Thursday, 27 March 2014 from 6:00 PM to 9:00 PM
Burlington Public Library – Holland Room
2331 New St
Burlington, ON L7R 1J4
On February 5, Canada signed an Intergovernmental Agreement with the United States concerning the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. This will enable the US to receive enhanced financial information Continue reading
I have been trying for months to educate people about FATCA at Garth Turner’s blog which focuses on the Canadian housing market, as well as investing. It has been a frustrating exercise. I am either ignored, or told to go find a FATCA blog somewhere to complain. After staying away for awhile, I could not resist today, when Garth wrote a post called ‘F’, especially since there were a couple anti-FATCA comments already there, which surprised me since I have never seen anyone dis FATCA there before (one was from BCDoc who referenced isaacbrock, YAY BCDoc).
Unfortunately, after I posted my comment, I got the usual negative feedback. Keep in mind this is a Canadian blog, frequented by Canadians, and yet rarely have I ever received a supportive reply. This makes me very sad.
Here is the link to Garth’s post about ‘F’: http://www.greaterfool.ca/2014/03/18/
Obama Bypasses Congress to Foist “Imperialist” Tax Plot on World
As part of a fiendish effort known as FATCA supposedly aimed at extracting an extra billion or so dollars from U.S. taxpayers each year, the Obama administration is bypassing Congress to impose a far-reaching new tax regime on the world, and domestically on the United States. Experts and analysts say the scheme could destabilize the U.S. financial system and potentially even spark another economic crisis due partly to executive-branch mandates on American banks; yet the IRS and the U.S. Treasury are moving full-speed ahead in spite of major concerns raised by lawmakers and others over their authority to do so. Critics are referring to the whole plot as “fiscal imperialism.”
The following email was sent to my MP, Scott Armstrong, signed with my real name:
Dear Mr. Armstrong;
In 1958, my Canadian parents crossed the US border and attended the nearest “maternity home” where I was born before we all returned home to Canada. Since that time, I have never lived, worked or voted in the US. I have always lived, worked, voted and paid taxes in Canada. I also bank here, where I continue to live.
As someone who has voted for you in the past, I would request that you answer the following questions, the answers to which will determine if I ever vote for you again:
1. Do you consider me to be a Canadian who was born in the US, or a “US person” who lives in Canada?
2. Based on the fact I am Canadian, have always lived and worked in Canada, and do all my banking here in Canada where I live, do you consider my bank accounts “offshore” and the business of any foreign government?
3. According to the Master Nationality Rule, a Canadian living in Canada is only Canadian. Do you believe this, or do you believe that a Canadian living in Canada can also be American or Eritrean, and thus be subject to the laws of those nations while in Canada?
4. Do you believe that might makes right (i.e. that the US can do what it wants inside Canada, because of its might, but Eritrea is not allowed to do the same thing) or that Canada should stand against all foreign marauders?
5. Do you support the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and its guarantees to protect people from unlawful search and seizure and to not be discriminated against based on national origin?
6. Do you support the FATCA IGA, which assists the IRS in a fishing expedition which, while allegedly aimed at tax cheats, will actually result in a massive by-catch of honest, law-abiding Canadians (and we know what becomes of the by-catch on a fishing expedition)?
7. If you answered “yes” to 5 and 6 above, how do you reconcile that, considering that the IGA violates the protections guaranteed in the Charter?
8. Do you honestly believe that there will ever be reciprocity, when all the US is promising to do is “to pursue legislation to provide reciprocity” or do you accept that Canada will get nothing from this except to maintain the status quo (i.e. avoid economic sanctions)?
9. Do you believe that Canada is a sovereign country, and should not acquiesce to the extortionist demands of foreign powers?
10. Would the Conservative government be so quick to sign an IGA that violated the Charter rights of any other group except “US persons”, or is the political calculus that Americans are unpopular enough that trampling on their rights will have little political fallout?
11. When the enabling legislation for FATCA is tabled, do you intend to support it or to take a stand for Canadian sovereignty and the Charter rights of all Canadians?
Thanking you in advance for your prompt reply.
Canadian Cop
Today’s TED Talks (from Vancouver, Canada) is worth a listen. What Edward Snowden says about the internet, pertains and resonates for me re FATCA:
It too bothers me so much for people to say “if you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to worry about.” You’re giving up your rights! You’re saying “I don’t think I’m going to need them — “these guys” are going to do the right thing.” I agree that: Your rights matter because you never know when you’re going to need them. They should not be taken away without due process.
Privacy — What does it matter?
IMPORTANT UPDATE: Here’s the explanation to the “secret court” reference: How a Court Secretly Evolved, Extending U.S. Spies’ Reach” by CHARLIE SAVAGE and LAURA POITRAS, NY Times, MARCH 11, 2014
and here’s a link to the: TED talk video, including transcript
Many interesting points, among them:
Who I am (Edward Snowden) doesn’t matter at all.
We don’t have to give up our privacy to have good government.
Is it really “Terrorism” we’re stopping? Or is it that justification provokes an emotional response? (Just as justification of FATCA as the term “Tax Evasion” provokes an emotional response.)
Re NSA “Boundless Information terminology” and how much interception: NSA says to tell you that would invade your privacy.
More communications are being intercepted by the NSA in America about Americans than in Russia about Russians.
Related: Debates: Does the NSA mass surveillance program violate privacy and due process?
Or some ask: Does Edward Snowden even exist?
Please have a look at:
RTS Article in French: McCain and Levin call for extradition of Swiss Bankers.
La lettre souligne que le traité d’extradition helvético-américain n’oblige pas la Suisse à extrader des citoyens ayant uniquement aidé à éviter les impôts. Le DoJ devrait cependant essayer d’obtenir la collaboration de la Suisse, réclament les sénateurs.
The letter emphasizes that the Swiss-American extradition treaty doesn’t oblige Switzerland to extradite citizens who only helped [some person/entity?] to avoid tax. The DoJ should nonetheless attempt to obtain the collaboration of Switzerland, insist the Senators.
Well, I don’t think the Senators have read the Swiss Federal Constitution.
If aforesaid “bankers” are Swiss citizens they cannot be extradited unless they consent.
Art. 25 Protection contre l’expulsion, l’extradition et le refoulement
1 Les Suisses et les Suissesses ne peuvent être expulsés du pays; ils ne peuvent être
remis à une autorité étrangère que s’ils y consentent.Article 25 Protection against expulsion, extradition, refusal of entry at the border 1 Swiss [citizens] cannot be expelled from the country; they cannot be handed over to foreign authorites unless they consent.
Levin, McCain… are you inciting more treason on the part of the Swiss Federal Council? You should be ashamed of yourselves. Respect the Constitution of Switzerland as you should respect your own.
Finance Minister Jim Flaherty resigns from cabinet http://t.co/uKfAL1H6uI Is it due to #FATCA #IGA
— USExpatCanada (@USExpatCanada) March 18, 2014
As we have been saying for a long time, ‘DATCA lite’ (FATCA IGA reciprocity) has the potential to be financially destabilizing. It, along with GATCA, was birthed from FATCA. DATCA and GATCA are the direct progeny of the 2010 Hire Act. Given the stealth nature of the FATCA amendment, is very hard to make a case that this was the intention of Congress, but it is now the ‘Rosemary’s Baby‘ reality that we are dealing with.
See this new article by Alex Newman.
A crucial component of the widely criticized new addition to the U.S. tax regime known as FATCA, passed by Democrats and signed by Obama in 2010 as part of a “jobs” bill, could result in massive capital flight from American banks and economic devastation if efforts to stop it are unsuccessful, experts and policymakers are warning. With the U.S. economy still teetering, some analysts are even suggesting that allegedly unlawful IRS mandates purporting to force American financial institutions to report foreign account holders to their governments could be the straw that breaks the proverbial camel’s back.
For a complete history of DATCA evolution and its opposition in Congress, read more here.
Of important note, is this addition I just made. It is the analysis from 2004 which merits your attention.
Mercatus Center at George Mason University
Treasury had tried before FATCA IGAs (going back to 2002) to impose a DATCA regime, but didn’t happen until it had an Administration in power to its liking. I didn’t realize this history, until this pdf analysis was sent to me recently. It just goes to show, that bad ideas have a long gestation period, and vigilance against them can NEVER be relaxed.
UBS offshore Tax evasion scandal and the birth of FATCA obviously (at least to me) were the “Shock Doctrine” moments that gave the Treasury its opportunity again, to impose DATCA lite unilaterally by their interpretation of ‘regulatory authority’ without regard to the will of Congress.
One of the criticisms lodged against using Federal Register page counts as a proxy for regulatory burden holds that many pages can be consumed in the process of deregulation, while only a handful of pages may be required to impose a particularly costly rule. The latter instance is clearly illustrated by the IRS’s proposed rule to require the reporting of deposit interest paid to nonresident alien (NRA) depositors of U.S. depositories. I hold this conclusion despite the IRS’s unsupported assertion in the scant (4 page) documentation of its proposed rule that the “proposed rulemaking is not a significant regulatory action as defined in Executive Order 12866.” (p. 50387).
Although proposed in 2002, and the comment period has long since passed, the NRA deposit interest reporting rule has not been finalized; however, the possibility that it may be implemented provides the motivation for this study. The analysis that follows confines itself to the likely economic consequences of the rule, and leaves the legal and political analysis of the rule to others.2 For ease of exposition, I summarize my analysis of the rule’s potential economic effects into primary effects, secondary effects, and other likely consequences.
I will update my timeline of DATCA to include this as an earlier start date, as my start date only begins at my moment of awareness of what was happening.
Domain Name News – U.S. Government to Transition Domain Name Functions http://t.co/PPLzRubQyg via @webnames – Could only be good news
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) March 18, 2014
The World Today hour 4, starts at 3:10.
McComb’s March 5 interview with Petros is available here.
