FATCA Discussion Thread (Ask your questions) Part Two
Please ask your questions here about FATCA.
Participants will need to provide their e-mail address (real or fake) and an alias. The only written rule is that participants must use a same alias each time they post (and not “anonymous” or derivatives thereof).
Bear in mind that any responses that you get from participants is peer-to-peer help, and it is not intended as a replacement for professional advice. Also, the Isaac Brock Society provides this disclaimer: neither the Society nor any of its members are professionals. We offer our advice here only in friendship and we recommend that our readers seek professional advice if they need it.
If you wish to receive an e-mail notification of comments, check the box to that effect when making your first comment.
NB: This discussion is a continuation of an older discussion that became too large for our software to handle well. See FATCA Discussion Thread (Ask your questions) for earlier discussion.
@Innocente
Thanks for your link about the Swiss Parliament here..http://bit.ly/XwGjyZ
Very interesting.
@innocent, thanks for explaining that to us – particularly the grounds for the opposition to a FATCA IGA in Switzerland, and also the issue of ‘dynamic changes’. http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/2012/01/13/ask-your-questions-about-fatca-discussion-thread/comment-page-41/#comment-183636
That is another very important point for all of us to include in contact with our politicians – that the terms of the IGA are whatever the US say they are – a moving target, unilateral, and subject to the priorities of US domestic interest.
I see that Prof. Christians has been working towards more analysis of the ‘dubious legal pedigree of FATCA’ “I argue that the IGAs have a dubious legal pedigree because they are not treaties, not congressionally-authorized executive agreements, and not interpretations of existing agreements; therefore they are sole executive agreements–entered into by the executive branch with no authorization or oversight from Congress. This puts them on very shaky ground in terms of the constitutional process for binding the US internationally”….
See http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2013/02/the-dubious-legal-pedigree-of-fatca.html
How can we get some Canadian legal and constitutional and foreign policy experts to take this up?
13-02-12 FATCA, Stanley Fischer: Request for clarifications by Bank HaPoalim regarding its lawless conduct
Stanley Fischer, Governor of the Bank of Israel, permits Israeli banks to enact, adjudicate, and enforce the law under the color of FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act). Effectively, Fischer established Israel as a lawless US corporate province.
[pics]
Bank HaPoalim’s Chief Internal Auditor Jacob Orbach;Stanley Fischer, Governor of Bank of Israel, showing off his newly acquired Israeli ID in 2005. Petition in the Israeli High Court of Justice alleged that Stanley Fischer exchanged his loyalty to the State of Israel and its laws with loyalty to another nation and its laws and/or loyalty to financial institutions and their interests. FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) is a US law, which fancies to subject any bank, worldwide, to the US government, force banks the to report any financial transactions by any “US Person”, and serve as the US government’s tax collector under threat of serious sanctions.
Jerusalem, February 12 – in a letter to Bank HaPoalim’s Chief Internal Auditor Jacob Orbach, Joseph Zernik, PhD, a Human Rights activist/computer science writer, asks Mr Orbach to provide clarifications regarding the status of Dr Zernik’s bank accounts today.
On or about January 1, 2012, Dr Zernik’s bank accounts with Bank HaPoalim, BM, were frozen. On or about January 31, 2013, his banks accounts were unfrozen, after a meeting with the German Consul in Israel to request protection against abuse of the Human Rights of a Human Rights activist/computer science writer in Jerusalem.
A recent letter from Bank of Israel-Banking Regulation, on behalf of Governor Stanley Fischer, makes it clear: first – that conduct of Bank HaPoalim, BM, in Dr Zernik’s case had no basis in the law of the State of Israel, and second – that Bank of Israel-Banking Regulation had no intention of according Dr Zernik equal protection under the law of the State of Israel. [[1]]
A recent opinion letter by Attorney James Jatras, of the Washington, DC, law firm Squire Sanders, LLP, makes it clear that conduct of Bank HaPoalim, BM, in Dr Zernik’s case had no basis in the law of the United States, either. [[2]]
Correspondence with Mr Orbach’s office makes it clear that the FATCA-related “New Policy” of Bank HaPoalim, which was purported as the basis for the Bank’s conduct, is a non-existing document. Moreover, to this date, Bank HaPoalim refuses to issue any written record, documenting the freezing, or unfreezing of Dr Zernik’s accounts. [[3,4]]
Therefore, given the arbitrary and capricious nature of the Bank’s conduct, Dr Zernik wrote to request further explanation by Mr Orbach, regarding the status of Dr Zernik’s accounts with Bank HaPoalim, BM, today.
The questions raised by Dr Zernik were:
1) Was the restoration of access to his own funds in Bank HaPoalim’s accounts temporary or permanent? If temporary, under what circumstances would the Bank decide to freeze his accounts again?
2) Dr Zernik permitted, like other citizens and residents of the State of Israel to buy and sell securities, or is he barred by Bank HaPoalim from executing such transactions in his accounts, as he had been previously advised by the Private Banking clerk?
3) On January 14, 2013, Dr Zernik completed his duties, pursuant to the law of the United States, to renounce my US citizenship. On the same date, he provided the relevant documents to Bank HaPoalim’s Branch, Kikar Zion, Jerusalem, and asked to open a non-“US Person” account, alternatively, to remove the “US Person” designation from his existing accounts. Bank HaPoalim refused to do either. Based on what standards would the Bank remove the “US Person” designation from Dr Zernik’s accounts? Or is the “US Person” designation permanent and non-removable, according to Bank HaPoalim?
The letter notes that the questions pertain to Dr Zernik’s fundamental Human Rights for possession and for protection against taking of his possessions with no due process of law. Likewise, these questions directly pertain to integrity, or lack thereof, in Bank HaPoalim’s operations.
Copies of the letter were forwarded to Bank of Israel’s Stanley Fischer and to the German Federal Republic’s Consul in Israel.
LINKS:
[1]
[a] 12-08-25 Dr Zernik’s complaint, filed with Israeli banking regulation against Bank HaPoalim – for attempting to extort compliance with US IRS regulations in Jerusalem
http://www.scribd.com/doc/103922991/
[b] 12-09-05 Addendum to Complaint, filed with Bank of Israel against Bank HaPoalim, and a Demand, filed with Bank HaPoalim, for a Written Statement of Interest Gained in Client’s Accounts in 2011
http://www.scribd.com/doc/104993753/
[c] 12-09-12 Dr Zernik’s Notice and Demand for the issuance of valid banking/legal communication by BANK HAPOALIM, BM, Israel, its subsidiaries and/or affiliates of their demands and threats against Dr Joseph Zernik, and for response within 10 days, with fax transmission report
http://www.scribd.com/doc/105706636/
[d] 12-09-13 More Evidence of Fraud and Extortion by BANK HAPOALIM, BM, Israel, Subsidiaries and or Affiliates
http://www.scribd.com/doc/105825087/
[e] 12-09-14 Demand for Action by Bank HaPoalim, BM, Chief Internal Auditor Jacob Orbach, re: FATCA related extortionist conduct by the Bank
http://www.scribd.com/doc/113463251/
[f] 12-11-04 Bank HaPoalim, BM, response re: FACTCA demands and threats with Appendices A. Demand and threat letter, B. customer agreement
http://www.scribd.com/doc/113460859/
[2] 13-01-27 Stanley Fischer, Bank of Israel Response re: FATCA, Bank HaPoalim, BM
http://www.scribd.com/doc/123951835/
[3] 13-02-06 Attorney James Jatras opinion in re: Bank of Israel’s Stanley Fischer’s January 27, 2013 FATCA Response Letter
http://www.scribd.com/doc/124247597/
[4] 13-01-28 FATCA, Stanley Fischer: Letter to Chief Internal Auditor Jacob Orbach, re: Phone calls by Bank HaPoalim
http://www.scribd.com/doc/122570341/
test test. I have tried to post some interesting info twice. It has not shown up however I get a comment the 2nd time that “it appears you have said this Before……”
Your comment had to be taken out of spam. Akisimet was too zealous. Thanks.
http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21571561-way-make-exchange-tax-information-work-automatic-response?fsrc=rss|spr
…”FATCA’s intrusiveness has caused concern among banks and fund managers. It raises big questions about data privacy. Compliance costs, mostly borne overseas, are likely to be at least double the revenue that the law will generate for America. The necessary overhauls of systems and procedures and the extra digging around to identify American clients could add $100m or more to a large bank’s administrative costs. No wonder bankers have dubbed FATCA the Fear And Total Confusion Act.”….
Good place to comment on the Economist article, although it uses cookies and you have to sign up for an account.
Ref the Swiss article “We are dead”… I went see on the original site ( I read German)… the reaction of the Swiss who comment is anger, deep anger. If they are typical citizens and the source is non-partisan and not just one that opposes the current confederation government, then the new IGA may be in big trouble if it reaches the referendum stage.
This may be from the same OECD FATCA briefing in Paris that Prof Christians noted on her blog here http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2013/02/oecd-public-briefing-not-really-public.html.
http://www.globaltaxwatch.com/2013/02/fatca-passthru-withholding-delayed-to-assess-scope-of-problem-eggert-says/
‘FATCA Passthru Withholding Delayed To Assess Scope of Problem, Eggert Says’
February 14, 2013 in International Tax Monitor
Rick Mitchell
PARIS — New regulations implementing the 2010 Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act delayed withholding obligations for so-called passthru payments until 2017 to give authorities more time to assess the size of the problem these obligations were meant to address, Treasury Associate International Tax Counsel Jesse Eggert said Feb. 12………..”
The US state of Delaware – Vice President Biden’s home state http://www.nytimes.com/2012/07/01/business/how-delaware-thrives-as-a-corporate-tax-haven.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 , comes up (yet again) in another article listing major global tax havens:
……”Not all these havens are in sunny climes; indeed not all are technically offshore. Mr Obama likes to cite Ugland House, a building in the Cayman Islands that is officially home to 18,000 companies, as the epitome of a rigged system. But Ugland House is not a patch on Delaware (population 917,092), which is home to 945,000 companies, many of which are dodgy shells. Miami is a massive offshore banking centre, offering depositors from emerging markets the sort of protection from prying eyes that their home countries can no longer get away with. “….
….”Thanks in large part to America’s FATCA, small offshore centres are handing over more data to their clients’ home countries—while America remains shamefully reluctant to share information with the Latin American countries whose citizens hold deposits in Miami.”…..
….”Financial centres and incorporation hubs, from the City of London to Delaware, will fight any attempt to tighten their rules. But if politicians really want to tax the missing $20 trillion, that’s where they should start.”
Worth reading the rest here: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21571873-how-stop-companies-and-people-dodging-tax-delaware-well-grand-cayman-missing-20
So when can we expect to see Delaware highlighted in a speech by Obama or Biden, about those who avoid taxes by hiding their accounts? When can we expect to hear from Treasury or the IRS about Delaware as a tax haven? When will they pass a state equivalent of FATCA in order to stop Delaware from profiting as a tax haven inside the US?
Will they do that as they are pressing Canada to implement a FATCA IGA and persecuting ordinary individuals outside the US with everyday legal post-tax transparent bank accounts – whose earnings and interest are already reported to the CRA tax agency where they are located – and subject to layers of Canadian government oversight?
Nope, because the US is a big fat hypocrite. Do as I say, not as I do – the FATCA motto of the US government.
I know that with the implementation of FATCA the banks and fund managers are to report US persons to the IRS. What about the accountants who do our taxes?
More on the state of Delaware as a US tax haven:
http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/features/corporate-dossier/which-tax-haven-is-right-for-you/articleshow/18503381.cms
…”Delaware
You are: An American CEO
Yes, you’re in … Delaware. It’s in a stable, democratic country (well, mostly), and it exempts subsidiaries of holding companies from taxes, which is why more than half the Fortune 500—on paper—are there.
They include Google, Ford, and Berkshire Hathaway, whose CEO, Warren Buffett, believes rich people don’t pay enough taxes. “Some tax havens have always been low-tax jurisdictions,” Cato Institute’s Daniel Mitchell says. “And then you have countries like the US., which are tax havens but no one knows about it.”
“….
@ Want Out,
I believe that only people like me who DON’T have an accountant – because I can do my CANADIAN taxes just fine by myself – have something to worry about.
@badger
Thanks for the Economist article – Automatic Response. It actually is pretty comprehensive back ground for those that come to the subject for the first time, and shows the evolution towards the Utopian goal of TTT – Total Tax Transparency.
@Just Me, I think I read it was part of a 10 part series by the Economist. Not sure what the rest will focus on.
Fantastic article here: http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/0C26B2CFD92F1FBE85257AFC004E8B38?OpenDocument
January 23, 2013
‘News Analysis: Will U.S. Hypocrisy on Information Sharing Continue?’
Full Text Published by Tax Analysts®
by Lee A. Sheppard
Summary by Tax Analysts®
“In news analysis, Lee A. Sheppard explains why the United States is not engaged in information sharing with Latin American countries and why many nations avoid signing a tax treaty.”
“This is an expanded version of a speech given to the Florida
Bar Association annual international tax conference on January 10.”
“Our question today is whether the United States will get away with continuing its hypocritical policy toward information sharing in light of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act and other developments.”
…………………………….
Note, particularly good section re Brazil, and some references (disappointingly small) re Canada.
Good comment re the use of clauses in the IGAs written to motivate banks to lobby their respective governments to urge them to sign on.
@badger
Re Lee Sheppard. Good to post that one again. I know I have seen it here on IBS somewhere, just can’t remember where… I should go looking… 🙂
Canadian Credit Unions http://www.cunewswire.com/ “The only electronic news service covering local, national and international news specifically for Canadian Credit Unions.” at http://www.cunewswire.com are tweeting the Globe article. Any Twitter user wants to engage back? https://twitter.com/CUNEWSWIRE/statuses/301807087099445248
My previous post is re The Feb 13 CUNESWIRE tweet https://twitter.com/CUNEWSWIRE/statuses/301807087099445248 which is referring to the Globe article (January 7, 2023, Don Whiteley) http://www.theglobeandmail.com/commentary/irs-wants-canada-to-nab-us-tax-cheats-why-we-should-care/article6994760/ ‘IRS wants Canada to nab U.S. tax cheats: Why should we care?’
@Badger…. I replied via twitter…
@CUNewswire They should care, because U.S Citizenship taxation & FATCA are reaching into the CA economy & Treasury & extracting wealth! (:
If Canada signs an IGA, will the bank ask me for a waiver of my privacy rights before they hand my financial info to CRA to be then handed over to the IRS or just sell me out to the U.S. without informing me of my death sentence?
@small…
Yes, they have to ask you, and then it is up to you if you give up your rights!
@just me
They can close my account and I will bury the money in my backyard . If I am more rational by then , a safety deposit box would be better than trying to remember under which tree I buried the money.
@Small,
I’m thinking that if ‘they’ close your bank accounts, your safe deposit box may be next on the hit list.
Perhaps a fire-proof box in your home is a better bet, or a non-US relative that you trust to hold your money in their account on your behalf, or a credit union to buy some time until FATCA officially blows up, which it will, eventually.