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
@Furious, re: “If THIS [TPP] goes through everything is lost: ”
Agreed…makes FATCA pale by comparison, but both fit in with the overall agenda…scary times.
@Charl
Re “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? . . . 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’ve been debating that to my self. I think ( but I could be wrong) that *tactically*, it’s better if Sec. 603 goes through — US institutions might finally wake up and get engaged to take FATCA down. But *strategically* it’s better if Sec. 603 goes down. Since the IGAs are essential to FATCA, delivering on reciprocity might lock them in once and for all — once the authority is given to Treasury to promulgate reciprocal domestic regulations, it will be 100 harder to revoke it than to have denied it in the first place.
The *best* outcome, of course, would be (A) to beat back the threat of Sec. 603 and that (B) the US institutions see what a near thing it was, and finally get off their duff. “A” will be very tough (there’s not much time!) and even we are successful “B” is far from certain.
@Jim Jatras:
And there you have it. Every word you said sums it up!
@Embee, re;
“…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.”
I think you’re right. After all, it beggars belief that there could be any actual returns to the Treasury in processing a “plethora of forms” unless they are counting on raising revenues via penalty regime (as in FBAR etc.) or using this as a side door into all accounts. If one earns no interest, there is no taxable sum. If one earns less than $10 of interest, then how much could they possibly think the Treasury is losing out on? Processing the forms has got to eat up far more. They’ve got no evidence that sufficient numbers would actually end up owing them, and cite none in their rationale http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2015/06/05/gatca-and-datca-alert-action-now/comment-page-2/#comment-6167892 (thanks James Jatras) So it is assets they are interested in. For most ordinary people it is going to be from already taxed at source wages. They are intent on criminalizing even the most paltry savings. And the short timeline shows that this is not benign.
I made mention of “bail-ins” earlier in the comments. I think our EU Brockers might be interested in reading this:
http://wakeupfromyourslumber.com/why-is-the-eu-forcing-european-nations-to-adopt-bail-in-legislation-by-the-end-of-the-summer/
@To All, perhaps I’m dense but am trying to understand why holding a small US account would be such a threat to me as a renunciant, especially as I would have no unrecorded interest to the. IRS and am fully .compliant with HMRC. I’m assuming the threat would be because the US account would be reported to the IRS with a 1099 even though it produces zero interest and would thus be a potential target for a tax lien if I were to still be audited?
@MONALISA, I am surprised a US bank has let you keep an account.
Most USA banks require that you either be a US Resident or a US Citizen and you are now neither.
I would suspect if you advised said US bank you are a renunciant they would close your account.
@George, I believe you’re correct that they’d make me close it down if they knew. My accountant told me she didn’t think I needed to worry about declaring that I’d renounced; it’s not ideal and would be relieved if I could close it but need it for when my parents write me birthday or Christmas checks…..am also due to inherit a share of a US beach property so would need an American account to deal with that.
@To All, I think the world is going mad. To have had to renounce my birthright to be able to lead a normal life where I live is extreme. It’s extreme that I’ve had to cut myself off from my family and any right to return. The notion that I can’t even maintain a small savings account based in the U.S. (at least while my elderly parents are still alive) seems absurd to the point of being cruel.
I trust the IRS to have enough decency to not attempt to garnish the mere $900 I now have in there….this is all so absurd….I am not a terrorist nor money launderer.
@George
I have basic accounts in the US with my address in Canada… these were open a long time ago… don’t know what the rules are now… but before… u could open an account with no problem… I opened the account very easily… this was prior to 2000 though.
@moanerlisa1776
Your accounts are grandfathered prior to all this madness so u did nothing wrong… u can keep it with no problem… but if u try to open new accounts now… u will probably be asked for DNA or something else stupid… whatever u have… u can just let it be…
@monalisa…….agreed…….
To have had to renounce my birthright to be able to lead a normal life where I live is extreme. DITTO
It’s extreme that I’ve had to cut myself off from my family and any right to return. DITTO
And to really piss you off;
http://rt.com/uk/265597-us-uk-nukes-russia/
The world has gone MAD
@USFP, I had a need to open a US account and because I was honest that I relinquished was turned down….and I do not even have a CLN but simply because I stated that I had relinquished it was see you later.
Sooo to open a US Account they take your word that you relinquished and do not demand a CLN to deny you.
But to open an account in your HOME nation, if you simply mention you were born in Lexington, KY you better damn well have that CLN and it better be a crisp copy.
@ monalisa
My husband always kept a small, no interest, chequing account in the USA for when he visited his mother. He (like me) doesn’t like to use a credit card and he didn’t want to carry too much cash in the car. He was able to keep that US account even though the bank (a small local type) knew he lived outside the USA. Honestly, it’s ridiculous how many things that are perfectly innocent and reasonable that they want to label suspicious: carry too much cash, withdraw too much cash at once, withdraw or deposit smaller amounts too often … even clear the cache and history on your computer … and on it goes. Anyway do not worry about them garnishing your account. They have no cause to because you do not owe them anything. It’s just a shame that after renouncing and thinking yay no more IRS dealings, this stupid Sec. 603 thing would put you right back in their sights. You just want to fade to black where they’re concerned but Sec. 603 would make that impossible … as long as you have a US account … even one earning nothing.
@George
Rule of thumb handed down by the elders…. keep your mouth closed… answer what u think is important… don’t offer up anything… there is no need to explain yourself to anyone. If u told the bank nothing other then open an account… chances are… they wouldn’t have cared & opened it…
No one in my family talks about that dirt secret… US person…. We are saving the special occasion money for them to get rid of it… so instead of buying a toy… we are going to buy them their freedom…
@USFP, I wanted to be very honest with the US Bank because…..I need to ensure I do nothing to contradict my relinquishment. Anyways I made out just as fine not opening said account.
“We are saving the special occasion money for them to get rid of it… so instead of buying a toy… we are going to buy them their freedom…”
I am doing the same for my children, instead of putting it aside for University, its going to a renunciation fund, I have explained this to my MP in order to shame them and their party.
And it is buying freedom just like black slaves had to buy their freedom.
@EmBee
I was stupid… never thought of opening a chequing account… Family member had some money in an account in the US… they wrote out cheques to clean out the account without leaving home… gave the money to relatives…
Even if u don’t use a bank card… make sure u have one & give the pin to someone u trust… if something happens… family can clean out the accounts which I how I am setting it up & they don’t have to deal with the bank in person… I am making sure my family gets it before any gov’t can get their hands on it… I also told people who can sign in my safety box, clean it out fast…
I trust no one but my own family… I have never been screwed over by them
@USForeignPerson, When the the time comes, I may just turn down any future U.S. Inheritance and offer it to my siblings and/or niece/nephews rather than deal with the hassle. Perhaps I’d leave it to a U.S.-based charity. Sometimes money just creates extra complexities and problems.
@All
This isn’t on point re FATCA/DATCA/GATCA, but if it knocks Sec. 603 out of the bill, we’ll have dodged a bullet.
+++++
Bravo, Michael
Jim
http://www.accountingtoday.com/news/tax-practice/banks-concerned-about-interest-reporting-change-74835-1.html
Banks Concerned about Interest-Reporting Change
WASHINGTON, D.C. (JUNE 8, 2015)
BY MICHAEL COHN
Trade groups representing the banking, credit union and financial services industry are sounding the alarm over a provision in a bill already passed by the Senate that would require them to report information to the Internal Revenue Service on both interest-bearing and non-interest-bearing accounts.
In a letter last week to Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ken., and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, the American Bankers Association, the Consumer Bankers Association, the Credit Union National Association, the Financial Services Roundtable, the Independent Community Bankers of America and the National Association of Federal Credit Unions complained about the provision in an effort to keep it from being passed by the House. The bill is the Trade Preferences Extension Act, H.R. 1295, which passed the Senate on May 14.
“Section 603 of the legislation 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,” the groups wrote. “Currently, information reports are not required on non-interest accounts, while there is a $10 threshold for reporting on interest bearing accounts. This change would be effective for the current tax year of 2015, giving banks and credit unions little time to adapt their systems for compliance.”
They pointed out that the provision would greatly increase the number of 1099 forms that financial institutions would need to send and receive. “Should this provision be enacted, taxpayers will be awash in new 1099s reporting de minimis amounts of interest,” the groups wrote. “In many cases, they will report less than a one dollar in earned interest per year. Additionally, this new reporting requirement will impose substantial costs on the financial services industry that far exceed the revenue that will be gained by the proposal. Many information reports will contain no interest at all, resulting in confusion for taxpayers who may not be aware of our new reporting requirements. This will create an environment ripe for taxpayer and IRS error and may trigger unnecessary audits.”
The financial groups argue that the provision would provide little additional revenue for the government. “The nominal tax revenue raised by this provision will come at the costs of added complexity to industry and will be an unnecessary nuisance for nearly every American,” the letter said.
The financial groups asked legislative leaders to remove this section from H.R. 1295 as soon as possible.
Let’s hope that the alarm being sounded by the banking industry, etc. will be heard loudly and clearly by the US government. In this case, the bankers are on our side.
See letter to House Speaker and Senate Majority Leader from Republicans Overseas asking that 603 be killed.
https://www.facebook.com/republicansoverseas/photos/pcb.391049337745534/391048311078970/?type=1&theater
@Stephen
@All
The following has just been distributed by email to numerous House offices and banks, credit unions, etc.:
Friends
Below is a message from Republicans Overseas (RO) Worldwide President Michael DeSombre with a letter from RO to Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy urging the House to drop Sec. 603 of the Senate-passed version of H.R. 1295, the “Trade Preferences Extension Act.” Sec. 603, if enacted, would zero out the current $10 threshold for reporting account information to the IRS – thus requiring reports of assetss that produce no or de minimis income.
As detailed below, Sec. 603 presents fatal flaws from a constitutional point of view. Of particular note:
[R]equiring all Americans to disclose all of their financial assets to the IRS could be very beneficial to catching tax evasion — just like allowing the warrantless search of everyone’s home could be very beneficial to catching other criminals. But that is not how America works and is not consistent with the protections of the Constitution.
Please add your voice! Contact the House Leadership and your Representative NOW and insist that this costly, burdensome, invasive, un-American, and unconstitutional provision not reach the House Floor! Please re-post and distribute this message widely. (NOTE to House offices on this email distribution: please forward internally to Leadership.)
The RO letter is available at this link: https://www.facebook.com/republicansoverseas/posts/391049337745534 . The text follows, below Mr. DeSombre’s cover message.
Jim Jatras
Editor, http://www.RepealFATCA.com
202 375-1005
More on this topic:
From http://www.RepealFATCA.com at RepealFATCA.com Alert! Stop ‘Backdoor’ Authority for FATCA and OECD Reciprocity!
From Accounting Today at Banks Concerned about Interest-Reporting Change
++++++++++++++++++++
My fellow Republicans,
The House of Representatives will shortly be considering the Trade Preferences Extension Act which was passed in the Senate. Buried in Section 603 of H.R. 1295 is Section 603, inserted only days before passage in the Senate, is a provision that provides for the NSA-style sweeping up of all financial information of all citizens and US residents and sets the stage for it to be shared with all countries around the world. Set forth below and attached is a letter we at Republicans Overseas have written to the Republican Leadership of the House urging them to remove Section 603 before passing the Act. Please pass this message along and publicize this issue as widely as possible. Otherwise there will no longer be any privacy of financial information and your most private information will be at risk of intentional disclosure by not only the IRS but by foreign governments around the world.
Regards,
Michael DeSombre
Worldwide President
Republicans Overseas
++++++++++++++
Text of the Republicans Overseas letter follows (see also at https://www.facebook.com/republicansoverseas/posts/391049337745534 ):
Republicans Overseas, Inc.
June 9, 2015
Speaker John Boehner
Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy
House of Representatives
Re: Section 603 of Senate-passed Version of H.R. 1295 (“Trade Preferences Extension Act”)
Dear Speaker Boehner and Majority Leader McCarthy,
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 [emphasis added].”
Even more dangerously, it would do so by what appears to be a new statutory 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.”
This grant of authority to the Treasury Department and the IRS is not necessary for enforcement
of income tax, infringes the privacy of all Americans in their financial information and opens up
the door to the provision of all financial information of Americans to overseas governments
under the reciprocal provisions of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (“FATCA”) as well
as the OECD Transparency Initiative in discussion among the United States and other members
of the OECD.
1. Section 603 Not Necessary
The grant of authority to provide for the mass-collection of information on all financial accounts
of all Americans is not necessary because income from such accounts is already required to be
provided by all banks and brokerages in 1099s and related forms. The Senate version of Section
603 specifically requires reports on non-interest bearing accounts to be reported which will
therefore provide for the unnecessary collection of private financial information that has no
relation to the income tax requirements managed by the Treasury Department and the IRS.
2. Section 603 is an Unconstitutional Invasion of Privacy
The goal of locating and prosecute tax evaders is a very important goal and is a goal we at
Republicans Overseas completely agree with. All citizens should pay all taxes which they owe.
As the United States does not have a wealth tax, however, requiring reporting of all financial
information is an unconstitutional invasion of citizen’s privacy because there is no justifiable
government interest in the detailed financial asset levels of American citizens absent probable
cause of tax evasion. Clearly, however, requiring all Americans to disclose all of their financial
assets to the IRS could be very beneficial to catching tax evasion- just like allowing the
warrantless search of everyone’s home could be very beneficial to catching other criminals. But
that is not how America works and is not consistent with the protections of the Constitution.
3. Section 603 Provides the Route for Sharing of American Citizen’s Private Financial
Information with Foreign Governments
Most of the Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) entered into to implement FATCA provide for
reciprocal sharing of financial information between the United States and the foreign country
(including China) with which the IGA has been entered into. Under FATCA, private financial
information of Americans residing (or maintaining accounts) outside of America will be
provided by the foreign government or the financial institutions to the IRS. The IGAs generally
provide that the Treasury will also provide reciprocal information to the foreign governments on
residents in the United States that have ties to the various foreign countries (including dual
citizens and residents). As a result, the gathering of the additional financial information on all
US citizens and residents under Section 603 will then trigger the requirement under FATCA and
IGAs to provide this private financial information to all relevant foreign governments (including
where relevant, China). In addition, the OECD is in the process of developing a global
transparency initiative which will further formalize wide-spread sharing of private financial
information amongst the OECD. Thus, not only will Section 603 result in the Treasury
Department and IRS being provided with the private, confidential financial information on all
Americans and residents it will also result in that information being shared with foreign
governments all around the world. All Americans and residents will thus be at risk of the
intentional and accidental disclosure of their most private information by the IRS as well as the
governments of countries not friendly to the United States.
We urge you to ensure that the Senate-passed language of H.R. 1295 is not passed under
suspension; that Sec. 603 is removed from any relevant bills before Floor consideration; and that
the House insist on dropping Sec. 603 in conference.
Respectfully Submitted,
REPUBLICANS OVERSEAS, INC.
Ach! ( german for “groan”)- it is just a constant battle. How much does one have to be on one`s toes constantly looking for abominations? Freedom is a never-ending battle.
@Polly, ” Freedom is a never-ending battle.”
Polly the expats of today and this includes expat accidentals, are echoing the sentiment of the Founding Fathers of the 13 Colonies.
The spirit of the 13 Colonies has not been lost, it simply left……..
@George
Ach!
@All:
Great article on the TPP from Canada Free Press:
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/72705?utm_source=CFP+Mailout&utm_campaign=b08035c5af-5_20_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_d8f503f036-b08035c5af-291118989