offshore voluntary disclosure lawyers Minneapolis

Swiss Bank Program Summary | Offshore Accounts Lawyer

/0 Comments/in /by

On December 29, 2016, the US Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the IRS announced that they have reached final resolutions with Swiss banks that have met the requirements of the Swiss Bank Program. In this article, I would like to provide the Swiss Bank Program summary and explain the importance of the Program to the overall US international tax enforcement efforts.

Swiss Bank Program Summary: History of the Swiss Bank Program

The Swiss Bank Program was a groundbreaking initiative of the DOJ and the IRS. It was the very first time when the tax authorities of one country (United States) conducted a voluntary disclosure program for banks in a different country (Switzerland) as if it were not an independent sovereign territory.

At the core of the Swiss Bank Program was the promise of the DOJ not to prosecute Swiss banks that would come forward and participate in the Swiss Bank Program. The banks were divided into four categories.

Category 1 banks were not eligible to participate because they were already under the DOJ investigation.

Category 2 banks had to pay a penalty and consisted of banks for which was a reason to believe that they committed tax-related criminal offenses with respect to undisclosed foreign accounts owned by US persons. In addition to paying a penalty, Category 2 banks also had to disclose all of their cross-border activities and provide detailed information with respect to US-owned accounts to the DOJ and the IRS.

Category 3 consisted of banks that established, with the assistance of an independent internal investigation of their cross-border business, that they did not commit tax or monetary transaction-related offenses and had an effective compliance program in place. These banks did not pay any penalties.

Finally, category 4 was reserved for Swiss banks that were able to demonstrate that they met certain criteria for deemed-compliance under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). They also did not pay any penalties.

Swiss Bank Program Summary: Results

Let’s discuss the results of the Program in our Swiss Bank Program summary. The Swiss Bank Program was announced on August 29, 2013 and it was in operation until December 29, 2016. During that time the DOJ executed non-prosecution agreements with 80 Category 2 banks and collected more than $1.36 billion in penalties. The Department also signed a non-prosecution agreement with Finacor, a Swiss asset management firm. Between July and December 2016, four banks and one bank cooperative satisfied the requirements of Category 3, making them eligible for Non-Target Letters. No banks qualified under Category 4 of the Program.

Swiss Bank Program Summary: Legacy

No Swiss Bank Program summary would be complete without a discussion of the legacy of the Program. In our Swiss Bank Program summary, let’s divide the impact of the Program into four parts: impact on Switzerland as a bank secrecy fortress, impact on other tax havens, impact on US tax compliance and the precedent for the future.

The most immediate impact was felt in Switzerland itself. The Swiss Bank Program has in effect completely destroyed the vaunted Swiss bank secrecy laws with respect to US taxpayers and gave the green light to other European countries to conduct similar interventions. In essence, the Swiss Bank Program has completely destroyed the main fortress of bank secrecy that had existed for centuries.

The destruction of the Swiss bank secrecy laws also influenced the other tax havens. Fearing a similar DOJ intervention, the rest of the world’s tax havens have significantly softened their own bank secrecy laws and have agreed to an automatic exchange of information regarding their account owners with the IRS. There can be no doubt that the Swiss Bank Program has greatly facilitated the implementation of FATCA on the global scale.

The combined effect of the Swiss Bank Program, the softening of the bank secrecy laws in tax havens and the implementation of FATCA was acutely felt by noncompliant US taxpayers. Tens of thousands of US taxpayers participated in the IRS voluntary disclosure programs (often, they were urged by the Swiss banks to enter the OVDP, because this is how the banks mitigated their own penalties under the Program). Many more tens of thousands of taxpayers became tax compliant through a noisy or quiet disclosure. The greater awareness of US international tax laws among the tax preparers has greatly improved US annual tax compliance, bringing huge amounts of additional revenue to the US treasury.

Finally, no Swiss Bank Program summary would be complete without mentioning the potential for repetition of the Swiss Bank Program in another country. It may not necessarily come in the same format, but it is very likely that a version of the Program will be implemented elsewhere, especially since the IRS commitment to offshore tax compliance will remain a priority in the immediate future.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help With Your Undisclosed Foreign Accounts

If you have undisclosed foreign accounts or other foreign assets, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help. Our legal team will thoroughly analyze your case, explore your voluntary disclosure options, prepare all of the necessary legal documents and tax forms, and defend your case against the IRS.

We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers to bring their tax affairs into full compliance and we can help you! Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Offshore Voluntary Compliance Draws 100,000 Taxpayers and $10 Billion

/0 Comments/in , /by

On October 21, 2016, the IRS announced that more than 100,000 US taxpayers participated in its Offshore Voluntary Compliance programs paying a total of more than $10 billion. Let’s explore these Offshore Voluntary Compliance numbers in more depth.

OVDP is Still the King of Offshore Voluntary Compliance but Its Impact is More Targeted

The IRS flagship Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) is still the most profitable program for the IRS in terms of actual amount of dollars paid by the taxpayers. More than 55,800 taxpayers have come into the OVDP to resolve their past US tax noncompliance. They paid a total of more than $9.9 billion in taxes, interest and penalties since 2009.

These numbers are very impressive, but they also point to a more targeted influence of the OVDP compared to its past. In October of 2015, the IRS reported that more than 54,000 taxpayers entered into the OVDP and paid more than $8 billion. In other words, in the past year (November 2015 – October 2016), about 1,400 taxpayers entered into the OVDP and paid an additional $1.8 billion.

What this means is that the IRS was highly successful in properly addressing the basic original injustice of the OVDP program which was equally painful to small taxpayers and large taxpayers as well as non-willful taxpayers and willful taxpayers. The OVDP now draws a more limited number of people with substantial foreign assets who pay a higher penalty for their prior noncompliance.

The only danger that still remains is the issue of incompetent tax advisors who might be entering their wealthier clients into the OVDP irrespective of their willfulness or non-willfulness.

Streamlined Procedures is the Favorite Offshore Voluntary Compliance Option for “Smaller” Taxpayers

The IRS data also reflects the tremendous popularity of the Streamlined Procedures among the middle-class taxpayers with limited international asset exposure. According to the IRS, as of October of 2016, 48,000 taxpayers have made use of various Streamlined Procedures (SDOP and SFOP) to resolve their prior non-willful US international tax noncompliance. These taxpayers paid a total of about $450 million in taxes, interest and penalties.

In the prior report (October of 2015), the IRS stated that only 30,000 taxpayers used the Streamlined Procedures; 20,000 of them after June of 2014. This means that the Streamlined Procedures continues to attract the great majority of the taxpayers with smaller foreign assets.

Offshore Voluntary Compliance is One of he Key Strategies to Resolve Prior US International Tax Noncompliance

Undoubtedly, Offshore Voluntary Compliance options offer the key strategies to resolve prior US international tax noncompliance. The other options, such as Reasonable Cause Disclosure and Quiet Disclosure, are much more limited in scope and application. In fact, in the case of a Quiet Disclosure, this option may put the taxpayers into a position more dangerous than they were in before their quiet disclosure due to the increased danger of detection without any protection offered by the Offshore Voluntary Compliance options.

Doing nothing is also not a good option for noncompliant taxpayers, because of the increased risk that their prior noncompliance will be deemed willful once the IRS discovers their noncompliance.

The risk of the IRS detection of prior tax noncompliance is very high in today’s world. This detection may come not just from the IRS investigations of a specific taxpayer, the massive disclosures by the banks already being investigated by the IRS or even from the banks that provided information as a result of the Department of Justice’s Swiss Bank Program. Today, the primary danger of detection comes from the third-party reporting under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and the network of inter-governmental agreements (IGAs) between the U.S. and partner jurisdictions.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office to Secure Professional Help With Your Offshore Voluntary Compliance Case

If you have undisclosed foreign accounts or any other foreign assets, contact Sherayzen Law Office as soon as possible for professional help with your voluntary disclosure.

Sherayzen Law Office is a leader in offshore voluntary disclosures which will help you with your entire case, including: the original determination of the best Offshore Voluntary Compliance option; the implementation of this option, including the preparation of all relevant legal documents and tax forms; the filing of the voluntary disclosure package; and the defense of your voluntary disclosure positions against the IRS.

We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the world to bring their US tax affairs into full compliance in the least painful and most beneficial way, and we can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Initial Consultation!

Hapoalim Prepares for Settlement with DOJ | FATCA Tax Attorney

/0 Comments/in , /by

On October 6, 2016, Israeli bank Hapoalim Ltd. announced that, in order to cover the costs of a future settlement with the US Department of Justice (DOJ), it will add a $70 million charge to an existing $50 million provision in its third-quarter results. The expected settlement will cover Hapoalim’s role in helping US tax residents to evade their US tax obligations.

In its news release, Hapoalim stated that its representatives held an initial discussion with the DOJ on September 30, 2016, to discuss the future settlement. The bank did not indicate whether $120 million in charges that it booked to date is the actual amount that Hapoalim will pay under its settlement with the DOJ. Rather, the news release emphasizes the uncertainty that still exists with respect to the actual amount.

The issue of the DOJ investigation dates back to the year 2011. In its recent (June 30, 2016) financial statements Hapoalim confirmed that its Swiss subsidiary Bank Hapoalim (Switzerland) Ltd. had been notified by Swiss authorities in 2011 that it was being investigated by the US government as a result of the DOJ’s suspicions that the bank had assisted US clients in evading federal taxes. The Swiss subsidiary could not resolve this issue in 2013 in the DOJ’s Swiss Bank Program due to the fact that it could not be classified as a Category 2 bank.

It is important to remember that the DOJ is not the only institution that is going after Hapoalim. The State of New York is conducting its own review. In its news release, Hapoalim indicated that the $120 million charge is not related to the New York investigation.

While all of this legal uncertainty makes it difficult for Hapoalim to assess its future liability under any deferred prosecution agreement, one can compare its situation with Bank Leumi. In 2014, Bank Leumi Group entered into a Deferred Prosecution Agreement with the DOJ under which it paid $270 million ($157 million of this penalty was allocated to Bank Leumi’s Swiss accounts held by US taxpayers).

If we rely on this precedent, it appears that Hapoalim is greatly underestimating its penalty, because Bank Leumi and Hapoalim are fairly similar in size as well as their actions in soliciting US clients. One also must not forget about the possible future indictments of Hapoalim’s employees (at least in the United States) by the DOJ.