Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 3 of 11 (Year 2016)

2,818 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 3 of 11 (Year 2016)”

1. @ Deckard1138
   So I guess this is the proposal for reciprocity we thought the USA would never come through with, right?

   Provide for reciprocal reporting of information in connection with the implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). To permit the United States to provide equivalent levels of information to foreign governments that have entered into reciprocal intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with the United States, the proposal would (i) require certain financial institutions to report the account balance for all financial accounts maintained at a US office and held by foreign persons; (ii) expand the current reporting required with respect to US source income paid to accounts held by foreign persons to include similar non-US-source payments; (iii) grant the Secretary of the Treasury authority to prescribe regulations that would require reporting of such other information as is necessary to enable the IRS to facilitate FATCA implementation by exchanging similar information with cooperative foreign governments in appropriate circumstances; and (iv) require financial institutions that are required under FATCA or this proposal to report to the IRS information with respect to financial accounts to furnish a copy of the information to the account holders in order to encourage voluntary tax compliance. The proposal would be effective for (information reporting) returns required to be filed after December 31, 2017.

   Now that this proposal is in writing will the financial institutions challenge it in courts? I know the Florida and Texas banks’ court cases have not been successful so far. Wonder how a US FI will be able to flag the US account of a foreign someone who uses a US address?

2. IF the proposal re: Accidental Americans is adopted would Ginny and Gwen lose standing in our Charter Challenge? What would Joseph Arvay do then?

3. @Embee, my understanding is that other plaintiffs with different characteristics can be added if necessary.

4. @ WhiteKat
   Yes but those with “different characteristics” tend not to come forward because doing so puts them at greater risk for greater harm. Anyway, I hope the proposal does pass even if it means Joseph Arvay has to work harder to pull something together for the Charter Challenge.

5. @WhiteKat

   Absolutely

6. @EmBee

   Hypocritically, the U.S. has always qualified its willingness to exchange outbound FATCA information with other foreign governments, which (unlike the IRS itself, with its pathetically insecure inbound FATCA portal) have to prove that they have sufficient data security safeguards in place blah, blah, blah. This means that they can basically say no to whoever they want, at least for now.

   But, they may indeed be setting themselves up for significant pushback by governments who, however naively, were expecting true reciprocity, like India, which very publicly touted FATCA as a powerful new tool to recover “black money” from Indian tax cheats’ offshore accounts. They won’t be at all happy when they finally figure-out they’ve been duped. At the same time, the banking lobbies of Texas and Florida could soon be joined by others in Nevada, Delaware etc. to resist any FATCA information exchange by American financial institutions that might weaken their collective status as the world’s greatest tax haven, not to mention increasing their compliance costs and forcing them to pass these onto their clients (like FFI’s have been doing so for some time). Such a combination of both internal and external negative publicity about FATCA might finally get the conversation to rise above the din in Congress, and start some meaningful debate about the whole mess. While neither of these potential triggers directly relates to the plight of U.S. persons, we’ll hopefully benefit from all the increased attention.

7. @Embee, not necessarily. There were other volunteers when the original search went out (I was one) who I imagine would still be willing to step up to the plate if necessary.

8. @ WhiteKat and Deckard1138
   We all waltzed around this proposal mulberry bush last year and nothing came of it. We’ll have to wait … again … to see what come of this.

9. @Duke of Devon, WhiteKat, Patricia Moon

   I really do hope you are correct about the wording of the proposal even if it doesn’t come to pass. It would be a great step forward and I would be more than pleased to admit I’ve got this wrong.

   Sadly, I don’t agree with your interpretation of what is actually written in the text shown by MuzzledNoMore.

   Again, I’ll be more than pleased if I’m wrong.

   https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/26/877A

10. By the way, I do agree with the section about the requirements for someone holding a US passport have changed.

11. @Embee, re; “..proposal for reciprocity we thought the USA would never come through with, right?…”…
    http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comments-part-3-of-3/comment-page-22/#comment-7202276 referring to;

    “….Provide for reciprocal reporting of information in connection with the implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). To permit the United States to provide equivalent levels of information to foreign governments that have entered into reciprocal intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) with the United States,…” https://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/budget/fy2017/assets/budget.pdf as cited by http://www.steptoe.com/publications-11056.html

    I highly doubt that this will happen. And as is noted; “…… all of the proposals appeared in the Administration’s budget for FY 2016 (2016 budget)…” http://www.steptoe.com/publications-11056.html

    But it and the proposal for a revised exit method reserved for certain Accidental Americans will function as pretense and cover, to allow FATCA IGA signatories – especially Canada (where the bulk of the renunciations seem to be taking place) plausible propaganda opportunities re ‘reciprocity’ – once more domestic taxpayers start to understand more about FATCA and its costs to accountholders and taxpayers (via banks, FATCA letters, the lawsuit). I imagine we might see the Liberal government of Canada using this when/if there is more visibility of the problem via the ADCS lawsuit.

    Weren’t there meaningful dates in the IGA re the end of 2016, and theoretical ‘reciprocity’ the US was supposed to start working towards? See; “…Article 6
    Mutual Commitment to Continue to Enhance the Effectiveness of Information Exchange
    and Transparency
    1.Reciprocity. The Government of the United States acknowledges the need to achieve
    equivalent levels of reciprocal automatic information exchange with Canada. The
    Government of the United States is committed to further improve transparency and
    enhance the exchange relationship with Canada by pursuing the adoption of regulations
    and advocating and supporting relevant legislation to achieve such equivalent levels of
    reciprocal automatic information exchange….”…
    https://www.fin.gc.ca/treaties-conventions/pdf/FATCA-eng.pdf

    Does this provide bad faith cover for the US – purporting to be ‘taking steps’ to ‘work towards’ ‘reciprocity’?

    Does this provide bad faith cover for the Canadian government, and its defendents named in the ADCS lawsuit – as they approach Dec 31, 2016 as referenced in: Article 10, #3. : “The Parties shall, prior to December 31, 2016, consult in good faith to amend this Agreement as necessary to reflect progress on the commitments set forth in Article 6 of this Agreement.”

    See:
    http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/treaties/Documents/FATCA-Agreement-Canada-2-5-2014.pdf
    Article 10
    Term of Agreement
    1. This Agreement shall enter into force on the date of Canada’s written notification to the United States that Canada has completed its necessary internal procedures for entry into force of this Agreement.
    2. Either Party may terminate this Agreement by giving notice of termination in writing to the other Party. Such termination shall become effective on the first day of the month following the expiration of a period of 12 months after the date of the notice of termination.
    3. The Parties shall, prior to December 31, 2016, consult in good faith to amend this Agreement as necessary to reflect progress on the commitments set forth in Article 6 of this Agreement.

    All they really said in the IGA was that they would be ;”pursuing the adoption of regulations
    and advocating and supporting relevant legislation”.

    So, they can say they ‘pursued’ and ‘advocated’ and ‘supported’ the ‘relevant’ legislation and regulations – knowing full well that it isn’t going anywhere – and will simply smear some transparent lipgloss on the US/Canada IGA pig.

    So what? It is bad faith BS. And now the Canadian Liberal government can play along and point to the latest in US BS as justification for why they’re not withdrawing from defense of the FATCA IGA in which they took over the Con and Bankster collusion to make the CRA an arm of the IRS, and drain the data and assets of Canadian taxpayers – for the benefit of the US Treasury – at Canadian taxpayer expense.

    It also provides cover for the US and everyone else to pretend that they are not the world’s biggest tax haven.

12. US hypocrisy and greed supported by our very own FATCA Mythster Stack:

    :……Stack believes the EU is misguided in its thinking and may be targeting funds that rightly belong to the US Treasury. “The retroactive application of these new approaches calls into question the basic fairness of the proceedings,” he said. “We are greatly concerned that the EU commission is reaching out to tax income that no member state had the right to tax,” he said.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/jan/29/european-commission-unfairly-targeting-us-companies-starbucks-mcdonalds-amazon-apple-taxes-treasury

    “.“We are greatly concerned that the EU commission is reaching out to tax income that no member state has the right to tax under internationally accepted standards,” Stack said. “The mere fact that the U.S. system has left these amounts untaxed until repatriated, does not provide under international tax standards a right for another jurisdiction to tax those amounts.”.”.
    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-01-29/u-s-tax-official-criticizes-eu-probes-of-american-firms

    http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c63db5c8-c6b1-11e5-808f-8231cd71622e.html#ixzz405BMLO7w
    “……Mr Stack retorted that the EU was misguided in using the state-aid weapon retrospectively to override tax arrangements legally agreed with member states. “The retroactive application of these new approaches calls into question the basic fairness of the proceedings,” …….

    Most critically, Mr Stack said the EU was seeking to tax income that should ultimately be payable in the US. “We are greatly concerned that the EU commission is reaching out to tax income that no member state had the right to tax,” he said.
    “The retroactive application of these new approaches calls into question the basic fairness of the proceedings”

    ………the US Treasury argues that most of this money is simply deferred and will have to be repatriated for taxation in the US, although there is no precise timetable for this.

    Mr Stack also mentioned Washington’s fears that an unexpected consequence of the tax recoveries could be that the affected companies would claim credits in the US over the international tax demands. “If so US taxpayers would end up footing the bill for these state aid settlements.”…”…..

    The Mythster also claims that the tax laws he is complaining against were political, nationalistic, overreaching, etc. etc.

    Gee, and Mythster Stack, what would you call FATCA?

13. @embee yes as I recall a year ago, there was a lot of waltzing around and many Brockers were dead set against letting a subset of victims escape. Getting the feeling that the proposal as imperfect and limiting as it still is would not get such a negative response this time around. Crossing fingers that something will come of it.

14. The Mythster Stack’s most ridiculously hypocritical statements so far in light of FATCA?

    “Some of the more interesting tax-related observations at the conference included: ”
    “…..Robert Stack (Deputy Assistant Secretary, US Treasury) spoke about the importance of the need for the ‘rule of law’ to prevail over the strong pressure which exists to politicize the tax law. If this did not occur, Mr Stack feared that global investment could be adversely impacted. By way of example, he said that improved dispute resolution between tax agencies would be a major beneficial outcome from the project, provided tax officials applied the law and did not act in national self-interest. He said tax should not become “the hand maiden of the politics of the moment”. Whilst acknowledging that some multinationals do not contribute fairly and stating that the US was supportive of the OECD’s BEPS project, Mr Stack pointed out that it is the countries themselves which write the tax laws and that tax competition was alive and well. “Watch the countries”, he said. “What are they really doing?””

    from;

    Reflections on G20 International Tax Symposium, 6-8 May 2015, Istanbul Turkey
    11/05/2015 by Michael Croker – ax Australia Leader at Chartered Accountants Australia and New Zealand
    https://www.charteredaccountants.com.au/secure/myCommunity/blogs/551821/tax-blogs/606/reflections-on-g20-international-tax-symposium-6-8-may-2015-istanbul-turkey

    Note that our very own federal FATCAapologist Brian Ernewein (General Director, Finance, Canada) https://openparliament.ca/search/?q=Brian+Ernewein+fatca was also cited as an event participant.
    What did he make of the Mythster’s outrage?

15. Re: budget proposal addressing accidentals, I still don’t see how someone who doesn’t consider themselves to be a USC would step within 10 feet of an American consulate. You’d have to opt in and admit/confess to something you feel your aren’t in order to opt out. It makes no sense.

    Does it make sense to you Gwen and Ginny?

16. More IRS data security problems;
    “Identity Thieves Breached IRS Computer Systems, Agency Says
    Automated attack last month sought e-file PINs for individual taxpayers ”
    http://www.wsj.com/articles/identity-thieves-breached-irs-computer-systems-agency-says-1455066304

17. @badger

    Call me old as all the kids do…. no internet banking… no filing online… still have an old mobile…. I can get calls… have little internet presence… I don’t tweet, twitter or shut out… whatever that is…. I do not need to take a pix or share every moment of my life with people as my kids… with their peeps? I got enough problems without having my id stolen… that could push me over the edge…

18. If somebody took pictures of you undressing, you don’t have to prove that the pictures were then uploaded onto the internet or that people drooled over them. Disclosure of bank records constitutes ipso facto a violation of your right to privacy. There are plenty of naturalised Canadian citizens in that category, and they are not classified as U.S. citizens under Canadian law.

19. When I say this I am truthfully not taking any sides in the matter, but Justice Antonin Scalia’s death could become a black swan event for U.S. politics, with unknown repercussions for us:

    From Democrats.org.

    Breaking news from the GOP debate stage:

    In tonight’s debate, the Republican presidential candidates were asked whether or not President Obama should nominate a new justice to the Supreme Court. They said Congress should block, delay, or otherwise refuse to allow the President to fill this vacancy.

    There’s no excuse for this. It’s putting partisan politics above the Constitution and the rule of law, and it’s appalling to hear from any public official — let alone someone who thinks he should be the next President of the United States.

    And they’re not alone. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell — who is responsible for scheduling votes in the Senate — has already said that “this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President.”

    But no matter what Mitch McConnell says, President Obama is going to fulfill his constitutional obligation to nominate a successor to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court — and that nominee deserves a fair hearing in the Senate.

    Add your name to call on Republicans to follow the Constitution instead of obstructing the confirmation of our next Supreme Court justice:

    http://my.democrats.org/Confirm-the-Next-Justice

    Thanks,

    Democrats

    This from Huffington Post:

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/scalia-obama-replacement_us_56bfabe4e4b08ffac1258cf5

    This from the Washington Post:

    https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/scalias-death-plunges-court-national-politics-into-turmoil/2016/02/13/136c0590-d2a4-11e5-b2bc-988409ee911b_story.html

    One commenter at the Washington Post had this to say:

    Liberals are cracking open champagne bottles everywhere! Obama is delighted! He will thrust a Liberal, black, Muslim woman – – – maybe Carolyn Walker? – – – into the confirmation chaos, thus satisfying every Liberal’s life dream. Here’s a thought: why no details on Mr. Scalia’s death? Anyone going to investigate why a man who was the “picture of health” suddenly died? Anyone want to speculate who in power would want Mr. Scalia dead? Far-fetched? Maybe. Saddening news for his family and for our country.

    So the conspiracy theories and posturing have already begun. And, an already fractured, completely dysfunctional two-party system may be about to split wide open. Awfully fertile ground for the ascension of a “winning” demagogue to fill the vacuum…

    One also has to wonder what affect all this turmoil will have on existing Federal and Supreme Court cases, including the FATCA Constitutional challenge led by James Bopp.

20. A fascinating response from Republicans Overseas:

    Republicans Overseas Statement on Passing of Justice Antonin Scalia
    “On behalf of the Republicans Overseas, I express our deepest condolences to Justice Scalia’s wife Maurren and nine children as our thoughts and prayers are with them,” said Vice Chairman and CEO Solomon Yue. “Although America lost a faithful and consistent defender of our freedoms and the Constitution, Justice Scalia’s legacy lives on forever, “said Mr. Yue, a 16-year veteran RNC member from Oregon. “Justice Scalia’s argument that since our freedom and liberty are guaranteed by the checks and balances in the constitution, the Republican Party’s unilateral abdication of vetting federal judicial nominees dooms this republic.” We already passed an RNC resolution to vet faithfulness of judicial nominees’ past rulings in applying the constitution strictly according to original intent.

21. The below comment to this article pissed me off: http://www.chinapost.com.tw/commentary/the-china-post/special-to-the-china-post/2016/02/06/457873/Congress-pulls.htm#comments

    Speaking as an American Expat living in Taiwan (and loving it here,) I declare this article to be a huge load of hogwash (a euphemism for B.S.)

    While only a very small number of countries tax their citizens regardless of where they reside and consider the world-wide income of their citizens to be taxable in their home country, all of this information has been well known for many years and is not difficult to comply with. In many cases (not including Taiwan,) the foreign tax rate is higher than the US tax rate which results in zero tax liability to the US for the Expat. All that is needed is to file a properly filled tax return.

    I’ve been living in Taiwan almost 6.5 years and previously lived in Europe for a total of six years. I’ve never had a problem with filing my US taxes.

    While it is true that the IRS has closed their foreign tax assistance offices, the toll-free help lines in the US are still maintained and they CAN be reached from anyplace that has Internet access using Skype. Such calls are connected at NO COST.

    As a citizen of the United States, I continue to receive services and benefits from my government and I have no objections to paying my fair share. Furthermore, I have absolutely NO SYMPATHY for anyone who racks up a delinquent tax liability in excess of US$50,000.

    Despite what Mr. Feingold implies, it is not AT ALL easy to incur such a significant liability. The IRS is not a particularly quick acting agency and simply owing them money is NOT the same as being DELINQUENT!

    Being declared tax delinquent only happens after a number of earlier steps and exchanges. Anybody who achieves this shameful status has had ample opportunities to make a settlement with the IRS and has no cause to be surprised.

    I am personally delighted to see that my country is becoming more aggressive in compelling tax cheats to pay their fair share.

    my response is as follows

    @”Taiwan Expat” I disagree with your opinion. Perhaps in your situation you are not adversely affected, but many people are. You seem to be unaware that the Foreign Earned Income Exclusion does not cover foreign unemployment, welfare, and disability benefits. Also in high standard of living countries additional US tax is accrued either due to Alternative Minimum Tax cancelling foreign tax credits or a lower local tax rate than the US one (the later is the case in Switzerland). Also, it is impossible to invest in mutual funds anywhere, and often difficult or impossible to have a bank account. Even mandatory-participation foreign pensions are doubly taxed by the US, and very few optional pensions (comparable to 401k or IRAs) are treated as compliant by the US. The US robs foreign economies of wages legally earned and taxed there according to rules negotiated through the local political system. The US does not take into account the cost of living abroad, and the housing credits seem only to apply to certain cities; in the case of Switzerland rents are incredibly expensive even in the suburbs. US policy crushes the expat middle class in many countries abroad. Furthermore, as we are not counted in the census, there is no proportional representation in the House as mandated by Article 1, Section 2, USCONST. The US citizenship-based taxes can be much higher than those of 2% exerted by the terrorist-thug nation of Eritrea upon its diaspora.

    My comment is in moderation. Brockers, please SWAT this article !

22. I have posted the following comment:
    —
    Hi JKay,

    your point of view seems to be pretty much blurred. Possibly by your single track and patriotic education you have been exposed to during your time in the U.S. homeland. I believe that freedom in the rest of the world is spelled differently!

    Sadly I’m also a U.S. citizen, I’m born in northern Europe, I was not exposed to any U.S. education and I never received any service from the U.S. that I haven’t asked to pay for in the first place, like my U.S. passport.

    I never received any benefits from the U.S.. According to my bank I was only intoxicated with U.S. citizenship at birth, which is more of a burden then a benefit if you are already living in a free 1st world country. Being a U.S. citizen I am limited with my investment options, I am making my local bank unhappy and I am subject to bleak double taxation. I have no intension to continue my life in the U.S. to escape these burdens and pay for the college education of my children or enjoy less paid vacation / less sick leave days, “at-will” contracts and a weak social security system. Anyhow I’m asked to pay $2,350 to leave, which is simply another way to make me pay again – what ever fair share…

23. My response:

    «This article is not hogwash. While you may believe that you properly complied with US filing demands, the US demands are actually rather complicated and the probability is great that you did not file correctly. Even many tax professionals have been reported to have filed incorrectly. Sooner or later, filing faults may come to haunt one.

    Why do you want to call the US to ask about their jurisdiction issues? Nobody, not a single person in America, calls Taiwan to inquire about Taiwan tax rules. For something to be fair, it must work both ways.

    What “services and benefits” that you receive are different from the rest of the world which doesn’t double-tax its unrepresented diaspora? The probability is great that you receive less from America than what Taiwanese working in America receive from Taiwan.

    You say that you have “no respect” for a victim of identity theft. Yet, wouldn’t the victim never have been a victim in the first place if you didn’t support the double-taxation of unrepresented colonists? You are basically condemning victims of crime because you honor a criminal system.

    You write that the IRS is quick, yet most expats find that it is much, much slower than their local tax authority.

    Why do you accuse people who pay their fair share of local taxes of being “tax cheats” simply because the US government is not content with taxing its residents?»

24. @US_Foreign_Person, I think you’re wise re the banking. It is a whole new online world out there, and you can bet that various forces are making it their life’s work 24/7 to bend it to their own interests – whatever they may be – but for certain, not altruistic.

25. A young woman discovers her US tax and filing obligations and realizes she’s damned no matter what she does. She speaks for many of us when describing her OMG moment to the current struggle whether to renounce a citizenship she still identifies with. This should be its own post really:

    http://thedualist.net/2016/02/14/assessing-my-options-for-addressing-my-newly-discovered-delinquent-us-tax-situation/

Comments are closed.