Trouble in Canada, Latest Commentaries in the U.S. and Abroad
The major political asset FATCA (the “Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act”) has always had going for it is silence. Enacted in the dark of night in 2010, the vast majority of those who would be negatively impacted by its implementation – which is just about everyone – have no idea FATCA even exists nor the costs this ill-considered law would inflict on them. Continued silence about how destructive FATCA’s implementation would be has particular consequences for the U.S. Treasury Department’s efforts to cajole foreign governments into IGAs (“intergovernmental agreements”) requiring them to enforce FATCA on (or more properly, against) their own institutions, effectively as deputies of the IRS.
At this juncture, the initiative remains with Treasury, which on November 15 signed an IGA with Denmark. (The only other IGA signed thus far is with the UK.) Treasury is doing everything possible to sign as many IGAs as possible, as quickly as possible. A snowballing sense of inevitability, they calculate, will itself impel additional countries to sign IGAs, thus avoiding the train wreck attempts of unilateral FATCA enforcement would trigger.
Trouble in ‘the True North Strong and Free’
One of the priority countries identified by Treasury as a must-have signatory on an IGA is Canada. It would be a sharp setback for FATCA if Canada were to refuse to agree to an IGA or to allow extraterritorial enforcement of FATCA against Canadian institutions. At the same time, given the high degree of overlap between the U.S. and Canadian economies (including the financial systems of the two countries) and the large number of U.S. citizens resident in Canada (many of them dual nationals), FATCA’s enforcement against Canada – whether with an IGA or without one – promises to be particularly expensive and invasive.
While Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has been blunt in expressing his negative opinion of FATCA, his Department of Finance recently asked for public comments on a possible IGA amid reports from both Ottawa and Washington that a deal would be finalized soon. This news prompted circulation of an Appeal against FATCA and a U.S.-Canada IGA by The Isaac Brock Society (IBS), in cooperation with Repeal FATCA. (The full text of the IBS Appeal follows this commentary, below).
As is clear from the comments on one site posting the IBS appeal, Canadians who support FATCA or an IGA are few and far between. When the silence about FATCA is broken, and people can assess what is being imposed on them, FATCA comes up short.
The question is, will enough Canadian patriots get the facts before it’s too late – and will the Canadian media stop ignoring this assault on their country’s sovereignty and prosperity?
New Commentaries Breaking the Silence on FATCA
A spate of recent opinion pieces from diverse quarters also suggests that the silence that protects and sustains FATCA is breaking down, opening prospects for resisting its implementation and achieving its repeal. (The following are excerpts, with full texts available at the sourcelinks, emphasis added in bold):
by [Andrew F. Quinlan, co-founder and president of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, “Coerced Foreign Tax Compliance Is Killing American Jobs,” Forbes, Nov. 20]
“Without authorization from Congress, Treasury has embarked in setting a new course for international tax policy and relations. They are selling promises to deliver for foreign governments the same information FATCA demands from foreign institutions – meaning Treasury wants American banks to comply one day with the same onerous rules that Congress placed on FFIs, only instead of monitoring and reporting on citizens from one country our institutions would have to do so for all. . . . [G]overnments are doing themselves and their financial industries a disservice by contemplating entering into FATCA agreements with the U.S. Backlash against the law is growing, and Treasury is in a race against time to lock it into place before a repeal effort can gain steam.
As Treasury continues to set new policy behind the backs of Congress, and further drag domestic banks into the FATCA crosshairs, opposition to the law will hopefully grow. But it is necessary for financial institutions, both foreign and domestic, to stand up against the law, and for Congress to step in, rein in the Treasury Department, and undo a mess that they are ultimately responsible for creating. The worse thing industry can do is meekly accept FATCA’s dictates as so many consultants and compliance industry experts are advising. They are interested in feathering their nests, as one compliance company’s representative revealed when stating that, ‘Everyone’s trying to make money on FATCA.’ FFI’s and their governments should ignore self-serving advice and instead resist this arrogant U.S. foray into fiscal imperialism by demanding respect for their sovereign rights. U.S. lawmakers in turn should immediately repeal FATCA and replace it with a pro-growth agenda to simplify the tax code and lower rates. In so doing they can achieve the original FATCA goals of increasing both tax compliance and revenues, but in this way will do so by growing the economy instead of smothering it.”
Br [Nigel Green, CEO at the deVere Group, “US Treasury should be called to account on ‘economy-damaging’ FATCA,” www.nigel-green.com, Nov. 16]
“The U.S government owes it to Americans to explain why it remains committed to implementing the highly controversial and potentially damaging Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). . . . FATCA will dramatically reduce foreign investment in the US– at a time when the economy is teetering on a knife edge – due to the threat of the IRS withholding 30 per cent of their funds. Investors will simply take their money overseas. Indeed, David Schwartz, the executive director of the International Bankers’ Association of Florida recently observed that “several hundred million dollars have left Florida for foreign jurisdictions” between April 19th, when FATCA regulations were passed, and the end of July.
The potential revenues that FATCA could generate will be outweighed by huge foreign investment losses. In addition, FATCA will adversely affect US businesses operating in global markets because they have to have foreign bank accounts to facilitate payments from foreign clients and to pay local charges. However, many foreign financial institutions are rejecting American firms as clients – even if they have worked with them for years – because becoming ‘FATCA compliant’ is too burdensome and far too expensive.FATCA does very little to actively target tax evaders and it has a potentially devastating effect on the American economy. The U.S government owes it to Americans to give public, in-depth justifications on why it remains committed to this highly controversial piece of legislation.”
By [Simon Culhane, Chartered FCSI and CEO of the Chartered Institute for Securities & Investment (CISI), “US ‘a bully’ because of FATCA,” SPEAR’S, Nov. 20, 2012]
“The Americans have slipped in an extra territorial requirement that will impose significant costs on all asset and investment managers and banks. This US requirement is resulting in a double whammy. It is completely extra-territorial and seeks global compliance while imposing significant additional costs of compliance on virtually every financial organisation globally. It has resulted in many financial organisations, including private client and wealth managers, turning away clients simply because they have a link with the US. That strategy alone will not get a financial institution out of the net. . . . No one is advocating tax evasion, but putting the costs on the UK is unfair and our Government should have the courage to say so.”
The above comments speak for themselves. FATCA’s a bad deal for the United States, and it’s a bad deal for other countries as well. As silence about FATCA continues to break, two things are essential: (1) foreign governments being enticed and pressured by Treasury need to say No! to signing an IGA; and (2) American and non-U.S. industry need to stop acting as enablers and support an active effort to spread the word about this damaging law and help get it repealed.
Jim Jatras
+1.202.375.1007
The above is on-the-record and may be posted or published with attribution; inquiries welcome.
Full contacts at the end of this message.
The Isaac Brock Society Appeal text follows:
Call or email Stephen Harper, Jim Flaherty, and Your MP Today!
STOP an Impending Massive Handover of Canadian Sovereignty to the United States!
Tell the Government: Canada Must Say NO
to the United States on ‘FATCA’
Recently the Department of Finance invited comments on what was characterized as “an agreement to improve cross-border tax compliance through . . . the provisions enacted by the United States commonly known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).” This eleventh-hour invitation came as sources in both Ottawa and Washington announced that they were close to finalizing an intergovernmental agreement (IGA) that would, in effect, deputize the Canadian government to enforce this American law in Canada.
The Department’s invitation is to “persons whose interests are affected by the provisions of FATCA” but does not spell out that each and every Canadian citizen would suffer from FATCA and from an IGA to implement it:
Canadian citizens have an interest in preserving Canada’s sovereignty against US encroachment. However it is disguised, FATCA is a unilateral U.S. initiative. The U.S. didn’t negotiate a global tax scheme with Canada and other countries but instead enacted an unprecedented extraterritorial law and demands that Canada comply and bear the costs.An IGA simply puts a Canadian glove on the hand enforcing American law.
Canadian taxpayers have an interest in a tax policy that benefits Canada’s needs, not America’s. Sold under the guise of “reciprocity” and “partnership,” an IGA in reality would be a costly one-way street imposed by the U.S. Given the differences between the two countries’ tax systems, FATCA would accelerate a zero-sum game that siphons wealth from Canada and robs the Canadian treasury.
Canadian consumers have an interest in avoiding foreign schemes that impose costly non-economic regulations on Canadian firms (banks, insurance companies, pension funds, stock and investment companies) – who will then pass those costs on to consumers. With or without an IGA, FATCA’s costs will be in the billions of dollars (for example, one major bank alone would pay an estimated $100 million in FATCA compliance!) These costs would be non-productive as regards the Canadian economy and a waste of human and material resources. Imposing these costs on Canadians supposedly is justified by the unproven hope that FATCA may trip up American “tax cheats,” even though FATCA does little specifically to catch such people.
Canadians as human beings have an interest in ensuring their rights are protected under sovereign Canadian law. FATCA demands extraordinary disclosure of private information from Canadian residents deemed U.S. taxpayers by the IRS. Such disclosure would violate Canadian laws such as the Personal Information Protection and Electronic Documents Act, whose application Canada would be forced to alter under an IGA. Many of the people whose rights would be abrogated are Canadian dual citizens who would be denied protection of Canada’s laws to appease the U.S. Once it’s established a foreign government can demand abridgment of such rights, even of Canadian citizens, where’s the limit?
So why is the Government considering an IGA with the United States? Because of the very real fear that Washington otherwise would unilaterally impose FATCA on Canada at ruinous cost, especially a 30% withholding penalty on Canadian firms’ U.S.-derived revenue. Simply put, this is a threat of U.S. economic sanctions against Canada.
Finance Minister Flaherty and industry leaders publicly have talked a good fight on FATCA while in private negotiating Canada’s capitulation under an IGA.
Canadians must not let that happen! Instead:
Contact Prime Minister Harper and tell him No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Contact Minister Flaherty and tell him No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Contact your Senators and MPs and tell them No on FATCA, and No on an IGA with Washington!
Get the FATCA facts at the Isaac Brock Society and Repeal FATCA!
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
James George Jatras, Esq.
Email: james.jatras@squiresanders.com
Office: +1 202 626 6248
Mobile: +1 202 375 1007
Reception: +1 202 626 6600
Profile: http://sspa.squiresanders.com/professionals/professionals_detail.aspx?attorney=6014
Squire Sanders (US) LLP
1200 19th Street, NW
Suite 300
Washington, DC 20036
We need a fulltime PAC/lobbyist for real people. The process is do-able, but it takes more effort than selling telecom systems to the Brazilian infrastructure.
Does anyone easily remember where the data is that showed the number of FBAR forms filled out each year? I used the figure of about 111,000 during the time that the Patriot Act recommendations were made (in comparison to the 7 million US persons overseas, ie 6.9 million US persons were retroactively judged to be tax evaders. I hope I can back myself up.
As an “américano-québécois” I’m wondering how we can help get this story out in Quebec. This version could be tailored to the sensibilities here — the message needs to reach Canadians of EVERY political slant, in both languages, because discriminating against Canadians because of their ancestry/birthplace is something I think everyone can unite against. I think people here feel more distant from the US and its interests than they may in English Canada, but many are affected: not a few low-income Québécois families crossed into New England a generation or two ago to work, and their children often crossed back — guess who is now on the hook for double taxation? The only “victims” I’ve met so far were shocked to learn that their parents’ birthplace could cause this, and hadn’t even been told they were allowed to renounce.
It’s always important to mention somewhere in these stories that Americans have the right to renounce, because many people have only been told of their obligations now, not their rights.
*Calgary411. You have very clearly and eloquenty explained how US tax laws indeed are a human rights issue in the case of disabled persons born abroad to a US citizen parent. I could not agree with you more. These are the unintended consequential results of the uniqe US policy of citizenship based taxation which I am sure the writers of this legislation never even though about, let alone considered. But the consequences are very real for those who, through no action on their part or no fault of their own, they surely reap. It appears that what you are doing is wise considering your situation and that of your disabled son. I can’t think of anything I would have done differently faced with these same circumstances.
There is actually quite a lot of information on the Internet about how US tax laws affect foreigners who become green card residents of the US, or who are physically present in the US for 183 or more days in any calendar year. It is very clear that they are subject to US taxation on their world-wide income. This particular document is just one of them.
http://voices.yahoo.com/income-tax-obligations-rules-us-residents-10524.html?
But there are many more similar documents which come up with a Google search. I suspect that few who are contemplating becoming residents of the US ever read this kind of information. They just assume, incorect as that assumption really is, that relocating to the US is pretty much the same for immigrants as it is for foreign non US-citizens to immigrate to their own countries.
Since the US is the only industrialized country that practices citizenship-based taxation, it just never occurrs to them that by relocating to the US they are exposing themselves to all sorts tax situations that nobody experiences when the immigrate to any other country.
@ Mark Twain, I think that Nina Olson’s last report to Congress cited the FBAR filing numbers too, but she’s been quoted again from the November 8 2012 International Tax conference in New York (would that we could get a full copy of her latest remarks and presentation). I think I did see something recently breaking it down into those filing from inside the US, and those from outside.
I did find this from a post dated this month;
“As
Olsen noted at a conference sponsored by the Tax Section of the
American Bar Association, there may be as many as 5 to 7 million U.S.
resident taxpayers and perhaps tens of millions of nonresident U.S.
taxpayers who are subject to the FBAR rules this year. Only 741,000
taxpayers filed FBAR returns in 2011….”
…..”Olsen
reasons that, given the number of taxpayers who are subject to the FBAR
rules, there may be many different reasons for taxpayer non-compliance.
But instead of taking this diversity into account, Olson argued that
IRS’s approach in this area has been driven solely by the view that all
non-compliance stems from a willful disregard to the FBAR rules.”………
………….”
If the Ratzlaf standard
for willfulness isn’t satisfied, then Olson said that the taxpayer
should be given a break and permitted to only pay the accuracy-related
penalties. “Such an approach would increase voluntary compliance and
would stop terrorizing the entire country of Canada,” Olson observed.”
from http://oicattorney.blogspot.ca/2012/11/taxpayer-advocate-fbar-penalties.html
*On the subject of the Progressive Canadian Party holding an event on FATCA. I consider this pretty good news. For those who don’t know who Sinclair Stevens is he was former cabinet minister in both the Clark and Mulroney governments. While Stevens has been out of active politics(other than running the Progressive Canadian Party) for a long time the fact that somone like him has taken an interest in the issue is a positive sign.
@mark twain
Re your near encounter with a mountain lion. Do you always indulge in such high risk behaviour, that is, meet with politicians?
@vin-de-table;
Welcome.
It’s great that you mention Quebec, because as you say, there are many there born across the border, or of a parent who went to the US , or was born in the US. Lots of flow across the border. I met a family in Trenton NJ, who said there was a large community in Florida – and some towns that had so many Quebecois visit or retire, that signs on businesses were in French.
Hope you can help us figure out how to connect with those in Quebec? Most here are probably anglophone only, but there are a few Europeans who speak French, and this wonderful IBS blogger lives in France and can write in French – see http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca/ also may have currently a temporary Quebec connection.
You are also very right re talking about our rights, since most of the talk from those with power – is only of the obligations.
Are there any politicians you know of in Quebec that would be sympathetic?
*Hoang Mai, the NDP Revenue Critic is of course from Quebec. I also know that technically Lucien Bouchard’s two kids are USP although not born in the US. On the otherhand Bloc Quebecois leader Danielle Paille has actually come out in support of FATCA saying Canada has moral obligation to help the US crackdown on tax cheats.
@Just Me & Deckhard,
StopFatca started tweeting on Monday. I looked at the Twitter page and just presumed this was a Brocker. Is there a way to isolate the info about the Fact Finding Forum without putting a url and reader having to scroll thru several posts?
@Badger and Mark Twain…
So, in 2008 there were 345,000 FBARs filed according to a quote from Senator Carl Levin, which I mentioned in my letters to Shulman at the time of my 2009 OVDP.
Now, after a 3 year intensive Offshore jihad with all the OVDP/OVDI participants, the number of filings have gone up to 741,000 FBARS per Nina Olson.
So, the way I do the math, that is a 115% increase in filings over a 3 year period.
Is that significant?
It depends on how you look at it.
The BIG question is, what is the actual compliance rate as compared to the universe of folks that should be filing FBARS?
That, of course all depends on how many of those ~6.5 million Expats plus 40.5 million foreign born million immigrants according to Wikipedia as of 2010, crossed the $10,000 aggregate amount threshold for FBAR filing requirements on accounts held offshore.
How many of ~47 million do you think should have filed FBARs? You can do your own assumptions of what you think it might be.
Let’s take a lowball (I think) conservative estimate. What if you just assume, allowing for children and the poor immigrants that have no savings, that only 15% of the ~47 million potential account holders should have filed.
(You can do your own meaningfully arbitrary assumption and come up with higher or lower percentages if you wish. The point of the exercise is not perfection, but a reference point)
Using the 15% rate, that represents 7.05 Million FBARS they should have received in 2011 compared to 741,000 that were.
This means for all their jihad activity, penalty threats, FATCA efforts, the percent of compliance moved from 4.9% (345,000) to 10.5% (741,000) as compared to the 7.05 million universe we are assuming.
Now the question, is a change in 4.6 percent points a significant compliance improvement for all the effort, cost and pain they have inflicted? A lot depends on what you were targeting and what your objectives were. If I were in charge of increasing compliance, that is how I would be watching my performance. Do you think anyone at the Treasury or IRS looks at things that way? Me either.
As you all know, the IRS has never told us what they were attempting to do, and as with everything they have done, there is no cost vs benefit analysis that they or we can refer back to later to see how successful they were related to their original goals. If there is some analysis somewhere, it is all Top Secret stuff protected by the Patriot Act, I suppose. State Secrets we can not discuss.
All we know, is what they like to trumpet in their success proclamations. Total Revenues collected and total entrants into their OVDP/OVDI programs without any break down of what is new tax revenue and what is penalties, and of course, they would never tell us the Whale to minnow ratio of those that have entered their wonder VD programs.
So, play around with the numbers and assumptions and see what you come up with. It is a fun exercise.
@badger – Thank you for your welcome!
I’m not sure which politicians to approach, but I believe in an all-of-the-above approach. The best ally of this FATCA mess is ignorance. The comments by Danielle Paille reflect ignorance about what FATCA is and what it does to us. We have to continue this process of educating and speaking out for our rights if we want to have any chance of beating this back — sooner rather than later.
I will not live as a second-class citizen. I have the right to be treated as any other immigrant from any other country. The question is whether these principles of “equality” are real, or just rhetoric that falls apart when a lot of money is on the table. Equality of citizens is a simple idea that enough people still believe in — and nobody besides banks and some politicians is scrambling to do the US’s business. There’s a winning story here, we just have to frame it properly and get it out there.
@Nobledreamer,
Other than just pasting the forum details here, it doesn’t appear on the StopFatca blog there is a way to isolate the information via a link.
This is as close as it gets…
http://stopfatca.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/the-war-of-2012-has-begun-us-attacks-canadian-sovereignty/#more-6
Plan to attend a Fact Finding Forum to preserve Canadian sovereignty and keep Canada a free and independent nation!
Who: The Honourable Sinclair Stevens, Federal PC Party leader, Party President Dorian Baxter and others
Where: University of Toronto – Room TBA (click for updates)
When: Saturday December 15, 2012 – 9:30 a.m. – 5:00 p.m.In 1961, on May 17th., President John F. Kennedy addressed the Parliament of Canada. During the address President Kennedy, commenting on the special friendship between Canada and the U.S., stated:
Neither President Kennedy nor Prime Minister Pearson in their worst political nightmares could have ever anticipated this second, dastardly, unprovoked, unprincipled and utterly unconscionable U.S. assault on Canadian sovereignty!!!
For updates and evolving information: http://StopFATCA.wordpress.com
Further information:
http://www.newswire.ca/en/story/1071319/stop-an-impending-massive-handover-of-canadian-sovereignty-to-the-united-states-says-isaac-brock-societyhttp://stopfatca.wordpress.comhttp://www.twitter.com/stopfatca
PC Party President: Dorian Baxter (289) 221-2687
PC Party National HQ: (905) 853-8949
Thanks for the numbers, it looks like it might fit with the number I remember from Patriot act reports.
An increase of 600,000, outside of OVDI/OVDP makes me wonder why we don’t hear of penalties.
Here you can walk right in and the Senator would be in the open-door office if Congress was not in session.
@just me
Great exercise. The question I would like answered is what percentage are there of minnows in OVDI, those of whom will be relieved of penalties due to reasonable cause, and what amount Schulman’s estimate of the $4.4B the IRS has claimed to have brought in will be reduced by as a result. In our particular case, if the penalty associated with tax owing and FBAR ‘in leu of penalty’ are abated and eliminated, we will see a reduction of well over half of what he claimed was the IRS’s haul from us. Consider that our FBAR ‘penalty’ was at the generous 5% rate, and those who file from the US is set at 25%, how will that effect his estimates should a significant number of them also be relieved of penalties. What isn’t clear is how Schulman determined his estimates, as we have already submitted the tax and its associated penalty (as per request), yet the ‘penalty’ associated with FBAR has not, as it was not requested with our OVDI submission. I would think that the optics would be better for him to include this amount in his claim even though the IRS isn’t in possession of it, wouldn’t you?
Just saw this?
Mexico and Spain sign IGAs
It appears both Spain and Mexico signed IGAs overnight. No sign of the actual documents yet. May not see the actual IGA until next week.
You can find details here:
For Spain:
Web Announcement
http://www.minhap.gob.es/en-gb/prensa/en%20portada/2012/Paginas/20121120_Ferre.aspx
Spanish press release (in Spanish)
http://www.minhap.gob.es/Documentacion/Publico/GabineteMinistro/Notas%20Prensa/2012/SE%20HACIENDA/20-11-12%20NP%20Fiscalidad%20Internacional.pdf
And for Mexico:
Here is the press release of the Mexican Finance Ministry (in Spanish)http://www.shcp.gob.mx/documentos_recientes_bliblioteca/comunicado_070_2012.pdf
Here is a news article in English
http://www.reuters.com/article/2012/11/21/mexico-united-states-taxes-idUSL1E8ML0DN20121121
Here is a news article in Spanish
http://eleconomista.com.mx/sistema-financiero/2012/11/20/mexico-eu-firman-acuerdo-contra-evasion-fiscal
1 hour ago
Would it be an exaggeration to say the entire world is going off its collective rocker?
@Just Me,
I think I just found a way. Was going to post a comment, asking for separate page. And it took me to one and link seems to work. Try this:http://stopfatca.wordpress.com/2012/11/19/on-the-200th-anniversary-of-the-war-of-1812-us-attacks-canadas-sovereignty/#respond
StopFatca=Jim?
@Just Me
I am thinking should retreat this to all those from list I did earlier in the week. I right-clicked as you mentioned but still cannot get the image of the tweet into a comment. All these technical challenges! Anyways, pls check the tweet and see if you think appropriate and tomorrow will send to the 100 or so. Time for sleep!
Info about the Fact Finding Forum:
Hon Sinclair Stevens is head of:
PC Party = Progressive Canadian Party https://www.facebook.com/groups/477188065600/
(Not the Progressive Conservatives)
http://www.pcparty.org/index.php/leader
“Stevens has since become involved with the website bloc-harper.com, which promotes the idea that Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Bloc Québécois leader Gilles Duceppe are weakening Canadian federalism in a way that could lead to Quebec’s separation from Canada. In 2007, following Tracy Parsons’s resignation as leader of the Progressive Canadian Party, Stevens became that party’s interim leader. “
NB: website bloc-harper.com seems obsolete
@nobledreamer
For some reason, you can only put the image of a tweet in the Original Post, but not in comments. Not sure why, but that happened when the cut over to .ca wordpress happened.
Still, you can past the link details by doing as I suggested. Right click on the time stamp in the upper right hand corner and choose ‘copy link address’ and then past here…
https://twitter.com/nobledreamer16/status/271500890752573440
and that StopFATCA link does what you desired! 🙂
Just Me – Regarding the Spanish accouncement: It just mentions that they signed (initialled) the agreement. Then it goes into the Spanish efforts to combat tax evasion, etc.. nothing technical like “What is a US Person…”
I know a few Americans that live in Spain. I tried to tell them about this, but they just ignored me.
http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2012-11-21/us-bully-fatca-tax-evasion-rules?mod=sectionheadlines-home-AM
“
US ‘behaving like a bully’ over Fatca
Sophie Baker
21 Nov 2012
A UK professional body representing
the financial services industry has accused the US of imposing ‘unfair
costs’ for fund managers over its controversial new tax evasion rules.”
………….
“In a press release, the Chartered Institute for Securities &
Investments, which represents 40,000 members of the securities and
investments industry, said: “The US is guilty of behaving like a bully
in imposing unfair costs on UK investment managers and banks, which work
with American clients, via its Foreign Account Tax”….
The IRS did not respond to requests for comment”
There is an interesting article in the news today, but it’s in Chinese so you might have to use a translator on it:
John Brown just posted this on the FATCA discussion thread:
Also hot off the press from MaCleans.ca:
“Banks bracing for U.S. law requiring they inform on dual citizen accounts”
http://www2.macleans.ca/2012/11/28/banks-bracing-for-u-s-law-requiring-they-inform-on-dual-citizen-accounts
From the article:
“Finance Minister Jim Flaherty has said Ottawa is “nearing a conclusion” on the issue, suggesting a similar arrangement as reached by the U.K. is in the offing.”
There are no comments yet.