway/article17916327/ , and with Allison Christians;
‘Submission to Finance Department on Implementation of FATCA in Canada’
http://ssrn.com/abstract=2407264
…. and any other provisions the US enacts after the FATCA IGA, are subject to override because the Canadian IGA is not a treaty in the view of the US (Allison Christians ‘Tax Cooperation, Past, Present & Future’ http://www.ifcreview.com/restricted.aspx?articleId=7479 , “…Since an IGA is not a treaty in the United States, it is not clear how it can be a treaty in another jurisdiction….” http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2674435 ,http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2013/01/why-fatca-is-tax-treaty-override.html ) and also due to the action of the US ‘last-in-time’ rules.
So the HONOURABLE Minister Lebouthillier is obfuscating, and sinning against Canadian taxpayers, citizens and residents by making deliberate omissions in her statements, and aiding the federal government in its abuse of our Canadian accounts, data, assets and tax revenues and carrying the CON’s FATCA IGA torch onwards.
And Brison and Garneau basically point to Lebouthillier and say; “What she said” about their abrupt turnaround (and turncoat) positions re FATCA.
@Calgary: Over 30 years in Human Resources, I hired and worked with many excellent social workers—for social work positions.
I also hired many accountants and finance people—fot accounting, finance or business positions.
I did hire accountants to work in social service organizations—as accountants or financial officers.
Never once did I hire a social worker for an accounting or finance position. Never once did I hire an accountant to be a social worker.
I am a firm believer in transferability of skills across jobs and careers. But a social worker in a significant finance position with no bridging is a huge stretch—esprcially when there is such an outstanding accountant available.
But that’s government. That’s Trudeau. “Because it’s 2015.”
Thanks for that wonderful synopsis, badger. The minister’s canned response is smelling like last week’s fish at this point.
@Bubblebustin More like last year’s rotten fish.Well, actually two year old rotten fish.
I did not know we elected Con Robots in Fibbing Lib clothes.
Serious thing Blaze.
Can I ask a question here. If I decide to rob a bank which is illegal so instead I decide to hire someone else
to rob it for me . In my mind, if they get caught , they will go to prison, and I will be free of all charges.
Even though I did the planning of the robbery and found out how to break in I was not the one that did it.
I’m sure the judge would not agree with me . Isn’t that what the Canadian government did with the Canadian Banks. They knew it would be illegal for the banks in Canada to send private info on Canadians to a foreign government. But instead , got the government to break the same law. it’s just that they got someone else to do the illegal activity. Why isn’t that the same as hiring someone else to rob the bank for you. You would still be charged with the crime, would you not?
@brian Edelman, they’ll be arguing that a higher and more important economic interest (created by US extortion) exempts them from having to adhere to any laws. That persecuting and betraying a subset of Canadian citizens and residents as protection money is just the price the subset should surrender to (resist no longer) – to serve the vastly more compelling (to them) interest of the Banksters, and the US machine and thus rationalize that it serves the best interest of the majority of Canadians to ab/use the Canadian Tax revenues of ALL CANADIANS to buy the US free lunch (and dinner) forever and ever – selling those with any US birthplace/parentage/marriage/other non-economic ‘connection’ down the river to the south.
@Badger, so I guess if I rob a bank to give money to a homeless person (for the greater good) it would be OK, using the Canadian governments logic.
@brian Edelman;
Just say “the US made me do it”.
So good to hear Peter Julian’s passionate remarks on our behalf yesterday in the House of Commons! And to hear the shouts of support behind him! Thanks for posting the video, Bubblebustin. It has made my day!
I’ve written to Mr Julian thanking him, MuzzledNoMore, and asking him to do something my own MP has failed to do, that is have the Revenue Minister tell me whether my Canadian banking info has been sent to the IRS. Let’s see if he responds.
@All
After much trying, I finally have a scheduled meeting time with my newbie Liberal MP (that I voted for) – – next Tuesday afternoon – – happily I’ve been slotted in for an hour! A fair amount of basic FATCA information/concerns/issues has been provided to her through several emails over the last couple months, but if you have any suggestions on the points I should be sure to raise, your ideas will be greatly appreciated.
Given that I do better with the written word than oral conversation (especially when on an emotional topic), I will be making notes to take with me so we don’t get too off topic.
While I already have some printed materials to bring, I would value any suggestions for documents to leave especially from anyone who HAS had a chance to actually meet with their MP. Further, it would be valuable (for me and anyone else soon to meet with their MP) to hear any pointers RE how to make the most of such a meeting.
Many thanks in advance.
LM,
I suggest that you bring a copy of the letter pre-elected Mr. Trudeau wrote to Lynne — and a copy of the letter Lynne came up with containing the pre-election FATCA comments from the Liberals.
You could then ask your Liberal Government Rep to go to the Government with a question along these lines: “This is what Mr. Trudeau and many of his colleagues said before the election — and you will admit that these comments were really quite clear and convincing. Can you please explain to me what specifically happened between then and now to change their minds? What happened? I want to get back to a very concerned member of my riding.” The answer (or lack thereof) may help you determine what should be your next step.
Tell the Rep that, given the harm of FATCA,, you would like her to get an answer for you in ten days.
Also, you might ask the Rep if she knows personally any Canadian citizens deemed to be U.S. “persons” by the United States. Probably she does have at least one U.S. person friend. Maybe even your Rep is or was a U.S person. Ask her to predict how her own friends might feel about being turned over to a foreign country by her Government’s FATCA law — and what she recommends they should do about it. Make it personal.
@LM says
My wife tried to get in touch with the our newly elected MP two months ago. We could not
get past his assistant. But during a meeting at the constituency office with the assistant our
MP walked in. I guess he heard my aggitated voice. I was in a loud heated debate with the assistant because I did not want to hear his excuses why they could not help us. Our MP
was very understanding and ordered the assistant to start a file on my wife’s case. He
also asked my wife to write a letter stating her situation which he promised to pass on to
the appropriate Ministers McCallum and Morneau. We emailed the letter over one month
ago but have not received a response yet. In the meantime I have been sending IBS postings
on a weekly basis trying to educate our MP. Especially articles about the lack of integrity
shown by Liberal turncoats Trudeau, Brison and Garneau. Probably shot myself in the foot
there but sometimes you have to say what you are thinking! I hope this helps.
I don’t know if this has been posted before but as of last week the Canadian Parliament has seven newly appointed Senators appointed:
Raymond Gagne (former president of Universite Saint-Boniface in Manitoba)
Peter Harder (former federal deputy minister – – liberal)
Frances Lankin (a cabinet minister in Ontario’s NDP government in the 1990s)
Ratna Omidvar (longtime multiculturalism and diversity advocate )
Chantal Petitclerc (wheelchair athlete)
Andre Pratte (journalist)
Justice Murray Sinclair (who led the Truth & Reconcilliation Commission)
Anyone know anything about these folks?