14 thoughts on “French Finance Minister Moscovici STRONGLY endorses FATCA”
If he’s so keen on FATCA to raise revenue, he’ll be disappointed because France is RBT. FATCA may catch a few rich French salting their money away, but it’s not going to balance France’s budget.
@Don, One would think this would be obvious. There must be other reasons he supports FATCA.
He especially likes the idea of a European FATCA, and it would have been hypocrite for him to push for the European version and deny the US one. In France, the real fuse that made them push for it was the affaire Cahuzac.
I wrote Moscovici a long detailed letter, modeled on Moby’s submission to the New Zealand’s government. Unfortunately, they must not have agreed to the arguments I was making, or seen greater good in FATCA, accepting the collateral damage. I wished more government were like Canada. It seems Canada is putting up a good fight.
Let’s hope that if they sign an IGA, it will be for the automatic exchange information of non-residents only, that because it will be a better deal that the other governments, this will apply to the other countries who have already signed.
Too bad the government shutdown is about to end…. France will sign any time now 🙁
The rumor I heard always heard with Cahuzac was that when he was Health Minister of France he would accept kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies deposited in his Swiss account to have the government purchase inferior quality cancer drugs from poorer quality vendors. So Cahuzac was more “corrupt” than a just a tax cheat per say.
The “Financial Transparency Coalition”- Do they also seek for the Treasury to be transparent? Or, do they only want more transparency from the working poor?
The key word is “transparency”, he says, so where is the transparency on renounciation figures as well as the 5 billion the US claims it collected and the myths that Mr. Stack was not honest about?
Yes, but the outrage was really about his undeclared Swiss bank account, and the fact that he vehemently lied and denied it to everyone – including to Moscovici – for months even though there was serious evidence about it.
He finally “came clean” and the whole France was disgusted about it. Cahuzac is France’s Saverin. It’s partly because of him that they pushed for FATCA, especially including a European one. That, and the revelations of this Swiss banker, who provided a list to the French finance department of French political celebrities who supposedly have Swiss bank accounts. There was also this research group, who published a huge list of people banking in tax havens. All these events came out at once and precipitated the “need” to legislate something. Hollande passed a law not too long ago about financial transparency for senators and such. They must declare all of their assets. Seriously, who’s business is it how much money they have in their bank accounts and how much their houses are worth??? You can view it as a local FBAR (LBAR) for politicians.
I am totally against it. This is private information – as long as they’re straight with the French IRS.
Here are a couple of links to back this up: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22147406 http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/20/swiss-cahuzac-reyl-idUSL5N0HG0ZF20130920 http://www.icij.org/offshore/secret-files-expose-offshores-global-impact
All pretty much at the same time. The perfect storm…
There is a “European FATCA” already, it’s the EU savings directive. It covers the whole EU, Switzerland and various small countries and territories considered tax havens. And unlike FATCA, banks actually send relevant information (income, not account balance), or the tax itself, to the account holder’s country of residence. What would the EU gain with FATCA?
In the savings directive, participating countries are obliged to send the taxable money of the interest to the country of residence of the depositor. The account holder has had the option for it to be sent under his name or anonymously. The countries get everything that is currently due to them. This was forced upon EU members in the early 2000’s, also upon the UK islands and probably also upon EES countries.
Where the money comes from and what the account balance should not have been reported.
But the issue should not have been about reporting the money where it is, but for the competency of the French (or whomever) system to have dealt with the corruption at source.
I am confused. Are you talking about the Rubiks accord. I thought not all countries sign it. Some countries are especially against sending or receiving anonymous bulk information (including tax money) to / from other countries, They want to be able to punish, prosecute, name and shame.
I believe many in the French government support the US FATCA for the simple reason they want to implement a French version. They are dying to get their hands on assets of French citizens abroad, making the argument that a French citizen anywhere can always come back to France for free health care. Therefore, they must pay taxes to France, too.
Reminds me of US politicians claiming we all should pay taxes to the US for no benefits, except for the fact they will send a gunboat to rescue us if we get in trouble anywhere in the world.
Of course, one can’t sign a FATCA agreement without first being told that it will collect tens of billions:
Don’t ask how they came up with that figure, though, because nobody cares.
Chris,
WEll, I can’t claim expertise upon the name. But EU individuals received papers from their Banks in the other countries that gave them a choice for their accounts to become registered with their country of residence, or to remain anomymous—when the tax money would be sent anyways. Timeframe was about 2005 if I remember, and I believed it was related to the EU getting started up and running, with some 5 yr phase in period.
If he’s so keen on FATCA to raise revenue, he’ll be disappointed because France is RBT. FATCA may catch a few rich French salting their money away, but it’s not going to balance France’s budget.
@Don, One would think this would be obvious. There must be other reasons he supports FATCA.
He especially likes the idea of a European FATCA, and it would have been hypocrite for him to push for the European version and deny the US one. In France, the real fuse that made them push for it was the affaire Cahuzac.
I wrote Moscovici a long detailed letter, modeled on Moby’s submission to the New Zealand’s government. Unfortunately, they must not have agreed to the arguments I was making, or seen greater good in FATCA, accepting the collateral damage. I wished more government were like Canada. It seems Canada is putting up a good fight.
Let’s hope that if they sign an IGA, it will be for the automatic exchange information of non-residents only, that because it will be a better deal that the other governments, this will apply to the other countries who have already signed.
Too bad the government shutdown is about to end…. France will sign any time now 🙁
The rumor I heard always heard with Cahuzac was that when he was Health Minister of France he would accept kickbacks from pharmaceutical companies deposited in his Swiss account to have the government purchase inferior quality cancer drugs from poorer quality vendors. So Cahuzac was more “corrupt” than a just a tax cheat per say.
The “Financial Transparency Coalition”- Do they also seek for the Treasury to be transparent? Or, do they only want more transparency from the working poor?
The key word is “transparency”, he says, so where is the transparency on renounciation figures as well as the 5 billion the US claims it collected and the myths that Mr. Stack was not honest about?
Yes, but the outrage was really about his undeclared Swiss bank account, and the fact that he vehemently lied and denied it to everyone – including to Moscovici – for months even though there was serious evidence about it.
He finally “came clean” and the whole France was disgusted about it. Cahuzac is France’s Saverin. It’s partly because of him that they pushed for FATCA, especially including a European one. That, and the revelations of this Swiss banker, who provided a list to the French finance department of French political celebrities who supposedly have Swiss bank accounts. There was also this research group, who published a huge list of people banking in tax havens. All these events came out at once and precipitated the “need” to legislate something. Hollande passed a law not too long ago about financial transparency for senators and such. They must declare all of their assets. Seriously, who’s business is it how much money they have in their bank accounts and how much their houses are worth??? You can view it as a local FBAR (LBAR) for politicians.
I am totally against it. This is private information – as long as they’re straight with the French IRS.
Here are a couple of links to back this up:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-22147406
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/20/swiss-cahuzac-reyl-idUSL5N0HG0ZF20130920
http://www.icij.org/offshore/secret-files-expose-offshores-global-impact
All pretty much at the same time. The perfect storm…
There is a “European FATCA” already, it’s the EU savings directive. It covers the whole EU, Switzerland and various small countries and territories considered tax havens. And unlike FATCA, banks actually send relevant information (income, not account balance), or the tax itself, to the account holder’s country of residence. What would the EU gain with FATCA?
In the savings directive, participating countries are obliged to send the taxable money of the interest to the country of residence of the depositor. The account holder has had the option for it to be sent under his name or anonymously. The countries get everything that is currently due to them. This was forced upon EU members in the early 2000’s, also upon the UK islands and probably also upon EES countries.
Where the money comes from and what the account balance should not have been reported.
But the issue should not have been about reporting the money where it is, but for the competency of the French (or whomever) system to have dealt with the corruption at source.
I am confused. Are you talking about the Rubiks accord. I thought not all countries sign it. Some countries are especially against sending or receiving anonymous bulk information (including tax money) to / from other countries, They want to be able to punish, prosecute, name and shame.
I believe many in the French government support the US FATCA for the simple reason they want to implement a French version. They are dying to get their hands on assets of French citizens abroad, making the argument that a French citizen anywhere can always come back to France for free health care. Therefore, they must pay taxes to France, too.
Reminds me of US politicians claiming we all should pay taxes to the US for no benefits, except for the fact they will send a gunboat to rescue us if we get in trouble anywhere in the world.
Of course, one can’t sign a FATCA agreement without first being told that it will collect tens of billions:
Don’t ask how they came up with that figure, though, because nobody cares.
Chris,
WEll, I can’t claim expertise upon the name. But EU individuals received papers from their Banks in the other countries that gave them a choice for their accounts to become registered with their country of residence, or to remain anomymous—when the tax money would be sent anyways. Timeframe was about 2005 if I remember, and I believed it was related to the EU getting started up and running, with some 5 yr phase in period.
Chris, the Rubik agreements are entirely separate from the savings taxation directive. Switzerland signed a Rubik agreement with only three EU member states (Germany, UK and Austria), if I remember correctly. This is an oldish reference, but see http://www.europolitics.info//economic-a-monetary-affairs/rubik-agreements-a-how-to-guide-art332075-30.html.