Dear PM Trudeau: Renegotiate FATCA IGA Now

A letter was sent to Prime Minister Trudeau from ADCS requesting him to renegotiate the IGA to protect Canadian citizens, interests, sovereignty and our Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

January 27, 2017

Right Hon. Justin Trudeau
Prime Minister of Canada
House of Commons
Ottawa, Ontario Canada K1A 0A6

Dear Prime Minister Trudeau

RE: Renegotiate FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA)

“The Government of Canada has a responsibility to stand up for its citizens when foreign governments are encroaching on their rights. We believe that the deal reached between Canada and the U.S, is insufficient to protect affected Canadians.” (Justin Trudeau in letter to Lynne Swanson, Jun 23, 2015)

FATCA encroaches.

Liberal Statements

In Opposition, many Liberal MPs spoke strongly against American Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Among a myriad of comments in Parliament and in a newspaper article, Liberal MPs called FATCA “dangerous…an attack on our privacy…the IRS’ dirty work…infringes on our sovereignty…violates the Charter of Rights and Freedoms…”

As Finance and Revenue critic, Scott Brison said “About one million Canadians are caught in this dragnet…The government did not negotiate a good deal in Washington…They failed to protect Canadian interests in terms of FATCA…The reality is you can negotiate a better IGA.”

So, we are dismayed and disappointed that the Liberal Government is failing to “stand up for (Canadian) citizens when a foreign government is encroaching on their rights” and is not protecting affected Canadian citizens and interests.

“Negotiate A Better Deal”

A new American President insisting on renegotiating NAFTA gives Canada the ideal opportunity to insist on “negotiating a better IGA.”

You can prove to all you are a Canadian leader and mean what you say — *A Canadian is A Canadian is A Canadian*. Now is the perfect time to show the value of Canada’s sovereignty as President Trump is making sweeping changes to protect United States sovereignty.

We, therefore, request you, the Minister of Finance and the Minister of Global Affairs renegotiate the FATCA IGA with an amendment put forward in Opposition by Mr. Brison and NDP MP Murray Rankin:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, for all purposes related to the implementation of this Agreement, “US Person” and “Specified US Person” shall not include any person who is a Canadian citizen who is ordinarily resident in Canada.

Please “stand up for (Canadian) citizens when a foreign government is encroaching on their rights.” Please tell President Donald Trump you will protect Canadian citizens, Canadian interests, Canadian sovereignty, and Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

“Negotiate a better IGA” now.

Lynne Swanson, Chair
Litigation Committee

Stephen Kish, PhD, Chair
Alliance or the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty

cc: Hon. Billl Morneau, Minister of Finance
Hon. Chrystia Freeland, Minister of Global Affairs

12 thoughts on “Dear PM Trudeau: Renegotiate FATCA IGA Now

  1. Lynn
    See if this will post. My eyes are annoying me.
    Any proposal to Trudeau et al will include the following;
    We should aim for a proposal that will have the maximum ally and prevent a USA court overruling it.

    The proposal should include the following it should be something that the congress can pass it if necessary with 50 Senate vote and if possible with 60 Senate votes. This will limit the possibility of US courts over ruling it. It can also be used as guideline to be used in other non tax heaven countries.

    1) Increase USA import that do not threaten Canadian manufacturing job in lieu of eliminating FATCA regulation and penalties on Canadian FI.
    We want trade unions on our side and if we eliminate all FATCA regulation on Canadian FI we will get their support. Do you really think they want to spend hundreds of million of dollar on FATCA regulation each year.
    Also eliminate any requirement for US banks to monitor Canadian taxpayers. USA banks do not want to waste money on FATCA regulation.

    The USA will get more money from this proposal than from FATCA. It can pass in the USA Senate by reconciliation and if we get enough rust belt Democrats we may be able to get 60 votes.

    Because the Canadian withholding tax on non residents is almost always higher than the USA tax on that same income. USA resident will almost always include Canadian withholding tax in their USA tax filling. While I am not familiar with IRS filling, I am familiar with foreign withholding in Canadian tax forms (T-2209). Look at your T3 or t5 of Canadian based foreign investment (e.g. Canadian based international mutual .)
    My eyes are done I will try and pass by in a few days with questions

  2. T & T seems to be doing something interesting in the amended version of their proposed FATCA IGA implementing legislation. Worth a look.

    As I posted at IBS;
    Maybe Trudeau and the gLibs should have a look at things like this from the proposed T & T FATCA implementing legislation called the “the Tax Information Exchange Agreements Bill, 2016 “;
    ex.
    “…And whereas the Act provides for the sharing of personal information of identifiable individuals without first obtaining consent for such sharing:

    And whereas the sharing of personal information of identifiable individuals without first obtaining consent for such sharing amounts to a breach of that person’s right to his family and private life as guaranteed by section 4 of the Republican Constitution:

    And whereas the Republican Constitution by section 5 provides that no law may abrogate, abridge or infringe or authorize the abrogation, abridgement or infringement of any of the rights contained in section 4 of the Republican Constitution:”………………

    “…the Committee is inviting members of the public to submit comments on the Bill, which includes proposed amendments and is available”;
    http://www.ttparliament.org/documents/2464.pdf

    “The report of the Joint Select Committee, which was laid in the House of Representatives on February 3, 2017 can be found”;
    http://www.ttparliament.org/reports/p11-s2-J-20170203-TIEA-r1.pdf

    http://www.ttparliament.org/about.php?mid=36&id=mrAC8325

    • For some reason, your comment went to Spam three times. I Unspamed it. Sorry!

      Stephen and I do not plan on submitting anything further at this at this time.

  3. I can not seem to post second part of reason for a full change. It regarded banks
    Part 2
    Your proposal would not get rid of the problem of Canadian Financial institution of doing the yearly review and USA bank of eventually doing their review. You want as many allies as possible on this subject. Just like I suggested any USA import should not come of the cost of manufacturing jobs in Canada (keep labour union happy). You can keep Canadian & USA financial institution happy by not forcing to do all this mindless paper work. Trump is pushing reducing business regulations.

    If you are a non resident of either country you pay a withholding tax on investment income. I think it is 30% on ordinary income dividend income may be lower %. You can receive Tax credit for the foreign withholding tax, from your taxes the country you live. There is is formula on T2209. If you ever owned a Canadian based international mutual fund you should be familiar with it. Since USA taxes are almost always lower than this withholding taxes a USA resident would always fill out this information on his USA taxes. There may be a very small amount of Canadian resident with USA based assets who may not report but on a cost benefit analysis it would not be worth while for Canada to pursue them. In addition Canada USA have other tax sharing agreement if they think a really rich person was evading taxes.

    Lynn or Steve if you have questions I will try and answer. Can you please reply in the next week or so? I do not want to post on Issac Brock.

    If a deal is made that help USA manufacturing jobs we may be able to get 60 USA Senates votes (permanent change). There is not a lot of conservative Democrat Senators (Manchin from West Virginia) but I think a Democrat Senator from the rust belt would be hard pressed to vote a bill that would create manufacturing job in their state.

  4. Lynn or Steve please read and respond
    Part 1
    A complete elimination of Canadian financial institution from FATCA for increased USA imports would be a better solution
    Reason 1
    Article 7 which applies to all FATCA IGA I do not think Trump would want to make these changes to countries who do not sign trade deal
    “Article 7
    Consistency in the Application of FATCA to Partner Jurisdictions
    1.Canada shall be granted the benefit of any more favorable terms under Article 4 or Annex I of this Agreement relating to the application of FATCA to Canadian Financial Institutions afforded to another Partner Jurisdiction under a signed bilateral agreement pursuant to which the other Partner Jurisdiction commits to undertake the same obligations as Canada described in Articles 2 and 3 of this Agreement, and subject to the
    same terms and conditions as described therein and in Articles 5 through 9 of this Agreement.”

  5. This is second part of saturday post
    2) Because of trade imbalance he can get what it wants without giving up much to Canada. He will throw in repeal of Canadian FATCA IGA because on benefit cost basis it is stupid and it allows Canadian government show something.

    “Stick to the big themes, know exactly what you want from the meeting and make sure he knows exactly what you want. Trump’s a very experienced and very successful businessman. He’s held thousands of meetings like this and doesn’t like to muck about. He’ll want to know what you can do for him, and what, in return, he can do for you. But in that order…America first.”
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-4160270/PIERS-MORGAN-S-TRUMP-MEMO-THERESA-MAY.html

  6. last part of saturtday post
    3) In any negotiation on trade he would want more USA manufacturing job. Using US made Steel instead of steel imported from Asia. Do you really have a problem with that if he got rid of FATCA on Canadian Banks?

  7. Lynn Can you please add this on
    In communicating with Canadian government we should pass on to the USA president that increased of US imports to Canada will more than make up for lost revenue due to lose of FATCA in Canada and therefore it can be passed by USA Senate with only 50 votes. In addition get the US banker group on our side to apply pressure. They do not want to implement FATCA and if we get enough non tax heaven US trading partner they may eliminate the need for US bank to implement FATCA. I assume they have some influence on Republicans. I am certain they would even like to stop reporting on Canadian residents on a stand alone basis.

  8. I provided the quote for the amendment but mistakenly left out the phrase “or a permanent resident”. I am sorry for the error.

    The actual proposed amendment is found on Sandbox and is:

    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. »

    http://maplesandbox.ca/2014/urgent-amendments-being-voted-on-today-or-tonight/

  9. We really need and deserve a relevant reply to this excellent letter. C’mon Justin. Whaddya say now? The tapping sound you hear is my foot … waiting … waiting … waiting …

Leave a Reply

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

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Optionally add an image (JPEG only)