Posts

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco | International Tax Lawyers California

Receiving a foreign inheritance may open a litany of US international tax compliance obligations. Therefore, one of the first things you should do is to seek the help of an international tax attorney who specializes in foreign inheritance reporting.  If you reside in San Francisco, California, you need to look for a Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco. You will find that Sherayzen Law Office Ltd. is very likely to be the perfect fit for you.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco: Why Foreign Inheritance is So Important to Your US international Tax Compliance

There are two main reasons why receiving a foreign inheritance may be a critical event for your US international tax compliance. First, receiving a foreign inheritance means that you have additional assets, income and transactions to report to the IRS.  The way that US international tax law works, it means that it is usually more than just one requirement is triggered. Rather, it may be a set of issues and reporting obligations that require an experienced international tax attorney to resolve them correctly. 

The multitude and complexity of issues can be fairly large: from the reporting of the foreign inheritance itself, income recognition, transfer of cash/assets to the United States to additional reporting requirements concerning newly acquired foreign assets and offshore voluntary disclosures involving prior noncompliance. You should keep in mind that noncompliance with these requirements may result in the assessment of high IRS penalties.

The second reason why a foreign inheritance is so important and so dangerous is the relative complacency with respect to and even complete nonrecognition of the potential US tax consequences of receiving a foreign inheritance with all of the multitude of issues to which I alluded above.  The problem is not just that many US taxpayers are completely ignorant of the fact that a foreign inheritance may require extensive US tax compliance. Even worse, many taxpayers erroneously but ardently believe that a foreign inheritance is something completely unrelated to the United States and should not have any US tax consequences. At best, they may focus on Form 3520 reporting while overlooking the complexity of the rest of the issues involved in receiving a foreign inheritance.

This is precisely why I highly recommend consulting an international tax lawyer with extensive experience in foreign inheritance US tax reporting, such as Sherayzen Law Office, if you have received or about to receive a foreign inheritance.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco: International Tax Lawyer

I just mentioned that you need to seek the help of an international tax attorney rather than just a foreign inheritance tax attorney.  Why is that?

The answer is simple: a foreign inheritance attorney is first and foremost an international tax lawyer – i.e. a lawyer with profound knowledge of and extensive experience in US international tax law, particularly in the area of US international tax compliance. This means that a lawyer must be familiar with such common US international tax forms as Form 3520 (critically important for foreign inheritance reporting) and Form 8938.  He must also understand and be able to identify related US international tax compliance forms such as Forms 3520-A, 5471, 8858, 8865 cetera.  Of course, every US international tax lawyer must be very familiar with FinCEN Form 114 commonly known as FBAR.

In addition to these information returns, an international tax lawyer must be familiar with all types of foreign income reporting.  This requirement includes the knowledge of foreign rental income, PFIC complianceGILTI income, capital gains concerning foreign real estate, et cetera.

Sherayzen Law Office is a highly experienced international tax law firm with respect to all of these income tax and information return requirements, including specifically all of the aforementioned forms.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco: Tax Planning

It is highly prudent to engage in tax planning concerning a foreign inheritance. This is important not only for the purpose of limiting future tax burdens, but also to control future US tax compliance costs.  

Sherayzen Law Office has extensive experience in foreign inheritance US tax planning for its clients in San Francisco and all over the world.  We also have highly valuable experience of combining income tax planning with offshore voluntary disclosures.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco: Offshore Voluntary Disclosures

Perhaps you learned late about your US international tax compliance requirements concerning foreign inheritance. In fact, this is a very common situation. In this case, you will find yourself in a very uncomfortable position of facing potentially multiple high IRS penalties for multiple violations of US international tax law.

For this reason, your foreign inheritance tax attorney must also have a profound understanding of the IRS voluntary disclosure options. In fact, in my experience, a discussion of a foreign inheritance often leads to the identification of past US international tax noncompliance and the immediate discussion of IRS offshore voluntary disclosure to remedy past noncompliance.

Offshore Voluntary Disclosures is a core area of our international tax practice at Sherayzen Law Office. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers worldwide, including in San Francisco, to bring their tax affairs into full compliance with US tax laws. This work included the preparation and filing of all kinds of offshore voluntary disclosures including: SDOP (Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures)SFOP (Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures)DFSP (Delinquent FBAR Submission Procedures), DIIRSP (Delinquent International Information Return Submission Procedures), et cetera.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Foreign Inheritance Tax Help

Sherayzen Law Office is an international tax law firm that specializes in US international tax compliance, including foreign inheritance reporting.  We have helped numerous clients around the world with their foreign inheritance US tax compliance. We can help you! Hence, if you are looking for a Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney San Francisco, contact us now to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Residents versus Nonresidents: US Tax Differences | International Tax Lawyer Minneapolis

There is a huge difference between the US tax obligations of a US tax resident versus nonresident alien. This brief essay strives to outline the main differences in the US tax treatment of tax residents versus nonresidents.

Residents versus Nonresidents: Worldwide Income Taxation

One of the key differences in the tax treatment of residents versus nonresidents is concerning what income is subject to US taxation.  A resident alien is subject to worldwide income taxation similarly to a US citizen. It does not matter where the income is earned, whether it is subject to taxation in a foreign country, whether it has been repatriated to the United States, whether it comes from pre-US funds, et cetera – a resident alien is always subject to worldwide income taxation.

Moreover, a resident alien may also be subject to highly invasive anti-deferral tax regimes such as Subpart F rules and GILTI tax (see below). Under these regimes, a resident alien may have to recognize income that the IRS deems that he earned, but there was no actual distribution.

On the other hand, a nonresident alien may have to pay US taxes on only four types of income. First, US-source income (that the Internal Revenue Code does not otherwise exclude from taxation) that the IRS considers as FDAP income (fixed, determinable, annual or periodical income) under IRC §871(a) (see below more on this subject). Second, a nonresident alien has to pay US taxes on US-source capital gains.  Third, a nonresident alien has to declare on his US income tax returns all ECI (Effectively Connected Income) income from a trade or business within the United States. Finally, certain other US-source and certain other foreign-source income under highly limited exceptions. All other income is excluded from taxation of nonresident aliens.

Residents versus Nonresidents: Deductions

On the other hand, a resident alien has available (at least hypothetically) a far broader range of deductions, including a more expanded list of itemized deductions (for example, mortgage interest, property taxes, et cetera) and a standard deduction.

A nonresident alien, however, has available a far more limited range of deductions.  First, deductions related to the ECI earnings. Second, only three specific kinds of itemized deductions: casualty/theft losses from property located in the United States, charitable contributions to qualified US charities only and one personal exemption (which is a moot point at the time of this writing). Third, a nonresident alien can only claim a standard deduction in the case of a few income tax treaties that allow the claim of a standard deduction; otherwise, the standard deduction is not available.

Residents versus Nonresidents: Tax Filing Status

If a resident alien marries another resident alien or a US citizen, then the couple may elect to file a joint US tax return. Married Filing Jointly is probably the most beneficial tax filing status in the United States.

On the other hand, nonresident aliens (if they want to keep their nonresident status) married to a resident alien or a US citizen can only file as “married filing separately”.  In most situations, this is the most unfavorable tax filing status from the US tax perspective.

Residents versus Nonresidents: US International Information Returns

Compliance with US international information returns is potentially a huge difference between the US tax burden of residents versus nonresidents. A resident alien may be required to file a bewildering array of US international information returns depending on his particular situation.  A failure to do so may result in the imposition of very high IRS penalties.

The main examples of such returns are: FBAR (officially FinCEN Form 114, the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts), Form 3520, Form 3520-A, Form 5471, Form 8621, Form 8865, Form 8938, Form 926, et cetera.

Residents versus Nonresidents: Tax Withholding on US-Source Income

There are several situations in which a payment to a non-US person may be classified as a US-source income and subject to tax withholding under IRC §§1441 and 1442 solely due to the “US resident” classification of the payor.  Here, I am referring to a situation where the US tax code classifies an interest payment as US-source income only because it is a resident alien made the payment. If such a payment were made by a nonresident alien, then it would be foreign-source income not subject to US tax withholding.

The most common example of such a situation involves interest payments.  Under §861(a)(1), interest paid by noncorporate resident of the United States is US-source income potentially subject to tax withholding. However, if the individual is a nonresident alien for US tax purposes, then the interest is not US-source income exempt from US tax withholding, at least under IRC §§1441 and 1442.

As a side note, I should mention that if the interest made by a US tax resident is classified as “portfolio interest” under §871(h), it would be exempt from the 30% tax withholding pursuant to §§871(a)(1) and 881.  There is also a potential for the exclusion from tax withholding under a particular tax treaty. As always, an international tax attorney should analyze each particular set of facts in its own context in order to determine whether income would be subject to US tax withholding.

Residents versus Nonresidents: Anti-deferral Tax Regimes

A US tax resident may be subject to a wide variety of various US anti-deferral tax regimes, such as PFIC (Passive Foreign Investment Company), GILTI, Subpart F rules, et cetera.

Moreover, a situation may occur where US resident classification as resident under the IRC does not impact this particular individual’s US income tax obligations but may affect such obligations of other US persons.  The most common example is the classification of a foreign corporation as a Controlled Foreign Corporation or CFC

Imagine where a person is a US tax resident under the IRC but utilizes the “tie-breaker” provisions of an income tax treaty to continue being classified as a nonresident alien. In this case, this individual’s US income tax obligations are the same as before. However, for the purposes of classifying a foreign corporation as a CFC, he remains a US tax resident. For example, if he owns 10% and the other US owners own at least 41% of this foreign corporation, then the corporation itself will become a CFC without any regard to the treaty provisions. See Reg. §301.7701(b)-7(a)(3).

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help Regarding US International Tax Law

In this article, I summarized some of the most important US tax differences between US residents versus nonresidents.  There are many more complexities and tax traps in this area of law.

This is precisely why you need to contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help with your US tax classification and any other US international tax issue. Our firm has extensive experience in advising clients concerning their US tax status and the potential US tax consequences of a particular US tax classification.

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Lansing FBAR Attorney | International Tax Lawyers Michigan

If you reside in Lansing, Michigan and have unreported foreign bank and financial accounts, you may be looking for a Lansing FBAR Attorney.  In this case, you should contact Sherayzen Law Office, Ltd., a leader in FBAR compliance, including offshore voluntary disclosures concerning delinquent. Let’s consider the main reasons for it.

Lansing FBAR Attorney: International Tax Lawyer

From the outset, it is very important to understand that, by looking for Lansing FBAR 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.

Lansing FBAR Attorney: Deep Knowledge of US International Tax Law and Offshore Voluntary Disclosures

When retaining Lansing FBAR attorney, consider the fact that such an attorney’s work is not limited only 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.

Lansing FBAR 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 Lansing, Michigan. On the contrary, consider international tax attorneys who reside in other states and help Lansing 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 Lansing, Michigan.

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

Saving Clause | International Tax Lawyer & Attorney Minneapolis

The Saving Clause is a provision that all US income tax treaties contain. In this brief essay, I will introduce the readers to the Saving Clause, its purpose and its effect.

Saving Clause vs. Savings Clause

The first thing to note is that the proper way to refer to this important tax treaty provision is “saving clause” and not “savings clause” (see, for example, 2016 US Model Income Tax Treaty, article 1(4)).  You will still see sometimes various articles and even tax provisions (for example, §7852(d)(2)) incorrectly use “savings clause”.

Saving Clause: Effect on US Citizens

The Saving Clause provides that the United States may tax its citizens as if the tax treaty were not in effect. Here is a common example of the clause from the US-Spain tax treaty: “Notwithstanding any provision of the Convention except paragraph 4, a Contracting State may tax its residents (as determined under Article 4 (Residence)), and by reason of citizenship may tax its citizens, as if the Convention had not come into effect” (italics added).

In other words, the Saving Clause prevents US citizens who are classified as income tax residents of the treaty country from claiming a different tax treatment that would otherwise be available under the treaty to noncitizens who are residents of the treaty country. For example, a US citizen cannot claim an exemption from certain income otherwise exempt for a noncitizen who is a resident of a treaty country.

Saving Clause: Effect on US Residents

The impact of the Saving Clause on US residents is more complicated.  The Clause usually provides that the United States may tax its residents as determined by a treaty (usually in an Article 4) as if the treaty were not in effect.  Usually, these resident provisions would contain tie-breaker rules. This would mean that an individual who is a resident alien under §7701(b) but a resident of the treaty country under the treaty, then the saving clause cannot deny the individual any of the exemptions from US tax law or reductions in US tax that are provided by the treaty to residents of the treaty country. In such cases, the saving clause would have limited impact on residents.

If, however, a tax treaty does not contain the tie-breaker provisions in its definition of a tax resident (as some old treaties), then the impact of the Saving Clause may be tremendous and even dispositive. In this situation, the Saving Clause assures that an individual who is, at the same time, a resident alien under the Internal Revenue Code IRC) provisions and a resident of the treaty country under the treaty country’s laws will still be taxed as a US resident alien irrespective of the tax treaty.

Saving Clause: Worldwide Income Reporting and Foreign Asset Disclosure Requirements

The application of the Saving Clause may have tremendous impact on an individual’s US tax obligations.  First of all, I remind the readers that, absent treaty limitations, all US tax residents are taxed on their worldwide income. This is the rule irrespective of whether the income is earned, whether it is repatriated to the United States and whether it is subject to foreign tax withholding.

Moreover, US Persons may also be subject to multiple US information return reporting requirements, including FBAR, Form 8938, Form 5471, et cetera.  In this context, it is important to remember that the definition of a “US Person” is broader than the definition of a “resident” for income tax purposes. In other words, a person may be a nonresident for tax purposes due to a tax treaty provision, but he will still be a US Person for the purposes of filing an FBAR or another US information tax return.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help with Your US International Tax Compliance

If you are a US tax resident or a US person, you may be subject to highly complex US international tax requirements.  In order to ensure your full compliance with US international tax provisions, contact Sherayzen Law Office for professional help.

Since 2005, Sherayzen Law Office has helped hundreds of US taxpayers to resolve their prior US tax noncompliance and assure their continuous compliance with US international tax laws.  We have extensive experience with all major US tax compliance requirements such as: worldwide income tax compliance, FBAR, Form 926, Form 3520, Form 3520-A, Form 5471, Form 8621, Form 8865, FATCA Form 8938, et cetera. We can help you!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Substantial Presence Test | US International Tax Lawyer & Attorney

The substantial presence test is one of the most important legal tests in the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), because it determines whether a person is a US tax resident solely by virtue of his physical presence in the United States.  Additionally, this Test is essential to the determination of whether a person is a “US Person” for FBAR and Form 8938 purposes. In this article, I will explain the substantial presence test and highlight its main exceptions.

Substantial Presence Test: The Main Rule

In reality, there are two substantial presence tests; if either test is met, a person is considered to be a US tax resident unless an exception applies.

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 (the so-called “lookback test”) is satisfied if two conditions are met: (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 discuss how exactly the lookback test works.  The way to determine 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).

Substantial Presence Test: Presence

As one can easily see, a critical issue in the substantial presence test is to determine during which days a person is considered to be “present in the United States”. Pursuant to 26 USC §7701(b)(7)(A), a person is considered to be present in the United States if he is physically present in the United States at any time, however short, during the day, including the days of arrival and departure.

There are limited exceptions under 26 USC §§7701(b)(7)(B) and 7701(b)(7)(C) for: commuters from Canada and Mexico, foreign vessel crew members and persons who travel between two foreign countries with a less than a 24-hour layover in the United States.

Substantial Presence Test: Exempt Persons

In addition to the exceptions above, the Internal Revenue Code contains a large number of categories of persons exempt from the Substantial Presence Test. 26 USC §§7701(b). In other words, the days that these “exempt persons” spend in the United States do not count toward the Substantial Presence Test. Here is a most common list of exempt persons:

Foreign government-related individuals and their immediate family (26 USC §7701(b)(5)(B))

Teachers and trainees and their immediate family (26 USC §7701(b)(5)(C))

Foreign students on F-, J-, M- or Q-visas (26 USC §7701(b)(5)(D))

Professional athletes temporarily in the US for charitable sporting events (26 USC §7701(b)(5)(A)(iv))

Individuals unable to leave the US due to medical conditions (26 USC §7701(b)(3)(D)(ii))

A couple of notes on these categories. First, for the “professional athletes who are temporarily present in the United States to compete in a charitable sporting event” category, the sports event must meet the following requirements for the exemption to apply: (1) it must be organized primarily to benefit §503(c)(3) tax-exempt organization; (2) the net proceeds from the event must be contributed to the benefitted tax-exempt organization; and (3) the event must be carried out substantially by volunteers.

Second, concerning the last category “foreign aliens who are unable to leave the United States because of a medical condition”, Rev. Proc. 2020-20 expanded this medical condition exception to include “COVID-19 Medical Condition Travel Exception” for eligible individuals unable to leave United States during “COVID-19 Emergency Period”. The term COVID-19 Emergency Period is a single period of up to 60 consecutive calendar days selected by an individual starting on or after February 1, 2020 and on or before April 1, 2020 during which the individual is physically present in the United States on each day. An Eligible Individual may claim the COVID-19 Medical Condition Travel Exception in addition to, or instead of, claiming other exceptions from the substantial presence test for which the individual is eligible.

Substantial Presence Test: “Closer Connection” Exception

In addition to exceptions and exemptions listed above, there is one more highly important exception to the Substantial Presence Test called the “Closer Connection” Exception. Under 26 USC §§7701(b)(3)(C), a person is exempt from the application of the Substantial Presence Test if the following four conditions are met:

1) the person is present less than 183 days in the United States during the current year;

2) the person can establish that, during the current year, he had a tax home in a foreign country (obviously, “tax home” is a term of art that has its special significance for the purposes of the “closer connection” exception;

3) the person has a “closer connection” to that foreign country than to the United States; and

4) the person has not applied for a lawful permanent residency status in the United States.

I have addressed the Closer Connection Exception in detail here.

Substantial Presence Test:  Tax Treaty Exception

Tax treaties provide another exception. IRC §7701(b)(6) and Treas. Reg. §301.7701(b)-7 provide that an individual who meets the substantial presence test but is a resident of a treaty country under a tie-breaker provision of an income tax treaty may elect to be treated as a nonresident alien for US tax purposes. This election is made on Form 8833, Treaty-Based Return Position Disclosure.

It’s important to note that while this treaty election can significantly affect an individual’s US tax obligations, it does not negate the fact that the individual met the substantial presence test. This distinction is crucial for certain reporting requirements, such as FBAR and Form 8938.

Substantial Presence Test: Closer Connection Exception and Treaty Election vs. FBAR

One of the most common pitfalls of US international tax compliance relates to a situation where the substantial presence test is met but either a closer connection exception is claimed or an election is made to be taxed as a resident of another country.  In such a situation, even many practitioners incorrectly conclude that the taxpayer is not required to file FBAR.  This is not the case; even where a tax treaty foreign tax residency election or a closer connection exception claim is made, the taxpayer may still need to file an FBAR. 76 Fed. Reg. 10,234, 10,238; IRM 4.26.16.2.1.2(6) (11-06-15).

I will discuss this FBAR exception to the closer connection and tax treaty exceptions in another article.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With US International Tax Law

Understanding the nuances of the US international tax law, including the Substantial Presence Test with its numerous exceptions and its implications for both tax residency and FBAR reporting, is essential for individuals who spend significant time in the United States. Given the complexity of these rules and their potential US tax impact, you need qualified professional help to properly navigate these complex rules.

This is why you need to contact Sherayzen Law Office.  Our international tax team is highly knowledgeable and experienced in this area of law. We have helped hundreds of US taxpayers to determine their US tax residency status, and we can help you!  

Contact us today to schedule your confidential consultation!