Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

FATCA Discussion Thread (Ask your questions) Part Two

If clicking on a link brings you to the wrong page in the comment stream, click on this sentence to arrive at the current page of the comments.

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.

If clicking on a link brings you to the wrong page in the comment stream, click on this sentence to arrive at the current page of the comments.

 

3,498 thoughts on “FATCA Discussion Thread (Ask your questions) Part Two”

  6. @ FBAR IS WRONG
    I posted this there but it didn’t appear so I’ll put it here …

    I love the whole concept of this site and hope it gets many contributions. The first one from the retired teacher in Italy is extremely compelling, as are so many other stories I have read at sites like the Isaac Brock Society. Will you eventually be able to provide a linked index on your home page to make it easier to access the contributions as they continue to come in?

  8. @ FBAR Is Wrong
    Yes, my husband tells me wordpress is not as easy as they would like you to believe. Best of luck with your site. It’s a valuable addition to the anti-F forces. Surgite! WordPress on!

  9. Tired of commenting on someone else’s article? Write your own and spread your own link to your own work.
    The first articles have garnered lots of hits! Generate some more and spread the anti-fatca word.

    Spread the word
    Post your anti #FATCA #FBAR #CBT article here!
    bit.ly/1w0Ky6U

  11. @badger

    IRS claims that “a very limited number of non-resident individuals” are affected by FATCA and FBAR? Sounds like more myth-making to me.

  12. Correction: the IRS claims that very few non-residents will be required to report their accounts under FATCA, which has a reporting threshold of $200K for non-residents. Still, more than “a very limited number”, and certainly not fewer than the number of US residents with offshore accounts!

  13. Cooking the Books at the Federal Register: What Has the Executive Branch Been Feeding You?

    http://bit.ly/1sLV5mJ

    Hmmm. What’s up here? Does 2+2 = 32? Why are the US Federal Register published statistics off by a factor of 8? Is this “truth”? Is this “competence”? Is this “leadership”? Is this “‘information’ for ‘formulating an opinion’?” What kind of opinion is meant to be formulated with this kind of “information”?

  14. @bubblebustin, US IRS and Treasury claims are worthless propaganda and disingenuous at root – as we know.

  15. This is the IRS bulletin that makes the claim that a limited number of non-residents are required to report foreign accounts under FATCA:

    “U.S. citizens, U.S. individual residents, and a very limited number of nonresident individuals who own certain foreign financial accounts or other offshore assets (specified foreign financial assets) must report those assets.”

    What are they basing this claim on, and what’s the motivation for making this type of unsubstantiated claim on an IRS bulletin, unless it’s to downplay FATCA’s effects on “individuals” abroad? Surely there must be more people living abroad with accounts over $200K than residents with offshore accounts over $50K?

    http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Corporations/FATCA-Information-for-Individuals

    May I ask someone to make this bulletin it’s own post so that Brock at large can have at this latest ‘propaganda’ from the IRS and US Treasury?

  19. Don’t tax him—Don’t tax me—Tax the man behind the tree. A number of additional questionable issues also come up when running search terms related to FATCA.

    The spending is strictly domestic infrastructure
    Yet the revenue is international–from US citizens overseas

    FATCA is a huge burden upon foreign banks—–who will be deputized IRS agents.
    The Administration has a Motive–It’s own favorite personal banks

    An amendment to fund Barack Obama’s Corrupt Partner was denied

    http://bancdelasteroideb612.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/fatcas-shady-sides-a-growing-list/?preview=true&preview_id=492&preview_nonce=8cbd92fc97

  20. @ FBAR is Wrong and le President amateur: Banc de l’asteroide B612
    Often when there is a “blue link” commenter listed under “Recent Comments” it is someone with a website fishing for hits. (Our moderators deal with them as quickly as possible.) Happily whenever I see YOUR “blue links” I perk up and gladly go to your sites to read the insights expressed there. Thank you for the effort you are putting into your very welcomed blogs. FiW, I loved reading the new subversive sonnet and le President, I appreciated reading your latest look at FATCA from yet another angle.

  23. can someone enlighten my memory….i thought i had read somewhere on here that any bank accounts that are closed after july 1st are reportable to the CRA and then to the IRS.

    i am attempting to clean up an issue and don’t want to create another one by closing a bank account.

    thank you in advance for your help 🙂

  24. @ Mettleman
    Duke of Devon answered your question under a different heading:

    Duke of Devon says
    Sasha and Mettleman.. Depends on whether the account was ‘reportable ‘ or not. I.E. Did the bank have any ‘indicia’ on file when the account was closed. If not, there is no reporting.

  25. The usual propaganda pretending that the whole world loves FATCA and wants to emulate it – always leaving out the pertinent context that the US chooses to define the bank accounts of those living ordinary lives outside the US as somehow the business of the US Treasury, based solely on birthplace or parentage.

    As usual, this article in Forbes leaves out that no other country practices CBT except the US.
    http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/10/27/fatca-envy-spreads-across-hemisphere/
    It also carefully leaves out that the US serves as a tax haven for other countries, including Latin Americans, and has no plans to stop the US banks in Florida, Texas, etc. from doing so. See for example: January 23, 2013 News Analysis: Will U.S. Hypocrisy on Information Sharing Continue?
    by Lee A. Sheppard http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/0C26B2CFD92F1FBE85257AFC004E8B38?OpenDocument

    Therefore, though some other countries may be interested in the bank accounts that its RESIDENTS have outside its borders, they do not seek to do so based on a geographical birthplace, or the national origin of their parents. Anyone who is now writing about FATCA, in a source such as Forbes will know this. Leaving it out – willful blindness or deliberate evasion?

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published.

%d bloggers like this: