US and China could play “fiscal chicken” under FATCA

This month the IRS released a list of 50 countries that are on the road to signing an IGA – either finalising models for IGAs, engaged in dialogue for pursuing an IGA or conducting initial negotiations. China was not on the list as being at any level of negotiation with the IRS. This is significant, according to Dan Niedle, a London-based tax partner at law firm Clifford Chance.

“The interesting question about the list is who’s not on it at all. And China is the obvious one,” he says. “There are lots of rumours. Early on it was reported that China might just ban its financial institutions from taking part and dare the US to impose withholding taxes.”

Again this re-iterates the need for Canada and other countries not to enter into IGA’s.

How bad is it?

Once Again—Death of the Liberal Class

Alberta to recruit American war vets to work in oilsands

The question is — with working in Canada for long periods of time, what are tax return and reporting responsibilities for these workers — both for Canada CRA and US IRS?

CALGARY— Alberta is seeking to recruit an army of oilsands workers — literally.

The province is on the march to attract thousands of demobilized U.S. military personnel to help develop what’s been touted as Canada’s economic engine for coming decades, the oilsands.

The project’s success would also act as a goodwill gesture for Canada’s controversial oilsands, said Alberta Energy Minister Ken Hughes.

“We’re trying to understand how we could produce employment opportunities for American service people returning from overseas,” Hughes said Friday. “I’ve detected some interest in the States.”

The mission has attracted the attention of U.S. Ambassador to Canada David Jacobson and the encouragement of the U.S.’s former consul general in Calgary, Laura Lochman, said Hughes.

Hughes said there are a half-million unemployed or underemployed younger military veterans in the U.S. — a force that could be tapped to satisfy a chronically-hungry energy industry in Alberta.

. . .

I am temporarily suspending wall of shame inductions but I think the following blog post is rather interesting. Ann Hollingshead and the Task Force for Financial Integrity & Economic Development have been big FATCA supporters for many years whom I sparred with back in the early days of Brock. At one time she was also critic of Jim Flaherty for as she put it interferring with the soveriegn right of the US to make its own tax policies. Clearly she knows about our criticism and has been stung by it(She in fact singles out American Citizens Abroad for as she puts it hyperbole). I think this might be a wonderful opportunity to bring our criticism back home to her and let her know about our latest activities. (The actually point of the blog post is to say how great the IGA’s are).

http://www.financialtaskforce.org/2012/11/14/a-strong-sustainable-future-for-fatca-and-tax-compliance/

A Strong, Sustainable, Future for FATCA and Tax Compliance.

UPDATE 2:  This post has been upgraded to a press release at newswire.ca and digitjournal.com.  Thanks go to Jim Jatras.

UPDATE:  Jim Jatras has provided an revised Word Version of the text below for mass distribution.

Canada appeal

The following is a message from Jim Jatras:

Friends

Please review that following and submit comments. I hope it’s more or less self-explanatory.

As indicated in a previous comment, it’s in effect a kind of ad or statement inviting people to contact Harper, Flaherty, MPs and oppose FATCA/IGA. Ideally, it’s the kind of thing that would be posted online or even in print publications as an ad, if there were money for that. (If Canadian industry weren’t spending money trying to get the “best deal possible” from the Americans under an IGA instead of fighting.) Certainly individual comment letters to the Finance Department should be sent, but let’s not kid ourselves they will pay much attention them. What we need is a groundswell of outraged Canadians to contact Harper, Flaherty, and MPs as soon as possible with a simple message: NO!

I realize that it’s always risky to hang a draft out where anyone can take a whack at it, but feel free. Also, any ideas on where and how it can be posted and distributed are welcome.

BTW, this is the kind of thing that routinely gets placed in DC in publications like Politico, The Hill, Roll Call, and other pubs aimed at Congress. Picture a similar message aimed at Congress but making an American argument against FATCA, as this makes a Canadian one. That’s how we get things done – if we had someone with money and willing to fight.

Best

Jim

Call or email Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, and Your MP Today!

Call or email Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, and Your MP Today!

STOP an Impending Massive Handover of Canadian Sovereignty to the United States!

 Tell the Government: Canada Must Say NO

to the United States on ‘FATCA’

Recently the Department of Finance invited comments on what was characterized as “an agreement to improve cross-border tax compliance through . . . the provisions enacted by the United States commonly known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).”  This eleventh-hour invitation came as sources in both Ottawa and Washington announced that they were close to finalizing an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) that would, in effect, deputize the Canadian government to enforce this American law in Canada.

Continue reading →

I just became aware of this: McBride #1 – Court Holds Government Must Prove FBAR Willful Penalty by a Preponderance (11/11/12).  I thought it might be interesting for all of you.

What I found most interesting was Townsend’s commentary:

Based on the detailed findings of fact, the Court first determined that the Government need prove willfulness only by a preponderance of the evidence rather than by clear and convincing evidence.  Since the Court’s recitation of facts was so damning, it is not clear that the Court would have reached a different conclusion even if the burden were clear and convincing.  Nevertheless, here is what the Court said about its holding on the preponderance of the evidence burden…

Continue reading →