US Treasury Engaging With More Than 50 Countries on FATCA

US Treasury has announced it is Engaged with More Than 50 Countries To Combat Tax Evasion through FATCA.
The announcement says:

The Treasury Department has already concluded a bilateral agreement with the United Kingdom. Additional jurisdictions with which Treasury is in the process of finalizing an intergovernmental agreement and with which Treasury hopes to conclude negotiations by year end include: France, Germany, Italy, Spain, Japan, Switzerland, Canada, Denmark, Finland, Guernsey, Ireland, Isle of Man, Jersey, Mexico, the Netherlands, and Norway.

Interesting that Canada is included.  I received a letter from Flaherty last week.  His tone has softened slightly, but I don’t sense he has he has budged a lot from his original position.  I will post the letter in the next day or two.  My own best speculation is that an agreement with Canada will be far from what International Robbery Society actually wants.  What do others think?  Tim?
The announcement goes on to give other countries at other stages.
The announcement also says:

“By working cooperatively with foreign governments and financial institutions, we are intensifying our ability to combat tax evasion while minimizing burdens on financial institutions.”

How about minimizing burdens on citizens of other countries who have had no financial ties with US for decades–or in some cases, never?


8 thoughts on “US Treasury Engaging With More Than 50 Countries on FATCA

  1. I’m afraid that we who are citizens and/or residents of other countries don’t really count. It is the financial institutions that matter the most. Our existence is of only incidental to the issue at hand. After all “no country has the right to tell the U.S. how to tax its citizens or green card holders” even if they are not resident in the U.S. It is incongrous to me that given the fact that this argument prevents other countries from criticizing U.S. treatment of its citizens at home or abroad that the U.S. would feel any kind of moral mandate to criticize the way in which other countries treat their citizens. Such hypocrisy should be exposed.
    This is because the U.S. by some perverse logic has given its citizens and green card holders concurrent residency in the U.S. even if they are not or have never been there.
    It is because of this stupidity that it is necessary to renounce U.S. citizenship since that is the only way to rid oneself of U.S. residency and its accompanying Congressional act of intergovermental theft.

  2. Treasury tweeted their announcement. Here is their tweet and my three replies to them:
    Treasury Department Treasury Department @USTreasury
    With FATCA, we are intensifying our ability to combat tax evasion while minimizing burdens on financial institutions – Asst Sec. Mazur
    Blaze @LynneBlaze
    @USTreasury International Robbery Society & FATCA think only laws of United States of Arrogance matter.
    Blaze @LynneBlaze
    @USTreasury FATCA (Foreign Attack to Control All) violates laws & constitution of country where I have lived & been citizen for 40 years. .
    Blaze @LynneBlaze
    @USTreasury Why don’t you leave honest, law-abiding citizens and taxpayers of other countries who have no financial ties to US alone?

  3. @Saddened: Thanks. Good to see you here again. Note the announcement I posted from Ministry of Finance shortly after I began this thread. Be sure to get your comments to them.
    Any word on when your Canadian citizenship will be finalized?

  4. I will have a lot more to say about this as time goes on. If you remember over the summer when we were all fighting among ourselves I said there would be a time come fall when things would really heat up well here it is.
    1. For those of you that have discussed these issues with Canadian legal counsel it is not necessarily time to lawyer up but I would inform such counsel of this bulletin and re-iterate your intent to bring litigation against the Government of Canada if they intend to change the Income Tax Act in ways that violate Section 15 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.
    2. By all means submit early and often to this RFC. Enclose all previous statements by Flaherty, John Weston, Hoang Mai etc. Do not assume any decisions have been made either way on this yet.
    3. Before making any submission call Kevin Shoom of the Business Income Tax Division at 613-992-2980. Call Kevin Shoom after you make a submission. In general pester Kevin Shoom a lot. The more the merrier.
    4. THIS is now the big battle. It is obvious FATCA cannot be implemented without an agreement with Canada. The US I think has basically come to the conclusion that unilateral implementation will not work.
    5. This is general has moved away from the Privacy Commissioner’s direct responsibilities but she is still in general given a opportunity to comment on this. Follow up with the Privacy Commissioner’s office.
    More to come. I will try to find out what I can in the next few days.

  5. @Tim: Houston, we have a problem!
    Just tried to contact Joe Arvay. He is on sabbatical for six months, Finley Arvay is closed and are not taking any new clients until January, 2013.
    This makes it even more critical for CCLA to be willing to step up and do something now. I encourage others to contact Abby Deshman at the e-mail address I gave in the Canadian Government Seeking Input thread.

  6. I will find you some other people in the legal community to contact who deal in this area. I just emailed Elizabeth May and Craig Scott. Now that we know. Note: It is still not yet the time to bring any legal action no legislation will be passed this year. The House of Commons is going to adjourn sometime around December 15th and will not be back until the end of January. Joe Arvay will be back in town in time for that. You cannot actually sue the Government of Canada until any legislative changes receive Royal Assent. That could still be a long time. What we do know is what I was afraid which is the Government of Canada would wash its hands and say its up to banks and financial institutions as “private” institutions to decide whether they want to comply is out of the picture. It is easier to sue the Government of Canada than it is to sue a bank. I know that might be counterintuitive but its true.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *