Duke of Devon says,
Mr. Morneau’s letter deserves its’ own post so it won’t get lost. He seems to get it. It will be interesting to keep on his case about the lack of reciprocity. He is the first Lib. to confirm they won’t help collect anything the IRS claims against a Canadian and I think his distinction that CRA-IRS transfer of information cannot legally be used by the IRS to impose FBAR fines is a new commitment. Not so sure the IRS would respect the distinction.
Here is the first reply that any of have gotten from the Finance Minister. Thanks for sharing it, Cheryl.
April 26, 2016 Reply from The Honourable Bill Morneau, P.C., M.P.
Re: “underlying policy objectives”.
The underlying policy objective of the Canadian government is to make sure that no Canadian bank is subject to the 30% withholding threat. This, of course, is far more important than any IGA Charter violations or the protection of its own Canadian citizens.
The underlying policy objective of the US government is…..actually I don’t think the US government at this point in time is even organized enough to have such a thing as a policy objective.
I notice that letter is dated April 26. That is just a few days after I raised the issue here that not a single Fiberal had reassured Canadians that CRA does not and will not collect for the IRS and our discussions around that..
Suddenly, after months of writing, tweeting, e-mailing, lobbying, etc., the Minister of Finance breaks his silence and confirms CRA will not collect for IRS from Canadian citizens. Coincidence? Maybe. But I think we can safely assume we are being followed by Finance and CRA here and at Sandbox.
I find his language on this weaker than that of Flaherty. I also noticed that Morneau did not say anything about CRA not assisting in collection of penalties for IRS from Canadian residents who are not Canadian citizens. This may have been an oversight, but if I was not a Canadian citizen, I would be very worried.
Bottom line: A Canadian isn’t a Canadian isn’t a Canadian when a Canadian was born in the United States.
The Canadian government’s policy objective is to either avoid sanctions against Canadian banks or to cooperate with the US on tax enforcement – or both. But does one objective undermine the other?
FATCA as it stands with the US lack of reciprocity does not achieve the latter, so we’re left with the former – which has NOTHING to do with cooperation. It is in fact it’s the opposite of cooperation.
The Canadian government speaks from both sides of its face.
@Blaze I noticed the same thing. I believe DOS also monitors this site. Hard to know the ultimate balance for good or ill that is.
I will think about this letter for a few days before replying. Any thoughts are welcome.
@Cheryl Probably IRS, U.S. Treasury and maybe even NSA too.
I don’t want to be alarmist, but I think it is something we need to consider.
A couple of years ago, Sandbox was under attack and Outraged Canadian needed to shut down the site for a few days because someone was trying to hack into it as me. She was never able to determine if it was just a spammer or if it was a three letter government agency. To the best of my knowledge, whomever it was did not succeed in their hacking attempts.
I don’t have any suggestions for replying to Morneau or any of the others. They are intentionally missing the point (or rather pretending to miss the point that they understood very well before they formed the government).
They know all the issues. They don’t care. Diane LeBouthillier went even further than the Con Cons last week in her vile testimony attempting to paint us as tax evaders. While she was testifying, her Parliamentary Secretary sat quietly in the room. He is the MBA Accountant with over 20 years working at CRA who called FATCA “an attack on our privacy…dangerous…”
@Blaze
And she went further in accusing any opposition MP who questions the Liberals on process of perhaps not supporting the fight against offshore tax evasion. Very poor tactic on her part – worthy of the McCarthy era.
@Blaze
Thank you for clearing that up. For some reason I thought charter rights could not be discussed in federal court.
@Bubblebustin: Very planned and deliberate tactic.
As soon as the KPMG shady deal with CRA and the Panama Papers hit the news, I predicted at Maple Sandbox we would become the scapegoats for the government’s failure to combat real offshore tsax evasion.
On April 4, I said:
I wasn’t wrong.
The only response worthy of this debacle is a unified “FUCK YOU!” to any government colluding with the United States and that’s pretty much all of them.
…and, yes, Blaze, the US McCarthyism-type question of the Minister of National Revenue; i.e. substitute the term *Tax Evasion* for what was once *Communism*. Led by the US to use these tactics? (Congress has spoken!) — both terms bandied around indiscriminately by the exceptional USA and now Canada?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism
http://data.parl.gc.ca/widgets/v1/en/intervention/8857742
http://www.parl.gc.ca/HousePublications/Publication.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&DocId=8188113
Quite shameful.
@All
After reading the full letter from Finance Minister, Mr. Morneau, me thinks the Minister needs a bit of education. No pleas or demands, just a good point by point reply to his understanding. The fact that the earlier Privacy Commissioner saw no problem with this has no bearing on the current situation, especially since we know how far and wide the IRS feels it has the right to share this information. Also, he needs to connect the points between the US not signing on to the OECD and the fact that they are in no position to do any serious reciprocity (they’d rather be the tax haven of the world and crow about it…..).
You know, I think we need to go back to the origins of IBS………….
The Privacy Commissioner and Petros provided the clues…..
PM Trudeau also provides the path thru A Canadian is a Canadian.
Note the ADCS request for the perfect witness, of which I consider Ginny and Gwen to be perfect.
Are these persons Canadian under the law of Canada or are they not? Dual Citizenship does NOT exist in law!!! Dual Citizenship is as real as Santa, Tinker Bell and Sasquatch.
Notice how the politicians REFUSE to say Canadian Citizens resident in Canada?
In our litigation and conversations with politicians we MUST always begin with “I am a Canadian Citizen (insert if since birth), with clinging/unwanted US Citizenship.”
NEVER EVER let these people allow them not to treat you and address you as a Canadian Citizen.
Folks, I hate to say this but we have been fighting with politeness and respect to people that deserve neither.
The Finance Minister is a RACIST, period.
PM Trudeau is a RACIST, period.
Time to get in their face.
George Carlin was right — forget the politicians…
*originally posted in the litigation thread, should be here, so here’s the repost with an edit below …
The Canadian government will bravely stand up and protect its citizens against human rights violations, well, only when the offending abuser is small enough …
http://www.internationalman.com/articles/this-appalling-practice-is-only-used-in-two-nations-and-the-us-is-one-of-th
Hypocritical cowards.
I found Morneau’s reply to be argumentatively awkward, no doubt because defending the indefensible is not an easy task.
Examples:
* Morneau claims to be sympathetic, yet takes no actions to protect us.
* The claim that privacy is being protected is ridiculous, the Canadian government looses control over the data as soon as it is transferred over to the IRS. Once in the hands of the US government, names will appear on secret lists, we all know this is going to happen, it’s been proven to be happening already for some time.
* Morneau labels you as “US person”, seemingly unaware that it’s a derogatory term to the person he is responding to, anyone labeling me as a “US person” is going to get it right back in the face!
* Morneau is seemingly unaware that we have a Charter to protect minorities against the tyranny of a majority, and attempts to justify the wrongs by proudly pointing out that 110 other countries are also ganging up on their own citizens who are deemed to be “US persons”!
* Morneau states that the IGA is a better outcome than allowing the US to levy additional taxes on Canadian banks with business in the US. So, let me think about that for a minute, it’s better to save the banks from earning a 30% lesser gigantic profit than it is with protecting basic human rights?
* Morneau actually advises you to consult with the abuser to ensure that you “receive appropriate advice”, um, that’s definitely NOT good advise.
I printed out Morneau’s reply letter so that I could ceremoniously rip it to shreds, I just got a whole lot more pissed off!
As for the court action, it’s worth a try for sure, but we may find that the court will put aside all integrity and rule in favour of discrimination. This is not a typical case like the others that did not involves billions of bank profits. If the courts won’t help us, we’ll just have to keep on fighting, there’s no way I’m going to bend over to this degrading treatment.
Edit:
There’s more I can say, such as his attempt to obfuscate the root issue with a lengthy description of tax information sharing between countries, there’s no comparison between people who are forced into CBT slavery and those who live under RBT. It’s one thing for a Canadian resident to have assets in a foreign country that needs to be reported to the CRA, it’s a completely different thing for a Canadian to resident to report assets in Canada to a foreign country!
What’s going on to hunt down and identify “US Persons” is a major human rights violation. The hunt for “US Persons” is discriminatory, will entrap people for life on secret lists, will trap people mistakenly, but ultimately it completely against the Canadian Charter! The CRA and the banks have no right to ask or look for place of birth or previous nationality.
There is absolutely NO BENEFIT to Canada to enable this hunt, The only benefit is to a few private corporations that do business in the US, and that IS NOT OUR PROBLEM!!! These corporations can either pay the 30% tax, or get the stop doing business in that country!
@George
>>The Finance Minister is a RACIST, period. <<
I fully agree! Anyone who calls me a "US Person" will get it right back in the face!
* sorry about my grammar in above post, I was in a hurry and did not proof read it before pressing the button.
@ Middle Finger
That’s a good comment. You are Middle Finger and perfectly entitled to type with that finger … all of us do sometimes when we are driven to rightful rage.
“Probably IRS, U.S. Treasury and maybe even NSA too.”
Didn’t Mopsick say the IRS monitors this site?
Of course the NSA does. The NSA is a hero. It’s the only US agency that actually listens to Americans.
This letter is amazing. Not once does he refer to individuals as Canadian citizens, Canadians, etc. Like the Conservatives, the Liberals refuse to acknowledge that this impacts Canadian Citizens. We are “Canadian residents who hold US citizenship” and that’s the best we’re gonna get. It’s almost as though they’re trying to condition us to believe that we are somehow different from other Canadians.
In addition, they continue to pimp the idea that CRS and Fatca are the same thing when they know damn well that CRS is based solely on residency.
@Marie. Canadians who have some sort of a US taint ARE different from other Canadians, at least in the eyes of our own government. That’s why they are perfectly happy to screw us. Why does the Canadian government believe we are different and are therefore not entitled to the same rights and protections as ordinary Canadians? Because the US government told them so, that’s why. Congress has spoken.
I am a Canadian citizen resident in Canada! Anything more is nobody’s business.
Hi guys… I tried posting this yesterday, but for whatever reason, my comment kept getting eaten and would not post.
Earlier this month, I had sent an email to my new MP, using the template found here.
(I modified the details to reflect Nate’s situation, and the last question to be more timely: “10. Your party was extremely vocal in the past speaking out against the risks of FATCAs (see interventions by colleagues Scott Brison and Emmanuel Dubourg) but has fallen silent since your election this past fall. Can you please indicate what steps, if any, your government will take to protect your constituents’ personal data?”)
I just received this response a couple of days ago:
“Thank you for emailing me. If your husband has Canadian Citizenship he is a Canadian citizen. As per your second question I would have to do more research, but if your bank accounts are in Canada then they are not the business of any foreign government. Dual citizenship is legal under Canadian law, but the American government sees dual citizenship differently. Canada is a sovereign country with its own legal body and procedures. I do support the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Canadian judicial process. As per your last few questions please call my office and you can give us your case details so we can assist you.”
I’m not sure if this is good news or bad news; I did kind of give his assistant a brief rundown when the EA tried to run interference, but I’m not sure if they know enough about FATCA.
That being said, he did confirm that “A Canadian is a Canadian” and that Canadian bank accounts are not the business of any foreign government.
Isabelle Brock is obviously an alias, and pursuing this would mean revealing my true identity… is it worth to follow up with him?
Wow Isabelle. Is that from a Liberal MP?
Yeppers.
@Isabelle Brock
I would take him up on his offer and contact his office. Once he checks with his “bosses” He’ll probably adopt the same stance as the other Libs. However, it is a good opportunity to raise awareness of this issue.
Isabelle. Maybe I am crazy, but it never bothered me to sign my name to any of the emails or written correspondences I’ve had over the past 3+ years with various government reps. They may have a list of names, but I seriously doubt they are handing them off to Canadian banks. At least, I have not yet been approached by any of the several FFI’s I now deal with as to my US status.