Posts

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties | IRS FBAR Tax Lawyer & Attorney

As if they were not high enough, the US Congress has obligated the IRS to adjust FBAR civil penalties for inflation on an annual basis. In this article, I will provide a broad overview of the current FBAR penalty system and describe the current 2021 FBAR civil penalties.

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties: Overview of the FBAR Penalty System

FinCEN Form 114, the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (commonly known as “FBAR”), has always had a very complex, multi-layered system of penalties, which has grown even more complicated over the years. These penalties can be grouped into four categories: criminal, willful, non-willful and negligent.

Of course, the most dreaded penalties are FBAR criminal penalties. Not only is there a criminal fine of up to $500,000, but, in some case, a person can be sentenced to 10 years in prison for FBAR violation (and these two criminal penalties can be imposed simultaneously). Since the focus of this article is on FBAR civil penalties, I will not devote more time to the discussion of FBAR criminal penalties here.

The next category of penalties are FBAR civil penalties imposed for the willful failure to file an FBAR. These penalties are imposed per each violation – i.e. on each account per year, potentially going back six years (the FBAR statute of limitations is six years).

The third category of penalties are FBAR penalties imposed for a non-willful failure to file an FBAR or a filing of an incorrect FBAR. These penalties can be imposed on US persons who do not even know that FBAR exists.

Finally, with respect to business entities, a penalty can be imposed for a negligent failure to file an FBAR or a filing of an incorrect FBAR.

It is important to note that FBAR has its own reasonable cause exception that may be used to fight the assessment of any of the aforementioned civil penalties. Moreover, each of these penalty categories has numerous levels of penalty mitigation that a tax attorney may utilize to lower his client’s FBAR civil penalties.

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties: Penalties Prior to November 2 2015

Prior to November 2, 2015, FBAR penalties were not adjusted for inflation and stayed flat at the levels mandated by Congress. Let’s go over each category of penalties prior to inflation adjustment.

As of November 1, 2015, Willful FBAR penalties were up to $100,000 or 50% of the highest balance of an account, whichever is greater, per violation. Again, a violation meant a failure to correctly report an account in any year. Non-willful FBAR penalties were up to $10,000 per violation per year; it is far less clear what “violation” meant in this context. At that time, the IRS took a clear position that non-willful FBAR penalties are imposed on a per account basis similarly to willful penalties, but the validity of this position has been heavily compromised by recent court decisions. Finally, FBAR penalties for negligence were up to $500 per violation; if, however, there was a pattern of negligence, the negligence penalties could increase ten times up to $50,000 per violation.

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties: Inflation Adjustment

The situation changed dramatically in 2015. As a result of the Federal Civil Penalties Inflation Adjustment Act Improvements Act of 2015 (“2015 Inflation Adjustment Act”), Congress mandated federal agents to: (1) adjust the amounts of civil monetary penalties with an initial “catch-up” adjustment; and (2) make subsequent annual adjustments for inflation. The inflation adjustment applied only to civil penalties.

The “catch-up” adjustment meant a huge increase in penalties, because federal agencies were required to update all of these penalties from the time of their enactment (or the last year the Congress adjusted the penalties) through November of 2015. This meant that, in 2015, the penalties jumped to account for all accumulated multi-year inflation. The catch-up adjustment was limited to two and a half times of the original penalty.

Fortunately, the Congress adjusted FBAR penalties in 2004 and the “catch-up” adjustment did not have to go back to the 1970s. It still meant a very large (about 25%) increase in FBAR civil penalties, but it was not as dramatic as some other federal penalties.

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties: Bifurcation of FBAR Penalty System

The biggest problem with the inflation adjustment, however, was the fact that it further complicated the already dense multi-layered FBAR system of civil penalties – FBAR penalties became dependent on the timing of a violation and IRS penalty assessment. In essence, the 2015 Inflation Adjustment Act split the FBAR penalty into two distinct parts.

The first part applies to FBAR violations that occurred on or before November 2, 2015. The old pre-2015 FBAR penalties described above applies to these violations irrespective of when the IRS actually assesses the penalties for these violations. The last FBAR violations definitely eligible for the old statutory penalties are those that were made concerning 2014 FBAR which was due on June 30, 2015. The statute of limitations for the 2014 FBAR ran out on June 30, 2021.

The second part applies to all FBAR violations that occurred after November 2, 2015. For all of these violations, the exact amount of penalties will depend on the timing of the IRS penalty assessment, not when the FBAR violation actually occurred. In other words, if an FBAR violation occurred on October 15, 2017 and the IRS assessed FBAR penalties June 17, 2021, the IRS would use the inflation-adjusted FBAR penalties as of the year 2021, not October 15, 2017.

2021 FBAR Civil Penalties: Penalties Assessed On or After January 28, 2021

Now that we understand the history of FBAR penalties, we can specifically discuss the 2021 FBAR civil penalties. The first thing to understand is that we are talking about penalties assessed by the IRS on or after January 28, 2021; prior to that date, the 2020 FBAR civil penalties were still effective.

The 2021 Willful FBAR penalty imposed under 31 U.S.C. §5321(a)(5)(C)(i)(I) is $136,399 per violation. So far, for willful FBAR penalties, “violation” is applied on a “per account for each year” basis described above. Last year (i.e. penalties assessed after February 19, 2020 and before January 28, 2021), the willful penalty was $134,806.

The 2021 Non-Willful FBAR penalty imposed under 31 U.S.C. §5321(a)(5)(B) is $13,640 per violation; last year, the non-willful penalty was $13,481. The term “violation” in the context of non-willful FBAR penalties at this point has not been settled. Starting last year and culminating with the recent 11th Circuit court decision, the courts have been applying the term “violation” on a per-form (rather than per-account) basis. It other words, a taxpayer can argue that a non-willful violation of $13,481 should be applied per each delinquent FBAR rather than each account reported on an FBAR. This is of course a highly beneficial approach (for taxpayers) to FBAR penalty imposition, but it is still a struggle to get the IRS to accept this position.

The 2021 Negligence FBAR penalty imposed under 31 U.S.C. §5321(a)(6)(A) is $1,166; if there is a pattern of negligence under 31 U.S.C. §5321(a)(6)(B), then the penalty goes up to $90,743. Last year, the respective amounts were $1,146 and $89,170.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With Your Prior FBAR Noncompliance

Sherayzen Law Office is a leader in US international tax law and FBAR compliance. We have successfully helped hundreds of clients from over seventy countries resolve their prior FBAR noncompliance concerning disclosure of their foreign bank and financial accounts. We can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Austin FBAR Tax Lawyer

A question that I would like to explore in this article is: Who is considered to be an Austin FBAR tax lawyer?

It seems to be an odd question, because a lot of people would say that an Austin FBAR tax lawyer is an attorney who resides in Austin and does FBAR law.

This, however, is an over-simplistic and incorrect view. First of all, there is no area of “FBAR” law. Rather, FBAR is a tax information return which is being administered by the IRS on behalf of FinCEN. This means that FBAR “law” forms part of a larger compliance framework within the area of international tax law. In essence, all “FBAR tax lawyers” are in reality international tax lawyers who must be knowledgeable not just about the FBARs, but about all relevant areas of international tax law.

However, despite its technical deficiencies, the term FBAR tax lawyers is commonly used to describe an international tax lawyer who helps his clients with FBAR compliance.

Second, an Austin FBAR tax lawyer does not mean that the tax lawyer must reside in Austin. FBAR is part of US federal tax law and can be practiced by an international tax lawyer who is licensed in any of the 50 states of the United States.

Thus, an international tax lawyer who is able to help his clients with FBAR compliance in Austin, Texas, is an Austin FBAR tax lawyer. This means that an Austin FBAR tax lawyer can actually reside in Minneapolis or any other city.

In this case, the modern means of communications usually come into play: email, Skype video conferences, telephone and regular mail. In fact, aside from initial consultation, your communication with an Austin FBAR tax lawyer who actually resides in Austin is likely to be limited exactly to these modern means of communication with very rare (if any) face-to-face meetings.

With this information in mind, we can now go back and answer my original question: Who is considered to be an Austin FBAR tax lawyer? The answer is as follows: An Austin FBAR tax lawyer is an international tax lawyer who is licensed to practice in any of the 50 states of the United States, resides anywhere in the United States (Minneapolis, for example) or any other country, and helps his clients in Austin with FBAR compliance with the help of modern means of communication.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office If You Are Looking for an Austin FBAR Tax Lawyer

If you are looking for an Austin FBAR tax lawyer, contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd., an international tax law firm that specializes in FBAR compliance and helps its clients in Austin, Texas.

Our professional legal team is highly experienced in FBAR compliance, including current FBAR compliance and FBAR voluntary disclosures. We have helped clients with every major IRS voluntary disclosure program (2009 OVDP, 2011 OVDI, 2012 OVDP and the currently-existing 2014 OVDP), both types of Streamlined Disclosures (Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures and Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures), Delinquent International Information Return Submission Procedures and Delinquent FBAR Submission Procedures.

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Treasury 2014 FBAR Currency Conversion Rates of December 31, 2014

According to the June 2014 FBAR currency conversion rates instructions published by FinCEN, in order to determine the maximum value of a foreign bank account, the Treasury’s Financial Management Service (still called so even though Financial Management Service was consolidated into the Bureau of the Fiscal Service within the Treasury Department) rates must be used. In particular, the 2014 FBAR currency conversion rates instructions state:

In the case of non-United States currency, convert the maximum account value for each account into United States dollars. Convert foreign currency by using the Treasury’s Financial Management Service rate (this rate may be found at www.fms.treas.gov) from the last day of the calendar year. If no Treasury Financial Management Service rate is available, use another verifiable exchange rate and provide the source of that rate. In valuing currency of a country that uses multiple exchange rates, use the rate that would apply if the currency in the account were converted into United States dollars on the last day of the calendar year.

The 2014 FBAR Currency Conversion rates are highly important for any international tax attorney who deals with FBARs.  For your convenience, Sherayzen Law Office provides a table of the official Treasury FBAR currency conversion rates below (keep in mind, you still need to refer to the official website for any updates):

Country – Currency Foreign Currency to $1.00
AFGHANISTAN – AFGHANI 57.9000
ALBANIA – LEK 115.1000
ALGERIA – DINAR 87.8100
ANGOLA – KWANZA 104.0000
ANTIGUA – BARBUDA – E. CARIBBEAN DOLLAR 2.7000
ARGENTINA-PESO 8.3730
ARMENIA – DRAM 470.0000
AUSTRALIA – DOLLAR 1.2190
AUSTRIA – EURO 0.8220
AZERBAIJAN – NEW MANAT 0.8000
BAHAMAS – DOLLAR 1.0000
BAHRAIN – DINAR 0.3770
BANGLADESH – TAKA 79.0000
BARBADOS – DOLLAR 2.0200
BELARUS – RUBLE 13779.0000
BELGIUM-EURO 0.8220
BELIZE – DOLLAR 2.0000
BENIN – CFA FRANC 538.7000
BERMUDA – DOLLAR 1.0000
BOLIVIA – BOLIVIANO 6.8600
BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINA MARKA 1.6080
BOTSWANA – PULA 9.4970
BRAZIL – REAL 2.6570
BRUNEI – DOLLAR 1.2540
BULGARIA – LEV 1.6090
BURKINA FASO – CFA FRANC 538.7000
BURMA – KYAT 1028.0000
BURUNDI – FRANC 1550.0000
CAMBODIA (KHMER) – RIEL 4103.0000
CAMEROON – CFA FRANC 538.8200
CANADA – DOLLAR 1.1580
CAPE VERDE – ESCUDO 87.8710
CAYMAN ISLANDS – DOLLAR 0.8200
CENTRAL AFRICAN REPUBLIC – CFA FRANC 538.8200
CHAD – CFA FRANC 538.8200
CHILE – PESO 607.1600
CHINA – RENMINBI 6.2050
COLOMBIA – PESO 2372.6000
COMOROS – FRANC 361.3500
CONGO – CFA FRANC 538.8200
CONGO, DEM. REP – CONGOLESE FRANC 920.0000
COSTA RICA – COLON 533.2500
COTE D’IVOIRE – CFA FRANC 538.7000
CROATIA – KUNA 6.1500
CUBA-PESO 1.0000
CYPRUS-EURO 0.8220
CZECH – KORUNA 22.3260
DENMARK – KRONE 6.1240
DJIBOUTI – FRANC 177.0000
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC – PESO 44.1300
ECAUDOR-DOLARES 1.0000
EGYPT – POUND 7.1500
EL SALVADOR-DOLARES 1.0000
EQUATORIAL GUINEA – CFA FRANC 538.8200
ERITREA – NAKFA 15.0000
ESTONIA-EURO 0.8220
ETHIOPIA – BIRR 20.0900
EURO ZONE – EURO 0.82200
FIJI – DOLLAR 1.9580
FINLAND-EURO 0.8220
FRANCE-EURO 0.8220
GABON – CFA FRANC 538.8200
GAMBIA – DALASI 45.0000
GEORGIA-LARI 1.8700
GERMANY FRG-EURO 0.8220
GHANA – CEDI 3.2100
GREECE-EURO 0.8220
GRENADA – EAST CARIBBEAN DOLLAR 2.7000
GUATEMALA – QUENTZAL 7.5970
GUINEA – FRANC 7136.0000
GUINEA BISSAU – CFA FRANC 538.7000
GUYANA – DOLLAR 202.0000
HAITI – GOURDE 46.7500
HONDURAS – LEMPIRA 21.2700
HONG KONG – DOLLAR 7.7560
HUNGARY – FORINT 259.4400
ICELAND – KRONA 126.7500
INDIA – RUPEE 63.2000
INDONESIA – RUPIAH 12350.0000
IRAN – RIAL 8229.0000
IRAQ – DINAR 1166.0000
IRELAND-EURO 0.8220
ISRAEL-SHEKEL 3.8810
ITALY-EURO 0.8220
JAMAICA – DOLLAR 113.9000
JAPAN – YEN 119.4500
JERUSALEM-SHEKEL 3.8810
JORDAN – DINAR 0.7080
KAZAKHSTAN – TENGE 182.4000
KENYA – SHILLING 90.6500
KOREA – WON 1086.8700
KUWAIT – DINAR 0.2930
KYRGYZSTAN – SOM 58.7000
LAOS – KIP 8078.0000
LATVIA – LATS 0.8220
LEBANON – POUND 1500.0000
LESOTHO – SOUTH AFRICAN RAND 11.5660
LIBERIA – U.S. DOLLAR 82.0000
LIBYA-DINAR 1.1950
LITHUANIA – LITAS 2.8390
LUXEMBOURG-EURO 0.8220
MACAO – MOP 8.0000
MACEDONIA FYROM – DENAR 49.2000
MADAGASCAR-ARIA 2596.7300
MALAWI – KWACHA 505.0000
MALAYSIA – RINGGIT 3.4950
MALI – CFA FRANC 538.7000
MALTA-EURO 0.8220
MARSHALLS ISLANDS – DOLLAR 1.0000
MARTINIQUE-EURO 0.82200
MAURITANIA – OUGUIYA 305.0000
MAURITIUS – RUPEE 31.7000
MEXICO – NEW PESO 14.7020
MICRONESIA – DOLLAR 1.0000
MOLDOVA – LEU 15.5520
MONGOLIA – TUGRIK 1885.6000
MONTENEGRO-EURO 0.8220
MOROCCO – DIRHAM 9.0240
MOZAMBIQUE – METICAL 33.0500
NAMIBIA-DOLLAR 11.5660
NEPAL – RUPEE 101.4000
NETHERLANDS-EURO 0.8220
NETHERLANDS ANTILLES – GUILDER 1.7800
NEW ZEALAND – DOLLAR 1.2750
NICARAGUA – CORDOBA 26.6000
NIGER – CFA FRANC 538.7000
NIGERIA – NAIRA 182.9000
NORWAY – KRONE 7.3900
OMAN – RIAL 0.3850
PAKISTAN – RUPEE 100.9000
PALAU-DOLLAR 1.0000
PANAMA – BALBOA 1.0000
PAPUA NEW GUINEA – KINA 2.5440
PARAGUAY – GUARANI 4629.3000
PERU – NUEVO SOL 2.9000
PHILIPPINES – PESO 44.77500
POLAND – ZLOTY 3.5130
PORTUGAL-EURO 0.8220
QATAR – RIYAL 3.6420
ROMANIA – LEU 3.6850
RUSSIA – RUBLE 58.6760
RWANDA – FRANC 689.1900
SAO TOME & PRINCIPE – DOBRAS 20087.7110
SAUDI ARABIA – RIYAL 3.7500
SENEGAL – CFA FRANC 538.7000
SERBIA-DINAR 99.4600
SEYCHELLES – RUPEE 12.9800
SIERRA LEONE – LEONE 4990.0000
SINGAPORE – DOLLAR 1.3210
SLOVAK REPUBLIC – EURO 0.8220
SLOVENIA – EURO 0.8220
SOLOMON ISLANDS – DOLLAR 7.3100
SOUTH AFRICA – RAND 11.5660
SOUTH SUDANESE – POUND 3.0000
SPAIN – EURO 0.8220
SRI LANKA – RUPEE 131.1500
ST LUCIA – EC DOLLAR 2.7000
SUDAN – SUDANESE POUND 6.4000
SURINAME – GUILDER 3.3500
SWAZILAND – LILANGENI 11.5660
SWEDEN – KRONA 7.7130
SWITZERLAND – FRANC 0.9890
SYRIA – POUND 179.2000
TAIWAN – DOLLAR 31.6400
TAJIKISTAN – SOMONI 5.3000
TANZANIA – SHILLING 1730.0000
THAILAND – BAHT 32.9200
TIMOR – LESTE DILI 1.0000
TOGO – CFA FRANC 538.7000
TONGA – PA’ANGA 1.8700
TRINIDAD & TOBAGO – DOLLAR 6.3560
TUNISIA – DINAR 1.8590
TURKEY – LIRA 2.3270
TURKMENISTAN – MANAT 2.8400
UGANDA – SHILLING 2770.0000
UKRAINE – HRYVNIA 15.7680
UNITED ARAB EMIRATES – DIRHAM 3.6700
UNITED KINGDOM – POUND STERLING 0.6420
URUGUAY – PESO 23.9600
UZBEKISTAN – SOM 2461.0000
VANUATU – VATU 99.9300
VENEZUELA – BOLIVAR 6.3000
VIETNAM – DONG 21400.0000
WESTERN SAMOA – TALA 2.3530
YEMEN – RIAL 214.5000
ZAMBIA – KWACHA (NEW) 6.3750
ZAMBIA – KWACHA (OLD) 5455.0000
ZIMBABWE – DOLLAR 1.0000

1. Lesotho’s loti is pegged to South African Rand 1:1 basis
2. Macao is also spelled Macau: currency is Macanese pataka
3. Macedonia: due to the conflict over name with Greece, the official name if FYROM – former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia.
4. Latvia’s Lats converted to the Euro on January 1, 2014. This means that the Euro 2014 FBAR Currency Conversion rate may also need to used for the determination of the highest balance of accounts in Latvia. Contact Sherayzen Law Office for more details.

FBAR Criminal Prosecution and Smaller Banks: The Case of Wegelin

On January 3, 2013, Wegelin & Co., the oldest Swiss private bank announced that it will close down following its guilty plea to criminal charges of conspiracy to help wealthy U.S. taxpayers evade taxes through secret financial accounts. The guilty plea and the closure of one of the most prestigious European banks that served its clients since the year 1741 constitute big victories for the U.S. authorities. It surely will inspire additional movement of non-compliant U.S. taxpayers into the 2012 OVDP (Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program) as well as ensure more widespread compliance with the FBAR, Form 8938 and other numerous international tax forms required by the IRS.

However, in addition to its significance to U.S. tax compliance, the Wegelin case also has other interesting features that may point to future trends in the IRS international tax enforcement. In this article, I will outline these trends and explore their potential implications for U.S. tax enforcement.

Jurisdiction to Prosecute Foreign Banks: Minimal Contact Will Suffice

In order to criminally charge a foreign bank, U.S. tax authorities need to establish some connection between the United States and the foreign bank. It appears that after the Wegelin case, proving U.S. exposure will not a be a significant problem for the IRS.

The main reason for Wegelin’s bold defiant behavior (Wegelin specifically advertised itself as a safe, tax-free alternative to U.S. taxpayers who were fleeing UBS after criminal prosecution charges were filed against UBS in 2008) was its deep belief that it cannot be criminally prosecuted in the United States because U.S. tax authorities have no jurisdiction over it. Unlike UBS, Wegelin had virtually no physical presence in the United States, no operating divisions and no branch offices in the United States.

However, Wegelin miscalculated. The IRS discovered that Wegelin did have presence in the United States because it “directly accessed” the U.S. banking system through a correspondent account that it held at UBS AG (“UBS”) in Stamford, Connecticut. The Justice Department successfully argued that this one correspondent account was sufficient to give the United States government the jurisdiction to criminally charge Wegelin.

Hence, one of the biggest consequences of the Wegelin case is that it will not be difficult for the U.S. tax authorities to establish jurisdiction to criminally charge foreign banks even with very insignificant presence in the United States.

Size Matters: Increased Risk for Smaller Banks

The other important lesson of the Wegelin case is that it appears that the IRS is more likely to aggressively pursue smaller banks than the bigger banks the demise of which can cause systemic instability in the world economy.

The collapse of Wegelin stands in stark contrast to the survival of its bigger Swiss rival, UBS. UBS offered pretty much the same services to U.S. taxpayers as Wegelin involving vastly larger number of U.S. persons and amounts of money (at the very least, 20 billion dollars versus Wegelin’s 1.2 billion dollars). The IRS did file criminal charges against UBS, but UBS entered into a deferred prosecution agreement and charges were dropped eighteen months later.

It could be that some of the aggressiveness of the U.S. government came precisely from Wegelin’s defiant stance. In order to reinforce its recent victory in the UBS case, the IRS had to adopt a more assertive stand. However, it did not necessarily have to end in Wegelin’s demise.

Some commentators argued that Wegelin was already a shadow of its former self at the time of its closure, because it aggressively sold-off all of its non-US related assets. Therefore, it may be argued that it is premature to draw general conclusions from the Wegelin’s case about the risks facing small foreign banks who find themselves indicted by the U.S. government. On the other hand, the very fact that Wegelin decided that it would be better for the bank to sell off its assets rather than fight the IRS and the fact that the U.S. government was not concerned about this decision do point to a conclusion that the Wegelin case may be demonstrative of the general vulnerability of smaller banks in such situations.

Unresolved Issues: Client Information and Sold-Off Practice

One of the most important issues, however, is still unresolved in the Wegelin case and makes it worthwhile to observe to its end. The issue is: will the bank disclose the names of its U.S. clients to the IRS?

Typically, disclosure of the names of U.S. taxpayers constitutes a key request by the IRS in such major investigations. Therefore, it does not seem likely that the IRS will simply leave this issue without at least attempting to obtain the names of non-compliant U.S. taxpayers as part of the final deal.

The other unresolved issue is whether a strategy similar to Wegelin’s sale of its non-US accounts to the Austrian Bank Raiffeisen just before the indictment is going to challenged by the IRS if the sale does involve U.S. clients and maybe even if it does not (especially where the bank is left without any assets). It is not known if we are going to get an answer at this time, but it is likely that this issue will show up again in a future case.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help With Voluntary Disclosure of Foreign Financial Accounts

If you have undisclosed offshore accounts (whether in the hard-hit Switzerland or any other country) ,contact Sherayzen Law Office to explore the voluntary disclosure options available in your case. Our experienced voluntary disclosure firm will thoroughly review your case, explore available options, propose a definite plan for moving forward, prepare all of the necessary legal documents and tax forms, and guide you though the entire case while rigorously representing your interests in your negotiations with the IRS.

New Version of the FBAR Form

In November of 2011, the U.S. Department of the Treasury issued a new version of Form TD F 90-22.1, now known as FinCen Form 114 commonly known as FBAR. All filers must now use this form in order to report their foreign bank and financial accounts.

The main difference between the previous (March 2011) version and the current (November 2011) version is the simplified process of amending the FBARs. However, you can still use the more thorough method described in the FBAR FAQ.

If you are filing the FBARs for previous years (perhaps as part of the voluntary disclosure), you should use the latest FBAR form. While it used to be Ok to use the 2008 version to file FBARs for the prior years, it is becoming doubtful whether the IRS would accept this version at this point. It is highly recommended that the taxpayers use only the latest version of the FBAR.

Any United States person who has a financial interest in or signature authority or other authority over any financial account in a foreign country, if the aggregate value of these accounts exceeds $10,000 at any time during the calendar year. Failure to comply with the FBAR requirements carries a very high penalty. Please, visit our Voluntary Disclosure and FBAR Center for details.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office to Comply with FBAR Requirements

If you need any legal help with FBARs, contact Sherayzen Law Office by telephone or email. Our experienced international tax firm will help you resolve all of your FBAR questions and help you comply with all of the FBAR requirements.