Another Open Letter to Recalcitrant Canadian Bankers Association: Response to statements made on November 19 2013 CBC broadcast

The November 19 CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) broadcast, in which a representative of the Canadian Bankers Association was interviewed, shows that Canada’s banks still feel that they have no choice but to capitulate to US demands for FATCA implementation.
This is just one brief response also posted on 


November 21, 2013
Mr. Marion Wrobel
Vice-President, Policy and Operations
Canadian Bankers Association
199 Bay Street, 30th Floor
Toronto, Ontario
M5L 1G2
Dear Mr. Wrobel,

[Re: Your November 19 2013 CBC broadcast statements on
Canadian banks and FATCA]

I am asking you, as a representative of the Canadian Bankers Association (CBA), to provide more balance in future statements you will make to the public on involvement of Canadian banks in implementing the U.S. imposed FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) law.
In your November 19 statements broadcasted on CBC the audience was left with the impression that Canada’s banks have no choice but to capitulate to U.S. demands to implement FATCA– because the U.S. has a “large economy” and “financial markets are integrated.”
I appreciate that only limited broadcast time was available, and know that you would not mislead; however, Canadians need to know, directly from the CBA, that Canadian banks do in fact have the option of resisting FATCA in order to protect rights of all of us and the sovereignty of our country.
This option is detailed in the November 12 2013 letter hand delivered to the office of Mr. Terry Campbell, the President of your CBA, and which was posted online at and
If you have not yet had the opportunity to read the letter, please do so and consider the specific options of FATCA non-compliance on pages 9 and 10.
In particular, I ask that you now in your public statements alert Canadians to a viable alternative to capitulation: To use the resources of CBA to begin (belatedly) a “serious lobbying and media campaign to secure FATCA’s repeal.”
I thank the CBA for commenting at the Isaac Brock website on our concerns and hope that you will continue to contribute to this discussion.
[Name and address disclosed on hard copy]
cc: Terry Campbell, President, Canadian Bankers Association
Maura Drew-Lytle, Director, Media Relations, Canadian Bankers Association
Honourable James Flaherty, Minister of Finance
Kevin Shoom, Senior Chief, International Taxation and Special Projects
Honourable Ted Hsu, Member Parliament, Kingston and the Islands
Honourable Scott Brison, Member Parliament, Kings-Hants
November 12 2013 Letter to Canadian Bankers Association:




8 thoughts on “Another Open Letter to Recalcitrant Canadian Bankers Association: Response to statements made on November 19 2013 CBC broadcast

  1. Thanks Compliant. I love “Recalcitrant Canadian Bankers Association.”
    It’s important CBA hear from a wide range of Canadians, but I understand people are reluctant to “out” themselves.
    When I initially contacted CBA, Schubert sent my letter to them on by behalf without me identifying myself. That was almost two years ago.
    After Schubert made the initial contact, I did my follow ups using my real name. I’m not prepared to hide any more. I have done nothing wrong.

  2. @Blaze, The problem is that not all of us who have also not done anything wrong have an ‘oath of allegiance’ paper that is the equivalent of a ‘get out of jail free card’ to fall back on. Some of us are in deep doo doo, if we step too far out into the limelight. Knowing where to draw the line for such people (I am one) is a bit tricky.
    Having said that, banks cannot just ‘pick on’ individuals even if they do know who we are due to our activism. They have to follow the IGA rules, and treat us all the same as everyone else who walks into a bank, whether or not ‘they’ know we are ‘US persons’ from having read our names on a petition or on a website somewhere or because they have us on video at a public demonstration.

  3. @WhiteKat: I know. I can’ t believe Canadian banks can be participants in this reign of financial terror on their long time Canadian customers.
    Despite repeated questions to them, (including by AnnMaria Tremonti on CBC last week,) they continue to evade the question of how they will know where someone was born.
    They don’t answer that question because they are fully aware that they can’t do it legally.
    I don’t believe an IGA will give them any way around that.
    If CBA would like to come here and answer that question, they are welcome to do so.

  4. They could be in the USA. The article had this at the bottom:
    ” Convey provides tax information reporting services and software to businesses to make IRS compliance clear and uncomplicated.”

  5. @Blaze, along with utter revulsion at what the banks are willing to perpetrate on their accountholders, and on assets that the banks need in order to exist, I am shocked that this is happening as applied to assets that we OWN. The money in the accounts belongs to us – not the banks, and not the US. Much of it/most/all of it has already been taxed, or will be taxed (on withdrawal or after any distribution). If legal locally made and held Canadian savings are to be seized and sent to the IRS, or accounts closed, then this is not a democracy. Basically at that point, we’re dealing with despots.

  6. Hey, I was just doing a search on the Parliament of Canada site for ‘fatca’, and ran across some interesting things. It could be that this is old news, and has been talked about before and I just don’t remember it, but I found the minutes to a March meeting of the Standing Committee on Finance. In it, there are high ranking bank officials named. For example,
    “Ms. Nanci York (Vice-President, Enterprise Regulatory Projects, Scotiabank):
    Hello. My name is Nanci York. I am vice-president of enterprise regulatory projects at Scotiabank. I am the bank’s point person for the implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA. In this role I am responsible for FATCA readiness and compliance across our global operations, ”
    Murray Rankin (MP) asked, “whether or not we in Canada can craft a good automatic information exchange agreement to get around some of the problems I’ve mentioned.”
    She said (at the time) “We could.”
    However, in the same search I came across a doc, “Pre-budget consultations 2012”, in which Tim Smyth said,
    “I believe a reporting requirement specific to nationality under the ITA is against the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Previous cases such as Chua vs Minister of National Revenue and Edwards vs Law Society indicate I suspect what would be a strong reluctance by Canadian courts to support this “intergovernmental” approach to FATCA. In some sense a ITA reporting requirement tied to nationality or in many cases even dual nationality would be seen as a modern day equivilent to the old Chinese Head Tax.”
    Kudos to Tim Smyth! And a pox on Murray Rankin and Nanci York.

Leave a Reply

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