FATCA and the EU
April 2019
July 2018
06: EU Lawmakers Vote to Kick-Start FATCA Talks With United States
05: Independence Day attempt in European Parliament–the Empire lives well
July 2017
11: Refreshing: @SophieintVeld calls EU answer to plight of #AccidentalAmericans “bullshit”
September 2016
30: #FATCA Came Last to EU, but Mandatory Fingerprinting was First
August 2015
31: Parliamentary Question: Legality of intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) on FATCA
January 2015
10: EU Residents/Citizens: This is For You
September 2014
13: US seeks additional Customs Pre-Clearance locations in the EU
August 2013
24: European Parliament opposes exchanging bank data with the US
June 2013
May 2013
31: Public Hearing on FATCA at the European Parliament in Brussels
23: EU Parliament Hearing on FATCA May 28th
April 2013
04: MEP Sophia In’t Veld discusses FATCA in EU Parliament
March 2013
25: Question and Answer on FATCA in the European Parliament
February 2013
26: EU Tax Chief Urges U.S. Support for Transactions Levy @BloombergNews
April 2012
19: US bullies the EU into sharing passenger data
March 2012
10: Two prominent members of European Parliament raise concern over FATCA five agreement
February 2012
16: Are China, Russia, the EU and Switzerland poised to give in to FATCA?
January 2012
King of the Road. Your CLN must be the same as V.A.’s loss of nationality letter. It seems you don’t have a problem.
For our affected Greek audience…
http://greece.greekreporter.com/2017/01/19/greece-u-s-sign-deal-on-tax-compliance-and-foreign-bank-accounts/
Coincidentally, the intergovernmental agreement was signed on the 19th January whilst Trump was inaugurated the following day.
There are many US-born Greeks living in Greece as well as across the European Union. Heaven help them all…
European Parliament votes to end visa-free travel for Americans
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/europe-visa-free-travel-americans-european-parliament-vote-a7609406.html#commentsDiv
I’m quite surprised by this outcome…
A couple of months ago, MEP Sophie in ‘t Veld submitted written questions to the Commission concerning the Mortgage Credit Directive, one of which relates to FATCA:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?pubRef=-%2f%2fEP%2f%2fTEXT%2bWQ%2bE-2017-000222%2b0%2bDOC%2bXML%2bV0%2f%2fEN&language=EN
An interesting development…
Apologies if this has already been posted, I found the link and description at the American Expatriates facebook site, posted by Keith Redmond https://www.facebook.com/groups/AmericanExpatriates/permalink/754026314763443/:
Petition No 1088/2016 by Mr J.R. (French) on the US’ Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act’s (FATCA) alleged infringement of EU rights and the extraterritorial effects of US laws in the EU
Petition treated as confidential 145 Supporters – Status: Available to supporters
Petition data
Summary title: Petition No 1088/2016 by Mr J.R. (French) on the US’ Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act’s (FATCA) alleged infringement of EU rights and the extraterritorial effects of US laws in the EU
Petition number: 1088/2016
Topics: Taxation
Country: European Union
Name of association: Collective of European citizens who are either “accidental Americans” or dual European / US citizens
Petitioner data
Name: J. R.
https://petiport.secure.europarl.europa.eu/petitions/en/petition/content/1088%252F2016/html/Petition%2Bre.%2B%2528i%2529%2Bthe%2Binfringement%2Bof%2BEU%2Brights%2Bfrom%2BFATCA%2Band%2B%2528ii%2529%2Bthe%2Bextraterritorial%2Beffect%2Bof%2BUS%2Blaws%2Binside%2Bthe%2BEU
@badger
It is rather depressing to see such lack of support from the European Union for European citizens affected by the devastating effects of extraterritorial tax policies imposed by the States. The petitioning Frenchman has not been detected on my radar, which implies that actions are being taken in unnoticeable and fragmentary ways. I recently read the following article with regard to the determined support received by expatriate EU and British citizens across Europe who have been affected by the Brexit referendum:
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/mar/17/eu-brexit-negotiator-to-meet-campaigners-on-citizens-rights
Anyone reading it would sense immediately the urgency of the matter felt by Brussels. I just wished the same level of support had been shown for the plight of affected Europeans. We need more than just a couple of MEPs (e.g. in ‘t Veld) to secure those deprived financial rights.
By the way, it would be interesting to know whether the number of Europeans affected by CBT-Fatca-Fbar outnumber those affected by Brexit. If so, that foolish Commission would need to explain this to all affected European taxpayers paying their foolish wages…
Interesting tidbit;
“.We understand the European Union is sending a delegation to Washington to discuss the reciprocity inherent in the IGAs…..”
from;
‘FBAR/FATCA Task Force Report’
posted by DA News |
March 28, 2017
http://www.democratsabroad.org/fbar_fatca_task_force_report
I’d like to know how they know, and what happens to the EU delegation. Who is part of the delegation? Maybe there is something in the EU Parliament minutes about this?
‘Fact Finding’ U.S. Visit
The European Parliament’s Panama Papers investigative committee will visit the U.S. March 21-24 for what has been described as a fact-finding mission.
The delegation will meet with counterparts in the U.S. Congress as well as with representatives of the U.S. Department of Treasury, the Internal Revenue Service and various think tanks and organizations.
According to a committee document seen by Bloomberg BNA, the purpose of the visit is “to discuss with interlocutors the state of play and future perspectives for transatlantic cooperation in the fight against money laundering, tax evasion and tax avoidance at international, OECD and G-7/G-20 level, and both tax and beneficial ownership transparency at U.S. State level.” …….
….”FATCA Complaints
Another issue highlighted in the report is the one-sided nature of the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, as EU governments must provide the U.S. with tax and income data about U.S. citizens living within their territory, but that reporting isn’t reciprocated with information about EU citizens living in the U.S.
Since the European Parliament panel began investigating the Panama Papers nearly a year ago, the FATCA issue has consistently been raised in hearings, the most recent of which took place March 6.
“The fact is that money laundering takes place when money is transferred from shell companies in tax havens via countries such as Switzerland and then onto to the U.S.,” Giuseppe Marino, a professor at Bocconi University in Milan, said at a March 6 hearing on the role Swiss lawyers and banks played in setting up and facilitating shell companies revealed by the Panama Papers. “The one-sided nature of FATCA is clearly a problem.” …..”
U.S. Emerging as ‘Leading’ Tax, Secrecy Haven, EU Report Says
REQUEST A TRIAL
https://www.bna.com/us-emerging-leading-n57982084891/
Here is the EU report
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_IDA(2017)598602
@badger: I’m not sure where BNA is seeing this:
Unfortunately the actual report appears to totally miss the issue of CBT. It does not contain the words “citizen” or “one-sided” at all, claims that “US taxpayers holding accounts abroad are required to fill out the Form 8938 and attach it to their income tax returns”, and discusses tax treaties without mentioning the unique U.S. saving clause. The words “citizen” and “one-sided” don’t appear in the report at all.
I was hopeful, but unfortunately BNA appears to have mischaracterised the EU report, which itself never uses the word “citizen”, fails to mention the existence of the saving clause when discussing tax treaties
@Eric, do they not understand, or are they downplaying it by omission?
Either way if the EU report http://www.europarl.europa.eu/thinktank/en/document.html?reference=EPRS_IDA(2017)598602 was produced to inform the delegation that is going to Washington in part to discuss FATCA, then they won’t understand the true nature of US extraterritorial taxation and the magnitude of the problem the US has created without understanding US citizenship transmission laws, USextraterritorial citizenship-based taxation=fictive ‘residency’, etc.. How can the EU delegation represent and defend the best interests of their EU citizens AND residents if they don’t understand the complexities and threats represented by US exceptionalism as applied extraterritorially?
And in a related note about inadequate briefing materials on FATCA being produced for the consumption of our non-US political representatives, I note this recent FATCA IGA update produced by The Library of Parliament HillNotes blog for Canadian politicians, which says that;
“The HillNotes blog provides research analysis and a collection of authoritative documents, on current events of significant interest to Parliament and emerging issues that will be significant to Parliament in the future.”
‘Update – The Canada–U.S. Intergovernmental Agreement and Sharing Financial Information’
admin / March 1, 2017
Authors: Raphaëlle Deraspe and Adriane Yong, Library of Parliament
https://hillnotes.wordpress.com/2017/03/01/update-the-canada-u-s-intergovernmental-agreement-and-sharing-financial-information/
I think their summation sins by omission, and misleads in its description of the lawsuit:
See the section;
‘Court challenge to the intergovernmental agreement’:
“On 11 August 2014, Virginia Hillis and Gwendolyn Louise Deegan filed a lawsuit against the Attorney General of Canada. They were born in the United States and have resided in Canada since the age of five.
They claimed that the intergovernmental agreement and the amendments to the Income Tax Act are unconstitutional because the federal government lacks jurisdiction under the Constitution Act, 1867 to enact these measures. Moreover, they believed that the intergovernmental agreement and the Income Tax Act amendments breach several sections of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The federal government argued that the disclosure of information to the Internal Revenue Agency is consistent with the Canada–U.S. tax treaty.
In September 2015, the Federal Court of Canada dismissed the lawsuit and refused to grant an injunction that would have prevented the Canada Revenue Agency from disclosing account information to the Internal Revenue Agency. However, the court said that the plaintiffs could pursue a constitutional challenge in relation to the intergovernmental agreement; so far, they have not done so.”
Commenters JC Double Taxed and John Boston tried to correct the above in posted comments on the Library of Parliament webpage;
“JC Double Taxed
March 2, 2017 at 1:09 am
There is a major error in this report here in regards to the ADCS lawsuit against the Canadian FATCA IGA:
“However, the court said that the plaintiffs could pursue a constitutional challenge in relation to the intergovernmental agreement; so far, they have not done so.”
Not true: ADCS Constitutional Challenge to FATCA IGA fully funded and proceeding.
Also, there is a severe omission in regards to FATCA in the U.S.:
* Repeal of FATCA is in the Republican Party Platform.
* The Republicans now control the Executive Branch and both houses of Congress.
* Trump said that he was out to repeal many Obama Executive Orders. The Authority of FATCA IGA is by Executive Order. Trump may cancel the order with one year notice.
* Republicans Overseas claims that the FATCA IGA are unconstitutional on 7 claims. One of these claims is that the IGA are international treaties and as such are required to be submitted to the U.S. Senate for review and approval. This has not been done.
* An impact of FATCA is financial institution discrimination against local citizens who may be considered US persons.
These are all important factors in the future of FATCA.
John Boston
March 3, 2017 at 3:40 pm
There is a significant error in this article.
“However, the court said that the plaintiffs could pursue a constitutional challenge in relation to the intergovernmental agreement; so far, they have not done so.”
This is not true. The ADCS Constitutional challenge to the Canadian FATCA IGA is fully funded and proceeding.
Also, the article does not state that FATCA is on shaky ground in the U.S. Repeal of FATCA is in the Republican Party platform.”
But of course the Library of Parliament ‘research’ is what our ‘representatives’ will rely on and dig no further.
@badger
Not much of a think tank, is it? I get the impression that they are clueless about extraterritorial taxation. The EU report states the following:
“Unlike virtually all of the other developed countries in the world, the USA has not signed up to the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard.”
Why is this?…
Fortunately, several national parliaments across Europe have caught on and have been investigating American extraterritorial taxation in their parliamentary committees (I believe in the Netherlands, Italy and France). Where it goes from here is the question…
@Eric
“Unfortunately the actual report appears to totally miss the issue of CBT. It does not contain the words “citizen” or “one-sided” at all…”
Precisely, as taxation has nothing to do with citizenship (under normal circumstances).
@Duality, collectively we have been following this and exploring and discussing it for 6 or more years now – en masse, we are the real experts.
But as we see, since we are never consulted and rarely published – never in peer-reviewed journals and rarely in the mainstream media, and never properly represented, we have no voice and our collectively amassed wisdom and information and analysis is not usually reflected in reports or even referred to.
We’re not paid agents of a government, or tax academics, or thinktanks or lobbyists or political parties or representatives of expats planning to one day return to the ‘motherland’.
The most affected, the least consulted.
@Eric:
Yes, BNA seem to have got it wrong. Europe surely wants information about EU residents who are hiding money in the US tax havens – the kind of information that could help identify money-laundering or tax evasion.
See the UK IGA, Article 2(b)(1):
“b) In the case of the United States, with respect to each United Kingdom Reportable Account of each Reporting U.S. Financial Institution [the information to be reported is]
:
(1) the name, address, and date of birth of any person that is a resident of the United Kingdom and is an Account Holder of the account;”
https://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/treaties/Documents/FATCA-Agreement-UK-9-12-2012.pdf
Information on accounts held by EU citizens living in the US would be of no interest, since an EU citizen living in the US is not required or expected to report it to the EU MS of which s/he is a citizen.
Worth pointing this out to BNA, perhaps?
BNA interview with Werner Langen (PANA Chair) on what the mission gleaned from its US visit:
https://www.bna.com/eu-panama-papers-n57982085759/
Interesting comment in this report on the EU delegation trip to the US re FATCA and other tax/information reporting/’transparency’ issues;
“…On FATCA, reciprocity is not going to be a winning argument with this administration. In my opinion if FATCA was reopened at this stage to include the extra elements of the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), it would result in the repeal of FATCA.”…”
The quote above appears to be coming from Elise Bean;
“Elise Bean, former chief counsel of the US Senate’s Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, in Washington on March 21 as part of the committee’s fact-finding mission to the US. Bean, now a member of the Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation, previously visited Brussels to address the PANA committee in October last year.”
from;
’30 Mar PANA committee meets Elise Bean in Washington’
http://guengl-panamapapers.eu/pana-committee-meets-with-elise-bean-in-washington/
@badger
“The most affected, the least consulted.”
As mentioned previously, I would really like to know how many people are affected by Fatca across Europe. At the moment, prominent figures in the European Union are impassionate about fighting to protect the rights of about 4,5 million British and European citizens affected by Brexit. With Fatca, only one MEP (at least to my knowledge) had the courage to say something about it. There has been no impassionate fight to protect people from discrimination, double taxation as well as unlawful information exchange.
If we assume 0,5 percent of EU nationals are affected in some way by Fatca, then:
743,1 million x 0,5% = 3,7 million
This may be hypothetical, but it is safe to say that many Europeans have had some connection with the United States, be it in the past or at present.
Barnier, Moscovici, Junker and Tusk ought to take action in favour of affected Europeans (especially from Moscovici). But so far, nothing…
Duality: being in the EU I feel very lonely. I know a few Democrats who are compliant, and say it’s a pain in the … but who don’t seem to be outraged.
I’ve very actively discouraged a local family from falling into the IRS nightmare, especially since they all have non-US birthplaces. And I met the wife of a private banker, born in the US, who renounced early (ah, that good private banking advice…)
I dream of an EU Isaac Brock Society. I’d love to vent publicly, though am a bit wary of “coming out”. I’ve even considered organizing a meeting in Brussels just to see who’d show up. I know there are tons of anxious people out there who just need some non-condor advice urgently. Meanwhile I regularly induce generalized family yawning over dinner when I bring the subject up again.
@Fred (B)
“I’ve even considered organizing a meeting in Brussels just to see who’d show up.”
If we are to meet with EU government officials, count me in.
Michel Barnier has met (and will carry on meeting) with both British and European ex-patriots to discuss their concerns about their rights post-Brexit. Perhaps Moscovici, Barnier, Verhofstadt and in’t Veld could meet with affected Europeans to discuss their ongoing drama with Fatca? To discuss how freedom of movement no longer exists if one is discriminated and therefore unable to open a bank account in another Member State, limiting one’s career progression? Such a meeting is long overdue, but who would listen?
@Duality, re;
“…This may be hypothetical, but it is safe to say that many Europeans have had some connection with the United States, be it in the past or at present.”
And are suffering or will suffer for it if they can’t easily hide/shed those connections – ex. US birthplace. As well as those who might have been sent to the US for work, or gone there to study – leaving their longstanding local EU accounts behind – then magically being transformed into fodder for the FBAR’nFATCA-fundraiser dreamt up by the IRS to turn pre-existing local banking into a crime before the fact and generate revenues via potential penalties that far exceed what they could not actually assess in US taxes. And then there will be those children born on US soil inheriting the US taxable birth-day present that will keep on giving – sucking away at their education savings and then their retirement savings – all those ‘foreign trusts’ don’t you know…
We should not be forgetting that the US FBAR burden fell heavily on those inside the US who came there with pre-existing assets and then found out about US exceptionalism the hard way – being penalized for the ‘crime’ of having legally saved their locally generated assets and left them in their home country of origin.
We should not forget the stories of ij http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/09/16/a-minnow-opts-out-of-the-irss-ovdi-and-gets-the-correct-result-a-simple-warning-letter/ http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.ca/2012/09/a-great-opt-out-result-irs-gets-good.html or Moby https://isaacbrocksociety.wordpress.com/2012/01/25/a-minnow-offshore-voluntary-disclosure-program-ovdp-opt-out-success/ and others.
May have some significance re FATCA IGA by EU countries?
“12 apr 17
Commission discloses first batch of documents on EU-US Umbrella Agreement negotiations
Upon request of Sophie in ‘t Veld, the European Commission has disclosed a first batch of documents concerning the negotiations between the EU and US regarding the protection of personal data when transferred for the purpose law enforcement and the fight against terrorism (the “Umbrella Agreement”). The Commission only partially disclosed the requested documents. Please find here the explanation of the Commission regarding this (partial) disclosure, and the list of documents concerned.”
http://www.sophieintveld.eu/commission-discloses-first-batch-of-documents-on-eu-us-umbrella-agreement-negotiations/
and,
“06 apr 17
EU-US Privacy Shield: Let’s make privacy great again
The European Parliament has today approved a resolution expressing concerns about the legal shortcomings in the Privacy Shield scheme, the framework for exchanges of personal data for commercial purposes between the EU and the US. The ALDE Group is particularly worried about the legal status of the safeguards offered by the US, especially under the Trump administration. The European Commission must examine the compliance of the Privacy Shield scheme with the new data protection regulation and the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights.
Sophie in ‘t Veld, ALDE first vice-president and spokesperson for data protection, said:
“ In September, the European Commission must undertake the first annual review of Privacy Shield. The Commission should use this opportunity to conduct an in-depth examination of all the weaknesses of the framework, as pointed out by this parliament, the Article 29 Working Party, the European Data Protection Supervisor and the stakeholders”.
“In order to ensure legal certainty to the almost 2000 companies that are registered in Privacy Shield, the Commission must ensure this framework is legally sound. If our concerns are not solved, we could again see this framework being challenged in Court, as happened with Safe Harbor”.
“We need clarification regarding the legal status of the written assurances provided by the US, which were made under the Obama administration. If the safeguards proposed by the US under the Obama administration were already doubtful, with Trump those commitments could be in danger. His latest measures, including the executive order on public safety in the Interior of the United States, could have a terrible impact on EU citizens, whose data is supposed to be protected under the Privacy shield scheme”.
“The US has only appointed one out of the five members due to compose the oversight board tasked with ensuring the personal data of EU citizens is not abused”.
“The EU has developed very strong safeguards to protect European’s data and privacy. We must ensure these standards are not put at risk”.
“Let’s make privacy great again””
http://www.sophieintveld.eu/eu-us-privacy-shield-lets-make-privacy-great-again/
@badger
“May have some significance re FATCA IGA by EU countries?”
Technically yes, but without the support of those Euromuppets (that is, EU Commissioners) like Pierre Moscovici and Valdis Dombrovskis, those FATCA IGAs would need to be challenged at the European Court of Justice.
@Duality, this is an older important FATCA comment/opinion letter – from within the EU, which raised data protection, and other rights issues, power imbalances between individuals and FFIs, unwarranted bulk transfer of personal and financial data, etc. – as they may conflict with EU law and protections – regardless of whether individual nations implement FATCA, though perhaps as you suggest, the “…FATCA IGAs would
need to be challenged at the European Court of Justice.” for recourse;
ex.
“…careful assessment of how FATCA’s goals balance with
that of the EU’s fundamental right enshrined in Article 8
of the Charter of Fundamental Rights – the right to a private and family
life, i.e. by demonstrating necessity by proving that the required data are the minimum
necessary in relation to the purpose. A bulk transfer and the screening of all
these data is not the best way to achieve such a goal. Therefore more
selective, less broad measures should be considered in order to respect the
privacy of law-abiding citizens, particularly; an examination of alternative, less
privacy-intrusive means must to be carried out to demonstrate FATCA’s
necessity….”……
from;
ARTICLE 29 Data Protection Working Party
This Working Party was set up under Article 29 of Direct
ive 95/46/EC. It is an independent European advisory body on data
protection and privacy. Its tasks are described in Article 30 of
Directive 95/46/EC and Article 15 of Directive 2002/58/EC.
The secretariat is provided by Directorate C (Fundamental
Rights and Union Citizenship)
of the European Commission,
Directorate General Justice, B-1049 Bru
ssels, Belgium, Office No MO59 2/13.
Website:
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/policies/privacy/index_en.htm
Brussels,
Just.c.3(2012)866296
Ref. Ares(2012)746461 – 21/06/2012
to:
Mr Heinz Zourek
Director General of Taxation and
Customs Union
European Commission
B-1049 Brussels
source link for above document quote is
http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/article-29/documentation/other-document/files/2012/20120621_letter_to_taxud_fatca_en.pdf
The declaration, by Sophie in ‘t Veld Dutch politician and Member of the European Parliament, that the European Commission’s response to impacts of FATCA is “bullshit” is at 16.58
https://twitter.com/CrossBriton/status/885108725807288320
“International relations every single time take precedent over rights of citizens.”
“Supposed to protect interests of European Citizens”