I want to see first hand how the FATCA debate and impasse unfolds.
Friday January 06, 2017.
Message Board Archives
I'll be in the TNT Parliament tomorrow at 1.30 pm.
2017-01-05 08:49:02
2017-01-05 10:13:33
In reply to Courtesy
And make sure you're carrying your Diplomatic Passport.
Don't leave home without it!
2017-01-05 18:05:23
In reply to Courtesy
You waan see FATCAT bachanal 
2017-01-06 15:06:35
Updates? Did the prof need to change drawers after Rowley walked in???
2017-01-06 15:17:47
In reply to Courtesy
I'll be in the TNT Parliament tomorrow at 1.30 pm.
How much did they charge you for doubles inside there?
2017-01-06 15:39:59
In reply to DAVE400
I got a little Soupçon last night that the government was willing, albeit begrudgingly, going to accede to the request from the PP opposition for the bill to be put before the JSC (the PNM government did agree to this in September 2016 but for reasons unbeknown to me, reneged).
This did in fact take place. In essence, the Lower House approved through a motion brought by the Minister of Finance under House Rules 68 Sub3, to withdraw the bill from a Full Committee of the House to the aforementioned JSC.
From a dispassionate observer's pow, when I hear one of the reasons put forward by the UNC for the bill to be put before the JSC was to give PM Rowley more time to write to the Trump administration asking whether the new US government propose to continue with FATCA, I really could not contain my laughter…that was asinine (I am being polite here) or should I say...POINTlike. The FATCA drama has been averted...well at least until February 03, 2017.
2017-01-06 15:40:53
In reply to SnoopDog
No doubles inside there mate,is pure bake an shark nowadays.
2017-01-07 10:23:19
Finance Minister Colm Imbert signalled yesterday that when the JSC report comes to the House of Representatives on February 3, Government will be taking the bill to the vote in order to allow debate in the Senate in time to meet the February 28 deadline for passage, set by the US Treasury.
Imbert said “the behaviour of the parliamentary Opposition” which had “blackmailed the country and held it to ransom” caused Government to give it what it wanted — the JSC.
Imbert said “the behaviour of the parliamentary Opposition” which had “blackmailed the country and held it to ransom” caused Government to give it what it wanted — the JSC.
Opposition Leader Persad-Bissessar said the Opposition did not trust the Government especially where fundamental rights were going to be violated. “We hear all the allegations about financiers of the PNM involved in terrorism and drugs...And this kind of information can be used by persons who want to blackmail and kidnap. When you give out this financial information you don’t know where it is going,” she said. This is why the Opposition’s position from day one was to have the JSC.
Persad-Bissessar said Government had initially agreed to a JSC in September and then reneged on this promise. “So to come here today and say that we are afraid of FATCA.
If we so afraid we would not have asked for a JSC, we would have just sat here...and voted no,” she said
Persad-Bissessar said Government had initially agreed to a JSC in September and then reneged on this promise. “So to come here today and say that we are afraid of FATCA.
If we so afraid we would not have asked for a JSC, we would have just sat here...and voted no,” she said
The members of the JSC are AG Faris Al-Rawi, Stuart Young, Imbert and Marlene McDonald, Bhoe Tewarie and Tim Gopeesingh along with six Senators who will be selected when the Senate meets on Tuesday.
link
2017-01-07 10:38:42
In reply to Narper
Imbert slammed Persad-Bissessar’s “timerity” to write Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley to ask incoming United States President Donald Trump repeal the US FATCA legislation. Saying Persad- Bissessar did not understand that FATCA was passed by the Republican controlled Senate and Congress. “Did you ever hear more absurdity?” Imbert asked. He continued, “You really think that the President of the United States has time with this? What they have time with is to see whether we are going to be compliant. Whether TT is a serious country.
Just for the sake of completeness, balance and to broaden the perspective.
2017-01-07 16:18:55
In reply to Courtesy
The substantive matter of the opposition ( and they had to pay a full page political ad to get their voice heard) is that the power to scuritinize accounts to the Minister of Finance...
Under the Bill, the Minister of Finance, will have access to citizens’ private financial information. That’s a violation of people’s privacy and we will not allow such an invasion into the lives of our citizens. That power should be vested in the Board of Inland Revenue and not a politician.
UNC website.
2017-01-07 16:31:36
In reply to DAVE400
Dave that's a moot point. The UNC/PP's recommendation in your post above has been altered in the bill by substituting "The Minister of Finance" with the "Board of Inland Revenue" (BIR) which seems to be acceptable to the opposition as well as other stakeholders.
In fact, all of the opposition's previous recommendations made public in a newspaper (not in parliament) have been acceded to by the government...but the UNC keep changing the goalpost at the turn of every wind.
It is also a moot point because the Minister of Finance has oversight of the BIR.
Now tell me which Minister of Finance cannot have private financial information if he needs it?
You file your Annual Tax Returns (online) do you? Lesser mortals in cyberspace and within the BIR are privy to this information.
In any event, why should I worry about my dollars if I can account for every cent?
..............
The UNC made public their contention with the FATCA bill via a newspaper ad...the government has every right to follow the precedent set by the opposition and explore any public relations avenue that it deems necessary.
2017-01-07 17:34:36
In reply to Courtesy
Can you do an analysis without your party -PNM- bias?
Look, I don't pretend to understand all the nitty gritty, but it seems the opposition has some valid concerns and the AG is keenly and with lots of energy acting as an agent of the USA government.
If I was living in Trinidad I will have concerns about the long arm of the US government.
The AG seems more interested in promoting the interest of the USA rather than his fellow citizens.
I can find many faults with the UNC, in this matter though, they must be complimented for seeking the best interest of the country.
2017-01-07 17:51:22
In reply to Emir
I wish you could share some of these UNC concerns here (not the ones in the newspaper ads nor in the letter to PM Rowley). I have these but I'll be delighted to be enlightened by what you can get from your UNC colleagues.
Meanwhile, the Bankers Association, the Chamber of Commerce and other stakeholders are scared stiff that the machinery of government is yet to pass this bill.
Tks.
2017-01-07 18:22:17
In reply to Courtesy
I wish you could share some of these UNC concerns
Its not UNC concerns but concerns that the bill is not good for Trinidadians.
Example, if the bill become law, the GOTT will become an IRS agent for the US govt against it own citizens. It is why China and others countires told the FACTA where to go.
Meanwhile, the US banks and IRS will not screel on its citizens living in Trinidad.
Meanwhile, the Bankers Association, the Chamber of Commerce and other stakeholders are scared stiff that the machinery of government is yet to pass this bill.
Sure, because passing the bill is in their best interest. They represent the interest of their members not the interest of Trinidad.
2017-01-07 18:29:06
In reply to Emir
To cut a long story short...let the UNC not vote or members abstain during the vote on the FATCA bill and tell the US government "where to go".
Let your colleagues in the UNC call the USA and the TT governments' bluff in the FATCA Bill. That will be interesting.
Oh btw, the PP government signed the IGA and mandated the then Finance Minister to proceed with the legislation. They did not take the opportunity then to tell the US government "Kiss Their Skunts". I wonder why...
Sure, because passing the bill is in their best interest. They represent the interest of their members not the interest of Trinidad.
What a load of...
2017-01-08 09:47:27
In reply to Courtesy
A simple question, how will this legislation help Trinidad?
2017-01-08 09:52:14
In reply to Emir
A simple question, how will this legislation help Trinidad?
You may wish to answer your question in this way: How will the non-passage of the legislation hurt TNT?
Do you think a 30 percent withholding tax applied to all transactions with the US will be helpful to your already fragile economy?
I will allow you to think of the other parts of the cascade effect.
2017-01-08 14:12:56
In reply to Courtesy
Do you think a 30 percent withholding tax applied to all transactions with the US will be helpful to your already fragile economy?
This can be AVOIDED. The US can be the loser- Trinidad import from the US, 3 times more than what they export and if you remove oil/gas, it is about 20 times.
So if USA impose a 30% penalty, Trinidad should do a Trump and impose a tariff.
I also believe the penalty will ironically force Trinidad to save- imagine all these junk food franchise shipping foreign exchange to the US- this penalty could shut down the foreign junk food franchise saving Trinidad billions.
I am curious as to why you are peddling the US position and so uncritically parroting the politician's playbook.
Think outside the box on this.
The poor and working class will not be hurt, the Syrian elite along with the off white french creoles will feel it.
Let them import form CARICOM, grow local food, produce local etc.
2017-01-08 14:15:01
In reply to Emir
The above is so simplistic and myopic.
Please spare me the trouble and get the fcuk off this thread.
2017-01-08 14:16:52
In reply to Courtesy
I am begging to think when challenged and exposed you resort to vile language, dotishness and threats
2017-01-08 14:18:19
In reply to Emir
It's just that I was shocked and still shocked at your uninformed puerile response...please accept my apology for fcuking you up.
2017-01-08 14:21:15
In reply to Courtesy
No need to apologize just be intelligent and brave on this, I am confident, even you are capable of displaying intelligence, sometimes..... and I am hoping now will be the time
2017-01-08 14:23:44
In reply to Emir
You better delete the foolish post. It's a sad reflection on your lack of understanding of the issue.
Come on Emir do this now...for your good sake I did not even quote it.
You can thank me for being unusually lenient after you remove the nonsense post.
2017-01-08 14:49:38
In reply to Courtesy
I have to give you credit for being such a good comedian, perhaps your hidden talents are now beginning to show.
When challenged on your opinion you resort to calling others out for not sharing your narrow minded view in this topic
Go check what 18 others small countries did with their FACTA legislation.
It is absolutely shocking you have chosen to promote a law this is imperial in nature.
Think outside the box.... think... think... think....
2017-01-08 14:52:35
In reply to Emir
...Go check what 18 others small countries did with their FACTA legislation...
Please provide the link. Thank you in advance.
2017-01-08 14:59:51
In reply to Emir
WTF is taking you so long to provide a link.
2017-01-08 15:04:12
In reply to Courtesy
Please provide the link. Thank you in advance.
OK beta, take this to the AG, tell d marn the 17 first world countries dat sign d bill got an equal bill signed by the USA- in odder words the bill was fair and equal.
Show d AG the majority of odder countries "IN DIALOGUE" this mean dey are torking wid the US in fixing d one sided bill.
Tell d AG to check out d lass option- they call it "Discussing Alternative..."
Yuh see dem countires not taking everything s US congress say as law, they realize America doh own dem and dey are an independent cuntry.
Yuh cud understand dis beta?
Link Text
2017-01-08 15:06:34
In reply to Emir
...Go check what 18 others small countries did with their FACTA legislation...
I repeat. No name calling yet.
Your link here is on lockdown...you cannot now remove it.
2017-01-08 15:08:40
In reply to Courtesy
Canada has not signed and has a lot of issues with FATCA. Most Canadians object to the U.S. exporting its laws over the border especially since FATCA violates Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Even if they DO sign when the rest of the general public here finds out what FATCA really is and what it will really do to millions of people here, there will be a very big problem with law suits ensuing very quickly. The first time a bank asks any Canadian “where were you born” or alters services or discloses information based on place of birth that bank is then in violation of Canadian laws so Canada is going to have a very big problem on its hands if the government is finally bullied into going along with this by the U.S. After all it is a U.S. law, not a Canadian one and despite what the U.S. thinks it cannot just make a law then tell the rest of the world to follow it or else. On paper this is what they have done disrespecting sovereignty everywhere. Most people don’t know about the effect of that yet but, they will and when they do, this is going to cause nothing but, trouble.
2017-01-08 15:11:06
In reply to Emir
You fcuker...you fell for the trap.
What is the date of your reference material, also please direct me to the relevant portion of your link and whom did you quote above?
And more importantly, list the 18 countries and tell us what they did with their legislation.
2017-01-08 15:27:01
In reply to Emir
Finally, you know not of what you speak. You are one of the rubbishes who festoons message boards. You deceitful skunt.
Have a great day.
2017-01-08 16:14:29
In reply to Courtesy
How yuh cussing so like yuh vex or wat.
De marn ax for ah link, ah give him, he get vex, start cussing mi
Boi, yuh have a lot to lear, whoever paying yuh to peddle their crap, tell dem you get hexposed nah marn.
2017-01-18 07:18:11
In reply to Emir
The Emir, is the outgoing US Ambassador a card holding member of the PNM? I bet your answer is YES.
Check out his take on FATCA. You tink he knows what he is talking about?
On a side note, I haven't heard your views on the Amendment to the Marriage Bill. Do favour marrying a 13-year old at your age?
Search
Live Scores
- no matches