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.
@NoName, your fear is clearly understandable. regardless your moral support is needed along with financial support. The stool has three legs and folks that can not help one leg need to help another leg.
Pierre-Luc Dusseault’s Assistant has now advised me that Mr. Dusseault and another NDP MP will be at the Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics Committee where the Revenue Minister and the Privacy Commissioner have been summoned to testify on Thursday morning 8:45-10:45 a.m. ET.
Mr. Dusseault’s Assistant has also advised the Meeting will now be televised on ParlVu (not just audio as was originally planned).
So tune in if you can. I think it will also be available on ParlVu after the meeting.
Like Stephen, I think lobbying politicians has little chance of changing anything. Like others, I’m becoming increasingly concerned about the possible outcome of the lawsuit.
But I’m not giving up on either. That is why I will continue to advocate through elected officials, look for witnesses, offer myself as a witness, request information that may help us and the lawsuit, write articles (even though no one will publish them), speak with media who will cover this, blog at Sandbox, work with Deckard on the Flip Flop video and protest with Native Canadian and others after Native returns in late April or early May.
To me, it’s not an either-or situation. It’s an and-both or an and-all situation.
@ Blaze
Thank you for your part in getting the ETHI meeting changed to TELEVISED. I tried listening in to an AUDIO ONLY meeting today and it is much harder to follow when you can’t see their faces. It’s important that we TUNE IN to this meeting because we need to see and hear for ourselves what resistance to our concerns the Revenue Minister might have and assess (best we can) how effective the Privacy Commissioner really is when it comes to our financial privacy.
For those of you who wonder where and how to view this meeting …
GO TO:
http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/View/Calendar/20160408/-1?device=
CLICK ON Thursday, April 14th on the calendar
SELECT “Meeting No. 8 ETHI – Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics – 8:45 am to 10:45 am”
CLICK ON the Camera icon and PLAY the video
NOTE: Make sure your Adobe Flash is up to date.
This is a chance to see MP Dusseault in action too. He and his assistant have been very responsive to our e-mail requests and tuning in to this video is one way to acknowledge that. A follow-up thank you e-mail would be nice too.
@all
The linked report is worth a read. Would YOU trust your tax data to this organisation ?
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/04/12/taxpayer-info-at-risk-from-cyberattacks-as-tax-day-nears.html?intcmp=hpbt2
I do hope that Elizabeth Thompson is planning to report on this meeting as a follow-up to her recent iPolitics story:
http://ipolitics.ca/2016/03/23/revenue-minister-asked-to-testify-on-records-transfer-to-irs/
@ Deckard1138
I sent an e-mail to Ms. Thompson encouraging her to write a follow-up to that article after the Thursday meeting.
Thank you, Blaze. Just reading your continued commitment, your action and your advocacy exhausts me. You’ll never know how grateful I am to you and so many others who have stepped up to the plate.
I’ll tune in at 6:45 a.m. on Thursday — and those in BC even earlier by an hour. Thanks for the information and getting this televised so we can see and hear this testimony.
To think we naively voted each election in good faith for those, including this new batch, who are to be our government representatives, but now marching to the tune of their real masters. As George Carlin pointed out — it’s a big club, and we ain’t in it.
@Calgary I just do a fraction of what you, Stephen (when does he work sleep or eat?!?)) and many others do.
It’s because so many are doing so much that we all can continue to fight in many different ways The distressing point is how much we have done for so little to show for it in terms of affecting change.
That’s why I believe that something’s just going to have to give at some point – but it ain’t going to happen if we give up.
Meanwhile back at the IRS Ranch:
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/agency-encourages-illegal-immigrant-theft-of-ssns-irs-chief/article/2588288
From the article:
The IRS is struggling to ensure that illegal immigrants are able to illegally use Social Security numbers for legitimate purposes, the agency’s head told senators on Tuesday, without allowing the numbers to be used for “bad” reasons.
Further comment from the IRS Chief:
Asked to explain those practices, Koskinen replied, “What happens in these situations is someone is using a Social Security number to get a job, but they’re filing their tax return with their [taxpayer identification number].” What that means, he said, is that “they are undocumented aliens … . They’re paying taxes. It’s in everybody’s interest to have them pay the taxes they owe.”
As long as the information is being used only to fraudulently obtain jobs, Koskinen said, rather than to claim false tax returns, the agency has an interest in helping them. “The question is whether the Social Security number they’re using to get the job has been stolen. It’s not the normal identity theft situation,” he said.
I think it’s closer to a funny farm than a ranch…
@NO NAME Have you thought of withdrawing all your money in Canadian-dollar travellers cheques? Then the banks cannot freeze your accounts.
Well, Tom, that’s an interesting suggestion, but I pay my bills with the investment income generated by that money. I’m trying to make my money last as long as I do, and in order for that to happen it has to grow a bit every year. But if the choice is confiscation or travellers cheques, I’ll start signing right away!
@Deckard: I know Elizabeth Thompson is still on this issue. I think she is planning to attend on Thursday.
Elizabeth had an article in iPolitics today: The Opposition says the Libs are trying to shield the Revenue Minister from KPMG questions.
http://ipolitics.ca/2016/04/12/opposition-says-liberals-trying-to-shield-revenue-minister-from-kpmg-questions/
In her article, Elizabeth Thompson reported there is a Finance Committee meeting on Thursday. So I checked to see if it conflicts with the ATI, Privacy and Ethics Committee timing.
It is just after the ATI, Privacy and Ethics Committee where the Minister and the Privacy Commissioner have been called to testify about the transfer of 155,000 records to IRS.
But guess what the subject of the Finance Committee is! Amendments to the Income Tax Act!
http://www.parl.gc.ca/Committees/en/FINA
I immediately e-mailed Mr. Dusseault’s Assistant (even though Mr. Dusseault is not a member of the Finance Committee) to see if it is possible to have “our” amendment to protect Canadian citizens from FATCA included in amending the Income Tax Act.
NDP MP Guy Caron is the Vice-Chair of the Finance Committee. Mr. Caron was part of the Finance Committee during the meetings when FATCA was being discussed in 2014. He was not as vocal as Rankin and Cullen, but he spoke against FATCA and voted for the amendment.
What do you think I will be doing first thing Wednesday morning?!?
And yes Stephen, I continue to look for witnesses. As you know, I suggested one today who could be very interesting if accepted and if willing after speaking with the Arvay team..
@Blaze, “The distressing point is how much we have done for so little to show for it in terms of affecting change.”
There is a bountiful amount to show in terms of the lives of your neighbors across Canada who have been informed and are safer today because they have knowledge.
@Bubbles, “That’s why I believe that something’s just going to have to give at some point – but it ain’t going to happen if we give up.”
You go girl!!! 🙂 🙂
@NoName, I would suggest some physical gold simply as a safety hedge regardless of FATCA or not!!!
Note…start reading zerohedge.
Blaze, you are on fire!
@ Stephen…What if a person was compliant, did renounce and has CLN, doesn’t have reportable accounts, doesn’t want the citizenship back because they always felt like a Canadian, but is mad as hell that their employer’s general and pooled trust accounts were involved?
@No name
“The fact that two different governments have refused to address the issues in any way whatsoever makes me think that there is an alternate reality at work out there that I know nothing about. Feeling a bit like Alice.”
Welcome to the club, you took the “red pill” and can now see things as they are. Unfortunately for you, there’s no going back to bliss, FATCA is just the tip of this “alternate reality”, there’s a whole lot worse going on if you care to dig deeper.
As for keeping your money safe, you can look for a credit union in your area that has no ties to the US or is at least below reporting thresholds. If you have bank accounts that may have been exposed, close them. If you need to use a bank account that may report you to the IRS, only put in what you need and no more. Basically, behave like someone who owes back taxes, you use obfuscation methods and redundantly hide what you have in several small places, if they find one account, you still have 10 more.
The first line of defense is to simply not out yourself to anyone. When asked, you are a Canadian and nothing else.
Never fill out IRS and FBAR forms, and definitely never willingly give your money to the IRS, that’s a green light for them to demand more from you, treat them like you would any scam artist, don’t play their silly game. If you receive an IRS letter, send it back as “not at this address” or shred it and place it in the recycle bin. If they don’t stop, report them to the police for trying to extort money from you that they have no right too, there’s obviously no IRS in Canada, so it’s clearly a scam.
Can’t wait for tomorrow morning! Great to hear that Elizabeth Thompson will be at the meeting to report on the proceedings.
@Blaze, Elizabeth and the NDP MPs might also be interested in this aspect of the issues – which as far as I can tell was never addressed – the conflict between the federal FATCA IGA, and the provincial jurisdiction over credit unions, and the conflict between the IGA and provincial privacy laws, which is raised in the BC FIPA submission to Finance in 2014 (see below).
Did the province of BC and the rest decide to remain mum on this? Did they all obtain legal advice that they were not obliged to pass enabling legislation to allow their provincially regulated credit unions to comply with the federal FATCA IGA even though most credit unions are provincial jurisdiction and that their own provincial privacy laws were legally superceded by the IGA?
I don’t think this was posted before, though it is from 2014. Read the FOI documents and the FIPA submission in the links;
‘BC FIPA calls for halt to implementation of US tax law in Canada’
https://fipa.bc.ca/bc-fipa-calls-for-halt-to-implementation-of-us-tax-law-in-canada/
March 11, 2014 • IN CATEGORIES: Privacy Law
“BC FIPA has weighed in on the side of privacy in the debate over the implementation of the American Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) in this country.
In our submission [https://fipa.bc.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MoF-consult-sub-signed-Mar-10-2014.pdf ] to a consultation by the federal Ministry of Finance on the deal signed last month between Canada and the US, we highlighted the damage this would do to privacy rights not just for Americans living in Canada, but also for ‘snowbirds’ and other Canadians who might have a US address or phone number on file with their Canadian financial institution.
Under the agreement, ‘Canadian financial institutions’ will be required to run an electronic scan of their clients’ accounts, looking for American addresses or phone numbers in the contact information. This could result in Canadian snowbirds and others having their financial information identified for sending to Ottawa, and then on to the Internal Revenue Service in Washington DC.
We are not the only ones concerned about this issue.
Internal e mails we received through freedom of information [ https://fipa.bc.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FATCA-Release.pdf ] shows that bureaucrats at the BC regulator of financial institutions (FICOM) were of the view that credit unions in the province “…could be left in a tough spot to comply with the US/Canada agreement and meeting privacy rules.”
Our submission deals with some of the constitutional problems involved with implementing the agreement, quoting a letter [ http://www.greenparty.ca/sites/greenparty.ca/files/attachments/peter_hogg_fatca.pdf ] to the Ministry from Canada’s leading constitutional scholar, former law dean Peter Hogg.
We also set out some of the issues related to federal and provincial privacy laws covering the public and private sectors; the federal government acting alone will not be able to amend these laws to let the implementation proceed.
We will have more to say on this issue if/when the federal government brings in legislation to implement the Intergovernmental Agreement.”
The BC FIPA obtained info via FOI https://fipa.bc.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/FATCA-Release.pdf (even though much redacted) shows that the province of BC became aware of the impact on BC credit unions as provincially regulated institutions. Which is interesting because it raises the question again of how the federal FATCA IGA legislation could forcibly impose FATCA on BC’s and other provincially regulated credit unions without the provinces becoming aware and objecting that it impinges on provincial jurisdiction – and having to pass legislation to resolve the conflict. We have never seen anything from the provinces about this conflict as far as I can tell. How is the IGA getting around that jurisdictional issue? The FIPA submission points out that there are provincial privacy laws at play as well.
There is also an acknowledgement in one of the FOI obtained emails that FATCA raises substantial sovereignty issues.
What I don’t see is follow up from FIPA on FATCA now that it has been implemented. They did make a submission to Finance in 2014 and interestingly, it delineated not only privacy law implications, but their view that provinces would have to pass laws to allow for FATCA to apply to provincially regulated credit unions.
https://fipa.bc.ca/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/MoF-consult-sub-signed-Mar-10-2014.pdf
Great FATCA ferreting, badger.
There are certainly a lot more questions than answers when determining just what went down when the Canadian government decided it was OK to throw over 1 million Canadians, their families and business partners under the FATCA bus.
There is nothing Gwen and I can do now without further help.
I, too, feel that I have done what I can to support this effort and at this point its success now depends on decisions made by others.
Arvay and team seem very obsessed these days with witnesses who have “reportable accounts”–you’ll notice that almost all categories of witnesses listed at the top of this blog post include the caveat that it would be much better if they also have a “reportable account”. I realize that Arvay has the right to keep his strategy private but the consequences of that are that I don’t understand his strategy and it is hard to support him if I don’t understand his strategy.
If someone tries to open a bank account in Canada and they admit to a US birthplace, they will be required to provide a US social security number. If they don’t make such an admission, they won’t face a similar requirement. They are being treated differently based on national origin and that represents a significant constitutional harm before they even open a bank account–let alone deposit enough funds to make it “reportable”.
Again–Arvay may have his reasons for his strategy but because I do not understand the reasons for the direction he is taking, it is hard to support him. That would be fine if he didn’t need my support (and he may, in fact, not need my personal support beyond the extent to which I’ve already offered it). But he is asking for the support of the public. Asking for the support of the public is inconsistent with playing your cards too close to the vest.
@ Badger –
The info RE provincial laws regarding Credit Unions is important and should be sent to Mr. Dusseault’s office (Pierre-Luc.Dusseault@parl.gc.ca) ASAP so that it is in his files for tomorrow’s committee meeting.