Posts

2024 Form 8938 Threshold | US International Tax Lawyers

/in /by

US taxpayers must file Form 8938 with their US tax returns if they hold foreign financial assets with an aggregate value exceeding a relevant balance threshold. This article discusses the 2024 Form 8938 threshold limits.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Form 8938 Background

Form 8938 burst onto the US international compliance scene in 2011 as a result of the famous Foreign Accounts Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). FATCA was enacted as part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act of 2010 (“HIRE Act” or “Act”) which was signed into law by President Obama in 2010.

FATCA revolutionized international tax compliance of the world by forcing foreign banks to report their US-held accounts to the IRS. In essence, it created the third-party verification of foreign accounts that FBAR has always lacked. This third-party verification was supported on the other side by creation of a new requirement to report foreign assets by US taxpayers as part of their US tax returns – Form 8938.

Form 8938’s scope of disclosure is very broad. It generally includes two types of “specified foreign financial assets”: (a) any financial account (also defined very broadly) maintained by a foreign financial institution (again defined broadly); and (b) other specified foreign financial assets not held in an account maintained by a foreign institution.  Other Specified Foreign Financial Assets is a term with a reach far and beyond any other US international tax form, making Form 8938 a unique “catch-all” international tax reporting requirement.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Form 8938 is a Dangerous Form

This enormously-grand scope of Form 8938 presents a grave danger to US taxpayers, because US Congress armed the form with a wide range of penalties, including a $10,000 failure-to-file fee.  For these reasons, it is highly important to understand when a particular situation triggers the Form 8938 filing requirement. One of the most important filing criteria is the subject of this article — the 2024 Form 8938 filing threshold limits.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Filing Threshold Factors

When considering the Form 8938 threshold requirements, there are two most important factors that influence which filing threshold will apply in a particular situation. First, the filing status of the taxpayer(s): married filing jointly, married filing separately, single, et cetera.

The second factor is whether the taxpayer lives in the United States or lives abroad.  

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Legal Test for Living Abroad

The IRS will agree that a taxpayer lives abroad if he meets one of the two “presence abroad” tests.

The first presence abroad test is satisfied if the taxpayer is a US citizen who has been a bona fide resident of a foreign country or countries for an uninterrupted period of an entire tax year.

The second presence abroad test is satisfied if the taxpayer is a US citizen or resident who is present in a foreign country or countries at least 330 full days during any period of twelve consecutive months in the relevant tax year.

Of course, these tests are almost exact replicas of the test for Foreign Earned Income Exclusion.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Taxpayers Living in the United States

Let’s first discuss the Form 8938 filing thresholds for taxpayers who live in the United States category by category:

1. Unmarried Taxpayers Living in the United States. The taxpayer is required to file Form 8938 if the total value of his specified foreign financial assets is more than $50,000 on the last day of the tax year or more than $75,000 at any time during that tax year.

2. Married Taxpayers Filing a Joint Income Tax Return and Living in the United States. If the taxpayer is married and files joint income tax return with his spouse, Form 8938 must be filed if the spouses’ specified foreign financial assets are either more than $100,000 on the last day of the tax year, or more than $150,000 at any time during the tax year.

3. Married Taxpayers Filing Separate Income Tax Returns and Living in the United States. If the taxpayer is married and lives in the United States, but files a separate income tax return from his spouse, then the reporting threshold is satisfied if the total value of his specified foreign financial assets is more than $50,000 on the last day of the tax year or more than $75,000 at any time during the tax year. Therefore, this category is very similar to that of the unmarried taxpayer who resides in the United States.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Taxpayers Living Abroad

Here are the Form 8938 filing thresholds for taxpayers who live abroad:

1. Married Taxpayers Filing a Joint Income Tax Return and Living Abroad. If the taxpayer lives abroad (as described above) and files a joint tax return with his spouse, then the reporting threshold is satisfied if the value of all specified foreign financial assets that the spouses own is either more than $400,000 on the last day of the tax year or more than $600,000 at any time during the tax year.

2. Taxpayers Filing Any Return Other Than A Joint Tax Return and Living Abroad. If that taxpayer lives abroad and does not file a joint income tax return (instead he files a different type of tax return such as married filing separately, head of household or unmarried), then the reporting threshold is satisfied if the value of all specified foreign financial assets is either more than $200,000 on the last day of the tax year, or more than $300,000 at any time during the tax year.

2024 Form 8938 Threshold: Specified Domestic Entity

Specified Domestic Entities are also required to file Form 8938. The filing threshold for a specified domestic entity is satisfied if the total value of such an entity’s specified foreign financial assets is more than $50,000 on the last day of the tax year or more than $75,000 at any time during the tax year.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office For Help With IRS Form 8938

The reporting requirements under Form 8938 can be very complex. Moreover, Form 8938 noncompliance often occurs in conjunction with noncompliance with FBAR and other reporting requirements (such as Forms 5471, 8621, 8865 et cetera).  In such cases, filing of a late Form 8938 is often should be done through an IRS offshore voluntary disclosure option in order to reduce additional IRS tax penalties.

Sherayzen Law Office is an international tax law firm that specializes in US international tax compliance, including Form 8938. We are highly experienced with Form 8938 issues, including offshore voluntary disclosures involving Form 8938.  We can help you!

Contact us today to schedule your confidential consultation!

The Tinkov Case: Concealment of Foreign Assets During Expatriation

/in , /by

On March 5, 2020, the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”) and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) announced that Mr. Oleg Tinkov was arrested in London in connection with an indictment concerning concealment of about $1 billion in foreign assets and the expatriation income in connection with these assets. Let’s discuss the Tinkov case in more detail.

The Tinkov Case: Alleged Facts

According to the indictment, Oleg Tinkov was the indirect majority shareholder of a branchless online bank that provided its customers with financial and bank services. The indictment alleges that, as a result of an initial public offering (IPO) on the London Stock Exchange in 2013, Tinkov beneficially owned more than $1 billion worth of the bank’s shares. He allegedly owned these shares through a British Virgin Island (“BVI”) structure.

The indictment further alleges that three days after the IPO, Mr. Tinkov renounced his U.S. citizenship or expatriated. Expatriation is a taxable event subject to the expatriation tax. As a an expatriated individual, Mr. Tinkov should have reported to the IRS the gain from the constructive sale of his worldwide assets and pay the expatriation tax on such a gain to the IRS. Yet, he allegedly never did it.

Instead, Mr. Tinkov filed an allegedly false 2013 tax return with the IRS that reported income of less than $206,000. Moreover, the IRS further alleges that he filed a false 2013 Initial and Annual Expatriation Statement reporting that his net worth was $300,000.

The Tinkov Case: Potential Noncompliance Penalties

If convicted, Mr. Tinkov faces a maximum sentence of three years in prison on each count. He also faces a period of supervised release, restitution, and monetary penalties. Other penalties (including Form 5471, Form 8938 and FBAR penalties) may be imposed.

The Tinkov Case: Presumption of Innocence

The readers should remember that an indictment is a mere allegation that crimes have been committed. The defendant (in this case, Mr. Tinkov) is presumed innocent until proven guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.

The Tinkov Case: Lessons from This Case

The Tinkov Case offers a number of useful lessons concerning US international tax compliance, particularly U.S. expatriation tax laws. Let’s concentrate on the three most important lessons.

First, a U.S. citizen or a long-term U.S. permanent resident must carefully consider all tax consequences of expatriation. Such a taxpayer must engage in careful, detailed tax planning prior to expatriation. Mr. Tinkov did not do such planning and renounced his U.S. citizenship merely three days before the IPO. By that time, the value of his assets was already easily established beyond reasonable dispute.

Second, one must be very careful and accurate with one’s disclosure to the IRS. Mr. Tinkov’s 2013 U.S. tax return and the Expatriation Statement contained information vastly different from the one that the IRS was able to acquire during its investigation. It is no wonder that the IRS concluded that he willfully filed false returns to the IRS, especially since it does not appear that his submissions to the IRS attempted to explain the gap between the returns and the information that IRS had or acquired later during an investigation.

Finally, expatriation cases involving sophisticated tax structures, especially those incorporated in an offshore tax-free jurisdiction, are likely to face a closer scrutiny and even a criminal investigation by the IRS. We have seen the confirmation of this fact in many cases already. In this case, Mr. Tinkov’s BVI corporation, which protected his indirect ownership of his online bank, was a huge red flag. His attorneys should have predicted that this structure alone would invite an IRS investigation of his expatriation.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With Your U.S. International Tax Compliance and Offshore Voluntary Disclosures

If you are a U.S. taxpayer with assets in a foreign country, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help with your U.S. international tax compliance. If you have already violated U.S. international tax laws concerning disclosure of your foreign assets, foreign income or expatriation, then you need to secure help as soon as possible to conduct an offshore voluntary disclosure to lower your IRS penalties.

We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the globe with their U.S. international tax compliance and offshore voluntary disclosures. We can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Ukrainian FATCA IGA Enters Into Force | FATCA Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

On November 18, 2019, the Ukrainian FATCA IGA entered into force. Sherayzen Law Office already wrote on this subject a little more than three years ago. This essay updates the status of the Ukrainian FATCA IGA.

Ukrainian FATCA IGA: Background Information

The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) was enacted into law in 2010 and quickly caused a revolution in the area of international tax information exchange. While FATCA is very complex, its basic purpose is clear – improving US international tax compliance through new information reporting standards. The revolutionary aspect of FATCA was to force foreign financial institutions (“FFIs”) to comply these new information reporting standards through what essentially amounted to FATCA tax withholding penalties. In other words, FATCA turned FFIs throughout the world into IRS informants.

Using brutal economic force on the FFIs, however, may be considered by many foreign countries as a violation of their sovereignty, because FFIs are not US taxpayers. In order to enforce FATCA effectively, the United States has worked to enlist the cooperation of the FFIs’ home countries. The ultimate products of these negotiations have been FATCA implementation treaties, officially called FATCA IGAs (Intergovernmental Agreements). The Ukrainian FATCA IGA is just one example of such a treaty.

Ukrainian FATCA IGA: History and Current Status

On November 9, 2016, the Ukrainian government authorized the Ukrainian FATCA IGA for signature. On February 7, 2017, the IGA was signed. Since November 18, 2019, it has been in force.

Ukrainian FATCA IGA: Model 1 FATCA Agreement

The Ukrainian FATCA IGA is a Model 1 FATCA Agreement. In order to understand what this means, we need to explore the two types of FATCA IGAs – Model 1 and Model 2. The Model 2 FATCA treaty requires FFIs to individually enter into an FFI Agreement with the IRS in order to report the required FATCA information directly to the IRS (for example, Switzerland signed a Model 2 treaty).

On the other hand, the Model 1 treaty requires FFIs in a “partner country” (i.e. the country that signed a Model 1 FATCA agreement) to report the required FATCA information regarding US accounts to the local tax authorities. Then, the tax authorities of the partner country share this information with the IRS.

Thus, the Ukrainian FFIs will report FATCA information to the Ukrainian tax authorities first. Then, the Ukrainian IRS will turn over this information to the IRS.

Impact of Ukranian FATCA IGA on Noncompliant US Taxpayers

The implementation of the Ukrainian FATCA IGA means that the Ukrainian FFIs either have already implemented or will soon implement the necessary KYC (Know Your Client) procedures. Using these procedures, the FFIs will collect the required FATCA information concerning their US customers and send this information to the Ukranian tax authorities, which, in turn, will share this information with the IRS.

Then, the IRS will process this information in order to identify noncompliant US taxpayers. Once it reaches this point, the IRS will most likely investigate these persons and determine whether to conduct a civil audit or proceed with a criminal prosecution.

In other words, since November 18, 2019, US taxpayers who have undisclosed foreign accounts in Ukraine have been at an ever-increasing risk of the IRS detection. Once their noncompliance is verified by the IRS, these taxpayers, may face the imposition of draconian IRS penalties and potentially even a criminal prosecution.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help Undisclosed Ukrainian Foreign Accounts and Other Assets

If you have undisclosed Ukrainian assets (including Ukrainian bank accounts) and/or Ukrainian-source income, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help as soon as possible. We have successfully helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the globe (including Ukrainians) to resolve their past US tax noncompliance issues, and we can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Finnish US Bank Accounts Face IRS John Doe Summonses | FATCA News

/in , /by

On May 1, 2019, the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina (the “Court”) authorized the IRS to serve John Doe Summonses seeking information about Finnish residents who own secret US bank accounts (collectively Finnish US Bank Accounts). Let’s discuss this development concerning Finnish US bank accounts in more depth.

Finnish US Bank Accounts Targeted by the Finnish Tax Administration.

This whole case is about the Finnish government’s efforts to identify noncompliant Finnish taxpayers who failed to disclose income related to their non-Finnish bank accounts. Specifically, the Finnish Tax Administration (“FTA”) identified bank accounts in the United States owned by Finnish tax residents as one of the primary targets in its tax enforcement campaign.

The reason why Finland cannot identify the affected individuals itself is because, in circumstances where the payment cards are used only at ATMs or in other transactions where authorization is by PIN code, and the cardholder need not identify himself or herself to the merchant, the cardholders cannot be identified from sources in Finland. Earlier FTA investigations of approximately 120 to 150 Finnish taxpayers who used foreign payment cards in a similar manner have yielded extremely high rates of tax non-compliance, as noted in the United States’ memo in support of the petition, which indicates that it is likely that the John Does sought by the summons are Finnish residents who are failing to report these foreign accounts and associated income.

Hence, the FTA asked the US Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the IRS for help as prescribed by the tax treaty between Finland and the United States. The treaty provides for cooperation in exchanging information that is necessary for enforcement each of the signatory’s tax laws.

The DOJ and the IRS readily agreed. Then, the DOJ filed a petition in the Court asking for it to grant the IRS a permission to issue John Doe Summonses in response to the FTA’s request for help.

Finnish US Bank Accounts: Affected US Financial Institutions

The IRS Summonses specially target persons who reside in Finland and have Bank of America, Charles Schwab or TD Bank payment cards linked to bank accounts located outside of Finland. It is important to note that the DOJ does not allege that Bank of America, Charles Schwab or TD Bank violated any US or Finnish laws with respect to these accounts.

Finnish US Bank Accounts: Information Targeted by the IRS John Doe Summonses

The IRS John Doe Summonses seek the identities of Finnish residents who have payment cards linked to bank accounts located outside of Finland so that the Finnish government can determine if those persons have complied with Finnish tax laws.

Finnish US Bank Accounts: Foreign Individuals With Secret US Bank Accounts Are Not Safe from Disclosure to Their Governments

The recent IRS John Doe summonses concerning Finnish US bank accounts is another indication that foreign individuals with secret US bank accounts are not immune from the disclosure of these accounts to their governments at home. In fact, the US government will cooperate with requests for such information, at least from friendly governments.

“The Department of Justice and the IRS are committed to working with the United States’ international treaty partners to identify and stop individuals using hidden offshore accounts to evade tax laws,” said Principal Deputy Assistant Attorney General Richard E. Zuckerman of the Justice Department’s Tax Division. “The United States does not tolerate offshore tax evasion, nor does it sanction tax evasion committed through U.S. financial institutions.”

This cooperation also stems from the desire to somehow thank the foreign government for their prior cooperation with the IRS tax enforcement efforts that targeted (and continue to target) US taxpayers with undisclosed foreign bank accounts. “Our continued success in combating offshore tax noncompliance has been helped by the assistance we receive through the network of tax treaties around the globe,” said IRS Commissioner Charles Rettig. “Yesterday’s effort reflects that the U.S. will return this help by working under the law with tax administrators in other nations to help them in their fight against tax evasion and avoidance. A global economy should not be allowed to serve as a possible vehicle for tax evasion in any country.”

Sherayzen Law Office has predicted in the past that, after FATCA, the global tax enforcement will become tighter and more cooperative. Our predictions turned out to be correct.

CRS Success: 47 Million Financial Accounts Reported | FATCA Lawyer News

/in , /by

On June 7, 2019, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (“OECD”) announced that countries shared information concerning 47 million financial accounts under the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard (“CRS”). Let’s explore this CRS success in more detail.

Measuring CRS Success: What is CRS?

CRS can be called the response of the rest of the world to the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (“FATCA”), a groundbreaking piece of US legislation that became a law in 2010. The idea behind the CRS is the same as that of FATCA – to combat tax evasion that utilizes secret foreign accounts through automatic information exchange between the member-countries concerning these accounts.

CRS was developed in 2014 as the information exchange standard for the Automatic Exchange of Information (“AEOI”) Agreements. Legally, CRS is based on the multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, but it is the standard in the bilateral AEOI agreements as well. The first reporting under the CRS occurred in 2017.

The United States has refused to information exchange under the CRS. This is an egoistical position – CRS does not substantially help the IRS in its combat against tax evasion; the US government believes that FATCA already provides the IRS with all of the information that it needs. Moreover, the CRS would require the United States to disclose information concerning domestic accounts owned by foreigners, thereby endangering the US “tax haven” appeal. Finally, there is a practical aspect of paying for the implementation of the CRS.

Measuring CRS Success: Account Information Shared

On June 7, 2019, OECD shared some actual data concerning the impact of CRS on information exchange. This announcement was made in Fukuoka, Japan, right before the G20 meeting of finance ministers. The results are extraordinary: the participating countries shared information concerning 47 million foreign accounts, which comprise $5.5 trillion or €4.9 trillion. The OECD already called CRS as the “largest exchange of tax information in history.”

Measuring CRS Success: Voluntary Disclosure Programs

Prior to the implementation of the CRS, many participating countries offered their taxpayers a chance to remedy their past noncompliance through a voluntary disclosure program. These programs turned out to be a great success.

Fearing disclosure under the CRS, about 500,000 account holders revealed more than €95 billion in offshore funds. OECD believes that the responsibility for such a huge success of voluntary disclosure programs should be attributed to the CRS; i.e. these disclosures were “early evidence of taxpayer behavioral responses” to the potential future information exchanges.

Measuring CRS Success: Drop in Tax Haven Investments

Another measure of the CRS success is its impact on the deposits in jurisdictions identified by the OECD as tax havens. The International Monetary Fund reported a 34% decline since 2008 in the tax haven deposits by individuals and corporations. The OECD believes that as much as two-thirds of this decline should be attributed to the CRS.