Moodys Gartner Thinks We Are "Inflammatory" on FATCA

Kim G.C. Moody of Moodys Gartner Tax Law (home of Roy Berg) thinks our opinions and voices are “inaccurate,” “incomplete” and “inflammatory.”
In FATCA A Canadian Perspective, Mr. Moody writes:

In today’s day and age, anyone with a microphone and access to the Internet can provide their opinion, and while free and open democracies need freedom of speech in order to function, sometimes the loudest opinions are inaccurate, incomplete and, in the FATCA world, inflammatory.

The Chief Jingo of Canada is proud to say she has never met a microphone she hasn’t loved and uses it to promote the accurate adn complete story behind FATCA.
Mr. Moody concedes:

One group who may feel blindsided by citizenship taxation laws are “accidental Americans.”

His solution:   Renounce–even though he admits how difficult that is.
Of course, Mr. Moody wants us to all become complaint. How to do that?  Come to Moodys Gartner
Mr. Moody does get one thing right.

FATCA is not going away and, instead, it appears as if the wildfire is spreading fast.

On the topic of those pesky little details like Canada’s privacy laws, the Charter and sovereignty, Mr. Moody says

I am simply a tax practitioner…

Hmmm.  Roy Berg used the word mugger in another recent article. Oh wait. Is that “inflammatory?”
 

19 thoughts on “Moodys Gartner Thinks We Are "Inflammatory" on FATCA

  1. Well, this certainly is a pompus self serving comment by Moody’s and condescending too. Oh, just simply renounce? How wonderful that someone who makes money off of such things should be advocating that people do this. Accidental Americans have so much money to renounce and to do all the running around, to pay for special services. This “Let them eat cake” post is truly shameful. “Anyone with a microphone” Yes, isn’t that true Moody’s, isn’t that just so true. How telling it is that Moody’s now advocates people give up their citizenship because of a bad law that shoves them into that corner. I’ll be sure to share that thought and this post far and wide. It speaks for itself.

  2. @ Kim and Roy
    I think it is self evident that Moodys Gartner is engaged in damage control after Roy Berg’s remarks to Finance Committee were noted here and at Brock.
    You are certainly aware that many people have discovered the Sandbox and Brock, and even if they never make a comment, obtain useful information.
    The criticism has stung. I doubt if the damage control will work. It may only make things worse.

  3. And its not just ‘accidental americans’ who didn’t know that they were US taxpayers. A lot of transplanted Americans who came to Canada as adults, and have lived productive, honest, lives, working and paying taxes to the Canadian government (whether they became Canadian citizens or not), also did not know they were still considered US taxpayers.
    Citizenship based taxation (where citizenship is bestowed regardless of lack of social, economic, or residence ties) is such an anomaly, it simply does not cross the minds of people to even think that it might exist, especially with regards to a country that touts itself as being ‘the land of the free’.

  4. FATCA is INFLAMMATORY.
    Moody’s US-Apologist sidekick Berg appearing in our Parliament to advocate what should happen to Canada and Canadians is INFLAMMATORY.
    FBAR is INFLAMMATORY. CBT applied to people with no economic ties to the US is INFLAMMATORY.
    Advocating that if we don’t like being overruled by the US overlord in our own home, millions of Canadians should stand in line in supplication at the US consulates and embassy, and be fleeced by 450. fees for renouncing, and the compliance fees and risks for backfiling – and any US tax consequences is INFLAMMATORY.
    Dismissing the constitutional, privacy, Charter and other considerations in favour of a solution that suits the narrow interests of Moody’s, the CBA, IIAC, and the Harper Conservatives is INFLAMMATORY.
    Bypassing Canadian citizens and the democratic process; passing legislation of this significance hidden inside an omnibus bill without Parliamentary study and debate, and without significant public notice and input is INFLAMMATORY.
    Doing so without any cost/benefit analysis – and willfully withholding from the Canadian public whatever federal reports or discussions that have taken place regarding the IGA (redacting everything including parts of the titles) is INFLAMMATORY.
    Suggesting we accept the absence of a full on economic assault from the US – as if we should be grateful we were ‘only’ robbed and not mugged, is INFLAMMATORY.
    We’re supposed to swallow the advice of a fellow Canadian with a US Homelander business partner who profits directly and handsomely from this situation – and who is advising renunciations for > 1 million affected Canadian citizens and residents if they don’t agree to let a foreign country dictate terms to Canada?
    And even apart from that monstrous cost and loss to all of us, we’re supposed to swallow that ALL Canadian taxpayers and accountholders should accept the signing of the blank cheque to America that the FATCA IGA represents – that we will be paying via our Canadian taxes and our account fees to implement the FATCA IGA – with NO control over how the US changes the terms – forever.
    Moody willfully ducks the huge question of what a government and society owes to ALL the citizens and residents in its care, and issues of democratic process, sovereignty, nationhood, human and civil rights, etc., probably because those are obstacles to the course that they see most profit in promoting and pursuing.
    However, we can expect that he understands numbers. And, what is his personal estimation of the costs to Canada and Canadians of having that many people, their families, their joint accountholders and their businesses in Canada affected by FATCA? And binding the CRA to report automatically and forever to the arrogant, punitive and capricious whims of the IRS and US Treasury?
    I think what he understands is what the CBA and IIAC do – download the costs as much as possible to other people, and define the ‘benefit’ to selfishly suit oneself – no matter what that means for Canada and Canadians as a whole.

  5. I think we should forward this Mondaq paid advertisment http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/316686/tax+authorities/FATCA+In+Canada+Is+The+Intergovernmental+Agreement+A+Good+Deal to our opposition MPs and ask why a recent American transplant to Canada – who has not established significant ties to Canada, is invited to appear and on May 13, 2014, was called to testify before the House of Commons Standing Committee on Finance re Bill C-31 in order to advocate for and support the imposition of a US law – FATCA, and the IGA – but yet, Canadian citizen voters and taxpayers and longterm permanent residents were deprived of any open and robust public notice of FATCA, and of a full and frank consideration and debate in Parliament.

  6. I’ve emailed both Mr. Berg and Mr. Moody but there has been no response from either. I have to say that I am appalled by their lack of morality and their wanton ignorance of the law. They both know that duress is a basic defense against having entered into a contract and yet they argue for the legality of C.B.TTand FATCA. They also know that a fundamental basis upon which anyone wants to bring a suit for damages is that a financial interest must exist that you must havebbeen deprived of. In the case of the U.S. there is no such interest because the Canadian taxpayer through his/her government stands behind the Canadian dollar and the tax system.
    If Moody’s wanted to do the right th what they would do is to refuse to service anyone who lives lawfully in Canada. The whole compliance industry should go on strike against C.B.T.

  7. WhatAmI and any other Calgarians,
    Do you want to join me this evening for conversation introducing the concept of Retaining Canadian Sovereignty for part of Canada’s 150th birthday celebrations:
    I’ve registered for this evening: http://www.i150.ca/VitalConversations/
    VITAL CONVERSATIONS: COUNTDOWN TO CANADA’S 150TH
    Wednesday, 28 May 2014 from 5:45 for 6:00 pm
    Downtown Campus, University of Calgary
    Event Centre, Main Floor
    906 – 8th Avenue SW, Calgary T2P 1H8
    http://www.i150.ca/get-inspired/
    Should we not have some input into these plans – keeping Canada a sovereign country?
    Our True North
    Vision
    Canadians come together to create a better Canada for each other, for future Canadians and for the world.
    Mission
    Build a nationwide movement that inspires Canadians to show their pride for what we’ve become and together build what we still hope to be.
    Strategic Priorities
    Encourage and share sesquicentennial gifts. Be a driver of original thinking about our nation and its future. Build internal capacity.
    Our Work
    In 2014 imagiNation 150 will use Calgary as a laboratory where we will experiment with ways for Canadians to further common purpose, each contributing their own passions and abilities.
    Our work has three streams:
    Stimulating dialogue about Canada: Who we are, where we want to go, and how we’ll get there.
    Establishing the practice of giving gifts to Canada.
    Sharing what we and others are doing and learning from each other.
    Outcomes
    imagiNation 150 is instrumental in creating a sesquicentennial movement.
    Canadians engage in thought and reflection about our country’s future.
    Canadians know each other better and appreciate each other more.
    Canadians are taking action to create a better Canada.
    The Sesquicentennial should include all Canadians.
    Sesquicentennial celebrations should encourage all Canadians to learn from one another and share their traditions. There are many different and important ways to celebrate Canada. However we celebrate, all Canadians should feel welcome.
    Discussion Questions:
    How should we celebrate Canada Day?
    How can we take this celebration to the world?
    What major events can we create to mark this milestone?
    How will different levels of government work together?
    What are the infrastructure legacies we want to build?
    How will citizens become engaged and exercise ownership for this celebration?
    What are the attributes of a strong Sesquicentennial brand?
    What policies and legislation do we need to make 2017 a success?
    What are the unifying themes that will make the Sesquicentennial relevant to Canadians?
    How can business and non-profit organizations play a leadership role?
    How can the arts create meaning and energize the Sesquicentennial?
    What are the success factors that will make 2017 memorable for all Canadians?
    What are the principles and values we’d like to see organizers of 2017 activities adopt?
    How can science and technology create meaning and energize 2017?
    How can the Sesquicentennial reaffirm the idea of three founding peoples?
    How can we use 2017 to revitalize Canadian democracy and participation?

  8. Here is some more today from Roy Berg:
    http://www.mondaq.com/canada/x/316686/tax+authorities/FATCA+In+Canada+Is+The+Intergovernmental+Agreement+A+Good+Deal
    I would submit that the IGA more closely resembles the bank’s deal. First, the US has the sovereign right to regulate its capital markets and, therefore, has the ability (heavy-handed though it is) to impose the 30% tax on non-compliant financial institutions. Second, the US also has the sovereign right to tax its citizens as it deems appropriate (even if it stands nearly alone in citizenship-based taxation). Third, the information the financial institutions must collect under the IGA is already available to the US per various information exchange agreements found in both the OECD and US model tax treaties.
    Some will argue that these examples are overly simplistic, and I would concede that they are, but they illustrate the point. Those who aced their high school English class might accuse me of posing these examples as a false dichotomy or false dilemma (which assumes that there are only two choices when there are others available). To those critics, I would note that the model IGAs were, for the most part, not negotiable. The IGA partners were able to insert pre-determined exemptions and exceptions, but the salient provisions were presented as a contract of adhesion; and in that sense, there truly were only two choices: take it or leave it.

  9. We already know that Obama thinks that American law should apply world wide. If legislation is passed into law by Congress, and signed into law by Obama, the world must follow, or so that arrogant buffoon thinks.
    We also know that Obama and/or certain members of Congress would like to harm the Russian economy. So, I have some suggestions for Congress. Here are some laws that they and Obama can pass for Russia.
    1) Ban their use of coal
    2) Mandate that Russia goes on Obamacare
    3) Ban drilling on Russian public land
    4) Force Russia to comply with EPA and Dodd, Frank regulations
    5) Re-define the full-time Russian work week to 30 hours
    6) Mandate overtime pay for government employees
    7) Demand the Russian Government provide welfare benefits to unqualified citizens and Illegal immigrants
    Can’t we all just see old Vlad compliantly bowing to the will of Congress?
    Whoops!!! I forgot!!!
    Russian refused to sign FATCA.

  10. Frankly, after reading the post on his blog, my first instinct was to laugh. It’s hard to take someone seriously who is so blatantly partisan toward FATCA. Of course he and Roy Berg are in favour of the IGA and think this is a good deal. If it goes through unchallenged it will make them LOTS of money for many, many years to come. They know what’s going to line their pockets and what’s not.
    They must try to make us seem like a reactionary, hothead, stupid people, and to do that they write/speak with voices dripping with condescension and derision toward anyone fighting FATCA/IGA implementation.
    What I don’t think they understand is that there are hundreds of thousands of us out there, and we’re watching, listening and judging. I know of many, many people who are reading and paying attention but are not commenting on any blogs or articles. Just because they’re quiet doesn’t mean they’re not out there.
    I hate to break this to you Roy & Kim, but we’re not stupid and we’re quite capable of intelligent, reasoned analysis. You’re right to be worried about us.

  11. @pastbeyond60
    The material in the link is not 100% clear to me. The guy did not disclose the existence of the accounts, but did he report the income from them? It appears that he probably did not, in which case he was evading taxes.
    People in here mostly have accounts only in Canada.. We are not evading taxes. We live, work, and pay our taxes here. Most of us do not have accounts outside our country of residence. The guy in that link obviously did.
    So you are really talking apples and oranges.

  12. @ArcticGrayling
    I guess I was just looking at the court upholding the FBAR rule and the excessive penalties and what this might mean for Mr. Bopp’s challenge.

  13. From Moodys ad for the Calgary renunciation seminar:
    “In July 2014, the US’s Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) will begin to go into effect, and at that time it will become increasingly difficult to renounce US citizenship for the “right reasons” and thereby avoid any negative consequences. All evidence suggests that now may be the time to consider renouncing US citizenship.”
    Hmm, I count 12 days after this seminar until FATCA kicks-in and all the badness ensues. Must be year-end bonus time at Moodys.

  14. There has been nothing inflammatory in here that Mr Berg could take issue with.
    If he is really and truly looking for something, I can oblige him.

Leave a Reply

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