http://www.repealfatca.com/index.asp?idmenu=4&idsubmenu=156&title=repealfatcacom-alert
Stop ‘Backdoor’ Authority for FATCA and OECD Reciprocity!
This is a RepealFATCA.com Alert! Contact your Representative NOW and tell him or her that the House of Representatives must —
- NOT accept Sec. 603 of the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1295 (“Trade Preferences Extension Act”) and
- MUST insist that the Senate recede to the House and DROP Sec. 603 in Conference.
As described in a letter in opposition to Sec. 603 from the financial industry, the Senate language would “change current law to require banks, credit unions and broker/dealers to report to the Internal Revenue Service and our customers on all interest bearing as well as non-interest bearing accounts.”
Even more dangerously, it would do so by what appears to be a new grant of regulatory authority to the Treasury Department:
“SEC. 6049A. RETURNS REGARDING NON-INTEREST BEARING DEPOSITS.
“(a) Requirement Of Reporting.—Every person who holds a reportable deposit during any calendar year shall make a return according to the forms or regulations prescribed by the Secretary, setting forth the name and address of the person for whom such deposit was held.
Even if not intended by Congress, the danger is that any new statutory authority by could be used (or abused) by Treasury to promulgate new regulations on domestic institutions as promised to foreign governments under unauthorized, non-treaty FATCA “intergovernmental agreements” and the OECD’s insidious “Automatic Exchange of Information” scheme, a/k/a global FATCA or “GATCA.”
ACTION ITEM: Right now, go to this link, find your Representative, and write a short email stating:
Dear [Name]:
I am opposed to Sec. 603 of the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1295 (“Trade Preferences Extension Act”), which would open the door to indiscriminate fishing of private financial information and providing it to foreign governments! Please ensure that this odious section is not approved by the House and is dropped from the final bill.
Let’s get this done!
James George Jatras
Here is a link to the House schedule for next week.
http://www.majorityleader.gov/Floor/
It is safe to say this will not be coming on Monday or probably Tuesday it is that very last line for Wednesday and balance of the week which is concerning.
“Possible Consideration of Legislation related to Trade”
Having said that all the bills listed ahead are fairly large and NOT by any means non controversial. So in addition to sending out emails right now I am crossing my fingers that the House might just burnup enough time on “other” things to not make it to this bill next week giving “us” enough time to stop it.
IF this had gone through over the past week we would have been totally FUCKED.
Note a significant number of business lobby groups want this bill to pass FATCA provisions from the Senate in all.
https://renewgsptoday.files.wordpress.com/2015/06/multi-association-preferences-bill-letter-060315.pdf
It is very ironic that in Canada, TD Bank and the rest of the CBA urged the Canadian federal government not to fight FATCA, and to surrender Canadian sovereignty via signing the FATCA IGA – and thus to report on accounts whether interest bearing or not, belonging to those the US defined as FATCAfodder, in Canada and yet, in the US, TD as part of the American Bankers Association and one of the largest 50 banking institutions in the US ( https://www.aba.com/Tools/Research/Documents/LargestInstitutionsbyAssetSize.pdf ) will be fighting this provision as applied to accounts in the US http://consumerbankers.com/cba-issues/comment-letters/joint-letter-re-sec-603 .
Thanks so much Mark Twain for alerting us.
Is it correct that this is a different bill than the passport revocation?
http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/05/14/orrin-hatch-passport-revocation-bill-passes-senate/
@Mark: that’s right. Customs bill & trade preferences bill are two different things. (Passport revocation is in Senate’s customs bill, H.R. 644). The House will probably get around their its version of the customs bill H.R. 1907 later next week.
Also, the “trade adjustment” bill (H.R. 1314) eliminates the child tax credit for anyone taking the FEIE. So basically every one of these trade bills has some revenue offset or other junk aimed at expats.
It seems to me that every time we turn around the U.S. is showing more and more interest in our *assets* as opposed to our *income*. This is one more step in that direction. And why would it be interested in our assets? The U.S. is in a hell of a lot of debt. Are they planning to garnish our accounts once they find out our account numbers? Anybody besides me thinking about what happened in Cyprus? Nothing would surprise me anymore.
Also, does anyone know when we can expect to hear from the Senate Finance Committee? I believe that the extra week they were given to come up with tax reform recommendations has just finished, am I right?
@ MuzzledNoMore
And THAT is exactly my concern too. However I think the correct term is not “garnish” but STEAL. Remember Canada and a host of other countries have already set up enabling legislation for a bail-in of “systemically important banks” which get in trouble due to their own greed and stupidity (i.e. our deposits become the banks’ deposits). In the meantime I wonder if they realize that the USA is fixing to save itself from what looks like inevitable financial collapse by stealing the overseas deposits of everyone having the tiniest hint of USness and by extorting multi-million dollar fines from overseas banks which harbour anyone having the tiniest hint of USness. The bank deposits of everyone other than the elite who have a force field around their wealth will be tossed on the ground and the USA has the biggest hoover of all. Disclaimer for my paranoia: I might have a touch of sunstroke from working outdoors for several hours today.
Ember you are spot on
They will pass some law and give it a patriotic name
@All
BTW, below is the claimed justification for the change, from the report accompanying the original Senate bill, S. 1267, the text of which was substituted into HR 1295.
It’s a familiar mentality: some people are up to no good, so make everyone suffer. There are some fat cat tax cheats out there, so welcome to FATCA. Some people are running meth labs, so let’s have your ID when you buy Sudafed.
https://www.congress.gov/congressional-report/114th-congress/senate-report/43/1?q=%7B%22search%22%3A%5B%22Every+person+who+holds+reportable+deposit+during+any+calendar+year+shall+make+return+according+the+forms+regulations+prescribed+Secretary%22%5D%7D
PRESENT LAW
The Code requires that every person who makes a payment of
reportable interest (as defined) of $10 or more to any other
person during any calendar year report the aggregate amount of
the payment and information identifying the recipient on an
information return (Form 1099-INT) to the IRS. This report is
not required to be filed for payments to exempt recipients and
certain non-U.S. persons. The Code also requires that the payor
furnish the corresponding information statements to payees
named on the information returns showing the information that
is reported to the IRS.
REASONS FOR CHANGE
A number of people have been earning income, not paying tax
on that income, and using non-interest bearing financial
accounts, such as non-interest bearing bank accounts, to hide
this money from the IRS. In addition, a number of people, when
they have earned interest of less than $10 from one payor, have
not been reporting that interest income even though they are
legally required to do so, because they are not receiving a
Form 1099-INT with respect to that interest income. This
provision addresses both of these issues.
EXPLANATION OF PROVISION
The provision revises the reporting requirement to
eliminate the minimum interest threshold of $10 and applies
information reporting requirements and penalties for banks and
other persons that hold non-interest bearing deposits.
@All
BTW, the Senate report justifying the change was issued on May 12 – two days before the Senate passed it. Talk about under-the-radar.
@ Jim Jatras
Might this proposed new reporting scheme tie into the trend called negative interest rates? Instead of a bank paying the depositor for keeping his money on deposit, the depositor will be paying the bank for keeping his money on deposit and in some cases risking that deposit on bad investments. And after the bad investments comes the “bail-ins” because we wouldn’t want the banks and their precious shareholders to suffer for their own stupidity and greed would we? Positive, zero or negative — it all gets reported so the IRS will know where a person is doing his banking. Deposits and their depositors will be deemed criminal unless a plethora of forms can prove their innocence I guess.
@All
Look at this timeline: introduced on the 11th, report filed on the 12th, passed by the Senate on the 14th:
Date Major Actions
05/12/2015 By Senator Hatch from Committee on Finance filed written report. Report No. 114-43.
05/11/2015 Committee on Finance. Original measure reported to Senate by Senator Hatch. Without written report.
05/11/2015 Introduced in Senate
@EmBee
“Might this proposed new reporting scheme tie into the trend called negative interest rates?” I don’t think that can be ruled out.
So they will provide partial reciprocity for FATCA reporting, which will increase costs for US financial institutions, and make them less attractive parking spots for foreign capital. They will also eliminate the $10 de minimus rule for issuing 1099s, which will create massive increased costs to the economy that are pretty much guaranteed to outweigh any extra tax revenues they may now be missing.
Seems to me they are in an awful hurry to shoot themselves in the foot. And to be honest, I’m not sure why I should want to stop them. I almost feel like saying, “Have at it kids, fire away!”
Yes, I know, an eye for an eye leaves everybody blind. and all that. Still…
Will this expose identities for those accounts in the tax haven states?
As interest rates head to zero and less, the passive income of the peasants disappears and there is no income left to tax. When the stock market and dividends go south, there will be no passive income at all.
Hence, some sort of asset tax needs to be in the long term plans to try to keep the boat afloat.
@ Mark Twain
I believe that the time-honoured practice of keeping your money under your mattress is going to make a big comeback. The bank of Sealy Posturepedic is a lot safer bet these days. Better the potential risk of someone breaking into your house to steal your money than guaranteed theft by the banks through negative interest rates and service charges and, inevitably, by the IRS. Of course they’ll figure-out that one too and start imposing an annual mattress tax and conducting random bedroom audits.
I find it hard to keep up with all of this,seems to be more every day. If you have funds in the US are you to close accounts? If I understand it right,if you then put it in a Canadian bank the same thing happens. Maybe under the mattress or a tin can. At 80 it boggels the mind to try and figure this out.
The original reason for the 10 limit on 1099’s was to eliminate the cost of printing, postage, and administration. The tax gained on $5 interest can only be $1 . So now, the government supposedly gets 7 million more and the banks must use more than 7 million in CONTROL functions.
This is the definition of a government out of control
A number of the socialist countries already shame their citizens by making income and wealth to be public information. Up to 2010, it was available on the internet in Norway, and now it can be acquired simply by signing in to the govt system under your own account. Sweden also has open info.
@ Jane Maw
Welcome to Brock! Believe me, at any age, this all boggles the mind. I’m approaching 70 and sometimes I think that my age is my biggest asset because I just won’t have to deal with all this madness as long as the younger ones will. We all want a peaceful existence on this planet and we all deserve that but The Powers That Be have decided that chaos must reign supreme because out of chaos will come their kind of “order” which means more wealth for them, more control over others for them, more power to do whatever satisfies their psychopathic egos. FATCA, GATCA, DATCA … TPP, TTIP, NAU … on and on the acronyms march and then there’s this war, that war, more surveillance, more police state … all part of their agenda … even Agenda 21 is part of their agenda. Sorry to rant on … back to mattresses and tin cans … we do whatever we can to preserve what is rightfully ours and we take action like the ADCS lawsuit to fend off TPTB which pull strings in the shadows to “order” the chaos.
Jane Maw: I will leave it to others more knowledgeable than I to suggest what to do with money in the U.S. but, believe me, this is boggling *all* our minds. It is unconscionable what the United States has done and I am particularly livid about the affects of all this on the lives of the retired people amongst us.
I am soooooo confused.
1. Is it beneficial to us that the US passes reciprocity and then we will have the US banks screaming, filing suits, demonstrating the ridiculousness of the law, hopefully bring ALL of FATCA crashing down? This would put an end to US LLC’s etc., NOT a wise financial move if one wishes to remain a tax haven. Surely the US would not allow FATCA to stand if the US banks did not participate, right? How could one have a modicum of integrity and not be humiliated by that scenario? (Damn, I can be naive). Would the remainder of the world push back? (Does anyone have any idea of what Jamie Dimon or Michael Corbet think regarding FATCA reciprocity)?
or
2. Would it be more beneficial for us If the US does NOT pass reciprocity making the IGA’s null and void? That would be the effect correct?
I am going to live under a chicken coop and take my measly pennies with me. The world is too complicated for us wrinklies to decipher.
@All ( Welcome Jane Maw!) and
@Jim:
If THIS goes through everything is lost:
http://thehill.com/policy/finance/244220-rand-paul-demands-white-house-release-trade-deal-text-immediately
(Especially interesting are the comments below the article.
Jane and all of us find all of these assaults on us mind boggling to say the least.)
Not all Americans are asleep.
Remember the Tea Party movement and how they have been targeted by the IRS as well and how that played out in the 2012 elections. ( as if there were not other skulduggery afoot)
And the November 2014 midterms results SHOULD have put a stop to the Dem agenda, yet the Republicans voted to allow the president to do everything the election win determined he should not be allowed. To vote to continue unconstitutional actions by the executive branch after being elected to do the exact opposite made it clear to the entire electorate just who they serve and it is not the American people.
Angry and Aware as exhibited in the comments:
We are not the only ones whose minds are boggled and most despair just what to do.
Sometimes the answer is very simple. Arrest and prosecution.
IF little Iceland can do it why not the rest of us? While we try to find somebody and something with the will to do what is necessary, we very much need “the bank of Sealy and Posturpedic” !!
And then there is this:
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/trade-agreements-like-tisa-tpp-and-ttip-will-sideline-national-laws-wikileaks-says-10299907.html
They have us under assault on so many fronts it is hard to know where to focus our fight but fight we must.
If not for Tim and Jim we would not know about the senate passing a bill that ensures more powers to the IRS ( while politicians seeking election tout :”Abolish the IRS”) and some think they are actually serious. Meanwhile they come up with laws to ensure the IRS has even more powers.
Betrayal on every front from those we elected to protect and preserve our rights and freedoms.
At this point Rand Paul stands alone in fighting for the rights of individuals. Others pay lip service and we need so much more than that!