UPDATE: ALL AMENDMENTS DEFEATED Amendments Being Voted on Today Or Tonight

UPDATE4:26 p.m.:  All amendments were just DEFEATED by the Cons–including one from Rankin to ensure the Act meets the Charter
BREAKING NEWS:  I just spoke with Scott Brison’s Policy Advisor. Mr. Brison has presented an amendment to the Finance Committee.  A vote will be late this afternoon or sometime tonight.

Ref.: 6611875  Clause/Article 99
Page 73  Page 73
COMMITTEE STAGE
May 22, 2014
Mr. Brison (Kings—Hants)
ÉTAPE DU COMITÉ
22 mai 2014
M. Brison (Kings—Hants)
That Bill C-31, in Clause 99, be amended by
adding after line 11 on page 73 the following:
Que le projet de loi C-31, à l’article 99, soit
modifié par adjonction, après la ligne 11, page
73, de ce qui suit :
“(2) Despite any other provision of this Act
or the Agreement, for all purposes related to
the implementation of this Act and the
Agreement, “U.S. Person” and “Specified
U.S. Person” does not include any person
who is
« (2) Malgré les autres dispositions de la
présente loi ou de l’Accord, dans le cadre de
la mise en oeuvre de la présente loi et de
l’Accord, « personne des États-Unis » et
« personne désignée des États-Unis » ne
visent pas la personne qui, à la fois :
(a) a Canadian citizen within the meaning of
the Citizenship Act or a permanent resident
within the meaning of subsection 2(1) of the
Immigration and Refugee Protection Act; and
a) est un citoyen canadien au sens de la Loi
sur la citoyenneté ou un résident permanent
au sens du paragraphe 2(1) de la Loi sur
l’immigration et la protection des réfugiés;
(b) ordinarily resident in Canada.”  b) réside habituellement au Canada. »

She advised they Mr. Brison has also submitted other amendments, including one that would  ensure other Canadian laws prevail over the Implementation Act, (instead of having this law prevail over those laws).
This is essentially a formalized version of the amendment Anne Frank suggested and that Schubert and I sent to Brison, Rankin and  Cullen. The second amendment Brison put forth is a varation of one I suggested–to remove the section that prevails over all other Canadian laws
She said the NDP and Elizabeth May have submitted similar amendments. She expects support for the amendment from the NDP and Greens (although the Greens do not have a vote at  the Committee), but does not know if the Conservatives will support it.Ted Hsu will be present for the Liberals to speak on this.
The Finance Committee will begin a clause by clause review and will consider these amendments at 3:30 today.  A vote will likely take place on each amendment tonight. She was not able to say what time that would be.
You can watch on ParlVu

116 thoughts on “UPDATE: ALL AMENDMENTS DEFEATED Amendments Being Voted on Today Or Tonight

  1. Thanks for this. If only!!! Fingers crossed.
    IBS was up and is down again. Lots of people are in the dark right now.

  2. This will be very interesting either way it turns out. These two amendments would actually protect the Citizens and Permanent Residents of Canada. The vote will indicate whether the government is protecting Canadian Citizens and their Charter Rights or simply protecting the big banks.
    Thanks for your hard work and for letting us know. Let’s hope for the best but be prepared for the worst. In the worst case scenario, this would indicate a Charter Challenge is necessary.

  3. I just spoke with Murray Rankin’s Assistant.  She expects the debate today to be “lively” and thinks the Conservatives know that.
    She expects the NDP will support Liberal and Green amendments and vice versa.  Some of the NDP amendments are similar to Liberal amendments, but some are different, including and amendment that the Privacy Act and Charter of Rights and Freedoms must be considered.
    In addition, the NDP are continuing to call for FATCA IGA to be removed from the omnibus bill so it can be given proper study.
    She thinks the Conservatives are feeling nervous.  She is sending notices to try to get the media at the meeting today.

  4. Voting against that amendment is pure political poison. I hope the cons understand that or someone is telling them that.
    This is the kind of political hardball language that smokes politicians out. They are either with Canadians or……they are with American Banksters.
    The attack ads at the next election are priceless.
    @Blaze, per your post the cons should be nervous!!
    I am also thrilled that there are amendments which will put Canadian Law ahead of US Law. Again, absolutely realpolitik.
    These guys are painted in a corner, they have to vote down Canadian Citizens and after that vote down supremacy of Canadian Law.

  5. If the vote passes (and the omnibus bill subsequently passes) will that force a re-negotiation of the IGA with the US? And if the US refuses?
    The IGA already has a reporting exclusion for local-client based FFIs, without a dollar limit and regardless of US citizenship. It doesn’t seem like a stretch for the IRS to accept an exclusion for all Canadian residents. Canadian big banks should be behind the amendment as it would help stop 1 million Canadians from leaving the big banks in favour of deemed-complaint credit unions.
    If Canada gets this exclusion, some or all of the other IGA signees have clauses that they are entitled to get any better deals that other countries get. This all snowballs into a residence-based FATCA system, where only accounts by non-residents are reported to their country of residence, and we have the RBT-based FATCA system that they should have designed in the first place.
    I loved Paul Rand’s objections in the Senate. Funny thing is, if I understand his stance, this amendment would not change his objections to FATCA at all.
    Where you stand depends on where you sit.

  6. Scott Brison is my daughter’s MP!!!
    I met him briefly, very casually, when he was campaigning in Wolfville, NS. Seemed a very straight-forward, down-to-earth guy and I am THRILLED that he is standing up to the Cons and pressing for this amendment. No matter what the final vote, I hope others will join me in sending him a huge cyber-hug for his courageous support of all Canadians and our national sovereignty against Harper and his clones.

  7. Murray Rankin’s Assistant sent me this notice that just went to the media:

    29 May 2014
    CONSERVATIVES HAVE TO FIX FLAWED FATCA AGREEMENT
    OTTAWA – New Democrats are fighting the reckless implementation of the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and pushing Conservatives at Finance Committee to remove it from Budget Bill C-31 so it can be properly scrutinized and amended.
    “It has become increasingly clear, through departmental and witness appearances at the Finance Committee, that the Conservative government simply has not studied the implications of the FATCA implementation agreement with respect to privacy, constitutionality or cost,” said NDP National Revenue critic Murray Rankin (Victoria). “Rushing it through in an omnibus budget bill without proper study is reckless and unnecessary.”
    The U.S. has delayed the application of FATCA sanctions until January 2015. Canada is already deemed in compliance with U.S. law, and legal experts agree there is enough time to properly study and amend the agreement.
    “More than one million Canadians could be negatively affected by this deeply flawed agreement,” said NDP Finance critic Nathan Cullen (Skeena—Bulkley Valley). “We are simply asking again that the Conservatives slow down and remove FATCA from the budget, so that we can ensure the privacy and constitutional rights of Canadians are protected.”

    Today, the NDP will move a series of amendments at committee to fight the Conservatives’ attempt to impose FATCA and protect the privacy of Canadians.

  8. @Blaze, they have no excuses not to pull the bill out, none. That is a great press release.
    @WhatamI, I do not think the most favored IGA clause, clause would apply if Canada carves out Canadian Citizens in the implementing act. Why? The IGA is unamended.

  9. Wow.  Murray Rankin was on a tear introducing  the amendment., Keddy is certainly indicating that they Cons will  not support it.
    It is clear “includes…dual citizens.”  It  won’t pass.  American law will take priority.
    The Yanks are just enforcing the rules that have always been in effect..comes with duty of citizenship.”
    I think it is clear the amendment will  fail.
     
     
     
     
     
     
     

  10. Well, Gerald Keddy clearly has NOT read the FATCA bill NOR has he read the IGA!
    Rankin in reply is hitting on these irregularities from Keddy
    Voted NPD6-failed
    Lib3-failed. Both admendments were to include Cdn Cit and Perm Res.
    May has an admendment to see to it that the IGA does NOT override the privacy act and Charter of Rights act.
    As Lynne says, they are summarily voting no on these admendments, with Keddy constantly mistating the facts, indicating the Privacy Commissioner ‘gave the green light’ to the IGA as written.

  11. AMENDMENT on Protecting Canadians just DEFEATED by Cons!!!!
    AMENDMENT prevailing over other laws just DEFEATED by Cons!!!
     
     
     

  12. Holy Crap!  They won’t even support an amendment to require the banks to inform clients that their information has been passed on or to require banks not to report under the $50,000.

  13. I’ve just caught up with the news. I’m not surprised at the results; I’ve known all along that the Tories are a pack of a$$es and these votes merely confirm that fact.
    The biggest a$$es however will be any affected persons who continue to vote Tory in any future federal elections. Those persons will deserve what they get, but the rest of the country won’t.

  14. Well, Keddy say goodbye to being a career politician. This can, will and should be used as evidence that you are a threat to all immigrants to Canada. Saudi/Canadian women can’t drive in their country of origin. According to your logic we should capitulate and “respect” their long held law in Saudi Arabia and start taking away the drivers liscenses of those women who are Canadian with Saudi indicia. Welcome back the Eritreans and go full bore allowing Eritrean government to make Canadian law. If all your constituents don’t already know your stance they soon will.

  15. Any idea why I’m getting “Account Suspended” blank pages when I try to visit your sister site, the Isaac Brock Society?

  16. Yes, and isn’t that interesting. In the IGA wording it states that they intend to monitor and have reported accounts of $20,000 subsequently. And less if they see fit.

  17. Yes, Keddy is indeed a real piece of work. For life long Conservatives we are NEVER going to forget this betrayal.

  18. @AtticusinCanada
    It was in the Chronicle Herald yesterday that Keddy is not running in the next election. I briefly hoped that this might be an indication that he would not feel obligated to toe the party line and might vote against dear leader – then I remembered that taking a step like that requires having some integrity (something sorely missing in the Tory ranks these days). Keddy undoubtedly is from the Nancy Pelosi style of governing – you gotta pass it to find out what is in it.

  19. Absolutely gutted on this news from the other side of the pond.
    These men are not Canadian Patriots. They are nothing more than carpet baggers.
    What on earth possessed them to not do these common sense things?
    Why will they not take the bill out of the omnibus legislation? Why?

  20. @Canadian Cop: I think Keddy not  running for reelection is exactly the reason why he was the chosen mouthpiece of the Cons today.
    @George: Because they are Cons.

  21. Demand that the opposition party will guaranty repeal of FATCA when they are in power? This should be much more specific than Chretian comment of getting rid of GST in 1993.

  22. @All, when is the next election in Canada?
    @George III, I agree with you but “repeal FATCA” is not the pledge thats needed. I think you need a pledge that says first, Canadian Citizens in Canada are not US Persons, Cambodian Persons, Nigerian persons…they are Canadian Persons and nothing else meaning FATCA does not apply to them.
    Next, you need a pledge that all persons tax resident in Canada are not subject to the IGA because you are not the Caymans.
    You also need, probably the most important, simply the repeal that the IGA trumps all law in Canada. I do not know how they had the guts to vote down an amendment saying the Charter overuled the IGA. BUT…..that tells me and gives me strength that there is a Charter problem!!
    Itching to send money to start litigation!!!

  23. It pains me to say this as a long time conservative, but I think they do not take their marching orders from the voters in Canada. I think they take their marching orders from G8 and G20 initiatives, decided in secret and implemented at their pleasure. There seems to me to be a concerted effort to ram this through NO MATTER WHAT. The IGA states that it follows ‘OECD guidelines’

  24. @GeorgeIII Next tentative date for federal election October 2015.
    You will soon be able to scratch that itch to send money. I promise!!!
     

  25. @Furious AC, I hope that is “former long time conservative.”
    @All, this “would not be so bad” if it was possible to easily get rid of this crap American Citizenship. I read earlier today the problem someone was having proving a long ago relinquishment. Let us go in peace!!! We do not want your lousy citizenship.
    @Blaze, for our own sanity do you think one of your NDP contacts could try to explain to us why all the amendments failed. Politically in my mind it seemed very reasonable to vote for one or two to gain political cover as a “patriot of Canada.”
    @All, whatever you all do come the next election you need to vote carefully and get the person who will most likely defeat the cons.

  26. @Furious AC.
    How does this sound?
    “You call me an “American in Canada” but I am actually
    a Canadian Voter and I will cast my vote against YOU.”

  27. That was really a sickening display from CAN conservatives. The world has been taken over by the Chicago Mafia.

  28. @George:
    How about this: EVERY Canadian who has his/her privacy violated and individual rights violated by this IGA concocted by the Conservative government will remember well when it comes time to vote just WHO ruined their financial lives and the lives of their families because someone in the family was ‘a US Person’, as defined by a foreign government.
    Well remembered at voting time will be the performances of Murray Rankin, Elizabeth May and and Nathan Cullen especially.
    Most egregious will be Keddy, who it appears, will not be running. TOO bad for his replacement!
    All duns for money from the Conservatives have been returned with comment.
    All Conservative MPs have been advised.
    They DON’T care. Let’s see how much they care come election time!

  29. As Con MP Mike Allen said, “Congress has spoken.”  I don’t know if there  has  ever been anything so outrageous said in Canadian Parliament.
     

  30. I don’t either. I could not be more outraged by the lack of interest by the Conservatives on the committee. They did not want to. nor did they in any meaningful way. discuss any of the amendments put forward. They intended to vote no no matter what kind of sense any of the amendments made.

  31. I have put up with a number of betrayal’s at the hands of this Conservative government that I voted for in the past. Like @FuriousAC, I consider this betrayal to be so monumental, that it cannot be ignored. The Canadian public at large needs to be made aware that the Conservative party position is that anyone with US taint is a US person living in Canada (not a Canadian). Throw in Mike Allen’s assertion that the Canadian government can’t do anything because “Congress has spoken”. The position of the government on these amendments solidifies that the Cons support Berg and Moody’s position (line the pockets of the compliance industry) and has no concern for Canadian citizens or laws. Harper and Obama are two peas in a pod – neither has any respect for the laws or Constitutions of their countries.

  32. @Canadian Cop:
    Well said and absolutely right!
    Just when did they turn? Just when did they become untrustworthy?
    We were not Conservative for flimsy or inconsequential reasons. We followed the issues closely. We felt it was in the interest of the security and prosperity of Canada that we have a majority Conservative government. We watched as their tax cuts came into effect as promised. We worried they were not moving fast enough on the tax cut front, but , by and large, they were living up to their campaign commitments.
    When, really did it all change?
    I listened and watched in dismay as they betrayed our veterans who deserve our respect and deserve our government’s commitment to them to be kept to the letter.
    They actually went to court to deny our vets their due and we were outraged about that and let our MP and the PM and Minister Fantino know what we thought of it all.
    ( never liked Fantino because of his part in the Caledonia affair, but that’s another story)
    And now this. This is the worst betrayal of Canadian sovereignty ever perpetrated on an unsuspecting and innocent country.

  33. Words escape me — I have rarely felt so empty as I do right now.
    My thanks to the MPs who so valiantly represented us as we have now confirmed that every Conservative MP brands us second-class citizens of Canada.
    (Did I hear Keddy say that if a child born in Canada has not been registered with the US before a certain age, there must be then an application for US citizenship? Just saying, my son does not have the ‘mental capacity’ to apply nor will I help him do so. Will our local Canadian “foreign financial institutions”, then, accept that that segment of us will not be deemed US citizens — no matter what the US deems these children born in Canada to US person(s)?)

  34. Yes, when I heard Keddy so confidently and arrogantly say that I almost split. Funny, although I knew how the vote would go I am still so disappointed. I was also offended by the somewhat jocular frivolity around some parts of the meeting. This is REALLY not funny.

  35. I echo the sentiments here – gutted, empty, disappointed, outraged.
    I can’t even talk about it right now.
    I will vow two things though –
    1. I will NEVER vote conservative again – ever
    2. I WILL donate to the charter challenge fund.
     

  36. I hardly see how they can force anyone to do so. They aren’t going to come looking for unregistered U.S. children. And unless they start stating lineage on passports there is no way to know if your child is born in Canada.
    I for one refuse to hand my defenseless child over to such arrogant people.

  37. The GST would have cost $30 billion a year to repeal in 1993. FATCA is far far cheaper. It is something we are working on.

    1. Who is working on repealing it?  Do you mean Rand Paul’s efforts in the US?  Based on how thing are going in Canada, I don’t see much happening here under this gov and I think repeal of a “treaty” under another government would be very difficult.
      Remember Liberal promises on free trade and GST?

  38. Today reminds me of the day the IGA was announced. Again no consultation, no debate. We live in a fascist state.

  39. Did Keddy also say that RESPs and RDSPs are not taxed by the US?
    Here is what I was told by Roy Berg of Moodys:
    The answer to your question is a bit nuanced.
    1. If the sponsor of an RDSP (or RESP for that matter) is a US person then (US person analysis of the beneficiary is irrelevant):
    a. The income generated by the RDSP is taxed to the US person sponsor currently as it is earned
    b. The grant is taxed to the US person sponsor when it is distributed to the beneficiary
    c. US person sponsor must file 3520A annually
    d. US person sponsor must file 3520 annually
    2. If the sponsor of a RDSP (or RESP) is NOT a US person, AND the beneficiary is a US person then:
    a. The income generated by the RDSP (RESP) is taxed to the US beneficiary currently as it is earned
    b. The grant is taxed to the US person beneficiary when it is distributed
    c. US person beneficiary must file 3520 annually (no 3520A)
    Neither RDSPs nor RESPs are covered by the Treaty.
    I can’t see how that says the RESP and the RDSP are not taxed by the US.
    I know I paid tax to the US, apparently from something that is not covered in the Canada / US Tax Treaty. And, perhaps so has the Canadian taxpayer (through what I paid to the US).

  40. @Calgary411:
    You know, I believe that the Conservative members of the Finance Committee have NO clue what they are talking about. Especially Keddy. I do not think he has read either FATCA OR the IGA let alone the bill itself. The only informed members are the NDP and Liberal and Elizabeth May did an outstanding job on her amendments she presented.
    There was NO reason whatsoever for not voting for Murray Rankins and Scott Brisons amendments ( and they both came at it several different ways ) to exclude Canadian Citizens and Permanent Residents in Canada from the designation of ‘US Person’, but they were shot down and there was little real discussion regarding, just NO.
    Now that should have been their answer to FATCA weasels instead of our Canadian opposition MPs who had valid submissions and well thought out arguments.
    These Conservative MPs really have no excuses because they sat and heard Allison Christians submission , Arthur Cockfield’s and John Richardson’s . All were well done and clearly indicated trouble ahead for the IGA as it stands.
    Yet, having heard they did not hear. They did not listen. I do not think they understand and that is being generous. They intend to pass this monstrosity as is and soon.
    The Conservative MPs have ALL been told by phone call, letter, petition and otherwise and now in Committee by experts yet they rejected any amendment out of hand and actually laughed about it.
    It will never be forgiven. Never be forgotten and it calls for activism in as many venues as can be exercised to kill this evil AND their political careers in the process!

  41. @Calgary411:
    Did Keddy say that RESP and RDSP are not taxable in the US.
    YES he certainly did say that!

  42. Furious AC,
    Not that I’m holding a grudge, but may every last Canadian Conservative and their “Dear Leader” rot in hell.

  43. Sorry guys, and this type of scene or even lack of discussion is happening all around the world. Very discouraging.

  44. He also said that children born in Canada of 1 or 2 American parents have to apply for US citizenship before their 18th birthday in order to be considered American.
    We now know that Keddy is a fool.

  45. The U.S. has no right to tax a benefit that is funded by the taxpayer of another country. It is all act of spite. But if they were to admit that then they would have to concede that C.B.T is wrong. Better to save their precious “exceptionalism” then to admit robbery of other nations.
    I thought the Americans believed self sufficiency? They should pay their own bills.

  46. @OutragedCanadian
    I echo the sentiments here – gutted, empty, disappointed, outraged.
    I can’t even talk about it right now.
    I will vow two things though –
    1. I will NEVER vote conservative again – ever
    2. I WILL donate to the charter challenge fund.
    very sincently put……
    i feel very empty that this has happened and will be happening to “we second class citizens of canada”

  47. Well, I sure am holding a grudge. This is totally unnecessary and it does not take a genius to figure it out!

  48. So we are approaching a situation where upwards of 4 million Canadian citizens are now deprived of their legal rights in Canada and this means that NO LAW IN CANADA should apply to us so feel free to act lawlessly and fight them to the bitter end. Everything is now on the table. Choose your battles and civil disobedience wisely as in guerrilla warfare. Attack then retreat so as to live to fight and disrupt their evil again andagain

  49. Over and over again in Canada, NZ, Australia, European countries and the European parliament, I have seen this fascist behavior. It is just amazing. It cannot be that they are all ignorant. They all have some sort of gun to their head either from the Chicago mafia, the OECD mafia, or the OECD mafia which is controlled by the Chicago mafia.

  50. @Blaze
    I am very sorry to hear about this. It sounds like your politicians were very badly informed. I think part of the problem is that everyone thinks of the U.S. as being a lower-tax country and very free market, so it is hard for them to comprehend how nationalist and at times confiscatory the U.S. tax system can be towards U.S. citizens residing overseas even in high-tax countries. None of the other countries that used CBT tried to micromanage their overseas citizens’ financial affairs so much. Sooner or later foreign governments are going to have their OMG moment about FATCA, too when the money flows out of their treasuries or finance industries.

  51. What Mr. Keddy, (et al.) needs to have dumped on his desk is boxes of U.S. tax returns, all hundreds and hundreds of pages of them (names redacted, of course), so he can see exactly what must be declared to that government none of us have anything to do with. He must see for himself the hell to which he and his colleagues have now exposed millions of Canadian citizens whose welfare they pledged to protect.
    Am I angry? Yeah, you could say that!

  52. I’ll be damned if I don’t civilly resist with regards to my rights as a Canadian citizen and my family’s rights in this country. My children are Canadian and my wife will BE A Canadian. If a paper is all that is keeping her from being a full-fledged citizen and a lack of a piece of paper is what is causing “Oblamer’s” bunch to call her a criminal, then they’ll see legal civil resistance coming in every damned shape and form that I can come up with.

  53. It seemed to me that maybe the government was told by the US that if the IGA is not passed as-is, the deal is off and FATCA will be imposed on Canadian banks directly. That would explain why they would not agree to even the most obvious clarifications.

  54. So it looks like the challenge is on.
    Does anyone have a good idea on how long it would take to get a decision from the supreme court?
    It seems so obvious that there is a violation that I don’t understand why it would take so long and why it would be so expensive.
    As Peter Hogg mentioned, this singles out in a way that causes adverse consequences a good percentage of Canadian people based on national origin.
    It seems the case could be expedited. What else is there to do but sue, and get the results in a timely fashion?

  55. Why mention Peter Hogg? Another coward in my opinion who could do something but doesn’t. This country needs rescuers, not wimps

  56. On facebook Petros has written that Brock is back. Not here though. “Account Suspended” is the message I get. Anyone else having this problem?
    About yesterday’s FINA committee debacle — I’m mad as hell and I have added more to my Charter Challenge war chest.

  57. @NoOne:  Yep. The Challenge is on.  Be prepared. It will  be long, brutal and costly.
    It will likely take years to reach the Supreme Court of Canada.
    This litigation will not be for the faint of heart.
     

  58. Ok Peter Hogg, let’s see you get an injunction to stop the implementation until the court rulings.
    Meanwhile an anti-American tourist campaign aimed at discouraging Americans from coming here and feeling comfortable would go a long way to get back at our government for what they did. I give the finger to anyone with US plates I see driving as I point downwards to their plates. If enough tourists get the message and complain to our tourism dept and to US media you will be surprised what the effect will be. If 1 million of us just did this once a day believe me word would spread that US tourists would not come and spend money here.
    How about bumper strips that read “Welcome to Canada, NOW GO HOME (with a US flag in the corner)?

  59. Peter Dunn is ruining things by that message which should read, temporarily offline for improvements, not giving the impression that the account is suspended. Peter…wake up! Why was that message put up in the first place?

  60. @wasabi,
    Petros has no control over the message. In fact, he was locked out and got the same message himself. Some can access the site now, others cannot. We just have to wait for the DNS and other issues to get sorted out.

  61. Wasabi. Your childish ideas are counter productive. How you can imagine that stopping US tourists from coming here would help is beyond belief.

  62. @Wasabi:
    Really. Peter had no control over the message. It is all about maintenance and proper servers to meet the commitment of high traffic levels it has nothing to do with the message that appears. I believe IBS is back up. I was just there about an hour ago. I see it is down again, but that is more to do with getting the servers able to handle the high volume of traffic at IBS these days. After the vote in the Finance Committee yesterday wherein {ALL Conservative MPs voted against amendments to exclude Canadian citizens and Permanent residents from the language in the IGA ( from the IRS ‘U.S. person designation) and their voting against taking out the override language in which the IGA supersedes privacy laws and Charter Rights in Canada.} If you think traffic is high now, wait until the word about THAT gets around!

  63. @Wasabi:
    Showing that kind of ignorance goes against the grain of what Canada and Canadians are all about.
    Believe me, beleaguered Americans are already looking to get out of the U.S. and get out of the way of the train wreck that this current administration is.
    ONE of the main reasons for the IGA in my view. And another of the reasons the con mps voted down all amendments.
    This is going to cost them their political careers if this goes the way I think it will.

  64. @Wasabi:
    Actually, maybe Blake’s would undertake an injunction should the IGA within Bill C-31 pass. Which I fully expect to happen.
    In my view the vote in Committee yesterday makes that inevitable. They would cost the earth but it would be worth it.

  65. I can’t blame all Americans for their government. We’re living proof that gov’ts do things that the people don’t want.
    We need to direct our anger and our fingers at our government, and the US government for implementing such a shortsighted, poorly thought out, ill conceived joke of a law.
    Right now it’s the conservative party that I’m angry at . They had a clear choice, and were given some clear solutions – instead they bowed down in obeisance to the US.  Yes sir, how high sir? Can I serve you up any more Canadians on a platter, sir?

  66. I read the following on the Senate website:
    http://www.parl.gc.ca/About/Senate/Today/laws-e.html
    “In 1998, after extensive hearings and consultation with a broad range of witnesses, the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee opposed the enactment of Bill C-220. The bill, although not a government bill, which was passed by the House of Commons, would have provided the government with the power to censor publications written by persons convicted of crimes where the publication in question was based substantially on the crime for which the conviction was entered. Senators on the Committee believed that the bill was a direct violation of section 2 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms which guarantees freedom of expression. The Senate agreed with the Committee’s recommendation, and the bill was rejected.”
    Could this happen to the omninus budget bill? How does one have the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee look at a bill?

  67. @OutragedCanadian:
    Has it occurred to anyone that “this poor conceived and thought out law” was really that poorly conceived and thought out?
    When you read FATCA and the IGA Canada signed it becomes clear they thought this out VERY carefully.
    Has it occurred to anyone that the IGA Canada signs catches both Canadians and Resident in Canada Americans in the net?
    INCLUDING any Americans even contemplating getting out of the US and going somewhere friendly. ( Unless of course you are the Oprah’s and Romney’s of the world, with great wealth who are buying property in Canada at a record pace.)
    Anyone with great wealth knows how to get out of the way and has long since done so. Then there are the ‘favourite sons and daughters’ who have the political and financial connections to not have to worry about such mundane things as fines and penalties. With GE owing 4 billion in back taxes and the IRS owing billions in back taxes ITSELF, we can see that it is not what you know but WHO you know that sees to it you are out of the way of the train barrelling down on US.
    And is it not clear to us all that what they are after is everything. Retirement accounts (targeted right now in the US. They intend to confiscate all retirement accounts and put them into the MYra, a government retirement plan forced on all private retirement accounts by the current admin. )
    Insurance policies with beneficiaries. If you leave insurance to your heirs, the IRS wants it before they can get it.
    I mean it is EVERYTHING. Every dime they can extort from us.
    And what galls me most is that OUR government is allowing them to do it.

  68. @FuriousAC – yeah, it’s occurred to me. I waver back and forth about it. Sometimes I think that saying it was a well-designed plan to trap millions of people is just being too generous and think that it has trapped more than originally intended. Other times I think they knew exactly what they were doing.
    And it’s not just all of our money they want – they want private information about us. Nowadays information IS power and power IS control.
    I hate to sound like doomsday-ist, but I believe that FATCA is only step 1. Now that they’ve seen that Canada and other countries will submit to their economic blackmail, the gloves will come off. It’s a slippery slope our govt’ is sliding down. And unfortunately, we’re at the bottom of the slide.

  69. Oh dear god Wasabi. The “Account Suspended” messaging has more to do with server maintenance. You should apologize to Peter, as it had nothing to do with him. Frankly, it is those who are constantly antagonistic that “ruin things” in most instances and who jump to conclusions, speaking without thought to others is no way to move forward.

  70. “Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence.” (Napoleon Bonaparte)
    I think FATCA began from incompetence.  It has turned to malice and an intent to grab information and control.
    The US used to punish people for becoming citizens of other countries by stripping us of our US citizenship. Now they punish us by trying to force our US citizenship back on us–even retroactively.
    I believe there are those in IRS and US Treasury who know full well the huge number of boomers who moved to Canada during the Vietnam era (about 100,000) are now either in early stages of retirement or nearing retirement.  That means we have the most amount of assets (entirely earned, saved, invested and taxed in Canada).  They know US Consulate told many of us we were “permanently and irrevocably” relinquishing US citizenship.
    I think there are bureaucrats in Washington who are likely Vietnam vets who think it is literally payback time.
     

  71. @One: I hope you don’t mind if I call you One instead of noone.  I don’t want anyone to think they are a NoOne–even if that is how the American and now our Canadian government thinks of us.
    Good idea about the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee of the Senate.
    You can see from the list below that the Cons outnumber the Libs and one Independent.  Can we stomach another e-mail campaign seeing how we were treated like “no ones” on our last go-round with both House of Commons and Finance?
    The flip side of that is what do we have to lose?  I’m quite immersed in some other FATCA projects.  Could someone else see if you can locate the e-mail addresses of the members so we can contact them to plead our case?
    In the meantime, I will send an e-mail to the Clerk of the Legal and Constitutional Committee to see if I and others could urgently testify before them.  I have had no response to my request to testify before Senate Finance Committee.

    Liberals/Libéraux
    Baker, P.C./C.P.
    *Fraser (Deputy Chair/Vice-présidente) (or/ou Cowan)
    Joyal, P.C./C.P.
    Conservatives/Conservateurs
    Batters
    Boisvenu
    *Carignan, P.C./C.P.
    Dagenais
    Frum
    McIntyre
    Runciman (Chair/Président)
    White
    Others/Autres
    Rivest (Ind.)
  72. @One: I  just sent an urgent request to the Clerk, Chair and Vice-Chair of the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee asking testify before them.
    Here’s what I said:

    RE: URGENT Request to Appear Before Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee
    I am writing to request an opportunity to testify before the Senate Legal and Constitutional Committee on the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), an American law that is about to be imposed on Canada, Canadian financial institutions and one million Canadian citizens and residents who were born in the U.S. or who have some other distant connection to the United States.
    This law directly threatens the privacy and well-being of one million Canadian citizens.  The implications of it are chilling for all Canadians.
    Legal experts have clearly informed the government FATCA violates Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This includes Canada’s most highly respected constitutional lawyer and retired Osgood Law School Dean Peter Hogg.  Mr. Hogg literally wrote the book on constitutional law. Mr. Hogg sent the attached letter to Finance Canada advising FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement would not withstand Charter scrutiny.
    I am also attaching a copy of the brief I submitted to the House of Commons Finance Committee before I testified before them.
    Yesterday, several amendments to the FATCA Implementation Act which is part of C31 were presented at the Finance Committee, including one I suggested.  These would have ensured the Act conforms to the Constitution, Charter of Rights and Freedoms, Human Rights Code, Privacy Act, Bank Act and Official Languages Act.  This would have ensured the rights of one million Canadians are protected.  With minimal debate, all of these amendments were defeated.
    Dr. Stephen Kish and I retained prominent constitutional lawyer Joseph Arvay to provide us a legal opinion on the constitutionality of the Act.  We did this with funds raised from Canadians and people around the world.
    After reviewing that opinion, it is our intent to commence a legal challenge to FATCA, including under the Constitution and Charter of Rights.
    We hope the Senate may review this unprecedented and misdirected law and take swift action to ensure  Canadian laws and Constitution are upheld.
    I suggest you also hear from McGill University tax law professor Alison Christians, Queen’s University law professor Arthur Cockfield, citizenship lawyer John Richardson and perhaps even Mr. Hogg himself.
    Thank you.
    Lynne Swanson

    If anyone else wants to support this request, here are the e-mail addresses.  I haven’t yet pulled out the e-mail addresses of other members of the Committee. It would be great if someone else could do that.
    lcjc@sen.parl.gc.ca
    bob.runciman@sen.parl.gc.ca
    joan.fraser@sne.parl.gc.ca

  73. If someone has the time to pull out the e-mail addresses of all of the members of that Committee, it may help if we all write to them. I am NOT optimistic, but:

    “Never, never, never give up.”  (Winston Churchill)

     

  74. “I believe there are those in IRS and US Treasury who know full well the huge number of boomers who moved to Canada during the Vietnam era (about 100,000) are now either in early stages of retirement or nearing retirement. That means we have the most amount of assets (entirely earned, saved, invested and taxed in Canada). They know US Consulate told many of us we were “permanently and irrevocably” relinquishing US citizenship.
    I think there are bureaucrats in Washington who are likely Vietnam vets who think it is literally payback time.”
    Lynne
    There is an escape clause have you not seen it on the offical website.
    “Does the agreement require Canadian financial institutions to report to the CRA on any individuals who were told that they relinquished their U.S. citizenship when they became Canadian citizens?
    The agreement does not require Canadian financial institutions to report on any individuals who have relinquished their U.S. citizenship and are not residents of the U.S. ”
    http://www.cra-arc.gc.ca/tx/nnrsdnts/nhncdrprtng/ndvdls-eng.html
    This is al ot worse in Europe and I doubt Vietnam Vets have anything to do with Obama and Carl Levin. Both of whom did not support the Iraqi invasion.
    Iraq war
    Senator Levin speaking at an event during the naming of the USS Gerald R. Ford
    “Levin was an early opponent of using U.S. military force in Iraq, saying in August 2002 that “if Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction, he wouldn’t use them,” and that “he’s a survivalist, not a suicide bomber”
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carl_Levin

  75. @ Lynne
    I’m not sure how helpful the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Standing Senate Committee would be. (Although the name suggests they should be.) They only have 2 up-coming meetings scheduled for June, both about Bill C-23 (Fair Elections Act). They don’t seem to even have Bill C-31 on their radar. Why don’t you see what kind of reply you get from the Clerk and then decide whether or not it’s worth e-mailing all of the members? They seem to be pretty selective about what legislation they will examine.

  76. @Lynne, Thanks for the initiative. I would contact these people, but I am hesitant since I am not a Canadian – not even a resident – just someone concerned with all the human rights issues caused by this misguided law.
    Thanks again for all your efforts.

  77. @GeorgeIII That may be as escape clause for those of us who know about the relinquish issue but I know of many boomers who became compliant so they could formally renounce after all the media hype, even though they were pre-86 Canadian citizens.
    Yesterday, when I was at an event that had nothing to do with FATCA, I heard about two of them.  Between the two, they turned over more than $170,000 of Canadian earned, saved,invested and taxed assets. That was $ planned for retirement. I know of others (also pre 1986) who have moved investments out of TFSAs.
    If a bank asks “Were you born in the US,” what will people who don’t know about the relinquishment clause do? Plus, no one has told us what a “reasonable explanation” will be about why someone does not have a CLN.
    When I first heard about all of this, I contacted a US immigration lawyer practicing in Canada. He insisted I was still a US citizen and referred me to a tax lawyer so I could become compliant. That same lawyer told someone else more recently he did not know much about relinquishment or how to do it.

  78. The response from the Con chair of the Legal and Constitutional Committee was fast.  This was received at 9:17 pm on a Friday evening:

    You should direct your request to the National Finance Committee chaired by Sen. Joe Day.

    In other words, don’t bug the Legal and Constitutional Committee with something as trivial as a legal, constitutional or Charter issue.  Of course, my request to testify before the Finance Committee has been totally ignored as have most of your submissions to them.
    I was anticipating something like that when I saw Bob Runciman was Chair of Legal and Constitutional Committee. He was Solicitor General and Minist er of Corrections and other Cabinet positions in  the Mike Harris Con cabinet in Ontario.

    
    
    
    				
  79. When historians look back on Stephen Harper’s (first?) decade in power, what will they make of the trail of institutional wreckage that his government is leaving in its wake?

    Will they conclude that a mastermind determined to change the course of the ship of state at all costs was in charge, or just a bunch of drunken sailors?
    Those are questions Chantal Hebert asks in Stephen Harper`s Self-Destructive Madness in the Toronto Star.
    I would say we saw a bunch of drunken sailors in action at the Finance Committee this week–except I do not want to insult drunken sailors. I think even drunken sailors would show more respect for Canada`s laws and Charter.
    Will historians even bother to look at the FATCA debacle?
  80. I wouldn’t waste much time with the Senate.
    Bill C 31 will be coming before the House for third reading. Presumably, there will be some debate which will be cut short by the Conservatives. If the opposition is really determined to oppose the IGA, they will do their best to make such a fuss that the media has to notice.
    The Charter Challenge needs as much publicity as possible. A strong effort by all the opposition to help generate news stories will give the Challenge fund raising efforts a strong opening boost.
    BTW, I’m not criticizing the opposition, especially Murray Rankin, but the political parties are in a better position, at this point, to educate Canadians
    about FATCA. After Royal Assent, then it’s up to us.

  81. So what it the timeline now, before this bill is actually law?
    When can we expect that to happen.
    Yes, I agree that some of the funds should be directed to a media campaign if we want to raise the money needed.
    RO was saying that they need $250K to start the litigation with Jim Bopp in the US.
    What is the ballpark in Canada before Joe Arvay can do anything?
    How does that work? Could the fundraising have multiple phases? In other words, how much money needs to be raised before anything can happen?

  82. As I ruminate about the injustice foisted upon us by our back-stabbing Conservative government, I have come to the conclusion that we have to somehow get the attention of the Canadian public and educate them (those that don’t already know) about the treachery of the Harper government. We have a large pool of very educated, intelligent, motivated people here who come from every section of the political spectrum. If we could coalesce around our disdain for Dear Leader and his betrayal of us, I think we could be galvanized into a political force to be reckoned with. The only thing holding many of us back is our fear of being identified by the IRS. I think our compassionate government is relying on that fear to keep us quiet.
    We have lots of ammunition to embarrass the Conservatives. Perhaps we have to be more strategic and political. Harper was very successful in branding Dion and Ignatieff the way he wanted, and Trudeau seems intent on destroying himself (my plan is to support the NDP, as they have supported me). With Canada Day coming up, could we somehow come up with a tombstone graphic saying:
    R.I.P.
    Canada
    Born: July 1, 1867
    Died: July 1, 2014
    Epitaph: “Congress has spoken”
    …or something along those lines? Perhaps a professional looking pamphlet to hand out at Canada Day events? I am obviously still very angry about the way the Cons have treated us after having always voted for them. I think that the way they treated the amendments is a clear indication that they care nothing about Canadians. I cannot imagine that any Canadian with some US connection would not deeply resent the Conservative position that they are first and foremost a US person resident in Canada (a group that is probably big enough to have a significant effect on the outcome of the next election).

  83. For anyone who has the stomach to watch, the House Finance committee meeting, where the IGA amendments were voted down, will be on CPAC on June 1 beginning at 7:45 AM ET.

  84. Yes, Canadian Cop, more fear instilled into us by the US Treasury and the IRS as we try to protect our Canadian-earned and taxed savings and shield our family members.
    FEAR rules and now that use of fear as a tool is being copied by our Conservative government as they, too, are willing to paint Canadians with a US taint as tax evaders, ready to turn fellow Canadians over to a foreign country.
    Will the Canadian public as a whole be swayed by the PR of the Conservative plan, especially since the media has not seen fit (and do we know why that is?) to give any coverage to what went on in the Finance Committee on May 29th, 2014?
    I went to a Calgary meeting with a fine group of persons laying plans for this country’s 150th Birthday Celebrations in 2017. We gave our wishes for Canada. Mine was that Canada remains a sovereign country. From the brainstorming taking place, it seemed to me that SOVEREIGNTY would have been the word to describe what everyone was trying to bring into the celebration. If any Brockers or Sandboxers have an opportunity to help plan in their communities for Canada’s 150th Birthday, it will present a good opportunity for you to discuss the importance of a Sovereign Canada.
    The planning in Calgary is called IMAGINation150. The next Calgary “Vital Conversation” in the countdown to Canada’s 150th will have the theme of “VALUES”.
    IMAGINation150 – Planning for Canada’s 150th Birthday (2017)

  85. Here is a formal reply from the Clerk of the Legal and Constitutional Affairs Committee:

    Thank you for your email and brief.
     
    Bill C-31 is currently before the House of Commons. When and if the bill is passed in the Commons it will be sent to the Senate for further study. Normally the Senate refers all budget implementation bills the Senate National Finance Committee.  I will therefore refer your email and documents to that committee for their eventual consideration of your request.
     
    For your information, the Senate did authorize a pre-study into the subject-matter of Bill C-31 of certain elements of Bill C-31 to a number of different Senate committees, including the Senate Legal and Constitutional Affairs committee. The elements of the bill that were referred to the Legal committee however was restricted to Division 5 of Part 6 of the bill (provisions relating to the Judges Act). As such, the committee’s examination into the subject-matter was limited in scope to only that part of the bill. That portion of the committee’s study is now complete. You can read a copy of the committee’s report on this section of the bill here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Content/SEN/Committee/412/lcjc/rep/rep08may14-e.htm
     
    The schedule of meetings for the Senate National Finance committee can be found here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenCommitteeBusiness/CommitteeMeetingSchedule.aspx?parl=41&ses=2&Language=E&comm_id=13
     
    And you can follow the progress of Bill C-31 using the Parliament of Canada’s LegisInfo site here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6483626
    And here is what the Senate Finance Committee said (Finally!) after my repeated requests to them:

    Ms. Swanson,
    Thank you for your email and brief.
    The Senate Standing Committee on National Finance has concluded hearing from witnesses on the subject-matter study of Bill C-31, and is currently in the process of hearing from the Chairs and Deputy Chairs of the other 5 Senate Committees who were assigned the subject-matter of certain elements of Bill C-31.  The committee has tabled a report on its subject-matter study, and this report can be found on the committee’s website.
    The schedule of meetings for the Senate National Finance committee can also be found here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/SenCommitteeBusiness/CommitteeMeetingSchedule.aspx?parl=41&ses=2&Language=E&comm_id=13  You may access the committee transcripts from past meetings and review the testimony received with respect to the subject-matter of Bill C-31.
    You may also follow the progress of Bill C-31 using the Parliament of Canada’s Legis Info site here: http://www.parl.gc.ca/LegisInfo/BillDetails.aspx?Language=E&Mode=1&billId=6483626
    I will circulate the briefs you submitted to the full committee for their information.
    Thank you for your interest in the work of Senate committees.

    In other words:

    Do Not Bug Us!


     

     

Leave a Reply to calgary411 Cancel reply

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