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.
@WhiteKat- you know…that is something that does scare the beejeezis out of me – that The Canadian Gov could use that bullshit law C-24 to strip duals of our Canadian citizenship using some crap excuse like how we are “tax cheats”. That in truth would be the ONLY reason that I would renounce. So that Canada would have NO recourse! Not because of the effin US!
Yeah, it scares me too. It is too bad there is not a simple way out “US personhood” for ALL those who really just do not want to be one – unfortunately the compliance hoops are just too high for many to be able to jump through.
Oh, SCREW the compliance hoops! I’d just renounce and that would be that! The US can take a flying ****!! I’d just be protecting my Canadianness! That would take care of the bank problems too, that is…if they were ever to arise.
I agree, but even $2,350 (US) is a lot of money to buy your freedom. Many cannot easily afford that.
@GwEvil,
I’ve thought of doing what you suggest – i.e. just renounce and screw the compliance hoops. At least I considered it when the price was $450 usd. Now, that it is significantly higher, I am significantly more angry, and not wanting to do that anymore either!
Plus, this is another possibility – imagine spending almost 3K Cdn to ‘take care of the bank problem’ and then finding out that now the banks want proof of tax compliance. Screwed again.
Best bet is just to win the lawsuit.
…and, the worst absurdity (information already in the hands of the US with FBARs of mother) some cannot renounce for any amount of money to any US tax lawyer, US tax accountant, US immigration / nationality lawyer — and neither can a parent, a guardian or a trustee act on behalf of such a person without *requisite capacity*, even with a court order.
Yes Calgary411. That is the worst absurdity for sure.
Back to the lawsuit!!
@whitekat
I think tom alcere has a valid idea on accepting employment as a poll worker
The foreign law does not limit the time employment must have
But to be effective I would advise as part of the application you are intending to relinquish
Once you tat paid you would then need to notify the consulate to get an appointment next year
Interesting that the quote below refers to the POTENTIAL “litigation from its citizens” that governments may face re FATCA privacy issues, but doesn’t admit to the ACTUAL litigation ACTUALLY IN PROGRESS in CANADA – the US next door neighbour, and home to the second largest group of those deemed UStaxablecitizens/persons in the world.
Is that willful blindness in the media and the world of US tax practitioners, or is it ignorance?
See;
“..Local litigation
Zimiles said another issue governments may face is litigation from its citizens who see the new reporting burdens placed on them as a result of FATCA as a breach of privacy…”
Information a FFI must provide on US clients includes their name, their US taxpayer identification number, their address, their account number, and account balance or value…..”….
http://www.international-adviser.com/news/1022762/governments-risk-falling-short-unprecedented-fatca-demands#sthash.AgTub7dZ.dpuf…
@Badger I just started following that author on Twitter, so perhaps he will now notice our litigation.
Notice how it only applies to those Canadians who, UNDER SOME FOREIGN COUNTRY’S LAWS are classified as citizens of that foreign country. Let them start banishing Jewish persons (because they are welcome to become citizens in Israel) and see how fast this gets fixed.
@George, re: “@whitekat
I think tom alcere has a valid idea on accepting employment as a poll worker ”
It just might work, and certainly couldn’t hurt to try.
@GwEvil, I find it hard to believe that all those media writing about FATCA could be unaware at this point that a FATCA IGA lawsuit has actually been filed. That really makes me wonder why our challenge doesn’t get written about.
Will be interesting to see if there is any response from the author.
Thank you for tweeting.
An extract from an article in the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/bank-accounts/11654845/When-were-you-founded-bank-asks-church-in-case-of-red-tape-ordeal.html
_________________________________________________________
Neil Campbell, treasurer of a church in Chartham, Kent, and his group of bell ringers had to go to extraordinary lengths to open a bank account for the group.
The Co-operative Bank was offering a “community direct plus” account that was ideal for the church organisation, but refused to allow Mr Campbell to open an account unless he filled out a “Fatca” form.
Fatca (the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) is an American law passed in 2010 which has applied in Britain since July 2014. It requires financial institutions to undertake reviews of customers’ tax residency details or face a 30pc penalty on their US operations.
But in this case, it was not known why Mr Campbell was asked to fill out the form. The bank also required a letter of reference from the church’s vicar, and identification information and bank details for each of the 12 members of the bell-ringing group.
Mr Campbell was also asked questions that seemed bizarre for a church treasurer. One was: “Are you involved in the nuclear power industry?”
The application form for the account ran to 18 pages.
The Co-operative Bank said that it “must carry out these checks, regardless of the size of the organisation, in order to meet the legal and regulatory requirements set for the industry”.
We’re revoking your Canadian passport and banishing you from Canada. You qualify for banishment because the U.S.A. considers you a U.S. citizen.
Oh yeah? When I got naturalised in Canada, that means, under Canadian law, I’m no longer a U.S.A. citizen. So I cannot have my passport revoked under Canadian law. Besides, even if I confirmed U.S.A. citizenship later under U.S.A. law by being tricked into obtaining a U.S.A. passport (and that doesn’t make me a U.S.A. citizen under Canadian laws) I lost that U.S.A. citizenship when I accepted employment as a poll worker.
For the litigation team and the UN Human Rights complaint. If accurate, this gives a mere glimpse into how widely the information collected by the FATCA IGA can be shared inside the US, and the destruction of privacy rights and threat to the integrity of personal and financial information.
See;
‘The Intersection of U.S. Federal Tax Law with Collection of International Information – Including other Federal Agencies’
May 25, 2015
“……..the IRS no longer works in such a vacuum. For a history of foreign bank and Congressional influences, see, How Congressional Hearings (Particularly In the Senate) Drive IRS and Justice Department Behavior
Today there are a host of governmental inter-agency activities along with foreign government exchanges of information; e.g., DHS, Department of State, ICE, USCIS, foreign government exchanges of information under FATCA IGAs, a plethora of federal “intelligence agencies” for “terrorism related requests” as identified in IRM pursuant to IRC Section 6103(i), foreign governments under tax treaty exchanges, among many others.
The law is not even clear as to which agencies qualify as “intelligence agencies” as they are not identified in the statute and many are presumably classified organizations.
Who is an “intelligence agency” for purposes of the statute?
The following is a list of some of the intelligence agencies that are presumably included in the federal tax statute Section 6103(i)(7): ” ………….
from http://tax-expatriation.com/2015/05/
The author at the Tax-expatriation makes what I consider a major omission in not acknowledging how the Patriot Act and the Homeland Security act already makes information sent over the border into the US vulnerable to sharing widely without notice or recourse – even if the owner of the information is not a UStaxableperson, and is not a US national. For ex. see even this non-US non-tax ex. from the Privacy Commissioner of Canada site which involved the shipment of VISA client account information to the US for third party processing;
See,
“…Access of U.S. authorities to personal information of Canadian residents
The possibility of U.S. authorities accessing Canadians’ personal information has been raised frequently since the passage of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act). Prior to the passage of this Act, U.S. authorities were able to access records held by U.S.-based firms relating to foreign intelligence gathering in a number of ways.
What has changed with the passage of USA PATRIOT Act is that certain U.S. intelligence and police surveillance and information collection tools have been expanded, and procedural hurdles for U.S. law enforcement agencies have been minimized. Under section 215 of the USA PATRIOT Act, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) can access records held in the United States by applying for an order of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act Court. A company subject to a section 215 order cannot reveal that the FBI has sought or obtained information from it……”… https://www.priv.gc.ca/cf-dc/2005/313_20051019_e.asp ).
Read my comment above if you STILL don’t feel any urgency to donate to the ADCS lawsuit http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/DonateADCS.html against the implementation of the FATCA IGA in Canada (with implications as a precedent to inspire pushback in/by other jurisdictions).
You don’t need to be a US citizen to be profoundly affected by FATCA = US data grab and the Great Canadian data give-away!
@ADCS, found this little gem in the Roy Berg Canadian Tax Foundation document that someone here linked to awhile ago.
The language he used could be useful in litigation;
“An individual who attempts to Cure his unambiguous place of U.S. birth by obtaining a CLN would do so by either officially renouncing his U.S. citizenship before a diplomatic or consular office,89 or by requesting a determination from the U.S. Department of State that in the past he lost his citizenship by performing an expatriating act with the requisite mental state.90 In doing so, the individual has just stepped into one of the most ambiguous, complex, misunderstood, and high-stakes areas of U.S. international individual tax law.
There are two reasons the U.S. expatriation tax regime is a Serbonian bog of legal and tax issues. First, U.S. immigration law has evolved over time: some acts (or omissions) that caused an individual to lose his citizenship at one point in time have been held by the Supreme Court of the United States to be unconstitutional, the legal effect of which is retroactive repeal of the offending legislation and resulting retroactive restoration of U.S. citizenship.91”
Thanks, George
I think you’re referring to this: https://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/08/26-u-s-code-%C2%A7877a-the-exit-tax-rules-do-you-see-them-as-applying-prospectively-or-retrospectively-or-both/
@Bubblebustin, re: “Mr/Ms Jenner is a dual. ”
No she is not.
@ Bubblebustin, we all need to be more sensitive to people’s differences.
http://www.cnn.com/2014/12/31/us/ohio-transgender-teen-suicide/
George,
Stephen has sent the document on to Joseph Arvay. Thanks once again!
We are so close! $425K out of the required $500K has already been raised. Hopefully there are some “on the fence” donors who will come through as we get closer to August 4th/5th.
Magna Carta is 800 years old. Its most important clause is translated by the Telegraph Newspaper in the following extract:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/11383687/The-Magna-Carta-explained.html
_________________________________________________
It is incredibly important today, but it was buried deep in the original document and made very little splash in 1215. Part of its success is its adaptability to all sorts of situations throughout the centuries.
If you were wondering what the actual text was, here it is (translated into modern English of course):
“No free man shall be seized or imprisoned, or stripped of his rights or possessions, or outlawed or exiled, or deprived of his standing in any other way, nor will we proceed with force against him, or send others to do so, except by the lawful judgement of his equals or by the law of the land. To no-one will we sell, to no-one deny or delay right or justice.”
That basically means the law belongs to everyone, not just the powerful. It is the bedrock of our society today.