Posts

Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney | International Tax Lawyer Colorado

/in , /by

If you reside in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and have unreported foreign bank and financial accounts, you may be looking for a Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney.  Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. is a leader in FBAR compliance, including offshore voluntary disclosures concerning delinquent FBARs, and you should consider us in your search. Let’s understand why this is the case.

Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney: International Tax Lawyer

First of all, it is very important to understand that, by looking for Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney, in reality, you are searching for an international tax lawyer who specializes in FBAR compliance.

The reason for this conclusion is the fact that FBAR enforcement belongs to a very special field of US tax law – US international tax law. FBAR is an information return concerning foreign assets, which necessarily involves US international tax compliance concerning foreign assets/foreign income. Moreover, ever since the FBAR enforcement was turned over to the IRS in 2001, the term FBAR attorney applies almost exclusively to tax attorneys.

Hence, when you look for an FBAR attorney, you are looking for an international tax attorney with a specialty in FBAR compliance.

Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney: Broad Scope of Compliance and Offshore Voluntary Disclosures

When retaining a Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney, consider the fact that such an attorney’s work is not limited to the preparation and filing of FBARs. Rather, the attorney should be able to deliver a variety of tax services and freely operate with experience and knowledge in all relevant areas of US international tax law, including the various offshore voluntary disclosure options concerning delinquent FBARs.

Moreover, as part of an offshore voluntary disclosure, an FBAR Attorney often needs to amend US tax returns, properly prepare foreign financial statements according to US GAAP, correctly calculate PFICs, and complete an innumerable number of other tasks.

Mr. Sherayzen and his team of motivated experienced tax professionals of Sherayzen Law Office have helped hundreds of US taxpayers worldwide to bring their tax affairs into full compliance with US tax laws. This work included the preparation and filing of offshore voluntary disclosures concerning delinquent FBARs. Sherayzen Law Office offers help with all kinds of offshore voluntary disclosure options, including: SDOP (Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures), SFOP (Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures), DFSP (Delinquent FBAR Submission Procedures), DIIRSP (Delinquent International Information Return Submission Procedures), IRS VDP (IRS Voluntary Disclosure Practice) and Reasonable Cause disclosures.

Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney: Out-Of-State International Tax Lawyer

Whenever you are looking for an attorney who specializes in US international tax law (which is a federal area of law, not a state one), you do not need to limit yourself to lawyers who reside in Colorado Springs, Colorado. On the contrary, consider international tax attorneys who reside in other states and help Colorado Springs residents with their FBAR compliance.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional FBAR Help

Sherayzen Law Office is an international tax law firm that specializes in US international tax compliance, including FBARs. While our office is in Minneapolis, Minnesota, we help taxpayers who reside throughout the United States, including Colorado Springs, Colorado. We can help with annual FBAR compliance, FBAR compliance in combination with other international tax forms as well as offshore voluntary disclosures.

Thus, if you are looking for a Colorado Springs FBAR Tax Attorney, contact Mr. Sherayzen as soon as possible to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Tax Treaty Election FBAR Obligations | FBAR Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

In my practice, I often receive calls from people who are confused about their FBAR obligations.  A recent call raised an important issue of whether a tax treaty election may affect one’s FBAR obligations.  In this brief article, I would like to address this issue of tax treaty election FBAR obligations.

Tax Treaty Election FBAR Obligations: What is FBAR ?

FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (used to be TD F 90-22.1) is commonly known as FBAR, the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts. This form is used by US persons to report to the IRS a financial interest in or signatory authority over foreign financial accounts.  This is one of the most important forms that US taxpayers need to file in order to comply with their US international tax law requirements. A failure to file an FBAR when required may result in an imposition of severe IRS penalties.

Tax Treaty Election FBAR Obligations: US Person

In another article, I already addressed in great detail the definition of a US Person.  Here, I will just briefly state the categories of persons who fall under the definition of a US Person for FBAR purposes:

(1) US citizens;

(2) residents of the United States;

(3) an entity, such as a corporation, partnership and a limited liability company, created or organized in the United States or under the laws of the United States;

(4) a trust formed under the laws of the United States; and

(5) an estate formed under the laws of the United States.

Tax Treaty Election FBAR Obligations: US Person & Tax Treaty Election

Now, we have come to the critical point and the main subject of this essay: would a tax treaty election to be treated as a resident of another country under a valid income tax treaty affect one’s FBAR obligations? In other words, can you elect out of being a US Person by making a tax treaty election?

The main general answer is no – a tax treaty does not and cannot affect FBAR filing obligations. See Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations—Reports of Foreign Financial Accounts, 76 Fed. Reg. 10, 234 & 238 (Feb. 24, 2011); also, IRM 4.26.16.2.1.2(6) (11-06-15).  If a person meets the definition of a resident alien under IRC §7701(b) (i.e. he meets the FBAR definition of a US Person), even if he is not treated as a resident for income tax purposes due to an election under an income tax treaty, he will still be subject to FBAR.

The main exception to this rule would be an abandonment of US permanent residency through a tax treaty election, because it would affect the definition of a resident alien under IRC §7701(b).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help with Your FBAR Compliance and FBAR Voluntary Disclosure

Sherayzen Law Office specializes in FBAR compliance and Offshore Voluntary Disclosures that involve prior FBAR noncompliance. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the world with their FBAR issues, and we can hep you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Form 114 US Person Definition | FBAR Tax Lawyer

/in , /by

FinCEN Form 114 US Person definition is a highly important component of FBAR and US international tax compliance.  In this essay, I will discuss in detail the FinCEN Form 114 US Person definition and highlight some common issues that arise with respect to this definition.

Form 114 US Person Definition: What is Form 114 and What is its Relation to FBAR ?

FinCEN Form 114, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (used to be TD F 90-22.1) is commonly known as FBAR, the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts. This form is used by US persons to report to the IRS a financial interest in or signatory authority over foreign financial accounts.  This is one of the most important forms that US taxpayers need to file in order to comply with their US international tax law requirements. A failure to file an FBAR when required may result in an imposition of severe IRS penalties.

Form 114 US Person Definition: Only US Persons are Required to File FBARs

It is important to understand that only “US Persons”, as defined by the IRS for the FBAR compliance purposes, are required to file FBARs.  What is the legal basis for this and where does this term “US Person” come from?

BSA (Bank Secrecy Act) §5314(a) states that the Secretary of the Treasury shall require a “resident or citizen of the United States or a person, in, and doing business in, the United States, to keep records, file reports”.  This seems like the FBAR requirement may apply a hugely broad group of people (far beyond US residents and citizens), especially if one takes into account that the “United States” is defined to include all 50 states, the District of Columbia, the territories, and insular possessions of the United States and the Indian lands as defined in the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act. 31 CFR §§1010.350(b) and 1010.100(hhh).  The territories and possessions of the United States include American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, and the US Virgin Islands (see BSA Electronic Filing Requirements for Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FinCEN Form 114), p. 5.).

Despite this initial impression, the actual definition that we use today is much smaller than what is mandated by §5314(a) and it is thanks to BSA §5314(b).  BSA §5314(b) states that the IRS has the discretion to interpret what this provision actually means and who is exempt from the FBAR filing requirement.

Armed with this authority, on February 26, 2010, the IRS issued proposed regulations, which for the first time defined that only “US Persons” needed to file FBARs. This is why we discuss the definition of a US Person when we discuss who is required to file FBARs.

Form 114 US Person Definition: Who is a Person ?

Before we turn to the definition of a “US Person”, we need to discuss who is considered to be a “Person” for the Form 114 purposes. Under 31 CFR §1010.350(b), a “person” includes:  natural persons (US citizens and US residents) and entities, including but not limited to: corporations, partnerships, trusts, or limited liability companies formed under the laws of the United States.  This definition includes entities disregarded for tax purposes (as long as they are US persons).

Additionally, pension and welfare plans are also US entities that need to file FBARs. See Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations—Reports of Foreign Financial Accounts, 76 Fed. Reg. 10, 234 (Feb. 24, 2011); IRM 4.26.16.2.1.3(3) (06-24-21).  Even though the regulations do not mention it, the Form 114 instructions expand the “person” definition to estates.  It is important to note that, according to page 6 of the FBAR electronic filing instructions, an executor of an estate has a fiduciary obligation to file FBAR on behalf of the estate and on behalf of the decedent in the year following the decedent’s death.

Form 114 US Person Definition: General Definition of a US Person

The definition of a US person includes the following categories of persons:

(1) US citizens;

(2) residents of the United States;

(3) an entity, such as a corporation, partnership and a limited liability company, created or organized in the United States or under the laws of the United States;

(4) a trust formed under the laws of the United States; and

(5) an estate formed under the laws of the United States.

Let’s analyze each of these categories in more detail.

Form 114 US Person Definition: US Citizens

All US citizens are subject to the FBAR filing requirement, even minor children.  The general definition of a US citizen is contained in 8 USC §1401.

Form 114 US Person Definition: US Residents

All US residents are subject to FBAR filing requirements.  Pursuant to 31 CFR §1010.350(b)(2), the definition of “US residents” follows the definition of a resident alien under §7701(b) with one modification – the definition of the “United States” still follows 1010.100(hhh) described above. Also, see IRM 4.26.16.2.1.2 (11-06-15).

There are three classes of US residents: (1) US permanent residents; (2) persons who satisfied the Substantial Presence Test; and (3) persons who elected to be treated as US residents.  Let’s discuss each of these classes of US residents in more detail.

1.  US Permanent Residents (the “Green Card Test”)

A person is considered a US person if at any time during the calendar year the person has been lawfully granted the privilege of residing permanently in the United States under the immigration laws and such status has not been revoked. 26 USC §§7701(b)(1)(A)(i) and 7701(b)(6).

One of the most common issues occurs when a person has been issued a green card and he has not yet physically entered the United States. In such cases, this person would not be considered as a resident alien until he actually physically enters the United States. 26 USC §7701(b)(2)(A)(ii).  Once he enters the country, however, he becomes a US permanent resident and continues to be one until the green card is revoked or considered abandoned either judicially or administratively. See 26 CFR §301.7701(b)-1(b)(2) and 26 CFR §301.7701(b)-1(b)(3).

2.  Substantial Presence Test

Even if a person is not a US permanent resident, he may still be considered a US Person if he meets the IRC §7701(b)(3) substantial presence test.  In reality, there are two substantial presence tests.

The first substantial presence test is met if a person is physically present in the United States for at least 183 days during the calendar year. 26 USC §7701(b)(3).  The second substantial presence test is met if two conditions are satisfied: (1) the person is present in the United States for at least 31 days during the calendar year; and (2) the sum of the days on which this person was present in the United States during the current and the two preceding calendar years (multiplied by the fractions found in §7701(b)(3)(A)(ii)) equals to or exceeds 183 days. 26 USC 7701(b)(3)(A).

Let’s focus on the mechanics of the second calculation.  The way to determine whether the 183-day test is met is to add: (a) all days present in the United States during the current calendar year (i.e. the year for which you are trying to determine whether the Substantial Presence Test is met) + (b) one-third of the days spent in the United States in the year immediately preceding the current year + (c) one-sixth of the days spent in the United States in the second year preceding the current calendar year. See 26 USC §7701(b)(3).

Note that the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) provides a number of important exceptions to the Substantial Presence Test.  In this article, I am just providing the general rule.

3.  Election to be Treated as a US Resident Alien

A person who makes the first-year election to be treated as a US resident alien pursuant to §7701(b)(4) is a US Person for FBAR purposes.   Note, however, that this rule applies only to elections made under this provision.  A nonresident alien spouse of a US person who makes an election under the IRC §§6013(g) and 6013(h) to be treated as a resident alien will not be considered as a US person for the FBAR compliance purposes.  This is an important divergence between the income tax and FBAR rules.

Form 114 US Person Definition: US Entities, Trusts & Estates

Entities (corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, et cetera), trusts and estates created, organized or formed in the United States or under the laws of the United States are generally considered to be US Persons for FBAR purposes.

A foreign subsidiary of a US parent will not have any FBAR obligations as long as it is not formed, created or organized under the laws of the United States. However, the US parent company may be required to include the foreign accounts of its foreign subsidiary on its FBAR. 31 CFR §1010.350(e)(2)(ii).

Moreover, a foreign entity organized in and under the laws of a foreign country will not be subject to the FBAR requirements even if it elects to be treated as a US entity for US tax purposes. See Amendment to the Bank Secrecy Act Regulations—Reports of Foreign Financial Accounts, 76 Fed. Reg. 10, 234-238 (Feb. 24, 2011).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help with Your FBAR Compliance

If you need questions concerning your FBAR compliance or a voluntary disclosure concerning your prior FBAR noncompliance, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help!  Our firm specializes in FBAR compliance and offshore voluntary disclosures to remedy prior FBAR noncompliance.

We have helped hundreds of clients around the world and we can help you! Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Hiding Assets and Income in Offshore Accounts Again Made the IRS “Dirty Dozen” List

/0 Comments/in , /by

On February 5, 2016, the IRS again stated that avoiding U.S. taxes by hiding money or assets in unreported offshore accounts remains on its annual list of tax scams known as the “Dirty Dozen” for the 2015 filing season.

The problem with offshore accounts is two-fold. On the one hand, there are numerous con-artists who use offshore accounts to lure taxpayers into scams and schemes. The second and a much larger problem for the IRS is the fact that many U.S. taxpayers used offshore account to hide assets and income from the IRS.

Fighting the strategy of using offshore accounts to hide assets and income has been one of the top priorities of the IRS since the early 2000s. The problem has been complicated by the fact that there are many legitimate reasons for having an offshore account – a fact that, unfortunately, has been largely ignored by journalists and the public opinion in the United States. Therefore, it is necessary for the IRS to approach the problem of offshore accounts carefully in order to avoid hurting innocent people.

Over the years, the IRS (with the help of Congress) has chosen five different and interrelated strategies to fight tax evasion through offshore accounts.

1. IRS Civil and Criminal Enforcement

IRS examinations, audits, subpoenas, and criminal enforcement play a central role in the IRS war against using offshore accounts to hide assets and income. The ability of the IRS to enforce U.S. tax laws is amazingly broad and the IRS will use it whenever it wishes.

Since 2009, the IRS conducted thousands of offshore-related civil audits that have produced tens of millions of dollars. The IRS has also pursued criminal charges leading to billions of dollars in criminal fines and restitutions.

Hence, brute force still looms large in fighting tax evasion through offshore accounts and creates enormous (and fully justified) fear in the hearts of many U.S. taxpayers. This fear is also central to the IRS ability to use the other four strategies listed below.

2. Extensive Reporting Requirement for Owners of Offshore Accounts

As owners of offshore accounts have already noticed, the number of reporting requirements with respect to offshore accounts has risen dramatically. In addition to FBAR (which has existed since the 1970s), FATCA introduced Form 8938 in 2011. Furthermore, Form 8621 and Schedule B to Form 1040 have been modified to require additional reporting with respect to offshore accounts. Other forms also indirectly require reporting of foreign accounts (through reporting of ownership or a beneficial interest in a foreign entity or a foreign trust).

By forcing U.S .taxpayers to do extensive reporting with respect to their offshore accounts, the IRS has achieved two goals at the same time. First, it has collected an enormous amount of information with respect to U.S. offshore accounts and their owners. This information can be used in a later investigation to track fund and identify patterns of behavior. In a short while, due to the implementation of FATCA in many jurisdictions around the world, this information will also be used to compare the banks’ information with the information provided by the taxpayers on their information returns.

Second, the enormous fines associated with offshore accounts reporting can create huge tax liabilities for noncompliant taxpayers. This provides the IRS with a financial incentive to pursue these taxpayers. These potentially disastrous noncompliance fines also serve to deter many taxpayers from engaging in risky tax evasion schemes.

Of course, one of the biggest problems associated with these reporting requirements is that the majority of persons, including tax accountants, never heard of them until they were already in trouble. When the IRS pressure started to rise, it was already too late for a lot of U.S. taxpayers to do simply current compliance and they had to pay fines to the IRS. It is important to emphasize that the process is by no means over – on the contrary, as the complexity of U.S. tax compliance continues to rise, a lot of taxpayers (and their accountants) still do not know about a lot of these requirements.

3. Voluntary Disclosures

In order to alleviate the reporting noncompliance nightmares for U.S .taxpayers, the IRS created a number of voluntary disclosure programs. The early programs were not very successful; however, after the IRS stunning victory in the 2008 UBS case, the 2009 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (OVDI) turned out to be a huge success. The 2011 OVDP, 2012 OVDP and 2014 OVDP with 2014 Streamlined Compliance Procedures followed in quick succession and with even bigger success. Since 2009, more than 54,000 OVDP disclosures took place and the IRS has collected more than $8 billion; this is not taking into account the huge surge in Streamlined disclosures since 2014.

The information that has been collected through OVDP is used to identify noncompliant individuals and entire schemes to evade U.S. taxes through offshore accounts. The IRS then uses this information to pursue taxpayers with undeclared offshore accounts, as well as the banks and bankers suspected of helping clients hide their assets overseas using offshore accounts. The IRS works closely with the Department of Justice (DOJ) to prosecute these tax evasion cases.

4. Swiss Bank Program

In addition to the voluntary disclosure program for individuals, the IRS also created a voluntary disclosure program for Swiss banks. Such voluntary disclosure program is, of course, an unprecedented event – never in history did one country force another country’s entire bank system to do a voluntary disclosure on the territory of that other country.

While the debate over this breach of Swiss sovereignty (although, technically, the Swiss government agreed to the Swiss Bank Program) is interesting, for the purposes of this article, it is important to note that Swiss Bank program was a huge step forward in attacking the usage of offshore accounts to hide assets and income.

By the end of February of 2016, about 80 Swiss banks went through Category 2 voluntary disclosure and paid penalties to the U.S. government. They also turned over enormous amount of information regarding their U.S. accountholders and the various schemes that Swiss bankers developed to hide assets and funds from the IRS. In essence, the Swiss bankers turned over to the IRS substantially all of the blueprints for tax evasion that they had created.

5. FATCA

The final major strategy for fighting the practice of using offshore accounts to hide assets and income from the IRS is the famous Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act or FATCA. Ever since FATCA entered into force, it has changed the global landscape of international tax compliance. One of the most salient features of FATCA is the fact that it forces foreign banks to report to the IRS all of the offshore accounts that they can identify as owned by U.S. persons.

This groundbreaking piece of legislation has had an enormous impact on the ability of the IRS to identify noncompliance by U.S. persons, because foreign banks now act as its agents and voluntarily disclose U.S. persons and their offshore accounts.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help With Your Offshore Accounts

If you have undisclosed offshore accounts, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office as soon as possible. We have helped hundreds of U.S. taxpayers to bring their U.S. tax affairs in order while saving millions of dollars in potential penalty reductions. We furthermore help to reduce your income tax liability as a result of your voluntary disclosure and post-voluntary disclosure tax planning.

Contact Us NOW to Schedule Your Initial Consultation!