FBAR Penalties: Outrageous, Draconian but Real

/in , /by

If you have undisclosed foreign financial accounts that should have been reported on the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (“FBAR”), you may be facing FBAR penalties. By far, the FBAR contains the most severe civil penalties and significant criminal penalties among all international tax forms. It is important to understand that these penalties, despite their apparently extreme nature, are real and you may be facing them.

FBAR Criminal Penalties

The two most common cases for criminal prosecution are willful failure to file an FBAR and willful filing a false FBAR, especially when combined with potential tax evasion. The criminal FBAR penalties in these cases may be up to the limit set in 31 U.S.C. § 5322. This means that, potentially, a person who willfully fails to file an FBAR or files a false FBAR may be subject to a prison term of up to 10 years, criminal penalties of up to $500,000 or both.

FBAR Civil Penalties

In addition to criminal penalties, FBAR penalties include a rich arsenal of civil penalties. The exact penalties that a person may be facing will depend on that person’s particular circumstances; these circumstances must be evaluated by an experienced international tax attorney.

In general, where the taxpayer willfully failed to file the FBAR, or destroyed or otherwise failed to maintain proper records of account, and the IRS learned about it (e.g. during an investigation), the taxpayer is likely to face the worst-case scenario with draconian penalties. The IRS may impose civil FBAR penalties of up to the greater of $100,000, or 50 percent of the value of the account at the time of the violation (in addition to the already discussed criminal FBAR penalties of up to $500,000, or 10 years of imprisonment, or both).

In certain circumstances, it is possible to mitigate the penalties, but this issue should be evaluated by an experienced international tax attorney. If mitigation is an option for you, then it may dramatically alter your calculation of willful penalties.

A less severe round of civil FBAR penalties may be imposed if a US person negligently and non-willfully failed to file the FBAR, and the IRS learned about it during an investigation. Unlike the first scenario, there are unlikely to be criminal penalties for the non-willful failure to file the FBAR. Rather, the taxpayer is likely to face non-willful FBAR penalties of up to $10,000 per violation (i.e. each unreported account in each year). However, where there is a pattern of negligence, additional civil FBAR penalties of no more than $50,000 may be imposed per each violation. Again, in limited circumstances, the taxpayer maybe eligible for the mitigation the penalties, but this issue should be evaluated by an experienced international tax attorney. While the impact of non-willful mitigation is not likely to be as dramatic as that of the willful penalties, such mitigation may still have a significant impact on the total number of penalties.

Reasonable Cause Exception and OVDP FAQ #17 (OVDP Is Now Closed)

There are two major exceptions to FBAR penalties. First, if you are able to establish reasonable cause, you may be able to escape all FBAR penalties. Again, an experienced international tax attorney should be consulted on whether you have a valid reasonable cause exception and the chances that this strategy will succeed. Second, in general, pursuant to OVDP FAQ #17 (obsolete), you may be able to avoid FBAR penalties if you have no additional U.S. tax liability as a result of  your voluntary disclosure and you already reported all of the income associated with the undisclosed foreign financial account on your tax returns. I cannot stress enough the importance of consulting an international tax attorney to  determine whether your case fits within the requirements of the OVDP Q&A #17.

IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program Closed

It is important to note that the FBAR penalty structure outlined above is not followed by the official IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) now closed. Rather, OVDP replaces this penalty structure with its own three-tiered penalty system with the emphasis on the aggregate balance of all accounts, rather than the number of accounts. Moreover, there is no reasonable cause exception to the OVDP (now closed) structure of penalties. However, OVDP FAQ #17 can still be applied to  the foreign financial accounts of the participating taxpayer whenever the situation warrants its application.

Given the enormous differences that exist between the IRS OVDP and the traditional statutory FBAR penalties, it is crucially important to consult an experienced international tax attorney in choosing your way to reduce your FBAR penalties.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help With Your FBAR Penalties

If you have undisclosed foreign financial accounts and you are facing the FBAR penalties, contact Sherayzen Law Office as soon as possible. Our international tax firm will thoroughly analyze your case, estimate your FBAR penalties (both, under the traditional and OVDP (obsolete) penalty structures), determine the options and strategies that may be used in your Offshore Voluntary Disclosure, and implement your case plan (including the creation of any necessary legal documents and tax forms).

We are the tax experts you are looking for to handle your case!

Foreign Accounts Tax Attorney: FATCA – Nowhere to Hide

/in , /by

As a foreign accounts tax attorney, I get a lot of questions from US taxpayers with undisclosed offshore accounts with respect to what FATCA means for the purposes of global transparency. As any foreign accounts tax attorney would tell you, FATCA will and already does make a huge dent in U.S. tax non-compliance. The purpose of this article is to explain why that is the case from a perspective of a foreign accounts tax attorney.

FATCA Background

The Foreign Accounts Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) was enacted as part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act of 2010 (“HIRE Act” or “Act”). From the perspective of a foreign accounts tax attorney, there are two major parts of FATCA that make this law so unique.

First, FATCA imposed a new set of foreign asset disclosure requirements on U.S. persons which has to be filed with a U.S. tax return: Form 8938. Second, FATCA imposes an international reporting regime of offshore accounts owned by U.S. persons. This regime is enforced through a network of FATCA implementation treaties which are negotiated between the IRS and governments of foreign jurisdictions.

Form 8938 Reporting Requirement

Form 8938 compliance is one of the most immediate concerns for a foreign accounts tax attorney. In a previous article, I detailed Form 8938 reporting requirements. For the purposes of this article, I will briefly summarize these requirements here. In general, under IRC section 6038D, disclosure is required if the aggregate value of all “specified foreign financial assets” as defined in the statute, exceeds $50,000 (compare this threshold to the FBAR requirement of $10,000). This information must be attached to the current year tax returns. This provision of FATCA is effective as of tax year 2011. Covered individuals or entities must disclose the maximum value of the asset(s) during the year, as well as other pertinent information regarding the account, stock, financial instrument, contract, interest, or related items.

Worldwide Foreign Accounts Reporting

In addition to targeting U.S. taxpayers directly with Form 8938, FATCA also establishes the framework for the worldwide reporting of US-owned foreign accounts by foreign financial institutions (the “FFI”). Through a network of FATCA-implementation treaties with other foreign governments, the FFIs will be (and, in some countries, already are) required to report foreign financial accounts owed by U.S. persons and impose a withholding tax on the earnings of these accounts.

In essence, as a Foreign Accounts Tax Attorney would assert, FATCA turns the FFIs into the IRS withholding and reporting agents on an unprecedented, systematic scale of the entire globe (or, at least, the participating countries which are likely to include some of the largest world economies, particularly European countries and Japan).

Cumulative Impact of FATCA Provisions on the Non-Compliant US Taxpayers

In the long term, as a Foreign Accounts Tax Attorney, I believe that FATCA has the ability to create the environment of global tax compliance with respect to undisclosed foreign accounts – probably, not 100%, but close. Of course, a lot will depend on the ability of the US government to promote FATCA implementation treaties around the globe. As a Foreign Accounts Tax Attorney, I anticipate great unwillingness of countries like China and Russia to fully participate in the Program. Nevertheless, at this point, it appears that Western Europe, Canada, Australia and Japan are likely join the global web of FATCA enforcement. I predict that special pressure may be applied to certain Central American countries, Singapore and the Caribbean countries to enroll them into FATCA compliance as soon as possible.

For non-compliant US taxpayers, this means that it is time to consider the impact of global FATCA enforcement as well as learn from the lessons of the Program for Swiss Banks. This means that the voluntary disclosure options should be considered as soon as possible to avoid dire consequences later. This type of analysis should be undertaken by an experienced Foreign Accounts Tax Attorney.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help with the Voluntary Disclosure of the Offshore Accounts

If you have undisclosed offshore accounts, contact Sherayzen Law Office for help with your voluntary disclosure as soon as possible. Our experienced Foreign Accounts Tax law firm will thoroughly analyze your case, identify your voluntary disclosure options, prepare all of the necessary legal documents and tax forms, file your voluntary disclosure package and rigorously defend your case during the IRS negotiations.

OVDP Lawyers Little Rock: Raiffeisen and Postfinance Join Program for Swiss Banks

/in , /by

On December 13, 2013, two Swiss Banks, Raiffeisen and Postfinance, joined the growing number of Swiss Banks who announced their participation in the The Program for Non-Prosecution Agreements or Non-Target Letters for Swiss Banks (the “Program”) initiated by the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) on August 29, 2013 – an event long anticipated by many OVDP lawyers, including the OVDP lawyers Little Rock. These news further confirm the precarious situation of the U.S. taxpayers with undisclosed foreign accounts in Switzerland.

OVDP Lawyers Little Rock: The Program

The DOJ, in cooperation with the Swiss government, instituted the Program at the end of August of 2013. I already described the Program in detail in another article; for the purpose of the present writing, it is sufficient to state that the Program is essentially a voluntary disclosure program for Swiss Banks, not that dissimilar from the OVDP (the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program) currently available to U.S. taxpayers. Essentially, in return for turning over very detailed information about their cross-border operations and U.S. accountholders with accounts over $50,000 (going back to August 1, 2008), the banks receive either a Non-Prosecution Letter or a Non-Target Letter which basically promises that the U.S. government is not going to criminally prosecute or target the participating banks. As in the OVDP, the Program excludes banks currently under the DOJ investigation from participating in the Program. Another similar with the OVDP feature – category 2 banks will pay a hefty penalty.

OVDP Lawyers Little Rock: Why the Joining of Raiffeisen and PostFinance Significant

Size matters, and this why the cooperation of Raiffeisen and PostFinance is important. Raiffeisen is the third largest bank in Switzerlan. Postfinance, is the banking arm of the Swiss state-owned postal services company and the fifth-biggest retail financial institution in Switzerland.

OVDP Lawyers Little Rock: Growing Number of Swiss Banks Join the Program

A total of seven banks (among them: St. Galler Kantonalbank, Valiant Holding, Berner Kantonalbank and Vontobel Holding AG) have now come forward to say that they are participating in the Program. Most of them will participate as a Category 2 bank while the rest intend to participate as a Category 3 bank. PostFinance will be participating in the Program as a Category 2 bank, while Raiffeisen said that it is likely that it will register as a Category 3 bank (even though, the bank did not rule the possibility that some of the its U.S. clients may have been non-compliant with U.S. tax laws). It seems that Vontobel is the only other bank that adopted this position.

These seven banks, however, constitute but a tiny part of the total number of banks who are likely to participate in the Program. While the total number of banks varies, it is expected that about 100 banks are expected to enter the Program by December 31, 2013, deadline.

The DOJ strongly encourages Swiss Banks to participate in the Program and promises tough action with respect to non-participating Banks. “Banks that facilitated U.S. tax evasion but do not come forward by the December 31 deadline bear significant risks that information provided by others may cause the bank to be targeted and prosecuted,” said Assistant Attorney General Kathryn Keneally.

Side Effect on Category 1 Banks

The Program has had a peculiar side effect on the Category 1 banks who are not eligible to participate in the Program (e.g. UBS, Credit Suisse, Julius Baer, et cetera). The cases of these banks have been frozen by the DOJ pending the resolution of the Program in the wider Swiss banking sector.

As some OVDP Lawyers Little Rock may predict, the number of banks that participate in the Program will likely affect the DOJ’s attitude toward the other banks.

Direct Effect of the Program: Non-Compliant US Taxpayers Should Consider Voluntary Disclosure NOW

The effect of the Program on US Taxpayers with undisclosed Swiss accounts is very direct and severe. They are quickly running out of options. If they do not consider their voluntary disclosure options at this point, they may lose the ability to participate in the IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (“OVDP”).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help with the Voluntary Disclosure of Your Swiss Financial Accounts

Given the time limitations, it is extremely important that you contact Sherayzen Law Office as soon as possible. Owner Eugene Sherayzen, an experienced offshore voluntary disclosure attorney will thoroughly analyze your case, identify the available voluntary disclosure options, prepare your voluntary disclosure package and negotiate the Closing Agreement with the IRS (for the OVDP cases).

2014 First Quarter Underpayment and Overpayment Interest Rates

/in , /by

On December 9, 2013, the IRS announced that the underpayment and overpayment interest rates will remain the same for the calendar quarter beginning January 1, 2014. The rates will be:

  • three (3) percent for overpayments [two (2) percent in the case of a corporation];
  • three (3) percent for underpayments;
  • five (5) percent for large corporate underpayments; and
  • one-half (0.5) percent for the portion of a corporate overpayment exceeding $10,000.

Under the Internal Revenue Code, the rate of interest is determined on a quarterly basis. For taxpayers other than corporations, the overpayment and underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points.

Generally, in the case of a corporation, the underpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 3 percentage points and the overpayment rate is the federal short-term rate plus 2 percentage points. The rate for large corporate underpayments is the federal short-term rate plus 5 percentage points. The rate on the portion of a corporate overpayment of tax exceeding $10,000 for a taxable period is the federal short-term rate plus one-half (0.5) of a percentage point.

The rate for large corporate underpayments is the federal short-term rate plus 5 percentage points. The rate on the portion of a corporate overpayment of tax exceeding $10,000 for a taxable period is the federal short-term rate plus one-half (0.5) of a percentage point.

Interest factors for daily compound interest for annual rates of 0.5 percent are published in Appendix A of Revenue Ruling 2011-32. Interest factors for daily compound interest for annual rates of 2 percent, 3 percent and 5 percent are published in Tables 7, 9, 11, and 15 of Rev. Proc. 95-17, 1995-1 C.B. 561, 563, 565, and 569.

Valiant Holding AG Enters DOJ Program for Banks; Others will Follow

/in , /by

With the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority (“FINMA”) deadline ending today on December 9, 2013, Valiant Holding AG made it official – it is the first bank to officially announce its intention to enter the The Program for Non-Prosecution Agreements or Non-Target Letters for Swiss Banks (the “Program”). While the first one to do it, Valiant Holding AG will definitely not be the only bank to do it. As Sherayzen Law Office predicted earlier, there will be an avalanche of Swiss Banks following in the footsteps of Valiant Holding AG.

Background

On August 29, 2013, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the government of Switzerland issued a joint statement instituting The Program for Non-Prosecution Agreements or Non-Target Letters for Swiss Banks (the “Program”). Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. has covered the specific details of the Program in a previous article. Essentially, the Program functions as a voluntary disclosure program for Swiss banks, similar to the US Internal Revenue Service’s Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (“OVDP”) now closed for U.S. taxpayers holding undisclosed offshore accounts. In general, in return for providing extensive disclosure of the accounts held by U.S. taxpayers, banks that qualify for the Program can avoid U.S. criminal prosecution.

As also explained earlier, the Program is only open to non-“Category 1” banks (fourteen Category 1 Swiss banks are already under criminal investigations by the DOJ, including Credit Suisse, Rahn & Bodmer, Zuercher Kantonalbank, Basler Kantonalbank, and Bank Leumi, among others). As I explained earlier in another article, under the Program, “Category 2” banks will face potentially substantial penalties.

There is actually fear that the costs of compliance combined with penalties will simply overwhelm a large portion of small Swiss banks, with some predicting the loss of at least one-quarter of the Swiss banks who enter the Program. It is not known whether Valiant Holding AG has sufficient resources to sustain the effort required to participate in the Program, though no one really raised this issue yet.

FINMA Deadline of December 9, 2013

According to Swiss regulatory officials, Swiss banks had it until today (December 9th) to notify the FINMA whether they intend to participate in the Program. This is why Valiant Holding AG announced its participation today.

FINMA Encourages Swiss Banks to Participate in the Program

Recently, various members of the FINMA, such as their CEO, Dr. Patrick Raaflaub, have issued statements and press releases encouraging various Swiss banks to enter the Program. (FINMA is responsible for implementing the Financial Market Supervision Act and financial market legislation, and according to their website, “As an independent supervisory authority, FINMA acts to protect the interests of creditors, investors and insured persons and to ensure the proper functioning of the financial markets.”) For example, in a recent edition of the Swiss Neue Zürcher Zeitung newspaper, Raaflaub emphasized the strong possibility that Swiss banks that chose not to enter the Program would likely face years of costly legal risks and even more coercive enforcement measures by the DOJ in the future. Further, although participation in the Program is onerous, he noted that it would provide participating Swiss banks with long-needed legal certainty.

Adding to the pressure that Swiss banks face is the fact that Raoul Weil, former UBS Chairman and chief executive officer of Global Wealth Management & Business Banking, was arrested in October while on holiday at a luxury hotel in Italy. Weil agreed to extradition to the US for trial for allegedly assisting U.S. persons in hiding $20 billion from the IRS.

The various public statements by FINMA, however, have understandably caused consternation among Swiss bankers. There is a sentiment in Switzerland that FINMA is not doing enough to protect Swiss interest and to counter the U.S. DOJ’s tactics.

Many Swiss Banks Likely to Enter the Program Following Valiant Holding AG

Despite the anti-US rhetoric, however, it appears that numerous non-Category 1 Swiss banks will follow the example set by Valiant Holding AG and will likely enter the Program today. According to recent US news reports, most of Switzerland’s approximately 300 or so smaller banks are expected to enter the Program (FINMA has not disclosed yet as to how many have done so). Therefore, Valiant Holding AG announcement, while somewhat historic, is not actually surprising.

A spokesman for Berner Kantonalbank noted that, “Participating in the program is absolutely an issue for us” and that the board would take a final vote on the matter; a spokeswoman for south Switzerland’s Corner Bank also stated that the bank was considering entering the Program. Other banks, such as Vontobel, EFG International, Banque Cantonale Vaudoise, St. Galler Kantonalbank, and Linth Bank, either have not made a decision yet, or did not issue public comments as of last week.

U.S. Taxpayers With Undisclosed Accounts In Valiant Holding AG and Other Swiss Banks Must Act Quickly

The Program presents a tremendous risk to U.S. taxpayers with undisclosed financial accounts in Valiant Holding AG and other Swiss Banks. Not only are their accounts likely to be disclosed to the IRS, but it will be done in a very short period of time.

As noted earlier, the due date for these banks is today; within a short period of time, Valiant Holding AG and other Swiss Banks will likely proceed with their disclosures to the DOJ and the IRS. In these case, U.S. taxpayers will likely face substantial civil and potential criminal penalties if they continue to hold undisclosed accounts or if their cases are not handled properly.

Therefore, U.S. taxpayers who either hold or previously held undisclosed bank accounts in Valiant Holding AG or any of the Swiss banks eligible for the Program should seek competent and experienced legal assistance as soon as possible to avoid potentially disastrous consequences.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Experienced, Professional Legal Help With Your Offshore Voluntary Disclosure

The experienced offshore voluntary disclosure attorney Mr. Eugene Sherayzen at Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. can help with your all of your voluntary disclosure issues. We are a team of highly experienced team of international tax professionals who are dedicated to helping our clients. Our ethical creative balanced solutions have helped people throughout the world to properly disclose their foreign financial accounts to the IRS while avoiding the numerous voluntary disclosure pitfalls.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office NOW!