UPDATE SEPTEMBER 19, 2015: SEE ALSO DISCLAIMER AND LITIGATION UPDATES.
[This post, which began in May and having over 1000 revisions and 2000 comments, is being retired from service and updates. It lived through the success of reaching a total of $500,000 in donations from our kind, dear supporters who had little money to give, the hope and disappointment with the summary trial decision, and the certainty that we are now finally moving on to the Charter trial.]
CANADIAN CHARTER TRIAL UPDATE:
— We have instructed the Arvay team to prepare for the “Constitutional-Charter” trial. This means that our focus now, as it was in the beginning of our lawsuit, is on the Charter trial.
Unless there is a new expense in the future that we have not anticipated, the monies from your donations will be sufficient to take us through the “constitutional-charter” trial in Federal Court. However, to pay other legal bills we will need additional donations from our supporters, and a request for donations will appear on another post soon.
OUR LITIGATION HISTORY:
One year ago, on August 11, 2014, Litigator Joseph Arvay filed a FATCA IGA lawsuit in Canada Federal Court on behalf of Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty (en français), and all peoples.
Because of a Government delay we initiated a “summary trial”, using a portion of the arguments, which offered the possibility of preventing private banking information from being turned over to the IRS before September 30, 2015. See Alliance’s Claims, our Alliance blog, and AUGUST 4-5 SUMMARY TRIAL FILINGS in LITIGATION UPDATES.
GwEvil will put the Sovereignty Thermometer back up tonight.
Re: “Some have suggested to us a scenario in which our FATCA IGA lawsuit costs are quickly paid off — so that we could begin a citizenship taxation constitutional challenge lawsuit in the United States itself.. ”
Going after CBT is a noble venture for any group to be sure, and I would love to see it dead like everyone else here, but isn’t it just a little bit of a stretch for an organization whose mandated purpose is to protect Canadian sovereignty to attack a foreign law from within a foreign country?
I mean, CBT in and of itself is not a threat to Canadian sovereignty anymore than any other immoral foreign law that that is not enforced within Canada. CBT has been ‘on the books’ since 1850, and never was a threat to Canadian sovereignty until our cowardly Canadian ‘leaders’ agreed to enforce CBT by agreeing to FATCA legislation. FATCA is the threat to Canadian sovereignty, not CBT. With FATCA gone, CBT will become like all other foreign laws – outside the borders of Canada, and thus not a threat to Canadian sovereignty.
Am I missing something here? Maybe it doesn’t matter if the purpose of the group doesn’t match the goals exactly since CBT is so horrible and everyone associated with killing FATCA wants CBT killed as well, regardless what organization pulls this off, and regardless the organization’s originally stated purpose.
I totally support what Dreamer says except last paragraph. I very much think it matters that a group use money collected for a specific purpose for that purpose and not for some other purpose. No matter what the group or purpose. Auditors or those who used to work with auditors, are funny that way.
I think it would be pathetic and wrong for an organization named for and claiming to be fighting for Canadian sovereignty, to use money collected for that purpose to go cap in hand to the US courts, the US Congress, or any US political party, to fight CBT or any other aspect of US taxation policy as enforced on US soil. The fight I support and am helping pay for, is to fight my own pathetic excuse for a Canadian government for not standing up for my national sovereignty and Charter of Rights and Freedoms against an imperialist and overweening overreach by a decrepit and crumbling self-appointed US world tax (and other) cop. What the US chooses to do on its own soil, through its own taxation system and border passport control, is their sovereign right and not my concern. What it does on Canadian soil (or any other country’s soil) is entirely another story.
If people who are willingly American citizens (whether or not they have one or more other nationalities) want to pay for a fight in the US against CBT, I wish them well. But that money should be collected under a separate umbrella, and I won’t contribute to that umbrella, because I’m not a US citizen (willing or otherwise), have no financial interests in the US that can be attached on US soil by the IRS, and that fight isn’t my fight. It’s not my country.
I’m happy to continue to contribute to ADCS as long as I know all the money I’m donating is supporting the legal fight in Canada against the (current and not for much longer, I hope and intend) Government of Canada. If I hear that my donations are funding a CBT suit in the US, I will stop donating. Not my fight, and I’m not paying for that fight.
I suggest that if there is an interest on this website in fund-raising for a CBT action in the US, that someone establish a separate thread for that discussion, and set up another organization than ADCS for that purpose. Or change the name and purpose of ADCS (in which case my donations will dry up immediately, as might donations from other like-minded Canadians who aren’t willing Americans).
… and if we get lucky and win the court case, any money left over should IMO be kept in reserve to pay the legal fees to fight the appeal that Harper’s crowd will almost certainly launch in a higher court, if they’re still in power at that time. And it should IMO be held in reserve for that contingency, in case we get a different government in the next election and they decide for whatever reasons to appeal the decision. If and when the decision has either not been appealed, or has won at the Supreme Court, then I suggest we have a discussion about some worthy Canadian-and-other-non-US-sovereignty-related cause to which we might donate. But not a lawsuit in US courts, IMO.
@Dreamer
Although many of us refuse to co-operate with US CBT, there are some Canadians who value and wish to maintain their US citizenship, and cross the border without potential hassle etc.
These people are filing their US tax returns, resulting in instances of unjust double taxation, inability to save for retirement like other Canadians, and the diversion of money to the US when it should rightly stay in Canada. All of this does hurt the prosperity of these Canadians and the Canadian economy.
The defeat of FATCA will not eliminate CBT’s harm to these people and to Canada.
I would support donate to funding a lawsuit against CBT but would probably prefer to do so–especially since we seem to now be so close on the $500,000 (80% of the way there–yay!!)–only once we get the $500,000 for the current lawsuit fully funded. I’d like to know we’ve gotten that hurdle behind us but will be up to helping to fund other things.
As to whether it is within the mandate of ADSC-ADCS to do so: it seems to me that any challenge to CBT is likely to challenge not only CBT as an abstract concept but also the enforcement of CBT extraterritorially–including in Canada. Once they do that–and it seems they’ve already started doing that–it falls within the mandate of ADSC-ADCS as it becomes an attempt on the part of the IRS to violate Canadian sovereignty.
FATCA is one way by which the USG attempts to enforce CBT extraterritorially but it doesn’t seem to be the only way: bullying of banks with financial ties to the US and the compliance industry are other important examples. Even before FATCA the USG came down extraordinarily hard on the Swiss banking industry as just one example.
I have to agree with Schubert. A CBT lawsuit in US courts should have a campaign set up under a “separate umbrella”. There’s the FATCA Legal Action going on down there in the USA and hopefully that will lead to a CBT Legal Action afterwards or maybe concurrently. Anyway right now I’m concentrating on ADCS and I can’t really look that far forward. Also starting in August I have to resume using my OAS/CPP cheques to pay our own bills.
@EmBee
I think it is appropriate under the current umbrella as long as there are plaintiffs for the new hypothetical action who are Canadian citizens/residents claimed by the IRS to be US citizens and being harassed by the IRS on Canadian soil.
I also hope that the summary trial will generate enough publicity that–even if some existing donors need to bow out for awhile–we will get new donors to fund a new action.
And–yes–I’d like to see the Jim Bopp action get moving–haven’t heard much about it for awhile–and it seems that this is ideally a fight that should be fought on multiple fronts.
However, rereading the memo from Bopp to Bruce Ash (no relation) of 4/18/2014, it appears that that action proposes to challenge certain aspects of FATCA and FBAR reporting–for example an 8th Amendment claim that the fines contemplated under FATCA and/or FBAR are excessive–and doesn’t seem to get at CBT that much. So a separate action against CBT–or at least adding a challenge to CBT to the Bopp action–is needed here.
But again–I think it is better to stay focused on the Arvay action until that’s fully funded and then decide on next steps.
I am kind of puzzled with some of the comments on this thread. I think it was clearly stated that “if” we wanted to fund raise for a CBT court challenge, it would be AFTER all the funds were raised for our current FATCA court case. That makes perfect sense. Who cares what the original intent was for this group, things evolve over time and that’s a good thing. CBT is absolutely an attack on the sovereignty of dual Canadian/Americans in Canada. As previous stated, FATCA is simply an enforcement tool of CBT. If FATCA goes away, that does nothing to change the IRS from trying to hunt you down and ruin your life. It would just make it a little harder for them. Killing CBT also kills FATCA. I personally think it would have been better to go after CBT originally. I would think that would make more sense then going after FATCA. However, I decided to support this group anyway. If after we raise ALL the money for the current court case we decide to raise money for a CBT court case, you can choose not to donate. It would be a sperate fund after this one is finished. I know I will donate more money to a CBT court case then I have for the FATCA court case and I know many people from all around the world will donate to a CBT attack as well. The Issac Brock Society in Canada is the best and most organized group fighting American tyranny. The difference between IBS and ALL the rest of the groups that claim to fight for Americans abroad is that IBS actually does something, we take action while every other group talks about doing things. I think a CBT challenge is the only logical next step.
PS:
A multi pronged attack also makes sense because it is possible that our current law suit may not be successful. I know many don’t want to consider it, but the government may win. Then what? Wouldn’t it be nice to also have a CBT suit already filed and in the works as well, at least as a back up plan?
@Dash re: “@Embee, I think it is appropriate under the current umbrella as long as there are plaintiffs for the new hypothetical action who are Canadian citizens/residents claimed by the IRS to be US citizens and being harassed by the IRS on Canadian soil.”
Without the FATCA IGA in Canada, harassment “by the IRS on Canadian soil” of “Canadian citizens/residents claimed by the IRS to be US citizens” as you write above, would not be happening.
If we defeat the FATCA IGA here in Canada, what “harassment by the IRS on Canadian soil” would you be referring to that could be used as justification for fighting USA’s unique CBT in American courts, whilst under the umbrella of an organization purporting to be an Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty?
@Phil re: “The Issac Brock Society in Canada is the best and most organized group fighting American tyranny…. I think a CBT challenge is the only logical next step. “.
The Alliance for the Defence of Canada – not to be confused with The Isaac Brock Society (or The Isaac Brock Leaker Society)
ooops… I meant the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty, not of Canada….yikes!….as if the mandate wasn’t broad enough already!
@Dreamer
‘what “harassment by the IRS on Canadian soil” would you be referring to that could be used as justification for fighting USA’s unique CBT in American courts’
That’s between the lawyers and prospective plaintiffs to work out. If no such harassment exists independent of FATCA then there is no justification for a Canadian-funded lawsuit. If such harassment does exist of Canadians resident in Canada then there is certainly grounds for an organization committed to Canadian sovereignty to get involved.
In short–I don’t know the answer and I don’t necessarily need or want to know the answer for now, as I think the focus should be on the present–and at the present time we still have one more funding deadline to meet on the Arvay action. It is simply one thing that I think should be explored as we consider what to do next once we fund the Arvay action.
@Phil @Dreamer
Basically I think this battle is going to ultimately need to be fought on multiple fronts. However I trust the leaders of this effort to pick their battles wisely and make good strategic decisions on which battles to fight when. I’m simply saying that if and when they decide ADSC-ADCS should get involved in fighting CBT, I’ll support them. I don’t know yet whether they plan to make such a decision.
@Dash,
You live in the USA, right?
@Embee: “…..hopefully that will lead to a CBT Legal Action afterwards or maybe concurrently.”
We have been rather harassing Mr. Yue at RO to launch a concurrent CBT lawsuit but he isn’t responding to the bait. I would think the FATCA/CBT suits launched concurrently would have a synergistic effect. It is my believe, and that of others, that the RO only cares about FATCA in relation to the US banks and reciprocity. They don’t give a hoot about us. But that is certainly debatable as they have chosen at least one great plaintiff that I know of. If that actually has any relevance to the CBT issue I don’t see it but some do.
OK, lets call the new potential lawsuit: ADSC….Alliance to Defeat the Southern Crooks (EmBee you can do better than this). I actually do not give a hoot if it is my dogs that launch a CBT suit. Damn, someone has to do it and it doesn’t seem that it will be coming from any other place than ADSC or whatever name they choose to regroup as.
Some people have referred to the “FATCA” lawsuit. I thought that the ADCS and the lawsuit are attempting to overturn the IGA between the U.S. and Canada to allow FATCA, a U.S. act, to be legislated here in Canada. We are fighting the Government of Canada for depriving certain Canadian citizens (and permanent residents of Canada) of their rights under the Canadian Charter. CBT is a law affecting citizens of a foreign country, and those claimed to be citizens or residents for tax purposes, of that country. That country has the ability within its borders to make any laws desired by the government, however despicable they may seem to residents of other countries.
Citizens and permanent residents of Canada are subject to the laws of Canada. They should have the right to expect their country of residence to protect them against the imposition of foreign laws.
If the lawsuit is successful, and we win appeals, perhaps we should use remaining funds to support a move to prohibit the Canadian financial institutions from discriminating against Canadian customers in ways that are not even required by the IGA, but which have been practiced in other countries and even in Canada. We could find ourselves no longer facing reporting of our accounts to the CRA/IRS but unable to open or hold certain investments, mortgages, insurance policies, and other financial products not covered by the Access to Basic Banking Services act.
@Queenston:
Actually, the lawsuit is against the IGA-enabling Canadian federal legislation not the IGA itself.
Another issue is when a Canadian dies who is considered a USA citizen under USA laws, and the estate administrator is afraid to ignore the USA taxes, lest the administrator get arrested upon wandering or emergency landing onto USA soil. If the administrator is licenced in Canada then the administrator should not be allowed to require the estate to pay USA taxes.
I like the idea of “One thing at a time” but then again there is “Don’t put all your eggs in one basket.” What to do, what to do? Walk softly and carry a big stick?
If some lawsuit against CBT is ever considered, then I think it should be a joint effort including all the other groups ( like rep overseas).
@Charl
Neither side will try to turn over CBT nor I think its Cook or whatever… they do not want to be seen as helping the Rich Fat Cats to the americans who vote in the US… Every time the subject of Fatca or taxes come up… someone or alot of people… start that crap with the rich stealing from them… how they figure its their money… your guess is as good as mine… Or don’t let the door slam u in the butt on the way out… Only way to challenge either concept is for a private person with deep pockets or heavy backing to do so in US court… Neither party will involve themselves in that… Even if u try to pressure Mr Yue to do so… he will not… what the Republican Overseas is trying to do is to throw a bone out to gain ex-pat votes.. if there are any left… all we hear is blah… blah… nothing else… In Canada… we have a goal… we are meeting each goal… by the skin of our teeth with people who are not rich but are willing to do what they can… I have yet heard of a deep pocketed person tossing money at the fund… have u? The Canadian gov’t has tossed us… citizens or not… to the lions… figuring we will not do anything… they are very wrong… We as a group… no matter where u are… are standing up together as one voice… with Hell No… Any other talk about after the canadian lawsuit is premature… we must only focus on this, getting the rest of the funding for it… do u think the Canadian gov’t will make it easy for us… no… I got a feeling we will have to continue our court fight… Many of us have plenty of ideas of what to do next… mine is the IGA.. but that is another issue… For now… our main focus is to get the next payment together… spreading the word… if other countries want to start their own law suit… that would be great… but so far… Canada is the only game in the world that is actually doing it….
Maybe it’s because my head is spinning from reading SFC submissions (almost done) but I can’t seem to get it sussed out, this possible future CBT lawsuit. Where would the plaintiffs reside? Where would the lawsuit be filed? I get Ginny and Gwen, both Canadians residing in Canada, bringing a lawsuit against the Canadian government for passing the harmful FATCA IGA implementing legislation but a CBT lawsuit? CBT is a US law which harms US persons living overseas. It needs to be challenged that’s for sure but would this have to go to an international court? Anyway, I really want to keep my focus on the task at hand — $100,000 for the August 1st deadline.