Author Archives: Petros

Global News has the following report:

U.S. sues Vancouver dual citizen for over $1M for not reporting accounts

This is big news. And it reveals and confirms my prediction of what FATCA would be used for:  To go after the bank accounts of “US persons” living in foreign countries by using FBAR fines and FATCA information. I called it the Master Plan.

A few observations on this article:

(1) Clearly this lawsuit should help the ADSC lawsuit. Here is a case of real hazard that failure to protect Canadians from IRS intrusiveness will result in.

(2) This case is not based on tax owed, and so this is purely an FBAR matter. But IRS code has no jurisdiction in this matter.

(3) The article doesn’t say where the lawsuit is taking place, but then says that the papers were deposited in Seattle in Federal court.

(4) The fine of $100,000 or 50% of account is wrong: Or did it go up from $10,000?

(5) President Donald Trump has made no difference in the persecution of so-called “Americans abroad”.

(6) This is a Canadian living in Canada. He is therefore an innocent person being sued by the government of the USA, for small money. I.e., he is a minnow, and what Nina Olsen has called a benign actor.

(7) The lawsuit shows that QI provisions are not sufficent for the USA government to seize Canadian accounts in Canada.

(8) The Justice Department is not suing this person in Canadian court. But perhaps that will come next.

See also:

U.S. government suing Canadian resident for $1.1M over bank form

The current media narrative is anti-Trump 24-7. He is bad. And of course all those celebrities and other people are waiting in line to flee the country and renounce their citizenship. So I was contacted by a reporter of a well-known news network who is writing an article on people who are renouncing their USA citizenship because of Donald Trump. He asked me:

1. If there has been an increase of traffic to isaabrocksociety.ca since the November election.
2. If anyone had contacted us with questions about renouncing directly linked to Trump.

Here is my response:

There has been no uptick in traffic to our website, and no one anti-Trump has contacted me in my function at Isaac Brock.  I do not predict an uptick in renunciations over Trump. People are renouncing for practical reasons. Anti-Trumpism is fanatical, but Trump has not so far caused real problems for American citizens. FATCA, citizenship taxation, the Obama enforcement of FBAR, CBT and FATCA, and the compliance condors have created real problems for so-called “Americans” abroad–especially those of us who are little older and more established financially. Trump just seems to make some American citizens really angry but has not yet substantially harmed them (at least I do not know of concrete examples).

I had one person contact me on behalf of someone who owns property here in Canada, wanting to know the tax implications of moving to Canada and how one might transfer bank assets.  This person was not asking about renunciation of citizenship–just the tax implications of moving to Canada (and how to move assets). She did not know I run the Isaac Brock Society. I know her from Facebook for other reasons.

I see that one of the problems with the shrill anti-Trump narrative in the mainstream press and social media is that the wrongs done against expats have been completely ignored. When I talk about the wrongs that Obama did, I am scorned.

Trump may eventually reverse FATCA, but I do not hold out hope. Nevertheless, in the current persecution of expats Trump only continues the demonic policies of his predecessor.

Here is a reminder of why Peter Dunn relinquished his USA citizenship:

The Isaac Brock Society is a direct response to the Obama administration’s criminalization of innocent expat behaviour. Helen Burggraf has written a great article in International Investment, telling our story.

U.S. tax laws, politics pushing more dual citizens to renounce citizenship

The lovely Trish Moon spoke to Jeff Lee of the Vancouver Sun. Still, he managed to interview some condors too. Alas.

Somehow Jeff Lee found someone who is thinking about renouncing because of Donald Trump and thus blames him in part for the spike in renunciations.

We have to remember that United States law code only applies to little people like you and me, but not to big important people like Hillary Clinton:

This is an illustration of Petros Principle 12: The criminals are in DC.

Kinds of Trolls

Typical trolls:  These are people who troll for the fun of it. Perhaps they get their  jollies out of contradicting others on social media. Perhaps they enjoy arguments with people they disagree with. Perhaps their personal ideology compels them to find people to contradict, like a vegan in a meat-eaters group (yes, I’ve seen this).

Spammers:  Spammers are robots or people that leave messages in social media. They post click bait to spread malware or to bring traffic to a website or a product that they are trying to promote. Most often spammers never engage in the discussion, though their comments are designed to look like they are actually interacting with your content: “Hey great post! Thanks for the help.” Or, “Sorry you don’t know how to write. I could give you some pointers to make your website better.” Our spam filter discards hundreds of these messages everyday, but a few manage to get through

Condors:  One type of troll is a real person who is dropping by to let people know that he’s got a book for sale or he’s available for business. At Isaac Brock we get compliance condors who are essentially fishing for business. We have had cases where readers here at Isaac Brock have engaged the services of such an expert, only to inform us later that they felt ill-served. So generally, we have mixed feelings about people from the compliance industry: in some cases, they may share arcane knowledge that might be useful for the purposes of this blog. On the other hand, we cannot vouch for their services, and we recognize in some cases these people are able to get what amounts to free advertising at Brock. We have never received a penny from a condor in the form of payment, commission or kickback. The same was not true at the Expat Forum, where compliance condors had to pay to play. At the Expat Forum, however, the condors began to control the agenda, and the forum moderators removed several threads with thousands of comments. Isaac Brock, by contrast, has never received any funding from advertisers, and we only rarely censor comments, and we almost never remove posts.

Astroturfers: The main distinction between the typical troll and the astroturfer is the lack of transparency.  Astroturfers troll with a hidden agenda. So for example, a pharmaceutical company may pay an astroturfer to visit social media to defend their products. At Isaac Brock Society we have had cases of astroturfers–one confirmed case, but only because the condor who posted with a second identity lacked the sophistication to use a second IP address for his alter ego. The alter ego of this compliance condor came on to reprimand Petros for his hostility against the condor in an attempt to generate sympathy for himself. Those were in the early days of the Isaac Brock Society. From that day forward, we have been suspicious about astroturfing and have tried to learn more about the phenomenon.

Modus Operandi of trolls especially astroturfers

The astroturfer doesn’t have to use anything approaching a real argument and it is perhaps counter-productive to engage the main points of the original post. It suffices to sow discord and doubt. Sometimes, an astroturfer can take a  know-it-all approach while always resting on conventional opinion, attempting to discredit the author through accusations of extremism, lack of knowledge or expertise, or mental instability (such as accusing the author of anger). Because the astroturfer sometimes relies on conventional wisdom, an air of paternalism will replace actual rational debate.

Astroturfers also use multiple identities because one of their main goals is to make it look like their views arise from the grass roots. Hence the name astroturf–it is a fake grass roots movement. Indeed, Adam Bienkov writes:

As reported by the Guardian, some big companies now use sophisticated “persona management software” to create armies of virtual astroturfers, complete with fake IP addresses, non-political interests and online histories. Authentic-looking profiles are generated automatically and developed for months or years before being brought into use for a political or corporate campaign. As the software improves, these astroturf armies will become increasingly difficult to spot, and the future of open debate online could become increasingly perilous.

Who might be astroturfing at Isaac Brock?

Since we do not require that people provide a real name or even a real e-mail address, it is absurdly easy for an astroturfer to assume an alias, create a persona, and begin to post comments. We allow this because it permits people who are intimidated by the IRS to feel the courage to comment. But it isn’t paranoid to believe that astroturfers are also coming to Isaac Brock to sow discord and doubt. We are a true grass roots movement which is challenging the triumvirate of  government, finance, and compliance industries. In my own posts in particular, especially by setting down Petros Principles, I have questioned the legitimacy of the triumvirate. Hence, it is in their financial interests to monitor and even astroturf at Isaac Brock Society. We are talking about industries with very deep pockets.

Conclusion

We must always be on our guard. Astroturfers do not reveal their conflicts of interest.  Since astroturfers may go to elaborate lengths to create fake identities, we must be suspicious of those who challenge the core of our approach–especially when it is a first time poster (though there may even be some who have been with us for a long time). We should be sophisticated when using social media and never allow astroturfers to sway our opinions.

In my view the burden of proof is on the person who has the alias. I am suspicious of anyone who comes onto this blog for the first time just to contradict me. Therefore, if someone talks like a condor, the burden of proof is on them to prove that they are not one–at least for me. Obviously others have shown that they think that they can trust anyone who comes onto Isaac Brock  to contradict Petros–and that Petros shouldn’t expect such people to have to prove themselves. However, anyone who wishes to attack me should at least be as transparent as I am–my blogging alias is a thin veneer over a real person.

Petros Principle 12: The criminals are in DC

Psalm 10.1-2 (RSV)

Woe to those who decree iniquitous decrees,
and the writers who keep writing oppression,
to turn aside the needy from justice
and to rob the poor of my people of their right,
that widows may be their spoil,
and that they may make the fatherless their prey!

Psalm 94:20-23 (RSV)

Can wicked rulers be allied with thee,
who frame mischief by statute?
They band together against the life of the righteous,
and condemn the innocent to death.
But the LORD has become my stronghold,
and my God the rock of my refuge.
He will bring back on them their iniquity
and wipe them out for their wickedness;
the LORD our God will wipe them out.

Commentary:

Often people assume that FATCA was about catching wealthy Homelanders who were putting their money in offshore accounts to avoid paying taxes. But in the above video, it comes out of the horse’s mouth what FATCA is all about by design–“far reaching steps to catch overseas tax cheats”–not tax cheats who have their money overseas–the adjective “overseas” modifies the noun “tax cheats”. The manner in which FATCA has been implemented has shown that the intention was always to snare innocent so-called Americans abroad.

Democrats Abroad have attempted to get a same country exemption for expats, but the regulators have not simply been slow to make it happen but have stonewalled. So we should please stop saying that the intention of FATCA was to catch Homelanders putting their money in banks abroad. The intention has always been to catch innocent people.  Moreover, the repeated petitions to find relief from FATCA and FBAR have fallen on deaf ears, showing that the US government is run by sociopaths who have no empathy for the people they are destroying.

One reason that an unjust law is no law (PP7) is because it will punish innocent behaviour. So a person living in Canada who works, opens bank accounts, invests in investment vehicles, who owns a personal corporation, who abides by the Canadian tax code, is an innocent person, full stop. That person is not a “tax cheat”. Thus, FATCA is itself a crime because of its criminalization of innocent behaviour.

Psalms 10 and 94 (cited above) show that it has long been recognized that evil rulers can create unjust statutes which criminalize innocent people. The Psalms invoke God himself to deal ever so severely with such wicked rulers. In several comments on my last post, a certain Jay said that lying to authorities is unethical. In his view, expats must only fill out good faith forms to the IRS. And yet doing that very thing has exposed not a few innocent people to the full brunt of bad laws and has turned them into victims. Evidently, Jay’s ethics do not conform to  this ancient traditional view of law. In my view, Petros Principles are an ethical response to unjust laws, by providing wisdom by which innocent people may protect themselves and find the least bad solution in the face of laws designed to criminalize them.

The true criminals are the makers and enforcers of laws like FATCA. Such people cannot withstand scrutiny. The following documentary, Clinton Cash,  sheds light on a criminal couple in DC who have gamed the system to make for themselves hundreds of millions. And such people have the audacity to come after my meager savings?

Previous Discussions

Human rights trump money: Why We must say no to FATCA
Ignorance is an excuse in the case of FBAR
The Real Intent of #FATCA: You are not “Collateral Damage” — You are the Target

Previous Petros Principles:

(1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.
(2) Fear makes the IRS more dangerous than it really is.
(3) Haste is the devil.
(4) Those most hurt by the IRS’s persecution of expats have engaged the services of cross-border compliance condors.
(5) Those least hurt have done nothing.
(6) Home is where you live.
(7) An unjust law is no law.
(8) Don’t feed the beast.
(9) Do the minimum in trying to achieve the least bad outcome.
(10) Lying to prevent a crime is a virtue.
(11) Cynical derision of Homelanders is healthy.

About: Petros is the alias of the founding administrator of the Isaac Brock Society. Petros Principles are guidelines that have helped him and others deal with the United States’ world-wide tax invasion.

 (10) Lying to prevent a crime is a virtue.

Commentary: USA citizenship-based taxation is a crime when applied to people living outside the USA jurisdiction. It is theft at multiple levels: (1) It is territorial theft of another country’s tax base. (2) It is theft to tax a person without representation. (3) It is theft to tax a person for the benefit of others. Furthermore, many of the reporting requirements of FATCA and FBAR cause crimes to be committed. The government of Canada, e.g., has committed a crime by sending the bank account information of Canadian residents and ciitzens to the IRS–it is national origin discrimination which is forbidden in the charter of rights, and it is a violation of their right to privacy.

It may be necessary to lie to prevent the IRS and one’s own local government from committing crimes. One may have to lie to a bank about where one was born. One may have to omit details when filling out forms.

While lying to prevent a crime is a virtue, lying to cover up a crime is politics as usual.

Previous Discussion:
Rahab’s renunciation of citizenship–Was she a harlot, liar, traitor and tax cheat or a heroine of faith?
California genocide and the Indian Tax Revolt of 1851
Fair tax, unfair tax: or When is it paying my fair share?
Is it taxation without representation if you can vote? Damn right!

Previous Petros Principles:

(1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.
(2) Fear makes the IRS more dangerous than it really is.
(3) Haste is the devil.
(4) Those most hurt by the IRS’s persecution of expats have engaged the services of cross-border compliance condors.
(5) Those least hurt have done nothing.
(6) Home is where you live.
(7) An unjust law is no law.
(8) Don’t feed the beast.
(9) Do the minimum in trying to achieve the least bad outcome.
(10) Lying to prevent a crime is a virtue.
(11) Cynical derision of Homelanders is healthy.

About: Petros is the alias of the founding administrator of the Isaac Brock Society. Petros Principles are guidelines that have helped him and others deal with the United States’ world-wide tax invasion.

(11) Cynical derision of Homelanders is healthy.

At Isaac Brock Society, we have always been not a little irreverent when it comes to discussing the USA’s international tax invasion. Eventually when we meet real Homelanders online or in person, we realize that they suffer from a type of sociopathy that we do well to criticize, deride, and even to spoof.

The coming election in the USA is a choice between a narcissist and a sociopath, a swindler and an influence peddler, a compulsive liar and a pathological liar. The Homelanders are bitterly dividing themselves between these two candidates. In my lifetime, I’ve never seen two such ill-suited people as candidates for the POTUS, and it seems like destiny would force Homelanders to choose between one of these two. Most Homelanders are short-sighted to the point of believing that, if they vote for another party, it means throwing their vote away.

The Republican Party platform is admittedly saying that it will eliminate FATCA and CBT. This is our issue–so if you are inclined to vote on our issues, it seems that there is a clear choice. But I caution against putting faith in either the Republicans or the Democrats. What we have learned in this battle thus far is that we must come up with our own personal solutions because our governments in our home countries have been derelict in protecting our freedoms, and the political leaders in the USA are only concerned about winning over the sentiments of Homelanders. Both candidates are demagogues whose only real concern is to appeal to Homelanders. Neither gives a rat’s ass about us. And so it is clear that there is no real political solution, and our only hope in coming together is to fight this in the courts.

I appreciate Patricia Moon’s  post yesterday about Donald Trump. It was interesting how a satirical post could be so easily believed (I believed it). The ensuing discussion was passionate–and that quickened me  and got me to thinking about some of my favoritest posts that I’ve written for Isaac Brock–irreverent, biting, cynical, satirical; in some cases we have successfully compared the USA to the worst examples of government tyranny in history, and this usually causes an uproar, and some people admittedly have left us. But uncensored derision is part of the DNA of this website, and I do not see that changing.

Previous Derisive Posts (Warning: some of these could come true in our lifetime):

Both our forefathers were slaves: When is a comparison correct and when isn’t it?
Santa Clause arrested on Christmas Eve
The FATCA star: a design suggestion
What would happen if Indonesia reclaimed its most famous former citizenship?
The accidental Kenyan: What would happen if the African nation copied U.S. tax policy? by Don Whiteley
The “Property of the USA” tattoo
Shulman and Flaherty Summit Ends: IRS and CRA to merge

Previous Petros Principles

(1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.
(2) Fear makes the IRS more dangerous than it really is.
(3) Haste is the devil.
(4) Those most hurt by the IRS’s persecution of expats have engaged the services of cross-border compliance condors.
(5) Those least hurt have done nothing.
(6) Home is where you live.
(7) An unjust law is no law.
(8) Don’t feed the beast.
(9) Do the minimum in trying to achieve the least bad outcome.
(10) coming soon

 (9) Do the minimum in trying to achieve the least bad outcome.

Sabrina: More isn’t always better, Linus. Sometimes it’s just more.

Commentary:

Once your life is in the hands of a compliance condor, fastidiousness becomes the norm, and you will find that IRS requires forms for many aspects of your life that you never knew were even taxable. The compliance industry also has a penchant for telling you that it is better to be safe than sorry. Principle 9 is really a reiteration of the first: (1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.

It is perhaps best not to tell compliance condors, if ever you engage one, more than a minimum of information–because there is no client confidentiality with a tax preparer. Furthermore, they will not be happy if you tell them about something and do not take their advice to file the correct form.

Doing the minimum may mean doing nothing at all. Not filing and coming into compliance. Not renouncing or even reporting your prior relinquishment of US citizenship to a Consulate to obtain a CLN. In some cases it means renouncing or relinquishing, and not coming into IRS compliance. Each person’s case is different, and because our governments and banks are not protecting us, each person is on their own to find a solution.

In my own case, doing the minimum meant getting out of the IRS system as cleanly as possible, and so I deemed it necessary for myself to relinquish my citizenship and to file my final 1040 tax returns and the exit form 8854. But I did the minimum necessary to escape the IRS and I did not employ a fastidious compliance condor.

Here are some concrete examples of doing the minimum, especially in the Canadian context.

1. RRSP (Form 8891): Is it really necessary to file since the IRS will not find about these accounts under the FATCA IGA? If you have already filed for an account in the past, perhaps yes. But why introduce new information to the IRS.
2. Fifth Amendment privilege: Not every line of IRS forms has to be filled out. If the information provided could lead to a criminal investigation, it is perfectly acceptable to write “Fifth Amendment” which is a signal to the IRS that you are invoking your  privilege. By law, however you are expected to provide all the information that they need to assess your taxes.
3. Mortgage FX gains and real estate capital gains: Mortgage foreign currency gains are considered taxable as are real estate capital gain. But real estate transactions are not part of the FATCA IGA.
4. TFSA and treating TFSA as a foreign trust: The US taxes TFSA but under the FATCA IGA they will not know anything about them unless you inform them. Furthermore, apparently the IRS has not ruled that TFSA must be treated as a foreign trust.
5. CRA forms and Social Insurance Number: My preparer once stapled my Canadian tax return to my 1040. I would say that is a complete no-no. It gives the IRS all kinds of superfluous information that could be used against you in a court of law. Once I took over my own reporting using TaxAct, I sent the minimum of information to the IRS in order to properly report my income. I am not even sure whether the IRS can even require proof of income (such as T4 or T5 in Canada).
6. Personal corporations: It may be that a person can do a simple tax return for the IRS without getting fastidious about how some of the actual income was deferred in a personal corporation.

Previous Petros Principles:

(1) What the IRS can’t know unless you tell them can’t hurt you.
(2) Fear makes the IRS more dangerous than it really is.
(3) Haste is the devil.
(4) Those most hurt by the IRS’s persecution of expats have engaged the services of cross-border compliance condors.
(5) Those least hurt have done nothing.
(6) Home is where you live.
(7) An unjust law is no law.
(8) Don’t feed the beast.

About: Petros is the alias of the founding administrator of the Isaac Brock Society. Petros Principles are guidelines that have helped him and others deal with the United States’ world-wide tax invasion.