Is this a new set of Order Questions from MP Dusseault?
Q-1072 — April 18, 2016 — Mr. Dusseault (Sherbrooke) — With regard to the exchange of information between Canada and the United States (US) under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA): (a) how many individuals were reported, in total and broken down by (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents of Canada, (iii) temporary residents of Canada; (b) how many individuals were reported, broken down by (i) individuals with Canadian addresses, (ii) individuals with US addresses, (iii) individuals with addresses in other countries; (c) how many accounts were reported, in total and broken down by (i) bank accounts, (ii) credit union accounts, (iii) investment accounts, (iv) insurance accounts, (v) other types of accounts; (d) with respect to (c)(iii), what types of insurance accounts were reported; (e) with respect to (c)(v), what other types of accounts were reported; (f) of the accounts reported, how many were (i) under $50,000 US, (ii) between $50,000 and $1,000,000 US, (iii) over $1,000,000 US; (g) of the accounts reported, how many were (i) Registered Retirement Savings Account accounts, (ii) Registered Education Savings Account accounts, (iii) Registered Disability Savings Account accounts, (iv) Tax Free Savings Account accounts; (h) of the accounts reported, how many were held jointly with one or more non US persons, broken down by type of account and indicating the type of relationship between the joint account holder and the US person, if it is known; (i) how many accounts of organizations were reported to the IRS because a US person had signing authority, interest in, or other connection to the organization; (j) of the accounts that were reported, how many were (i) business accounts, (ii) professional accounts, (iii) charitable or non-profit organization accounts, (iv) connected to other organizations, broken down by type of organization; (k) what agency, organization, and individuals was the information provided to; (l) what measures were taken to ensure this information will not be provided to any other agency, organization, and individuals; (m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy; (n) how many records did Canada receive from the US, in total and broken down by (i) individuals who live in Canada, (ii) individuals who live in the US, (iii) individuals who live in other countries, broken down by country; (o) how many accounts did Canada receive information about; (p) what type of information was in the records Canada received; (q) did Canada receive information regarding (i) income from the accounts, (ii) total assets in accounts, (iii) account balances, (iv) transactions, deposits and withdrawals, (v) account numbers, (vi) names of account holders, (vii) Social Insurance Numbers, (viii) other related information; (r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and (s) when did Canada receive the information?
Publications – May 10, 2016 (Previous)
Order Paper and Notice Paper | Projected Order of Business
Tuesday, May 10, 2016 (No. 52)
Questions
@ badger
That’s a new set of questions from Mr. Dusseault and they are good ones too. They’re significantly different than his Q-35 questions. Looks like he submitted these 4 days after the epic failure of the ETHI 8 meeting (failure of the Revenue Minister and Privacy Commissioner, that is).
Guys, treasury will report “No Canadian Citizens were reported.”
Thats the dirty little secret and part of the problem. You guys do NOT exist in this alternative reality as Canadian!!
In my dialogue with haydon, it became clear and he saw it that we need as part of our multi-prong to reinforce that these in your case are Canadians resident in Canada being reported.
@Embee, I wish MP Dusseault was my MP. He deserves praise and thanks.
And what with Minister Lebouthillier’s much touted “.. 23 years working with the clients of the Rocher Percé Health and Social Services Centre..”. can we expect that she will demonstrate informed commitment to the plight and financial health and data security of her fellow Canadians who are held in bondage by a foreign power – including the most vulnerable who are without the ability to renounce/relinquish due to being a minor, or being deemed legally incompetent based on certain disabilities) who she has committed to outing with her defense of the CON-LIB FATCA IGA?
How much of the FibbingLib answers to MP Dusseault’s questions will be either redacted or witheld under attorney client privilege?
@ badger
That’s a new set of questions from Mr. Dusseault and they are good ones too.
Thanks Badger. Note the question about RRSPs? New term?
Good questions from you too, @badger!
I don’t expect good answers will be given for Mr. D’s questions and everytime they do a do-si-do around revealing what they actually do and do not know, they reconfirm my low expectations.
Maybe a little reformatting will make it easier to read Q-1072 …
***************
Q-1072 — April 18, 2016 — Mr. Dusseault (Sherbrooke) — With regard to the exchange of information between Canada and the United States (US) under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA):
(a) how many individuals were reported, in total and broken down by
(i) Canadian citizens,
(ii) permanent residents of Canada,
(iii) temporary residents of Canada;
(b) how many individuals were reported, broken down by
(i) individuals with Canadian addresses,
(ii) individuals with US addresses,
(iii) individuals with addresses in other countries;
(c) how many accounts were reported, in total and broken down by
(i) bank accounts,
(ii) credit union accounts,
(iii) investment accounts,
(iv) insurance accounts,
(v) other types of accounts;
(d) with respect to (c)(iii), what types of insurance accounts were reported;
(e) with respect to (c)(v), what other types of accounts were reported;
(h) of the accounts reported, how many were held jointly with one or more non US persons, broken down by type of account and indicating the type of relationship between the joint account holder and the US person, if it is known;
(i) how many accounts of organizations were reported to the IRS because a US person had signing authority, interest in, or other connection to the organization;
(j) of the accounts that were reported, how many were
(i) business accounts,
(ii) professional accounts,
(iii) charitable or non-profit organization accounts,
(iv) connected to other organizations, broken down by type of organization;
(k) what agency, organization, and individuals was the information provided to;
(l) what measures were taken to ensure this information will not be provided to any other agency, organization, and individuals;
(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;
(n) how many records did Canada receive from the US, in total and broken down by
(i) individuals who live in Canada,
(ii) individuals who live in the US,
(iii) individuals who live in other countries, broken down by country;
(o) how many accounts did Canada receive information about;
(p) what type of information was in the records Canada received;
(q) did Canada receive information regarding
(i) income from the accounts,
(ii) total assets in accounts,
(iii) account balances,
(iv) transactions, deposits and withdrawals,
(v) account numbers,
(vi) names of account holders,
(vii) Social Insurance Numbers,
(viii) other related information;
(r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and
(s) when did Canada receive the information?
Nope, didn’t work … my indents for (i), (ii) … etc. didn’t survive the copy and paste … maybe calgary411 can fix that?
Not all of my re-formatting worked either (the tabs I put in did not transfer), EmBee. But perhaps it is a little easier to read.
@ calgary41
It’s much better. Thanks calgary411. You are THE quicker fixer upper … always there to help.
I submitted these questions to CRA in a formal Access to Informtion request in early Aoril. CRA advised me they needed to be in statement instead of question form, but rewrote them for me.
Then a source (outside of the government) told me an ATI answer will only give me information that is already available. So, if CRA has not already compiled the data they are not required to do so in order to respond,
My source told me that if an MP asks for the information in an Order Paper, they are expected to reply. So, I immediately contacted Mr. Dusseault’s Assistant with the questions I submitted and asked him to request the information in Order Paper questions. He agreed to do this I did not realize the Order Paper had been submitted yet.
I understand the government has until September to reply because Parliament is not sitting for 45 days before they break for the summer.
It is now past the 30 days in which they should have replied to me, but they have not yet done so. My experience with other ATI requests is they will drag it out as long as possible, I will follow up. I am not optimistic we will get much of a response, but it is one more way of reminding them we are still here and we are still in the fight.
@ Blaze
Thank you!
(a) How many times have I said this to you?
(b) How many time will I say this in the future?
RE: perseverence
“Don’t give up. I know you’ve made a thousand attempts to reach your goal, but look at it this way: after repeatedly banging your head against the wall, you ought to be numb enough break through this time.”
― Richelle E. Goodrich, Making Wishes: Quotes, Thoughts, & a Little Poetry for Every Day of the Year
“(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;”
This information is being transmitted to the IRS, right? 100% of it will be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy; and that’s assuming hackers don’t get their hands on it.
@Norman Yep. We know that. The Con Cons knew that. The Lib Cons know that. The NDP knows that. Finance and Revenue know that. U.s. Treasury and IRS know that.
They will lie again and tell us our data is secure.
But I included the question to let them know we know they are putting us at great risk of serious harm.
@Blaze, @Norman….they called them “slips”, well they should have folded them up into paper airplanes and flown them over the Detroit River to the FINCEN center in Detroit!!!
@Blaze, asking for the number of Canadian Citizens reported is brilliant because they will answer No Canadians were reported or they could not determine same.
We MUST force them to admit they are handing over their countrymen to a foreign power.
Grateful to you @Blaze for your perseverance and for asking all these questions and obtaining MP Dusseault’s assistance in asking them direct in Parliament.
Even if we don’t get answers, sometimes the fact that they didn’t answer substantively or redacted it is great to get on the record to show their deliberate obfuscation, misdirection or lack of that much touted TRANSPARENCY – a good stick to beat them with given their claims to; “Openness. Transparency. Fairness.
Making government work for Canadians.” http://www.liberal.ca/openness-and-transparency/
Re; “(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;……”
Mr. Raj Saini:
” I have just one final question.
What obligations, if any, do other countries, such as the United States and the U.K., have when it comes to protecting foreign data? How are these obligations created and monitored? Do we have some sort of comparison with other countries in terms of what our regime is like?” http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8188113#Int-8858423
Mr. Daniel Therrien:
“There are no formal international rules on these questions. All institutions, public and private, have an interest. To the extent that there’s legislation in these countries and in the countries you have mentioned, there are legal requirements to protect information. It’s a question of the legal regime that’s in place. In the U.S. there are provisions that require institutions to protect information properly.
It certainly could be part of an agreement between Canada and another state to ensure that once the data is sent to the other state, it is properly safeguarded. It’s a question of either national laws or potentially the content of an agreement reached between Canada and another state.”
And as to the portion the questions re what information was exchanged (see (n) to (s), if the Honourable MP Dusseault’s questions are answered, there may be fodder to compare with the statements on record by Privacy Commissioner Therrien, Revenue Minister Lebouthillier, and the CRA minions – unless of course the replies to the Order Q’s are also vague, redacted, withheld, etc…… much like we’ve come to expect.
Go Blaze!
And thank you.
@ George “….they called them “slips”, well they should have folded them up into paper airplanes and flown them over the Detroit River to the FINCEN center in Detroit!!!”
Do realize that your suggested delivery method is multiple times more secure than the CRA sending those “slips” electronically through “the internets” (a GW Bushism)? My preferred method would be to fold them into paper boats and float them over the river. My dream being that none of them would survive the weather and waves and then the CRA would just shrug and say, “Well we tried.”
re
“(r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and
(s) when did Canada receive the information?”
See most current US primary source proof for the CRA, Canadian MPs and countries with Model 1 IGAs that the US does NOT reciprocate under FATCA and cannot. As we know, and as experts such as Prof. Allison Christians has noted, FATCA never contemplated, and was NEVER designed for reciprocity and was never empowered to do so ( ex. What You Give and What You Get: Reciprocity Under a Model 1 Intergovernmental Agreement on FATCA, Allison Christians, McGill University – Faculty of Law, April 12, 2013 Cayman Fin. Rev. April 2013, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2292645 ).
Letter from Paul D. Ryan, Speaker, House of Representatives,
from Jacob Lew, Secretary of the US Treasury,
May 5, 2016
……..”……..Finally, we must ensure that the United States can live up to its end of the bargain on foreign tax reporting.”……..”currently, the United States does not provide its FATCA partners with the same information about U.S. financial institutions that foreign financial institutions must provide the IRS. This is because legislation is needed to require U.S. financial institutions to provide this additional level of detail. Reciprocity with other jurisdictions is a key component of any successful strategy for combatting international tax evasion and ensuring future collaboration with our partners overseas. The President has proposed providing full reciprocity under FATCA in his last three budgets. Congress should enact this proposal as soon as possible.”……..
As an aside, among numerous other significant points, Keith says in a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan, (commenting on the letter above, from Ryan to Lew):
“..Collectively, this is OUR Civil Rights Movement, and I respectfully ask you to address these serious issues which are devastating so many lives around the world…”
Bravo to Keith. This is indeed a Civil Rights Movement now.
Now I see this too:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Pub=NoticeOrder&File=9
Is this a new set of Order Questions from MP Dusseault?
Q-1072 — April 18, 2016 — Mr. Dusseault (Sherbrooke) — With regard to the exchange of information between Canada and the United States (US) under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA): (a) how many individuals were reported, in total and broken down by (i) Canadian citizens, (ii) permanent residents of Canada, (iii) temporary residents of Canada; (b) how many individuals were reported, broken down by (i) individuals with Canadian addresses, (ii) individuals with US addresses, (iii) individuals with addresses in other countries; (c) how many accounts were reported, in total and broken down by (i) bank accounts, (ii) credit union accounts, (iii) investment accounts, (iv) insurance accounts, (v) other types of accounts; (d) with respect to (c)(iii), what types of insurance accounts were reported; (e) with respect to (c)(v), what other types of accounts were reported; (f) of the accounts reported, how many were (i) under $50,000 US, (ii) between $50,000 and $1,000,000 US, (iii) over $1,000,000 US; (g) of the accounts reported, how many were (i) Registered Retirement Savings Account accounts, (ii) Registered Education Savings Account accounts, (iii) Registered Disability Savings Account accounts, (iv) Tax Free Savings Account accounts; (h) of the accounts reported, how many were held jointly with one or more non US persons, broken down by type of account and indicating the type of relationship between the joint account holder and the US person, if it is known; (i) how many accounts of organizations were reported to the IRS because a US person had signing authority, interest in, or other connection to the organization; (j) of the accounts that were reported, how many were (i) business accounts, (ii) professional accounts, (iii) charitable or non-profit organization accounts, (iv) connected to other organizations, broken down by type of organization; (k) what agency, organization, and individuals was the information provided to; (l) what measures were taken to ensure this information will not be provided to any other agency, organization, and individuals; (m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy; (n) how many records did Canada receive from the US, in total and broken down by (i) individuals who live in Canada, (ii) individuals who live in the US, (iii) individuals who live in other countries, broken down by country; (o) how many accounts did Canada receive information about; (p) what type of information was in the records Canada received; (q) did Canada receive information regarding (i) income from the accounts, (ii) total assets in accounts, (iii) account balances, (iv) transactions, deposits and withdrawals, (v) account numbers, (vi) names of account holders, (vii) Social Insurance Numbers, (viii) other related information; (r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and (s) when did Canada receive the information?
Publications – May 10, 2016 (Previous)
Order Paper and Notice Paper | Projected Order of Business
Tuesday, May 10, 2016 (No. 52)
Questions
@ badger
That’s a new set of questions from Mr. Dusseault and they are good ones too. They’re significantly different than his Q-35 questions. Looks like he submitted these 4 days after the epic failure of the ETHI 8 meeting (failure of the Revenue Minister and Privacy Commissioner, that is).
Guys, treasury will report “No Canadian Citizens were reported.”
Thats the dirty little secret and part of the problem. You guys do NOT exist in this alternative reality as Canadian!!
In my dialogue with haydon, it became clear and he saw it that we need as part of our multi-prong to reinforce that these in your case are Canadians resident in Canada being reported.
@Embee, I wish MP Dusseault was my MP. He deserves praise and thanks.
May the results make a lie out of the recent memorized by rote and regurgitated testimony of Mme. Diane Lebouthillier, Minister of National Revenue (with the assistance of her merry CRA minions who she and turned to, agape whenever she got stuck) http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2016/04/18/april-14-2016-canadian-parliament-ethi-standing-committee-on-access-to-information-privacy-ethics/ . What with her vast background experience in federal taxation, revenue, international treaties, etc. PLUS her demonstrated deep commitment to the wellbeing of ALL Canadians, we will be sure to get all the information that the Honourable MP Dusseault has requested – no problems right? Cause this is the ‘transparent’ government who pledged a new era of government transparency different from the Harper transparency, right? https://www.liberal.ca/petitions/call-on-parliament-to-pass-justin-trudeaus-transparency-act/
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/canada-saudi-arabia-arms-transparency-liberals-conservatives-neil-macdonald-1.3547714http://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/preston-manning-s-prescription-to-recharge-the-right-1.3463742/liberal-fiscal-plans-less-transparent-than-under-harper-kevin-page-says-1.3464078
And what with Minister Lebouthillier’s much touted “.. 23 years working with the clients of the Rocher Percé Health and Social Services Centre..”. can we expect that she will demonstrate informed commitment to the plight and financial health and data security of her fellow Canadians who are held in bondage by a foreign power – including the most vulnerable who are without the ability to renounce/relinquish due to being a minor, or being deemed legally incompetent based on certain disabilities) who she has committed to outing with her defense of the CON-LIB FATCA IGA?
How much of the FibbingLib answers to MP Dusseault’s questions will be either redacted or witheld under attorney client privilege?
@ badger
That’s a new set of questions from Mr. Dusseault and they are good ones too.
Thanks Badger. Note the question about RRSPs? New term?
Good questions from you too, @badger!
I don’t expect good answers will be given for Mr. D’s questions and everytime they do a do-si-do around revealing what they actually do and do not know, they reconfirm my low expectations.
Maybe a little reformatting will make it easier to read Q-1072 …
***************
Q-1072 — April 18, 2016 — Mr. Dusseault (Sherbrooke) — With regard to the exchange of information between Canada and the United States (US) under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA):
(a) how many individuals were reported, in total and broken down by
(i) Canadian citizens,
(ii) permanent residents of Canada,
(iii) temporary residents of Canada;
(b) how many individuals were reported, broken down by
(i) individuals with Canadian addresses,
(ii) individuals with US addresses,
(iii) individuals with addresses in other countries;
(c) how many accounts were reported, in total and broken down by
(i) bank accounts,
(ii) credit union accounts,
(iii) investment accounts,
(iv) insurance accounts,
(v) other types of accounts;
(d) with respect to (c)(iii), what types of insurance accounts were reported;
(e) with respect to (c)(v), what other types of accounts were reported;
(f) of the accounts reported, how many were
(i) under $50,000 US,
(ii) between $50,000 and $1,000,000 US,
(iii) over $1,000,000 US;
(g) of the accounts reported, how many were
(i) Registered Retirement Savings Account accounts,
(ii) Registered Education Savings Account accounts,
(iii) Registered Disability Savings Account accounts,
(iv) Tax Free Savings Account accounts;
(h) of the accounts reported, how many were held jointly with one or more non US persons, broken down by type of account and indicating the type of relationship between the joint account holder and the US person, if it is known;
(i) how many accounts of organizations were reported to the IRS because a US person had signing authority, interest in, or other connection to the organization;
(j) of the accounts that were reported, how many were
(i) business accounts,
(ii) professional accounts,
(iii) charitable or non-profit organization accounts,
(iv) connected to other organizations, broken down by type of organization;
(k) what agency, organization, and individuals was the information provided to;
(l) what measures were taken to ensure this information will not be provided to any other agency, organization, and individuals;
(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;
(n) how many records did Canada receive from the US, in total and broken down by
(i) individuals who live in Canada,
(ii) individuals who live in the US,
(iii) individuals who live in other countries, broken down by country;
(o) how many accounts did Canada receive information about;
(p) what type of information was in the records Canada received;
(q) did Canada receive information regarding
(i) income from the accounts,
(ii) total assets in accounts,
(iii) account balances,
(iv) transactions, deposits and withdrawals,
(v) account numbers,
(vi) names of account holders,
(vii) Social Insurance Numbers,
(viii) other related information;
(r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and
(s) when did Canada receive the information?
Nope, didn’t work … my indents for (i), (ii) … etc. didn’t survive the copy and paste … maybe calgary411 can fix that?
Not all of my re-formatting worked either (the tabs I put in did not transfer), EmBee. But perhaps it is a little easier to read.
@ calgary41
It’s much better. Thanks calgary411. You are THE quicker fixer upper … always there to help.
I submitted these questions to CRA in a formal Access to Informtion request in early Aoril. CRA advised me they needed to be in statement instead of question form, but rewrote them for me.
http://maplesandbox.ca/2016/dear-cra-please-provide/
Then a source (outside of the government) told me an ATI answer will only give me information that is already available. So, if CRA has not already compiled the data they are not required to do so in order to respond,
My source told me that if an MP asks for the information in an Order Paper, they are expected to reply. So, I immediately contacted Mr. Dusseault’s Assistant with the questions I submitted and asked him to request the information in Order Paper questions. He agreed to do this I did not realize the Order Paper had been submitted yet.
I understand the government has until September to reply because Parliament is not sitting for 45 days before they break for the summer.
It is now past the 30 days in which they should have replied to me, but they have not yet done so. My experience with other ATI requests is they will drag it out as long as possible, I will follow up. I am not optimistic we will get much of a response, but it is one more way of reminding them we are still here and we are still in the fight.
@ Blaze
Thank you!
(a) How many times have I said this to you?
(b) How many time will I say this in the future?
RE: perseverence
― Richelle E. Goodrich, Making Wishes: Quotes, Thoughts, & a Little Poetry for Every Day of the Year
“(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;”
This information is being transmitted to the IRS, right? 100% of it will be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy; and that’s assuming hackers don’t get their hands on it.
@Norman Yep. We know that. The Con Cons knew that. The Lib Cons know that. The NDP knows that. Finance and Revenue know that. U.s. Treasury and IRS know that.
They will lie again and tell us our data is secure.
But I included the question to let them know we know they are putting us at great risk of serious harm.
@Blaze, @Norman….they called them “slips”, well they should have folded them up into paper airplanes and flown them over the Detroit River to the FINCEN center in Detroit!!!
@Blaze, asking for the number of Canadian Citizens reported is brilliant because they will answer No Canadians were reported or they could not determine same.
We MUST force them to admit they are handing over their countrymen to a foreign power.
Grateful to you @Blaze for your perseverance and for asking all these questions and obtaining MP Dusseault’s assistance in asking them direct in Parliament.
Even if we don’t get answers, sometimes the fact that they didn’t answer substantively or redacted it is great to get on the record to show their deliberate obfuscation, misdirection or lack of that much touted TRANSPARENCY – a good stick to beat them with given their claims to; “Openness. Transparency. Fairness.
Making government work for Canadians.” http://www.liberal.ca/openness-and-transparency/
Re; “(m) what measures were taken to ensure that information transmitted will not be subject to identity theft, fraud, other criminal activities, or breach of privacy;……”
Therrien wasn’t at all specific or definitive when asked about the safeguards to transmitted FATCA data
at the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics
NUMBER 008, 1st SESSION, 42nd PARLIAMENT, EVIDENCE; Thursday, April 14, 2016
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8188113
See extract:
Mr. Raj Saini:
” I have just one final question.
What obligations, if any, do other countries, such as the United States and the U.K., have when it comes to protecting foreign data? How are these obligations created and monitored? Do we have some sort of comparison with other countries in terms of what our regime is like?”
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8188113#Int-8858423
Mr. Daniel Therrien:
“There are no formal international rules on these questions. All institutions, public and private, have an interest. To the extent that there’s legislation in these countries and in the countries you have mentioned, there are legal requirements to protect information. It’s a question of the legal regime that’s in place. In the U.S. there are provisions that require institutions to protect information properly.
It certainly could be part of an agreement between Canada and another state to ensure that once the data is sent to the other state, it is properly safeguarded. It’s a question of either national laws or potentially the content of an agreement reached between Canada and another state.”
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8188113#Int-8858425
And as to the portion the questions re what information was exchanged (see (n) to (s), if the Honourable MP Dusseault’s questions are answered, there may be fodder to compare with the statements on record by Privacy Commissioner Therrien, Revenue Minister Lebouthillier, and the CRA minions – unless of course the replies to the Order Q’s are also vague, redacted, withheld, etc…… much like we’ve come to expect.
Go Blaze!
And thank you.
@ George
“….they called them “slips”, well they should have folded them up into paper airplanes and flown them over the Detroit River to the FINCEN center in Detroit!!!”
Do realize that your suggested delivery method is multiple times more secure than the CRA sending those “slips” electronically through “the internets” (a GW Bushism)? My preferred method would be to fold them into paper boats and float them over the river. My dream being that none of them would survive the weather and waves and then the CRA would just shrug and say, “Well we tried.”
Better link to PDF for latest Questions from MP Dusseault;
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2016/parl/X4-421-42.pdf
42nd PARLIAMENT
FIRST SESSION
Order Paper
and
Notice Paper
No. 42
Tuesday, April 19, 2016
The one I posted earlier doesn’t work anymore.
re
“(r) what type of information did Canada receive that was not provided by the US prior to the FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement; and
(s) when did Canada receive the information?”
See most current US primary source proof for the CRA, Canadian MPs and countries with Model 1 IGAs that the US does NOT reciprocate under FATCA and cannot. As we know, and as experts such as Prof. Allison Christians has noted, FATCA never contemplated, and was NEVER designed for reciprocity and was never empowered to do so ( ex. What You Give and What You Get: Reciprocity Under a Model 1 Intergovernmental Agreement on FATCA, Allison Christians, McGill University – Faculty of Law, April 12, 2013 Cayman Fin. Rev. April 2013, http://ssrn.com/abstract=2292645 ).
See below, courtesy of Keith Redmond,
https://www.facebook.com/groups/AmericanExpatriates/permalink/599409483558461/
Letter from Paul D. Ryan, Speaker, House of Representatives,
from Jacob Lew, Secretary of the US Treasury,
May 5, 2016
……..”……..Finally, we must ensure that the United States can live up to its end of the bargain on foreign tax reporting.”……..”currently, the United States does not provide its FATCA partners with the same information about U.S. financial institutions that foreign financial institutions must provide the IRS. This is because legislation is needed to require U.S. financial institutions to provide this additional level of detail. Reciprocity with other jurisdictions is a key component of any successful strategy for combatting international tax evasion and ensuring future collaboration with our partners overseas. The President has proposed providing full reciprocity under FATCA in his last three budgets. Congress should enact this proposal as soon as possible.”……..
fulltext here;
https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10209426602571250&set=pcb.599409483558461&type=3&theater
As an aside, among numerous other significant points, Keith says in a letter to Speaker Paul Ryan, (commenting on the letter above, from Ryan to Lew):
“..Collectively, this is OUR Civil Rights Movement, and I respectfully ask you to address these serious issues which are devastating so many lives around the world…”
Bravo to Keith. This is indeed a Civil Rights Movement now.
Will any MP champion Canadian owned businesses burdened by FATCA reporting or FATCA compliance?
No level playing field if Canadian sited and owned businesses have FATCA burdens but US ones do not.
http://www.bdo.ca/en/Library/Services/Tax/pages/What-Canadian-Business-Owners-Need-to-Know-About-FATCA.aspx