Read the May 15, 2019 report to France’s National Assembly on the impacts of extraterritorial American tax legislation on French citizens called “Accidental Americans”.

The report was obtained through an American Expatriates FB post of Fabien Lehagre, who is at the Association des Américains Accidentels.

Google translate seems to do a fairly decent job in translation of the report to English.

Your comments on the report?

A few excerpts:

“Certain guarantees must be provided by the French public authorities. The priority is to force the banks to stop discriminating and to respect more the privacy of their customers, so as not to be more diligent than FATCA demands.”

“If no progress is made, denunciation of the FATCA agreement should be considered as a perfectly feasible option… On all these issues, a common approach must be sought and promoted at the European Union level.”

“…reduce the administrative costs of renouncing US citizenship by returning to their previous amount of $ 400 and exempt the most modest individuals from their payment…revise upwards the thresholds in the application of expatriation tax and for the departure tax system”

“The situation of “accidental Americans” is part of a larger problem: the extraterritoriality of certain standards adopted by the United States. Errors have been made: it is now up to Parliament to be more vigilant in considering international agreements, such as IGAs.”

“We may have gone too fast on the FATCA law, whose purpose is in itself laudable and positive, since it is the fight against tax evasion and tax evasion. It is therefore normal that France has seen an interest in a reciprocal exchange of data for its own nationals. The agreement, however, did not report more cases of fraud and tax exile to the French tax authorities, unlike the Americans, with collateral damage extremely damaging to “accidental Americans”.”

“In the eyes of the rapporteurs, the number [of “accidental Americans”] does not matter. In fact, all the elements gathered at the end of their mission – including 156 concrete and documented testimonies ( 9 )- characterize a reality: that of practices and obligations likely to infringe individual liberties, and this, on the basis of an agreement whose current execution calls into question the sovereignty and interests of France.”

Here is some very recent activity from some members of the Government of three countries, France, Netherlands, and Canada — all making an attempt to protect their citizens from U.S. FATCA/citizen based taxation control. Compare the words used by the French/Dutch officials to those of the Canadian Finance Minister. See links for details:

FRANCE:

From Bloomberg (May 15, 2019):

“France should renegotiate its FATCA tax treaty with the U.S. and consider unilaterally pulling out if it can’t win concessions to protect dual nationals, a French parliamentary report said…which was co-written by a deputy from President Emmanuel Macron’s party and one from the center-right opposition…”

NETHERLANDS:

From DutchNews.nl (May 16, 2019):

The Dutch Tax minister Menno Snel says: “This week I spoke to a number of Dutch people who experience problems because of the American FATCA regulations…They are confronted with high costs and red tape, while they did not even realise they are liable for tax in the US…I am going to do my best to try to find a solution for these people while I am in Washington…”

Some comments on the Netherlands report on the American Expatriates FB site:

“Who knew the French and Dutch were so awesome!” “I’d love to say this gives me hope for Germany, but nope, German politicians are well aware of who their financial master is and are quite eager to engage in kowtowing.” “There are more Americans in Canada [what the writer might have meant to say instead: “Canadian citizens deemed by the United States to be U.S. citizens — being “deemed” by a foreign country does not necessarily make it so”] than anywhere else, and little pushback in general to FATCA, probably because bank accounts aren’t being closed. What pushback there is through the courts which the government is fighting us over.”

CANADA:

From American Expatriates FB (May 21, 2019 letter from Finance Minister):

Canada is a proud supporter of FATCA, spending lots of money to defend itself in Plaintiff Gwen and Kazia’s kill FATCA IGA lawsuit now in Federal Court; however, in a May 21, 2019 letter to a Canadian citizen/resident, Finance Minister Bill Morneau explained his (modest) efforts in trying to reduce the impact of the horrific U.S. “transition tax” on affected Canadian citizens. Some excerpts:

“Dear Ms. XXX:

Thank you for your further correspondence … expressing your concerns regarding the transition tax on foreign earnings introduced by the U.S. and the impact of this tax. I want you to know I understand your frustrations. This is an issue we have heard about… The tax can put significant pressure on your financial situation.

“…Canadian officials have discussed this issue with U.S. officials on several occasions … Some actions have been taken… extending the deadline for people to elect to pay … in installments, allowing an additional year to pay….

…Our Government has taken steps … to make life in Canada more affordable — starting with a tax cut for the middle class… investments in families, seniors, [etc. etc.]

… Bill Morneau”
[Finance Minister of Canada]

Some comments on the Morneau letter on the AE FB site:

“On the upside, you got an actual response. On the downside, it’s a rather poor consolation to hear that one of the “actions taken” is an extended deadline for payment, installments, and an additional year. Big deal!” “Only politicians can spew so many words without actually saying anything”

[The link to the Moscovici letter can be found at American Expatriates FB site and on a tweet posted by Sophie in’t Veld. There is also a response to the Moscovici letter from Fabien Lehage.]

There are efforts targeting FATCA at the European Union (EU) level. The link above shows a May 2, 2019 response from Pierre Moscovici (EU Commissioner of Economic and Financial Affairs, Taxation and Customs) to a letter complaining about FATCA from Sophie in’t Veld, an EU Member of Parliament.

In her April 5, 2019 letter Sophie says: “…Why has the Commission decided not to take an initiative and take this responsibility after ongoing problems that the extraterritorial application of FATCA pose to EU citizens?… the association des Americains Accidental brought a legal action before the Conseil d’Etat to contest the intergovernmental agreement between France and the US…it becomes clear that in the Netherlands and France, in the European banking sector and the European Parliament, the problems that Accidental Americans are facing because of FATCA are being taken seriously. It is high time that also the [EU] Commission, especially in its role as guardian of the Treaties, starts taking these problems of EU citizens seriously, and stops hiding behind excuses that it has given in the last year… With European elections in sight…”

Here are some excerpts from the letter of EU Commissioner Moscovici, responding to Sophie in’t Veld:

— “You raise a number of points on the topic of “Accidental Americans” … Nationality ties, even when acquired by “accident”, come together with the existence of reciprocal and duties, and this is at the centre of the issues you raise vis a vis the United States…”

[No, don’t agree — for example, the plaintiffs in our Canadian FATCA lawsuit dispute this as U.S. citizenship was attempted by a foreign country (US) to be imposed on these Canadians without their consent and in the absence of any meaningful relationship with the foreign country. As such, there is no legitimate or rational argument justifying this unwanted and unaccepted “citizenship” or any “duty” associated with this bogus “citizenship”. Although born in the U.S. they are not “accidental” or any kind of “American”.]

— “As regard access to banking facilities by dual EU/US citizens, I understand from the response given at the PETI meeting that only one national authority has signalled having received, albeit very few, relevant complaints, and that the analysis of the national implementation of the Payment Accounts Directive did not find any evidence of discrimination against “accidental Americans…”

— “…no figures [on the number of accidental Americans] have been provided, making it difficult to establish how many citizens are in this position…”

— “On the topic of a possible mandate to negotiate an EU FATCA agreement with the US, I remain open to any support for this from the Council. However, I do not think it useful to formally request one as to date there is no sign that Member States would support such an action…In any event, given the global approach to tax transparency, and future (re)negotiated agreement would be likely to maintain the requirement for individuals who are taxable in the U.S., including joint EU/US citizens, to provide their US TIN when they open a bank account in the EU…”

— “With regard to the recent developments in France and Netherlands, I look forward to learning how these actions develop…”

— “In the case of FATCA, like you, I very much regret that the amount of information that flows from the US to the EU Member States under their bilateral agreements is less that flows from the US to the EU. But, this does not mean that the information should not be provided to the US…”

— “To conclude, I believe that there are two main issues which are often overlooked when discussing this subject. The first concerns sovereignty. All states have the sovereign right to determine who they tax individuals and, in the case of the US, the international community has accepted double Conventions that the US reserves the right to tax its citizens, rather than only its residents. The second concerns the recent worldwide movement towards tax transparency in an effort to ensure that tax avoidance and evasion can be reduced and that every taxable person pays their fair share of taxation…”

[The Government of Canada lawyers in our FATCA lawsuit in Federal Court made in court the very same points as Moscovici in the above paragraph. Will Justice MacTavish agree with Moscovici or with plaintiffs Gwen and Kazia who insist that the Canada’s FATCA “agreement” with US violates their Charter rights (sections 8 and 15) and Canada’s sovereignty and that the FATCA IGA legislation goes too far?]

Ms. in’t Veld responds to the Moscovici letter in an article by Helen Burghof:

— “…I was not surprised by the commission’s refusal to take action – to my regret, I note that is consistent with their attitude so far – but I was surprised by the denigrating tone of the letter…The real problem is of course the blunt refusal by member state governments, with the exception of the Netherlands and France, to stand up for the rights of their citizens…File a complaint, with the data protection authorities, and/or the banking oversight bodies; join one of the associations that has been formed, inform your MP and/or MEP, use social media and traditional media, to make the message heard.”