Posts

Saving Clause | International Tax Lawyer & Attorney Minneapolis

/in , /by

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 article 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, you should 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!

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney Minneapolis | International Tax Lawyer Minnesota

/in , , /by

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 Minneapolis, Minnesota, you need to look for a Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney Minneapolis. You will find that Sherayzen Law Office Ltd. is very likely to be the perfect fit for you.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney Minneapolis: 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 Minneapolis: 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 compliance, GILTI 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 Minneapolis: 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 Minneapolis and all over the world.  We also have a highly valuable experience of combining income tax planning with offshore voluntary disclosures.

Foreign Inheritance Tax Attorney Minneapolis: 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 Minneapolis, 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 Minneapolis, contact us now to schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

FACC Seminar (French-American Chamber of Commerce Seminar) | News

/in , /by

On October 19, 2017, Mr. Eugene Sherayzen, an owner of Sherayzen Law Office and a highly experienced international tax attorney, conducted a seminar titled “Introduction to U.S. International Tax Compliance for U.S. Owners of Foreign Businesses” at the French-American Chamber of Commerce in Minneapolis, Minnesota (the “FACC Seminar”). The audience of the FACC Seminar consisted of business lawyers and business owners.

The FACC Seminar commenced with the breakdown of the title of the seminar into various parts. Mr. Sherayzen first analyzed the tax definition of “owner” and contrasted it with the legal definition of owner. Then, he identified who is considered to be a “U.S. owner” under the U.S. international tax law.

During the second part of the FACC Seminar, Mr. Sherayzen discussed the definition of “foreign” (i.e. foreign business) and the definition of the concept of “business”, contrasting it with a foreign trust. At this point, the tax attorney also acquainted the attendees with the differences between the common-law and the civil-law definitions of partnership.

Then, the focus of the FACC Seminar shifted to the discussion of the U.S. international tax requirements. The tax attorney stated that he would discuss four major categories of U.S. international tax requirements: (1) U.S. tax reporting requirements related to ownership of a foreign business; (2) U.S. owner’s tax reporting requirements related to assets owned by a foreign business; (3) U.S. tax reporting requirements related to transactions between a foreign business and its U.S. owners; and (4) income recognition as a result of anti-deferral regimes.

Mr. Sherayzen first discussed the U.S. tax reporting requirement related to the ownership of a foreign business. In particular, he covered Forms 5471, 8865 and 8858. The tax attorney also introduced the catch-all Form 8938. In this context, he also explained the second category of U.S. international tax requirements concerning the assets owned by a foreign business.

The next part of the FACC Seminar was devoted to the U.S. tax reporting requirements concerning transactions between a foreign business and its U.S. owners. Mr. Sherayzen explained in detail Form 926 and Schedule O of Form 8865, including the noncompliance penalties associated with these forms. The tax attorney also quickly reviewed Form 8886 for participating in transactions related to tax shelters. The discussion of the complex penalty system of Form 8886 surprised the audience.

The last part of the FACC Seminar was devoted to the income tax recognition and other U.S. tax reporting requirements that arise by the operation of anti-deferral regimes. Both, the Subpart F and the PFIC regimes were covered by the tax attorney.

International Personal Services Sourcing Rules | International Tax Lawyer

/in , /by

In a previous article, I explained that US tax law sources personal services to the place where these services are performed. What about a situation where such services are performed partially in the United States and partially outside of the United States (hereinafter, I will call such services “international personal services”)? In this article, I will address this situation and discuss the US international personal services sourcing rules.

I will specifically limit my discussion in this essay to international personal services sourcing rules concerning non-corporate independent contractors. In the future, I will discuss the income source rules for corporations and employees, including the source of income rules concerning fringe benefits and stock options.

International Personal Services Sourcing: Two Main Situations

The rules concerning the sourcing of international person services income depend on how a contracting agreement structures the payment for such services. In this context, there are two most common categories of contracts.

The first category of contracts specifically designates part of the payment to cover the services performed in the United States and part of the payment to compensate for services performed in a foreign country. In this situation, we can easily apply the general rule and source each part of the payment to the place where services are performed. In other words, the payment for US services will be US-source income and the payment for foreign services will be foreign-source income.

Unfortunately, contractors rarely structure their agreements in this way, because they often fail to retain an international tax lawyer to review their contracts for US international tax issues. Business lawyers also often make the same mistake, because they fail to see the need to involve a tax attorney.

Hence, most contracts fall within the second category of contracts, where a contract does not allocate the payment between services performed in the United States and those performed in a foreign country. The general rule is of little help for these contracts; hence, the IRS developed a supplementary legal process for income sourcing in this type of a situation.

International Personal Services Sourcing: the Two-Step Allocation Process

If the contract does not divide the payment between the countries where the services are performed, then the taxpayer will need to engage in a two-step process.

First, the taxpayer should determine if the terms of the contract allow to make an accurate allocation of payment between the United States and a foreign country. Sometimes, a contractor may perform services so specific to a country that the allocation of payment is obvious, even though the contract does not expressly allocate the payment to this country.

Second, if no such accurate allocation is possible, then the taxpayer should allocate the payment “on the basis that most correctly reflects the proper source of income on the facts and circumstances of the particular case.” Treas. Reg. §1.861-4(b)(1). This appears to be a very general rule that opens up possibilities for creative tax planning, but, once we look at the history of this rule, we will quickly realize that one method – the Time Rule (described below) – limits its flexibility.

The current flexible rule is in force only since 1976. Prior to that year, the IRS required the allocation of payment strictly based on the Time Rule. The impetus to changing to a more flexible rule was a 1973 case from the Tenth Circuit, Tipton & Kalmbach, Inc v US, 480 F2d 1118, 32 AFTR2d 73-5334 (10th Cir 1973). In that case, the IRS determined that a re-enlistment bonus was a compensation for services which the taxpayer performed on the day he re-enlisted. The paradoxical result was the fact that the location of the soldier on the day of his re-enlistment determined the sourcing of the entire re-enlistment bonus.

Hence, the IRS infused more flexibility into the Time Rule by adopting the language currently found in Treas. Reg. §1.861-4(b)(1). Nevertheless, given this history, there is no question that the Time Rule remains the most persuasive method of income allocation for non-corporate individual contractors.

It should be emphasized, however, that dominance of the Time Rule should not deter a taxpayer utilizing alternative methodology (for example, the value produced by specific services) if it is more accurate. In other words, the Time Rule is the default methodology which the IRS will use to allocate the payment between the countries, but a taxpayer may use other alternatives as long as he can persuade the IRS that his methodology represents a more accurate allocation of income.

International Personal Services Sourcing: the Time Rule

The time has come to define the Time Rule. According to Treas. Reg. §1.861-4(b)(2)(ii)(E), under the Time Rule, the amount of payment allocated to the United States “is the amount that bears the same relation to the individual’s total compensation as the number of days of performance of the labor or personal services by the individual within the United States bears to his or her total number of days of performance of labor or personal services.” Taxpayers should use fractions in determining the allocations.

Let’s use an example to demonstrate the application of the Time Rule. A US Corporation signs a contract with Mr. Hause, a tax resident of Germany, to provide professional advice concerning incorporation of German heavy machinery into a Chinese factory owned by the corporation. The total price paid is $900,000; the work is performed within 180 days. Out of these 180 days, Mr. Hause spends 60 days in the United States working on the implementation plans and 120 days in China overseeing the implementation process. Based on the Time Rule, Mr. Hause spent 1/3 of his time in the United States and 2/3 in China; hence, $300,000 will be considered US-source income and $600,000 will be sourced to China. Of course, if Mr. Hause can show that the value of his work in China was far more important to the contract than his work in the United states, he can use an alternative methodology (which may still have to survive the IRS scrutiny during an audit).

Based on this example, you can see why the IRS likes the Time Rule – it is a relatively straightforward, objective calculation that can be easily implemented in almost any case.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With International Personal Services Sourcing Rules and Other US International Tax Issues

Sherayzen Law Office can help you with all of your US international tax needs, including the international personal services sourcing rules. Our highly experienced international tax team has successfully helped US taxpayers around the globe to deal with their US international tax issues. We can help You!

Contact Us Today to Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!

Interest Income Sourcing | International Tax Lawyer & Attorney

/in , /by

This article is a continuation of a recent series of articles on the US source of income rules. In this article, I would like to introduce the readers to the interest income sourcing rules.

Interest Income Sourcing: Definition of “Interest”

Let’s first understand what is meant by the word “interest”. It is very curious that there is no definition of this term in the Internal Revenue Code nor in the Treasury regulations. Indeed, when applied to real life situations, the tax definition of interest spreads to items which do not at first appear as interest income (the most famous example is the original issue discount); the contrary is also true – sometimes an income that appears to be interest income is not considered to be such by the IRS (for example, commitment fees).

Generally, “interest” is a payment for the use of money. In most cases, there is a relationship of indebtedness that accompanies the requirement to pay interest; however, this is not always the case. In fact, there are numerous rules and rulings that one must know in order to properly determine how the IRS will treat a certain payment.

Interest Income Sourcing: General Rule

Generally, the interest is sourced at the residence of the obligor. IRC § 861(a)(1). Thus, if the obligor resides in the United States, then the interest paid on the obligation will be considered as US-source income. This is the case even if the obligor is a foreign national who resides in the United States. On the other hand, if a US citizen resides in a foreign country, then the interest that he pays to his lender is a foreign-source income.

This rule may lead to a paradoxical situation. For example, if a US citizen resides in Spain and pays interest to a Spaniard, this interest would be considered as Spanish-source income. At the same time, if a Spaniard resides in the United States and pays interest to a US citizen who resides in Spain, then the interest would be considered as US-source income.

Generally, interest paid by domestic corporations and domestic partnerships follows the same interest income sourcing rules. There are, however, some exceptions to this rule. For example, with respect to banks, interest on deposits with a foreign branch of a domestic corporation is not considered to be US-source income. IRC § 861(a)(1)(A)(i).

I wish to emphasize that I am stating here a general rule only. There are various exceptions, especially with respect to the portfolio interest. Most of these exceptions are especially relevant to nonresident aliens who receive interest from the United States.

Contact Sherayzen Law Office for Professional Help With US International Tax Law, Including Interest Income Sourcing Rules

Sherayzen Law Office is a leading international tax law firm in the United States which has helped hundreds of US taxpayers with their US international tax issues. We can help you!

Contact Us Today To Schedule Your Confidential Consultation!