"JR" (deported from USA at age 5) explains why he was born into #FATCA "tax slavery" @Sophieintveld says "bullshit" https://t.co/93CA769Lre
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) July 12, 2017
Many thanks @Embee for providing the link to the spectacle in her comments here and here. The latter comment included:
A message from Jus de Fruit on American Expatriates FB:
So no need for a summary of the audition seeing as a filmed version will be available soon. Suffice to say that things went as well as we could hope.
In the morning I met with an MEP who will be travelling with the next ECON delegation to the US. He was not aware of the issues. He is now. He agreed to find a slot in the itinerary to raise the issue of Accidental Americans with the relevant US Authorities.
The presentation of the petition went well. Followed Tim Smyth’s advice and tried to put the Commission in a corner. Seems Sophie Int Veld is on the same wave length. The Commission in Sophie’s words sent messengers to be shot. Personally I took the fact that three different teams from the Commission were represented as a badge of honour. They simply don’t know what to do with us! Ok got a bit belligerent with one of them, offering to step outside (not to fight but to witness me failing to get an account at BNP Fortis).
Various MEPs approached me after the meeting for more details. I am back at the EP tomorrow to meet more MEPs and their assistants.
We live to fight another round!
Shocking news!! US citizens born into "tax slavery" says #AccidentalAmerican at EU hearing #FATCA is no easy escape https://t.co/L2J89Wfqob
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) July 12, 2017
I encourage all of you to take the time to watch this video starting at the 1 hour 21 minute mark.
The video features:
– two very spirited presentations (the first by the petitioner “JR”) and the second by Sophie int Veld.
– three pathetic responses from “the three representatives” of the “teams of the commissions” sent by their “bosses” to respond to the petition. I mean really, how stupid can these people actually be? The responses can be basically summarized as: what? This is the first I have heard of this? If any of this is really true, then please file a report. No suggestions that they understood the pure evil of “taxation-based citizenship. No, more like: “See no evil. Hear no evil. Speak no evil.”
Europe is obviously home to millions and millions of unfortunate “souls” who are considered not only:
1. U.S. tax slaves (recent discussion on whether “slave” is an appropriate term here – perhaps “prisoner” is a better term); but
2. Nodes to siphon European capital out of Europe to the U.S. Treasury for “better use”.
My thoughts on this video were a combination of empathy for “JR” the petitioner, respect for Ms. int Veld, embarrassment for the stupidity of the “technocrats” (sent to be the “messengers”) and a sense that (as was so aptly demonstrated by Ms. int Veld) that political institutions don’t operate for the benefit of their citizens.
On the point of “not operating for the benefit of their citizens”, this explains small events like:
– the election of Donald Trump (whether you like him or not) a president with far more democratic legitimacy than any president who was the representative of a political party (although not popular he was NOT the choice of any political party)
– the U.K. vote to exit the EU
In any event …
These “slaves” (or at least “prisoners”) are NOT going to be set free by the politicians. It’s painfully obvious the the EU doesn’t care in the least about its citizens who are claimed as U.S. property. They are quite happy to simply “turn them over”.
It’s also very obvious that the United States of America – that “Great Citadel of Freedom and Justice” – also knows exactly what its doing. As the petitioner makes clear in the video, the United States has “weaponized nationality” and is using that weapon against any country whose residents include those who the USA deems to be its’ property citizens.
Interestingly the petitioner (“JR”) talks about the costs of “buying his freedom” (compliance costs, etc.) Rather than “buying his freedom”, perhaps he (and others like him) should simply “declare their freedom” rather than buy it. Although there are “tax consequences to renouncing U.S. citizenship”, there is NO requirement – “Go ahead make my day” – of tax compliance to renounce U.S. citizenship.
Although, at the present time, “All Roads Lead To Renunciation“, one wonders whether renunciation will continue to be an option at all.
Seriously, the whole situation is ridiculous. As I have written many times:
All Homelanders need to see what is in store for them is to watch how the U.S. treats its citizens outside the USA!
Donald Trump wants to build that wall. Ron Paul famously noted that walls could be used to “keep people in”.
The USA doesn’t need a physical wall to “keep people in”. FATCA, FBAR, CBT, PFIC, CFC and the “alphabet soup” list of indignities inflicted on Americans abroad are a wall.
Have you ever seen the “invisible fence” used to keep the dog in the yard?
Congratulations to the petitioner and to Ms. int Veld for a a fantastic job.
Looking forward …
Tax reform (in some form) will be taking place in the USA.
The USA is well aware of the problems of CBT and FATCA.
The only reason for the USA to continue CBT is to transfer the capital of other nations to the USA (Boris Johnson style).
The only reason to continue FATCA and NOT join the CRS is to enhance the USA as the world’s premier Tax Haven – “Tax Haven USA“.
If you believe in and/or admire the USA’s status as the world’s number one tax haven, then why not:
Like Tax Haven USA on Facebook!
In other words, the failure to change will be intentional and willful with respect to the effects on other nations and their citizen/residents.
It’s like this:
You are either against the “weaponization of nationality” or you are with the Americans!
@plaxy
“It’s a question of what route might lead to a successful challenge.”
It is hoped that the French litigants will find a way through this. We affected Europeans have been waiting for too long…
Duality:
Sorry, I don’t understand what you mean.
I just hope someone finds a way to defeat or repeal FATCA, in the EU and worldwide.
Our posts crossed. When I said I don’t understand what you mean, I was responding to your first post above. I hope the French litigants will find a way.
@badger
“I can only conclude that the rights and best interests of ordinary individuals are considered expendable where the US is involved.”
And this is what makes FATCA a breathtaking anathema to affected Europeans. European treaty rights are bestowed upon all EU citizens… except those EU citizens who are deemed a so-called “US Person” by Washington. Brussels might as well be honest and include such an exclusion in the Treaty of Lisbon.
“And I’m wondering how/whether the newest developments in EU data protection might help to challenge FATCA in the EU or an EU member nation since the US is not considered to have adequate data protection and security, and the IRS has had numerous and well documented problems with protecting taxpayer data – even according to US government bodies such as the GAO and TIGTA and the IRS Taxpayer Advocate.”
In my opinion, there is no such thing as “adequate data protection” when it comes to behemoths like CRS and FATCA, as mistakes will be made. If FATCA were to be successfully challenged on the grounds of inadequate data protection by the United States, then CRS would probably have the same fate. In the new world of tax transparency, this sounds a bit implausible (though not impossible!)…
General Data Protection Regulations
The following is from a guide to the regulations on the website of the UK’s Information Commissioner’s Office:
https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/data-protection-reform/overview-of-the-gdpr/individuals-rights/the-right-to-object/
As I understand it, the IGAs give banks protection from being challenged on data protection grounds, by turning the FATCA witchhunt into a legal obligation. This guidance leads me to wonder if it could be possible that even people born in America might still have a right to object, even though the witchhunting is a legal obligation imposed on banks by the local government.
Here is a portal where EU citizens can ask for advice on EU rights.
http://ec.europa.eu/eu-rights/enquiry-complaint-form/home?languageCode=en
@Edelweiss ” If you are a dual EU citizen living in one of these countries, you could make the argument that EU’s acceptance of US policy prevents you exercising your freedom of movement rights because you are financially penalised by moving to an EU country whose pension scheme is not recognised by the US.”
Fascinating observation….
Disregard Brexit for the moment. A UK Pension is recognized by the Tax Treaty but lets assume that a Romanian Pension is not (I do not know) but if its not I am being discriminated against as a EU Citizen because I can not work in Romania and have a pension like a typical Romanian.
@Duality, “As I understand it, European Union citizenship prevails in the European Union. EU treaty rights apply to all who possess such citizenship. I remain baffled as to how a bilateral tax agreement (without Senate approval) can trump European treaties and individual rights.”
Thats why I voted Leave. My EU Citizenship was trampled upon and the EU did not say boo.
And yes I am even more disgusted as to the energy put into EU Citizens rights in the UK post brexit and the rest of us in the EU……..they watched us getting tossed under the bus.
@George (Original George)
“Thats why I voted Leave.”
That’s why all my US-born European relatives suffering from FATCA only vote for the (very) extreme right. For them, it is a single issue vote. Yes to FATCA? Then yes to fascists (who hold a number of seats back home in Parliament). I do not blame them…
“My EU Citizenship was trampled upon and the EU did not say boo. And yes I am even more disgusted as to the energy put into EU Citizens rights in the UK post brexit and the rest of us in the EU……..they watched us getting tossed under the bus.”
After this farce, the European treaties no longer mean anything to me, as I have been relegated to the status of a sub-human of sort in European society. Rejected by the European Commission, rejected by the financial institutions, forgotten by the European Parliament, too poor to launch a legal challenge, and run over by more than enough buses, I can only concur with you in feeling “disgusted” by it all. Sophie in’t Veld appears to have good intentions in trying to get this resolved, but we desperately need so much more support from the European Parliament which is slowly losing its legitimacy…
The problem in EU countries is the same as in other (democratic) IGA signatory countries: there is no right which prevents governments from legislating to enable cross-border reporting.
There might be a right to object,
(1) on the grounds that you’ve been wrongly identified as a “US Person” (if you’ve renounced, for instance)
(2) or on the grounds that the basis for identifying you as a US Person (birthplace) is discriminatory,
(3) or on the grounds that the IGA legislation has the effect of preventing you from exercising your legal rights (such as bank access)
(4) or that your data protection rights may be infringed, by the collection and use of the data, by not adequately informing you, by not seeking your consent, or by sending the data outside the EU without adequate protection.
The Commission’s response confirms that Member States must respect the privacy rights set out in Article 8 ECHR, must ensure access to a payment account with basic features (nothing more, alas), and must:
– “take into account the specifics of the US tax system as well as their Union law obligations when negotiating those Agreements, and to request revisions thereof in view of any practical issues or incompatibility with Union law faced or any further amendments, in particular with regard to full reciprocity.”
The French litigants may be able to make a case on one or more of those grounds.
Or rather, the response doesn’t say Member States must
“take into account the specifics of the US tax system as well as their Union law obligations when negotiating those Agreements, and to request revisions thereof in view of any practical issues or incompatibility with Union law faced or any further amendments, in particular with regard to full reciprocity.”
The response just says it’s “up to them” to take those things into account.
Maybe the Commission would watch with interest if a Member State chose to terminate its IGA under Article 7. They’ve made it clear they’d like full reciprocity.
Sophie in’t Veld has been active also in voicing concerns about transatlantic transfers and use of EU citizens’ data.
http://www.sophieintveld.eu/eu-canada-pnr-agreement-advice-to-european-court-re-affirms-legal-concerns/
Eventually, says Joseph Smallhoover (the DA Joseph Smallhoover?) “the Court of Justice of the European Union rendered an opinion on 26 July 2017 which upholds the notion of the PNR regime, while requiring a review of the terms of the PNR Agreement.”
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=6c0aae9c-5284-41a4-828f-683ebd056a3c
Sophie in’t Veld’s page has a Note to Editors:
Not quite comparable, since this was a EU agreement, not a Member State agreement. Interesting though.
“Eventually, says Joseph Smallhoover (the DA Joseph Smallhoover?) ”
Yes. Turns out J. Smallhoover, who in his Democrats Abroad “Task Force” role claims he is fighting against FATCA, in his day-job represents:
https://www.bryancave.com/en/people/joseph-smallhoover.html#experience-0
Do you like the US extraterritorial your-data-is-my-data stance or don’t you, Joseph Smallhoover?
If he’s only a Smallhoover he can’t suck up that much data. Imagine if he was Joseph Bighoover.
He has help.
“For more than a decade Bryan Cave has guided clients through the dynamic terrain of data privacy and data security law. From our breach response services to our strategic planning, we assure that our clients can safely collect, utilize, and transfer, valuable data. We hope that the resources on this site are useful to your organization. If we can be of assistance in any way, please feel free to contact me, or any of our team members.”
JS being one of the team members.
@Nononymous
Lost my coffee with that one.
@Duality…..once upon a time, I was very pro-EU. I was thrilled to be a Citizen of the European Union!!! I honestly believed that my EU Citizenship was supreme and would be protected by the EU Instiutions.
What I/we learned was that just about everyone is protected to the n’th degree EXCEPT if you were Born in the USA.
@ George
Do you think that a UK government on their own would protect you from the overreach of Fatca and the IRS? The UK Gov are insistent on first talking about trade relations in Brexit negotiations before they even consider protecting citizens rights, both those of British citizens living in the EU and EU citizens living in the UK. A government’s first duty is to its people. It’s a small thing to let those EU citizens present in both be protected by the European court of justice from whom those rights of abode were granted in the first place. Business concerns reign supreme. NO western government has resisted FATCA.
@heidi, the EU Instiutions are sticking up for EVERYONE and their cousin except me, my family and every other person that was born in the USA.
This once proud EU Citizen………no more.
So my British Citizenship was ran over and then my EU Citizenship was ran over……
The EU will not stand up for me and my kids……so screw them.
The last bit of love I had for the EU was tossed aside when I saw them fighting for that final inch in EU Citizens rights post brexit. The UK offer for EU Citizens was pretty good but they are fighting for even more. Hey……I can see they do not give a rats as- about this EU Citizen so they can take their USELESS EU Citizenship and screw it.
IF EU Citizenship was so bloody sacrosanct they would have stood by those Born in the USA with no hesitation. All I know is the EU is damn fiesty in the brexit talks and they could not help me and mine.
@george
It’s a small point to allow EU citizens rights to be overseen by the EU charter from which those rights were bestowed. I trust the EU more than the totalitarian right wing government that is controlling the conservative party in the UK. You can’t blame the EU for your lack of protection when the rest of the world succumbed in the same way.
Brexit will be a disaster in may aspects, my college of physicians just informed me of a
50% downturn in EU physicians coming to work in the UK. They do not have the numbers of qualified UK Dr’s to cover this downturn.
“Do you think that a UK government on their own would protect you from the overreach of Fatca and the IRS?”
In 1815 the UK government, after winning a war, voluntarily lost the peace, to promote its trading privileges with a slaveholding country. I wouldn’t recommend holding your breath waiting for the UK government to protect you.
“A government’s first duty is to its people.”
In a democratic country, a government’s first duty is to its campaign contributors.
@Heidi
“You can’t blame the EU for your lack of protection when the rest of the world succumbed in the same way.”
I beg to differ; the European Union could have been a model for human rights as well as taxpayers’ rights worldwide. The option is there in front of us.
“In a democratic country, a government’s first duty is to its campaign contributors.”
Democracy is a cliché nowadays anyway…
@George (Original George)
“IF EU Citizenship was so bloody sacrosanct they would have stood by those Born in the USA with no hesitation.”
This is why I still retain an ounce of hope that the French litigants might finally resolve this dire problem at the European Court of Justice, which is known for embracing citizens’ rights.
@duality
Yes, the EU en mass could have resisted Fatca, but they didn’t. Probably because they didn’t understand the consequences. How many of them knew about cbt, many of us didn’t. How many EU politicians understand it even now?Then there was the supposed reciprocity factor and also the pressure from the banks scared of the 30% withold.
No, I would not put my trust in a progressively isolationist UK. The French alone in the EU may hold the only hope.