WITNESS SEARCH UPDATE FOR CANADIAN FATCA IGA LAWSUIT:
WE STILL SEEK MORE CANADIAN WITNESSES:
Have you experienced marital stress or breakup, or medical or psychiatric illness because Canada turned you and your family over to a foreign country — or because you were afraid and entered into IRS compliance and suffered harm, or because you are in “hiding” and can’t afford to be IRS compliant or to renounce? Be a witness.
No single witness will be “perfect” from a litigation point of view. We will be seeking more witnesses (almost) right up to the time of submission of court documents. Your specific situation, that we cannot predict, might have unique characteristics that would be helpful in the lawsuit.
If you cannot be a witness, please tell a friend who you think might be interested.
— If you are interested in becoming a witness You will describe your harm in a written affidavit which will be made public and you can contact me at stephen.kish.chair@adcs-adsc.ca See our website at www.adcs-adsc-ca
FOR THOSE CANADIANS WHO ALREADY VOLUNTEERED: Unless you have already been informed by me or by our legal team that you will not be a witness, there is still the possibility — or (for some) likelihood — that you will be asked to be a witness. I’m sorry but I cannot estimate the time it will take for our legal team to get back to you with their decision. This is because they need to “mesh” the characteristics of all of the necessary witnesses and testimonies with the actual detailed submission that contains the entirety of their evidence, which are all still evolving. Please be patient in our getting back to you with a decision. Thank you for your help.
I believe I saw on Facebook where Keith Redmond said that in France banks will report all accounts then the tax agency will decide which accounts to report to the US – from someone involved with administration of it all.
8938 reporting involves an aggregate value exceeding $50,000. Then why only concern with accounts of $50,000 or more when one may split accounts to be under the threshold. Not to mention FBAR $10,000 thresholds.
We have seen a tendency of compliance paranoia on the part of the US. There were numerous instances in the US of legitimate businesses getting their cash confiscated because they were making many deposits below $10,000 – the reportable threshold. They were branded guilty of structuring with criminal intent. Following this thinking the US would want all account information from all accounts – whether they could get this from overseas is another question.
See today’s post which, as usual, focuses ONLY on seeking witnesses for our lawsuit. I ask those who “know” or speculate or saw on FB that accounts LESS THAN U.S.$ 50,000 are routinely being turned over to CRA/IRS to volunteer as a witness or help me find witnesses who will testify to this point.
Some, it appears, would like me to abandon my request (made on behalf of our litigators) for those holding accounts > US$ 50k because some less than 50k accounts may have been turned over by FATCA. However, please consider that there is litigation value to including witnesses having the higher value accounts. In the post I ask for higher and lower account holders as witnesses.
I appreciate also that there are many arguments why we don’t or should not need Canadian witnesses, and expect many more arguments to be raised, but our litigators continue to feel that witnesses testifying to specific harms will help our lawsuit.
@AnonAnon
The risks you cite are real but IMHO not a good reason to hold back from being a witness–because those risks exist whether they come forward as a witness or not.
They’ve already been outed by their banks/CRA–and also by the law requiring them to carry a passport when crossing the border which will generally show a US place of birth. They are literally in a situation where they can run but they can’t hide–but they can fight it by testifying.
Also there should be plenty of border babies or people with only distant relatives still living in the US who don’t have any pressing need to cross the border in the near term.
Sorry–I meant ‘file an affidavit’ rather than ‘testifying’. I tend to use the word ‘testifying’ generically but I realize what is being asked here is to sign an affidavit not to testify in front of attorneys in examination or court.
@Stephen Kish
Some, it appears, would like me to abandon my request (made on behalf of our litigators) for those holding accounts > US$ 50k because some less than 50k accounts may have been turned over by FATCA.
I myself am trying to ascertain whether the $50k threshold actually makes a difference in practice or whether the banks/CRA are just turning over all accounts to play it safe. I think it is important to answer that question and I hope that Arvay and team also recognize that it is important to figure out exact whose data is being turned over.
Perhaps they already have the answer to my question but cannot share their info due to the pending litigation–if so then that is fine but I just wanted to raise this issue. If much smaller accounts are, in practice, also being turned over I want to eventually get that fact before a judge.
[“Courage is fear holding on a minute longer” (George S. Patton)]
Sometimes.
And sometimes courage is deciding to act rather than waiting a minute longer.
Recent comments clarified something that makes it harder for us.
If a bank turns over information about all accounts, the bank is volunteering to be a witness against some of its customers.
If a bank turns over information about accounts that the IGA forces the bank to turn over, the turnover challenges the constitutionality of the IGA.
On the other hand, the production of a victim (a witness) helps prove the amount of damage but doesn’t affect the unconstitutionality of the IGA. For comparison, a command to turn over census records of all Canadians who had Japanese parents or grandparents should be recognized as unconstitutional even before the people get put in concentration camps.
Here’s another idea for advertisements:
Do you have a parent who immigrated from the US? The Canadian government agreed to put you in the crosshairs for IRS penalties. Please be a witness in our Charter fight in the Federal Court of Canada.
You all may find this Jamaican Gleaner article of interest:
Jamaican attorney slams US over treatment of most vulnerable. Margaret Macaulay chairing a sitting of the Inter-American Commission for Human Rights, last week.
http://jamaica-gleaner.com/article/lead-stories/20160410/jamaican-attorney-slams-us-over-treatment-most-vulnerable
Less than four months after being elected one of the commissioners of the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), Jamaican attorney Margaret Macaulay has stamped her mark on the international body by blasting the United States government over the difficulties being faced by some minority groups in that country to access potable water.
Addressing a hearing hosted by IACHR, Macaulay noted that she is from one of the small-island, poor countries which the US has been generous in helping around the world, but expressed shock at the difficulties some Americans are facing in meeting some of their basic needs.
She said the US needs to balance its efforts and focus on addressing internal issues, too.
“If you’re doing that (helping others) outside of your borders, can’t you do it at the same time in tandem so that nobody falls through the cracks?” Macaulay questioned, eliciting applause from participants.
“I literally cannot understand the most powerful country in the world having these kinds of stories about the lack of clean, potable water and sanitation!
“It really blows my mind, quite frankly. There should not be these gaps. If you ignore your most vulnerable, I say it quite bluntly, you are not a civilised society,” added Macaulay to more applause.
The April 4 hearing hosted by the IACHR, which is part of the Organisation of American States, was scheduled in response to a crisis caused by contaminated water supplies in the city of Flint in Michigan state.
It featured stark testimony that sharply contrasted with the bureaucratic statements of US officials who largely failed to address the specifics of the collective human rights violations, which were highlighted and which led activists to call for the hearing.
After all of the representatives spoke, the US officials opened with an overview of what the country has done and continues to generously do through initiatives intended to improve water and sanitation around the world.
However, this tactic backfired in extraordinary fashion as Macaulay responded.
Sunday update:
Our litigators are still asking for more witnesses.
Yes, Norman, discrimination is harm in itself. It shouldn’t have to have a negative effect for it to still be discrimination. The negative effect is a result, not cause.
@Norman Diamond:
“The production of a victim (a witness) helps prove the amount of damage but doesn’t affect the unconstitutionality of the IGA. For comparison, a command to turn over census records of all Canadians who had Japanese parents or grandparents should be recognized as unconstitutional even before the people get put in concentration camps.”
Within the Canadian IGA are details about how the information is to be gleaned in order to send it to CRA , which then passes on to IRS.
It makes very clear that the threshold will be reduced and that banks will employ third party snitches to garner the information, leaving banks free to deny their involvement. As it is also stated that the Canadian IGA “follows OECD guidelines”
OECD guidelines clearly state that their aim is to garner 15% tax on every individual, business, corporation ON THE PLANET. That is the base and they intend to up the percentage from there AND to release that information to all countries with an interest ( at least 40 in the OECD group ) of which many are thug and criminal nations)
The IGA is illegal. OECD guidelines are Illegal and ends sovereignty of any country participating.
Allison Christians is correct in her assessment of the IGA overriding the Treaty and not a part OF the treaty.
Any person in Canada is in harm’s way and that harm is ongoing. Simply because the information gleaned is intended to harm and intended to fleece every person residing in Canada, citizen or not.
ONCE there is any hint of connection to the U.S. , there is danger , as the intent is to confiscate. Using the flimsy excuse that someone was at some time born on US soil owes their lives and the lives of their families tribute forever is the grossest of offenses. Roman conquerors did this worldwide.
Once someone is known to be or suspected to be a U.S. Citizen, no matter how tenuous, the theft begins. And Canada aids and abets that theft.
RRSP’s belonging to Canadian only individuals , earned in Canada, with no ties to the US whatsoever, ARE not only reportable but are frozen or confiscated if there is a US spouse. Along with penalties for non compliance. Including threat of inprisonment.
How do I get in touch? I am a naturalized citizen of US with dual in Canada. I live and work in Canada. Last year I paid THOUSANDS of dollars to resubmit my taxes. For what? I am so red hot over this. I’m a law abiding citizen in both countries and I feel like I’ve been screwed by criminals. Can someone please email me.
@Heidi:
You are not alone in your feelings. AND you describe the situation extremely well.
@Whitekat
I’m wondering if you would be willing to exchange emails? I have a question I would like to ask you. Thanks
@Heidi B
Stephen Kish is the one to contact about being a witness: stephen.kish.chair@adcs-adsc.ca .
@Stephen Kish:
I think I may have found you one more witness. Details sent to your work email.
Cheers,
BC Doc
@Heidi B:
Contact stephen.kish.chair@adcs-adsc.ca about signing an affidavit.
@ everybody: The word “witness” might scare people away. Seek victims willing to sign affidavits, not witnesses.
@CanadianSpouse. Sure.
@Mods, Can you please give CanadianSpouse my email address. Thanks.
Thanks everyone. I sent Mr. Kish an email. I will keep my eye on this website for current info.
‘The word “witness” might scare people away. Seek victims willing to sign affidavits, not witnesses.’
Also emphasize that lawyers have already been paid to prepare the affidavits, so all that is needed is their:
John Hancock.
Remember these are Americans, so a patriotic appeal shouldn’t hurt.
“Remember these are Americans, so a patriotic appeal shouldn’t hurt.”
Arghhh!!! Canadians. They are Canadians.
http://www.nationalreview.com/article/433730/corporate-inversion-renouncing-us-citizenship-america-builds-walls-around-itself
Good article – the world continues to wake up to the FATCA wall.
https://youtu.be/NqCIyHHOCQo
http://www.inquisitr.com/2980331/us-citizenship-undesirable-for-some-american-ex-pats/
Interesting video from RT on YouTube – This guy renounced more on political reasons and now has Irish citizenship (O’Keefe probably a grandparent).
Another article about the US’ current decline. The US only has 19% of world GDP today vs 50% in 1950. If Trump wins, and building his walls, dismantling NATO, making Japan and South Korea pay for US military expenses, and hacking off the Chinese, I think the other 81% will band together and finally put an end to the Petrodollar system.
Then the US will be screwed and will have to live within its means – translation lower standard of living.
https://youtu.be/GQVWu9btCtA
A video from 2015 on CNBC.