"Sovereignty, Shmovereignty"

“Sovereignty, shmovereignty.”

Those two words sum up how “one by one” countries around the world fell to the FATCA “rotten carrot.“ Or an attempt to Explain the Wormy Morass of FATCA.
We certainly saw that in action in Canada’s Parliament this week.  Unlike the other countries, Canada wasn’t even offered a “rotten carrot.” Canada already had an information exchange agreement with the US.
Or, as Mike Allen said “Congress has spoken.“
“Sovereignty, shmovereignty.” indeed.

8 thoughts on “"Sovereignty, Shmovereignty"

  1. I quite agree. Nothing we do is worth a hill of beans until we get these Harper bums out of office and until governments all over the world unite and rebel against the US thugs and their draconian approach to law abiding folks.

  2. Lynne, you have so many great posts here. I would love it if you had a twitter sharing button. Victoria too! I often copy and paste the links though.
    FATCA is so convoluted it’s hard for the average citizen to sit down with that legislation and the “agreement* (arm twisted) to really understand what just happened here. If people really “got it” they’d be outraged and horrified.
    This thing is an open door now for the U.S. to just continue demanding more and more and Canada? What’s Canada now if the U.S. makes our laws with no benefit to us? I saw an article yesterday about how twenty states are set to run out of water in the next fifteen years. Guess where they’ll come and “demand” (arm twist) to get it?

  3. Excellent article:
    “In Europe, people are beginning to question the continual stream of investigations, indictments and regulatory fines involving European banks. Some even go so far as to accuse US regulators of pursuing a “vendetta” against European banks to appease public anger about the banking industry without harming the US industry. The dominance of European banks on the US regulators’ hit list is indeed noticeable, and not just for sanctions-busting: European banks also feature prominently in regulatory investigations into rigging of benchmark rates.”

  4. There was debate in the House on the IGA on June 4th, beginning after 18:55 , almost half way through the session
    This from Elizabeth May:
    It is certainly remarkable that U.S. legislation has been accepted in Canada as having extraterritorial application. Canada is prepared to say okay. I do not know if this would be allowed if, say, Iran decided to pass legislation to say that anyone with an Iranian connection in Canada had to be treated differently than other Canadians.
    In the case of the United States and this piece of legislation, it is based on the implementation of something called the Intergovernmental Agreement, or IGA. Obviously, the United States is our greatest trading partner and closest friend. This is nothing against the United States, but as a matter in principle of law, one nation’s laws do not apply extraterritorially to citizens of other countries. In this case, we have agreed, as though it were a treaty, to implement the IGA.

Leave a Reply

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