Posted on July 3, 2014 by Patricia Moon Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 25 Comments Updated video link here John Richardson on Global News Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:Like Loading...
Here is a direct link to the video clip:
I drives me nuts how just about every media report and blog lists the “less than $175M in assets” exemption for credit unions, but not the “local client base” exemption, which is much more useful, IMO.
Expect the wave of OMG moments to far exceed the one in 2011. The renunciation lines are about to get much longer. Time to allow for mass renunciations.
This is an OMG moment for me. The mass media has caught on and is sensationalizing it one top of that!
Where was this media rush when it really really mattered?? Now law, very hard to get it undone, unless the agreement is deemed illegal….
It’s about time. Really nothing more to say.
Hope this has massive EFFECT.
Too bad they can’t get it right. The news sensationalized the story by saying banks have to ask where you were born and possibly where your parents were born . They are not supposed to ask either. I realize some are asking where you were born . Don’t answer-file a complaint.
I heard FATCA on CBC 10:00 news last evening — the had a statement about the so-called exemption of registered accounts. I can’t, though, find a link on CBC.
Absolutely, NativeCanadian!!! Our Canadian media (save a few pieces from good journalists here and there) was negligent in getting this story out to the Canadian public. It is a day late and a dollar short, as much as we appreciate it and the media’s references to our “entirely obscene now need to raise money for a Constitutional Challenge”.
Now that we see the media stepping it up, I hope and pray they will keep the issue alive. There are still too many potential individuals and families (US collateral damage) that don’t know or don’t take any of this as seriously as they should. I think this media complicity angers me as much as Conservatives hiding in omnibus Bill C-31 implementation of the FATCA IGA (which was signed behind closed doors, only the banks privy to what was going on). Just not acceptable — our government not standing up for its people, including the most vulnerable — and the media not reporting that fact. I have NO GOVERNMENT REPRESENTATION in Alberta — my representation was from MPs from other provinces — bless their common sense and hard work, all to little avail with a majority Harper government by management!
Any gagging of the media just should not be acceptable — when they are at the same time reporting distractions and we all know what those have been. It is entirely why we are not believed!!!!
was just sitting down to dinner with my wife last nite when we saw this piece.
i was glad to finally see it on global but i too had the thought as others here that it was a day late and dollar short.
oh well at least it is becoming a mainstream news story…..lets hope it will continue to gather steam from here and carry over to the 2015 election and wipes the cons out.
Thanks for posting this, Tricia! Let the Revolution begin!
Re: the sensationalism. I’m thrilled! It’s about time the blood of Canadians got stirred up about this! If it takes some sensationalism, then great! From the posts on the thread about questions being asked at the banks (and credit unions) it appears that all sorts of questions that they don’t have to ask are, indeed, being asked anyway. Depends on the institution. No “thou shalts” or “thou shalt nots” from the government so it’s open season on us.
Going by my own fathers views I’m not hopeful of anything changing. My pop lives in the US and doesn’t understand what is wrong with FATCA. Believe me I have tried to explain and printed out the best info to show him. He thinks it a good idea to finally ‘catch the tax cheaters’. He did manage to understand why I relinquished, but overall he fully supports FATCA and has this ingrained vision of 1,000’s of traitorous tax cheats being frog marched to prison. From our perspective we see things crystal clear and think others will also see this.. but folks like my father are set in their ways and tend to have blind faith in government to do what is right. Pretty crazy.
FATCA would be a whole lot easier to take if the US taxed on residency. It would be a lot easier for the banks to implement it too. CBT might actually turn out be FATCA’s Achilles Heel.
Once upon a time, the Colonists were unpaid ambassadors for the British. Once upon a time #Americansabroad were ambassadors for the homeland.
I wonder if in the 1700s the British viewed the Colonists as “traitorous tax cheats” and saw nothing wrong with the British attitude toward the Colonists.
If the British hadn’t abused the Colonists, would they still have their empire?
Global says that IRS are only interested in the “big fish, accounts over $50,000”. So every retired grandma or grandpa with a savings account. Where is the outrage?
You`re absolutely right, Petros. What an outrageous, dumb statement by Global!!!
It just makes FATCA sound even more demented.
@Petros, you’re right re the lack of outrage, and critical perspective re; “the “big fish, accounts over $50,000″”…
How many of those at Global would not hope to have at least that much after a lifetime of work to help pay for their longtermcare etc.? And what of someone who scrimped in order to save it? Or sold their house?
Ironically, those MPs and the US officials and politicians who are making these rules likely have a great deal more than that.
Petros and badger,
Damn, I have saved more than $50,000 in the Canadian Registered Disability Savings Plan that I HOLD of my *so-called US-citizen* son. Of course one MP (I suspect Conservative) said that no one with a `development disability` would have that amount in any account anyway.
Well, my son does have a little more than that in the RDSP I hold for him (and from which he will be able to collect benefits from in about 20 years, with monthly contributions made by me and by the Canadian government and Canadian taxpayer, that will hopefully make that account on his behalf grow substantially from the $50,000 account a Canadian MP says he should never have in the first place).
In the meantime, I have paid US taxes because of that RDSP which the US considers a `FOREIGN TRUST` (despite Conservative MP Gerald Keddy`s statement that RESPs and RDSPs are not taxable by the US). Of course all FOREIGN TRUSTS = criminal behaviour in the eyes of the USA IRS.
@Petros, I clearly remember thinking ‘WTF?’ when I heard that comment about the 50K accounts also. I’m far from rich, but sold my house a couple years ago ( from which I barely recovered what I put into it), but as a result of paying the mortgage for many years, I have more than 50K in the bank. That makes me a rich tax cheat apparently.
“burn the witch”,.i’m a ginger, and have black cats, so it must be true.
The whole problem with the $50,000 figure is that it is aggregate, not per account. If you have 3 accounts at the same bank with $20k each, guess what?
Yes, and this is why I no longer deal with just one FFI. I feel like a squirrel hiding nuts. I hope I can remember where I put them all. They need to last a long time!
I wonder how many lunch room conversations in the bank branches recently, have included talks about the rush of people opening <50K accounts. I'm sure I haven't been the only one. And every time I did it, I got the, 'well we'd like you to move ALL your business here'. Yeah, no thanks, just tell me when I get close to going over 50K.
Of course, all this could change (no 50K limit, must show proof of non-US person tattoo), and it won't matter where I hid my piddly pile of nuts anyway.
“Of course all FOREIGN TRUSTS = criminal behaviour in the eyes of the USA IRS.”
The US CBT supporters like Michael Kirsch http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/2013/11/defending-citizenship-based-taxation.html and the IRS and US government have yet to explain how those deemed legally incompetent and thus specifically prevented by US law from renouncing due to a deemed insufficiency of capability to understand the concept of ‘citizenship’ and thus make an informed decision to give up inherited US status, can nevertheless be deemed to have the necessary understanding and capacity to be held responsible for knowing and complying with the US tax and financial reporting regime.
This applies to minors prevented from renouncing as well, as they are assumed to lack sufficient capacity.
It is ridiculous for the IRS to state as it does that CHILDREN abroad should be reporting their deemed ‘foreign trusts’ such as RESPs on FBARs and the like. If their parent is NOT a US citizen (and so has NO legal obligation to the US), then I fail to see how the IRS could argue that regardless, US law imposes the reporting duty on the parent or legal guardian. And, if one is deemed by the law to be incompetent to understand citizenship, then it is ludicrous to consider willfulness or non-willfulness, etc.
And, it was indeed a Conservative MP who dismissed any of my stated and proven concerns about the US extraterritorial taxation of Canadians with disabilities on their RDSPs and disability benefits (as well as minors on their RESPs) by stating that very few would ever have 50,000., and so refused to address the issues, and the irresponsible and negligent state of the Canada US tax treaty which does not exempt these registered savings and benefits and grants from being preyed upon by the US from afar.
We are lucky to have such able spokespersons being featured in interviews and in articles.