Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)

1,714 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 5 of 11 (Year 2018)”

1. …which though unpleasant would have no discernible consequences.

   She would need to renounce if the bank threatened to close accounts etc.

2. Getting stripped of data protection/privacy rights is quite enough of a consequence, for some.

3. @ Patricia Moon.

   Thank you so much for the links, HIGHLY educational. 😉

4. Interestingly, Wikipedia says Left Foot Forward regards ThinkProgress as a “sister” blog.

   Yet ThinkProgress is on record as supportingFATCA (https://thinkprogress.org/why-are-republicans-plotting-to-sabotage-a-crackdown-on-tax-evasion-4862922400b3/)

5. Who wouldn’t support FATCA when it can collect 300 billion a year from rich tax cheats and it’s not going to be spent on a new aircraft, but on children!

   Excuse me while I lose my breakfast…

6. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-france-taxes-socialmedia/france-to-hunt-for-tax-cheats-on-social-media-idUSKCN1NF0JH

   It has been reported a while (like a few years) ago that the IRS is doing similar.

7. Good article that Duality posted in the FATCA and France thread about a demonstration by Accidental Americans in France today.

   Duality wrote: “J’aime la phrase: “Américains un jour, Français toujours.” (American one day, French forever.)

   I love their slogan too! And turnout is reported having been about 150 people!

   “Des ‘Américains accidentels’ manifestent à Paris pour interpeller Donald Trump,” Europe 1. (Accidental Americans demonstrate in Paris to call out Donald Trump)

8. Like that protest picture.

   Solomon Yue confirms that there is a Democrat co-sponsor for TTFI. The person has not been named yet.

   https://twitter.com/WNINE1/status/1061820373765885953

9. @Michael

   You’re welcome.

10. New Legal action: against the Transition Tax and GILTI. Monte Silver has launched a GoFundMe page.

    John Richardson interviews Monte Silver

    http://www.citizenshipsolutions.ca/2018/11/13/part-23-its-time-for-americansabroad-to-support-the-fight-against-the-ustransitiontax-and-gilti/?fbclid=IwAR2gjmmm6gWbKAqbv2jtEo_u-ZNpvFcm7WUcgnQzuFSD5DluCl1GrfbFbnA

11. You beat me to it, JC! Just watched it. Very informative and passionately delivered by both gentlemen.

12. .

13. “The Human Cost of Bank Data Exchange “
    “https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/tax-row_the-human-cost-of-bank-data-exchange/36716818”

    The Swiss Data Protection Commissioner has issued a legal complaint against the Finance Ministry for sending the names of bank employees, lawyers, accountants and other third parties to the United States to assist with tax evasion investigations.

    The Swiss Supreme Court has already issued a ruling that bans the indiscriminate disclosure of people’s names without forewarning the individuals involved. This applies even when Switzerland has a treaty to automatically exchange tax information with other countries, as it does with 30 nations including the US.

    These treaties were signed following a US criminal probe into the way Swiss banks helped tax evaders. The investigation and threats of legal sanctions brought about the demise of Swiss banking secrecy.

    Data Protection Commissioner, Adrian Lobsiger, believes the Finance Ministry is failing to observe the court’s ruling on protecting the rights of individuals caught up in the transfer of data.

    “”Because Switzerland wants to play the role of international model pupil, Swiss citizens are being deprived of their most basic rights,” lawyer Adrian Rüd, who represents clients who are contesting their names being handed over, told the newspaper.

14. “US and four allies target tax dodge specialists”
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-tax/u-s-and-four-allies-target-tax-dodge-specialists-idUSKCN1NJ2FQ

    In an interesting turn-up for the books,
    the J5 seem to be more concerned about Americans who don’t have foreign bank accounts, ans are increasingly suspicious that they must be hiding all that US-taxable money in devious blockchain-y ways that a poor IRS agent cannot get his head around. 🙂

    Cryptocurrencies are a key part of the J5’s work, Fort said, citing the risk that such coins are used in the United States to avoid capital gains taxes. Digital money can be used to transfer funds to people without the need for foreign bank accounts, he added.

    The IRS is looking at the involvement of cryptocurrency exchanges and financial firms in withdrawals of digital money, and their conversion to government backed “fiat” currencies.

    “One of the ways to track cryptocurrencies, focused on when the actual cryptocurrency enters the system – folks want their money, and when it comes out is what we are focused on,” Fort said.

    In another interesting development, apparently associated with the revision of the Swiss Data Protection Act, the Swiss Federal Council “is currently developing the legal foundation for a state-recognised electronic identity (e-ID). The so-called e-ID law will create a legal and standardisation framework for the recognition of e-ID systems and ID providers.
    [..]
    The involvement of the private sector is essential for the success of the e-ID. The private sector has the technological expertise and the necessary customer proximity to ensure the rapid dissemination of the e-ID nationwide, which will make this financially attractive for the sector. The banks will be particularly important here, as their mobile banking systems are used daily by millions of bank customers to identify themselves securely and in a user-friendly manner.”

    https://www.swissbanking.org/en/topics/information-for-private-clients/privacy-and-data-protection/privacy-and-data-protection

    IRS v. Swiss banks, round 2?

15. “IRS to Virtual Currency Traders: No Formal Voluntary Disclosure Program”

    The IRS recently announced that it is not planning to establish a formal voluntary disclosure program for taxpayers who have unreported income derived from virtual currencies. Specifically, Daniel N. Price of the IRS’s Office of Chief Counsel stated on November 8, 2018 that he needed to dispel the rumor that had been circulating since last year that the IRS intended to establish a separate voluntary disclosure program for unreported income related to offshore virtual currencies. This is in contrast to the voluntary program that the IRS established for unreported income from offshore financial accounts.
    [..]
    Because the IRS requires a U.S. taxpayer to report its worldwide income regardless of where that income was generated or where the taxpayer lives, a U.S. taxpayer could have significant income tax liability for its cryptocurrency activities that were conducted and remain offshore. In spite of this substantial U.S. taxpayer exposure, and despite the potentially enormous amount of unreported income from virtual currency activities, the IRS has provided relatively little guidance to taxpayers and tax professionals, given the complexity of the tax issues and reporting requirements triggered by virtual currencies. At the same time, as discussed previously in On the Chain, the IRS is preparing to collect the massive amount of tax from unreported income from Bitcoin-related trades.

    In other words, the IRS is preparing to collect from those it can collect from: US residents and expats who are suspected of having committed a felony (e.g. by filing a return (signing the jurat) but not reporting all income.

    IMO, of course.

16. DailyMail: “Royals face ‘tax nightmare’ as US officials use Meghan’s American citizenship to line up a raid on Harry’s multi-million pound fortune”

    “The Royal Family faces a tax ‘nightmare’ as US officials examine whether Meghan and Harry owe them a slice of their multi-million pound fortune, according to reports.

    The Duchess of Sussex is still an American citizen so has to pay tax in the US, and this could extend to anyone else she draws money from, including her husband.

    This could deplete both her $5million US fortune and Prince Harry’s main source of private wealth, a £300,000-a-year trust fund on which he pays UK income tax.

    The probe could even extend to the Queen and Prince Charles as they provide funding for the couple, aides told the Sunday Express, which reported that the royals are set to employ a team of US financial consultants to deal with the issue.”

    https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6402761/Meghan-Harry-face-tax-nightmare-hands-officials.html

    Just what was Harry thinking?

17. “according to reports.”

    According to reports in the Mail, based on what they’ve been fed by a US tax advice firm – one of the ones that’s not been hired by the Windsors. 🙂

18. This isn’t exactly what this thread is for, but I was afraid that if I posted this only on the OVDP or Streamlined related threads it wouldn’t get seen.

    Even 7 years on, those who contributed here and elsewhere continue to make a difference because they chose to share and post information altruistically to help others. Some of the commenters mentioned in the quote below from another blog, were also once active commenters here.

    Below is a link to a comment that references a recent use of info posted in the past such as that by Just Me years ago, Moby, and anon5percent – which lead to a successful reasonable cause defense and a penalty waiver;
    “…..I called the agent and he pointed out it was a “Letter 3800.” Interestingly, and this is something I wanted to share, he commented that if I hadn’t demonstrated great inquiry and research as I did in my “reasonable cause” letter (thanks to Anon5percent, Moby, and blogs like this really) he would not have been inclined to waive the penalties…….. ”
    http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.com/2012/03/opting-out-2-3212.html#comment-4193156899

19. But the commenter who reported success is apparently US-resident? And according to her comments, she did indeed have a “five-figure” unreported foreign brokerage account, which came to light during an audit? A very different situation from that of a Canadian or European being told they’re going to be wiped out by America for having a bank account.

    IRS penalties are horrific, and I sympathise with citizens/residents of non-US countries who got trapped in the early “amnesty” programmes. Fortunately, it’s now known (realised) that FBAR penalties can’t be collected from a citizen of a non-US country for having a bank account in his/her own country where s/he lives and has his/her being.

    The OVD* programmes are history now, and not before time.

20. Suzanne Herman, on Facebook, posts a letter to the Israeli government – it appears from a tax/compliance firm – in regards that GILTI should not apply to CFC.

    https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AHEkYy4yus7_RjEcUpUIzTByQKTK1E4o/view?fbclid=IwAR0976-4Gj3qAlFLpmN2dx6fPJdwyd0iWM0PQIqUK9mMBmsUI2R2BNuVlwI

21. From the UK Express: “Meghan Markle in tax ‘nightmare’ causing crisis for Queen and Prince Charles”: BUCKINGHAM PALACE is to recruit a firm of US financial consultants as aides struggle to deal with Meghan Markle’s American tax ‘nightmare’

    https://www.express.co.uk/news/royal/1046936/us-taxman-on-prince-harry-fortune-meghan-markle-us-citizen

    “An aide said: “We’re looking at a level of financial exposure the Royal Family has never had to face before. It’s the royal household’s worst nightmare.”

22. Clarification on that letter:

    From: Ministry of Finance of the Government of Israel
    To: The Internal Revenue Service

23. Markle story picked up by US media:

    https://www.foxbusiness.com/features/royal-wedding-a-financial-dilemma-for-meghan-markle

    Relatively sober, straightforward account, no glaring inaccuracies. Curious why this is happening now, as it was discussed prior to the wedding.

24. Thomson Reuters’ tech head takes a look at GILTI in the context of international tax trends and developments.

    “U.K. Digital Services Tax Introduces New Tech Weapon To Global Trade War”

    The U.K has announced its plans for a new 2% tax on local revenue generated by large tech firms like Google, Facebook, and Amazon. By doing so, it has become the largest global economy to aim a federal tax directly at U.S. tech giants
    [..]
    The U.K. is hardly alone in its efforts to capture tax revenue from digital services. The concept first came to bear in 2013 in the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development’s (OECD) Action Plan on Base Erosion and Profit Shifting…At its core, BEPS lays out a series of actions designed to realign contemporary tax policy with the realities of the increasingly global and digital economy.
    [..]
    So far, India, Italy, Spain, the E.U., and now the U.K., have all proposed some form of digital services tax aimed at extracting revenue from firms who transact business on their shores, whether or not they have a significant physical presence in that region.

    fact, the first real big move on the digital tax front actually came from the U.S. Though it was not positioned so overtly as a digital tax targeting specific tech companies, the U.S. tax reform plan introduced a complicated provision called Global Intangible Low Taxed Income (GILTI), which creates a new category of foreign income for U.S. shareholders that own 10% or more of a foreign corporation…. The GILTI definition assumes that 10% of a corporation’s profit is attributable to tangible, fixed assets, or QBAI, that are depreciable as trade or business assets. Any profit in excess of that 10% is GILTI.

    What that all means is that the U.S. introduced a new minimum tax on intangible assets from overseas operations, giving the U.S. government more taxing power over things like intellectual property, which many tech firms have historically housed in low tax regimes overseas.

    This is just the beginning. The U.K.’s approach is clearly one of the most in-your-face implementations of the digital tax ideology, but it is really just part of an evolving global trend toward capturing revenue on digital services based on where those services are consumed as opposed to where they are created.
    […]

25. “US attacks UK plan for digital services tax on tech giants”
    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-46050724

    The US has hit back against a UK plan to impose a new tax on sales by technology giants

    US political leaders and business groups say the proposal would violate tax agreements by targeting US firms.
    They warned the tax could spark US retaliation and hurt prospects for a US-UK trade deal.

    In a statement on Wednesday, Representative Kevin Brady, a Republican from Texas, called the measure “troubling”.

    “If the United Kingdom or other countries proceed, that will prompt a review of our US tax and regulatory approach to determine what actions are appropriate to ensure a level playing field in global markets,” said Mr Brady, who helped shepherd US tax cuts through Congress last year.

    His statement echoed comments last week by US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who voiced “strong concern” about different countries’ efforts to develop digital sales tax….

Comments are closed.