Here:
http://site.d66.nl/intveld/document/fatca/f=/vj90hk8obskl.pdf
Does the Commission consider that this condition of Swedbank is related to the recently adopted US law FATCA, the ongoing IGAs on it and the legal uncertainty for the FFI as to the extraterritorial application of FATCA?
Is the Commission aware that the extraterritorial effect of FATCA could lead to banks on the territory of the EU refusing to take US clients?
Does the Commission consider this practice as a violation of the general principle of equal treatment and non-discrimination, or any provision of the EU treaties?
Does the Commission consider that the definition of’ US person’ could also include EU citizens, which would mean that EU citizens could be affected directly by US law on EU soil?
@swedishcitizen
Excellent work. A couple of comments regarding the wording:
1. “all tax obligations for the past 5 years” – change to “all tax obligations to the US IRS and US Treasury Department for the past 5 years” (So it is absolutey clear that they have to file 5 years to the US)
2. “while on expatriate work assignment for Volvo in USA” – perhaps change to:
“while on expatriate work assignment for a Swedish firm in USA”
3.” full Swedish businesses” – perhaps use the word “completely” instead of “full/fully”
All that you write seems to also apply100% to your little neighbour the south – Dk
One possible way to impress on the US government the absurdity of citizenship-based taxation is to identify prominent non-US people who might be accidental US citizens, have taken out US citizenship years ago while studying or working there or be married to a US citizen. As I understand Swedish society, there are two highly prominent families, the Bernadottes and the Wallenbergs. Here is what I have been able to determine regarding their connections to the US:
1) Bernadotte family: Princess Madeleine, daughter of the King and Queen of Sweden, is engaged to marry Christopher O’Neill, a dual US and UK citizen with a wedding planned for this summer. She reportedly lives in New York and would generally be eligible for a US green card following her marriage to an American citizen.
– The finances of one member of the Swedish royal family could then become subject to US tax laws. To the extent that she jointly owns property or a business with other family members, they could also be pulled into the US tax quagmire.
2) Wallenberg family: The two cousins, Marcus and Jacob Wallenberg, who control numerous Swedish industrial companies such as ABB, Astra Zeneca, Electrolux, Ericsson, Saab Aircraft, SKF, etc. and the SEB bank, graduated from US universities. Marcus was in the US for seven years to study at Penn Wharton and also worked on Wall Street for two years. Although he is listed as a “Swedish citizen” in several documents available on the internet, it is possible, but not documented, that he once had a green card or even possibly took out US citizenship during his seven years in the US.
Jacob Wallenberg studied in the US, at Georgetown, but apparently did not work there. It is less likely that he had a green card or took out US citizenship, i.e., he may have been in the US for only four years.
Another Wallenberg cousin, Peter, also studied in the US at Denver University and, similar to Jacob, it is less likely that he had a green card or became a US citizen since I can find no mention that he worked there.
Another relative, Raoul Wallenberg, the Swedish ambassador to Hungary during World War II, was awarded honorary US citizenship posthumously in the 1980s. He did not have any children so, even if this were possible, he would not have passed on his (honorary) US citizenship.
@Edelweiss, similar story here to Alliance Trust Savings:
http://www.sippdeal.co.uk/Resources/Content/PDF/SD_ISADA_terms_and_conditions.pdf
“1.8 We cannot open a Sippdeal ISA or a dealing account for you, or a child, if you, or the child, are, and we will close your account if you become, a US citizen or a US resident for tax purposes. You must inform us immediately if you become a US citizen or a US resident for tax purposes.”
Glad to know that Ms. in’t Veld is watching. We have MP Elizabeth May from the Canadian Green party.
Where is the NDP equivalent? The BC NDP caucus, MP Mai and others were laudably vocal. Where are they now that the Harper government is in FATCA talks leading to some kind of IGA?
Where is the Liberal equivalent?
https://twitter.com/SophieintVeld/statuses/326722581942136833
exchange re FATCA and public right to know;
Samples:
“…there are 1000nds of docs on it. Public have a right to know”
http://www.mytweets.nl/index.php?nr=878406
http://www.mytweets.nl/index.php?nr=878109
23 april 2013 20:21:12
@SophieintVeld: @MiaChupacabra that is irrelevant: transparency rules apply to EU docs. There is extensive law and case law on this (Sophie in `t Veld)
String re FATCA and public’s right to know about behind the scenes talks with US re FATCA – sought for release of related EU documents
Where is the Canadian equivalent asking for release of behind the scenes documents re talks with the US on FATCA?
Under the Harper government, will Canada cease to be a sovereign autonomous country or will Prime Minister Harper sign Canada away as just another US state?
@Innocent. Thank you for the affirmation
27 March: To: Same address list (excepting Ms. Veld), incl newspapers
Have you consulted with Princess Madeleine, and her Swedish lawyers and her US lawyers, regarding FATCA?
Both herself and her fiance should be subject to US taxation until they both renounce their USA visas. If they return to live in Sweden, without making that renouncement, they should be forced to continue that reporting their USA taxes and IRS reporting forms until they renounce and pay the 30% USA Reichflugsteuer.
Here is the form they should need to fill out when they renounce their USA visas.
http://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f8854.pdf
In that form, they should be required to list all of their assets in Sweden. THey should be subject to 30% tax upon the gain of those assets. THe treatment for a Dutchess should be the same as the treatment for a commoner, according to USA law. And the USA law applies to them as long as they retain their USA visas and are US persons.
Below is a list of forms that they should fill out for their time in USA and also for their time while they are living permanently in Sweden with a USA visit.
Every US person, such as the Princess, are required to declare all of their foreign accounts to USA, whether such a US person lives inside USA or even if that US person has never set a foot in USA.
Note that the regeringen is currently in negotations with USA, to make an intergovernmental agreement, which will apply USA law in Sweden, where Sweden will be reporting upon Swedish Citizens who are suspected of being US persons. Those Swedish Citizens will then be subject to draconian fines and penalties from USA, and enforced upon them by Sweden while they are in Sweden.
Does it all sound crazy? Yes. And Sweden is getting ready to sign it, same as Denmark and Norway have already done.
Certainly the Regeringen and Riksdag will take responsibility fully investigate the effects of the Intergovernmental Agreement for FATCA with the Royal Family’s lawyers?
Will they take responsibility to investigate how the Little people are being affected?
Swedish Citizen
Here are the other forms which any Swedish Citizen who is a US person (such as Princess Madeleine or such as 30,000 other Swedish people living in Sweden) must fill out.
FBAR: Foreign Bank Account Reporting: To report bank accounts where one has signature authority
(applies to personal accounts, joint accunts with Swedish spouse, volunteer organization accounts, and accounts at workplace)
Penalty not to exceed $10,000 per violation (per account per year?) if proven that it is not willful. A person who willfully fails to report an account or account identifying information may be subject to a civil monetary penalty equal to the greater of $100,000 or 50 percent of the balance in the account at the time of the violation (reporting is required for signature authority upon accounts controlled by a manager at a workplace such as Ericsson, volunteer organization such as badforeningen, or personal account values)
Form 8938 Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets
Failure to File Penalty If you are required to file Form 8938 but do not file a complete and correct Form 8938 by the due date, you may be subject to a penalty of $10,000. Continuing failure to file. If you do not file a correct and complete Form 8938 within 90 days after the IRS mails you a notice of the failure to file, you may be subject to an additional penalty of $10,000 for each 30-day
Criminal penalties also.
Effect of Swedish jurisdiction laws: The fact that a Swedish jurisdiction would impose a civil or criminal penalty on you if you disclose the required information is not reasonable cause (for not reporting to USA).
Form 8621 –to report a Swedish citizen’s shareholder interest in a Passive Foreign Investment Company (PFIC),( most Swedish mutual funds) or a Qualified Electing Fund.
· Failure to file Form 8621: $10,000 failure to file penalty per person for year.
Form 8886 to report any ”transaction of interest” (as called by the IRS)
· Failure to file Form 8886 penalties: minimum of $5,000 in the case of an individual, $10,000 in the case of any other entity, maximum of $10,000 for an individual and $50,000 for other entities. This rises to a maximum of $100,000 per individual and $200,000 per entities for certain listed transactions for which the form is not filed.
Form 3520 –Annual Return To Report Transactions With Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts
Certain transactions with foreign trusts, Ownership of foreign trusts under the rules of sections 671 through 679, and Receipt of certain large gifts or bequests from certain foreign persons.
A penalty generally applies if Form 3520 is not timely filed or if the information is incomplete or incorrect. Generally, the initial penalty is equal to the greater of $10,000 or: 35% of the gross value of any property transferred to a foreign trust for failure by a U.S. transferor to report the creation of or transfer to a foreign trust or 35% of the gross value of the distributions received from a foreign trust for failure by a U.S. person to report receipt of the distribution or 5% of the gross value of the portion of the trust’s assets treated as owned by a U.S. person for failure by the U.S. person to report the U.S. owner information. Additional penalties will be imposed if the noncompliance continues after the IRS mails a notice of failure to comply with the required reporting. For more information, see section 6677.
Form 3520a –Annual Information Return of Foreign Trust With a U.S. Owner
The U.S. owner is subject to an initial penalty equal to the greater of $10,000 or 5% of the gross value of the portion of the trust’s assets treated as owned by the U.S. person at the close of that tax year, if the foreign trust: (a) fails to file a timely Form 3520-A or (b) does not furnish all of the information required by section 6048(b) or includes incorrect information. See section 6677(b). Additional penalties will be imposed if the noncompliance continues after the IRS mails a notice of failure to comply with the required reporting. For more information, see section 6677. Criminal penalties may be imposed under sections 7203, 7206, and 7207 for failure to file on time and for filing a false or fraudulent return. Penalties may also be imposed under section 6662(j) for undisclosed foreign financial asset understatements.
INFORMATION FORMS TO USA FOR HAVING A SWEDISH BUSINESS
Form 8865 –Used to report that a Swedish citizen in Sweden is a 10% partner in a Swedish partnership.
If the information is not filed within 90 days after the IRS has mailed a notice of the failure to the U.S. person, an additional $10,000 penalty (per foreign partnership) is charged for each 30-day period, or fraction thereof, during which the failure continues after the 90-day period has expired. The additional penalty is limited to a maximum of $50,000 for each failure.
8832 Entity Classification Election
For a Swedish Citizen starting up a Swedish corporation. Filed when it is made
Form 5471 –to report that a Swedish citizen living in Sweden is a 10% or more shareholder in a Swedish corporation. used by certain U.S. citizens and residents who are officers, directors, or shareholders in certain foreign corporations. The form and schedules are used to satisfy the reporting requirements of sections 6038 and 6046, and the related regulation
· Failure to file Form 5471 penalties: $10,000 failure to file penalty per year per person required to file.
A $10,000 penalty is imposed for each annual accounting period of each foreign corporation for failure to furnish the required information within the time prescribed. If the information is not filed within 90 days after the IRS has mailed a notice of the failure to the U.S. person, an additional $10,000 penalty (per foreign corporation) is charged for each 30-day period, or fraction thereof, during which the failure continues after the 90-day period has expired. The additional penalty is limited to a maximum of $50,000 for each failure
· Form 5472 –Information Return of a 25% Swedish-Owned U.S. Corporation or a Swedish Corporation Engaged in a U.S. Trade or Business
· Failure to file Form 5472 penalties: $10,000 failure to file per year per person required to file.
If the failure continues for more than 90 days after notification by the IRS, an additional penalty of $10,000 will apply. This penalty applies with respect to each related party for which a failure occurs for each 30-day period (or part of a 30-day period) during which the failure continues after the 90-day period ends.
Form 926 to report transfers of property from a Swedish citizen to a Swedish corporation, including undistributed earnings. (for example, a Swedish citizen loaning startup money to one’s own Swedish corporation? Or maintaining earnings in a Swedish company)
· Failure to file Form 926 penalties: 10% of the property transfer, up to $100,000 although not limited if the failure to file was due to “intentional disregard.”
PROCEDURE FOR RENUNCIATION OF USA VISA (GREEN CARD) OR USA CITIZENSHIP
$450 application fee
Renunciation procedure, appointment at USA embassy
File IRS form 8854—attesting that all USA taxes have been filed (as above) for the last 5 years.
Pay the applicable exit tax (Reichsfluchsteuer) from USA (for hi-earners, it is 30% of the gains of assets, even if the asset gain occurs completely in Sweden by a Swedish citizen)
(Even for Swedish citizens living in Sweden) It is against the law to give up USA citizenship for tax reasons.
@Swedish Citizen – great stuff! Why not send it to Aftonbladet, Expressen and/or The Local with the title, “Tips for Princess Madeleine in America from Swedish-Americans”? I also think making the Swedish public aware that Princess Madeleine will have to declare all her foreign investments including those of the Swedish State (if she has signing authority or they are held in trust for her) will be interesting to the Swedish public.
done. All are cc’d to the tipsa hole. Never a response. I have visited GP office and peaked the interest of human beings a couple times. It Went nowhere.
I send the same to a local Contact, who’s son is Francois Mitterand’s son, who works for SVT. She said it sounds horrible, but her Contacts in Stockholm have no interest. My first Contact gave too much information, and I drowned them.
I put 2 questions in a mail yesterday, one of them about Swedbank. She answered the other one.
Dear
Thank you for your messages. We have raised the matter with the European Commission, in addition to our earlier Parliamentary Questions on FATCA. At my request, the European Parliament Economic and Monetary Affairs Committee will hold a hearing on Fatca on May 28th. It will be webstreamed.
We will post the replies of the European Commission on our website, and you can equally follow us on twitter @sophieintveld
With kind regards,
Sophie in ‘t Veld, MEP
@Swedish Citizen,
It is hard I know. Keep up the good work. We must keep trying if we can, even when it is not clear that it is having an impact; I got an answer recently, replying to an anti-FATCA e-mail I sent to a politician way back in November 2012. I was also able to get an in-person meeting with another representative who had also originally not answered an initial e-mail on the topic.
Sophie is our hope in Europe.
I’ve spent a little time investigating some of the largest UK retail banks and whether there are any discriminatory terms in their terms and conditions. I searched the account terms and conditions for “US person”, “citizen” and “United States” to see if there were any clauses that contained any of these terms. I searched the terms and conditions for at least one current account, savings account, cash ISA account and share dealing accounts (if provided by the retail bank). I’ve done this for the 10 largest retail banks in the UK according to this page (http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/347/uk-economy/top-10-british-banks/). The banks I checked were HSBC, RBS, Lloyds TSB, Halifax, Bank of Scotland, Barclays, Santander, Co-operative, Nationwide and Tesco Bank.
I’m pleased to report that I found no evidence in the account terms and conditions that any of the 10 largest retail banks that would prevent a US person from having a current account, savings account or a cash ISA.
It gets a bit murkier with a share dealing account. HSBC, Lloyds TSB, Halifax and Bank of Scotland don’t appear to have anything preventing a US person from opening a share dealing account. RBS prevents any US person from having a share dealing account. Nationwide offers share dealing through an outsourced service through Stocktrade that doesn’t exclude US persons but Nationwide’s Investor Portfolio Service (provided by Legal & General) does contain a blanket ban on US persons. I couldn’t find Barclays terms and conditions. Santander, Co-operative and Tesco Bank don’t appear to offer a share dealing account.
I can’t say that the search was exhaustive. There may be supplementary terms and conditions in addition to the general account terms and conditions that are only evident if you apply for or open an account (which I didn’t do). Also, it’s possible that my search terms weren’t comprehensive.
As I am a Fidelity UK customer, I thought I would read their client terms and conditions dated Dec 2012.
The third paragraph, page 1 begins: “The products and services described in these Terms are available to UK residents only and are not being offered, in particular, to citizens or residents of the United States of America (US persons). By accepting these Terms, you warrant that you are resident in the UK, that you are not a US person, and that you accept the terms of the relevant prospectus.”
To date, they don’t appear to have actively enforced this blanket ban on US persons by searching through their customer files. Rather, they are relying on customers to read the T’s & C’s and self-select out of opening an account.
While Fidelity UK is not currently a subsidiary of the US Fidelity (it’s part of Fidelity Worldwide International, a Bermuda company and was separated from the US Fidelity many years ago) it is at least in part owned by the Johnson Family who also own a large part of Fidelity in the US and has a US heritage.
@Edelweiss
Although it may not a part of their member bank’s terms and conditions, the Canadian Bankers Association’s website states for customers:
“If you do not complete IRS Form W-9 or provide your consent to disclose information to the IRS, your financial institution maybe required to withhold a tax of 30% on any U.S. source payments1 that you receive and send this money to the IRS. Also, your financial institution may refuse to open an account or may be required to close existing accounts.”
http://www.cba.ca/en/consumer-information/40-banking-basics/597-us-foreign-account-tax-compliance-act-fatca-information-for-clients
I can’t find anything such thing for the public at the BBA.
I look forward to seeing more from Sophie – like this http://youtu.be/3uVZiFNkDsA
Where are our equivalent Canadian representatives with as much guts as she shows here in this video – to demand that the FATCA negotiations and documents be made transparent, and the Canadian public be notified of what is at stake and what the US government is demanding of our sovereign autonomous country?
Don’t get too excited many if not most of her colleagues are quite willing to sell their American born fellow citizens right down the river in the name of cracking down on tax evasion. My sense is a far larger percentage of Canadian MPs are less willing to do the same. I didn’t post videos of the rest of the debate. I am working on something behind the scenes in Europe to try “flip” political opinion. Stay tuned.
@Tim, thanks for the work you do to make these politicians make politicians make decisions that do not hurt “normal” people. I wish we could do things to help. I feel helpless and at mercy of the decision these people make. From the outside, it looks like they’re making emotional decisions and choosing bad policies because they’re outraged at rich people and international corporations dodging taxes.
And how can you not be outraged when see scandals like what big corporations are doing to avoid paying taxes, and scandals like budget minister Cahuzac’s in France.
The problem is complex, but there must be rational policies and decisions in the end. Thanks for working towards that.
On the corporate side for example, how the US can lower its corporate tax rate to the point that it can make a difference in how these companies choose to invest, without drastically reducing how much tax income the US is getting overall. I am not sure the increase in tax revenue due to job creations and overall increase in economic activity would counter the decrease in corporate tax if the tax rate decreased how much as Tim Cook wants it to be reduced to make a difference on how he’s willing to invest his resources.
If you decrease it not enough, these companies won’t do anything and the overall US debt will be a lot worse.
Tough problem…
Just for the fun of it, I’ve reviewed the customer terms and conditions for 28 of the 30 “Best UK Online Stock Brokers” (http://the-international-investor.com/comparison-tables/cheapest-uk-stock-brokers). It’s just a list and is not exclusive but gave me 30 websites to look up. I couldn’t access the terms and conditions for 1 site and 1 site was an unsecure connection.
I found that 9 of 28 have blanket bans on US citizens as customers for a share dealing account. They are:
– Royal Bank of Scotland (82% owned by the UK government)
– NatWest (a subsidiary of Royal Bank of Scotland)
– Santander (the 43rd largest company in the world according to the Forbes Global 2000)
– Alliance Trust Savings
– Charles Stanley
– Fidelity
– The Share Centre
– Sippdeal
– TD Direct Investing
I suspect more will be added to the above list in coming months as many have not changed their terms and conditions in months or years.
Barclays seemed to have the most advanced terms and conditions as it stipulated that they had to have a W-9 from any US citizen.
EN E-004481/2013 Answer given by Mr Šemeta on behalf of the Commission (7.6.2013)
The Commission is aware of this problem which can also be encountered by EU nationals wishing to open bank accounts in Member States where they are not resident.
Banks have the right, under the contractual freedom principle, to decide with whom they want to contract. They can in any event refuse clients for sound commercial reasons.
However the Commission believes that financial institutions should not deny persons access to financial services merely because they would then face due diligence and reporting obligations. The Commission has recently adopted a proposal that would oblige the Member States to ensure that consumers legally resident in the EU are not discriminated against by reason of their nationality or place of residence when applying for or accessing a payment account. To this end, the Directive obliges Member States to ensure that at least one payment service provider in their territory offers a payment account with basic features to consumers legally resident in the Union, irrespective of the consumer’s EU place of residence or nationality. This proposal may help to address the difficulties that not just US citizens who are resident within the EU but also EU nationals may currently encounter in opening bank accounts.
Moreover, the FATCA Model agreements include, in Annex II, a clause that would forbid a financial institution wishing to benefit from the “deemed-compliant” status from having “discriminatory policies or practices” in respect of US citizens .
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2013-004481%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN
and this research from a Brock colleague
EU Directive 2006/123. Basically it is against EU Law to discriminate on the basis on nationality on most goods and services except see below:
1. This Directive shall apply to services supplied by providers established in a Member State.
2. This Directive shall not apply to the following activities:
(a) non-economic services of general interest;
(b) financial services, such as banking, credit, insurance and re-insurance, occupational or personal pensions, securities,investment funds, payment and investment advice, including the services listed in Annex I to Directive 2006/48/EC;
(c) electronic communications services and networks, and associated facilities and services, with respect to matters covered by Directives 2002/19/EC, 2002/20/EC, 2002/21/EC, 2002/22/EC and 2002/58/EC;
(d) services in the field of transport, including port services, falling within the scope of Title V of the Treaty;
(e) services of temporary work agencies;
(f) healthcare services whether or not they are provided via healthcare facilities, and regardless of the ways in which they are organised and financed at national level or whether they are public or private;
(g) audiovisual services, including cinematographic services, whatever their mode of production, distribution and transmission, and radio broadcasting;
(h) gambling activities which involve wagering a stake with pecuniary value in games of chance, including lotteries, gambling in casinos and betting transactions;
(i) activities which are connected with the exercise of official authority as set out in Article 45 of the Treaty;
(j) social services relating to social housing, childcare and support of families and persons permanently or temporarily in need which are provided by the State, by providers mandated by the State or by charities recognised as such by the State;
(k) private security services;
(l) services provided by notaries and bailiffs, who are appointed by an official act of government.
3. This Directive shall not apply to the field of taxation.
What a BS answer from Mr. Semata. He thinks that as long as there is one bank in each member state that offers “basic” payment services (I guess a current account) then everything is ok. What about all the other accounts that an EU citizen or resident should have access to that are not included by Mr. Semata’s definition? I’m thinking credit cards, mortgages, savings accounts, tax-free accounts (ISAs etc.), pensions etc. I don’t understand how it can be possible for financial institutions to discriminate on the basis of national origin for every but a current account. It is particularly galling that tax-free accounts and pensions are by and large FATCA EXEMPT products yet some financial institutions refuse to provide FATCA EXEMPT products to EU citizens with US person status.
Mr. Semata is also very poorly informed about the “deemed compliant” status. This is an extremely narrow category. It is only banks who choose to attempt to qualify under the local bank exception deemed compliant status that are not allowed to discriminate against US persons. All other FFIs (who do not qualify or choose not to qualify under the local bank exception) are actively encouraged to discriminate against US persons by virtue of the fact that the USG has made a US person the least desirable customer on earth who brings unimaginable potential liability and endless paperwork. As I’ve said before, there is zero benefit for being in the local bank exception because you still have to implement FATCA, you still have to report on non-resident US persons, and you still have to be able to collect the FATCA information for resident US persons (but just not transmit the info). Additionally, a “local bank” can only have one country of business and must have >98% of deposits from resident account holders (individuals and businesses).
Sophie will be available to meet on June 17th!
For years D66 MEP Sophie in ‘t Veld has been fighting for more open government in Europe. The European Union must develop a Europe of diplomats, discretion and confidentiality to a Europe of citizens, open government and trust. The old culture of secrecy is a major obstacle in gaining the trust of the citizens. Parliamentary questions, Eurowob requests to public lawsuits, In ‘t Veld tries to claim things like anti-piracy treaty ACTA and U.S. law FATCA. Openness in every way.
On Monday, June 17th in ‘t Veld organizes the seminar “Open government in Europe”. The seminar takes place in Nieuwspoort, Lange Poten 10 in The Hague from 10:00 to 12:30. It will also be followed via a live stream on the websites of D66 Europe and Nieuwspoort.
Speakers include:
– Sophie in ‘t Veld, leader D66 European Parliament
– Alexander Brenninkmeijer, Dutch Ombudsman and Ombudsman candidate
– Onno Brouwer, European law. State In ‘t Veld on her in public lawsuits
– Brenno de Winter, investigative journalist
– Gert-Jan Dennekamp, economics editor editorial NOS news
http://site.d66.nl/intveld/agenda/20130617/seminar_openbaarheid_van_bestuur?ctx=vi2tmgwp4ry0
Why not? USA takes all personal information. Why not RUssia?
We saw it coming miles away: the Russians will start collecting your travel data from July 1st onwards. Like the US, Australia and Canada, Russia will oblige air carriers to transfer their PNR (Passenger Name Records) to the Russian authorities. The European Commission is crying big crocodile tears that they had not been informed by the Russian government, but that is ingenuous, as everyone who wanted to know, knew. Now personal data of Europeans will be transferred to the Russian authorities without any legal safeguards
http://d66blog.nl/sophie_intveld/2013/06/05/kgbs-wet-dream/
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/vod/vodservice/getVODForDownload?vodid=1370936531929&format=wmv&type=1
Sophie’s comments during today’s EU Parliament debate on PRISM. It’s not FATCA related but I know she has a few fans here.
Further to the above discussion on Princess Madeleine of Sweden marrying the UK-US dual citizen, Chris O’Neil, the Swedish “Expressen” obtained a copy of the couple’s pre-nuptial agreement. Generally, in the event of a divorce, the couple is keeping its pre-marital assets separate. Since his name will not likely be on these assets, they should remain uncontaminated during her marriage to this USC.
Also, as I understand it, the couple plans to reside in the US which could actually reduce their tax complexity vs. living abroad with her USC husband.
Attached is the software translated Expressen article. Note that the software incorrectly translates Swedish Kronen as Dollars at times, e.g., her total assets are SEK 30 million ($4.6 million), not US$ 30 million as translated:
http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?from=&to=en&a=http://www.expressen.se/nyheter/har-ar-prinsessparets-aktenskapsforord/?print=true