International Tax Attorney Minnesota Minneapolis

FBAR (Report on Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts) is due on June 30, 2010

/in , , , , , /by

Pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act, 31 U.S.C. §5311 et seq., the Department of Treasury (the “DOT”) has established certain recordkeeping and filing requirements for United States persons with financial interests in or signature authority (and other comparable authority) over financial accounts maintained with financial institutions in foreign countries. If the aggregate balances of such foreign accounts exceed $10,000 at any time during the relevant year, FinCEN Form 114 formerly Form TD F 90-22.1 (the FBAR) must be filed with the DOT.

The FBAR must be filed by June 30 of each relevant year, including this year (2010).

Reporting Canadian Registered Retirement Savings Plan (RRSP) and Registered Retirement Income Fund (RRIF) Income to the IRS

/in , /by

U.S. citizens and resident aliens (for U.S. tax purposes) who have financial interest in Canadian Registered Retirements Savings Plans RRSPs)and/or Registered Retirement Income Funds (RRIFs) must report their RRSP and RRIF income to the IRS by using Form 8891. The taxpayers (even if resident aliens from Canada) must comply with this reporting requirement even if their earnings from these retirement plans are not considered as taxable income in Canada.

Prior to year 2003, the IRS maintained that RRSPs and RRIFs are foreign trusts and the annuitants and beneficiaries of these plans must annually file Form 3520 with the IRS. See IRS Announcement 2003-25. IRS was authorized to impose heavy penalties for failure to file Form 3520. 26 U.S.C. §6677.

In 2003, however, the IRS adopted a new simplified reporting regime which is still the current law. Under the new rules, U.S. citizens and resident aliens who hold interests in RRSPs and RRIFs only need to file the new Form 8891 in lieu of the burdensome Form 3520 required earlier. See IRS Announcement 2003-75. Moreover, in the new form, the filers are able to make the election under Article XVIII(7) of the U.S.-Canada income tax convention to defer U.S. income taxation of income accrued in the RRSP or RRIF. Id. The filers are still required to maintain supporting documentation relating to information required by Form 8891 (such as Canadian Forms T4RSP, T4RIF, or NR4, and periodic or annual statements issued by the custodian of the RRSP or RRIF). Id. Nevertheless, the new simplified reporting regime substantially reduces the reporting burden of taxpayers who hold interests in RRSPs and RRIFs.

If you have any questions with respect to your RRSP and/or RRIF income, or if you failed to disclose this income during the prior years, CALL Sherayzen Law Office to discuss your case NOW!

Definition of “U.S. person” for FBAR (Report on Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts) Purposes

/1 Comment/in , , /by

Since October of 2008, the definition of a “U.S. person” has been going through a turbulent phase of uncertainty with periodic expansions and retractions. The pre-2008 FBAR instructions (dating back to July of 2000 version) defined the “U.S. person” broadly as: “(1) a citizen or resident of the United States, (2) a domestic partnership, (3) a domestic corporation, or (4) a domestic estate or trust.” See IRS Announcement 2010-16.

Two important features of this definition stand out. First, the term “person” is defined to include not only individuals, but also virtually any type of business entity, estate or trust. 31 C.F.R. §103.11(z) Even a single-member LLC, which is generally disregarded for tax purposes, may be classified as a U.S. person because it has a separate juridical existence from its owner. A partnership or a corporation created or organized in the United States is considered to “domestic” under 26 U.S.C. §7701(a)(4). Second, the definition of who should be considered as a U.S. resident is interpreted under 26 U.S.C. §7701. Under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b), an individual is a U.S. resident if he meets any of the three bright-line tests: (1) lawful admission for permanent residence to the United States (“green card”); (2) substantial presence in the U.S.: the sum of the number of days on which such individual was present in the United States during the current year and the 2 preceding calendar years (when multiplied by the applicable multiplier determined under the following table) equals or exceeds 183 days; (3) and first-year election to be treated as a resident under 26 U.S.C. §7701(b)(4). Thus, the definition of a U.S. resident under the tax rules is much broader than the one used in immigration law.

In October of 2008, the IRS revised the FBAR instructions and further expanded the definition of a “U.S. person” by including the persons “in and doing business in the United States.” This revision caused a widespread confusion among tax professionals. The outburst of comments and questions prompted the IRS to issue Announcements 2009-51 and 2010-16, suspending FBAR filing requirement through June of 2010 (i.e. for calendar years 2008 and 2009) for persons who are not U.S. citizens, U.S. residents, and domestic entities. Instead, the tax professionals were referred back to July of 2000 FBAR definition of a “U.S. person.”

In the meantime, in February of 2010, the IRS published new Proposed FBAR regulations under 31 C.F.R. §103. The proposed rules modify the definition of a “U.S. person” as follows: “a citizen or resident of the United States, or an entity, including but not limited to a corporation, partnership, trust or limited liability company, created, organized, or formed under the laws of the United States, any state, the District of Columbia, the Territories, and Insular Possessions of the United States or the Indian Tribes.” 75 Fed. Reg. 8845 (proposed February 23, 2010) (to be codified as 31 C.F.R. 103.24(b)). This definition applies even if an entity elected to be disregarded for tax purposes. Id. The determination of a U.S. resident status is to be done according to 26 U.S.C. §7701(b) and regulations there under, except the meaning of the “United States”(which is to be defined by 31 U.S.C. 103.11(nn)). Id.

Thus, if the proposed regulations will ultimately be codified in their current form, the definition of the “U.S. person” will be slightly broader than that of the July of 2000, but will represent a major regression from October 2008 definition. Nevertheless, based on even existing (July of 2000) definition of the “U.S. person,” the IRS has been able to cast a wide net over U.S. taxpayers, trying to force disclosure of as many foreign financial accounts as possible.

House passes the Tax Extenders Act of 2009

/in , , /by

On December 9, 2009, the U.S. House of Representatives approved H.R. 4213, the “Tax Extenders Act of 2009.” The bill would extend for one more year more than forty tax provisions that are set to expire at the end of this year, including the research credit and a number of important tax breaks for individuals. In order to offset more than $30 billion in tax relief, the bill also requires stricter reporting on U.S.-held foreign assets by foreign financial institutions and U.S. citizens.

Three provisions draw particular attention. First, starting with tax year 2013, the foreign financial institutions, foreign trusts, and foreign corporations are required to obtain and provide information from each of their account holders to determine if any account is American-owned. Foreign financial institutions must also comply with verification procedures and to report any U.S. accounts maintained by the institution on an annual basis. Then, any foreign financial institution that complies with the new verification and reporting standards would be subject to a 30 percent tax on income from U.S. financial assets held by the foreign institution. Where the owner of the account is a foreign government, an international organization, a foreign central bank, or any other class identified by the Treasury Department as posing a low risk of tax evasion, the withholding tax would not apply. Notice, the H.R. 4213’s requirements only apply if the aggregate value of the accounts in the foreign institutions exceeds $10,000. Hence, the basic FBAR rule that the owners of foreign financial accounts with the aggregate value of below $10,000 do not need to report the accounts still applies.

Second, H.R. 4213 requires any U.S. taxpayer with a foreign financial asset exceeding $50,000 in value to report the asset with their tax return. The penalty for failure to report a foreign financial asset would be $10,000 and could possibly increase to as much as $50,000.

Third, additional annual reporting requirements (similar to other U.S. holders of foreign assets) are imposed on the shareholders of passive foreign investment companies and U.S. owners of foreign trusts. A U.S. taxpayer failing to report a foreign owned trust would pay the greater of $10,000 or 35 percent of the amount of the trust.

Finally, the Tax Extenders Act of 2009 increases the tax rate on so-called “carried interest” levied on investment partnerships by treating carried interest as normal income and taxing it at the standard income tax rate (currently 35 percent) rather than the capital gains rate (currently 15 percent). This measure would have a particular impact on most private equities and hedge funds (which operate as partnerships with a general partner managing the fund and contributing partners supplying the capital), because the managers of these funds generally receive two forms of compensation from the fund: a small percentage of the fund’s assets like a contributing partner, and a higher percentage of the fund’s annual earnings that only the fund’s manager receives (i.e. carried interest).

While most of the provisions of the H.R. 4213 are expected to pass the Senate, the “carried interest” provision might present a significant problem.

Definition of Foreign Earned Income for the purposes of Foreign Income Exclusion under I.R.C. §911

/1 Comment/in , /by

Under I.R.C. §911, if certain conditions are met, a qualified individual can exclude as much $91,400 (for tax year 2009) of foreign earned income from taxable gross income. Two questions arise: what is earned income, and when is such income considered to be foreign earned income?

Earned Income

Earned income usually means wages, salaries, or professional fees, and other amounts received as compensation for personal services actually rendered, but does not include that part of the compensation derived by the taxpayer for personal services rendered by him to a corporation which represents a distribution of earnings or profits rather than a reasonable allowance as compensation for the personal services actually rendered.

The issue of earned income becomes complicated in a situation where a taxpayer engaged in a trade or business in which both personal services and capital are material income producing factors. Capital is a material income-producing factor if the operation of the business requires substantial inventories or substantial investments in plant, machinery, or other equipment. In this case, a reasonable allowance as compensation for the personal services rendered by the taxpayer, not in excess of 30 percent of his share of the net profits of such trade or business, shall be considered as earned income (I.R.C. §911(d)(2)(B)). This rule, however, would not apply where the capital is merely incidental to the production of income (see Rousku v. Commissioner (Tax. Ct.1971)).

In a situation where the services rendered abroad culminate in a product that is either sold or licensed, it is difficult to determine whether the proceeds are earned income. Usually, such issues are resolved on a case-by-case basis.

Foreign Earned Income

Earned income is usually considered as “foreign earned income” if it is attributable to services actually rendered by the taxpayer while oversees. The place at which the taxpayer receives the income is not relevant. For example, an employee working abroad for a U.S. employer does not lose the exclusions by having her compensation paid into a bank account in the United States. Note, however, that services rendered in anticipation of, or after the conclusion of an oversees assignment are not covered by the exclusion. I.R.C. §911(b)(1)(A) and §911(d)(2)