110 thoughts on “Notice of Meeting of Standing Committee on Finance #34 Tuesday May 13”

1. or perhaps what we are even more famous for, “inflammatory” language. LOL!

2. Today the Moscow Times writes that Russian Deputy Finance Minister Alexei Moiseyev said;
   “….. Russia will not become “tax agents for the Americans, that will not happen under any circumstances,” Interfax reported.”… May. 22 2014 http://www.themoscowtimes.com/news/article/russia-mulls-limitations-on-information-exchange-with-us-under-fatca/500669.html

   And the late Canadian Finance Minister Flaherty originally took the position that FATCA FFI reporting requirements would; “… turn Canadian banks into extensions of the IRS and would raise significant privacy concerns for Canadians.”http://business.financialpost.com/2011/09/16/read-jim-flahertys-letter-on-americans-in-canada/

   I see those position statements in stark contrast to the US Treasury collaborationist Conservative MPs in Canada who voted for the FATCA IGA and who appear to be more eager and committed to professing their ‘respect’ for the US ‘right’ to extraterritorially tax anyone it wants to in Canada more than they profess or demonstrate any ‘respect’ for our own Charter and Constitutional rights. The FATCA apologists also include those from Canada’s Ministry of Finance appearing before FINA to defend the FATCA IGA.

   Contrast the positions taken by Flaherty and Moiseyev against FATCA with that of the Canadian FATCAfriends appearing recently before FINA (like the CBA and the Ministry of Finance) who continue to mischaracterize the FATCA IGA as ‘only’ “information sharing” (ex. “The IGA is strictly an information-sharing agreement….” http://www.fin.gc.ca/n14/data/14-018_1-eng.asp ) and not a ‘US tax’ measure, and not part of imposing or assisting with imposing and enforcing (logically with the eventual aim of collecting) US extraterritorial taxation on Canadian citizens and residents. I got the impression from what Prof Christians said to the committee that the FATCA IGA automatic and mass information reporting aspect via the CRA is part of the continuum that would constitute ‘assistance in collection’ which the ‘revenue rule’ precludes? The purpose of the ‘revenue rule’ described thus; “..a major rationale for the development and retention of the rule was to ensure the preservation of a nation’s sovereignty. In the words of one commentator, “domestic recognition of foreign laws and judgments ceases at the point where enforcement of a foreign claim would allow a foreign government, directly or indirectly, to collect foreign taxes from the domestic tax base.”86…” (from CANADIAN TAX JOURNAL (2012) 60:2, 305 – 54 305 ‘FATCA and FBAR Reporting by Individuals: Enforcement Considerations from a Canadian Perspective’ by
   Andrew Bonham https://www.ctf.ca/ctfweb/EN/Publications/CTJ_Contents/2012CTJ2.aspx ).

   The Canadian Ministry of Finance describes the FATCA IGA as intended to; “…. assist each in administering its own domestic tax laws.” ( ‘Backgrounder: Intergovernmental Agreement for the Enhanced Exchange of Tax Information under the Canada-U.S. Tax Convention’).

   I also cannot see that US lawyer Roy Berg can defend his assertion ( http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/lynne-swanson-appointed-chief-jingo-4-canada-on-fatca-hyperbolic-rhetoric/ ) that Canadians like Lynne, who quite correctly raise the serious issue of the inexcusable affront to Canada’s sovereignty in the context of opposition to the FATCA IGA are engaging in “hyperbole” and “jingoism” ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jingoism ) when they protest. A nation’s sovereignty is at the root of the principle of the ‘revenue rule’. If the FATCA IGA is on the continuum of assistance in collection – in contradiction to that longstanding common law principle, then it is logical to protest FATCA as an affront and unwarranted intrusion of the US – by force and threat – into Canadian jurisdiction and the Canadian fisc and economy – and into the homes of Canadian families.

   In fact, see the definition of ‘jingoism’, which “… also refers to a country’s advocation of the use of threats or actual force against peaceful relations, either economic or political, with other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one’s own country as superior to others—an extreme type of nationalism.”

   I would say that the extortionate actions of the US via FATCA fits the description above of ‘jingoism’ as “…a country’s advocation of the use of threats or actual force against peaceful relations, either economic or political, with other countries in order to safeguard what it perceives as its national interests. Colloquially, it refers to excessive bias in judging one’s own country as superior to others—an extreme type of nationalism.”” And thus, anyone who defends the imposition of the US FATCA on other countries are themselves engaging in jingoism and extreme US nationalism – to the direct detriment of Canada and Canadians.

3. @ badger
   Another home run for you. All countries should have stood firm against the FATCA monster years ago when it first reared its ugly head. Canada could have done but didn’t so now we look to Russia to bop the beast on its head or at least finger flick its forehead.

   And regarding your “jingoism” comments. I wish you were a tweetie and could somehow get that into 140 characters to tweet off to Roy Berg. Someone needs to flip him the bird after his arrogant comment before the FINA committee.

4. Blaze with Badger’s inspiration took up the Roy Berg twitter challenge. Brilliant!

   @RoyBerg1 “2 object 2 #FATCA is our duty” http://bit.ly/1jaPZWV “Freedom of speech, duty 2 participate politically and economically”

   @RoyBerg1 “appears deeply hypocritical 2 criticize long-time Cdn citizen deeply rooted in Canada” against #FATCA http://bit.ly/1jaPZWV

   @RoyBerg1 See definition of “jingoism” http://bit.ly/1jaPZWV “We r attempting 2 safeguard our country” from US #FATCA threats.

5. @Em: Last week I tweeted Mr. Berg asking:

   Retweeted by STOP FATCA
   Lynne Swanson ‏@LynneBlaze May 15

   @RoyBerg1 Was my “jingoistic, hyperbolic rhetoric” on #FATCA? good enough 4 u? http://bit.ly/1gEThll
   We r Canadians http://bit.ly/1g8nEWb

   Inspired by Mr. Berg, Outraged Canadian promoted me to Chief Jingo of Canada. I am thrilled and honoured to accept the position.

   http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/lynne-swanson-appointed-chief-jingo-4-canada-on-fatca-hyperbolic-rhetoric/

   .

6. Looks like we’ll have to wait until next week for transcripts from the May 13th and 14th FINA meetings. Funny (not so much) how Dave Van Kesteren questioned John Richardson about US citizenship and its value but there were no questions for Roy Berg in this regard. Roy Berg is an American living in Canada, NOT a Canadian. He came to Canada from the USA about 3 years ago to take advantage of the anticipated surge in people needing high-priced help to become US tax compliant. FATCA might be a bust for his clients but its been a boon to him and Moodys-Gartner. Even if he wanted Canadian citizenship he would still have a long wait for that to happen.

7. The transcript for the May 13 meeting has just been posted:
   http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6597204&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2
   Witnesses:
   Allison Christians
   Marc-André Pigeon
   Roy Berg
   Ian Russell
   Arthur Cockfield
   Ralf Hensel
   Katie Walmsley
   Lynne Swanson
   Max Reed

8. Deport Roy Berg!

9. Roy Berg — FATCA carpetbagger

10. I should have posted this http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2014/05/08/cross-post-canadians-give-your-fatca-briefs-to-finance-committee/comment-page-3/#comment-1848182 here instead.