Just-obtained Directive from the Federal Court:
“Written directions received from the Court: The Honourable Madam Justice Mactavish dated 19-JUL-2019 directing that “The parties are advised as follows: 1. barring any currently unknown contingencies, the Court’s decision will be issued Monday, July 22, 2019, at approximately 2:00 pm EST…”
From France via Bloomberg:
“French Court Declines to Overturn Tax Treaty With U.S.
By Gregory Viscusi and Gaspard Sebag
France’s top administrative court has ruled that French authorities can pass on tax information to their U.S. counterparts, rejecting a motion by dual citizens who have been trying for years to stop France cooperating with the U.S.’s FATCA tax treaty.
The Conseil d’Etat ruled Friday that France’s measures to implement FATCA, or the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, didn’t contravene the country’s privacy laws. It also rejected arguments that U.S. doesn’t adequately cooperate with French tax authorities in return….”
“…In its statement, the Association of Accidental Americans said it would “file a complaint of breach of EU law with the European Commission”, regretting that the Council of State refused to question the Court of the European Union to decide this issue…”
The Association des Américains Accidentels (AAA) [on its FB site] says: “If the government [of France] think we’ll admit we [are] defeated, he is mistaken” [translation].
— Thoughts from a few of the AAA FB commenters: “…Mais il faut continuer. Bon courage…Courage pour le combat. Je suis avec vous…La France qui lâche ses enfants…C’est sur tous les fronts et depuis des décennies que la France baisse son froc devant les US, et avec le sourire en plus…”
Justice MacTavish decision to be released Monday July 22, 2019
Going to be on tenter hooks this weekend with this and the court decision regarding Monte Silver’s challenge of the Transition Tax expected around then too!
Monte corrected me. The decision in his case could take a month or two.
So we will learn Monday if Judge MacTavish views Canada as a sovereign country or as a protectorate of the United States of America.
Object to the word ‘protectorate’ . Who are they protecting us from ? As far as I see, they are protecting us from the rest of the world.
Protection has multiple meanings, but this is the meaning most appropriate:
Even though I sadly realize that this ruling is just a stepping stone to the Supreme Court (but only if it deems the case worthy of its consideration) I’ve been anxiously waiting for this ruling. It would be such a boost to morale if she rules in our favour. I want to cling to the hope of justice coming someday but they don’t make it easy to do so. Personal privacy and national sovereignty are being downgraded daily to the status of irrelevant and people, in general, don’t seem to be troubled by that. At the very least we’ve shown we are aware and we do care. Special thoughts of support and appreciation go out to our plaintiffs. If it’s been tough for us, think what it has been for them.
Maybe I would not put that news from France out before/combined with Monday Canadian Court announcement. France does not have a Charter of Rights that prohibits discrimination based on national origin.
JC: I hope that the existence of our Charter in Canada will bring us better fortune on Monday than they received today in France. Meanwhile, my heart hurts for our French compatriots.
So France is not a country, it’s a territorial slave of the US
So when does the fundraising start for the appeals process?
@ Tim Smyth
I’ve been thinking about that too. I won’t be able to offer a year’s worth of pension cheques again but I still want to help out. The FATCA nut needs to be cracked and it would make me so happy if the break through happens in Canada. We’ve got so little, politically, to be proud of here but I think (I hope) Canadians aren’t as bad as our politicians who betray us on many issues. Our leaders, in name only, dance to the tunes of their masters, all to the rhythm of their own beat.
The judge will rule against us. Canadian charter of rights won’t matter. Today’s politicians, break the laws and the judge in this case will just break the law and make up stupid excuses. There is zero chance we win this. It already breaks laws with the privacy issue. Yet, Canada just says screw our privacy laws. We will break as many laws as we want. And they will break this one as well. When you have felons as judges you can’t win this lawsuit. Watch what happens on the 22nd. It will be one broken law after another by the judge. Guaranteed outcome.
That’s deep. Very deep. It’s clearly important to you that FATCA is upheld in Canada.
The result tomorrow will be interesting but not particularly relevant because whoever loses will appeal (as upsetting as that is to you.)
As a significant financial contributor to this legal challenge, I have been anxiously awaiting this verdict but I have to admit that I am very pessimistic. When watching the trial in January, I was dismayed at how totally out of her depth the judge was in these issues and I thought our legal team’s performance was lacklustre, at best. It was clear, at least to me, that the judge didn’t get it and Arvay, et al., couldn’t get her to get it. While @Sparticus’ cynicism might have some validity, I think the biggest issue working against us is that, infuriatingly, no one not directly affected by this can seem to comprehend the blatant injustice of it all or muster the moral fortitude to take action on behalf of those affected. If I am wrong and she rules in our favour, I will stand delightfully corrected…but I don’t think that is what will happen tomorrow.
Also, due to changes in life circumstances, I will not have the disposable income this time around to contribute significantly to the appeal. I hope some others with deeper pockets can step up this time…
I thought that was the expectation at this point is that we would be ruled against, as a speed bump on the route to the Supreme Court. And we would then see what they say and appeal.
I note references to an appeal as if it’s a given. The SC may decide there are no grounds for appeal.
I thought Arvay was dull and uninspiring, the crown’s lawyer arrogant, and the judge not up to the task, i.e. unprepared.
Just look at where the so called “judge” resides and their citizenship. I have absolutely NO confidence in any kind of a “fair trial” in this country. People are basically at war with their own so called “government” full of un-punishable corruption.
This is the Wikipedia article about Justice Mactavish and, in particular, notice that her most famous case and very controversial ruling was against American war deserters seeking asylum in Canada:
Also, look at this 24 June 2019 story to see where Justice Mactavish is headed next, after she’s done with our case…
Is it possible that she was picked for our case knowing that she would rule against us in favour of American interests? And, is she moving up to the Appeals Court to be able strike it down again at the next level? Surely, she wouldn’t be allowed to be a judge on the appeal, too?
She gave refugee status to this American. So maybe all hope is not lost
I posted to soon. I hadn’t read the article all the way. Turns out mactavish is the one who revoked her refugee status.
Maybe I should be worry
Well actually the court said 2pm EST not 2pm EDT. EST is the real time. Maybe she is planning to strike down Daylight Savings Time on the grounds that it is a US law imposed on Canada.
Aaron. Did you read the report? Judge MacTavish overruled the IRB and ruled against the plaintiff. She (the judge) was ready to send her back to Florida to face 30 years in prison for having consensual sex with a 16 yr old boy.
Contrast this with Epstein’s virtual house arrest.
Apparently the IRB stuck to it’s guns although it’s not at all clear from the story.
A promise (fulfilled) to move Justice Mactavish to the federal appeals court (a promotion I presume) might have been a subtle inducement to rule in favour of the federal defendants but that’s conspiracy theory, right? Mustn’t go there. I want to trust our justice system but sometimes it’s hard to not be skeptical. No matter what her ruling is I will never cease to be very, very proud of this effort to challenge Canada’s blind acceptance of FATCA and I can never find the words to properly thank Gwen, Kazia and Ginny for standing up for all of us. The ADCS team of organizers and lawyers have done an excellent job and I’m grateful for all their hard work. I’ve never been involved in anything like this before and it has made me feel that you can never go wrong when you try to fight an injustice.