A couple of familiar names are featured prominently in the Associated Press story More Renounce US Citizenship But Defy The Stereotype.
Carol Tapanila (aka Calgary411):
“You know, we are not rich people and we are not tax evaders and we are not traitors and I’m more than tired of being labeled that way,” Tapanila says.
Decisions to renounce “are driven by a whole range of emotional considerations. … You’ve got anger, you’ve got fear, you’ve got a strong sense of indignation,” said John Richardson, a Toronto lawyer who advises people on expatriation. “For many of these people, this is not a tax issue at all.”
Peter Dunn (aka Petros at Brock) also tells his story. Many of the other names are not familiar to us, but their stories are.
I understand this Associated Press story will be in many more American newspapers tomorrow.
I was reading through the Fraser Institute report from January 2014 “Canada’s Catch-22: The State of Canada-US Relations in 2014”
The report mentions several disputes and barriers, such as the Keystone pipeline, the softwood lumber dispute, and intellectual property rights, but there is not a single mention of FATCA.
According to their website “The Fraser Institute measures and studies the impact of markets and government interventions on the welfare of individuals” (emphasis is mine)
Can anyone tell me why and how they can just ignore the impact of FATCA?
Stephen Kish and Lynne Swanson have reviewed the legal opinion provided by constitutional lawyer Mr. Joseph Arvay on the constitutionality of the pending legislation “Canada-United States Enhanced Tax Information Exchange Agreement Implementation Act”. This act is aimed at implementing the “Intergovernmental Agreement” (IGA) designed to make the “Foreign Account Tax Compliant Act” (FATCA) operative in Canada.
The opinion has also been discussed with Mr. John Richardson, a Toronto lawyer, with whom we now have solicitor-client privilege, and who will be part of Dr. Kish’s and Ms. Swanson’s “litigation committee”.
The lengthy opinion provides in detail the pros and cons of the arguments, and possible outcomes.
There are good arguments that the proposed legislation infringes at a minimum on constitutionally protected rights and freedoms. Nevertheless, there are also arguments that the Government of Canada may employ to counter our position and, we emphasize, there is no certainty that litigation will be successful. Further, any litigation will be hard fought and very expensive. This litigation is not for the faint of heart.
Given the opinion of Mr. Arvay and discussion with Mr. Richardson, we advise that it is our intention to take all necessary steps to commence litigation against the Government of Canada once the IGA implementation legislation is enacted. Moreover, the nature and impact of the unprecedented legislation on all persons in Canada and those throughout the world who will be impacted by FATCA demands that we exercise this option that is in the public interest.
Very significant fundraising will be required.
Cross posted at Isaac Brock Society
Dr. Stephen Kish and Lynne Swanson today received a very lengthy and comprehensive legal opinion from constitutional lawyer Joseph Arvay on the constitutionality of Canada’s pending FATCA IGA legislation.
We are reviewing the document and will get back to you.
Cross Posted at Isaac Brock Society by Stephen Kish.
By Arthur Cockfield and Allison Christians in today`s Globe and Mail: How the U.S. Pulled Off the Great Canadian Privacy Giveaway.
For the first time in Canadian history, our federal government is preparing to provide a foreign government with sensitive personal financial information about hundreds of thousands of Canadians. It is doing so to stave off threatened economic sanctions, and is getting nothing in return.
Their article tells the “`sad saga“ of how the US managed to pull it off and makes a suggestion for an amendment to the enabling law that would allow reporting only on U.S. residents.