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.
@Stephen
You’re welcome. If I can’t clone myself, then I may as well work to find more witnesses by mentioning that I am in fact myself a witness (it’s not like I’m asking someone to do what I won’t do myself).
It’s the plaintiff’s and the ADCS team who deserve the real thanks, though.
@Ann#1
See you in court? 🙂
Justin Trudeau was in London today, dealing with the controversial $15 billion Saudi Arabia arms deal (light armoured vehicles), which involves the London General Dynamics plant. This was a Stephen Harper deal, big money for Canada and jobs for the London area. Saudi Arabia, as everyone knows, is one of the world’s worst human rights abusers.
The Liberals are now defending the deal, and here is Trudeau’s argument (as was reported on CBC radio):
Canada’s word must mean something on the world’s stage. It is a matter of the principle of honouring an agreement that Canada signed with another country. A change of government does not lead to contracts (that Canada signed) being ripped up.
So there is the Liberal logic for defending the IGA. And I think that it will only change if the ADCS legal action prevails or there is massive public pressure and repeated examples of this insanity getting widespread exposure.
I think that it is great that people such as Blaze, LM, Bubblebustin etc. are not giving up with the government and the media. It does concern me that the legal team feels the need to demonstrate harm when the IGA is so clearly a violation of fundamental Charter rights. I am concerned that even the courts will not be able to stand up to the power that the US holds over Canada (ex. trade and military security) and Canada’s banks, and use the “lack of harm” as a reason to rule against us (as the Vancouver summary trial judge did). I hope that I am wrong about this.
I would not wish an IRS letter on anyone but will the courts only be satisfied if and when the IRS letters go out and the IRS makes attempts at Canadian asset confiscation?
@usxcanada
Try opening a RBC Direct Investing account. You will be asked the country of your birth.
“A change of government does not lead to contracts (that Canada signed) being ripped up.”
Does that mean the forward averaging tax that I paid under Trudeau Sr. will be reinstated under Trudeau Jr.? Conservatives were in power when the government reneged on its contract, but it would be nice to have that contract no longer ripped up (assuming I actually get back to Canada some time).
The next ‘Roll of Honour’ from the Federal Register for ‘Quarterly Publication of Individuals, Who Have Chosen To Expatriate’ is due in early May. Last one was on 8 Feb 2016.
@ Mr.A
I worry too why we require so many witnesses to make the case against something that is so blatantly a charter violation. (Do we really need the testimony of slaves to know that slavery is a violation of human rights?) That said, we have to put our trust in the legal team and know that ADCS hired one of the best legal minds in the country. I wish I could be a fly on the wall during the Arvay team meetings.
Dash: I don’t know this for a fact but I believe it is possible that our legal team already has plenty of witnesses whose bank accounts are valued below the $50,000 threshold. If I’m not mistaken Mr. Arvay is simply looking to expand the witness list to include people with higher value accounts and, therefore, a different set of harms.
Bubblebustin: Great letter!
Mr. A: We now know *exactly* why the Liberals are now supporting the FATCA IGA, and we heard it from the mouth of the Minister of National Revenue yesterday morning in the Ethics Committee meeting. It’s because while they were in opposition they weren’t given an adequate opportunity to read and study the legislation. Now that they are in power they have had that opportunity and they now find it acceptable.
Well, gosh, how is it that all of us here, who have never sat in the halls of power in any capacity, have had the opportunity, for the past many years, to study this legislation in the greatest of detail? The Minister of National Revenue fell flat on her face IMHO.
Elizabeth Thompson’s latest article. The Privacy Commissioner says CRA should notify people when their records are transferred.
http://ipolitics.ca/2016/04/14/cra-should-notify-people-when-their-bank-records-are-shared-therrien/
That seems to be about the best the Privacy Commissioner will do for us. But Canada’s Minister of Revenue won’t even agree to that She says people can ask for that information.
What if people don’t know to ask? What if information is transmitted in error? What if…?
Note the communications at the end of the article between CRA and Privacy Commissioner.
More to come. Elizabeth plans another article today about yesterday.
@Don
The Liberty List is supposed to be published within 30 days of the end of the quarter, but more often than not it’s late.
Mr. Therrien does not really come across as a big champion of privacy rights.
@Blaze
From Elizabeth’s article:
“Testifying before Parliament’s Access to information, Privacy and Ethics committee Daniel Therrien said there is no reason for the CRA not to advise people when their information is transferred.”
Should they even consider this, it would no doubt be the only part of the whole unsavoury mess that would get throughly scrutinized for privacy impacts.
“Lebouthillier and Gallivan appeared cool to the idea of proactively notifying those whose information has been shared, saying they are free to ask the CRA if their information been transferred to the IRS.”
My MP informed her months ago that the CRA told me that I had to go to her for the information. Now she’s saying I have to go back to the CRA? Talk about passing the buck.
I’d like to talk to Elizabeth.
@Marie, he was a dubious candidate to protect privacy from the get go. Which is why the CONS appointed him.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/08/22/privacy-commissioners-information-office-says-dont-bug-us-in-disappointing-response-to-questions-about-canadian-privacy-rights/comment-page-1/#comment-6408819
But the Trudeau Liberal flip floppers are finding him useful now that they’ve taken on the CON mandate.
First of all … why the blinkin’ blazes hasn’t ParlVu archived yesterday’s video yet? I would have expected it to be up there by now since committee meetings from the 13th were archived by the 14th. When I tried to watch it live yesterday morning it was buffering so much I missed probably 30 to 40 percent of it.
Now from what I was able to watch, I can say that we now know that the Revenue Minister needs to be reassigned to some Social Worker type portfolio (if such exists) because she is out of her depth in Revenue. The Privacy Commissioner is perhaps only one slight grade above milque toast. MP Dusseault tried but he just didn’t seem to hit many crucial nails on the head. The Con chairman was, as expected, smug and quite content to watch the FATCA flotsam flow under the bridge and into oblivion so he could go on to other topics he is more interested in. Just my opinion and maybe if I see the WHOLE session someday I’ll modify it.
The obsession with the $50,000 threshold was a waste of time since we know that banks aren’t paying any heed to it anyway. All victims who have FATCA reports compiled by the banks MUST automatically receive duplicate copies, just like they receive T5 slips, and these reports MUST be received prior to the tax filing deadline, just like T5s. I don’t think anyone there realized that if a compliant US filer goes through all his bank statements, dutifully reports what he believes are the proper “high balances” and then months later the bank sends a FATCA report to the IRS via the CRA which does not match that person’s FBAR (8938 too, if needed) that it will cause a great deal of grief and possibly evoke some hefty filing penalties. What ARE they thinking? Why do they want to see people put into a position where they might have to battle with FinCEN and the IRS about number, number, who’s got the right number?
End of rant.
@ Bubblebustin…still trying to get my husband onboard with the whole court thing. He’s worried.
@EmBee
Beginning of rant.
I’m hopping mad that several months after my MP sent the revenue minister a request as to whether my bank info has been sent to the CRA, the revenue minister is punting it back to the CRA – who told me to go to her in the first place.
Therrien is pretty clueless too, as he can’t seem to grasp what citizenship base taxation means as far as FATCA reporting goes. He refers to those having tenuous ties to the US because they’ve never worked there. That’s an entirely separate argument unrelated to the IGA, which doesn’t give one iota of consideration to what he’s referring to. Also, he didn’t even come close to mentioning how the dragnet doesn’t pick up those who don’t have indicia, and all the false positives and false negatives that will occur when banks are forced to determine who are US persons under the IGA.
If these people can’t even understand what Canada has signed and what it realistically means to all Canadians, how can we ever expect them to fix it?
Quick question regarding renunciations. It says that you have to hand in your USA documents, like passport and social security card. It also mentions a NEXUS card if you have one. I live close to the border and don’t want to have to give it up. Any Canadian is allowed to apply for one, its not a privilege of being American. Has any dual Canadian/American been in this situation? I have a NEXUS card that is issued to me as a Canadian, not under my American citizenship. Do I have to hand that over to them when I have my appointment? If someone renounces, are they disqualified from having a NEXUS card?
@Phil
If you were a US citizen when you obtained your Nexus card and informed them of such, the Nexus card should’ve been issued to you as a US citizen.
@Ann#1
Is he worried about retaliation by the CRA or IRS? I think that’s what a lot of people worry about.
I have heard it said that being a witness might actually give you some protection as the government wouldn’t want to be accused of targeting people who challenge them. I don’t however know if there’s any truth to this but I may just find out.
I’m trying to do what’s right – which is not always the safest thing to do.
@Phil
I should add, even if you live in Canada.
@ Bubblebustin,
First, your letter to the newspaper was excellent; you must let us know when it gets published what changes were made and whether it brought any inquiries.
Second, you are so totally right about the Privacy Commissioner – – absolutely clueless. I wonder whether a group should demand a meeting with him to help him become less clueless regarding the range of privacy issues. Is that at all possible? Evan meeting with an associate in his office?
My MP admitted that she knew no one who was a “US Person” in Canada – – well, if they have no personal contact with this situation, of course they are clueless – – it’s like expecting the average Christian to understand the joys and problems of Ramadam, Taoist philosophy or the cultural realities of Buddhist monks. The question is, would the Privacy Commissioner be open to education?
Thanks, LM. The letter was published on line on Wednesday, printed copies were available Thursday (yesterday). I’ve allowed the editor to give people my phone number and email should they inquire with him.
I sent a rather curt message to my MP today, letting her know how I feel about the CRA and Revenue Minister punting back and forth to each other as to who is going to tell me if my banking info has been sent to the CRA.
Is it worthwhile trying to talk with the Privacy Commissioner? I guess we won’t know until we try!
Just in: Canada’s Finance Department is gung-ho for CRS:
http://www.fin.gc.ca/drleg-apl/2016/crs-ncd-eng.asp
@LM
She probably does and doesn’t know it. *We* can’t even recognise each other. I’ve been in situations where I’ve known people socially or at work and after five or ten years, it just came up in conversation they were born in the US and I go like, “Really! So was I!” — or vice versa. In the most extreme case, I knew someone about 20 years and learned in his obituary that he was born in the US – I’d always assumed he was local or possibly from Nova Scotia (maybe he’d mentioned having lived there or something).
I think that’s one of the problems – we’re kind of invisible. (On the other hand, this “invisibility” can be a positive thing when dealing with banks.)
Nevertheless, as an MP, I would think she would have been hearing from USP constituents – maybe she has been, but she or her staffers have been blowing off the e-mails?
@LM
*My MP admitted that she knew no one who was a “US Person” in Canada *
Do US persons have a special mark or sign that indicates they are US persons? Did I miss the US person meeting that told me the colour of the day my outfit should be? MP needs a reminder… it use to be very easy to cross the border back & forth… also… loads got GC when they couldn’t get work in Canada because it was easy to get & we wanted to feed our family rather then live on gov’t hand out…. How about all them canadian babies that were born across the border in the US because Canada could not provide them with medical services?