# Dual US-Canadian group lose in court



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

The (lengthy) decision can be read here;

https://decisions.fct-cf.gc.ca/fc-cf/decisions/en/item/418707/index.do?q=Deegan


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

Some aspects of this case seem to me rather odd:

a) One of the two Plaintiffs didn’t submit any evidence — or, according to the judge, participate in the trial in any meaningful way.

b) _“Plaintiffs also suggested that the Impugned Provisions [the provisions of the Canadian implementation of the IGA] are overly-broad, and that they should apply only to those individuals who were not complying with their obligations under American law.”_

A law requiring banks to report only the accounts of those of us who never filed (a category which would include both the Plaintiffs) seems a strange thing for the Plaintiffs to argue for.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

> The Charter does not require Canada to assist persons resident in this country in avoiding their obligations under duly-enacted laws of another democratic state, nor does it require this country to shelter those living in Canada from the reach of foreign laws. Indeed, as was noted earlier, insulating persons resident in this country from their obligations under duly-enacted laws of another democratic state is not a value that section 15 of the Charter was designed to foster.


Well said, Canadian judge. Well said.

Nice to see Canada spelling it out.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

The Canadian judge has spelt out in considerable detail Canada’s position vis-à-vis FATCA and the IGA; including a careful analysis of the question of discrimination on the basis of national origin. 

The judge concludes (and finding her reasoning convincing, I agree with her conclusion) that the IGAs draw a distinction on the basis of national origin/citizenship, but the effect is not discriminatory.

Well worth reading.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

Also interesting that the Plaintiffs’ lawyers were unable to show that either of the Plaintiffs had suffered harm as a result of the IGA, and none of the affidavits submitted in support seems to have alleged any harm other than anxiety and hurt feelings.

And actually, no anti-FATCA/IGA case anywhere has been able to convince a national court that the IGA1 agreements have caused harm to US citizens or infringed on the rights of US Person individuals.

This should surely be reassuring for US Person citizens/residents of IGA1 countries. The G5 countries evidently succeeded in negotiating a deal with the US which _requires_ the banks and _allows_ USC individuals, to comply with US tax obligations, while respecting individual rights under national laws.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

underation said:


> This should surely be reassuring for US Person citizens/residents of IGA1 countries. The G5 countries evidently succeeded in negotiating a deal with the US which _requires_ the banks and _allows_ USC individuals, to comply with US tax obligations, while respecting individual rights under national laws.


Not particularly reassuring for those who aren’t law-abiding, of course. The IGA doesn’t change the underlying tax treaty provisions, which can indeed be used as needed for the enforcement of US and Canadian tax laws.

The end result of this strange court case is to secure the blessing of the Canadian courts for the FATCA IGA. It will be interesting to see if the guidance to banks changes, in the wake of this ruling.

Two legal options: 

(a) renounce;

(b) keep the citizenship and comply with the citizenship obligations - including the filing of US tax returns when there is US-source income.


----------



## underation (Oct 25, 2018)

An interesting account from a dual US-Canadian citizen who chose to renounce:

“Why I gave up my citizenship”
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-leaving-america-why-i-gave-up-my-citizenship/


----------

