This seems to be a class action suit, based in Delaware, against FATCA.

http://armstrongeconomics.com/2014/12/16/class-action-lawsuit-forming-against-fatca/

Martin Armstrong may be brilliant. He also spent seven years in prison for contempt of court relating to security fraud charges, only released in 2011. Delaware of course is a notorious tax haven. Do we want to approach him, be associated with him? Maybe, maybe not. Such an association could confirm our enemies in their opinion that we are tax evaders.

OR…is he just forwarding contacts to the lawsuit already underway in DC?

Elves: Make Blaze’s Christmas wish come true. Help Santa fill Ginny and Gwen’s stockings!

With the dearth of seriousness that pervades most of the topics we slog through, day after day. it seems a little fun is in order, especially when something unusual has been created! This post grows out of a comment being posted as a post and again, as a comment becoming a post.
Would see an abolute shame to see this gem of Embee’s get buried away; without the post it refers to, it wouldn’t make sense.
So here it all is, in complete form.
 

FORM PEOPLE

to the tune of “Goldfinger”
 
Form People
They’re the ones
The ones with a vampire’s bite
A scary sight
Such a cold people
Beckon you to enter their world of fines
You must decline

Bafflegab they will pour in your ear
But their words can’t disguise what you fear
For the clever ones know how bad this ends
It’s the kiss of death to befriend
Form People
Clever ones, beware of their deeds untold
Their hearts are cold

Bafflegab they will pour in your ear
But their words can’t disguise what you fear
For the clever ones know how bad this ends
It’s the kiss of death to befriend
Form People
Clever ones, beware of their deeds untold
Their hearts are cold

They love only forms
Only forms
They love forms
They love only forms
Only forms
They love forms
 

Continue reading →

Hello Brockers!

Special for the holidays I have created a Greedy Giver campaign to raise extra money from those who don’t feel that this issue is about them. This is for you Brockers to share with friends and family who feel that giving to this campaign “doesn’t get them anything”.

Well now it can and will for a short time. (Click above pic or below coupon to take you to the campaign).

Please share this far and wide via email, Twitter, Facebook and whatever other means you can think of.

An example of a coupon that can be purchased on Greedy Giver to fund our campaign:

Too many coincidences for me not to enter this post about what a friend of Brock proposes as “CATCA”.

Today, Furious AC commented:

The IGA Canada signed could have been simply had a word or paragraph change as well to protect Canadian Citizens and Permanent Residents and was proposed several times by other than Conservative MPs and it was rejected out of hand with the phrase “Congress has spoken”.. well Congress actually did not speak nor did they vote for a senate majority stamp of approval, yet our government pushed through this monstrosity KNOWING how easily it could be changed to actually do what it pretends to intend. That’s how Ottawa works!!

Yesterday I got an email with a *CATCA* proposal — see it below*. I had just read a comment from GwEvil:

How’s this for extreme irony?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-threatens-to-block-buy-america-rules-in-canada/article22079182/?click=sf_globe

“The application of these protectionist trade restrictions on projects on Canadian soil by a foreign government is unreasonable,” said Max Moncaster, Mr. Fast’s press secretary.

This comment at the Globe and Mail article had a relationship to the *CATCA proposal* just below:

A year ago I was invited at their expense to present some research to american government people in Washington DC.
They offered to book my flights through a third party agency that is contracted by the State Department and a few others.
Fine I said give – me two options and I’ll pick one.
They came back with two options both of which were on US based airlines
Both bookings had me flying from Ottawa to DC normally a flight of around 80 minutes, going via US regional hubs making the flights about four hours each one way.
I sent them an itinerary for An air Canada flight – direct and cheaper.
They told me it doesn’t matter – buy american rules obligate them to book through US airlines regardless of price or efficiency.
I declined the offer to present my research in the usa for this reason and will do so again.
They came back with two options both of which were on US based airlines
Both bookings had me flying from Ottawa to DC normally a flight of around 80 minutes, going via US regional hubs making the flights about four hours each one way.
I sent them an itinerary for An air Canada flight – direct and cheaper.
They told me it doesn’t matter – buy american rules obligate them to book through US airlines regardless of price or efficiency.
I declined the offer to present my research in the usa for this reason and will do so again.

The *CATCA proposal*, introduced by email as:

So now I’d like you to consider (and then let me know what you think about) my perspectives on dual-citizenship, border controls, sovereign rights and international relations evolving from past history to modern-day enlightenment. Three things to get started:
.
First, it is well established in history that every sovereign nation has an absolute right to control the movement of people across its borders — and there is nothing in today’s world to challenge this (barring major Treaty accords like the European Union’s right of free movement).
.
Second, as a general principle a traveler cannot be denied entry into the country of his citizenship — and again, there is nothing in today’s world to challenge this
.
Third, if that person happens to have another citizenship, then the country to which he’s seeking admission can require him (upon entry and stay and exit) to present himself only as a citizen of that country (and not the other one) — namely the issue of Boris Johnson, Ginny Hillis and many others like them.
.
However, the latter principle is open to challenge because in today’s world, most modern democratic enlightened countries no longer raise a fuss over it — for example, an American citizen entering the UK with a US Passport showing a British birth-place generally encounters no impediment. Therefore, the United States with its appalling treatment of visitors like Boris Johnson and Ginny Hillis needs to face some push-back (with very sharp teeth) from other countries.
.
This is what I think Canada can do to hit back at America over FATCA and the “Accidental” Dual-Citizen problem — that is, if Harper’s successor has any guts:

Continue reading →

With great thanks from me to “Mark”: Dear President of America…

https://fbariswrong.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/dear-president-of-america/.

My wish today is that the *President of America* will take the time to answer this letter as he has those of other children!

Janne and her nice grandfather DESERVE some answers! So does the rest of Janne’s family.

Dear President of America,

My name is Janne. I am 9 years old.

I learn English in my school.

That is all of the English I know.

My teacher will translate the rest of my letter from my language.

I was born in America. My father says I am American. But I don’t live in America anymore.

My sister, my mother, and my father were not born in America. My sister, my mother, and my father are not American.

My grandfather is nice. My grandfather puts money in the bank for me and for my brother and for my sister. This is his present for my birthday and for my name day and for Christmas. Sometimes, he just gives me a present on any day. My grandfather is a nice person. My grandfather is not born in America. My grandfather is not American.

My grandfather says that my grandfather and I are in trouble. My brother and my sister and my parents are not in trouble. My grandfather says that we are in trouble because I am American and because my grandfather has been so nice.

My grandfather says that you believe that my grandfather and I are washing your money. My grandfather says that we must now explain to you that we are not bad people. He says that you don’t listen. My grandfather says that he does not like you or your friends anymore.

My grandfather says that my grandfather and I must send reports to you every year. What kind of report do you want? Is it like a school report?

Why do you believe that my grandfather and I are washing your money? Why don’t you believe that my grandfather and I are good people?

Please answer me very soon because my grandfather is very old and he is very worried. He says that this is the biggest problem he has had in a very long time. He says that you don’t listen and that you don’t care about my grandfather or about me.

Sincerely,
Janne

With thanks to badger’s never-ending research, I am cross-posting from MapleSandbox.ca, Lynne Swanson’s FATCA will cost the CRA $15.7-$15.8 Million.

FATCA Will Cost CRA $15.7-$15.8 Million(or $5.7-5.8)
Posted on December 16, 2014 by Lynne Swanson

NDP MP Guy Caron asked how much FATCA will cost CRA.

When the committee was studying the matter, the department wasn’t able to provide us with the costs of the agreement, for either the agency or the financial institutions. Do you now have that information, from the moment when the funding for implementation is released?

Here’s the answer from CRA:

The costs that we are working with for our ability to implement the obligations that we have to administer this agreement is funding of, I believe, $15.7 million or $15.8 million, which has been allocated to the CRA to implement this over these next few years.

Those costs are principally intended to support the costs of implementing a new electronic form for mandatory filing for financial institutions to be able to file their obligations to us, a database in which we would be able to receive and store that information, and the tools to give us the ability to select files from that database for subsequent transmission electronically to the Internal Revenue Service in order to comply with those obligations.

So there you have it folks. Over $15 million of our tax dollars to violate our fundamental rights as Canadians for foreign government demands. (Thanks to Badger for this great find and for sending it to me and the Board of ADCS.)

That, of course, does not include the $750 million that Canadian banks say FATCA is costing them.

Nor does it include the money the government will spend of our tax dollars fighting us in court while we struggle to raise the needed money for our lawsuit.

@Tim alerted us to this “opinion paper” just issued by the Republican staff of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee.

The December 11, 2014 paper, entitled “Continuing the Conversation on Comprehensive Tax Reform” has a section dealing with the question of citizenship-based taxation.

This is a very brief outline “analysis” only and does NOT equal introduced legislation — which I hope will happen during the next two years — and which may well fail to be passed into law.

Go to page 282/293:

“The United States needs to rethink its taxing rules for nonresident U.S. citizens.

If a U.S. citizen is living and working abroad with some permanence, and the primary nexus the individual has to the United States is citizenship, we think it makes sense to tax the individual, as a general rule, only on income from U.S. sources.

A test would need to be developed to determine at what point a U.S. citizen is considered a nonresident of the United States and then at what point the U.S. citizen is considered to be a resident again.

Some factors that may be considered include the permanence and purpose of the stay abroad, residential ties to the United States, residential ties to the foreign country, and regularity and length of visits to the United States.

The test could be adopted, in some part, from the existing rules that are used to determine residency of alien individuals, i.e., those individuals who are not U.S citizens.

In addition, an exit tax could be applied when the U.S. citizen is considered a nonresident and no longer subject to U.S. worldwide taxing jurisdiction. If the U.S. citizen later becomes a resident and then becomes subject to U.S. worldwide taxing jurisdiction, then the individual’s basis in her assets would be the fair market value of the assets at the time she again becomes a resident.”

Continue reading →