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.
@badger,
This is just the IRS extending the scope of U.S. Personhood by degree and regulation. It is expanding the reach of the concentric ripples from being even closely related or associated with an American. You are indeed a U.S. Person if you swim in waters populated by Americans. Talk about making Americans even more virally infectious than they already are. Mother’s, don’t let your children grow up to marry Americans! Don’t even date them, and watch out for that causal lunch or using the same bathroom, as it could cause dangerous social disease!
@badger @just me
Is there any indication that these duties are relieved by going to IGA?
@Mark Twain..
I wouldn’t think so… IGA is just to help get the FFIs off the 30% withholding threat.
Due diligence and ‘reason to know’ standards are the same with or without IGA….
THe IGA is short, I don’t see that it is excluded
http://www.treasury.gov/press-center/press-releases/Documents/020712%20Treasury%20IRS%20FATCA%20Joint%20Statement.pdf
didn’t see it in the norwegian IGA either. If they don’t exclude it, then they are taking upon US law, which the locals refuse to understand
@All
I would think this should be empathized at the Toronto protests, especially to tje media, that FATCA is Canada taking on US law. Then what? Once the US can do this they won’t stop to have change other Canadian laws. Wonder if there is any international law regarding this? It seems like extortion.
@Mark Twain
The doc you linked to seems to describe an alternative to FATCA based on existing tax treaties. This is what Flaherty mentioned months ago in one of his statements, if I remember correclty.
And remember, folks:
Friends don’t give friends usindicia!
Canada should use the FATCA negotiations as leverage to fix the tax treaty to properlyinclude RRSP, RESP, RDSP, TSFA, MUTUAL FUNDS, capital gain on primary residence, etc.
@WhatamI
What leverage does Canada have? The US holds all the cards.
Unless I misunderstand, the EU is switching from Model N IGS’s to working FATCA-like exchanges into existing tax treaties. That sounds like the US isn’t getting what they wanted in the first place. We can hope that Canada can do the same, while fixing some of these other issues. “We’ll sign this if you sign that”.
Is this any less worthy of hope then people who have stedfastly said for 2 years that Canada won’t give up our birthplaces?
Europé is doing the IGA’s and claiming that they are justifiable under existing tax treaties. The last one, the Norwegian one, was more complex and subject of a post.
On the side, European countries, Sweden & Norway included, have been doing agreements around the World on Exchanges. They want info on their own residents and resident Citizens. Europé confuses those agreements with FATCA which is one-sided.
Possibly the doc I linked to was the wrong one–not FATCA itself.
Oh, I guess I misunderstood. It seemed to read that they’re using existing tax treaties as a means to implement FATCA. No wonder nobody got excited except me.
Allison Christians talks FATCA on CBC Radio’s “The Current” tomorrow:
http://taxpol.blogspot.ca/2013/11/im-talking-fatca-listen-tomorrow.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+TaxSocietyCulture+(Tax,+Society+%26amp;+Culture)
CNBC Africa covers the FATCA “machine”:
“Our topic of the week focuses on the proposed foreign account tax compliance ACT or FATCA which will come into being on the 30th June 2014. The legislation brought on by the US government’s Internal Revenue Service will force other countries to report on US citizen’s assets that are held outside of the borders of the US. Although this has a direct impact on US citizens, what impact does this hold for residents of other countries? Joining ABN’s Samantha Loring to give clarity to Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act is Anthony Markham, founding partner at Maitland and as per usual at the desk Our 2 strategists Cobie Legrange, Strategist at ClucasGray Investment Managers and & Roland Rousseau, Equity Strategist at ABSA Capital.”
South African banks told their government that they needed their help to comply.
Also discusses FATCA’s mini-me, the G5 Pilot.
Worth listening to just to hear his views concerning privacy and constitutional rights.
http://www.cnbcafrica.com/video/?ytid=XCN3LLf0J48
Is it definite that Canadian will not have to start the FACTA procedure July 2014? I may want to do a little more transferring of asset before start but I want to see the IGA before hand. Is it definite that RRSP will not be counted in overall total assets?
Does anybody know if transfer agent (Ishares Canada) for Canadian Provincial Bonds and Equity is subject to FACTA?
Harry,
Your RRSP will be counted on FATCA Form 8938 which is attached to your 1040 (well, not reported specifically there, but the 8891 will be referred to where your RRSP is reported), if I’m not incorrect, as well as Form 8854 if you expatriate. http://taxtim.ca/2012/07/02/report-rrsptfsa-fbar-report-us/
http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Comparison-of-Form-8938-and-FBAR-Requirements
No I am talking about what Canadian Financial Institution have to report. I am looking at the total they report on your net assets. Depending on the totals they do different checks.
Harry,
Some one else will have to answer that. Who knows? The Shadow?
@Harry
See my post of November 9, 2013 at 4:26 pm where I quote ING Direct saying that FATCA reporting starting in 2015 will include the years 2013 and 2014.
@ Calgary411
I found this in the 8938 instructions:
I don’t know why you call it “FATCA Form 8938”. I think it has nothing to do with FATCA. I think the IRS added the 8938 to 1040 tax returns because they couldn’t legally have access to FBAR information for their nefarious tax purposes.
FATCA
http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Corporations/Foreign-Account-Tax-Compliance-Act-%28FATCA%29
http://www.irs.gov/Businesses/Corporations/FATCA-Information-for-Individuals
Part IV, Form 8891, U.S. Information Return for Beneficiaries of Certain Canadian Registered Retirement Plans. We added a new checkbox for Form 8891 to indicate that you are excepted from reporting a specified foreign financial asset on Form 8938 because you reported the asset on Form 8891.
As mine was done and as I read it, the RRSP is not actually listed on the 8938 but is referred to and the total of that included in your total reported.
8938 – required for larger accounts
https://www.tnvisaexpert.com/articles/essential-us-tax-forms-rrsps/
Form 8938, Statement of Foreign financial Assets, is the newest reporting requirement. The threshold for filing form 8938 depends upon the filing status of the individual, the value of their accounts at year, maximum value during the year and whether the taxpayer is living permanently in a foreign country. Individuals can hold other foreign assets besides RRSPs and trigger this requirement. For those who have already filed an 8891 to report their RRSPs and meet the threshold for filing form 8938, the form is still required, however, the taxpayers simply references the filing of form 8891.
Sound like a lot? The IRS has become very aggressive in pursuing US tax residents who hold funds in other countries. Since a US tax resident is taxable on worldwide earnings regardless of source, locating these funds is imperative to effective tax collection.
We may have to wait to see IGA to determine what is included in total,
Harry Harry Harry!!! How many times???? RRSPs are/will be exempt from FATCA reporting. Accounts under $50,000 are exempt. If your FI doesn’t have any US ‘indicia’ on file , you don’t need to worry about accounts under $1million.
@Calgary411
Interesting. I’ve been using the term FATCA to refer to the blackmail the US is doing to the world’s FFI and governments. Now the IRS is using the term to include filings done by individuals.
I see this interesting point: