Posted on January 13, 2012 by Petros Posted in Issues regarding US persons abroad 1,012 Comments Ask your questions about FATCA. This discussion has been continued here: FATCA Discussion Thread (Ask your questions) Part Two Share this:TwitterFacebookEmailLike this:Like Loading...
All these FFIs sure want to socialize the cost across the entire country and be bailed out from having to make a market driven business decision, don’t they?
Cheers Just Me. Here’s an article from Costa Rica.
Tropical Daily: “FATCA Compliance Looms for Costa Rica and Panama”
From the article:
“Very few financial institutions in Costa Rica and Panama are prepared to meet the Foreign Accounts Tax Compliance Act regulations. The reason? Most are waiting for clarification from the U.S., especially given the possibility that there exists more agreements to be signed to simplify the reporting process.”
Here is another from Germany.
Just Landed (blog): “FATCA Legislation – US Expats and the IRS”
From the article:
“Many members of Germany’s American expat community are now considering renouncing their US citizenship, as the FATCA Legislations prepare to be implemented from January 1st 2013.”
“The majority of US expats are being prompted to consider relinquishing their US citizenship due to the complexity of the reporting process to the IRS, plus the threats of heavy penalties, which includes fines for previous, inadvertent non-compliance.”
“This sense of anxiety is compounded by the fact that a growing number of Americans are being left stranded by their foreign financial institutions. All banks and wealth management firms will also have to declare the assets of their American clients. This process is perceived as very costly and burdensome, meaning many are refusing to deal with US citizens.”
I am trying to get some gardening done today, and visit with friends, but you keep sending me these links requiring me to put up a comment! LOL Actually, thanks for keeping my mind occupied with new ways to say the same ole thing. “IGAs, don’t do it! ”
Glad to see that type of comment out of Germany. They were one of the first FATCA partners and still, a year later, they have not yet followed the UK down the path of capitulation. Assume they are still holding out for some real reciprocity.
Thanks @John Brown:
Continues to be powerful to see another expat (first I’ve read from Germany) say flat out that they and many others they know are going to renounce because of the jeopardy of potential draconian penalties, the complexity, etc.
Re renouncing: “I know many others who feel the same as I do,” says Claire.”….
………..”The majority of US expats are being prompted to consider relinquishing their US citizenship due to the complexity of the reporting process to the IRS, plus the threats of heavy penalties, which includes fines for previous, inadvertent non-compliance.
This sense of anxiety is compounded by the fact that a growing number of Americans are being left stranded by their foreign financial institutions.”….”being turned down by foreign firms for jobs in which they will require signatory authority..”…..
I see that another article http://www.justlanded.com/english/Germany/Articles/Money/Bank-secrets on the site describes the transparency of German accounts to the German tax authorities. Like Canada, there is no evidence that Germany functions in any way as a so-called ‘tax haven’, or home for money launderers, drug lords, etc. – that baseless and disingenuous rationale continually offered up in US Treasury soundbites to justify the imposition of FATCA and FBARs.
Can’t see what Germany would possibly gain out of signing a FATCA IGA if the US will not deliver exact reciprocity. And even then?
Tropical Daily (blog): “U.S. Goes After Dual Citizens’ Bank Accounts”
From the article:
“There are a lot of Panamanians who, for one reason or another, have U.S. citizenship – many of these folks have never lived in the U.S., have never earned a penny of U.S.-source income, and have never even heard of an FBAR … yet literally by accident of birth, they are now obligated under penalty of imprisonment to pay a huge portion of their assets to another government.”
And @John Brown, I like the end of the Panamanian article above, which asserts that there is no social contract when only one party sets the terms and demands obeisance and obedience from the other – as if they are merely serfs, and subjects, as if of a king. The US prides itself on historical roots that flow from Rousseau and Paine, among others, but now tells us the exact amount of lifelong tribute we and our children, living lifelong or born outside the US are to give over annually, and forces us to submit complex documentation to make certain that we have been ‘compliant’. Or, creates complex documentation to create a debt through penalties, that it cannot assess or levy by any other existing means.
The penalties are so fantastical as to bear no relationship whatever to any actual US tax assessed, and in fact can be so in the absolute absence of any actual US tax owed. This after we have already paid to the non-US country where we actually live, perhaps were born, and use services.
Two comparative type of articles…
Conformity and discrepancies between Fatca regulations and the IGAs explained by Alfi
Read more here: http://bit.ly/Xtah6N
Non-U.S. Financial Institutions: Due Diligence in the Final FATCA Regulations
Read more here: http://bit.ly/Z6C9Rf
Solving the complexity of FATCA classification
Lisa at i-Expats is at it again… This gal is dangerous. I think she means well, but she is VERY sloppy with what she allows to be posted.
See this story…
FATCA Leads The Worldwide Search For More Tax http://bit.ly/12qCryN
I had to post this response, which of course, if past experience is any indication of future behaviour, will never be let out of moderation.
Re your statement: “Around 50 countries have now signed up to FATCA – or through their own Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) which redefine how their own double-taxation agreements with the US will work.”
The Swiss parliament is debating an IGA for FATCA today. Three points might be worth noting:
1) The nationalist Swiss People’s Party (SVP) and the Socialist Party (SP) are against it and have the numbers to defeat it. The SVP does not support the IGA because it infringes on Switzerland’s sovereignty. The SP’s lack of support is due to the non-reciprocity of the the proposed IGA. Support for the IGA come from the centrist parties.
2) A contentious topic is the requirement to automatically accept changes in US law which impact the IGA without further ratification, called “dynamic changes”. The Swiss NZZ newspaper indicates that the definition of “US Person” under US law could be changed, as an example, and this would automatically flow through to the approved IGA without further action by the Swiss parliament.
3) The approved IGA is subject to referendum.
Article (in German):
Comments are closed on this thread. Please continue the conversation here: http://isaacbrocksociety.ca/fatca/