Goat Rodeo:
A chaotic situation, often one that involves several people [or organizations], each with a different agenda/vision/perception of what’s going on; a situation that is very difficult, despite energy and efforts, to instill any sense or order into.
I don’t think there’s a much more apt expression for what is happening right now in the larger FATCA / FBAR / CBT universe. The calm-before-the-storm waiting game of the last few years is now clearly giving way to frenzied activity and veritable verbal warfare across multiple organizations and web sites around the globe. The big-picture dots of this reality have not yet been fully connected into a single post and thread, so that’s why I’m starting this one.
In no particular order, here are some of the latest developments to consider:
1. The ADCS summary trial is poised to begin next Tuesday, August 4th. Even now, the Canadian Government is wheeling out their propaganda machine to fight our lawsuit in the court of public opinion as well as in the Federal Court in Vancouver. One of the first targets of their inevitable smear campaign is our legal counsel, Joe Arvay, via a Conservative Party soapbox piece published in today’s Globe and Mail. And, as I write this, news that the Canadian federal government, “…may seek an adjournment of the summary trial scheduled to be heard on August 4-5,” as reported in the ADCS thread.
2. Mirroring the Canadian Charter Challenge is last week’s filing of the James Bopp / Republicans Overseas Action FATCA lawsuit whose seven plaintiffs include Rand Paul and Stephen Kish.
3. Republicans Overseas reports on the US Federal government response to their motion to expedite a Preliminary Injunction:
On July 22, Republicans Overseas Action and the seven Plaintiffs asked the District Court to expedite the consideration of the request for a preliminary injunction to give the Court adequate time decide the matter before some of Plaintiffs’ sensitive account information is reported to the IRS at the end of September. The government’s response is to say that shortening its response time would be too burdensome and that it needs even more time to respond. Normally, they would have 21 days to respond, and we’ve only asked to have that time shortened by a week. The federal government instead has asked the Court to delay the suit and give them 60 days to respond to Plaintiffs’ request for a preliminary injunction—three times the amount of time to which it would normally be entitled! The truth is that the Plaintiffs are the ones playing catch up in this case. The government has had nearly five years to consider the constitutional underpinnings of FATCA. They should not be allowed to complain now that they need more time to understand it when American citizens’ constitutional rights are being pushed aside.
4. Democrats Abroad has published a couple of trash-talk pieces here and here condemning the Bopp/RO suit. So far, every one of the 22 comments on the DA Switzerland piece has been uniformly opposed to DA’s positions on FATCA and Same Country Safe Harbor (SCSH), which has also been referred to as SCE (Same Country Exception).
5. Democrats Abroad has doubled-down on its SCSH campaign by re-igniting its FATCA Reform 1000 letters sign-on campaign, apparently completely ignoring the frustration of its dwindling constituency, as exemplified by one of the comments:
Most of us will not support this. Same country exemption is a diversion from the issue. It will enable you to try and tell people that you have done something. 90% of us see right through this and want nothing to do with this. Full repeal of FATCA and CBT is what needs to be done. Anything else is a distraction. Time for the democrats to join the rest of the world and use the world standard tax practice of residence based taxation (RBT). Why does the party of “progress” want to hold onto an outdated, civil war era tax policy that all other countries have abandoned?
6. Republicans Overseas is also pushing back on SCSH and the letter writing campaign:
By delaying the Motion for Preliminary Injunction, it gives DA time to push for the Same Country Safe Harbor (SCSH) exemption
DA is asking expats to write 1,000 letter to Congress to support SCSH by pressuring Treasury Secretary Lacob Lew and IRS Commissioner John Koskinen to selectively enforce FATCA based on expats’ accounts in one foreign country or more than one foreign country. DA knows better than that. This is lawlessness because neither Secretary Lew nor Commissioner Koskinen have the constitutional authority to amend or selectively enforce FATCA without a vote in Congress to amend the law.
7. Meanwhile, other organizations have apparently chosen to hitch their wagons to the increasingly-maligned Safe Harbor campaign, including FAWCO (Federation of American Women’s Clubs Overseas) and AARO (Association of Americans Resident Overseas), though the latter has posted a position paper calling for the replacement of CBT with RBT. American Citizens Abroad has remained rather low-key, focussing on its own, rather convoluted RBT proposal and partnering with the University of Nevada via its ACA Global Foundation on a research study about the effects of FATCA on American citizens living abroad. Other groups, such as American Expatriates, appear to be inundated by a confusing and often contradictory array of opinions from across the political spectrum, though the same thing can often be said of IBS.
8. The Trump factor. Will his brand of demagoguery help or hurt our cause? Here is a quote from his most recent advertorial for his own book:
America has become the world’s “dumping ground” for everyone else’s problems. A “whipping boy” for other countries as we sink further and further into the debt of no return.
Trump warns of so-called leaders willingly giving our jobs to foreign hands and further crippling the economy. Literally taking future opportunities from our children and grandchildren.
Meanwhile those same leaders feed America’s looming debt beast — an $18 trillion tab — with foreign aid and terrible negotiations.
And what then do we get for extending our wealth to help a legion of other countries? Lack of respect. We’re the “laughingstock” of the world.
These are just a few examples of how fragmented and confusing the landscape has become, and just how far away US Persons are from achieving any kind of consensus about how best to fight back against FATCA and CBT. The dominant “camps” now emerging are, predictably, identifiable largely along traditional party lines, but with some important exceptions. On one hand, “Safe Harbor” has crystallized into the Democrats singular take-it-or-leave-it proposition. On the other hand are the lawsuits in both the US and Canada, initiated by an increasingly diverse mix of Republicans, disaffected Democrats and untold numbers of other supporters who have no allegiance to any US party. In the case of Canada, our battle is dishearteningly with our own Canadian government, which has lowered itself to becoming a mere proxy for the US. Nevertheless, when it comes to the issues of FATCA, FBAR and CBT, it would appear that the most dominant fault line now starkly divides an increasingly out-of-touch and disingenuous Democratic Party with, literally, everyone else on the planet.
No FATCA reporting etc. for clarity
Does this safe harbor deal let me only get my foreign earned pension taxed in country of origin ?
My house sale exempt by US tax ?
No US death tax ?
At least things are happening. I sense that the genie will not go back into the bottle this time.
Great summary…thanks!
Splendid summary. Thank you!
One small nitpicky different point of view: AARO and FAWCO have touted SCE for a long time. Even ACA was on board at one point. It was pushed at the Overseas Americans Week in Washington that I participated in in 2013. And guess what? Nobody was biting the hook. It was “uh huh” and “interesting” – the latter being Washington speak for “not a chance in hell.” (My interpretation 🙂
The point I’m trying very clumsily to make is that SCE has been on the table for years. It hasn’t gone anywhere. So the question I would have for Dems Abroad is: So ladies and gents, what has changed in the world to make you folks think that SCE/Safe Harbour stands a chance today? I think that is a fair and totally non-partisan question.
What did flip me out recently was an email from someone I know here in Japan. She didn’t know about the lawsuits. And so when the Dems Abroad mass mailing showed up in her mailbox she had the impression that they were the ONLY people fighting FATCA. I wonder how many folks abroad are getting that same email and thinking exactly the same thing? Wow, finally someone is doing something about FATCA!
Last thought: Americans abroad are not joiners. The various organizations are shunned by most with the exception of some of the women’s clubs which FAWCO have federated (smart move). None of them have a sufficient number of members to be able to say that they are representative of 7 million + Americans abroad. And homeland politics is so ugly and dysfunctional that most of us don’t want to go there. Sad to say but US politics is just one long argument about who is the tallest midget in the room.
Thanks for attempting to herd the goats into this post for us, Deckard. It sure helps me better focus in on the rapid changes that have been hard to keep up with.
@Victoria,
The lawsuits seem to have lit a fire under their asses. And also may have made it an easier sell.
Could be just coincidence, of course.
(But I don’t think so.)
Yep, foo, that would be my cynical response. Reminds me of several conversation I have had over the past few years with the Americans Abroad Establishment about the various forums, blogs, FB groups and, of course, Brock.
My argument was: Look, folks, the game is changing. People are righteously pissed off and they are organizing. You might want to pay attention to this. They are using the technology to good effect and they are skipping past you.
Answer: They’re just talking. That’s all they do. They have no access. They don’t get stuff done. Let them talk.
And now there are TWO active lawsuits. Not too shabby for folks who “just talk”. 🙂
@Victoria
Thanks so much for your valuable perspective, especially your inside-the-bunker snapshot revealing the considerable hubris of the Americans Abroad Establishment. It’s something I’ve always suspected.
Considering how Brock alone more or less began with a conversation over coffee just a few short years ago, I’d say that we and our wider community haven’t done too badly for ourselves.
Since I’m kind of on a Kelly’s Heroes jag this week, here’s some more inspiration:
This is lawlessness because neither Secretary Lew nor Commissioner Koskinen have the constitutional authority to amend or selectively enforce FATCA without a vote in Congress to amend the law.
I don’t like SCE but this is a piss-poor argument by Republicans Abroad. The authority is in 1472(c)(2) and 6038D(h)
More important questions for Democrats Abroad:
1. Why they want to restrict SCE to people who are “fully-compliant” when they damn well know that no one is fully compliant
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/05/29/almost-no-u-s-persons-abroad-properly-report-their-foreign-retirement-accounts-on-form-3520/
2. Why they are only talking about FATCA and not pushing the administration to use their existing statutory authority to exempt accounts from other stuff like Forms 3520 & 8621
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/08/29/its-all-congress-fault/
If Democrats Abroad need some “Republicans are Evil And Trying To Ruin Our Country” rhetoric for cover, they should be screaming from the rooftops that PFIC was Ronnie Raygun’s fault and talking about how it criminalises TFSAs and foreign mutual funds and the like. (This is at least as accurate as any of the other idiot soundbites you regularly hear in politics.)
But of course they will not do this, because they have not the slightest clue about PFIC or other actual problems faced by Americans abroad trying to run ordinary financial lives like their neighbours. It’s the same reason they didn’t go after Mitt Romney in 2012 by pointing out that you need fewer years of tax returns to run for president than to go into “offshore” disclosure to clear up $21/year of tax owed: because DA didn’t care at all about the people who actually went through “offshore” disclosure hell, and refused to listen to them.
@Eric,
That is an extremely good question. In fact, I asked them something like that last year, and got the e-mail equivalent of a blank stare. I think your analysis is correct:
Excellent piece, Deckard, and powerfully written.
Interesting remark about Trump’s bombastry. It underscores something that has been floating in my head for days and won’t go away. If only there were a way to get this issue in front of Trump, something for him to latch onto, so that he would erupt in a stream of blather to denounce CBT. It wouldn’t solve anything, and he’s unlikely to get elected. But I’m just thinking he’s so anxious to grasp at anything that smacks down both Republicans and Democrats and proves his plain-speaking maverick status, that he would at the very least bring these issues into the forefront and force other candidates to have to respond.
I’m mulling over in my mind a letter to try to persuade him to open his mouth about CBT. Start it out with some shocking anecdote, and the fact that he’d gain the loyal support of millions of expats, that would make his campaign aide pass the letter along. As we all know, it’s near-impossible to boil these issues down to soundbite talking points, but perhaps someone else might want to also have a try.
Deckard: I loved the “Goat Rodeo Roundup” story. It brought this nonsensical issue back into a clear view. Goats do climb trees after all!
The imagery of goats penned up in a corral butting heads with each other is quite funny. Also funny is imagining trying to get Anerican abroad to be of one mind – like herding cats.
@WhiteKat
Do you worry that no one will view me as Canadian because I don’t deny the fact that I’m a U.S. citizen? Having both doesn’t make me any less Canadian does it? I always thought Canadians prided themselves on our pluralism. I support the ADCS lawsuit because I expect the Canadia government to respect me as a Canadian, regardless of any other nationality I have, whether it be US, Ukranian, or Eritrean.
Ok, Bubblebustin, here’s a version especially for you:
@Bubbles….”Do you worry that no one will view me as Canadian because I don’t deny the fact that I’m a U.S. citizen?”
I sense I am about to enter a cat fight……..
By all international norms and for practical reasons it is impossible to be a so called dual citizen at any one moment in time. When you are in Canada you can solely be a Canadian Citizen because it is by that status and that status alone that you can stay in Canada.
When you enter the USA, you leave your Canadian Citizenship at the border, it is very clear that the USA does not recognize your Canadian Citizenship.
The last time you entered Canada, you entered on a Passport issued by Canada ergo you held yourself out and requested admittance as a Canadian Citizen.
Dual Citizenship does not exist in law other than the fact in Canada you are a Dual Canadian and Commonwealth Citizen.
Otherwise, you fall into the common trap exibited by many homelanders who start referring to themselves as half Irish, quarter Polish and quarter Russian when the fact is that they are none of the above and simply are US Citizens.
LOL, Deckard1138
@George
I get it. I despise the term “dual” too – as a matter of fact I came up with the alternate description of “hybrid” which does not exist in the world of citizenship, but by virtue of the fact that I contribute to the pages, I consider myself affected by my status. It’s not as though I expect special privileges by having two citizenships, I just expect the Canadian government to give me the same rights of any other Canadian.
Whatever else I might be doesn’t change anything – that’s the point.
Saying we shouldn’t call ourselves Americans in Canada is saying it matters. It doesn’t.
…it didn’t matter when those apes from the Conservative government said it, and it doesn’t matter now.
Correction, that’s “when”, not, “who”.
I have a secret. Being anti-American won’t make you more Canadian.
@Bubblebustin
Re: “Do you worry that no one will view me as Canadian because I don’t deny the fact that I’m a U.S. citizen? ”
No. I don’t deny I am a US citizen either. I know the rules. I was born in USA, therefore I am a US citizen.
Re: “Having both doesn’t make me any less Canadian does it? ”
Absolutely not, but not everyone thinks you do, or like I do.
The reason I harp on the whole, “we are Canadians living in Canada” as opposed to “Americans living in Canada” or “dual citizens” is because I believe that the court of public opinion is important in our fight to get the Canadian government to treat us the same as all other Canadians. And reality is whether we like it or not, Canadians generally speaking think of us as less Canadian when we refer to ourselves as “Americans Abroad” or “Americans living in Canada” or just plain old “Americans”. Anti-Americanism is alive and well in Canada. We won’t get the same sympathy from fellow Canadians for our FATCA plight if they see us as American. I’ve been told “Yankee go home” to my face. That attitude is not unusual amongst fellow Canadians I’m sad to say.
Why do you suppose the plaintiffs who were chosen from a group of volunteers were the “least American” so to speak of all the volunteers? Legally speaking, it shouldn’t matter as all the volunteers were Canadian, and I don’t pretend to know WHY Arvay selected the purest of the pure, but maybe the court of public opinion also had something to do with it.
And although this fight for Canadian rights has turned into a legal battle, lest not forget that there is a political battle being fought here as well, so I will say it again, we need our fellow Canadians to see us as Canadian, not as “Americans abiding in Canada” – won’t happen if we insist on calling ourselves American.
@Bubblebustin
re: “I have a secret. Being anti-American won’t make you more Canadian. ”
I have a secret. Portraying yourself as American or dual, tends to make fellow Canadians(speaking in terms of generalities here) think of you as less of a Canadian. Or at the very least tends to make people think that, “yeah you are different from other Canadians, and maybe USA does have a right to your financial info.”
Is that attitude fair? Is it right? Do I think that way. No, but it is what it is. That attitude is out there.
@Bubblebustin re: “Saying we shouldn’t call ourselves Americans in Canada is saying it matters. It doesn’t. ”
It shouldn’t matter, but it does. That is my point.
@WhiteKat, you’re right. Many Canadians think that those Canadians who also have U.S. citizenship have an advantage. That attitude is held by Canadians who wish they, too, could have the privileges of U.S. citizenship — the ability to travel there freely and even move there and work there. For the same reason, they express surprise and maybe feel “sympathy” for those of us Canadians who have relinquished (i.e., “lost”) U.S. citizenship. The idea that U.S. citizenship is a liability rather than an asset for people living outside the U.S. is still so new as to be almost incomprehensible to most people.