Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)

1,714 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)”

1. Excellent list of questions, Nononymous! Looking forward to your report. I’m particularly interested in Moody’s answer to Question #2.

2. Nononymous,

   As you might be told you should not / cannot monopolize with too many questions, it might be appropriate to ask the audience if they, as well, want answers to these questions and, if so, the answers should be forthcoming for all concerned (the entire audience whether or not they yet each knows they will want these answers) by this US tax law and accounting firm who hopefully want to provide ALL information, over and above what they want to offer.

   And, a big thank you on behalf of many. I hope the presenters, in good faith, will give answers to your questions.

3. With the World Cup on right now, I have a feeling there might only be six of us in the room…

4. But if time is limited and I need to do some triage, any thoughts as to the priority order?

5. Nononymous,

   I think each person would prioritize your important questions differently. My (only) top three would be as follows, with the other two important Q&A’s a bonus:

   1) As you are no doubt aware, the IRS has no power to collect penalties or taxes owing imposed against Canadian citizens resident in Canada. When asked, the federal government has confirmed this to be the case. Consequently, under current law a dual citizen with no financial ties to the US – no assets, income, expected inheritance or business interests – should have no reason to fear the IRS, and no reason to come into compliance. Would you not agree that for the typical “Accidental American” living in Canada the costs and risks of compliance – the expense of hiring professionals, the possibility of penalties or taxes owing due to incompatibilities between the two tax systems – outweigh the risks of non-compliance? Has there been any discussion within your office of whether advising dual citizens to enter the US tax system is, in some circumstances, morally or ethically wrong?

   2) I think the question about Canadian estates would or should be of interest not only to me; that would be my second choice.

   3) We already know that one CAN renounce without prior tax compliance (we usually read about five years prior compliance requirement); tax and FBAR reporting a separate path from renunciation, but I would like this firm to confirm as they seem to infer otherwise.

6. Only six in the room could mean more individualized Q&A time. Getting answers to relevant questions more important than quantity of those in the audience who receive the information for you will pass on if you get answers and what those answers are, Nononymous.

7. The moral/ethical question will likely end the conversation, so I will save it for last.

8. @Nononymous, re;
   “The moral/ethical question will likely end the conversation, so I will save it for last.”
   : )

9. Not only is tax evasion unethical and immoral, but to them so is tax avoidance and to them, you and all of us are tax evaders/tax avoiders.

   I’d be prepared to be hit with such ideas.

10. @Nononymous: Thanks for improving upon my suggested question. Instead of Nazi references, you might instead address Japan T’s valid point just above. Perhaps ask whether, in 1775, it would have been moral or ethical to advise people in Boston Harbour to leave the tea alone and come into compliance with British extraterritorial tax laws. The law is the law, but was it just? If not, was it therefore immoral or unethical to refuse to pay the tax? Which side would Moodys have been on?

    Essentially, the underlying gist of such a question, which they’re smart enough to understand, is: “F— you, ar–holes, for coming here to scaremonger to your own benefit, disguised as information.” But it’s worth asking.

11. “Perhaps ask whether, in 1775, it would have been moral or ethical to advise people in Boston Harbour to leave the tea alone and come into compliance with British extraterritorial tax laws. The law is the law, but was it just? If not, was it therefore immoral or unethical to refuse to pay the tax? Which side would Moodys have been on?”

    Well said Barbara. I agree.

    This single question is the one to ask, IMO.

12. While I love the 1775 reference, the US gov has been training its employees that the founding fathers would be considered terrorists at worst and extremists at best today. If the USG teaches that its own founders are bad people…

13. The Boston Tea Party was a bit of symbolic play-acting designed to stir up the masses to help one élite wrest power from another élite. But Moodys can’t very well say that, even if they think it, which they probably don’t.

    It’s a good question to ask in the current circumstances because it quite succinctly makes the point (to the audience) that they are not the ones in the wrong, it is the law that is wrong.

    (Much more true of the CBT/FATCA laws than of Britain’s Tea Act (other, non-white colonies were treated much much worse) but that doesn’t lessen its potential effectiveness. It was good theatre.)

14. @JapanT These firms understand the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. They might be professionally if not personally opposed to tax evasion, but they make their money by advising tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal and legitimate.

    I don’t think a bunch of Canadians necessarily understand the 1775 reference in any but the most superficial way, plus for anyone following US politics “Tea Party” just leaves a bad taste in their mouths.

    How I might phrase it, if given the chance, is something along the lines of “do you think it’s okay for you to help enforce a foreign country’s laws in Canada, at the expense of Canadians, when that country cannot itself enforce those laws here?” That I think everyone will understand, and it’s not so insulting as to have me tossed out (though I’m tempted to ask them what advice they give to Eritrean clients).

    I’m quite curious as to how this will go down, in a few hours’ time. I’d advise anyone in other Canadian cities to do they same when they come through in July (Kelowna 12th, Victoria 13th, Vancouver 14th, Toronto 21st, online webinar 26th).

15. “@JapanT These firms understand the difference between tax avoidance and tax evasion. They might be professionally if not personally opposed to tax evasion, but they make their money by advising tax avoidance, which is perfectly legal and legitimate.”

    Ah! Good point.

16. It’s also possible that everyone in the room owns US property and does business in the US and has legitimate concerns about their US tax exposure and needs professional advice.

    Unlikely, but possible.

17. Just be prepared for them to have some comeback. I have no idea what, but better to be mentally prepared for them to not be shocked and awed by your questions.

18. Oh I’m very ready for pushback. But it won’t be that tax *avoidance* is bad. I think it will be something along the lines of how you are putting yourself at grave risk if you don’t give us minimum $10k to help you renounce and do all your filings. Whereas my feeling is what risk, Canadian law protects me.

    But the point about future risk is a valid one. It’s a gamble I’m prepared to take, but who knows, in five or ten years, after Doug Ford is elected PM and Trump abolishes term limits, my ass could be in the jail.

19. “for anyone following US politics “Tea Party” just leaves a bad taste in their mouths.”

    Good point.

20. ”Big changes coming at the IRS with new commissioner”

    https://www.accountingtoday.com/news/big-changes-coming-at-the-irs-with-new-commissioner

    And in the same article:

    [Fort] noted that the IRS has a staggering amount of data to analyze with all the millions of tax returns it receives, along with information from banks, giving it access to probably more data than any other government agency. The Palantir program is helping IRS Criminal Investigation cull through that data looking for areas of noncompliance, particularly in the area of international tax enforcement and employment taxes.

    ”Palantir Knows Everything About You”

    https://www.bloomberg.com/features/2018-palantir-peter-thiel/

    I seriously doubt that.

21. Interesting. I’m busy for the rest of the day (go Deutschland) so won’t have time to write things up before the morning. I have copious notes. Maybe 40-50 attendees. I did manage some questions. He’s actually quite honest about US limitations on collection, but the overall impression is, of course, the big scare.

22. Whenever I read that the IRS has a staggering amount of data to analyse I just get irritated. Because they make HUGE amounts of money just with the late interest fees which are plain usury. All they have to do is sit back and wait, twiddle their thumbs, while earning money. I think similar to the credit card companies who once upon a time realised that the really big business was in giving credit cards to those who could NOT pay it back and then cash in on the late interest fees, the IRS understood at one point with something like a 20% late interest fee ( ! ) – they could do something similar.

23. And staggering mountains of data can’t make USCs living outside the US file US tax returns. Scary-scary announcements with vague references to Palantir seem more likely to make it ever clearer to expats that it’s far safer to ignore or renounce than to comply and sign up for the IRS tax-billing service.

    That Palantir diagram is an eye-opener though. Google reveals they recently opened their first office in Europe (in London).

    Creepy. Not because of the IRS – just creepy.

24. Everyone is sharing data with everyone, including the IRS. Directly or indirectly, intentionally or unitentionally.

25. Yep.

Comments are closed.