You (Canadian and International donor-supporters, witness volunteers and plaintiffs, Isaac Brock Society and Maple Sandbox who let me post on their websites) are all major investors in our Canadian FATCA IGA legislation lawsuit. The pace must seem very slow to you, but we do move forward. Here is a brief update:
This link provides the letter (a “status report“) our Vancouver litigator Joe Arvay sent to the Case Management Judge responsible for the “supervision” of our litigation in Canada’s Federal Court.
Below I also mention briefly what the upcoming Constitutional-Charter trial is about — our “Claims”, and what Government thinks of our Claims.
— The key points in our June 3 2016 status report:
— The Government provided approximately 2000 documents “relevant” to the litigation and these have now been reviewed. I can’t disclose whether the information in any of the documents was helpful or not. Remember that early in the litigation we had a long delay because Government claimed that it would need much time to review up to 100,000 documents to establish which were relevant and needed to be turned over to our litigators.
— For the upcoming Constitutional-Charter trial, our litigators will very soon be asking specific written questions to the “Defendants” (Attorney General, Revenue Minister) that are related to the lawsuit.
— Mr. Arvay has sent an Amended Statement of Claim to the Defendants — but the details will not be released here until the Claim is decided.
— Our litigators will be asking for a summary trial (see LITIGATION UPDATES for Ginny’s description of summary trial) and express the hope to the Case Management Judge that the trial will take place “in the fall”.
No one wants any “delay” in litigation, but after the Crown attorneys confirmed to our litigators (11/30/2015) that the new Trudeau Government, notwithstanding pre-election statements, provided no “change of direction”, our litigators needed time to move forward. This involved in part review of Government documents received in January, selecting expert witnesses, receiving expert witness statements, seeking Canadian witnesses having specific characteristics willing to come forward and explain their harms, and “meshing” the witness harms with the submission.
None of these actions could have happened “immediately” — and as you can see from my “Witness” post, I am still seeking additional witnesses willing to provide a written affidavit and will do so right up to the time of submission of the documents to the Court.
— Plaintiff Claims:
To remind you, see this link for our Claims for the upcoming Constitutional-Charter trial. Plaintiffs claim that Government’s FATCA IGA enabling legislation violates Canadian Charter sections 7, 8, and 15, and (for me the most important) “… the unwritten principles of the Constitution including the principle that Canada will not forfeit its sovereignty [as it has] to a foreign state”.
— Part of Government response to Plaintiff Claims:
11/10/2014, “…The Impugned Provisions are reasonably necessary to achieve the dual goals of relieving Canadian financial institutions and their clients of the potential for crippling tax and commercial consequences of non-compliance with FATCA and furthering Canada’s international commitments to share information for the better administration and enforcement of taxation laws.”
9/25/2015, “…If Canada is enjoined from complying with its obligations under FATCA, there will be considerable uncertainty regarding the situation of Canadian financial institutions and their customers. Canadian financial institutions may have difficulty conducting business outside Canada and benefits associated with the IGA may be lost. 60.
In addition, the CRA will lose the benefit of the information they would otherwise receive from the IRS to support the CRA’s tax compliance work. The IRS will not provide such information if the CRA is unable to fulfill Canada’s obligations under the IGA. 61.
Even more importantly the working relationship between the CRA and the IRS may be damaged and with the breaching of an international agreement, relations between Canada and the US may be impacted.”
— The Future:
My prediction is that irrespective of who wins or loses the Federal Court case, the decision will be appealed to the Federal Court of Appeal, where both Constitutional-Charter and the “Tax-Treaty” (from our previous summary trial) arguments will be heard.
Yay, force their feet to the fire!
Another argument may be to have the Government of Canada, which is already complying with US laws (FATCA) and the IGA to request documented formal approval from the US Senate on FATCA and the IGA. in the required ratio of 2/3rds Senate Approval.
https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-106SPRT66922/pdf/CPRT-106SPRT66922.pdf
Apparently, Sen. Rand Paul is not too happy with FATRCA either.
https://www.paul.senate.gov/news/press/sen-rand-paul-introduces-bill-to-repeal-anti-privacy-provisions-in-fatca
“Even more importantly the working relationship between the CRA and the IRS may be damaged”
Is that a problem? Does CRA employ embezzlers and identity thieves who need a good relationship with IRS employees?
“and with the breaching of an international agreement, relations between Canada and the US may be impacted.”
So what? Relations between all countries and the US are about to get trumped. I hope he gets his walls built.
It’s great to read what’s been going on with regards to the lawsuit and to see that the trial is expected sometime this fall.
Thanks for all your work, Stephen, and, of course, thanks to our legal team!
@Stephen, is that 2015? re;
“No one wants any “delay” in litigation, but after the Crown attorneys confirmed to our litigators (11/30/2016)”
Admins, please delete this comment if correction made and this is made redundant.
Thank you so very much again Stephen and the others at ADCS for this update, and for all the hours and hours and energy dedicated to working behind the scenes keeping this all going on the behalf of countless people affected, in Canada and elsewhere in the world, many of whom do not even know this is happening, and what hangs in the balance with the outcome.
This appears to call into serious question the FATCA IGA agreement as to the treatment and security of Canadian data transmitted by the CRA to the IRS – done at IRS express instruction and assurances re security and technical safeguards:
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2016/06/09/thanks-to-bruce-schneir-irs-quietly-retracts-two-grossly-insecure-fatca-xml-encryption-processing-recommendations-but-doesnt-admit-fault/
The Canadian Revenue Minister Lebouthillier and her minions should have to answer to the Privacy Commissioner and Parliament for this, as she assured Parliamentarians that;
“……….our government takes the matter of privacy protection very seriously. All the information exchanged with the United States is subject to very strict confidentiality rules. The Canada Revenue Agency makes sure that tax cooperation with its partners is fully consistent with the privacy rights in effect in Canada. Information exchange is done electronically, through a dedicated, secure and effective transmission system.
……………..
Protecting the confidentiality of all transmissions is a major requirement for the agency. Protecting privacy really is a priority for the agency and for our government.”
https://openparliament.ca/committees/ethics/42-1/8/diane-lebouthillier-4/
Badger, you are right — especially because 11/30/2016 has yet to happen. I have changed 2016 to 2015. Thanks for pointing this out!
“The Impugned Provisions are reasonably necessary to achieve the … [patently stupid goal] of … furthering Canada’s international commitments to share information for the better administration and enforcement of [another country’s predatory] taxation laws.”
“All the information exchanged with the United States is subject to very strict confidentiality rules.”
Even if true (which is isn’t), no one knows what is done with the data while on the other side of the pond. What we do know about IRS security that has leaked out, is that it’s in disarray. It is also clear that the US spy agencies have no privacy concerns with peering at foreign data. The US has no respect for anything, and it’s word is worthless.
“Even more importantly the working relationship between the CRA and the IRS may be damaged …”
There should be absolutely no relationship between the IRS and CRA, why is that even mentioned?
“… and with the breaching of an international agreement, relations between Canada and the US may be impacted.”
The US is aggressively attacking Canada with the threat of economic sanctions and we’re supposed to be enjoying not “impacted” relations?
Who makes this stuff up?
SURGITE!!!
Thank you Stephen for this update which I hope will assure everyone that we are always working daily on this law suit, behind the scenes. I know it seems like forever, and for us as well. But we continue to do, with your help all that is required to advance our mutual cause.
I can never express my gratitude for the confidence and support you have placed in our team be that by the generous funding you have provided, the comments you have left and the incredible research provided by the many skilled researchers. I take note of each of your contributions with immense gratitude.
I am truly humbled by all that many of you have done. And although our situations and circumstance may differ, knowing that we are in this together is the best part of this ongoing nightmare.