First Colombia-US Tax Treaty is Almost Ready | International Tax Lawyer

/0 Comments/in , /by

The first Colombia-US Tax Treaty nears the final stage of negotiations. This announcement was made on September 28, 2016, in Bogota, Colombia, by Colombian Finance Minister Mauricio Cardenas and U.S. Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew (the details of the meeting were published on the Colombian president’s website).

Despite the fact that United States and Colombia already signed a tax information exchange agreement on March 30, 2001, the two countries still do not have an income tax treaty that would protect its citizens and business from the effect of double-taxation.

There are a lot of expectations that the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty will benefit individuals and business in both countries. “La negociación de un tratado de doble tributación entre Colombia y Estados Unidos está cerca del fin, esperemos avanzar para lograr algo que los empresarios colombianos y los empresarios norteamericanos desean, al igual que muchos colombianos que dividen sus actividades entre los dos países”, said Mr. Cárdenas.

It is also possible that, upon ratification of the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty the Colombians who live in the United States and have businesses in Colombia will finally be able to benefit from the long-term capital gains tax rates that apply to qualified foreign dividends.

Of course, there is a still a long way to go for the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty. Even after the negotiations are successfully concluded and finalized, the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty will need to be signed and ratified by both countries before it enters into force. While it is reasonable to expect a relatively fast ratification in Colombia, the United States is a completely different story. Treaties can languish in the United States Senate for years before they are even considered.

Furthermore, Mr. Cárdenas and Mr. Lew may not have sufficient time to conclude the current negotiations. Before they may be done, a new president may be elected in the United States and he may take a different to negotiating with Colombia. If this happens, the conclusion of the negotiations and the ratification of the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty may be postponed even further into the future.

Sherayzen Law Office will continue to observe the situation surrounding the first Colombia-US Tax Treaty.

Poland AEOI Rules Still Not Implemented | FATCA Lawyers

/0 Comments/in , /by

On September 29, 2016, the European Commission announced that it had asked Poland to fully implement into its domestic law Council Directive 2014/107/EU on mutual assistance in income and capital taxation matters (which amends the earlier Directive 2011/16/EU on mandatory automatic exchange of information between member states). The request came in after the realization that Poland AEOI Rules were still not implemented despite the deadline.

Poland AEOI Rules Implementation, CRS and Council Directive 2014/107/EU

After the United States adopted Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) into law, the OECD (including the European Union) created the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) which established the standard for what type of information needs to be automatically exchanged between signatory countries. AEOI is essentially the practical application of the CRS.

In December 2014, the EU Council adopted Directive 2014/107/EU, which extended cooperation between tax authorities to automatic exchange of financial account information (i.e. AEOI) and expanded the scope of information to be exchanged on an automatic basis to include interest, dividends, and other types of income. Virtually all countries, except Poland and Portugal, have implemented the directive on AEOI

The Delays in Poland AEOI Rules Implementation

In reality, Poland, like other member states, were requires to implement the directive into their national laws by January 1. According to Tax Analysts, the European Commission already sent a formal notice to Poland on January 27, 2016. Then, it send another formal notice in March of 2016. At that time, Poland replied that the government was working on transposing Directive 2014/107/EU into national law.

However, Poland AEOI Rules still have not been implemented. What is worse, it appears that the Polish government has taken no concrete steps into that direction. Poland also has yet to fully inform the Commission of its plans to meet that requirement.

What Happens if Poland AEOI Rules Implementation Stalls

While the latest Commission action comes at a difficult time in Poland (on September 28, 2016, Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydlo sacked Finance Minister Pawel Szalamacha), it may not save Poland from later EU actions. If Poland does not respond in a satisfactory manner within the next two months, the Commission may refer Poland to the Court of Justice of the European Union.

Seattle FBAR Attorney | FATCA International Tax Lawyer

/0 Comments/in , /by

Due to Seattle’s proximity to Canada and a large amount of foreign professionals employed by high-tech firms (especially Microsoft), there is a large number of residents of Seattle, Washington, who have an obligation to report their foreign accounts. The great majority of these people need the assistance of professional Seattle FBAR attorney, but they find it difficult to decide who to retain. Often, they find that the attorney who they like lives outside of Seattle (for example, in Minneapolis) and they are not sure if they should prefer him over local Seattle FBAR Attorneys. This short essay is devoted to defining the term Seattle FBAR Attorney and the description of the main criteria which should guide you in retaining your Seattle FBAR Attorney.

Seattle FBAR Attorney: Definition

The term Seattle FBAR Attorney includes two groups of FBAR attorneys. First, all of the FBAR Attorneys who reside in Seattle, Washington, should be considered Seattle FBAR Attorneys.

The second group includes all FBAR Attorneys who reside outside of Seattle but offer their FBAR services to the residents of Seattle. Hence, the geographical location of your FBAR Attorney does not actually matter, only the geographical scope of his FBAR services.

Why is this case? The answer is relatively simple – FBAR is a federal compliance requirement. This means that neither the State of Washington nor the city of Seattle have anything to do with it.

Seattle FBAR Attorney: Knowledge of International Tax Law and FBARs is the Key Criteria for Retainer

Now that we know who is considered to be a Seattle FBAR Attorney, we can turn to the key criteria for choosing the right Seattle FBAR Attorney. There are two main considerations in choosing your FBAR Attorney: professional and personal.

The professional criteria consists of the requirement that your Seattle FBAR Attorney be an international tax lawyer with a lot of experience working with FBAR and FBAR-related issues. It is not enough for your attorney to simply know what the FBARs are and how to prepare them. FBAR issues are often deeply intertwined with other US international tax requirements that determine a taxpayer’s legal and tax positions. Therefore, your Seattle FBAR Attorney must have profound knowledge of other related international tax law issues, regulations and compliance requirements.

In addition to the knowledge of the subject-matter (i.e. “objective criteria”), there is also a subjective criteria – do you feel he is devoted to your case? The issue of trust is the most important consideration here – both the client and the attorney will feel frustrated with the case if there is a deep distrust between them. This distrust may have a great influence on the outcome of the case.

Thus, in retaining your Seattle FBAR Attorney, you need to be looking for an international tax attorney who satisfies both criteria.

Seattle FBAR Attorney: Means of Communication is Not an Issue

Is there a difference between the ability to communicate with an out-of-state Seattle FBAR Attorney and a local one? Should this issue become part of the retainer criteria?

The answer is “no”: the objective ability to communicate (i.e. the availability of the modes of communication, rather than an attorney’s personal attitude toward communicating with a client) is not an issue in retaining a Seattle FBAR Attorney. The development of modern communications technology has eliminated the entire advantage of retaining a local Seattle FBAR Attorney. Even if your attorney resides in Seattle, almost all of your communication with him is going to be through email, telephone and regular mail – i.e. the same as if your attorney resides in Minneapolis. The person-to-person meetings are now easily replaced by a video Skype conference.

Obviously, personal subjective ability (i.e. availability and readiness to communicate with his clients) of a Seattle FBAR Attorney (irrespective of where he actually resides) to communicate with his clients is part of the subjective criteria for the retainer already discussed above.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office to Retain Your Seattle FBAR Attorney

Based on the analysis above, Sherayzen Law Office should be one of the preferred choices in your search for a Seattle FBAR Attorney. Sherayzen Law Office holds a leading position in the world on FBAR compliance due to its highly-experienced international tax team, headed by its founder Attorney Eugene Sherayzen. We have helped our clients throughout the world with FBAR compliance and all related international tax issues, including voluntary disclosure of foreign accounts under the IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program, Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures, Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures, Delinquent FBAR Submission Procedures, Delinquent International Information Return Submission Procedures and Reasonable Cause Disclosures (also known as “noisy disclosures”).

This is why, if you are looking for a Seattle FBAR Attorney, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. today to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Houston FBAR Lawyer | FATCA Tax Attorney

/0 Comments/in , /by

The main thesis of this essay is that the designation of a Houston FBAR Lawyer should be applied based on the geography of services of an FBAR lawyer rather the physical location of a lawyer.

Houston FBAR Lawyer Definition: Legal FBAR Services Provided in Houston, Texas

The old designation where a Houston FBAR Lawyer designation was limited only to lawyers who reside in Houston was incorrect from the very beginning for two reasons.

First, it was based basically on the premise that an out-of-state lawyer cannot effectively provide any legal services to a client who resides in Houston, Texas. Perhaps, to a certain degree, this premise could have been applicable to the time when there were no telephones, emails or other forms of modern communication. However, since the appearance of telephone and Internet-based communications, a modern lawyer can provide services efficiently and effectively at almost any point around the globe as long as he is licensed to do so. Even the face-to-face meetings can now be replaced with video conferences over the Internet (for example, video Skype conferences).

Second, some credence should be given to this old designation in situation where the subject matter is based on local Texas law or required appearance in a Texas court. In these situations, a local attorney indeed appears to have an advantage over an out-of-state attorney (although, even this advantage may be nullified if this is a one-time court appearance or the out-of-state attorney is actually licensed to practice in the State of Texas).

However, a Houston FBAR lawyer deals strictly with just federal subject-matter, because FBAR is a federal law and any US international tax lawyer can practice it irrespective of his physical location as long as this attorney is licensed to practice law in any of the 50 states or District of Columbia. This means that, as long as an international tax lawyer offers his legal FBAR services in Houston, he should be considered a Houston FBAR lawyer even if he resides in Minneapolis.

Houston FBAR Lawyer’s Knowledge of US International Tax Law is the Key Factor

While the physical location of a lawyer is not important in determining whether he is a Houston FBAR lawyer, it is necessary that this lawyer be an international tax lawyer experienced in FBAR issues.

This emphasis on competence in US international tax law is based on the fact that FBAR is just a part of a much bigger area of US international tax law. In fact, the FBAR and international tax law are so completely interrelated this interaction between FBAR and other international tax issues is crucial to determining a taxpayer’s legal position. This is why your Houston FBAR lawyer should have a profound understanding of both FBARs and all other relevant US international tax compliance requirements.

Sherayzen Law Office Should Be Your Houston FBAR Lawyer

Sherayzen Law Office is a highly experienced international tax law firm with profound knowledge of FBARs and all other relevant US international tax compliance requirements. Our team consists of highly-experienced international tax professionals headed by the founder of the firm, attorney Eugene Sherayzen. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers worldwide with their FBAR issues and we can help you!

This is why, if you are looking for a Houston FBAR lawyer, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. today to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

France Asks Switzerland for Names of UBS Accountholders

/0 Comments/in , /by

This is an international tax lawyer news update: on September 26, 2016, Swiss tax officials confirmed that France asked Switzerland to provide the names of the holders of more than 45,000 UBS bank accounts. The request covers years 2006-2008.

Le Parisien newspaper, which first published extracts from the French request that the combined balance in the affected accounts exceeded CHF 11 billion (around $ 11.4 billion.). Le Parisien, which did not disclose how it gained access to the letter, also said the French authorities were able to identify the holders of 4,782 accounts.

The French request came to light after, on September 12th 2016, the Swiss Supreme Court over-ruled the lower court’s rejection of a similar request from the Netherlands for financial details of Dutch residents with accounts at UBS. Despite the Netherlands’ success, doubts still remain about the viability of the French request due to the fact that article 28 of the France-Switzerland tax treaty of 1967, as modified in 2010, provides that accounts that were closed before 2010 are not covered by the agreement and, therefore, should not be subject to information exchange.