WITNESS SEARCH UPDATE FOR CANADIAN FATCA IGA LAWSUIT:
WE STILL SEEK MORE CANADIAN WITNESSES:
Have you experienced marital stress or breakup, or medical or psychiatric illness because Canada turned you and your family over to a foreign country — or because you were afraid and entered into IRS compliance and suffered harm, or because you are in “hiding” and can’t afford to be IRS compliant or to renounce? Be a witness.
No single witness will be “perfect” from a litigation point of view. We will be seeking more witnesses (almost) right up to the time of submission of court documents. Your specific situation, that we cannot predict, might have unique characteristics that would be helpful in the lawsuit.
If you cannot be a witness, please tell a friend who you think might be interested.
— If you are interested in becoming a witness You will describe your harm in a written affidavit which will be made public and you can contact me at stephen.kish.chair@adcs-adsc.ca See our website at www.adcs-adsc-ca
FOR THOSE CANADIANS WHO ALREADY VOLUNTEERED: Unless you have already been informed by me or by our legal team that you will not be a witness, there is still the possibility — or (for some) likelihood — that you will be asked to be a witness. I’m sorry but I cannot estimate the time it will take for our legal team to get back to you with their decision. This is because they need to “mesh” the characteristics of all of the necessary witnesses and testimonies with the actual detailed submission that contains the entirety of their evidence, which are all still evolving. Please be patient in our getting back to you with a decision. Thank you for your help.
George,
I agree that that careful selection of the appropriate word to make the point is important — but I know from experience that this is not always easy for me to do. Brock commenters keep us on our toes.
You ask for example whether Middle is a “self-documented relinquisher”? Based on the comments above, I think that Middle might not be a relinquisher.
“Relinquish” means (according to a dictionary) to surrender a possession or a right. If you never accepted U.S. citizenship or the right to U.S. citizenship — how can you relinquish it? Maybe Middle is just a “self-documented Rejecter/Never Accepter”?
Bubblebustin suggests “Administrative American”. But for the subgroup of the affected who never accepted imposition of citizenship by a foreign state, how can they call themselves any kind of an “American” — administrative or otherwise?
— As this is a witness post, I’m putting in here another plug for more Canadian witness volunteers. There is still time ….
Great point, Stephen. That’s why I’ve always thought the Obama budget proposal to provide an administrative route for “accidentals” to opt-out of the system was a non-starter.
Could you imagine Gwen, Ginny or MF marching down to the US consulate to stake their claim to it? I can’t.
BB, what are you talking about?
It is not hard to imagine Ginny, Gwen, MF and other ‘non-meaningfuls’ “marching down to the US consulate” to take advantage of an ‘Obama proposal’ designed to let ‘non-meaningfuls’ off the hook. . Why the hell wouldn’t an accidental/non-meaningful (or whatever you want to call those with tenuous, long ago US connections) take advantage of an opportunity to easily (relatively speaking) and officially remove the ball and chain?
If the proposal was a “non-starter”, it wasn’t because there were no takers.
Remember when Trump said he wanted to disenfranchise and strip citizenship from anchor babies? That definition would according to him include me, as I was born to two non Americans residing in the Land of Freedom and Glory.
I said I’d accept that in a heartbeat. Obama’s carve out was useless. So, no I didn’t run and skip across the river to line up for it. Not that I believed him for one NY minute.
I guess for some, it is difficult to understand what we who reject the imposition of citizenship by a foreign government with whom we had the most tenuous of connections feel.
You all know my story. We use a lot of terminology in our discussions here. Sometimes, even when we use different terms ( @George), I think fundamentally the underlying principles are the same.
Frankly for those still having difficulties understanding Gwen, Middlefinger, Badger, Lynne, WhiteKat, BC doc, me and others? I still try to wrap my head around why many here comply and pay taxes, especially those that came to Canada and became citizens here. But they have their reasons.
And as we always say, do what is best for your personal circumstances and what you can live with.
I cannot imagine a day where I would send a penny to the USA. That would be something I could not live with according to my conscience. I pay taxes where I earn income and reside.
Nothing else makes a particle of sense to me, legally or otherwise. And I continue to be involved because I see clearly the incredible hardships imposed on Canadians and others living overseas whether they have acquired the citizenship of the country where they reside or have not.
Former PM, Trudeau Version 1.0 said it is not the Government’s role to police the bedrooms of its citizens ( paraphrasing badly of course).
I say it is not the Canadian Government’s role to collect my or your personal banking information which is a far stretch from what the CRA collects of soil born citizens or people from any other country but the USA, and then send that information to a foreign government to try to incriminate us.
Apparently sovereignty is more important to me than to Version 2.0 PM Trudeau. How sad is that?
@Canadian Ginny
RE: “And as we always say, do what is best for your personal circumstances and what you can live with.”
This is very true. I totally understand why you and others don’t renounce. Everyone’s circumstances are different. I was a relative newcomer to Canada, being here only 10 years when I renounced and filed the required tax forms. I didn’t owe any US taxes and was not a covered expatriate. Also my renunciation fee will be repaid by US Social Security payments. If I live as long as some of my relatives this will amount to about 30 years of benefits, hundreds of thousands of US dollars over time. In my case the joke is on the US government and IRS. Money will be leaving the good old USA on my behalf.
The unfortunate situation is that if someone has certain types of assets or over 2 million net worth, they can be more of a FATCA target. We know the IRS will attempt to extract money from innocent Canadians for taxes and penalties. Also the whole matter of FATCA and the IGA is very unfair and immoral. This is why those who have renounced/relinquished should continue to support this litigation along with those who are just saying no.
One more comment: It’s always possible that US Social Security could go bankrupt with the way things are going down there. I hope to at least recover the renunciation fee before that.
@PatCanadian
I apologize for not parsing my words well. I have no quarrel with anyone who is compliant. But I was mainly referring those who didn’t enter any program when they received condor advice nor have sought a CLN. I totally understand when someone is renouncing and files and wants to make a clean tax break.
I have a lawyer friend whose wife was born in the USA and still has very strong connections to it. She is also a signatory on a lot of his businesses and accounts. He knew about FATCA around the same time I found out about it. We have had many an interesting discussion by a fireplace with good wine as to our respective paths. They have faithfully filed for years ( long before I knew it was a requirement) and always will.He greatly admires the work we here have been doing and is a supporter.
Having those kinds of assets as many home owners in Toronto and Vancouver face would be quite daunting as a risk factor.I just live in good old Hicksville town where house prices and property taxes remain reasonable and have had negligible increase in value.
Again, apologies. In fact one of my factors for being involved is the way I deeply regret how so many people got hoodwinked into the condor programs before word got out about options. It’s in my nature to take a long view on things and work out what I feel are best strategies. And it’s quite possible I have got it all wrong but I’d be ok with that as well.
Visiting hours for when Gwen and I are incarcerated are noon to midnight. She’s not much of a morning person. It would be like being back in terrible boarding school but with a nicer room mate.
Which is just my clumsy way of saying she and I have taken on this cause on behalf of all of you, recognizing your individual circumstance and choices or lack of. Someone had to do it and Gwen and I just so happened to be able to. I know it may be hard to understand our perspectives, but really it is no big deal for either of us other than how proud honored and humbled we feel to be the representatives in our law suit. We speak frequently to each other and the thing we always agree on and remind each other is that we never want to let any of you down. That’s the committee’s mission statement, our lawyers’ and others who are directly involved.
@Ginny
And bless you for that friend. If I were close I’d treat you to Tunnel BBQ (but I heard it closed). How about Franco’s or The Blue Danube?
@Lake Superior Guy
Yes sadly the TBQ closed down and the property was sold recently to the U of Windsor for the Downtown campus it is assembling. Joe Arvay also has great memories of eating there. In fact I sent him some clippings of its closing and he got a kick out of that.
Franco’s has a new owner and the food is not so tasty anymore. But for sure it is a date at the Blue Danube. Especially when the violin players are there. Is it still PC to call them Gypsy players as they named themselves?
Nice to know we shared an area. It’s lonely down here at times. I feel everyone is from the sunshine coast or TO or Calgary.
Sorry folks for the topic drift but so nice to hear from you again LSG. Don’t be such a stranger here. And thanks for the kind words and dinner invite. Be careful what you offer.
My understanding is that only so-called naturalized US citizens can relinquish, while those who are native born cannot relinquish (i.e., they can never shed their place of birth), therefore they can only renounce.
I fall into the place of birth category, and I left the US as a minor when my parents moved back to Canada (both parents were Canadian), and I’ve lived in Canada all my life except for those few short years in the USA as a minor.
I can honestly say that I never accepted the citizen contract. A pledge of allegiance while in elementary school by a minor is a contract that is null and void. How can I honestly renounce a contract that I’ve never competently agreed to?
If Obama had offered a “get out of jail free” card, I would have had to refuse the offer because, having never agreed to US citizenship in the first place, I’ve always been free of US citizenship.
What does irk me considerably, is not so much what the US is attempting to do, no, what is much worse in my mind is what the Canadian government is attempting to do by agreeing to that FATCA IGA.
It is the Canadian government that has passed enabling legislation, that allow certain corporations to seek out and rebrand certain Canadians as “US persons”, it is the Canadian government that is handing over my personal information to a foreign government that intends to do harm to me, it is the Canadian government that is putting my life in danger should I be abducted while unknowingly flying over US territory.
What harm is the US able to do to me without the cooperation of the Canadian government? All of the blood, so to speak, is on the Canadian governments hands!
Canada has been my home for many years, and now I no longer feel comfortable. It is a great concern to me that after building an entire life here in Canada, I’m in danger of possibly being handed over to the USA as a tax fugitive. It’s not just me that I’m worried about, it’s also my family that will suffer if I’m abducted and/or financially ruined.
What is going on here, is a bartering and rebranding of who is and who is not a real Canadian, this sort of nonsense is going to destroy the country, we must put an end to it.
Our new PM must be reminded that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian, if he refuses to agree, and continues to actively attempt to impose an alternate Citizenship on selected people based on their location of birth and other arbitrary criteria, then he should be unceremoniously booted out hard!
@Ginny, Oh nooooooooo……Tunnel BBQ closed. So unhealthy but so tasty……. I suspect cardio health has now improved locally.
In regards to housing you have family affordable housing. 🙂
I hope Sir Cedrics Fish and Chips is still around. My favoritie activity was getting a take away and eating it at QE2 Park.
——
On this side of the pond where you can get great fish and chips everywhere, I am also knee deep in the BeLeave debate. Cough cough…..notice the use of term. 🙂
The UK and EU immigration policy rules are like the merging of DNA in a petri dish and out comes a deformed monster. The immigration monster being that EU Nationals can freely migrate to the UK with no controls or visa fees but Non-EU Nationals like Canadians, Jamaicans, Americans have to pay tremendous fees and are subject to great scrutiny. Since my partner is Non-EU, my family experienced the full force of that discrimination.
Anyways, just like the FATCA IGA we have people here saying that its OK to discrminiate against non-EU families to ensure “market access.”
Does that sound familiar?
@Middle Finger, I am native born and committed a relinquishing act that the USA was not pleased about for other reasons. I lost my citizenship by doing the action but as you say…….you can not shed your place of birth so you are subject to discrimination for the rest of your life.
@Middle Finger, the Government of Canada has involuntarily stripped you of your Canadian Citizenship. (Notice my ever careful choice of words.)
Yes, I fully agree and would say that it is a violation of your human rights to impose upon you a citizenship that you neither requested, nor wanted, nor need. Sadly in the early 19th Century, some of the greatest statesmen in the USA knew all this!!!
@Ginny, as a lawyer there has got to be a phrase/term utilizing legal type language that describes your “citizenship status” with respect to the USA.
I have preferred the term “clinging nationality” as there have been papers using that phrase.
But above all we must stop using the term dual national.
Well said @middlefinger
@Canadian Ginny
I too have family in your area …. and elsewhere in Ontario ….. and in the Prairies ….. and the left coast with its warm wet westerly winds …… and south of the border in the land that has forgotten Freedom and its Constitution …. and of course the West Indies where the Rum comes from.
@WK
MF said:
“If Obama had offered a “get out of jail free” card, I would have had to refuse the offer because, having never agreed to US citizenship in the first place, I’ve always been free of US citizenship.”
Spoken like a true non-American. Has nothing to do with the practical aspects (for some) of the ill-fated Obama proposal.
@Canadian Ginny
Your words are always parsed well. And no apologies please. We all should be apologizing to you and Gwen for not giving more support.
I agree with Middle Finger that “Our new PM must be reminded that a Canadian is a Canadian is a Canadian….” and just wished to emphasize that we should remain united in our fight. Our circumstances may be very different and require very different approaches to the FATCA problem but the injustice is there for all to see.
@BB,
One ‘true non-American’s’ (MF) refusal to accept a free gift of official ‘non US citizenship’ status should it be offered (a pipe dream anyway) does not reflect on what the majority of ‘true non-Americans’ would do in that situation should the pipe dream become a reality.
I am a ‘true non-American’ just like MF, yet I would happily pay a couple hundred bucks (a reasonable admin fee) for proof of non-US status if that is all it took. In my opinion so would the majority of ‘true non-Americans’ PRESUMING they are cognizant of and have acquired a rational, healthy fear of the repercussions of being considered a ‘US person’. I think many are still in the dark.
Such a move (i.e. accepting an offering of official non-US status) would not minimize one’s ‘non-Americanism’ in the least. Quite the contrary actually as one could argue that not to take up such a gracious (sarcasm) offer of freedom from slavery could imply one is a ‘true American’ rather than a ‘true non-American’. I highly suspect that even Gwen and Ginny would take advantage of such an opportunity, if it were not for the lawsuit they are currently embroiled in.
Disclaimer: my situation is different than many other ‘true non-Americans’ who post their opinions at Brock in that I and my children have a future US inheritance to consider, so practicality trumps any stubborn refusal to acquire a piece of paper that would prove to the banks that I am not what I never felt I was in the first place.
@Ginny. @Gwen
If there was no Canadian lawsuit, might you agree to pay a couple hundred bucks to the US government to get a piece of paper that said you were not a US person?
@George
Let’s look at the term “clinging” itself, as I feel it can lead to misconceptions. “Clinging” can be either emotional or administrative, and by accepting either one accepts their USness. Both Middle Finger and I share the administrative burden the US seeks to impose upon us, yet MF’s inability to share the emotional aspect of clinging nationality has prevented him/her from investing in US citizenship administratively – whereas I have accepted both. But that’s my business.
None of this would be happening if the US didn’t weaponize US citizenship with taxation. When people are under attack, or perceived to be under attack, they respond in a great number of ways in the hope of removing themselves as targets. Ironically, in an effort to remove myself as a target, I put myself in the US’s sights. MF is a target administratively only because the Canadian government has made him/her one.
@MF, as you consider yourself to be solely Canadian you are correct to direct your anger solely at the Canadian government for placing any administrative burden the US government claims you have over your Canadian citizenship. As a solely Canadian person with no “clinging nationality” emotionally, should you be angry with the US for what it is attempting to impose on you – or should you sleep well knowing it doesn’t affect you?
Regardless of my choice to comply, I feel precisely as you do about what the Canadian government has done. That is why I have offered myself as a witness in the lawsuit as a 100% Canadian.
LOL…clinging emotional US citizenship versus clinging administrative US citizenship. Is this new Broccolingo?
@WK
With the US’s history of inclusiveness concerning its citizenship, it wouldn’t surprise me if the US down the road made all those Obama proposal renunciations US citizens again – just for showing up.
I prefer the term “contamination” as it reflects an unwanted “foreign” substance!
@BB, you make too many points for me to keep up. Still can’t wrap my head around why ‘true non-Americans’ generally speaking would not press the magic button that opened the door towards freedom if presented to them.