October 9, 2013
By: Paul Seymour, Director of Client Services
pru·dent, adjective \ˈprü-dənt\ : having or showing careful, good judgment
Full Definition of PRUDENT: characterized by, arising from, or showing prudence: as
a : marked by wisdom or judiciousness <prudent advice>
b : shrewd in the management of practical affairs <prudent investors>
c : marked by circumspection : discreet
d : provident, frugal
If I asked you to pay me today, for a hamburger tomorrow, you’d prudently reply, “why, no thank you, but I appreciate the offer”. Or some such negative retort. I think it’s even more appropriate to respond as such, if someone suggests that you should pay today, to pre-implement an unconstitutional, tyrannical law, passed, and currently being challenged on several fronts, by your public servants. That of course being FATCA.
I keep reading that some banks are beginning to act currently as “participating foreign financial institutions” in order to comply today with the challenged and troubled FATCA legislation. This strikes me as quite odd, since although it’s been passed (not necessarily read), FATCA has not yet been implemented for several very good reasons and, in fact, there are several motions in play to repeal or materially modify FATCA, which have as yet been unresolved.
For example, back in July of 2012 Senators Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, and Saxby Chambliss wrote a letter to then Treasury Secretary Geithner requesting a slew of documents and other legally required information, which would be necessary to formally implement the act. You can read the eight page letter here. It’s obvious from this letter that Congress followed the Obama/Schumer/Feinstein law-making methodology of “pass it now and read it later” when trying to cram this unconstitutional garbage down the throats of not only law abiding US citizens, but citizens of the entire world.
Senator Rand Paul, in May of this year, after apparently receiving no reply from the bureaucrats who report to Congress, therefore introduced a bill to Congress to repeal FATCA. That bill has yet to be voted upon. Here’s a WSJ article on that subject.
Furthermore Rep. Bill Posey, of Fla., has written a letter to current Treasury Secretary Jack Lew questioning regulations that would require U.S. banks and credit unions to collect and report information on nonresident aliens, urging him to cease enforcement of the Foreign Accounting Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, and stop negotiating intergovernmental agreements with other countries for FATCA enforcement.
It has been logically stated that without IGA’s from every nation on Earth, FATCA becomes effectively unenforceable. So far there are less than 10 signed IGA’s, and those require that every US financial institution reciprocate by reporting their foreign account holders’ balances back to those foreign governments. The billions in implementation and future compliance costs are not going to be accepted by US financial institutions without a major battle. It’s also unclear as to whether or not these IGA’s, negotiated outside of any legal authority under the Constitution, and not ratified by Congress, have any legal authority whatsoever. Also see the lawsuit by banks below.
Extremely relevant along these IGA lines, is that Canada continues to lean towards upholding their own Constitution, and telling Lew, and his fellow Constitution-hating neo-fascists to go blow. Can you imagine the publicity and credibility issues for Treasury if the good guys to the north refuse to be extorted? I predict a cool shoulder would be extended by the rest of the world if that were to happen.
Read here news released just this week from the great white north, where Canada’s Shadow Revenue Minister Warns Government against Sellout on FATCA.
As I reported previously in Offshore Re-education Camp: Lesson 7, “There are only two countries in the world that levy income tax based on citizenship rather than residence; one is Eritrea and the other is the United States. But while Canada fulminates and threatens diplomatic reprisals against Eritrea, it says nothing about the U.S. By the way, the Eritrean diaspora is 2%, while Uncle Sam is stealing 50% of the overseas bank balances of US citizens, then imposing “penalties”, in addition to a $250,000 fine, and then finally tossing US citizens in the can. Eritrea is obviously the more civilized of the two nations, one might conclude. Recall the $21.6 million stolen from the Swiss account of a 79 year old lady in Florida. The $21.6 million represented half of her wealth, and was just for starters. There were also “penalties” charged in addition, and this dangerous character was then placed on probation. Note that the IRS didn’t prove that she actually owed any taxes. This robbery was simply for not reporting that she had money outside the US. Meanwhile, the IRS criminals responsible for abusing their offices for political purposes and to intimidate US citizens for Constitutionally protected political dissent remain free, as I predicted they would a few months ago.
However, with regards to the illegal negotiations being carried out by Treasury up in Canada, there seems to be a major obstacle, in addition to Posey’s moratorium, notably Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This document apparently prohibits, in Section 15.1, discrimination based on several criteria, including “national or ethnic origin.” Canadian Constitutional expert Peter Hogg has pointed this out in a five-page letter to the Finance Department, which is coordinating the IGA negotiations with the US.
Hogg said, “In my opinion, the procedures mandated by the Model IGA are discriminatory in a way that would not withstand Charter scrutiny. These procedures effectively treat individuals differently, and adversely, based on an immutable personal characteristic, specifically citizenship. If Parliament were to enact legislation authorizing and permitting this type of differential and adverse treatment, the legislation would contravene the equality protections in section 15 of the Charter.”
There are about one million people in Canada — the vast majority Canadian citizens — who have connections to the U.S. in one way or another. Some are “accidental” Americans — born in Canada to parents who are (or were) U.S. citizens; Americans who left the U.S. decades ago and thought they automatically renounced their U.S. citizenship when they became Canadians; and border babies — people born to Canadian parents in the U.S. who came home as infants.
You should also be aware that in April of 2013 several Florida and Texas banks filed suit against Treasury and the IRS: “The lawsuit, filed Thursday (April 19, 2013) against the U.S. Department of Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service in the U.S. District Court in Washington, seeks a judgment that the new regulation (FATCA) is in violation of a federal law, the Administrative Procedures Act and Regulatory Flexibility Act, which requires a cost-benefit analysis.”
The banking associations in the two states said in a news release that they believe the federal agencies failed to adequately do an economic analysis for the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. They also said their members are seeing an outflow of deposits as nonresident customers close their accounts, worried about disclosure of their banking information to their home governments.” This is based upon many of the unanswered questions posed in the letter to Treasury by Senators Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, and Saxby Chambliss last year. Again, your public servants acting as though they are above the law.
Therefore, if you’ll allow me to use an old-fashioned phrase from the former US Constitution, there seems to be “reasonable doubt” as to not only, the constitutionality of FATCA, but also as to the practicality of implementation without IGA’s from every country on the planet, including the Chinese and Russians, and the economic realities negatively affecting each and every US citizen if implementation were actually to occur.
So, although I hate to trouble you with all of these boring details, I think it’s time well spent rather than just saying, “oh well, it’s the US government after all, what else can we do but just bend over and comply fully and with a smile and say, thank you sir, may I please have another?” As a prudent statesman, dissident, and offshore consultant, I would suggest rather, that sufficient evidence exists as to place in question the eventual implementation of FATCA. I think that at a minimum, one might like to wait and see the eventual outcome of all these logical, legal actions, which have been put into motion in order to prevent the implementation of FATCA. Why not? What’s the rush to bypass due process? The alternative, rushing to the IRS with wallet in hand, and asking our public servants how we can help them further illegally invade our personal privacy, and act in direct conflict with our basic Constitutional rights, just seems blatantly weak, first of all, and may I dare say—unpatriotic?
According to Webster’s: pa·tri·ot
n. One who loves, supports, and defends one’s country.
According to Samuel Clements:
“Patriotism is supporting your country all the time, and your government when it deserves it”. – Mark Twain
Let’s analyze that. The President, members of Congress, and members of the military take the following, or a very similar oath, upon accepting their public servitude to you and me. This from the US Senate website:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
I guess, therefore, that we can agree that defending the US Constitution is patriotic. What I’m proposing is that we allow adequate time for the due processes initiated by some of our elected officials, and some private banks to be carried out. Such due process being promised to us in the Constitution. Especially considering what’s at stake, and before allowing such a travesty as FATCA to be implemented. Not doing so would be analogous to not allowing the UN to finish their inspections before bombing a sovereign nation not rubble. Why wouldn’t you?
See due process here.
Conversely, if I were to sit here and recommend to our readers that they rush to help a group of sociopathic, lying, power mongers, namely the IRS in this particular instance, to unconstitutionally invade our privacy, and hold all citizens with bank accounts as guilty until proven innocent, would that make me a patriot? If you concluded it would not, then I propose that those who do so are unpatriotic by definition.
In fact, if I were completely devoid of any conscience or principles, and therefore qualified to be US Attorney General, I might even be able to twist that into a treason charge and throw someone who advocates the quick, pre-implementation of FATCA into a cell next to Bradley Manning. Fortunately, I happen to have said conscience and principles, and am woefully unqualified to be US Attorney General.
So let’s briefly summarize. The following actions have been initiated in order to repeal or otherwise halt the implementation of FATCA:
1) In July of 2012 Senators Rand Paul, Jim DeMint, Mike Lee, and Saxby Chambliss wrote a letter to then Treasury Secretary Geithner requesting a slew of documents which would be required to actually implement the act, with no response to date
2) Senator Rand Paul, therefore, in May of this year, introduced a bill to Congress to repeal FATCA. That bill has yet to be voted upon.
3) On July 1, 2013 Rep. Bill Posey, of Fla., wrote a letter to Treasury Secretary Jack Lew questioning regulations that would require U.S. banks and credit unions to collect and report information on nonresident aliens, urging him to cease enforcement of the Foreign Accounting Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, and stop negotiating intergovernmental agreements with other countries for FATCA enforcement. This resulted in a further “delay” in implementation, with as of yet, no response by Treasury that I’m aware of.
4) In April of 2013 Florida and Texas bankers filed suit against Treasury and the IRS rightfully stating that these two rogue agencies have failed to follow applicable laws when proposing this legislation, and therefore rendering the law invalid.
5) Treasury has so far gotten 9 countries to sign IGA’s. Obviously, only those few with something to gain (or not lose) by signing on. How many does that leave? FATCA is in much more trouble than Treasury would like you to think or acknowledge in their press releases. Have you read this at the New York Times? //nyti.ms/12KJaEc
I’m not saying that all of these actions won’t eventually be successfully defeated by the neo-fascists in Washington. After all, we’re talking about a regime which has put into law Indefinite Detention, engages in extraordinary rendition, maintains gulags with torture chambers around the world, supports the illegal spying on both US and other citizens around the world, and then allows NSA leaders to commit perjury to our elected officials with impunity, supports or even directs the illegal targeting by the IRS of groups and individuals for political purposes, and then allows the unelected bureaucrats in charge to perjure themselves and otherwise commit crimes with impunity. Uses the guise of providing healthcare to gather such unrelated information as to whether or not you own a weapon, etc. etc. etc. Are such people also capable of implementing an economically devastating, and unconstitutional law such as FATCA? Without question, yes, they are. And it might well happen. BUT…
All I’m saying is that it would be “marked by wisdom or judiciousness, and/or shrewd in the management of practical affairs, and/or marked by circumspection”, as noted in the definition of prudent above, to at least wait for the outcomes of these actions, in accordance with Constitutional due process, before rushing forward with your head in an awkward location, in order to assist our public servants in their “purposeful evasion” of the US Constitution. A handful of our patriotic elected officials evidently take their oaths much more seriously than others, and are working very hard to protect our rights against this onslaught against them by Treasury and the IRS. Let’s try and assist them, rather than aid and abet the criminal bureaucrats at Treasury and the IRS shall we?
I could only speculate as to why anyone would want to pre-implement FATCA. Maybe they’re hoping to cash in on the other side of the $Billions in estimated implementation and compliance costs, without regard to what’s actually best for the citizens of the world? I will continue to follow this matter, and to provide unbiased and factual information so as to counter-balance the propaganda spewing forth from Treasury so that you will have the information available in order to make your own prudent decisions regarding how to best deal with an out of control government.
If you’ve received a notice requesting that you participate in FATCA pre-implementation, contact me at [email protected] about obtaining an account at a bank which will be a bit more prudent regarding its interpretation of USG propaganda, and the other largely unreported facts surrounding the implementation of this highly controversial law. Note: we do not recommend that anyone not act in full compliance with the law. In fact, we will help you stay in compliance if you desire our assistance. We just believe that basic prudent decision making, and old-fashioned patriotism, dictates that we at least await the full cycle of Constitutional due process regarding the mal-intentioned law which is FATCA, as has been duly and legally challenged under the US Constitution, before trying to pre-implement it before law requires.
You know, the more we examine such topics, the more it seems to me that the guys who stay up there behind the curtain, trying to get us all to buy into the fact that America is still the greatest nation on Earth, etc, that those guys start to appear like the ones who may actually be fashioning sombreros de aluminio. How can all of this not be obvious?
Additional reading available at the Renounce US Citizenship website.
Also you should take a look at the Repeal FATCA website. According to the WSJ article sited above “”This is a major game-changer,” says James George Jatras of RepealFATCA.com. “With the wind in Washington now blowing against FATCA, foreign governments are on notice that Treasury’s promises of ‘reciprocity’ are plain rubbish. Congress will not provide the needed authority to rescue this fatally flawed law.” “Both American and non-U.S. firms that stand to lose millions of dollars each complying with FATCA need to help push the repeal bill through,” adds Jatras. “FATCA repeal needs to be part of any tax reform.”
Also from the WSJ-“James George Jatras manages RepealFATCA.com. He previously served as a policy analyst at U.S. Senate and as an American diplomat. He can be reached at [email protected]”
Hasta la próxima muchachos, y mucha suerte.
Paul, as of 1996, is an escaped former Big 4 CPA (financial statement auditor), and Corporate Controller/CFO who found a natural home in the offshore industry with Bobby Casey and the gang at GWP. Contact him at [email protected] to learn more about the realities of economical offshore asset protection.
An offshore company and bank account can be established for as little as $1,797, including my advice and assistance throughout both processes, and in both privacy-respecting jurisdictions, apostils required to open bank accounts, and courier charges to send original documents to you. There’s never any need to visit the jurisdictions personally, although they’re very nice places, and I recommend a visit. With our established agency agreements, we can do everything via e-mail. We maintain long-term relationships with our clients, and remain available for consultation on an ongoing basis.
One Response