Deegan – Federal Court of Appeal confirms that FATCA-required disclosures do not constitute an unreasonable seizure contrary to the Charter

Woods JA confirmed the rejection by the Federal Court of the position of two American citizens, who had had no significant connection with the U.S. since early childhood, that the information-reporting requirements in ITA Part XVIII (the “Impugned Provisions”) resulted in the unreasonable seizure of financial information belonging to U.S. persons in Canada, contrary to s. 8 of the Charter.

She stated:

The Impugned Provisions … are similar to information automatically provided to the CRA for regulatory purposes (e.g., T4s by employers, T5s by financial institutions, and taxpayers’ annual disclosure of foreign holdings). …

It is difficult to see how a seizure contemplated by the Impugned Provisions significantly intrudes into privacy interests, as the appellants appear to suggest. Accordingly, I see no reason in this case to revisit the comment in Jarvis that the entire ITA is a regulatory statute. …

Quite simply, the Impugned Provisions are an example of international cooperation in the administration of income tax laws. …

Neal Armstrong. Summary of Deegan v. Canada (Attorney General), 2022 FCA 158 under Charter s. 8.