Elves: Make Blaze’s Christmas wish come true. Help Santa fill Ginny and Gwen’s stockings!
Category Archives: Issues regarding US persons abroad
Another Gem from EmBee
With the dearth of seriousness that pervades most of the topics we slog through, day after day. it seems a little fun is in order, especially when something unusual has been created! This post grows out of a comment being posted as a post and again, as a comment becoming a post.
Would see an abolute shame to see this gem of Embee’s get buried away; without the post it refers to, it wouldn’t make sense.
So here it all is, in complete form.
FORM PEOPLE
to the tune of “Goldfinger”
Form People
They’re the ones
The ones with a vampire’s bite
A scary sight
Such a cold people
Beckon you to enter their world of fines
You must decline
Bafflegab they will pour in your ear
But their words can’t disguise what you fear
For the clever ones know how bad this ends
It’s the kiss of death to befriend
Form People
Clever ones, beware of their deeds untold
Their hearts are cold
Bafflegab they will pour in your ear
But their words can’t disguise what you fear
For the clever ones know how bad this ends
It’s the kiss of death to befriend
Form People
Clever ones, beware of their deeds untold
Their hearts are cold
They love only forms
Only forms
They love forms
They love only forms
Only forms
They love forms
Holiday coupons from Greedy Giver for ADCS Fundraiser
Hello Brockers!
Special for the holidays I have created a Greedy Giver campaign to raise extra money from those who don’t feel that this issue is about them. This is for you Brockers to share with friends and family who feel that giving to this campaign “doesn’t get them anything”.
Well now it can and will for a short time. (Click above pic or below coupon to take you to the campaign).
Please share this far and wide via email, Twitter, Facebook and whatever other means you can think of.
An example of a coupon that can be purchased on Greedy Giver to fund our campaign:
*CATCA* or What could the Government of Canada do differently than *rolling over to the threat of US sanctions to their banks* and saying “Not ALL Canadians are protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms?
Too many coincidences for me not to enter this post about what a friend of Brock proposes as “CATCA”.
Today, Furious AC commented:
The IGA Canada signed could have been simply had a word or paragraph change as well to protect Canadian Citizens and Permanent Residents and was proposed several times by other than Conservative MPs and it was rejected out of hand with the phrase “Congress has spoken”.. well Congress actually did not speak nor did they vote for a senate majority stamp of approval, yet our government pushed through this monstrosity KNOWING how easily it could be changed to actually do what it pretends to intend. That’s how Ottawa works!!
Yesterday I got an email with a *CATCA* proposal — see it below*. I had just read a comment from GwEvil:
How’s this for extreme irony?
“The application of these protectionist trade restrictions on projects on Canadian soil by a foreign government is unreasonable,” said Max Moncaster, Mr. Fast’s press secretary.
This comment at the Globe and Mail article had a relationship to the *CATCA proposal* just below:
A year ago I was invited at their expense to present some research to american government people in Washington DC.
They offered to book my flights through a third party agency that is contracted by the State Department and a few others.
Fine I said give – me two options and I’ll pick one.
They came back with two options both of which were on US based airlines
Both bookings had me flying from Ottawa to DC normally a flight of around 80 minutes, going via US regional hubs making the flights about four hours each one way.
I sent them an itinerary for An air Canada flight – direct and cheaper.
They told me it doesn’t matter – buy american rules obligate them to book through US airlines regardless of price or efficiency.
I declined the offer to present my research in the usa for this reason and will do so again.
They came back with two options both of which were on US based airlines
Both bookings had me flying from Ottawa to DC normally a flight of around 80 minutes, going via US regional hubs making the flights about four hours each one way.
I sent them an itinerary for An air Canada flight – direct and cheaper.
They told me it doesn’t matter – buy american rules obligate them to book through US airlines regardless of price or efficiency.
I declined the offer to present my research in the usa for this reason and will do so again.
The *CATCA proposal*, introduced by email as:
So now I’d like you to consider (and then let me know what you think about) my perspectives on dual-citizenship, border controls, sovereign rights and international relations evolving from past history to modern-day enlightenment. Three things to get started:
.
First, it is well established in history that every sovereign nation has an absolute right to control the movement of people across its borders — and there is nothing in today’s world to challenge this (barring major Treaty accords like the European Union’s right of free movement).
.
Second, as a general principle a traveler cannot be denied entry into the country of his citizenship — and again, there is nothing in today’s world to challenge this
.
Third, if that person happens to have another citizenship, then the country to which he’s seeking admission can require him (upon entry and stay and exit) to present himself only as a citizen of that country (and not the other one) — namely the issue of Boris Johnson, Ginny Hillis and many others like them.
.
However, the latter principle is open to challenge because in today’s world, most modern democratic enlightened countries no longer raise a fuss over it — for example, an American citizen entering the UK with a US Passport showing a British birth-place generally encounters no impediment. Therefore, the United States with its appalling treatment of visitors like Boris Johnson and Ginny Hillis needs to face some push-back (with very sharp teeth) from other countries.
.
This is what I think Canada can do to hit back at America over FATCA and the “Accidental” Dual-Citizen problem — that is, if Harper’s successor has any guts:
Dear President of America … from nine-year old Janne …
With great thanks from me to “Mark”: Dear President of America…
https://fbariswrong.wordpress.com/2014/12/16/dear-president-of-america/.
My wish today is that the *President of America* will take the time to answer this letter as he has those of other children!
Janne and her nice grandfather DESERVE some answers! So does the rest of Janne’s family.
Dear President of America,
My name is Janne. I am 9 years old.
I learn English in my school.
That is all of the English I know.
My teacher will translate the rest of my letter from my language.
I was born in America. My father says I am American. But I don’t live in America anymore.
My sister, my mother, and my father were not born in America. My sister, my mother, and my father are not American.
My grandfather is nice. My grandfather puts money in the bank for me and for my brother and for my sister. This is his present for my birthday and for my name day and for Christmas. Sometimes, he just gives me a present on any day. My grandfather is a nice person. My grandfather is not born in America. My grandfather is not American.
My grandfather says that my grandfather and I are in trouble. My brother and my sister and my parents are not in trouble. My grandfather says that we are in trouble because I am American and because my grandfather has been so nice.
My grandfather says that you believe that my grandfather and I are washing your money. My grandfather says that we must now explain to you that we are not bad people. He says that you don’t listen. My grandfather says that he does not like you or your friends anymore.
My grandfather says that my grandfather and I must send reports to you every year. What kind of report do you want? Is it like a school report?
Why do you believe that my grandfather and I are washing your money? Why don’t you believe that my grandfather and I are good people?
Please answer me very soon because my grandfather is very old and he is very worried. He says that this is the biggest problem he has had in a very long time. He says that you don’t listen and that you don’t care about my grandfather or about me.
Sincerely,
Janne
FATCA will cost the Canada Revenue Agency (CRA) $15.7-$15.8 Million (or $5.7-5.8). Q: Who funds the CRA? A: ALL Canadian Taxpayers
With thanks to badger’s never-ending research, I am cross-posting from MapleSandbox.ca, Lynne Swanson’s FATCA will cost the CRA $15.7-$15.8 Million.
FATCA Will Cost CRA $15.7-$15.8 Million(or $5.7-5.8)
Posted on December 16, 2014 by Lynne SwansonNDP MP Guy Caron asked how much FATCA will cost CRA.
When the committee was studying the matter, the department wasn’t able to provide us with the costs of the agreement, for either the agency or the financial institutions. Do you now have that information, from the moment when the funding for implementation is released?
Here’s the answer from CRA:
The costs that we are working with for our ability to implement the obligations that we have to administer this agreement is funding of, I believe, $15.7 million or $15.8 million, which has been allocated to the CRA to implement this over these next few years.
Those costs are principally intended to support the costs of implementing a new electronic form for mandatory filing for financial institutions to be able to file their obligations to us, a database in which we would be able to receive and store that information, and the tools to give us the ability to select files from that database for subsequent transmission electronically to the Internal Revenue Service in order to comply with those obligations.
So there you have it folks. Over $15 million of our tax dollars to violate our fundamental rights as Canadians for foreign government demands. (Thanks to Badger for this great find and for sending it to me and the Board of ADCS.)
That, of course, does not include the $750 million that Canadian banks say FATCA is costing them.
Nor does it include the money the government will spend of our tax dollars fighting us in court while we struggle to raise the needed money for our lawsuit.
Robert Wood: “20 Really Stupid Things In The U.S. Tax Code” – “is there any way to go but up?”
Robert Wood identifies U.S. citizenship-based taxation as one of "20 really stupid things in the U.S. tax code" http://t.co/nK9NbTWtuk
— U.S. Citizen Abroad (@USCitizenAbroad) December 16, 2014
Yesterday Stephen Kish wrote a post recognizing that Republican Senators have at least identified that citizenship-based taxation exists. Today Robert Wood identifies citizenship-based taxation as one of “20 really stupid things in the U.S. Tax Code”.
Mr. Wood concludes:
Do you have a bad taste in your mouth yet? Remember, this is only a tasting menu. And although some parts of our tax law make sense, many do not or lead to abuses. And all inject a level of complexity that no one would wish upon anyone. We need a better, simpler, fairer and flatter tax system. A flat tax or simple tax might not be perfectly fair, and might not improve everything. But is there any way to go but up?
France imposes American-style “saving clause” on Andorra
France’s newly-ratified tax treaty with Andorra contains a clause which U.S. Persons abroad will find rather familiar:
| la France peut imposer les personnes physiques de nationalité française résidentes d’Andorre comme si la présente convention n’existait pas. Lorsque la législation fiscale française permet l’application de la présente disposition, les autorités compétentes des États contractants règlent d’un commun accord la mise en œuvre de cette dernière. | France may tax natural persons of French nationality resident in Andorra as if this convention did not exist. When the tax legislation of France allows for the application of this provision, the competent authorities of the contracting States shall come to a mutual agreement on its implementation. |
Have a read over the full record of the debate on this treaty in the National Assembly last Monday. France does not currently impose tax on the basis of nationality, except in the case of French citizens who move to Monaco (not French citizens actually born in Monaco, though). However, people seem worried that this is what the future may hold.
December 11, 2014: Senate Finance Committee Republican staff opinion paper says that “The United States needs to rethink its taxing rules for non-resident U.S. citizens.”
@Tim alerted us to this “opinion paper” just issued by the Republican staff of the U.S. Senate Finance Committee.
The December 11, 2014 paper, entitled “Continuing the Conversation on Comprehensive Tax Reform” has a section dealing with the question of citizenship-based taxation.
This is a very brief outline “analysis” only and does NOT equal introduced legislation — which I hope will happen during the next two years — and which may well fail to be passed into law.
Go to page 282/293:
“The United States needs to rethink its taxing rules for nonresident U.S. citizens.
If a U.S. citizen is living and working abroad with some permanence, and the primary nexus the individual has to the United States is citizenship, we think it makes sense to tax the individual, as a general rule, only on income from U.S. sources.
A test would need to be developed to determine at what point a U.S. citizen is considered a nonresident of the United States and then at what point the U.S. citizen is considered to be a resident again.
Some factors that may be considered include the permanence and purpose of the stay abroad, residential ties to the United States, residential ties to the foreign country, and regularity and length of visits to the United States.
The test could be adopted, in some part, from the existing rules that are used to determine residency of alien individuals, i.e., those individuals who are not U.S citizens.
In addition, an exit tax could be applied when the U.S. citizen is considered a nonresident and no longer subject to U.S. worldwide taxing jurisdiction. If the U.S. citizen later becomes a resident and then becomes subject to U.S. worldwide taxing jurisdiction, then the individual’s basis in her assets would be the fair market value of the assets at the time she again becomes a resident.”
SSL – Will it protect you?
This discussion has come up many times before so am creating a space for those who wish to discuss it. I will tidy the post up but need to put somethig up to move the ccomments. But feel free tp begin!
One indicator of a SSL site is in the URL bar instead of “http:” it shows“https” with an image of a lock by it.
This is a quick overview of Secure Socket Layer (SSL)