Posts

FBAR Legislative History | FBAR Tax Attorney Minneapolis

/0 Comments/in , /by

Exploring the FBAR legislative history is not just a theoretical adventure which should interest only legal scholars. Rather, the FBAR legislative history allows us to understand the theoretical and historical basis for the high FBAR penalties and the legal arguments that may serve best to combat the imposition of these severe penalties.

FBAR Legislative History: The Bank Records and Foreign Transactions Act and the Bank Secrecy Act

The obligation to file a Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) originated from the Bank Records and Foreign Transactions Act, which, together with subsequent amendments, is commonly known as the Bank Secrecy Act.

The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) was first enacted in 1970. The BSA created various financial reporting obligations to identify and collect evidence against money laundering, tax evasion and other criminal activities. One of these reporting obligations is U.S. Code Title 31, Section 5314 which directly discusses what became known as the FBAR.

31 U.S.C. §5314 requires a U.S. person to file reports and keep records regarding this person’s foreign financial accounts maintained with a foreign financial institution: “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, or keep records and file reports, when the resident, citizen, or person makes a transaction or maintains a relation for any person with a foreign financial agency.” The statute identifies the basic information required to be reported on FBAR and authorizes the U.S. Department of Treasury to prescribe the requirements, including identifying the classes of persons who should file FBARs and the threshold amount triggering this reporting requirement.

FBAR Legislative History Prior to 2001

Prior to 2001, the FBAR legislative history does not reflect any major changes. In fact, the most important development in the FBAR legislative history prior to 2001 came not from Congress, but from the United States Supreme Court.

Prior to 2001, the BSA required that, in order to impose civil and criminal FBAR penalties, the U.S. government had to prove willful failure to file an FBAR. Here is where the Supreme Court made its decisive contribution in Ratzlaf v. United States, 510 U.S. 135, 149 (1994). In that case, the Court established the willfulness standard as a “voluntary, international violation of a known legal duty”. The Court further held that merely structuring a transaction to avoid the applicability of the BSA did not constitute willfulness.

In other words, after 1994, the DOJ (the U.S. department of Justice) had to show that the defendant structured the transactions with knowledge that such structuring was in itself unlawful. Such a high standard was difficult to satisfy and the FBAR-related indictments became relatively rare.

FBAR Legislative History After 2001

The terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, resulted in significant changes in the FBAR legislative history which propelled the FBAR to its current prominence. Let’s focus on three such changes.

1. USA PATRIOT Act

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (“USA PATRIOT Act”) charged the U.S. Treasury Department with improving FBAR enforcement, particularly with respect to illegal offshore banking activities. The USA PATRIOT Act reflected the Congress’s findings that terrorist funding was successfully concealed through offshore banking activities which provided secrecy and anonymity of the parties involved. It is worth noting that the focus of the USA PATRIOT Act was still on the money-laundering and terrorist activities, not tax enforcement.

The USA PATRIOT Act further required the Treasury Department to submit recommendations to improve FBAR policies and procedures.

2. Treasury Reports and the Delegation of FBAR Enforcement to the IRS

In response to the Congress’ request, the Treasury Department released three reports between 2002 and 2004. The importance of these reports lies in the evolution of the FBAR role from the original purpose of fighting terrorism to international tax compliance.

The first report was released in 2002 complained that, due to the small probability of imposition of civil penalties and limited FBAR filing guidance, compliance with the FBAR was lower than 20% (in retrospect, this was still a very generous assessment because FBAR compliance was, in reality, much lower). Therefore, the Treasury Department outlined a number of objectives to improve FBAR policies and procedures, such as improving forms, enhancing outreach and strengthening enforcement.

Most importantly, for the first time, the Treasury Department suggested delegating the enforcement of civil FBAR penalties from FinCEN to the IRS. While nothing yet expressly suggested in the FBAR legislative history that FBAR should be used for tax enforcement, it is difficult to interpret the Treasury Department’s report in any other way. At the very least, the first report hinted at such a possibility.

The second report issued by the Treasury Department (in 2003) was much more direct. The report noted that the civil enforcement of FBAR was already delegated to the IRS and contained the key statement: “one could argue the FBAR is directed more towards tax evasion, as opposed to money laundering or other financial crimes, that lie at the core mission of FinCEN”. This was the first time the IRS officially stated the true purpose of FBAR in the post-9/11 world.

It is worth noting that the final report of the Treasury Department (issued in 2004) happily related to the Congress that the FBAR filings had increased in 2003 by 17% from the year 2000 as a result of the IRS enforcement action, confirming the correctness of the Department’s original objectives stated in the first report.

3. American Jobs Creation Act of 2004

No summary of the post-2001 FBAR legislative history would be complete without discussion of the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 (“2004 Jobs Act”). The 2004 Jobs Act was enacted partially as a result of the Treasury Department’s reports and its complaints about the difficulty of imposing civil sanctions for a failure to file FBAR and partially seeking an increase revenue. As a result of the 2004 Jobs Act, the Congress made one of the most important changes to FBAR by significantly increasing the FBAR penalties, including the imposition of a non-willful penalty for up to $10,000 per violation.

FBAR Legislative History: New FBAR Deadline Starting 2016 FBAR

The most recent change in the FBAR Legislative History came from the innocently-sounding “The Surface Transportation and Veterans Health Care Choice Improvement Act of 2015″ that was enacted on July 31, 2015. As a result of this new law, starting with the 2016 FBAR, the FBAR deadline moved from June 30 to April 15 (with an extension possible for the first time in the FBAR legislative history).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for FBAR Legal and Tax Help

If you have not complied with the FBAR requirement in the past or you need to determine whether FBAR applies in your situation, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the world with their FBAR compliance and we can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Usefulness of FBARs for the IRS and DOJ | International Tax Law Firm

/0 Comments/in , /by

The usefulness of FBARs for the U.S. tax enforcement agencies may seem to be an odd issue, but, in reality, it concerns every taxpayer with foreign bank and financial accounts. Why the FBAR is important and how the IRS and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) utilize it in their prosecution tactics is the subject of this essay.

Two Periods of the Usefulness of FBARs

In describing the usefulness of FBARs, one can distinguish two distinct periods of time. The first period lasted from the time FBAR came into existence in the 1970s through most of the year 2001. It is definitely a simplification to place this entire period of time into one category, but this simplification is intentional in order to contrast this first period of usefulness of FBARs with the second one.

The second period commenced right after the FBAR enforcement function was turned over to the IRS in 2001 and it continues through the present time. In this period of time, the usefulness of FBARs was expanded to a completely different level. It is important to point out, however, that it has not lost its original usefulness that dominated the first period of time of its existence.

Usefulness of FBARs Prior to 2001

Prior to 2001, the main purpose of FBAR had been the enforcement leverage in prosecution of financial crimes. This leverage came from the draconian FBAR penalties which often would offer a worse outcome than the statute associated with a criminal activity (especially after a plea deal). Moreover, it was much easier for prosecutors to establish an FBAR violation (any failure to report a foreign account on the FBAR would do) than to prove specific criminal activity.

The usage of FBAR prosecutions was particularly useful in money laundering cases where it was difficult to prove specified unlawful activities and certain criminal tax cases where it was difficult to establish the receipt of illicit income. In such criminal cases, instead of charging criminals solely with tax evasion or money laundering activities, the prosecutors would opt for charging the criminals with a (willful and/or criminal) failure to file an FBAR that occurred while the defendants engaged in a criminal activity. It was easier to get a plea deal this way, because, obviously, criminals would not report the foreign accounts used in a criminal activity on FBARs.

Why was the usefulness of FBARs limited to being an enforcement leverage; in other words, why were FBARs not used for collection of data? After all, FBAR was born out of the Bank Secrecy Act and its stated purpose was to collect data with respect to foreign bank and financial accounts owed by US persons.

The answer is fairly simple – there was no third-party verification mechanism for the data submitted on FBARs. In other words, the FBAR reporting was completely dependent on honest self-reporting (in fact, this is one of the reasons for the creation of FATCA) and, unless, an investigation was conducted with respect to a specific individual, there was no direct way for FinCEN to corroborate the information submitted on FBARs.

It is important to emphasize that, in this first period of its existence, the usefulness of FBARs was primarily non-tax in nature. It was not until after September 11, 2001, that FBAR commenced to acquire a new level of usefulness with which we are familiar today.

Usefulness of FBARs After 2001

The usefulness of FBARs underwent a tremendous change after the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks in the United States. Soon after the 9/11 attacks, the enforcement of FBARs was taken away from FinCEN and given to the IRS.

The IRS decided to shift the scope of the usefulness of FBARs from financial crimes to tax evasion. The Congress wholeheartedly agreed and further expanded the already-severe FBAR penalties in the American Jobs Creation Act of 2004 to their current draconian state. From that point on, FBAR became the top international tax compliance enforcement mechanism for the IRS.

The potential FBAR penalties were so extreme that even non-willful taxpayers preferred to enter the IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (and, later, Streamlined Compliance Procedures) and pay the appropriate Offshore Penalties rather than to directly confront the potential consequences of FBAR noncompliance. In other words, the usefulness of FBARs expanded further to indirect tax enforcement.

Furthermore, the UBS case victory in 2008 and the enaction of FATCA in 2010 meant that the IRS could now obtain FBAR-required information from third parties (foreign financial institutions) and verify a taxpayer’s compliance with the FBAR requirements. This further reinforced the FBARs already dominant position in US international tax compliance.

This FBARs dominance in the tax enforcement with respect to foreign accounts continues even today despite the appearance of a rival – Form 8938 (born out of FATCA). While Form 8938 has a broader scope of reportable assets, its penalty structure is highly inferior to the terrifying FBAR penalties.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Help with FBAR Compliance

If you have foreign bank and financial accounts that were not disclosed on FBARs as required, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. as soon as possible. Sherayzen Law Office is an experienced international tax law firm that has helped hundreds of US taxpayers with their delinquent FBARs, and we can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Omaha FBAR Attorney | OVDP IRS International Tax Lawyer

/0 Comments/in , /by

As the headquarters of Berkshire Hathaway, Omaha (Nebraska) draws a large number of foreign-born professionals. A high percentage of these professionals still have foreign accounts overseas and they are in great needs of assistance from an Omaha FBAR attorney. Oftentimes, they cannot find an attorney they like in Omaha (especially, since this is not a very large city with a lot of international tax attorneys) and they not sure they can use the help of out-of-state FBAR attorneys who offer their services in Omaha. This essay is meant to help these persons by defining the term Omaha FBAR Attorney.

Omaha FBAR Attorney: What is FBAR

The Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (“FBAR”) is probably the most important information return with respect to disclosure of foreign accounts by US tax residents. Its importance stems from the low filing threshold and very high civil and criminal penalties.

As of the calendar year 2016, under the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) §5314 and in accordance with the FinCEN regulations, the FBAR must be filed by a US person who has a financial interest in or signatory authority over one or more foreign financial accounts with an aggregate value greater than $10,000 at any time during the calendar year. See 31 U.S.C. §5314; 31 C.F.R. §1010.350; 31 C.F.R. §1010.306(c).

Thus, there are five requirements that must be satisfied in order for the FBAR filing requirement to arise. First, the filer must be a US person. Second, this US person had a bank or financial account (or accounts) during the calendar year in question. Third, this foreign bank or financial account must be foreign – i.e. in the foreign country. Fourth, during the calendar year, the US person had a financial interest in the account or signature or other authority over the financial account. Finally, the fifth requirement is that the aggregate value of the account or accounts (converted to US dollars) exceeded $10,000 at any point during the calendar year.

All five of these requirements contain important terms (such as “US person”, “financial account” and “financial interest”) which have very specific definitions; so, one must be very careful before making any assumptions about the applicability of FBARs to his situation (in fact, this is really the job for FBAR attorney). The definition of “financial account” is especially fraught with danger and may include anything from a normal investment account to a gold bar stored under the custody of a foreign bank. Please, see other relevant articles on sherayzenlaw.com for more details.

Omaha FBAR Attorney: Definition

Armed with this understanding of FBARs, we can now turn to the main subject of this article – who is considered to be an Omaha FBAR Attorney. There are two aspects to this concept: geographical and substantive.

From the outset, it should be stated that the geographical location of an attorney does not matter. An attorney can reside in Omaha, Nebraska or Minneapolis, Minnesota and still be considered an Omaha FBAR Attorney if this attorney offers his services in this city.

The reason for this geographical indifference lies in the fact that FBAR is a purely federal compliance requirement; it has no particular ties to Omaha or any other specific city or state (or a foreign country, for that matter). As long as a person is a US tax resident and he has foreign accounts, he is potentially subject to FBAR requirement even if he physically resides outside of the United States. Since FBAR is a uniform requirement that does not respect borders and jurisdictions, the same is almost true of the FBAR attorneys, except that an attorney must be licensed to practice in any of the fifty states or Washington D.C. and FBAR must be within the realm of his main area of practice.

The substantive requirement that forms part of the definition of an Omaha FBAR attorney is related to what I just mentioned – FBAR must be within the realm of the main area of an attorney’s legal practice in order for this attorney to be considered an Omaha FBAR attorney.

What is this main area of practice? US international tax law – an Omaha FBAR attorney must be an international tax attorney, because FBAR compliance is part of the much broader US international tax law.

Retain Sherayzen Law Office as Your Omaha FBAR Attorney

If have undisclosed foreign accounts or if you need assistance with your annual FBAR compliance, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help. Sherayzen Law Office is a leading international tax law firm in the area of FBAR compliance. Our highly-experienced international tax team, headed by its founder Attorney Eugene Sherayzen, has helped hundreds of US taxpayers around the globe with their FBAR compliance and other international tax issues (including offshore voluntary disclosures under the OVDP, Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures, Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures, Delinquent FBAR Submission Procedures, Delinquent International Information Return Submission Procedures and Reasonable Cause Disclosures (also known as “noisy disclosures”)).

This is why, if you are looking for a Omaha FBAR Attorney, please contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. today to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Madison FBAR Attorney | FBAR FATCA OVDP IRS Lawyer

/0 Comments/in , /by

Do you reside in Madison and have undisclosed foreign accounts? Are you searching for a highly-knowledgeable Madison FBAR Attorney to help you resolve this situation? Then, read this essay in order to understand who is considered to be a Madison FBAR Attorney and and why you should retain the services of my firm, Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd..

Madison FBAR Attorney: Geographical Location

There is a traditional preference among people to choose an attorney who lives in their city due to perceived communication problems with an attorney outside of their city. Also, often, the fact that their attorney is local sometimes gives an illusion of a better control over the case.

This is an incorrect view when it comes to a case that involves FBARs – in reality, the geographical location of a Madison FBAR Attorney does not have any impact on the attorney’s ability to conduct your FBAR case. The reason is that FBAR is federal law; the state of Wisconsin and the city of Madison have no impact over the implementation and enforcement of FBAR. This means that the physical location of a Madison FBAR Attorney does not affect the effectiveness of his legal representation of his clients in Madison or any other city.

Furthermore, the communication issue is a mythical problem in today’s world. The development of modern communications technologies has eliminated the entire advantage of retaining a local Madison FBAR Attorney. Even if your attorney lives and works in Madison, almost your entire communication with him is going to be through email, telephone and regular mail – i.e. the same as if your attorney resides in Madison. The infrequent person-to-person meetings can now be replicated through a video Skype conference.

Finally, retaining a local Madison FBAR Attorney has no impact on the control over the case by the client. It all depends on the personality of the attorney; a good attorney would maintain control over the legal side of the case, while allowing his client to make informed choices with respect to issues that require a client’s input (such as a personal preference for a voluntary disclosure path).

All of this analysis leads us to two important conclusions. First, a Madison FBAR Attorney is any attorney, irrespective of his residence, who offers his FBAR services in Madison. Second, the geographical location should not have influence over your decision to retain a Madison FBAR Attorney; the personality and, as will be explained below, the knowledge of your attorney is what really matters.

Madison FBAR Attorney: Knowledge of International Tax Law and FBARs is the Key

We are now approaching the key consideration that you should have in retaining a Madison FBAR Attorney: his knowledge of the subject matter.

The subject matter that your Madison FBAR attorney must know should be broader than just FBARs. Rather, he should know about FBAR, the place this form occupies within the US international tax system and how FBAR interacts with other US international tax compliance requirements, such as foreign income reporting, FATCA Form 8938, Form 8621, foreign business ownership information returns, et cetera. This profound knowledge of US international tax law should also include the knowledge of remedying past noncompliance, including the various voluntary disclosure options.

Thus, FBAR issues are often highly intertwined with the rest of the US tax laws and this interaction is what will make the real impact on your tax position in the United States. This is why your Madison FBAR Attorney should be highly knowledgeable in US international tax law in general, not just FBARs.

Madison FBAR Attorney: Contact Sherayzen Law Office

We are now ready to answer the main underlying question of this essay: who should you retain if you are looking for a highly-skilled Madison FBAR Attorney? While the actual choice is ultimately personal, based on the objective criteria, Sherayzen Law Office definitely should be a top candidate in your search.

Sherayzen Law Office is a leading tax firm in the area of FBAR compliance due to profound knowledge of the subject matter and extensive experience of dealing with FBARs and related issues including foreign income reporting, FATCA compliance (Form 8938), PFIC compliance (Form 8621), Subpart F rules, all types of US international reporting returns (3520, 3520-A, 5471, 8865, 8858, 926, et cetera), US income tax returns (individual, partnership and corporate) for domestic and foreign persons and other issues.

Furthermore, Sherayzen Law Office has helped hundreds of clients with their past FBAR noncompliance. In fact, this is one of the leading international tax law firms in the world with experience in all major IRS offshore voluntary disclosure programs, including 2009 OVDP, 2011 OVDI, 2012 OVDP and the still current (as of August of 2016) 2014 OVDP.

This is why, if you are looking for a Madison FBAR Attorney, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. today to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Philadelphia FBAR Attorney | Foreign Accounts Lawyers

/0 Comments/in , /by

Are you looking for a highly-skilled Philadelphia FBAR Attorney? Then, you are among many Philadelphians who need to report their foreign accounts, but do not know how to find appropriate legal help. Often, they find the attorney that they like lives outside of Philadelphia and they are not sure if they should prefer him over local Philadelphia FBAR Attorneys. In this short article, I would like to address the issue of who is considered to be a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney and why you should retain the services of my firm, Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. (Sherayzen Law Office).

Philadelphia FBAR Attorney: Geographical Location

From the outset, it is important to understand that the geographical location of a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney does not have any impact on the attorney’s ability to conduct your FBAR case. The reason for this statement lies in the fact that FBAR is federal law. The state of Pennsylvania and the city of Philadelphia have no influence whatsoever over the implementation and enforcement of FBAR. This means that the physical location of your Philadelphia FBAR Attorney does not affect the effectiveness of his legal representation of his clients in Philadelphia.

Furthermore, the development of modern communications technology has eliminated almost the entire advantage of retaining a local Philadelphia FBAR Attorney. Even if your attorney resides in Philadelphia, almost all of your entire communication with him is going to be through email, telephone and regular mail – i.e. the same as if your attorney resides in Minneapolis. The person-to-person meetings are now easily replaced by a video Skype conference.

All of this analysis leads us to two important conclusions. First, a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney is any attorney, irrespective of his residence, who offers his FBAR services in Philadelphia. Second, the geographical location should not have any impact on your decision to retain a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney.

Philadelphia FBAR Attorney: Knowledge of International Tax Law and FBARs is the Key

The conclusions from the first part of this essay point us now to the key consideration that you should have in retaining a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney: his knowledge of the subject matter.

What is this “subject matter”? Is it only limited to knowing the FBARs or is there something else a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney should know? Indeed, the subject matter that your attorney must know should not be limited to just how to file an FBAR. Rather, he should know about FBAR, the place this form occupies within the US international tax system and how FBAR interacts with other US international tax compliance requirements, such as foreign income reporting, Form 8938, Form 8621, foreign business ownership reporting returns (5471, 8865 and 8858), et cetera.

It is also important to understand that the FBAR issues are often highly intertwined with the rest of the US tax laws and this interaction is what will make the real impact on your tax position in the United States. This is why your Philadelphia FBAR Attorney should be highly knowledgeable in other areas of international tax law in addition to FBARs.

Philadelphia FBAR Attorney: Contact Sherayzen Law Office

We can now revert to the question we already posed at the beginning of the essay: who should you retain if you are looking for a highly-skilled Philadelphia FBAR Attorney. While the actual choice is ultimately personal, based on the objective criteria, Sherayzen Law Office should definitely occupy a top spot in your search.

Sherayzen Law Office holds a leading position in the world on FBAR compliance due to its highly-experienced international tax team, headed by its founder Attorney Eugene Sherayzen, that has been helping its clients throughout the world with FBAR and related international tax issues including foreign income reporting, FATCA compliance (Form 8938), PFIC compliance (Form 8621), Subpart F rules, all types of US tax information returns (3520, 3520-A, 5471, 8865, 8858, 926, et cetera), US income tax returns (individual, partnership and corporate) for domestic and foreign persons and other issues.

Furthermore, Sherayzen Law Office has helped hundreds of clients who are delinquent with respect to their FBAR and other US tax obligations. In fact, Sherayzen Law Office is one of the leading international tax law firms in the world with experience in all major IRS voluntary disclosure programs, including 2009 OVDP, 2011 OVDI, 2012 OVDP and 2014 OVDP now closed.

This is why, if you are looking for a Philadelphia FBAR Attorney, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. today to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!