“A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian.” This is a fine election slogan. But is it not time to get rid of Harper’s law which results in the extraordinary rendition to the USA of certain Canadians’ banking account information? Are they not Canadians deserving the protection of law, just like any other Canadian? That is the meaning of the slogan.
But wait! The Younger Trudeau has also said dual citizens fall under USA authority:
Despite its good intentions, the unfortunate consequence of FATCA is that Americans who hold dual citizenship still fall under its authority, and it requires access to their financial information through their banks. As a result of FATCA, there has been a surge in US citizenship renunciations over the past few years, and this trend continues to grow.
It remains to be seen if the Younger Trudeau is just one of Obama’s Eunuchs. It is true too that le Dauphin now crowned Prime Minister promised to improve relations with Obama and the USA, and I do not see how he will please Obama by abolishing FATCA and treating all Canadians as Canadians as according to the rule of law that he cited in his debate with Harper. (Here he acknowledges that positive law may not be in keeping with the rule of law, unlike his illustrious father).
I see a lack of coherence. What will he really do about FATCA? It is a toss up. But this much is clear: it does not seem that he has really understood all the ramifications of his election slogan, “A Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian”. This suggests a certain deficiency either in his moral or in his intellectual capacity–or perhaps as young man, he has not yet had time to think the issue through.
Why do I only read that FATCA was adopted in Canada either because the Conservatives blindly trampled on Canadian’s rights, and/or that the Canadian government is and will continue to be in bed with Obama and the US? Instead of these, why not give the credit to the effectiveness of the US extortion by way of the threat of the 30% withholding and what it would have done to the Canadian banks and economy? When faced with extortion the best one can do is choose the lesser of two very grave evils. Without the 30% withholding, I doubt many governments anywhere would have agreed to FATCA.
Clearly, extortion is designed to achieve “compliance with the extortionist’s will”. To guarantee that, one simply ensures that the feared threat is worse than the extortionist’s will. Otherwise, the victim might choose the threat which is not what the extortionist wants as the outcome.
Why should I hate my government and banks for being the victims of a very effective extortion plan? I choose instead to hate the IRS and Congress for their poor attempt at catching American tax cheats. If these cheats didn’t exist in the first place the US wouldn’t need FATCA. So, I choose to hate the IRS, Congress _and_ American tax cheats. Oh, and of course the root of all this evil is US CBT, which I can blame on the same list of people. With RBT, the US would probably still want FATCA in order to catch homeland Americans hiding money offshore (arguably the original intent of FATCA), but at least it would be “residence-based”.
@WhatAmI, That our spineless leaders allowed themselves to become eunuchs for the Kingdom of Obama? Should we be mad at them for handing over our sovereignty because of mere 30% withholding fee? Should we be upset that some were thrown under the bus? Aren’t they supposed to “stand on guard for thee”. We can marvel all we want at how brilliant the USA criminals are at extortion. Why do we have a Canadian government in the first place if not to defend Canada and Canadians?
I really like how Trudeau takes the high moral ground in the clip. It is very effective rhetorically.
One minimal observation I will make is Pierre Trudeau was NOT necessarily that well liked by other foreign leaders during the time he was Canada’s PM especially “bigger” countries such as France, Germany, the US, and the UK. As someone once told me there is a pecking order in countries and Trudeau Sr was very keen on Canada moving its place in the world up something that was not appreciated by France, Germany, et all.
Despite the fact that Trudeau Jr is telling the world he is own man it appears is if old memories die hard in foreign capitals. The two most eager foreign leaders on the eve of Trudeau Jr’s victory were those in Italy and Mexico of all places. While this might appear to be odd a keen scholar of 1970s Canada will note the then as now governing parties in Mexico and Italy were close allies of Trudeau Sr especially 1970s Mexican president Luis Echeverria.
BTW, both Echeverria and Trudeau Sr were close to Castro. This was back in the day when the only two countries in the Western Hemisphere that recognized Cuba were Canada and Mexico. Of course it is also well known that Trudeau Jr has met Castro numerous times since he was a child.
From a comment at Maple Sandbox…
You seem to assume that the 30% withholding would have been trivial and inconsequential. I’m assuming it would have been devastating and that it would have harmed more Canadians than agreeing to FATCA (yes, I know, FATCA effects ALL Canadians in terms of rights violations etc but most non-US persons are not out-of pocket, so to speak). I’m sure we agree that no country would have accepted FATCA if there was no 30% threat, but with it no country refused. Therefore, It would seem that globally the 30% was not seen as trivial. What leads you to trivialize it so?
I think you’ll find this early interview with Margaret Trudeau very interesting. In promoting her book “Beyond Reason” she describes with fondness her visit to Cuba with PM Trudeau, the welcome she felt from Fidel Castro, and the night Castro and Trudeau spent arguing.
@Duke, Yes, I was happy when Blaze started Maplesandbox.ca so that there would be an alternative to Isaac Brock.
@WhatAmI, the USA was not prepared for reciprocity on 30% withholdings. There are a lot of US businesses in Canada. Theft of transfer payments could have resulted in similar treatment the other way.
We could turn the lights off in several states as well.
There is a joke that no one knows how many French men it takes to defend Paris because it has never been tried.