189 thoughts on “Be on the Lookout! Bubblebustin to be on CBC The National- on the #TransitionTax”

1. I seriously think there’s no ROI to be had in the comments here. Most of the CBC trolls are so intellectually and emotionally crippled that it’s simply not worth engaging. With the Globe & Mail you’ve got a fighting chance, sometimes it’s worth trying, but the CBC is a waste of my abundant spare time. (I love the CBC – I’m just complaining about the dolts on their comment boards.)

2. @MNM

   I haven’t seen the segment yet but had the same concerns about the article. I plan on writing a thoughtful response to the author.

3. Just watched the interview on the National. You and your husband did well, BB, conveying the seriousness and impact of the issue.

4. I’m sorry, but with comments on the article mainly like this one…

   Your a US citizen. Pay your taxes due to the IRS! what on earth ever made you think you could avoid US taxes just because you took on a duel citizenship?

   …its knot worth responding two sutch stoopidity. Noe logic will evver penetrate these rat-sized skullz. spelling deliberate, to lower myself to their level.

   Though the above commenter got one thing right: anyone with two passports, one of which is American, is engaged in “duel” citizenship. The USA is dueling over your money…while making up its own rules!

5. I am not reading the comments. Pointless.

   While I’m happy the issue is getting some press, not so pleased with the reporting. First, that it’s a problem for “Americans in Canada” not “Canadians who also happen to have US citizenship”. But I’m particularly annoyed by the comment right at the end about CRA assisting the IRS in collecting. That would only happen for US citizens only, not for duals!

   The only mention of non-compliance suggests that it wouldn’t work, which is of course nonsense and likely to scare off-the-radar duals into doing something the absolutely should not.

6. The Broadcast missed that the government of Canada is shirking it obligation to protect its resident citizens.

   Comments: if everyone here landed one instead of talking about them, then that may turn the tide. Sometimes with a few comments from people actually knowledgeable about the subject, then that may cause reduced comments from those who know nothing.

7. Generally I’m willing to engage with comment boards, but I steer clear of the CBC. It’s 98 percent borderline pre-literate. On par with Fox News.

8. I just watched the article on Newsworld, and I feel that BB and husband did a fine job. I am, however, left with a taste in my mouth that this was just another example of CBC using whatever evidence it can to bash president Trump. Same old same old…..
   This is not meant to suggest any endorsement of Trump…..just an opinion.

9. Kudos to BB and husband for trying to get the message to Morneau and for being willing to stick their necks out. bravo!

10. I don’t see it as Trump-bashing. They did make the point that it was a potentially unintended consequence of a law designed to repatriate earnings held outside the US by large US corporations.

    I get that there’s only so much you can accomplish in a short piece, but overall I wasn’t happy with it, for reasons discussed above. Except of course for BB, who did well.

11. Clear and urgent statements from BB. Most Canadian not in the know will take it as aimed at americans in Canada and another bit of Trump trashing. Piece is way too short . CBC did its usual.
    After all, pot and letting illegals into the country are far more than Canadian souvereignity . Trudeau,Morneau et al -what a hopeless mess.

12. 99% of commenters on the CBC article think that Canada should stop selling Canadian companies to the US and start GIVING Canadian companies to the US.

    Canada needs to hold a referendum on this. If 50.0001% of Canadians agree with the commenters on the article, well then that’s what Canada should do.

13. Oh my, the CBC piece was way too short to even begin to address the distress that TT is causing in Canada. However there was oodles of time for flooding, wasn’t there, even though we all understand the effects of that. Nevertheless, for the few seconds allotted Bubblebustin and her husband did very well and we thank them for putting themselves out there on behalf of all the others who also face a very difficult US 2017 tax filing, thanks to the nincompoops who wrote the TT portion of Trump’s tax reform bill.

14. Thanks Nononymous for the News World suggestion.
    http://www.cbc.ca/news/thenational/trump-s-tax-reform-affects-canadian-residents-1.4642608
    Just wondering, if someone decides to #NotPayingThis, obviously they wouldn’t be calculating how much they don’t intend to pay, so how can the IRS calculate the amount they wish to extort if the numbers are not given to them?

15. Will people go in there on the comments and at least support John Richardson battling away.

    Just uptick his comments. I believe upticks are anonymous.

    It appears to me that he is up against a bunch of Trumpers and when he says anything about Canada getting hurt by it all and that the U.S. is getting away with confiscation that he gets down voted.

16. I have gone on the site but everything is waiting for my profile name to be approved.

    I have been upticking but probably even more, downticking.

    There are 3 fellows over there that know what is going on.

    I think BB & BFF did a terrific job and John Richardson did as well on the article.

    Unfortunately, just too much of the wrong angles offered by the reporting. No idea after all these years, how to fix this. Or even to get those people to actually read……….so depressing……..

17. JR is doing his level best but is being outvoted by the ‘why don’t you pay your fair share ‘crowd. I fear reading the comments or voting on them is a waste of time.

18. Embee – “if someone decides to #NotPayingThis, obviously they wouldn’t be calculating how much they don’t intend to pay, so how can the IRS calculate the amount they wish to extort if the numbers are not given to them?”

    They can’t, and why would they even want to, since it would be uncollectable under the treaty. The point for the USG is Apple’s billions. They’re not going to risk having the whole shaky law struck down, in a fruitless endeavour to steal a fraction of that from a small foreign company in Canada.

    But to file and not to provide the figures and pay could create a problem, in that the form would have to be processed. Better not to file or to renounce (no final filings). Appointment, oath, CLN. Job done.

19. Or would this be a fourth possible option, for those for whom renouncing or not filing are not acceptable choices:

    An Offer in Compromise (offer) is an agreement between you (the taxpayer) and the IRS that settles a tax debt for less than the full amount owed. The offer program provides eligible taxpayers with a path toward paying off their tax debt and getting a fresh start. The ultimate goal is a compromise that suits the best interest of both the taxpayer and the IRS. To be considered, generally you must make an appropriate offer based on what the IRS considers your true ability to pay.

    https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f656b.pdf

    Could this allow the owner/shareholder to offer much much much less, and allow the IRS to accept the much lower offer because it really does reflect true ability to pay?

20. No, since the taxpayer can access the money by paying it out from the company, there is no chance that the IRS will accept an OIC.

21. If the US is so unreasonable that they not only demand that owners of small foreign companies pay such a huge demand, but also refuse to compromise, even if it means bankruptcy, then it’s not likely that the US is going to turn around and say, “Oh sorry, of course we didn’t mean you. Here’s a law to let you off the hook.”

    There seems to be no basis for the theory that they didn’t intend the transition tax to apply to owner/shareholders of small foreign companies. On the contrary, they appear to have taken extra special care to close all possible loopholes for CFCs – such as the IRS Notice hastily banning all changes in business classification, or anything else that might result in reducing the tax.

    Subpart F underpins the whole thing. It would be uncharacteristic, to say the least, for them to turn around and acknowledge that it’s unreasonable to tax the imaginary foreign income of US expats. They do it with the exit tax, and those voluntary victims aren’t even USCs. Why would they suddenly have qualms about unfairness, when taxing the imaginary foreign income of compliant US citizens?

    #Don’tPayTheFirstInstalmentHopingForRefund

22. Congratulations to BB and Mr. BB for having the courage to go public! Mr. BB, the camera seemed attracted by your nose – I think you have a very handsome nose. I saw the piece on Newsworld 3 times last night – it was so short it went by very quickly so I wanted to be sure I didn’t miss any of it tax on “Americans” living in Canada, barely mentioned that some of the people affected are “duals” who are also citizens of Canada. Didn’t mention that the CRA won’t collect from the IRS from Canadian citizens, or is that only for personal taxes, not businesses? It hardly gave any background information, just the explanation that the BBs don’t have a bank account or address in the US to emphasize their lack of financial ties to the US. This item should have been much more extensive, but BB and Mr. BB did a fantastic job with what they had the opportunity to say.

23. Thanks, BB and Mr. BB, for your bravery in standing up to tell this story — and to John Richardson for short and simple explanation of the injustice. I’ve learned that getting the story across through mass media cannot be done effectively with a sound byte taken from a much longer interview for a short TV clip and, again and seemingly always, being referred to as Americans who are Canadian residents when we, first and foremost — resident in Canada — should be considered and that EMPHASIZED the Canadian citizens we are as in *A Canadian is A Canadian is A Canadian*. It is not an easy thing for the average Canadian mass-media news viewer to understand in such small segments and has taught me, from my past interviews with journalists, that there is always much more to any small news story we view on the nightly news. (I decided long ago I would not again try to tell my family’s story that way / few really care and many of the resulting comments are very hurtful and hard to not take personally.)

    BB is absolutely correct when she says in the clip,

    We need the help of the Canadian government to do that (come through this unscathed). They cannot ignore this situation!

24. Ted and I both thank you all for your encouraging comments, and the compliment on his nose. He got a chuckle over that. Hard to laugh these days. I’m glad the interviews are over, but now how to use them to our advantage?

    I definitely intend to contact Evan Dyer about his comment that the tax treaty may allow the CRA to collect the tax on behalf of the IRS. Who told him that, his contact at the Department of Finance, Dan Lauzon? If he did, and neglected to inform CBC that the CRA won’t collect from Canadian, he should hear about it.

    The online, radio and TV coverage can be accessed in the following link:

    http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/transition-tax-trump-corporations-1.4639020

    @14:30:

    http://www.cbc.ca/listen/shows/cbc-news-the-world-at-six

    http://www.cbc.ca/player/play/1222849091745

    I think the radio coverage by Elizabeth Thompson is the most informative.

25. Broadcasters and journalists may be wary of stating that the treaty does not provide for the CRA to collect from citizens. Bad things can happen, even without the CRA collecting, once a US tax debt has been assessed and all US avenues of appeal lapsed or failed. Passport revocation, for instance.

    Not filing is safer.