This is a lawsuit attacking the constitutionality, especially regarding privacy, of the Canadian FATCA IGA legislation.
In the very early FATCA “negotiations” between Canada and US, Canada recognized a privacy problem and wanted a “blanket exemption” from the US FATCA law. Part of April 2018 cross-examination between our lawyer, Arden Beddoes, and Canada negotiator Kevin Shoom, now a Director of International Taxation:
Beddoes: “…So my point is simply that both [FATCA] compliance and non-compliance were problematic and the main problem with non-compliance was the withholding tax and thus I’ll just call them serious negative economic consequences. But compliance also had problems and that’s why the whole thing was a problem because neither route was acceptable. Compliance was problematic because then you compromise the privacy of Canadians and of course there is potential violations of Canadian privacy laws and further, as you mentioned, there could be a functional at least denial of access to banking services. So the law was problematic to the extent that both compliance and non-compliance were problematic. Is that fair to say?”
Shoom: “I would agree with that and just add that another aspect of compliance was how burdensome compliance would be based on what FATCA looked like it would be at the time.”
…Beddoes: “…Finance felt that irrespective of those potential benefits a blanket exemption was better, it was better if this law just didn’t happen in Canada. Is that fair?
Shoom: “In the early stages, yes, our starting position was that we would have preferred that FATCA simply not apply in Canada…”
…Beddoes: I could be reading that wrong but it sounds to me what you’re saying is that Finance’s pitch to Treasury as to why there could be a blanket exemption or some flexibility was we already have adequate exchange of information and that surely you don’t need much more than what you already have. Is that a fair sort of summary of what Finance said to Treasury in this context that you are referring to here in paragraph 18?
CANADIAN FATCA LITIGATION UPDATE January 19, 2020:
LITIGATION STATUS: Notice of Appeal filed, Canada defending, Justice Boivin (November 20, 2019) orders timelines for appeal book and memoranda of fact and law. See Rules
You are contributing to raising the money needed to pay the legal costs to litigate with the Government of Canada — to prevent Canada from imposing the U.S. FATCA law on Canada and Canadians.
The Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty and Gwen and Kazia have raised $35,553 in this funding round. We ask you for $9,447 to make the overdue December payment for appeal of FATCA Federal Court decisions.
You can DONATE by cheque, cash, PayPal and transfers.
Our four ADCS Board members are John Richardson (co-chair and legal counsel), Patricia Moon (Treasurer), Carol Tapanila, and Stephen Kish (Chair).
Justice Mactavish said that it is “important” to avoid consequences threatened by the U.S. But we say not at the expense of our Charter rights.Please help end one of the FATCA compliance laws that impact on all of our countries.
CBC says that, for 2018 tax year, information on 900,000 financial records of Canadian residents was turned over by Canada to U.S. IRS because of the Canadian FATCA law. Gwen and Kazia, two Canadian citizens having no meaningful relationship with the U.S., are appealing on your behalf two Federal Court decisions to the Canadian Court of Appeal.
The grounds for appeal will include violations against their autonomy (Charter section 7), privacy (8) and equality (15) as well as arguments that the ruling was improperly based on the finding that the Income Tax Act is primarily regulatory in nature, and that factors such as the relationship between Canada and United States were not properly dealt with. Fleshed out details of appeal grounds will be provided in the Factum, likely early next year.