cross posted from AmericanExpatFinance.com
By Helen Burggraf, Editor – September 08, 2018
A panel discussion that will consider recent and growing efforts to convince U.S. lawmakers to end America’s increasingly-unpopular “citizenship-based” tax regime is set to take place at a venue in the Mayfair district of London, on the 18th of September.
American expats with concerns about the way they are being tax are being invited to the event, which is entitled “What’s next: a light at the end of the tunnel? The possible end of U.S. citizenship-based taxation.”
The discussion will feature Solomon Yue (pictured), the Oregon-based global chief executive of the Republicans Overseas, who has been a long-time and visible campaigner on behalf of expatriate Americans, but the event’s organizers say he will be joined in London by tax, Solomon Yue legal and citizenship experts from across the political spectrum.
Some tax experts who are determinedly non-political, including at least one non-American, will also participate, the event’s organizers, an un-affiliated group of individuals who include some Republican Overseas members, said.
A question-and-answer period will be held at the end.
Last month Yue participated in three similar such events in Toronto, including one that was filmed and posted on YouTube.
This followed an earlier appearance in May in Hong Kong. Yue is set to follow up the London event in coming weeks with similar programs in Paris, Berlin, Frankfurt and Rome, most of which are being sponsored by the respective local chapters of the American Chamber of Commerce.
Among those scheduled to join Yue at the London event will be John Richardson, a Toronto-based lawyer who specializes in citizenship issues, and who is an American-Canadian dual national himself.
He and Yue are also set to participate in another, more informal event on the subject of America’s expat tax regime, also in London, on the 17th of September, at a venue yet to be decided (but probably near Kings Cross Station). More information ******* about this event will be made available in due course, Richardson said.
When: Tuesday 18 September 2018 – 17:30 to 19:00
Where: Central London location – to be confirmed upon RSVP (nearest tube: Westminster)
Venue: To be provided upon RSVP (nearest tube: Westminster)
Cost: Free to attend
RSVP: drewliquerman@gmail.com by 17:00 Monday 17 September 2018
*******
UPDATE – Wednesday Sept 12 2018
Due to unforeseen circumstances, Solomon Yue WILL NOT be able to attend the “grassroots” meeting on Monday, September 17 listed below. John Richardson will run this program as scheduled.
In addition to the meeting mentioned above, we will have a second, more informal program for expats and their families and friends. This format will be a more intimate question and answer session which will be focused on individuals subject to the CBT regime.
When: Monday 17 September 2018 – 19:00 – 21:00
Where: 40 Bernard St, Bloomsbury, London WC1N 1LE, UK- across from Russell Square Station
Venue: Pret a Manger
Cost: FREE
Registration : REQUIRED: nobledreamer16 at gmail dot com by 5 pm (EDT) Saturday 15 September 2018
MAP 
Plaxy, there’s no ball to roll seems to be general attitude. As a noncompliant, hiding from FATCA is easy as commenters here keep reminding. Why are accidentals suing Canadian government if most noncompliant Canadian US persons are accepting of current status quo? Guessing that decision was made before we all became so accepting of new reality.
Jules:
“there’s no ball to roll seems to be general attitude. ”
It does seem to be _your_ attitude. 🙂
“Why are accidentals suing Canadian government if most noncompliant Canadian US persons are accepting of current status quo? ”
I think the question is, why are you complaining about what others are doing, if you’re apparently not interested in taking any action to resist FATCA yourself?
@ jules
go back and look a the history to better understand why the lawsuit was started.
as a contributor way back then and still a supporter of the law suit it those early facta days were scary days around here.
lots of hand wringing and general akgnast about what to do.
as time went on and more people came to grips as to just what to do or not to do the hand wringing and fear disapaited and people came to terms with their “OMG” moments and clairity set in.
it took me a couple of years to go through the 5 stages of grief and finally when acceptance arrived i am at a much more peaceful place than i was 5 or 6 years ago.
there is nothing the bully to the south can do to me. they are dead to me. i will never travel to that country again.
This is completely unscientific, since we have data neither for non-compliant Canadians in general nor for tax seminar attendees. However, based on my overhearing conversations around the room and the questions asked at the Moodys presentation I spied on earlier in the summer, I got the impression that the folks who were really worried (and might actually need professional help) were not your typical Accidentals, but people in more potentially precarious situations, for example business owners with dealings in the US who were Canadian residents with US citizenship only and who had not been filing US returns.
Also I’m delighted to see that the London meeting is being held at the Pret across from Russel Square tube. I have eaten many a sandwich at that particular location.
@nononymous
And I have taken many an exam at Queens square, just around the corner.
Plaxy I would appreciate if you don’t turn conversation around to discuss me personally. It matters not whether you think I am “complaining” or how you perceive my “attitude” or how much I have personally done or not done to fight FATCA. Makes for more interesting, effective communication to talk about subject matter rather than make other commenters feel their input is not worthy and put them on defence, don’t you think? But if you have something to say regarding any of the arguments or views I make, feel free. 🙂
Jules – I think it’s up to people to decide for themselves what course to follow. The plaintiffs in the lawsuit have taken the position, as I understand it, that they’re Canadian, not American, and have rights under the Canadian charter equal to the rights of other Canadians. I think they’re in the right, and I’m hoping they’ll win their case.
Mettleman, I agree with your assessment. Lawsuit was launched during shock and disbelief phase which has passed for most part. So my question still there. What do Canadian accidentals and long term noncompliant Canadian US persons need a Canadian FATCA IGA lawsuit for now we have discovered is easy to avoid revealing US birthplace? Could lawsuit actually make things worse for Canadian accidentals and noncompliants? A valid question, interesting to contemplate don’t you think Plaxy? 🙂 Nononomous, your description of type of people at TTFI meeting does not surprise me as is compliant people who benefit from it obviously.
Meetings are great, but we are still not getting the message out there…spoke to someone last night who is holding dual citizenship and thinking of coming back to Canada to retire. He is living in the US. He had no clue what FATCA was or the FBARS. his response to me “I never had to do that when I lived in Canada.” He was born in US. He wasn’t even filing dual taxes back then. How to we get this message out there? How do we educate the American public?
“Could lawsuit actually make things worse for Canadian accidentals and noncompliants? A valid question, interesting to contemplate don’t you think Plaxy?”
A victory would certainly seem likely to put the ball squarely in the Republican Party’s court. What would they do, if the Canadian government was obliged to stop reporting on Canadians born in America? Interesting indeed!
Plaxy. Obviously plaintiffs are “in the right”. No argument from me or most any other US persons living outside USA. I think we have hashed that point of view to death here at Brock. A more interesting question I think is whether Canadian accidentals and noncompliants would be better off doing nothing rather than attempting to bring down a status quo that seems to be working for them.
Jules – what’s your opinion?
Plaxy. Sorry. I am submitting comments before I see yours.
Opinion on what?
No problem.
“Opinion on what?”
On the question you referred to:
” A more interesting question I think is whether Canadian accidentals and noncompliants would be better off doing nothing rather than attempting to bring down a status quo that seems to be working for them.”
Plaxy… Kidding. My opinion has morphed over the years. I am currently torn between rights versus realities.
Jules – I hope eventually a case based on the rights of citizens will come before the ECJ, and win.
There’s a FATCA case in France, but there’s also a CRS case in the UK, and that’s the one I think has a better chance of reaching the ECJ.
So the (former) Canadian government had the brainwave that led to FATCA IGAs being signed all over the world, and in Canada it turns out it’s easy for US-born residents to avoid being reported as a suspected US tax cheat.
Canada’s reward?
Kind of sad, if so.
@Jules
It wasn’t a TTFI meeting. I went to one of the Moodys seminars, asked obnoxious questions, and took copious notes. Wrote a great long post about it, god knows I could never find it again, no idea where I parked it here. I think it’s on the “Comment at Current Media & Blog Articles” and the date was a Saturday and one of Germany’s (few) world cup matches, so June sometime.
I would love it if the lawsuit takes down the whole mess. Yes there is a risk that it would just invalidate the IGA and the US would go back to directly threatening banks, who would have their hands tied by privacy laws or something (which was the whole point of the IGA, to sidestep those rules).
On the other hand, our current easy situation is due to banks’ lack of diligence (partly because the IGA shields them from any negative consequences if they don’t try very hard to find US persons) rather than any legal protections, and there’s always a risk that things could change for the worse one day soon. A good scandal of some sort and some US pressure and maybe the major banks will start taking it more seriously and asking for passports or birth certificates instead of drivers licenses. I don’t think there’s much risk of service denial at present, but better enforcement would mean more names reported under FATCA, which would scare more people into compliance even though the US has no collection ability against Canadian citizens.
@ Jules and Nononymous,
Re: Nononymous,”I went to one of the Moodys seminars, asked obnoxious questions, and took copious notes”
Here’s links to Nononymous’ 3-part comment about it. A good read!
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comment-part-5-of-5/comment-page-40/#comment-8275298
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comment-part-5-of-5/comment-page-40/#comment-8275299
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comment-part-5-of-5/comment-page-40/#comment-8275301
“What do Canadian accidentals and long term noncompliant Canadian US persons need a Canadian FATCA IGA lawsuit for now we have discovered is easy to avoid revealing US birthplace?”
If you want to invest with RBC Direct Investing the birthplace question is right there in black and white. I am prevented from sharing such an account jointly with my husband even though I’ve been a Canadian citizen for probably longer than most of the employees at the bank have been alive. That’s wrong, and that’s why our lawsuit is so important.
“If you want to invest with RBC Direct Investing the birthplace question is right there in black and white.”
Sure, but in 2018 we know something that we didn’t know in 2014: You’re supposed to lie when answering a bank’s question.