Finance committee  Is this trying to prevent the law of unintended consequences? I'm just trying to clarify Mr. Keddy's concern. I'm sure some of this originated in your department. If this is a redundant amendment, an amendment that suggests that the Americans renege on FATCA and we obviously

Finance committee  Well, thanks, Mr. Chair. This is relatively straightforward, although the drafting would make it look complicated. It's simply an amendment I'm putting forward to ensure that if the FATCA is repealed in the United States—and after all, it is a U.S. law in origin, facing its own

Finance committee  I haven't considered all those points, and in fact they are not for me to consider. The Department of Justice has the standing responsibility for constitutional matters. The privacy question was obviously of interest to us because of the issues that FATCA itself raised, and so

Finance committee  Liberal amendment LIB-3 ensures simply that Canadian law will take precedence over this agreement with the United States regarding FATCA and not the other way around.

Finance committee   broad and could be interpreted to mean that any inconsistency between this agreement and the provisions of any other law, that the FATCA agreement would supersede any other law. That could include the Privacy Act of Canada. It could include the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. We

Finance committee   complicated process that we're trying to find a reasonable way, through the FATCA agreement and through the IGA, to work through. To be fair, I think the officials have done a very good job at doing that. In closing, Mr. Chair, I want to make it clear once again. There's a lot of talk

Finance committee  . citizenship. He didn't apply in the United States before his 19th birthday. He's deemed to be a U.S. person under a foreign law. He's a fellow Canadian, and he's caught up in the FATCA web. I don't understand why we as a sovereign country have to simply go along with this law, presumably

Finance committee   the agreement itself. To your point about the scope of the agreement, yes, there is a narrower scope or field of accounts that have to be reported or are subject to reporting under the intergovernmental agreement as compared to FATCA itself. I won't list them all, but we've talked before

Finance committee  I have just one last point on some of the procedures as well. Under the U.S. FATCA, if we didn't have an IGA, would that also contemplate account closings for U.S. citizens, for example, and banks may potentially have to close accounts?

Finance committee  Yes, it would. Under FATCA, the financial institution is charged with the obligation. It is required to agree to collecting this information. If it doesn't collect it, then one of the penalties that can be imposed—or the incentives, if you can put it that way—on the client

Finance committee   to group all my remarks for the next three clauses. I will put all my remarks on the record now, and I will not be making extensive remarks for the next three clauses. This legislation regarding the Conservative government's FATCA deal with the United States should not be part

Finance committee  Mr. Chair, through you, I just have a couple of comments and clarification questions for our witnesses. Mr. Ernewein, you did indicate that there is a narrower level of information that is being contemplated under the IGA than what would have been contemplated under FATCA

Finance committee   seems to avoid potential concerns on privacy issues, as well as with—sorry, regulatory issues—whether or not access to basic banking would be a concern. That is on the account closing. That's a FATCA test.

Finance committee  Forgive me; I'm melding two things. There's the consequence of FATCA versus an IGA, and FATCA itself, in the event of information not being furnished as required under FATCA, could involve account closing. It is not specific to your point about why information is provided

Finance committee  Yes, I would say so. First of all, the scope of the information to be provided is narrower under the intergovernmental agreement than under FATCA. Second, the transmission of that information is, under the Canada-U.S. treaty, subject to the safeguards of the treaty and our own