Update on my previously buried comment from information I received from Terry McBride, Saskatoon, SK’s The StarPhoenix. I am moving this to its own post. There is input here from James Jatras, including the comment:
This hits the nail right on the head. Now that the Republican Party has officially endorsed FATCA repeal, momentum is shifting. National governments should not sign IGAs and subject themselves to an American law that even the US Department of Justice admits has no legal authority over them, and can only be backed up with the threat of reprisal — the 30% sanction. Most of all, Mr. Green is right, institutions that stand to save a lot of money if FATCA is repealed have the ability to affect the outcome: “The prospect of FATCA’s repeal is quite realistic. If institutions help educate and inform the American public and Congress, there’s a good chance Fatca can be delayed and perhaps – I hope – eventually repealed.” If banks, credit union, pension funds, stock and hedge funds, spent a tiny fraction of the money they’d spend for FATCA compliance on securing its repeal, that goal is achievable.
We’ve also seen Allison Christians’ input to a letter to Justin Trudeau, Canadian Liberal Leader:
It is one thing for the USA to say to individuals across the planet: if you have status under our law you must follow all of our laws no matter where you are. It is another thing entirely for Canada as a nation to voluntarily, with no compensation except the conditional promise of removal of a threat of economic sanctions, assist the United States in globally rounding people up to force them to comply with its patently untenable and unjustifiable position. Such assistance fundamentally conflicts with a universally recognized (and far more just) jurisdictional claim based on actual residence, which Canada practices along with the rest of the world.