The Alliance for the Defeat of Citizenship Taxation, a non-profit corporation registered in Canada, wants to move forward with a lawsuit targeting Citizenship Taxation in U.S. federal District Court.
At present ADCT is NOT accepting donations. We estimate legal costs of U.S. $200,000 to take litigation through U.S. Court of Appeals. If interested in possibility of being a major donor (minimum donation $US50,000), please contact ADCT at information@cbtlawsuit.ca.
Our lawsuit will focus on the core doctrine of “Citizenship Taxation” which serves as the basis for the extraterritorial reach of U.S. tax obligations as well as the annual financial reporting requirements imposed upon permanent residents and citizens of other countries. The litigation will also seek to overturn other U.S. laws made applicable to persons who may have been born in the United States but have long since had little or no nexus to United States. In addition, the legal action would challenge the excessive costs and time delays imposed on those seeking to abandon U.S. citizenship.
John Richardson,
Carol Tapanila
Patricia Moon
Stephen Kish
The Directors of the
Alliance for the Defeat of Citizenship Taxation (www.citizenshiptaxation.ca) 283 College Street, P.O. Box 67678 Toronto, Ontario, CANADA M5T 3M1
Bravo!
And the legal opinion from Jim Butera? Can that be published?
The Issue http://citizenshiptaxation.ca/the-issue/
Subpeona Nina Olsen to testify!!!
I applaud this move. Would that deep pockets back this effort. If they do not, however, 1000 people giving $50; 500 people giving $100; and 500 people giving $200. I wonder if that’s possible.
I’m not religious, but God Bless ADCT for stepping forward with this outstanding move! I can only hope that supporters of means can be found quickly so that this lawsuit can strike while the iron is blistering hot! I sincerely hope that at least some of these possible donors are already waiting in the wings. Many, many thanks to all of you!
Thank you ADCT for this.
I’m happy to see that you will be attacking the disease (CBT) and not just a symptom (FATCA).
And thank you to all the members of ADCS, ADCT and the Isaac Brock Society for your dedication. Many of you can walk away from this issue entirely, having relinquished/renounced your citizenship.
@Stephen Kish
I guess the days of standing on 18 inches of curb, carrying “Say No to FATCA” picket signs, on Front Street in Toronto are behind us? lol
@Marie, standing on the curb with fellows was a significant turning point for me, and helped buoy up my spirits for the protracted course I had to see through in order to be finally free of the burden of US extraterritorial CBT. Grateful thanks always to Stephen and the others for organizing and participating in that day. When I met other Brockers at that and subsequent events, it was immediately apparent that I was in excellent company – a judgement confirmed by everything that has taken place before that day and since.
Good to know the fight is continuing. I think $50,000 is a little rich for my blood. During the earlier ADSC-ADCS funding cycles, I gave regularly and significantly but not at anything approaching the $50,000 level. If you aren’t successful in getting funding from major donors–and a new funding cycle begins on Jan 15, 2018–I’ll consider contributing at a much lower level. But I hope some people to step up to bat at the $50,000 level.
Can’t a gofundme be set up? Can’t hurt.
Why does it have to be Butera? Wouldn’t a constitutional lawyer be more suitable?
“The lawsuit will require plaintiffs who have suffered a distinct, not “speculative”, injury and funds to pay legal costs.”
I’m happy to see this lawsuit go forward but I’d like to see plaintiffs with “standing” — up to American extraordinary standards — located before funding is started. They will have to be very dedicated to righting the wrong of US CBT (also fairly young, in good health, articulate and not too poor).
This legal route is in pursuit of enduring remedy beyond the clutches of political vicissitudes.
I’m rapidly coming to the conclusion that this has to get worse before it gets better.
What we need is some raving patriot congressman to get laws in place that allow for the setting up of an internment camp in the USA just for those that are not in tax compliance around the world, and to threaten (and act) massive economic sanctions on any country not taking part in sending these people to the camps.
Ok, that might be a little too much to “hope” for…..
$50,000?
I’m afraid my need might just be greater, sorry.
Internment camps in the USA are so last-century. In modern times the USA’s internment camps are in Cuba and other cooperating countries.
What Jane and JC said.
I will, of course, help, as I have helped for the Canadian lawsuit but it won’t be to the $50k level unfortunately. I also have a feeling finding plaintifs will be difficult as the US hasn’t actively pursued anybody outside of their borders and let the banks and foreign executors do their job. Saying that, maybe the few people whose “foreign” inheritance has been frozen pending IRS approval could help. There is at least one in France, member of the association there and one Canadian asking for help on American Expatriates.
@Mike
“What we need is some raving patriot congressman to get laws in place that allow for the setting up of an internment camp in the USA just for those that are not in tax compliance around the world”
Extraditions on that scale? We are talking about millions of innocent people worldwide, right? All this for not completing an unnecessary zero-tax return or not declaring their local savings accounts? I doubt the European Court of Justice would allow European taxpayers living in Europe to be extradited en masse to the States or Guantanamo or wherever else…
I just want to chime that I have heard from several different people in private that they believe this is the wrong idea at this time especially if a large donor is not found within 30 days. Basically the view that has been given to me is that the are are already enough lawsuits in the air and more work should go towards lobbying and drafting legislation.
Second, I am of the belief that suing various individuals involved in implements of FATCA in their personal capacity for various forms of libel, defamation, slander, and torturous interference would be a far more effective use of time and money. For example former Senators Levin, Baucus, Notre Dame Prof. Michael Kirsch, Former US President Obama, Former IRS Commissioner Shulman, Dick Harvey, Elise Bean could all be sued NOT in American court but in Canadian court for various forms of torturous interference and slander.
The December 15, 2017 “final draft” of the tax bill is now out.
Can readers so inclined please look through the bill (not yet voted on) and tell us whether we are helped, or whether we are harmed even more in any respect?
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=4330091-Tax-Cuts-And-Jobs-Act-2017
https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/4330091/Tax-Cuts-And-Jobs-Act-2017.pdf
If you find a better link please post that link.
From Tax bill:
“1. Residence
U.S. persons are subject to tax on their worldwide income. The Code defines U.S. person to include all U.S. citizens and residents as well as domestic entities such as partnerships, corporations, estates and certain trusts….
“….For legal entities, the Code determines whether an entity is subject to U.S. taxation on its worldwide income on the basis of its place of organization. For purposes of U.S. tax law, a corporation or partnership is treated as domestic if it is organized or created under the laws of the United States or of any State, unless, in the case of a partnership, the Secretary prescribes otherwise by regulation.1302 All other partnerships and corporations (that is, those organized under the laws of foreign countries) are treated as foreign.1303 In contrast, place of organization is not determinative of residence under taxing jurisdictions that use factors such as situs, management and control to determine residence. As a result, legal entities may have more than one tax residence, or, in some case, no residence.1304 Only domestic corporations are subject to U.S. tax on a worldwide basis. Foreign corporations are taxed only on income that has a sufficient connection with the United States….”
Sec. 14103 (p. 387) Transition tax has been expanded to include minority US corporate shareholders of foreign corporations which aren’t CFCs (amended Code Sec. 965(e)(1)(B), definition of “Specified Foreign Corporation”, p. 403). Foreign corporations with US individual shareholders are excluded from 965(e)(1)(B) but not from 965(e)(1)(A).
So this is the smoking gun: Repubs know about the “transition tax on individuals” issue and don’t give a flying fig about fixing it. If Repubs had added the “with respect to which one or more domestic corporations is a United States shareholder” limitation to BOTH limbs of the “Specified Foreign Corporation test” then individuals abroad would explicitly be excluded from paying the transition tax. Repubs failed to do so.
Sec. 14201 (p. 423) GILTI as Subpart F income (aka screw owners of service businesses) remains in conference bill.
Sec. 14202 (p. 437) Domestic C corporations get 50% off the tax rate on GILTI; you, dear human, don’t.
Stephen – here’s another link – direct to the house.gov website – the document appears to be the same file. http://docs.house.gov/billsthisweek/20171218/CRPT-115HRPT-466.pdf
I found an interesting footnote in the conference report (page 1014 of the pdf)
Footnote 1513 reads “Sec. 962 allows individuals to make the election for a specific taxable year, subject to regulations provided by the Secretary. ”
It looks to me like the section 962 election could be used to a) make the effective rate on the transition subpart F inclusion the same for individuals as for corporations (with the possible exception of the application of NIIT); and b) fix the problem noted by Eric above with regard to sec 14202. Such an election appears to also allow the use of section 960 to treat foreign tax paid/accrued by the CFC as available for FTC on the individual return.
Eric and Karen,
Thanks for trying to sort through the difficult language related to the transition tax, individual shareholders of corporations, etc.
— But do you find in the very long draft tax bill anything that gives any relief to, or contradicts, this statement which I find in the bill: “U.S. persons are subject to tax on their worldwide income.”?
Can you confirm that this bill does not repeal citizenship-based taxation for individuals?