The Isaac Brock Society

It is good to see that the mainstream press is covering the FBAR / VDP issues surrounding foreign retirement accounts:

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/04/06/your-money/rules-aimed-at-tax-evasion-abroad-trip-up-average-americans.html

However, there is some misinformation, such as: “Americans who spend their entire career working abroad will probably not be eligible for much, if anything, from Social Security since they cannot contribute to it while working abroad.” This is not true if the country in question has a Social Security totalization agreement with the US. In such cases, it would be possible to draw Social Security benefits later in the US based upon what was paid in social security to the foreign country.

It does not appear to me that such foreign social security contributions are deductible under the Foreign Tax Credit. I believe that US Social Security contributions are (another form of discrimination). Mrs Serrato from ACA is quoted in the article as saying the same thing: “many wealth, social and value-added taxes in Europe were not eligible for credits or deductions on American taxes. ‘They could be a significant part of your foreign tax bill, but you can’t apply them to your U.S. taxes, so you just pay them,’ she said.” Yeah, right, just pay them… and give up the new refridgerator you need and cancel your vacation and your kid’s college.

What is lacking in the article is the extreme sense of outrage that many of us who are middle class and living abroad are feeling.

Please SWAT (Speical Writers and Theses) this article with comments. Thanks to Joe Smith for finding the comments page: http://bucks.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/04/05/financial-lessons-for-american-expatriates/?comments#comments.

There are already numerous comments and it seems that people that are commenting really understand the issues… and I haven’t seen any hostile trolls there yet!

Also, I mentionned the article in this Maple thread: http://maplesandbox.ca/2013/aca-blasts-fatca/#comment-6097

Enough signatures have been collected for an initiative to force a vote to ensure that the Swiss National Bank:
1. Stops selling gold reserves.
2. Keeps 20% of its assets in gold (currently 10%).
3. Repatriates gold held abroad (including in the US).

Swissinfo Article in English

Gold Initiative Website (German)

The Swiss People’s Party (UDC/SVP), the Christian Democrats (PDC), and the Liberal-Radical Party (PLR) are in the process of writing an initiative to anchor bank secrecy in the Constitution, with some exceptions for criminal investigations.

RTS Article in French

RTS News Article

Translation from the French: Continue reading →

I am flabergasted that the only official Swiss government press release that I seem to be able to find on the FATCA IGA contains only and merely the same sort of general summary of the agreement that we saw in the announcement last summer about impending negotiations and the December announcement about pending signature.

[Addendum: As it turns out, while the press release did not give links to the agreement in its text, there was a link in the righthand column to a French translation of the agreement: http://www.news.admin.ch/NSBSubscriber/message/attachments/29631.pdf as well as a link to documents related to the parliamentary consulation on the agreement, which I had clicked on the other day but didn't see anything related to FATCA--you have to scroll down several pages or CTRL-F and search for FATCA: http://www.admin.ch/ch/f/gg/pc/pendent.html I will be creating another post today on the response I received from the Swiss State Secretariat for International Financial Matters].

Almost a month later, the Swiss people are being kept in the dark. I wrote the Swiss federal government spokesman that issues the press releases today on this matter:

Bonjour Monsieur Tuor,

Je trouve aberrant que votre annonce sur admin.ch (http://www.admin.ch/aktuell/00089/index.html?lang=fr&msg-id=47779) à propos de FATCA ne donne ni référence au texte de l’accord, ni au texte du règlement d’application FATCA, à savoir :

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/treaties/Documents/FATCA-Agreement-Switzerland-2-14-2013.pdf

https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/01/28/2013-01025/regulations-relating-to-information-reporting-by-foreign-financial-institutions-and-withholding-on

Les implications de FATCA en termes de son complexité ainsi que les menaces posées par son application méritent une analyse approfondie par le peuple suisse et ses élus au parlement.

Il n’est également pas évident si le parlement va débattre l’accord pendant la session de mars 2013, ou plus tard. Auriez-vous des informations à ce propos ?

Aussi, comment est-ce que le conseil fédéral puisse signer un tel accord sans referendum obligatoire (Art 140a,b, 141a CFS) accompagné des modifications constitutionnelles nécessaires, vu que FATCA est incompatible avec des multiples protections garanties par la Constitution, comme par exemple : liberté d’opportunité économique, anti-discrimination, droit de famille ? Sans mentionner la loi réglant la question de nationalité dominante (RS291 Art 23). Si l’accord FATCA est approuvé, le résultat est l’adhésion à une communauté supranationale parce que le principe juridique américain en matière de taxation « Last in Time Rule » permet les autorités américains de changer les règles de jeu quand ils veulent, malgré des traités, conventions et accords. Et alors, le conseil fédéral n’agit pas en bonne foi et ne veut pas protéger les suisses contre l’arbitraire (Art 9 CFS).

Une acceptation d’une loi extraterritoriale étrangère comme FATCA est une claire violation du mandat constitutionnel « La Confédération suisse protège la liberté et les droits du peuple et elle assure L’indépendance et la sécurité du pays. » (Art 2 Al 1 CFS).

Et tout ça à l’insu du souverain peuple suisse !

Je demande des explications !

Salutations,
Jefferson D. Tomas

All Brockers who can speak and/or write in French, German, or Italian, please SWAT this guy (Special Writers and Theses): +41 31 322 46 16, mario.tuor@sif.admin.ch.

I can’t find the thread here where we discussed this during the bumpy ride last week as Petros jacked up the IBS bus and redid the wheels, but according to Allison Christians blog it seems that Victoria has, after initial refusal by the OECD to the ACA, gotten the go-ahead to attend OECD meeting “on behalf of ACA and all the people I know who are keenly interested in this topic. I plan on taking lots and lots of notes” http://taxpol.blogspot.ch/2013/02/oecd-public-briefing-not-really-public.html I understand that she will be attending today, the 12th.

For those of you who do not know Victoria, here is her own blog: http://thefranco-americanflophouse.blogspot.ca

Bon Courage Victoria!!!

I would suggest that we SWAT flood this CNN Article with comments about the various taxes USPs abroad face. Perhaps we can stress double taxation due to non FEIE on welfare, unemployment, disability, retirement benefits.

…some of the working poor face marginal tax rates “approaching 90% as they lose benefits attempting to better themselves.”

Readers were incredulous, asking how it could be that in a nation with a top federal income tax rate of 39.6% on individuals making more than $400,000 a year, anyone could face a 90% rate.

It is true. Marginal tax rates, especially for those below the top rate brackets, are chaotic, confusing, and all over the map.

As a result, some of the working poor face extremely high rates on their next dollar earned.