Posts

US Continental Shelf Definition of the United States | US Tax Attorney

The US continental shelf presents a unique problem to the tax definition of the United States. It is governed by a special tax provision that sets it apart from any other tax definition. If fact, the US continental shelf is only considered to be part of the United States with respect to specific taxpayers who are engaged in a particular activity on or over the continental shelf. In this article, I will explore certain features of the US continental shelf definition of the United States that distinguishes it from any other tax provision in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC).

Definition of the US Continental Shelf

For the purposes of the US income tax, the IRC § 638(1) states that the United States “when used in a geographical sense includes the seabed and subsoil of those submarine areas which are adjacent to the territorial waters of the United States and over which the United States has exclusive rights, in accordance with international law, with respect to the exploration and exploitation of natural resources.” The opening clause of IRC § 638 specifically states that this definition of the United States applies only to the activities “with respect to mines, oil and gas wells, and other natural deposits.”

Analysis of the Definition of the US Continental Shelf

Two aspects need to be noted with respect to the definition above. First, the reference to international tax law means that the US government considers 200 miles of land underneath the ocean as its territory (the so-called “Exclusive Economic Zone” or “EEZ”). An interesting assumption that underlies IRC § 638 is that the continental shelf and the EEZ are the same.

Second, I want to emphasize that this is the definition that is tied to land only, not the water above the land – even more precisely, to certain activities on the ocean’s floor rather than in the water. This is a highly important aspect of IRC § 638, because it produces interesting results.

On the one hand, anyone (including foreign vessels and foreign contractors) drilling or exploring oil in the US continental shelf is considered to be engaged in a trade or business in the United States, which subjects these individuals and companies to US income tax. This also means that US tax withholding needs to be done with respect to foreign contractors. Moreover, even personal property (located over the US continental shelf) of a taxpayer engaged in the drilling or the exploration of the US continental shelf would most likely be classified as US personal property within the meaning of IRC § 956.

On the other hand, fishing in a boat in the same zone will not be considered as an activity within the United States, because it is not linked to mines, oil and gas wells, and other natural deposits.

This means that the application of the US Continental Shelf’s definition of the United States depends on the activity of the taxpayer, not just his location.

US Continental Shelf Rules and Foreign Countries

There is one more interesting aspect of the US continental shelf definition of the United States: its application to foreign countries. The first part of IRC § 638(2) states that the same definition of the continental shelf will also apply to foreign countries – i.e. the seabed and subsoil adjacent to the foreign country or possession and over which the country has EEZ rights.

At the end, however, IRC § 638(2) contains an interesting limitation: “ but this paragraph shall apply in the case of a foreign country only if it exercises, directly or indirectly, taxing jurisdiction with respect to such exploration or exploitation.” In other words, if a foreign country exercises its taxing jurisdiction over the continental shelf, then it is considered to be part of a foreign country. Otherwise, it will be considered as “international waters” (since it is also outside of the US continental shelf).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help with US Tax Issues

The definition of the United States in the context of the US continental shelf is just one of many examples of the enormous complexity of US tax laws. While even US citizens with domestic assets only have to struggle with these issues, the complexity of US tax laws is multiplied numerous times when one deals with a foreign individual/company or even US taxpayers with foreign assets. It is just too easy to get yourself into trouble.

This is why you need the help of the professional international tax law firm of Sherayzen Law Office. Our firm specializes in helping US and foreign taxpayers with their annual tax compliance, tax planning and dealing with past US tax noncompliance.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

What Needs to Be Included in the OVDP Preclearance Request

The OVDP Preclearance Request is a very important document that is required to be filed in order to commence a US taxpayer’s voluntary disclosure under the 2014 IRS Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (2014 OVDP) which is still in existence at the time of this writing. This is why it is important to understand what actually needs to be included in the OVDP Preclearance Request.

FAQ 23 of the 2014 OVDP details three major requirements for the OVDP Preclearance Request. First, the OVDP Preclearance Request must include the identifying information of the applicant(s), including complete name(s), date(s) of birth, tax identification number(s), address (or adresses), and telephone number(s).

Second, the OVDP Preclearance Request should include the identifying information of all financial institutions at which undisclosed OVDP assets were held during the voluntary disclosure period. The “identifying information” includes complete names of the foreign institutions (including all DBAs and pseudonyms), addresses, and telephone numbers.

It is up to your international tax lawyer to determine the OVDP assets and the voluntary disclosure period prior to filing the OVDP Preclearance Request.

Finally, the OVDP Preclearance Request should include the identifying information of all foreign and domestic business entities (e.g., corporations, partnerships, limited liability companies, foundations, et cetera) and trusts through which the undisclosed OVDP assets (again, this is the determination that needs to be made by your international tax lawyer) were held by the applicant.
Note that this request does not include the entities that are traded on a public stock exchange in the United States or overseas.

This information should be supplied for the entities that were in existence during any period of time during the Voluntary Disclosure Period, including any entities that were dissolved. The determination of the Voluntary Disclosure Period should be done by your international tax lawyer.

The identifying information that should be included in your OVDP Preclearance Request with respect to entities includes: complete names (including all DBAs and pseudonyms), employer identification numbers (if applicable), addresses, and the jurisdiction in which the entities were organized.

The OVDP Preclearance Requests should be accompanied by an executed Form 2848 (IRS Power of Attorney form) if the applicant is represented. I strongly advise that you retain an experienced international tax lawyer to conduct your voluntary disclosure process.

Note that, if your case involves jointly-filed US tax returns, the OVDP Preclearance Request should be prepared for both spouses.

Once the OVDP Preclearance Request is faxed to the IRS, the IRS-CI (Criminal Investigation) may take up to 30 days to notify the applicant’s representative (or the applicant himself (or herself), if the applicant is not represented). In my experience, if the IRS-CI is not busy, it will usually respond within a few weeks, but it can take the whole month. However, there are instances (like the August of 2014 deadline for US taxpayers to secure the 27.5% penalty, instead of 50%) when the IRS-CI is overwhelmed and it can take even a couple of months for them to make the decision on your OVDP Preclearance Request.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Experienced and Professional Help With the Voluntary Disclosure of Your Foreign Assets and Foreign Income

If you have undisclosed foreign accounts and you are considering entering the OVDP, you should contact the experienced voluntary disclosure team of Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd. We will handle your entire case, including all legal and accounting documentation (including the preparation of amended tax returns and FBARs). We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers worldwide and we can help you!

Contact Sherayzen Law Office to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Vadian Bank AG Signs Non-Prosecution Agreement with DOJ

On May 8, 2015, Vadian Bank AG (Vadian) became the second bank to sign a Non-Prosecution Agreement with the US Department of Justice (DOJ) pursuant to the DOJ Program for Swiss Banks.

Program for Swiss Banks: Background Information

On August 29, 2013, the DOJ announced the creation of the “The Program for Non-Prosecution Agreements or Non-Target Letters for Swiss Banks (Program)”. The basic goal of the program was to allow Swiss banks to purge themselves of the prior US tax non-compliance (or complicity with such non-compliance) in exchange for providing DOJ with detailed description of their illegal activities, bank accounts owned by US persons and, in many cases, the payment of monetary penalties.

The Program is a really a version of the 2014 OVDP for foreign banks. However, it was not open to all banks. The banks already under criminal investigation related to their Swiss-banking activities and all individuals were expressly excluded from the program.

As of the time of this writing, the application process has already been completed for the great majority of the Swiss banks, and the Program has entered into the resolution phase (i.e. the review of the banks’ disclosure and penalty calculation).

Vadian bank’s case was the second such case that completed the resolution phase (BSI SA was the first bank to do so).

Vadian Bank Background

Vadian has one office and 26 employees. Prior to 2008, Vadian’s business predominantly consisted of savings accounts, residential mortgage lending and small business loans. In 2007, Vadian hired a marketing firm to assist with its planned growth into private banking, and focused its efforts on attracting external asset managers. In 2008, after it became publicly known that UBS was a target of a criminal investigation, Vadian accepted accounts from U.S. persons who were forced out of other Swiss banks. At this time, Vadian’s management was aware that the U.S. authorities were pursuing Swiss banks that facilitated tax evasion for U.S. accountholders in Switzerland, but was not deterred because Vadian had no U.S. presence. As a result of its efforts, after August 2008, Vadian attracted cross-border private banking business and increased its U.S. related accounts from two to more than 70, with $76 million in assets under management.

Through its managers, employees and/or other individuals, Vadian knew or believed that many of its U.S. accountholders were not complying with their U.S. tax obligations, and Vadian would and did assist those clients to conceal assets and income from the IRS. Vadian’s services included: “hold mail” services; numbered accounts, where the client was known to most bank employees only by a number or code name; opening and maintaining accounts for U.S. taxpayers through non-U.S. entities such as corporations, trusts or foundations; and accepting instructions from U.S.-based accountholders to prevent investments from being made in U.S.-based securities that would require disclosure to U.S. tax authorities.

Vadian Bank: Terms the DOJ Non-Prosecution Agreement

According to the terms of the non-prosecution agreement that was signed on May 20, 2015, Vadian agreed to cooperate in any related criminal or civil proceedings, demonstrate its implementation of controls to stop misconduct involving undeclared U.S. accounts and pay a $4.253 million penalty in return for the department’s agreement not to prosecute Vadian for tax-related criminal offenses.

In resolving its criminal liabilities under the program, Vadian also provided extensive cooperation and encouraged U.S. accountholders to come into compliance.

Consequences of Vadian Non-Prosecution Agreement for Vadian US Accountholders

If you have (or had at any point since the year 2008) undeclared foreign accounts at Vadian, you may still be eligible to participate in the OVDP (assuming that you can pass the IRS-CI Preclearance process). However, the price of participating in the OVDP has almost doubled from the pre-Agreement 27.5% to the current 50% of the highest value of your undisclosed foreign assets.

Of course, if the behavior was non-willful, Streamlined options remain available at the same penalty rates.

What Should Vadian US Accountholders Do?

If you are a US person and an accountholder at Vadian, please contact the experienced international tax law firm of Sherayzen Law Office to explore your voluntary disclosure options as soon as possible.

2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative vs. Statute of Limitations

As I already described in an earlier article, the IRS instituted a new voluntary disclosure program, called 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (“OVDI”). One of the most problematic areas under OVDI is the length of the examination period.

Agreeing to assessment of taxes and penalties for all voluntary disclosure years is part of the resolution offered by the IRS for resolving offshore voluntary disclosures. The OVDI disclosure period is 2003 through 2010 – eight years in total.

This contrasts greatly with the general three-year statute of limitations for IRS examination. Therefore, a tax attorney should consider all options prior to engaging in OVDI in order to avoid subjecting his client to unnecessary penalties.

One of the major factors in electing quiet disclosure versus OVDI is considering whether one or more of the numerous exceptions to the general IRS statute of limitations may apply. For example, if the IRS can prove a substantial omission of gross income, the statute of limitations is likely to be expanded to six years. Moreover, if there was a failure to file certain information returns, such as Form 3520 or Form 5471, the statute of limitations will not have begun to run. If the IRS can prove fraud, there is no statute of limitations for assessing tax. In addition, the statute of limitations for asserting FBAR penalties is six years from the date of the violation, which would be the date that an unfiled FBAR was due to have been filed. See 31 U.S.C. § 5321(b)(1).

Obviously, other factors should be considered before the decision to engage into OVDI is made. The chief factor would of course be the likelihood of criminal prosecution if the taxpayer fails to make use of OVDI. Engaging in voluntary disclosure pursuant to OVDI virtually eliminates possibility of criminal prosecution.

These factors aside, though, close analysis of the IRS statute of limitations is one of the most important considerations of whether to engage in OVDI.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office NOW!

Sherayzen Law Office can help. Our international tax firm has guided our clients throughout the United States through a voluntary disclosure process, making sure that the rights of our clients are protected and they pay only fair taxes and penalties.

Failure to Conduct Voluntary Disclosure: Possible Penalties

The IRS just instituted a new voluntary disclosure program for taxpayers who have offshore accounts or assets and who failed to properly report them to the IRS and pay appropriate U.S. taxes. It is called 2011 Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative (“2011 OVDI”). While 2011 OVDI is not available for everyone and some particular circumstances of a case may determine whether it is advisable to go through this program, this new voluntary disclosure program offers a great chance for taxpayers to bring their tax affairs in order and virtually eliminate the possibility of criminal prosecution.

However, what may happen if a taxpayer who should have voluntarily disclosed his offshore income and assets, but fails to do so through 2011 OVDI and the IRS discovers the noncompliance through later examination? This article addresses the common types of penalties that a taxpayer may be subject to in cases where IRS identifies noncompliance with U.S. tax laws before the taxpayer goes through the voluntary disclosure process.

Penalties in General

In general, if the IRS finds out that a taxpayer is not in compliance with U.S. tax laws and fails to voluntarily disclose his offshore assets and foreign bank accounts, the taxpayer may be subject to severe civil and criminal penalties. In additional to accuracy related penalties, the fraud-related penalties, FBAR penalties, and foreign asset reporting penalties (with interest) may be imposed. Combined, all of these penalties and interest may exceed the actual value of nondisclosed assets and foreign bank accounts. In the worst-case scenario, a criminal prosecution may be launched against the noncompliant taxpayers.

Finally, the voluntary disclosure process – which would otherwise be a far less painful way to deal with this problem – is automatically unavailable for taxpayers as soon as they are under civil examination of the IRS.

Let’s discuss the penalties in detail.

Accuracy-Related and Failure to File and Pay Penalties

An accuracy-related penalty on underpayments is imposed under IRC § 6662. Depending upon which component of the accuracy-related penalty is applicable, a taxpayer may be liable for a 20 percent or 40 percent penalty.

If a taxpayer fails to file the required income tax return, a failure to file (“FTF”) penalty may be imposed pursuant to IRC § 6651(a)(1). The penalty is generally five percent of the balance due, plus an additional five percent for each month or fraction thereof during which the failure continues may be imposed. The total penalty will not exceed 25 percent of the balance due.

If a taxpayer fails to pay the amount of tax shown on the return, a failure to pay (“FTP”) penalty may be imposed pursuant to IRC § 6651(a)(2). The penalty may be half of a percent of the amount of tax shown on the return, plus an additional half of a percent for each additional month or fraction thereof that the amount remains unpaid, not exceeding the total of 25 percent of the balance due.

Fraud Penalties

Fraud penalties may imposed under IRC §§ 6651(f) or 6663. Where an underpayment of tax, or a failure to file a tax return, is due to fraud, the taxpayer is liable for penalties that may essentially amount to 75 percent of the unpaid tax.

FBAR Penalties

Read this article discussing the penalties that may be imposed as a result of a taxpayers failure to file the FinCEN Form 114 formerly Form TD F 90-22.1 (Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts, commonly known as an “FBAR”).

Other Penalties

Depending on a particular fact pattern, additional penalties may be imposed for failure to file Form 926, 3520, 3520-A, 5471, 5472, and 8865.

Criminal Prosecution

In the worst-case scenario, a criminal prosecution may be launched by the IRS. Huge penalties and potential jail time are the possible in case of tax evasion.

Contact Us to Let Us Help You

Sherayzen Law Office can help. We are a tax firm based in Minnesota who has helped taxpayers throughout the United States to disclose offshore assets, foreign bank accounts and unreported foreign income to the IRS, avoiding the nightmare scenarios for our clients.

For many taxpayers, 2011 OVDI is a chance to become compliant, avoid substantial civil penalties and generally eliminate the risk of criminal prosecution. A voluntary disclosure also provides the opportunity to calculate, with a reasonable degree of certainty, the total cost of resolving all offshore tax issues.

If you believe that you may not be in full compliance with U.S. tax laws, the worst course of action is to do nothing and wait for the IRS to discover your noncompliance. Once this happens, your options are likely to be severely limited and the penalties a lot higher. Therefore, call or e-mail us NOW to let us help you with your tax problems. Remember, all calls and e-mails are confidential and attorney-client privileged.