FATCA Tax Attorney

Lebanon FATCA Note: Is the “Switzerland of Middle East” in the Crosshair of FATCA?

/in , /by

This Lebanon FATCA update is intended to provide a broad analysis of the impact of the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (“FATCA”) on the numerous U.S. accountholders in Lebanon.

Lebanon FATCA: Background Information

The Lebanese banking secrecy rules, commonly known as the “1956 Law”, have earned the country the unofficial title of the “Switzerland of the Middle East”. It is estimated that as many as 100,000 U.S. taxpayers took advantage of the 1956 law and opened foreign bank and financial accounts in Lebanon.

Lebanon FATCA: Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act Threatens the 1956 Law

The UBS case in 2008 became a crucial turning point in global tax compliance, because, for the first time, the US was able to leverage its economic might to break through the wall of bank secrecy in the country which, until recently, was synonymous with bank secrecy.

Encouraged by the crucial success over UBS in 2008, the IRS and U.S. Congress took an unprecedented step in international tax compliance with the passage of FATCA in 2010. FATCA is not just another law, but a new global standard for the international tax transparency which endangered all U.S. taxpayers with undisclosed foreign accounts.

One of the unique aspects of FATCA is that it requires foreign financial institutions (“FFIs”) to report directly or indirectly to the IRS all bank and financial accounts held by their U.S. customers. In essence, it turned foreign banks into the agents of the IRS compliance effort.

While FATCA requires legislative adjustments in many countries, in Lebanon, FATCA ran counter to the spirit and letter of the 1956 Law.

Lebanon FATCA: Initial and Subsequent Reaction in Lebanon

At first, the reaction of the Lebanese banks was very negative with even talk of accepting the 30% tax withholding requirement imposed by FATCA. As late as the first quarter of 2012, Lebanon was considered as one of the potentially most vexatious non-compliant countries.

By April of 2012, however, the attitude of the Lebanese banks and Lebanese financial authorities began to change rapidly. In February of 2013, the head of Lebanon’s banking association stated that the Lebanese banks will cooperate with FATCA.

At the present time, all major Lebanese Banks (such as Bank Audi, Blom Bank, Bank of Beirut and so on) are in the process of implementing FATCA regulations. Given the another unprecedented step by the U.S. government – voluntary disclosure program for banks in Switzerland – it is expected that the Lebanese Banks (as the example of Bank of Beirut demonstrated) will strive to implement FATCA as fast as possible.

Lebanon FATCA: What Does FATCA Compliance Mean for U.S. Taxpayers with Undisclosed Accounts in Lebanon

The move of the Lebanese banks toward FATCA compliance has profound consequences for all U.S. taxpayers with undisclosed bank and financial accounts in Lebanon even though the exact impact is not likely to be felt in the same way by all U.S. accountholders (due to the individual circumstances of each U.S. taxpayer).

At this point, these U.S. taxpayers with Lebanese accounts should understand that their account information is likely to be reported by the Lebanese banks to the IRS within a fairly short time (it is hard to state it exactly and some of the account information may have already been disclosed, but I would expect the Lebanon FATCA compliance to be firmly implemented by the end of 2014 or early 2015). This development is likely to have two major effects on U.S. taxpayers. First, the U.S. accountholders whose information will be disclosed to the IRS are not going to be able to enter the OVDP (unless there is a specific exception or a chance in the OVDP rules – program is now closed), which is the official IRS voluntary disclosure program for offshore accounts.

Second, once the IRS follows up on the information that it receives from the Lebanese banks (i.e. opens up an investigation), these taxpayers are likely to suffer from the imposition of the draconian FBAR willful penalties. Criminal penalties, including jail time, are also possible. See this article for a more detailed explanation of the FBAR penalties.

Thus, the implementation of FATCA in Lebanon means the end of 1956 Law and Lebanese Bank Secrecy for U.S. taxpayers. It also means that the U.S. taxpayers with undisclosed Lebanese accounts are currently in a very dangerous position and may face heavy penalties.

Lebanon FATCA: U.S. Taxpayers with Undisclosed Accounts in Lebanon Should Explore their Voluntary Disclosure Options As Soon As Possible

With the implementation of FATCA in Lebanon, U.S. taxpayers have to act fast if they want to reduce or avoid IRS penalties. This is why they should consult an experienced international tax attorney who specializes in offshore voluntary disclosures as soon as possible.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Legal and Tax Help With the Voluntary Disclosure of Lebanese Bank and Financial Accounts

If you have undisclosed bank or financial accounts in Lebanon, contact the offshore voluntary disclosure experts of Sherayzen Law Office now. Our experienced international tax law firm will thoroughly analyze your case, advise on the available voluntary disclosure options, prepare all necessary tax forms and legal documents, and professionally represent your interests through the IRS voluntary disclosure process.

FATCA Tax Lawyers: Six More Agreements to Implement FATCA

/in , /by

On December 19, 2013, the U.S. Department of the Treasury announced that the United States has signed bilateral agreements with six additional jurisdictions to implement the information reporting and withholding tax provisions commonly known as the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). The six jurisdictions are: Malta, the Netherlands, The Islands of Bermuda, and three UK Crown Dependencies – Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man.

Enacted by Congress in 2010, these provisions target non-compliance by U.S. taxpayers using foreign accounts. With these most recent agreements, the United States has signed 18 FATCA intergovernmental agreements (IGAs), has 11 agreements in substance, and is engaged in related discussions with many other jurisdictions.

In general, FATCA seeks to obtain information on accounts held by U.S. taxpayers in other countries. It requires U.S. financial institutions to withhold a portion of certain payments made to foreign financial institutions (FFIs) who do not agree to identify and report information on U.S. account holders. Governments have the option of permitting their FFIs to enter into agreements directly with the IRS to comply with FATCA under U.S. Treasury Regulations or to implement FATCA by entering into one of two alternative Model IGAs with the United States.

FATCA Tax Lawyers: Model 1 IGAs Signed by Fix Jurisdictions

Malta, the Netherlands, Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man signed Model 1 IGAs. Under these agreements, FFIs will report the information required under FATCA about U.S. accounts to their home governments, which in turn will report the information to the IRS. These agreements are reciprocal, meaning that the United States will also provide similar tax information to these governments regarding individuals and entities from their jurisdictions with accounts in the United States.

In addition to these FATCA agreements, protocols to the existing tax information exchange agreements with Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man were also signed.

FATCA Tax Lawyers: Bermuda Signs Model 2 IGA

Unlike the other jurisdictions, Bermuda signed Model 2 IGA meaning that Bermuda will direct and legally enable FFIs in Bermuda to register with the IRS and report the information required by FATCA about consenting U.S. accounts directly to the IRS. This requirement is supplemented by government-to-government exchange of information regarding certain pre-existing non-consenting accounts on request.

FATCA Tax Lawyers: Tax Shelters Are No Longer Information Shelters

The fact that Bermuda, Jersey, Guernsey, and the Isle of Man (all of which are considered to be offshore havens) signed FATCA is a fact that is indicative of a general trend that I have emphasized since the appearance of FATCA – there are no reasonable safe havens for non-compliant U.S. taxpayers outside of few important jurisdictions, such as China. Even Russia has declared its intention to sign FATCA. More importantly, the jurisdictions that are generally regarded as tax shelter or low-tax jurisdictions are likely to allow the IRS to impose its will on their banks.

“FATCA continues to gather momentum as we work with partners worldwide to combat offshore tax evasion,” said Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Tax Affairs Robert B. Stack. “This large number of signings in one week alone sends a strong signal to tax evaders everywhere: international support for FATCA is growing.”

FATCA Tax Lawyers: Implications of Recent Agreements for Non-Compliant US Taxpayers

These developments continue to support the argument that non-compliant U.S. taxpayers worldwide need to urgently consider their options with respect to the voluntary disclosure of their foreign financial accounts and other foreign assets. Each new jurisdiction that signs FATCA is going to turn over the information about the non-compliant accounts to the IRS in one way or another. In such circumstances, procrastination with a voluntary disclosure may result in a dramatic reduction of available disclosure options and increase the chances of a criminal prosecution by the IRS.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help with Your Voluntary Disclosure of Offshore Assets

If you have undisclosed foreign financial accounts or any other assets subject to U.S. reporting, contact Sherayzen Law Office. Our experienced international tax law firm will thoroughly analyze your case, review the available options and implement a customized plan of your voluntary disclosure (including the preparation of any required legal documents and tax forms).

Do I need an Accountant or Attorney for Form 8938 Offshore Assets Disclosure?

/in , , /by

A lot of taxpayers are still confused about whether they need an attorney or an accountant to file delinquent Forms 8938. As I explain below, Form 8938 is an essentially legal disclosure form and its voluntary disclosure should be handled by an experienced international tax attorney.

Form 8938 Requires Legal Disclosure

It is important to understand that Form 8938, more than any other form except the FBAR now Form 114 (formerly TD F 90-22.1), requires a legal disclosure of specified foreign assets. The form does not involve any accounting calculations of tax liability or even knowledge of US GAAP (something that other information tax returns, like Forms 5471 or 8865, may require). The taxpayer simply needs to disclose his ownership of specified offshore assets according to the instructions of Form 8938.

Failure to File Form 8938 Is a Legal Issue

Since Form 8938 is a legal disclosure form, the failure to file the form and the penalties associated with the form constitute a legal problem that should be handled by an international tax attorney, not an accountant.

This is even more the case because the strategy with respect to handling Form 8938 and the explanation of the reasonable cause require advocacy – a critical skill which is a part of an attorney’s basic training, which accountants are not trained in.

Clients need an advocate to deliver their position to the IRS in a clear manner. Clients need an advocate to be able to interpret the law, not simply assume that what the IRS agent is saying is the only true version of the law. Finally, clients need an advocate to defend their interests with skill and persuasion.

Tax attorneys are advocates, in addition to performing calculations. Despite the seeming confusion over the role of the two professions, an attorney’s entire approach is likely to be radically different from that of an accountant simply because attorneys are trained to think and act in a completely different manner.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Legal Help with Your Voluntary Disclosure of Specified Foreign Assets

If you have undisclosed offshore assets that should have been disclosed on Form 8938, contact Sherayzen Law Office. Our experienced international tax firm will thoroughly analyze your case, estimate your potential Form 8938 penalties, identify all non-compliance issues, and develop a comprehensive approach to your offshore voluntary disclosure.

Accountants Beware: Offshore Disclosure with Form 8938 is a Legal Issue

/in , /by

In an earlier article, I already explained why the FBAR disclosure is a legal issue. In terms of their lineage, Forms 8938 are very similar to the FBARs. While the FBARs are the creation of Bank Secrecy Act, Form 8938 is a creation of a legislation of a similar nature – FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act).

The intent of both laws is similar – to produce legal disclosure of foreign assets by U.S. taxpayers. Notice that I am talking about legal disclosure, not an accounting calculation.

While the penalties associated with failure to file Form 8938 are not as severe as those of the FBAR, they are still substantial and have legal and tax repercussions. Where non-compliance is such that it requires voluntary disclosure, the issues associated with Form 8938 take on a new importance that requires the full protection of the attorney-client privilege and complex legal advocacy.

This is why it is so important for the accountants to avoid committing malpractice and recognize that an offshore disclosure that involves filing delinquent Forms 8938 is a legal issue that should be left to international tax attorneys who are trained and experienced in this area of law.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Legal Help with Your Voluntary Disclosure of Offshore Assets

If you have undisclosed offshore assets, contact Sherayzen Law Office . Our experienced international tax law firm will thoroughly analyze your case, estimate your potential FBAR penalties, identify all non-compliance issues, and develop a comprehensive approach to your offshore voluntary disclosure.

Application of Offshore Penalty to Business Ownership Interests

/in , /by

In another essay, I previously discussed the possible inclusion of the business ownership interests in the calculation of the OVDP (2012 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program) Offshore Penalty.  In this article, I would like to explore in more depth the application of the Offshore Penalty to ownership of business interests.

OVDP Offshore Penalty

It is a requirement of the OVDP that the taxpayers who enter the program pay the Offshore Penalty. This penalty is imposed in lieu of all other penalties that may apply to the taxpayer’s undisclosed foreign assets and entities, including FBAR and offshore-related information return penalties and tax liabilities for years prior to the voluntary disclosure period. The default penalty rate is 27.5% (in limited cases, the penalty is reduced to 12.5% or 5%) of the highest aggregate balance in foreign bank accounts/entities or value of foreign assets during the period covered by the voluntary disclosure.

The Offshore Penalty calculation includes business ownership interests related to tax noncompliance. Tax noncompliance includes failure to report income from the assets, as well as failure to pay U.S. tax that was due with respect to the funds used to acquire the asset.

Business Ownership Interests Are Included in the Offshore Penalty; Limited Exceptions

As I previously discussed, the Offshore Penalty is much broader than simply the FBAR penalty. Among other items, the Offshore Penalty encompasses ownership interest in businesses related to income tax non-compliance or acquired by tainted funds (i.e. funds that were subject to U.S. tax but on which no such tax was paid; the definition also includes funds derived from illegal sources such as criminal and terrorist activities).

There are exceptions to this rule, however. Two most prominent exceptions deserve to be emphasized here. First, where a business interest was not obtained by tainted funds and there are no under-reported U.S. tax liabilities, the taxpayer is likely to be able to exclude the business interest from the Offshore Penalty.

Second, the OVDP rules carve out a limited exception for U.S. taxpayers who are foreign residents and quality for the third category of 5% penalty rate. For these taxpayers only, the IRS stated that the offshore penalty will not apply to non-financial assets, such as real property, business interests, or artworks, purchased with funds for which the taxpayer can establish that all applicable taxes have been paid, either in the U.S. or in the country of residence. This exception only applies if the income tax returns filed with the foreign tax authority included the offshore-related taxable income that was not reported on the U.S. tax return.

Obviously, the determination of whether either of these two exceptions (or any other exception) applies in your individual case should only be determined by an international tax attorney experienced in the area of offshore voluntary disclosures.

Major Types of Business Ownership Interests Covered by the Offshore Penalty

The biggest category of business ownership interests covered by the Offshore Penalty includes ownership of foreign entities for which information returns, such as Forms 5471, 8865, 8858, 926 and so on, should have been filed by the non-compliant taxpayer. Most often, this category includes ownership of closely-held foreign corporation, interest in the controlled foreign partnership and contribution of property to a foreign corporation.

Notice that, even if the business entity controlled by the taxpayer is not itself tax non-compliant, but it holds the assets which are non-compliant (usually because they were purchased by using tainted funds), the entire ownership interest in the business entity may be exposed to the Offshore Penalty.

Another type of business interest that is often subject to Offshore Penalty involves business entities that are virtually indistinguishable from its owners. In situations where a business entity is an alter ego or nominee of the taxpayer, the IRS may determine that the Offshore Penalty should be applied to the underlying assets of the entity.

The most spectacular reach of the OVDP, however, is the possibility of involving domestic entities. In spite of having “Offshore” in its name, the Offshore Penalty can actually apply to ownership of U.S. businesses acquired with tainted funds. This is a critically-important consideration for non-compliant U.S. taxpayers who repatriated tainted funds back to the United States and invested them into U.S. businesses.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help With Your Voluntary Disclosure of Offshore and Domestic Business Ownership Interests

Sherayzen Law Office can help you with the disclosure of any of your foreign assets, including Offshore and Domestic business ownership interests. Our international tax law firm is highly experienced in conducting offshore voluntary disclosures of business interests. We will thoroughly analyze your case, assess your tax liability as well as the liability that you would face under the OVDP, determine the available disclosure options and implement the disclosure strategy (including preparation of all legal and tax documents as well as IRS representation).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office to schedule your consultation!