A comment from Tim included:
I know some of you don’t want to hear it but I personally think we should back off the NDP for know. I am very confident at the end of the day they will be on our side as will the Greens. As difficult as it might seem lets take a breather on this front. Instead we should be turning our fire toward the Canadian Bankers Association and Maura Drew-Lytle and try to smoke out in the next month or two whether they have any pull to force Mulcair to switch stances on FATCA.
This in line with the post referenced in the following tweet:
Anti-#FATCA movement gains momentum – Time to protest Canadian banks – "Seize the day!" http://t.co/SfYfLtaMfv via @wordpressdotcom
— Stop FATCA (@StopFATCA) October 4, 2013
And if a FATCA IGA is not signed
This is anybody’s guess. But, what is clear is that:
If an IGA is not signed, FATCA will still be there and the individual banks must choose whether to obey U.S. law and inflict FATCA on Canadians.
The reporting requirements – Form 8938 remain intact.
Therefore, although it is helpful to defeat the FATCA IGA (and I believe this will eventually mean the repeal of FATCA), those opposed to FATCA must think ahead and think ahead now!
If the Government of Canada does not cave to FATCA by signing an IGA, then each bank will have to decide what to do.
What each bank president is probably thinking is:
“To FATCA or not to FATCA, that is the question
Whether tis better to betray Canada and all Candians for the purpose of obeying a U.S law.”
Therefore, the protests must be expanded beyond the Government of Canada . Each of Canada’s banks needs to feel FATCA Dissatisfaction from Canadians. The banks must be understood to be one of:
1. IRS Enabler and Deputy – will enforce FATCA for the IRS
2. Friend of Canadians – will NOT be FATCA compliant.
The policy of each bank must be understood. Organized (but legal) protests must take place against the banks. The people of Canada must understand that those which are “IRS Enabler/Deputies” are the enemies of Canada.
Organized protests against the banks must begin.
Closing anecdote:
TD Canada Trust is one of the biggest banks in the United States. In fact, the Boston Bruins and Boston Celtics play in the “TD Gardens”. It’s easy to see why the Canadian banks want a FATCA IGA.
It’s essential to begin targeting the banks and financial institutions!
The Ontario Human Rights Code could make it expensive for Canadian Banks to obey FATCA.
Start posting “FATCA fact sheets” on community bulletin boards in every mall, and as close as you can to banks.
One way to start a personal protest is to cancel all your accounts with Canadian chartered banks and move every cent you have into a local credit union, preferably one with assets under $175 million or whatever the FFI cutoff is for now. But to be safe, check with the credit union first, or at least open small accounts and see if they ask any questions about birthplace that they shouldn’t be asking, before moving. If so, try another credit union.
Expressing an opinion in a letter is one thing; actually moving your money is something they will pay more attention to, if it starts to happen on a large scale.
Then after you’ve switched, write the CEO of the bank and spell out for him/her what you did and why. And tell him/her you won’t be the last, if they don’t smarten up and stand by their own citizens.
I’d do this, but I closed all my chartered-bank accounts some time ago, mostly before FATCA. However I did get the hell out of every US-related mutual fund I had in my very small RRSP, and I told the account manager at the different brokerage firm that I’d done so in outrage over FATCA, stressing that I’m not a US person and that I’m still furious about this. So the message is sinking in, for some FFI staff out there anyway.
… further to bubblebustin’s suggestion which I saw after posting, maybe add to the FATCA sheet a suggestion that a credit union is an attractive alternative to a bank …
keep checking the board from time to time to make sure someone hasn’t taken your sheet down, and if they have, keep a re-stock supply handy 😎
I’m also writing at the top in fluorescent felt pen “IMPORTANT INFORMATION FOR AMERICANS LIVING IN CANADA”
@ bubblebustin
I’m about to refresh our local bulletin boards here again but it has been my experience that nothing stays up for very long at or near a bank (a couple of hours usually) or even outside the newspaper office. (Fair enough I guess since those are private properties but a couple of push-pin pricks couldn’t be considered vandalism and certainly the message is not hateful.) There is another strategy if you don’t mind bank surveillance cameras. Go inside and casually drop your information sheet off “by accident” at the desk where people fill out deposit slips. It might get picked up by a customer or handed to a bank clerk. If it gets read by either it’s all good. I don’t use the whole FATCA fact sheet, just my little 1/4 page ALERT sheet which directs people to Brock because there is often not enough room available for a full sheet on our bulletin boards (especially now with local elections looming). Maybe this all seems futile but if I can warn at least a few people it is worth the effort to me. Besides, it gets me out and about and away from the computer.
And another reminder @ All, please help Atticus with I-am-not-a-myth portraits for her Tumblr page — 6 is not enough. If someone as camera shy as I can do it, so can you.
@Em, AtticusinCanada
We’re pretty laid back here in our small community, which is why I haven’t taped one to my banks ATM machine – they’d recognize me in the camera surveillance.
I plan to forward a photo soon 🙂
To follow up on Schubert’s suggestion regarding Credit Unions, many, but not all CUs, post the latest financial statements on their websites. That’s a quick way to see a CU’s assets are over $175,000,000.
For now, FIs with assets under $175m are deemed compliant. Also deemed compliant are FIs with a local base of 98% or more. Some CUs with assets over the limit may qualify under that rule.
This is, of course, assuming Canada signs an IGA and it somewhat similar to the Model 1 agreement.
All I’m finding in BC are community credit unions over $1b. Anybody know of a credit union in British Columbia with assets under $175m nowadays? It seems like these buggers are making money hand over fist?
@ The_Animal
Try this. On page 3 it lists credit unions by their asset size (last quarter of 2012).
http://www.cucentral.ca/FactsFigures/top100-4Q12_19-Mar-13.pdf
Not much hope is there, for anyone living in the Fraser Valley. ~sigh~ Most if not all the credit unions in the Lower Mainland have assets over 200m.
This is probably an odd question but I was looking up chartered banks and ran across the information that Alberta’s ATB is not chartered and is solely regulated by the province, what does that mean for it and FATCA? Does the province have to have an IGA agreement with the USG on its own? Would the federal IGA cover an unchartered bank?
The province is luring a lot of American workers here and I have yet to see any warnings about tax filings or off-shore accounts of any kind and if basically having its own bank puts it in the position of having to negotiate with the USG about FATCA – is the finance minister or MLA’s here worth contacting?
posted previously
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/07/16/canadian-bankers-association-maura-drew-lytle-responds-to-the-isaac-brock-society/comment-page-5/#comment-531631
What about thinking in terms of a protest in Toronto aimed at the banking industry rather than government?
Here’s a possibility:
http://regulatorycomplianceforfis.com/
Hear from OSFI, FINTRAC, FCAC and the Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
November 13-14 2013
Conference Venue: Metro Toronto Convention Centre, North Building
Address: 255 Front St W Toronto, ON M5V 2W6
Attend The Canadian Institute’s 19th Annual Regulatory Compliance for Financial Institutions conference and gain key strategies to manage the rapidly evolving global regulatory landscape by:
Establishing a plan to meet OSFI’s new corporate governance requirements
Preparing for regulatory changes to the Anti-Money Laundering regime
Understanding the risks of non-compliance with the Canadian Anti-Spam Legislation (CASL)
Implementing customized social media and Bring Your Own Device (BYOD) policies
Identifying risk mitigation strategies for seamless adoption of new technologies
Adopting compliance solutions to address challenges with emerging payments and new card systems
Navigating the hurdles preventing you from achieving compliance with FATCA
And much more
Hear from all 5 big banks in Canada and others including:
CIBC ● TD Bank ● Scotiabank ● AMEX Bank of Canada ● Travelers ● Manulife Financial ● ATB Financial ● RBC Law Group ● BMO Financial Group ● JPMorgan Chase Bank ● HSBC Financial Canada
(don’t think I can insert his picture in a comment)
David Goodis
Director of Legal Services
and General Counsel
Information and Privacy Commissioner of Ontario
What I am concerned about is whether the banks will be following the $50,000 “de minimis” limit recommended by the IRS; if the balance of the account is greater than $50,000, search for the US indica. If US indica is present, then ask for the Social Security Number and for the account holder to waive his rights to privacy.
If so, then one could remain with one of the big five banks and avoid FATCA; just keep the portfolio balance under $50,000 and you are treated as a compliant account. I have heard that some banks outside Canada will be ignoring the $50,000 “de minimis” limit and searching for US indica on all accounts due to technology limitations. I hope that none of the big five adopt this methodology; it would seem senseless to do so, as it would cost more to screen all the accounts.
@Tricia
That’s a great idea! I wish I lived in Toronto (not really).
@Cerium398
“I hope that none of the big five adopt this methodology; it would seem senseless to do so, as it would cost more to screen all the accounts.”
The opposite is the case. Banks do not store customer static data (e.g. US indicia) on the same systems where current account information (e.g. balances) are stored. In order to link that information, complex and expensive(!) interfaces would be required. Without some other compelling reason, no bank will bother to do this. (Note that accounts < $50K may be reported, accounts > $50K must be reported.)
I saw this in an IBS post on or about July 17, 2012.
A Canadian high court decision (Van deMark vs. TD Bank 1989) established two relevant principles:
(1) In a conflict of laws, Canadian law has primacy over the law of a foreigh jurisdiction where the bank also does business.
(2) Canadian banks may not act as foreign revenue collectors or enforcers.
Here’s links to some comments made on Van deMark, 16-17 July 2012, a WSJ blog article, and the High Court of Justice decision.
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/07/16/canadian-bankers-association-maura-drew-lytle-responds-to-the-isaac-brock-society/comment-page-1/#comment-35898
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/07/16/canadian-bankers-association-maura-drew-lytle-responds-to-the-isaac-brock-society/comment-page-1/#comment-35898
http://blogs.wsj.com/privateequity/2012/06/14/fatca-the-irs-very-big-stick/
http://uniset.ca/other/cs6/68OR2d379.html
The $50,000 de minimis is likely to be followed by major FIs because they can afford the more complex IT systems. Likely, it will only be smaller FIs who will not find it cost effective to sort out who or who is not above the $50,000 limit.
For those interested in putting their savings in a smaller Credit Union, a person can open an account at a Credit Union some distance away and use the Inter Credit Union service to do their banking through another Credit Union more conveniently located. Most CUs also have online banking.
For those in Ottawa, I believe the Women’s Credit Union has under 175 mill assets.
@Hazy
I’ve yet to encounter a bank which does anything just because they can “afford” it. 😉
TomOn,
Wondering gave an informative comment that Canadian decision: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/relinquishment/comment-page-13/#comment-558670
and “money” on http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2013/08/01/td-waterhouse-begins-fatca-hunt-let-the-expatriation-games-begin/comment-page-2/#comment-464527
@ The Animal
Check out the North Shore Credit Union. I read an interview of the management a few years back and got the impression that they are keeping assets and data storage out of the US. If they got locked out of the US markets, it would not affect them. I think they probably have a large client base of expat Iranians who have trouble sending gifts to their extended families back home. I’m not sure that kind of program would survive a full on FATCA assault, but its interesting.
For what it is worth, Credit Union Central of Canada is intensely interested in FATCA. A search on their website (http://www.cucentral.ca/) for “FATCA” turns up 270 hits. All of these, so far as I can tell, are restricted to members of the Central.
On their home page, if you place your cursor over “Policy & advocacy”, you will find five links. Of these, the only one password protected is on FATCA. Clearly they are talking among themselves and do not want outsiders (i.e. people like us) to listen in on the discussions.
Thanks, David, I’ll check them out and see.
@northernshrike, it is clearly too dangerous to let ordinary Canadian voters, taxpayers, citizens, residents and account holders know about what is transpiring. Better that they should just be blindsided and obey or be eaten.
Though I find it disappointing that credit unions who are made up of members with shares in a cooperative venture are not publicizing FATCA. The banks I can see – they do what is best for themselves, and devil take their accountholders always – nothing new there. I would never make the mistake of thinking that the CBA has any scruples about the interests of US person accountholders or their families. They only care if they’ll get sued and maybe lose. In any case, better a credit union than a bank.
I did speak with someone from one of the large credit unions, and they were interested in what I had to say. Which is more than I can say for two large Canadian pension plans – who were distinctly chilly about my questions – and the suggestion that they owed their plan members at least a heads up re the potential for inclusion in FATCA. In fact, I got more information from reading one of their anti-FATCA submission letters available on the internet, than they were willing to provide in answer to my questions. But they were both happy to proactively send me forms that I didn’t ask for or require – and when I asked why they were sent to me, they said it was just in case I wanted to cash out of the plan (prematurely – thus creating an even more complex Canadian AND US tax mess). I guess they couldn’t actually kick out their US person plan members, of which there must be many, but they could hope that I’d opt to exit on my own and potentially spare them the trouble of answering my questions or urging them to issue a newsletter update on FATCA – to alert all of their ‘US taxable person’ members – whose interests I thought was their fiduciary duty.