DRAFT 2016 DEMOCRATS ABROAD PLATFORM

Democrats Abroad has released its draft 2016 platform and readers of this new election year manifesto are invited to “JOIN OR LOGIN to leave a comment” until April 27th, by completing an online survey.

As usual, there are plenty of widely divergent, even contradictory, statements and goals contained within the platform’s pages. For example, DA favours

…restoring U.S. citizenship to persons born abroad who lost it by failing to meet residency requirements in a section of the Immigration and Naturalization Act that was repealed in 1978…

while calling for

…an amnesty program for foreign nationals who are citizens of the United States in name only, with no nexus to the United States other than their birth on U.S. soil or birth abroad to a U.S. parent, to allow them to shed their unwanted U.S. citizenship on a no fees, no penalty and no tax filing or reporting basis.

This thread is intended for those who would like to comment on this latest DA dispatch without potentially outing themselves in the process. We would encourage Democrats Abroad to carefully read and consider the thoughts and opinions of our commenters here, as well as those who choose to take the survey and comment on DA’s web site.

VIDEO: April 14, 2016 — Minister of National Revenue Diane Lebouthillier at Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy & Ethics re Transfer of Information to the United States IRS

MINUTES of Proceedings: Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics (ETHI) 42nd Parliament, 1st Session Meeting No. 8, Thursday, April 14, 2016, 8:45 a.m. to 10:49 a.m.

TRANSCRIPT: House of Commons, Canada – Standing Committee ETHI 8 Meeting on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics, Thursday, April 14, 2016

and

Appearance before the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics on the Transfer of Information to the United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) April 14, 2016 Opening Statement by Daniel Therrien, Privacy Commissioner of Canada

There has been comment on the Revenue Minister’s qualifications for her post.  Here, as well,  is some discussion (brought forward by EmBee) on Daniel Therrien’s qualifications for Privacy Commissioner:
From *The Privacy Advisor* – May 29, 2014 *Harper Pick for Privacy Commissioner “May Not Be the Best Fit*

News that the Harper government has nominated a new federal privacy commissioner is sending shock waves through the Canadian privacy community. But the buzz isn’t over the fact that former Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart’s replacement has been found; rather, it’s over the fact that no one in the privacy world has ever heard of the newly nominated-for-appointment Daniel Therrien—and what they have heard doesn’t sound good if the end-goal is the protection of Canadians’ privacy rights.

What is known about Therrien is that he’s been a lawyer at the Department of Justice (DOJ) for more than 20 years. His current title is assistant deputy attorney general, public safety, defence and immigration portfolio. And in the midst of an increasing push by the government for surveillance powers and law enforcement access to Canadians’ data—a la bills like thehighly controversial C-13 and now-dead-in-the-water C-30—a lawyer who’s worked on helping the DOJ achieve those aims isn’t exactly who privacy advocates had in mind as the chief defender of privacy rights.

In fact, NDP Leader Thomas Mulclair has outright told the Harper government that Therrien has “neither the neutrality nor the necessary detachment to hold this position,” CBCreports, and has asked Prime Minister Stephen Harper to reconsider the nomination, which, by mandate of the Privacy Act, the House of Commons and the Senate must approve.

Mark my words, this year’s most fashionable footwear in Ottawa is the #FATCA flip-flop. (Sorry, I’ve noticed that a lot of people who practice Yoga also wear flip-flops. Set me straight if you need to.)

Bad for your feet – but perfect for your posturing.

For the record, you can buy custom-printed flip flops online (printed with the image of your choice). If anyone, with the appropriate disposable income, wants to generate some news media about our plight, ordering a pair of these and letting the media know you’ve sent them to PMJT might get some very well-deserved attention. I’ll even write the press release.

Otherwise, feel free to steal the image below and share the crap out of it whenever+wherever you see fit: Twitter, Facebook, et al.

Cross-posting while listening to viewing / listening to: http://parlvu.parl.gc.ca/XRender/en/PowerBrowser/PowerBrowserV2/20160414/-1/24805?useragent=Mozilla/5.0%20(Windows%20NT%2010.0;%20WOW64)%20AppleWebKit/537.36%20(KHTML,%20like%20Gecko)%20Chrome/49.0.2623.112%20Safari/537.36

http://maplesandbox.ca/2016/baby-elles-fatca-letter/

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau and President Obama:

Why do you think I am a tax cheat?

I am eight months old. I live with my Mommy and Daddy in Canada.

I can’t walk or talk yet. So my Nana’s friend Lynne is helping me write to you.

At Christmas time Mommy and Daddy opened a small savings account for me in Canada. When I was six months old in February, TD Bank sent me a letter and other stuff.

I can’t read. So Nana read it for me.

I don’t know what the gibberish in the letter means. Nana says it’s crazy. I believe my Nana.

The letter says TD will squeal on me to Canada Revenue Agency (CRA). Then the CRA will tattle on me to U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for FATCA. What’s a FATCA?

I don’t know what a citizen is. But I’m a double one.

I was born in the United States. My Mommy and Daddy are Canadian citizens. The Canadian government sent me a letter saying I am too. But I have a blue book that says I’m a U.S. citizen too.

TD says because they know I was born in the United States, I have to complete, sign and mail forms to them.

How can I? I can’t even print yet.

President Obama: Why do you want my information? What will you do with it?

Prime Minster Trudeau: Why are you giving your friend Mr. Obama information about me? Why are you helping him? Why aren’t you helping me?

Please help me. I can’t afford an accountant or lawyer from my allowance.

Bye Bye.

Baby Elle
Vancouver Canada

referencing also today’s: http://ipolitics.ca/2016/04/14/baby-girl-drawn-into-cra-irs-information-sharing-controversy/

AND

http://ipolitics.ca/2016/04/14/so-now-the-cra-is-going-after-infants/

…to be continued

cross-posted from ADCSovereignty Blog

Strict tax compliance has its innocent victims /via @globeandmail https://t.co/gj1llKnzgT – Bravo @BarrieMckenna for mention of # FATCA!

— John Richardson – Counsellor for US persons abroad (@ExpatriationLaw) April 5, 2016

The above tweet references the following article by Barrie McKenna of the Globe and Mail. The comments to the article include:

Canada has signed an inter-governmental agreement with the US, implementing FATCA in Canada. As a result, more than 155,000 Canadian tax records were delivered from Canadian banks to CRA, which in September 2015 turned them over to the IRS, circumventing Canadian privacy legislation. Most of the holders of these accounts are ordinary Canadian citizens, whose only crime (as Mr. McKenna notes) is being born in the US to Canadian parents or who otherwise have only tenuous connections with the US. Under the agreement, the Government of Canada plans to turn over Canadian financial information to the IRS annually.

This agreement was implemented by the former Conservative government, over the objections of opposition parties, including the Liberals. Now that the Liberals are in power, they reversed themselves and now insist they have no choice but to obey US demands.

The Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty (ADCS) has launched a lawsuit against the Government of Canada, opposing this agreement. The plaintiffs are two Canadian women born in the US to Canadian parents and brought back to Canada age 5 years.

For more information, see the ADCS website: http://www.adcs-adsc.ca/

Continue reading →

This is an extremely important post because it makes clear that some “US Persons” in Canada, due to holding a green card, have an option to follow the advice of the CRA and not identify themselves as a US Person to their financial institution. This may also be possible in other countries IF a treaty has the same provisions as those discussed in this post and that tax agency has a similar position. Please do check carefully and follow through before deciding whether this can apply to you. And note, nothing in this post can be considered to be accounting or legal advice for your situation.

Without intending it, we seem to have started a new approach to the ongoing problem of having US law inflicted upon us outside the US. I consider this post connected to my recent posts which I will call the “Tax Treaty Series.” Brockers outside of Canada are encouraged to do what we do best; i.e., go and research this to see if people in your countries also have a possibility of utilyzing this information. I think it is undeniable that Brock has had perhaps the largest effect on these issues due to our beginning as a resource tool based upon research. Due to our REFUSAL to believe what we were being told without adequate proof. We have managed to make this situation/people uncomfortable and forced to see that there are other options available than those we are told/offered. No other expat organization as far as I can see, in the last four years, has contributed more. In this spirit, I want to initiate a new effort focused upon looking for “loopholes;” not loopholes in the sense that we get out of doing something. Loopholes where governments have failed to “nail” us to the US’s requirements and by which we may legally NOT follow what is presumed by such governments and the tax compliance industry. I think treaties are an area where we can do more than we have in the past. And I ask for suggestions for a new term – not “loopholes” – what shall we call these? – Patricia Moon

*****

cross-posted from citizenshipsolutions.ca
Introduction …

Circa 2014: Are Green Card Holders who r resident in Canada "US Persons" within the meaning of Canada US FATCA IGA? https://t.co/txcOlpNMfJ

— Citizenship Lawyer (@ExpatriationLaw) April 3, 2016

The above tweet references a comment that was left on Olivier Wagner’s Tax Samurai blog. Olivier is discussing an earlier post of mine called “When It Comes To FATCA, There Are Four Kinds Of Americans Abroad“.

I highly recommend his “post about my post”.

The comments discuss the question of:

Is a Green Card Holder resident in Canada a “U.S. Person”
for the purposes of FATCA?

The last comment notes that the Canada Revenue Agency is advising U.S. Green Card Holders who are resident in Canada that they should NOT identify as “U.S. Persons” under the FATCA IGA.

The exact text of the comment reads:

Green Card holders in Canada are interpreting the following statement from the Government of Canada to mean that FATCA does NOT apply to them:

http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/nnrsdnts/nhncdrprtng/ndvdls-eng.html

“I hold a U.S. green card. How does this affect my tax residency?

If you are a green card holder (that is, a lawful permanent resident of the U.S.), the U.S. considers you to be a U.S. resident.

However, if you are a resident of Canada for tax purposes and do not hold U.S. citizenship, you should not identify yourself as a U.S. person to your Canadian financial institution.”

The actual IGA is here.

http://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/pdf/FATCA-eng.pdf

The definition section includes “U.S. residents” which presumably means tax residents (which in the case of Green Card Holders may be affected by a Treaty election).

The plain reading of the statement on the CRA site will mean that Green Card holders resident in Canada will NOT identify as being U.S. tax subjects.

Note: I tried to leave a similar comment a moment ago, but it didn’t seem to show up. This is a duplicate. Feel free to pick one comment or the other.

– See more at:
http://www.taxsamurai.com/index.php/2014/09/06/four-kinds-americans-abroad-response/#comment-7

The purpose of this post is to expand this discussion …
Continue reading →