[We now have a NEW POST taking us up to February 1, 2015. This post will be retired from service.]
THE AUTUMN 2014 UPDATE
Dear Donors,
Together, we reached our goal of $100,000 to pay the November 1 legal bill 11 days ahead of schedule!
Thank you Canadian donors from coast to coast and our friends from around the world for your generosity, support and determination — and especially for not being afraid.
The name of our non-profit corporation is the “Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.”
We were very deliberate in including in our name the word “sovereignty”, which forms a cornerstone of our Claims against the Government of Canada.
Canada and dozens of other countries throughout the world gave into a bully because their “leaders” were afraid of harm caused by a trading “partner” — and they gave their sovereignties away.
Help us convince by example the Leaders and Governments of all countries worldwide that they should return their sovereignties back to their Peoples.
Please continue to support our lawsuit.
“Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much.” (Helen Keller)
— Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, and the ADCS-ADSC team
Chers donateurs,
Ensemble, nous avons atteint notre but d’amasser 100 000 $ pour payer notre facture légale du 1er novembre 11 jours d’avance !
Un gros merci à vous, donateurs canadiens, et à nos amis de tous les coins du monde pour votre grande générosité, soutien et détermination. Et surtout pour votre courage.
Le nom de notre organisme sans but lucratif est « l’Alliance pour la défense de la souveraineté canadienne ».
Nous avons choisi délibérément le mot « souveraineté » puisqu’il constitue la base fondamentale de nos revendications envers le gouvernement du Canada.
Le Canada et des dizaines d’autres pays se sont pliés devant l’intimidation des États-Unis parce que leurs « leaders » ont eu peur des menaces de notre « partenaire » commercial. Ils ont donc vendu leur souveraineté à rabais.
Aidez-nous à convaincre les dirigeants et les gouvernements de tous ces pays qu’ils se doivent de remettre leur souveraineté à leurs peuples.
S’il vous plaît, continuez à soutenir notre cause.
« Seuls, nous pouvons faire si peu. Ensemble, nous pouvons faire beaucoup. » (Helen Keller)
— Ginny, Gwen et toute l’équipe de l’ADCS-ADSC
DONATE to www.adcs-adsc.ca (ADSC en français).
Here is another possible avenue for building support.
CBC published a report this morning that lawyer Rocco Galati and the Constitutional Rights Centre will challenge as unconstitutional changes to Canada’s citizenship law in bill C-24. See
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/marc-nadon-challenger-rocco-galati-to-test-citizenship-bill-in-court-1.2670454
A couple of observations:
1. Note Galati’s strategy for bringing media attention to the case: letters to parliamentarians and to the Governor General
2. His organisation might be interested in our case. The Centre’s webpage is at:
http://constitutionalrightscentre.wordpress.com/
Note that the Constitutional Rights Centre Inc (Galati’s organisation) is not to be confused with the David Asper Centre for Constitutional Rights, which is in the University of Toronto Faculty of Law. The latter might also be of interest:
http://www.aspercentre.ca/home.htm
Whatever might come of contacting these organisations, I would not look to them for money. They are themselves seeking funding from the public.
Also reporting on Bill C-24 / Q Essay (CBC Jian Ghomeshi: Bill C-24 set to change who gets to be Canadian, http://www.cbc.ca/q/blog/2014/06/09/q-essay-who-is-a-canadian/.
Would Jian Ghomeshi be interested in discussing the “dual citizens” that are from the US — and what is buried in Bill C-31? http://www.jian.ca/contact/
This is how much the IRS can be trusted with data:
http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/379897/report-irs-sent-database-containing-confidential-taxpayer-information-fbi-eliana
And under FATCA, there is NO restriction on how the data can be shared once it crosses the border into US hands. And Harper and the Conservatives – at the behest of Canadian Banksters and their investment kin (ex. IIAC) – signed us all away and designed their FATCA IGA legislation agreed in order to make ALL Canadian laws subject and subordinate to a foreign country’s demands and have the US domestic law FATCA supercede them.
http://bccivillibertiesassociation.cmail2.com/t/ViewEmail/j/8346AEDA5224288A/5D8ABC06F60C762A4FB5D4CAE8F50064
C-24 Threatens Equal Citizenship
As you know, in February the federal government tabled Bill C-24, introducing sweeping changes to Canada’s citizenship laws.
This new law will turn Canadian citizenship law upside down, and shatter two of the key features of Canadian citizenship: permanence and equality. Learn more about the bill here.
Renowned Canadian author, and dual citizen, Lawrence Hill joined the BCCLA and the Canadian Association of Refugee Lawyers (CARL) in issuing a petition calling for Minister Chris Alexander to STOP Bill C-24. More than 28 000 people joined us.
Delivering 28 000 Voices
On June 3rd we delivered the 800+ page petition to the Office of Citizenship and Immigration in Vancouver. See photos on our Facebook page. Electronic copies were also delivered to the Citizenship and Immigration Minister in Ottawa, and to critics in the opposition parties.
Bill C-24 is expected to pass third reading later this week. We encourage you to share information about the bill with those who may be impacted. Thanks to CARL, information on this bill is now available in multiple languages.
Lawrence Hill, younger brother of singer,songwriter Dan Hill and author of “The Book of Negroes”
In 2013, he presented the Massey Lectures “Blood: the stuff of life”
http://www.cbc.ca/ideas/episodes/massey-lectures/2013/11/11/the-2013-cbc-massey-lectures-blood-the-stuff-of-life/
I’m considering donating to this effort–I’m referring to challenging C-31 here not C-24–but I’m wondering what, SPECIFICALLY, this lawsuit is going after. For example, the following question is rightly mentioned as an inappropriate question to put to a Canadian citizen in Canada:
““Are you or have you ever been a U.S. citizen?””
Is there a specific example of this question being posed to a Canadian citizen in Canada? Who was the Canadian citizen? Who posed the question? In what context? What was the answer? What were the consequences of the answer?
Don’t get me wrong–I completely support this lawsuit in principle. But the specifics still seem a bit too vague and “early days” for anyone to be donating a million dollars+ to this effort.
@ Dash1729
RE: “Are you or have you ever been a U.S. citizen?”
Those are fair questions you have about that question but I think what the litigation will be concentrating on is not that question per se but the fact that the FATCA IGA divides Canadian citizens and residents into two camps where one will retain their financial privacy and the other will not. That’s the inequality aspect of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Section 15) that Joe Arvay will likely be focusing on. He probably has other things up his sleeve but I’ll leave that to him.
Power & Politics with Evan Solomon- Ballot Box Question:
Should the gov’t have the power to strip Canadian-born dual citizens of their citizenship?
http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/politics/inside-politics-blog/author/evan-solomon/
@Em
In particular it’s the “have you ever been” part that worries me most:
“Are you or have you ever been a U.S. citizen?”
A Canadian in Canada can truthfully IMHO deny being a US citizen at present, because that is a question of US law and I believe that Canadians have the right to answer from the sole perspective of Canadian law. Asking about someone’s past, OTOH, smacks of discrimination on the basis of national origin and concerns me a lot more.
@Em
“the FATCA IGA divides Canadian citizens and residents into two camps where one will retain their financial privacy and the other will not.”
There are probably limits to what Joe Arvay can discuss in a public forum just yet and I understand that. I’m trying to get a feel for whether this litigation will be based simply on the general concept on one camp losing its financial privacy. Or will there be a specific example of someone (or more than 1 person) losing that privacy that the challenge will then center around? If so it would be good to know the specifics. But I realize that maybe those things can’t be revealed yet.
@ Dash1729
True and we will have to wait, wonder and worry what will be asked of who and where. We already know why — because Congress has spoken and our Parliament caved. Anyway, I know that I can honestly answer NO and NO but add more questions and things get murky for me.
When Rocco Galati has spare time, he likes to challenge the gov’t to restore the use of the Bank of Canada.
It appears to be moving forward.
Dash1729,
No, we do not have a specific, inappropriate question put to a Canadian citizen in Canada “Are you or have you ever been a U.S. citizen?” — YET. We anticipate what might be asked after Canada Day, July 1st, 2014, when (if Bill C-31 given Third Reading and then Royal Assent) implementation of the Canada / U.S. IGA will become Canadian law. At that point, many of us here believe it will several contravene Canadian laws, one of which is the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
The Alliance for Defence of Canadian Sovereignty is a non-profit organization to protect the sovereignty of Canada, and the first such assault we need protection from is implementation of the IGA, making deemed ‘US Persons in Canada’ second class to any other Canadians, no matter their national origin or their parents’ national origin.
As I see it, we are challenging our Canadian government legalizing discrimination (a Challenge re Bill C-31 to the rights guaranteed ALL Canadians under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, as described by Arthur Cockfield in this portion of the transcript of the May 13 House of Commons Standing Finance Committee Meeting: http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?DocId=6597204&Language=E&Mode=1&Parl=41&Ses=2
@calgary411
Thanks for the additional info.
@All
Regarding second class citizenship that might result from C-24, I think it is worth noting that Harper already downgraded my Canadian citizenship to second class status in 2009. This came about due to changes in the Canadian Citizenship Act that went info effect on April 17, 2009. This change meant that I would no longer be able to pass Canadian citizenship to any children born outside Canada because I was myself born outside Canada to Canadian-born parents. So I became a second class citizen since I lost the ability to pass on my Canadian citizenship. At the time I was not yet a US citizen–and I haven’t lived in my birth country since infancy–so Canada was definitely my dominant nationality.
So this downgrading of Canadian citizenship to second class status is nothing new for me or others in my situation with Harper as PM. This loss of status was definitely a factor in my choosing to become a US citizen in 2011, as I felt my Canadian citizenship–which in an ideal world I might have preferred to keep as my dominant nationality–was losing value under Harper.
Of course, since I don’t have kids losing the ability to pass on Canadian citizenship is a bit academic–but it still shows a very clear decline in the value of Canadian citizenship.
@ Sid
Good for Rocco Galati. Restoring the Bank of Canada to its rightful role is an admirable goal.
http://canadafcusa.wordpress.com/solutions/bank-of-canada-policy/
Here’s a 12 year old who understands banking in Canada:
@Em, this is similar to how the federal reserve in the US works.
There are videos about that also. I think it’s been posted on IBS but can’t find the link.
I guess all governments do that… All fiat money that is bound to collapse at some point.
@Dash1729
The same changes to Canada’s citizenship that denied you the ability to pass Canadian citizenship on to your children through descent made me, born outside Canada, a Canadian at birth even though I was born in the US and naturalized as a Canadian in my 30’s. Fortunately, my children were born in Canada so there’s no question that they are Canadian. I guess the Canadian government no longer felt it was in Canada’s best interest to have endless generations of Canadians never stepping foot in Canada.
Dash 1729 The brokerage arms of the banks are asking all new account applicants if they are ‘US persons’
RBC direct is asking your place of birth- this is clearly way out of line- if not illegal.
In terms of publicity, Patrick Cain did an article a while back in which he mapped out where U.S. born Canadian residents live. That might be helpful in knowing where to focus any local advertising. It will be difficult to reach everyone since U.S.-born residents are all over the place in Canada. Still, there should be a lot of potential supporters: 44% of U.S. born residents of Canada told the 2006 Canadian census that they believed themselves to be solely American and since they were middle aged on average and should have some savings, they are going to start having problems.
@Dash1729
My grandmother was Canadian and I can sort of see why Canada wouldn’t want to go down granting citizenship to a second generation born out of Canada. Canada is a great country, but it isn’t mine.
Having said that, I will be supporting this because 1) it is clear that many Canadians simply weren’t well informed. Why would people pay U.S. taxes if they really thought they were solely Canadian? 2) unlike the U.S., Canada is not on anyone’s tax haven list: this is not about offshoring 3) U.S. born people in Canada in 2006 didn’t have that much money on average. This is not about FATCAts.
This morning I viewed again the video prepared so well and so thoroughly by those organizing and supporting this challenge. It is remarkable – and speaks so eloquently to the darkness in the heart of FATCA and the application of US CBT on Canadians.
The comments and intent of the Conservatives and the Canadian Bankster representative, and the US tax lawyer apologist ( temporarily abiding in Canada) is clear – they will do and say anything to defend imposing and elevating a foreign, US domestic law – which they note and acknowledge is the will of a FOREIGN government body and agencies – the US Congress, and the US Treasury – in order for the US to reap personal and financial data ( in aid of collection) on Canadian CITIZENS and legal PERMANENT RESIDENTS habitually resident INSIDE CANADA’s sovereign boundaries.
For shame.
It made me weep the first time I viewed it, and it made me weep again today. And I am no longer a US person of any kind.
It has been a struggle to arrive at the point at which I felt that I had to undertake the long and expensive journey to protect myself and my Canadian family. It has been a struggle on many levels to do what the US demanded in order to formally expatriate and sever my US citizenship forever.
I am a part-time worker, with a low and unpredictable income. I did not owe the US any money. Our savings were entirely Canadian source, Canadian held, and Canadian taxed – the breadwinner in our family is a Canadian citizen only. To divest myself of US citizenship has cost my family very dearly – and I still grieve for the hard won savings which should have by rights gone to pay for my child’s education and for my Canadian family’s wellbeing and security. Those funds should have been used to help us, not to pay significant accounting and legal fees in order to satisfy the extortionate demands of the US.
I am sick at heart that I cannot count on the government of either my birthplace or my chosen permanent home to act ethically and morally towards my family and other Canadians.
This legal challenge is the only remedy I can see. I am no longer a ‘US person’ in Canada, but I need to defend my chosen home from those within Canada who have the audacity and nauseating gall to say to us in the Canadian parliamentary system that the US “Congress has spoken”, and lecture us on what a foreign country’s laws say, yet NEVER ONCE raise what Canadian laws and sovereignty say about the rights and protections that these Conservative MPs are sworn to uphold as part of their sacred duty of trust towards ALL those on Canadian soil – AND to protect the Canadian fisc and Canadian assets from foreign incursions.
I note that several of the Conservatives are from ridings that either border, or are not far from the US border. I suggest that perhaps they might be more comfortable moving even further south – since they demonstrate a higher allegiance and greater inclination to the will of the US Congress than to the duty of care they have to CANADIAN law, the Charter, and Canadian citizens and legal permanent residents here. And it is very offensive that a US tax lawyer only temporarily abiding here in Canada, with obvious American allegiance should have been given a voice before a Canadian parliamentary committee urging Canadian Parliamentarians to ignore opposition to a US made and imposed law – and sacrifice Canadian citizens and permanent residents in their own Canadian homes, dismissing our concerns as ‘hyperbole’ and jingoism.
@KalC
Thanks for the pointer to the RBC Direct site. Yes, the questions there are as you describe.
IMHO there are at least two distinct legal issues here–probably more than two but certainly at least two–and I’m hoping the litigation will touch on both.
The first is whether a Canadian citizen, resident in Canada, has the unequivocal right to refer to themselves as solely a Canadian and nothing else. In other words–when asked questions such as whether they a US citizen, or a US person, or a US resident for tax purposes–can they truthfully answer ‘no’ to such questions? IMHO answering ‘no’ to such a question in Canada should be seen as a completely truthful answer–not as a white lie that might be understandable and forgivable under the circumstances but rather as a completely truthful answer. IMHO it is a bit like if someone is adopted. Such a person is IIRC entitled to refer to their adoptive parents in ALL context as their only legal parents–with their biological parents not figuring as parents in any legal sense. It shouldn’t be any different if Canada is someone’s adoptive country. It shouldn’t be seen as a lie for them to deny their US citizenship, etc.
IMHO it is really important that this issue gets addressed in this litigation. If this issue isn’t addressed, then no matter what the outcome, Canadians will be vulnerable if the USA once again moves the goalposts and redefines these terms like US citizen, person, etc, to try to bring Canadians into the US tax net. Canadians need to feel fully comfortable referring to themselves as Canadians in Canada.
The second issue which also needs to be addressed is what happens when questions are asked about someone’s past–eg their place of birth or whether they have ever been a US citizen. IMHO such questions should be avoided whenever possible. But when such “US indicia” to creep into a Canadian’s banking records, the litigation needs to clearly establish that their Charter rights trump any possibility of their privacy being violated.
It is interesting that it seems that for now it is more the brokerage arms of banks as opposed to plain vanilla chequing accounts that are asking these intrusive questions.
@ Dash1729
Well put! I am a Canadian in Canada. That’s all anyone needs to know.
@bubblebustin / @Publius
The problem is–although it is beyond the primary scope of this site/litigation–that the second generation born abroad can lose out on Canadian citizenship even when the first generation born abroad has clearly established Canada as their dominant nationality. When someone is born outside Canada to Canadian parents, their claim to Canadian citizenship is forever weaker than that of either someone born there or someone naturalized there–even if they spend 95% of their lives in Canada after that.
This situation, for example, affects people born in US hospitals close to the Canadian border whose Canadian mothers entered the US only briefly to give birth. As has been discussed elsewhere on IBS, these people are at risk when it comes to FATCA. But when it came to downgrading them to second-class status, Harper moved faster than Obama–such people were already downgraded to second class Canadian status by the 2009 law even before FATCA.
ie–my dominant nationality was definitely Canadian from shortly after birth–when my Canadian parents moved back to Canada–until 2011 when I became a US citizen. Yet I had second class status–moreover there was no oath or steps I could take to acquire first class status.
Dual citizenship is BS.