Liberty and justice for all United States persons abroad

The Isaac Brock Society

Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 4 of 11 (Year 2017)

You can access all years at this link: Media and Blog Articles – Links for All Years

 If clicking on a comment link brings you to the wrong comment, click here  to get on the most recent page of comments.(alternatively, to reach the most recent comment page, go to  the url in the bar at the top of your browser and delete everything after http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/media-and-blog-articles-open-for-comments-part-4-of-4)

Media and Blog Articles

EmBee suggested that it would be good if there was a thread for new articles, so that people would be aware of where to comment.   So, I created this permanent page.   I’ll make a permanent list of links posted here and keep adding to it,  but not deleting, so we’ll end up having sort of a  “bibliography” of FATCA/CBT articles.  [Note:  Some articles are not open for comments]

For more articles on FATCA, enter FATCA into Google then click on the link “more news for fatca” just below the most recent featured article.

Notes:

From JC:   To see #FATCA on Twitter for latest breaking news.  JC finds that is quite a good source and there even are some international articles that one may read using Google Translate.   Others may help certain tweets and articles remain in elevated position by retweeting them.

From Badger:   On an important archival note, please use the Internet Archive Wayback machine https://archive.org/web/ (see bottom right ‘Save Page Now’ box to enter URLs of webpages you want saved for posterity, and try to save backup copies of articles and other items of interest in some other form – such as a datastick or external drive. Some important and very significant webpages and the fulltexts of articles are no longer available (although some can be retrieved if someone using the Wayback machine saved them).

Be sure to read the comment stream for this thread — there are usually very recent articles mentioned there that aren’t on this list yet.

2017.12.28
It’s time to address the double standard about tax havens, Angela Wrights, Macleans, Canada.
The US Is Becoming the World’s New Tax Haven, The Editors, Bloomberg View, US.
2017.12.21
Rep. Dina Titus Supports Americans Abroad Tax Reform, Democrats Abroad, US. 
Now That The GOP Tax Bill Is Approved, The IRS Gets Busy, Brian Naylor, NPR, US.
2017.12.20
Taxpayers will have to wait to find out how they fare under new legislation , Renae Merle and Aaron Gregg, Denver Post (reprint from Washington Post), US.
U.S. Shareholders –Take Action by December 31, KPMG.
2017.12.18
Have You Ever Felt Sorry for the I.R.S? Now Might Be the Time, Patricia Cohen, New York Times, US.
2017.12.12
EU finance ministers issue warning to Trump over tax reforms, RTÉ, Ireland.
2017.12.11
Banque: les consequences étonnantes de l’accord FATCA, Edouard Lederer, Les Echos, France.
2017.12.10
As Australia ousts MPs with dual citizenship, Canada’s Parliament embraces many in its ranks, Kathleen Harris, Canada. (mentions MP who “assumed his U.S. citizenship was automatically rescinded because he did not meet several requirements for continued citizenship. [But when travelling to Washington] was told he was ineligible to enter the U.S. on a Canadian passport because he was a U.S. citizen. He was . . . allowed in on a one-time basis . . . it cost him $3,000 to later sort out the administrative requirements.”)
2017.12.09
The American Diaspora: Outreach and Organization, Victoria Ferauge, The Franco-American Flophouse, Japan.
2017.12.08
Foreign-owned banks to be hit by US tax rules, Financial Times, UK.
Trump Tax Plan Worries Europe, Christian Reiermann, Der Spiegel, Germany.

For articles earlier in 2017, click here.

1,720 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 4 of 11 (Year 2017)”

  1. @Ellen
    Yeah- I know a guy living in Europe who was not made a partner of a new business because of his US passport. That is why he renounced.

  2. How Exactly Does The Meadow Bill Repeal FATCA?

    John Richardson has written a post that examines what is involved in getting FATCA off the books-

    “What exactly would it mean to repeal FATCA?”

    The short answer to the question is:

    “We make FATCA go away by reversing all the changes to the Internal Revenue Code that collectively comprise FATCA.”

    The real question becomes: “How do we reverse FATCA?” ………………

    Would really appreciate if folks could direct a few comments to the TaxConnections blog. It is read by a lot of professionals-and we all think they could use a bit of our point of view……….

  4. @JC
    How nice to hear the word “lunacy” used when referring to FATCA. I think it really has to be made that clear to homelanders.

  5. Paper uploaded to ssrn by Peter Spiro:

    “Citizenship Overreach”

    This Article examines international law limitations on the ascription of citizenship in the context of U.S. taxation of non-resident citizens. U.S. citizenship practice is exceptionally generous, extending citizenship to almost all persons in its territory at the moment of birth. At the same time that it is generous at the front end, U.S. citizenship is sticky at the back. Termination of citizenship on the individual’s part involves substantial fees and tax compliance. It is difficult to shed a citizenship one may never have wanted in the first place.

    This stickiness would be inconsequential if few costs were associated with the status. But the United States taxes its citizens on a worldwide basis. The 2010 enactment of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act has ramped up historically lax enforcement and imposes substantial administrative burdens on even middle-earner citizens abroad.

    In this frame, U.S. birthright citizenship and expatriation regimes may violate international norms, especially with respect to those “accidental Americans” who departed the United States as children. Even in the context of extremely relaxed historical constraints on state nationality practice, there were acknowledged nineteenth century limitations on the extension of citizenship to individuals with insufficient connection to a state — citizenship over-claiming, as it were. The article also describes the historical requirement that naturalization be volitional, a norm now appropriately applied in some cases in the context of birthright citizenship.

    To the extent the ascription of U.S. citizenship compromises individual rights, there are tax fixes and there are citizenship fixes. Citizenship fixes include opt-in and opt-out mechanisms for birthright citizenship. The better solution may lie in frictionless exit for those with nominal ties to the national community. Though reform is more likely to be accomplished through the tax regime, the moment highlights the over-inclusiveness of U.S. citizenship and the growing salience of international law to citizenship practices.

    https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2956020

    Seen by me on Allison Christians’ blog at http://www.allisonchristians.com/blog

  7. For the those who understand tax language, I assume this means that PFIC’s are only now non-reportable for non-residents (still taxable)?

    “Under the regulations, exceptions to PFIC reporting now include:

    Dual-resident taxpayers – The final regulations add an exception from reporting for dual-resident taxpayers treated as residents of a foreign country under a treaty-tie breaker rule. This changes the rule in the proposed regulations, which subjected such dual-resident taxpayers to PFIC reporting.”

    https://www.taxconnections.com/taxblog/final-regulations-clarify-exceptions-to-pfic-reporting/#.WQoBdpFfOhA

  8. @Bubblebustin – Looks from the following as if this not available for USCs:

    Dual resident taxpayers

    A shareholder is not required to file Form 8621 if they are a considered a dual resident taxpayer under a relevant US income tax treaty and take a treaty position that they are a nonresident alien for purposes of computing their US income tax liability filing all the required forms.

  11. Apparently, or dual-status. KPMG has more explanation:

    Exceptions to Annual PFIC Information Reporting

    Dual-resident taxpayers who are treated as residents of another country pursuant to an income tax treaty – The final regulations provide an exemption from the annual PFIC information reporting requirement for certain dual-resident taxpayers who are treated as U.S. nonresidents under the provisions of an income tax treaty (commonly known as “treaty tie-breaker aliens”) and who properly file Form 8833, Treaty-Based Return Position Disclosure Under Section 6114 or 7701(b) for the portion of the tax year that the individual is taxed as a nonresident.

    KPMG NOTE

    Prior to the issuance of the final regulations, it was unclear whether dual-resident taxpayers were subject to the annual PFIC information reporting requirement. Although such individuals were not subject to tax under the PFIC rules (which only apply to U.S. persons), absent a specific exception, a dual-resident taxpayer may be treated as a U.S. resident under the Code for purposes other than the computation of his income tax liability, such as information reporting requirements. The rule contained in these final PFIC regulations is consistent with the reporting exception provided to dual-resident taxpayers under the FATCA (Form 8938, Statement of Specified Foreign Financial Assets) and reflects the recommendation submitted to the IRS by KPMG LLP (U.S.).

    https://home.kpmg.com/xx/en/home/insights/2017/01/flash-alert-2017-008.html

  14. @Bubblebustin,

    8621 is a ‘pay tax form’ and also a ‘penalty trap form’. If you own a PFIC and get a dividend or sell the shares you have to file 8621 in all it’s amazing complexity to pay taxes. The problem though for the feds is they wanted more. The statute of limitations had run on a bunch of people who had PFICs and never reported them. So they changed 8621 to be a form you file if your PFICs didn’t have dividends or were never sold. You just reported that you owned PFIC. If you don’t file 8621 then the statute of limitations on the tax didn’t run. So they could get you forever. Now of course they added a burden on people so they tried to limit who should file. They exempted small holding and foreign pensions. It looks like not they are exempting people who live in other countries who hold green cards.
    This is minor stuff. The real sting is the PFIC taxes and the fact they can get you for all years you didn’t file 8621 after about 2006.

  15. @Bubblebustin

    Green card holders who are ‘dual resident taxpayers’ and who claim treaty benefits on form 8833 risk being ‘deemed’ — ah, the US’s favourite word there yet again — to have terminated US residency and so could face an immediate application of the execrable 877A exit tax. Yet another tax trap.

    From the form itself: “If you are a dual-resident taxpayer and a long-term resident (LTR) and you are filing this form to be treated as a resident of a foreign country for purposes of claiming benefits under an applicable U.S. income tax treaty, you will be deemed to have terminated your U.S. residency status for federal income tax purposes. Because you are terminating your U.S. residency status, you may be subject to tax under section 877A …“

  17. Macron has filed a lawsuit because LePen implied on the basis of no evidence that he might have an offshore account.

    “French election: Macron takes action over offshore claims”
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-39802776

    Who can I sue, I wonder? The US has told all banks, on the basis of no evidence, that I might have an offshore account.

  20. @ Patricia Moon
    John’s article is interesting but at this point there are so many didn’t-do-rights and potential penalties stacked up that do nothing is the only option for some GC holders and many don’t even know this dilemma exists.

  21. For anyone wondering what happened to the Bopp suit – this answers it. A fund raiser for it 26 May in London.

    https://www.facebook.com/groups/citizenshiptaxation/permalink/1377958058960605/

    My question to Mr. Bopp – Why not multiple claims against FBAR and not just for excessive fines. One good example is you work overseas for a company or the girl scouts, and you must report via FBAR those accounts you may have signature authority over but not a beneficial interest. To do this for an employer – report company confidential information to a foreign government – is grounds for termination. There has got to be more Constitutional claims around this. It seems a clear case and not allegedly self-inflicted.

    FBAR represents the grounds for not hiring persons, not promoting persons, blocking from business or partnership. It seems to be FBAR is more an issue than FATCA. FATCA is only an enforcement tool to highlight and make real FBAR requirements and harms.

  23. @JC – “Why not multiple claims against FBAR and not just for excessive fines. One good example is you work overseas for a company or the girl scouts, and you must report via FBAR those accounts you may have signature authority over but not a beneficial interest. To do this for an employer – report company confidential information to a foreign government – is grounds for termination. There has got to be more Constitutional claims around this. It seems a clear case and not allegedly self-inflicted.”

    I’m guessing that most people would probably go to the boss and get rid of the signature authority rather than secretly sending confidential company information to a foreign tax authority. Doing that could get them in a whole pile of trouble.

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: