![]() | |
Acronyms (colloquial) | FATCA |
---|---|
Enacted by | the 111th United States Congress |
Effective | March 18, 2010 (26 USC § 6038D); December 31, 2017 (26 USC §§ 1471-1474) |
Citations | |
Public law | 111-147 |
Statutes at Large | 124 Stat. 71, 97-117 |
Codification | |
Titles amended | 26 |
U.S.C. sections created | 26 U.S.C. §§ 1471–1474, § 6038D |
U.S.C. sections amended | 26 U.S.C. § 163, § 643, § 679, § 871, § 1291, § 1298, § 4701, § 6011, § 6501, § 6662, § 6677 |
Legislative history | |
|
The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) is a 2010 U.S. federal law requiring all non-U.S. foreign financial institutions (FFIs) to search their records for customers with indicia of a connection to the U.S., including indications in records of birth or prior residency in the U.S., or the like, and to report such assets and identities of such persons to the United States Department of the Treasury. [1] FATCA also requires such persons to report their non-U.S. financial assets annually to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) on form 8938, which is in addition to the older and further redundant requirement to report them annually to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) on form 114 (also known as 'FBAR'). [2] Like U.S. income tax law, FATCA applies to U.S. residents and also to U.S. citizens and green card holders residing in other countries.
FATCA applies to all subjects identified as U.S. person. All U.S. citizens are U.S. person by default, but a non-U.S.-citizen can be eligible as U.S. person for tax purposes, for example, Green Card holders and corporations under certain criteria. Inhabitants of unincorporated U.S. territories (American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, Guam, Puerto Rico or the U.S. Virgin Islands) are conciliated with a Resident Based Taxation. However, financial institutions are notified that U.S. taxpayer identification number (TIN) information is mandatory for all reportable accounts with FATCA reporting obligations, even residents of those territories do not pay taxes to the mainland U.S.A. Likewise, FATCA does not apply to Banks in Puerto Rico since they are classified as "Territory Financial Institutions". Nonetheless, customers in Puerto Rico must complete forms W-8BEN and W-8BEN-E as part of the account opening process and reportings are almost the same as other U.S. banks. However, Puerto Rico's Act 273 is that FATCA, Common Reporting Standards (CRS) and Intergovernmental Agreements (IGA) signed between the United States and a foreign country do not apply to International Financial Entities in Puerto Rico.
FATCA was the revenue-raising portion of the 2010 domestic jobs stimulus bill, the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act, [3] [4] and was enacted as Subtitle A (sections 501 through 541) of Title V of that law. According to the IRS, "FFIs that enter into an agreement with the IRS to report on their account holders may be required to withhold 30% on certain payments to foreign payees if such payees do not comply with FATCA." [5] The U.S. has yet to comply with FATCA itself, because as of 2017, it has not yet provided the promised reciprocity to its partner countries and it has failed to sign up to the Common Reporting Standard (CRS). [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] FATCA has also been criticised for its effects on Americans living overseas, and implicated in record-breaking numbers of U.S. citizenship renunciations throughout the 2010s and 2020s. [11] [12] [13] [14] Bills to repeal FATCA have been introduced in the U.S. Senate and House of Representatives. [15] [16] [17]
FATCA was reportedly enacted for the purpose of detecting the non-U.S. financial accounts of U.S. resident taxpayers rather than to identify non-resident U.S. citizens and enforce collections. [18] However, although there might be thousands of resident U.S. citizens with non-U.S. assets, such as investors, dual citizens, or legal immigrants, [4] FATCA also applies to the estimated 5.7 to 9 million U.S. citizens residing outside of the United States [19] [20] and those persons believed to be U.S. persons for tax purposes. [21] [22] FATCA also affects non-U.S.-person family members and business partners who share accounts with U.S. persons or who have U.S.-person signatories of accounts. This feature allows the reporting of the assets of non-U.S. corporations, volunteer organisations, and any other non-U.S. entity where a U.S. person can be identified.
FATCA is used to locate U.S. citizens (residing in the U.S. or not) and "U.S. persons for tax purposes" and to collect and store information including total asset value and Social Security number. The law is used to detect assets, rather than income. The law does not include a provision imposing any tax. In the law, financial institutions would report the information they gather to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). As implemented by the intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) (discussed below) with many countries, each financial institution will send the U.S.-person's data to the local government first. For example, according to Ukraine's IGA, the U.S.-person data will be sent to U.S. via the Ukrainian government. Alternatively, in a non-IGA country, such as Russia, only the Russian bank will store the U.S.-person data and will send it directly to the IRS.
FATCA is used by government personnel to detect indicia of U.S. persons and their assets and to enable cross-checking where assets have been self-reported by individuals to the IRS or to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). U.S. persons, regardless of residence location and regardless of dual citizenship, are required to self-report their non-U.S. assets to FinCEN on an annual basis. [23] According to qualification criteria, individuals are also required to report this information on IRS information-reporting form 8938. FATCA will allow detection of persons who have not self-reported, enabling collection of large penalties. [23] FATCA allows government personnel to locate U.S. persons not living in the United States, so as to assess U.S. tax or penalties.
Under FATCA, non-U.S. ('foreign') financial institutions (FFIs) are required to report asset and identify information related to suspected U.S. persons using their financial institutions. [24]
Under U.S. tax law, U.S. persons (regardless of country of residence) are generally required to report and pay U.S. federal income tax on income from all sources. [25] The U.S. and Eritrea are the only two countries worldwide which tax non-resident citizens. The law requires U.S. citizens living abroad to pay U.S. taxes on foreign income if the foreign tax should be less than U.S. tax ("taxing up"), independently within each category of earned income and passive income. [26] [27] [28] For this reason, the increased reporting requirements of FATCA have had extensive implications for U.S. citizens living abroad. Taxpayer identification numbers and source withholding are also now used to enforce asset reporting requirements upon non-resident U.S. citizens. For example, mandatory withholding can be required via FATCA when a U.S. payor cannot confirm the non-U.S. status of a foreign payee. [29]
The IRS previously instituted a qualified intermediary (QI) program under 26 U.S.C. § 1441 which required participating foreign financial institutions to maintain records of the U.S. or foreign status of their account holders and to report income and withhold taxes. [30] : 10–11 One report included a statement of a finding that participation in the QI program was too low to have a substantive effect as an enforcement measure and was prone to abuse. [30] : 10–11 An illustration of the weakness in the QI program was that UBS, a Swiss bank, had registered as a QI with the IRS in 2001 and was later forced to settle in the UBS tax evasion controversy with the U.S. Government for $780 million in 2009 over claims that it fraudulently concealed information on its U.S. person account holders. [30] : 10–11 Non-resident U.S. citizens' required self-reporting of their local assets was also found to be relatively ineffective. [30] : 5
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment Act (of which FATCA is a part) was passed on party lines: It narrowly passed the House, with no Republican members voting "yes" [31] and passed the Senate with only one Democrat member voting "no". [32] President Obama (D) signed the bill into law. [33]
Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) has stated that the U.S. Treasury loses as much as US$100 billion annually to "offshore tax non-compliance" without stating the source of the data. [4] [34] On March 4, 2009, the IRS Commissioner Douglas Shulman testified before the subcommittee that there is no credible estimate of lost tax revenue from offshore tax abuse. [35] In his book The Hidden Wealth of Nations , economist Gabriel Zucman estimates that U.S. persons hold US$1.2 trillion in financial wealth offshore. According to Zucman's analysis, this sheltering of assets results in US$36 billion in lost tax revenue annually in the United States. [36]
Supplementing the reporting regimes already in place was stated by Senator Max Baucus (D-MT) to be a means of acquiring more financial data and raising government revenue. [37] After committee deliberation, Sen. Max Baucus and Rep. Charles Rangel (D-NY) introduced the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act of 2009 to Congress on October 27, 2009. It was later added to an appropriations bill as an amendment, sponsored by Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV), which also renamed the bill the HIRE Act. [38] The bill was signed into law by President Obama on March 18, 2010.
FATCA has the following important provisions:
Foreign financial institutions which are themselves the beneficial owners of such payments are not permitted a credit or refund for taxes withheld, absent a treaty override. [42]
US persons are identified by "FATCA indicia". A bank official who knows a U.S. person's status by other means is also required to identify that person for FATCA purposes. [43] After identification, the FFI is responsible under the law for further questioning the individual.
In other words, all account holders of FFIs are expected to confirm whether they are US persons or not. In practice, since the introduction of the Common Reporting Standard, FFIs are required to confirm the residence of all account holders as well as their US status.
The reporting requirements are in addition to the one that all U.S. persons report non-U.S. financial accounts to the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN). [54] This notably includes Form 114, "Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts" (FBAR) for foreign financial accounts, where the balances of such accounts in the aggregate exceed US$10,000, required under Bank Secrecy Act regulations issued by the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network. [55]
Banks which are performing functions according to FATCA law will be searching according to FATCA indicia, which include: [56]
There are varying estimates of the revenues gained and likely cost of implementing the legislation.
With implementation, FATCA was estimated by the United States Congress Joint Committee on Taxation to produce approximately $8.7 billion in additional tax revenue over 11 years (average $792 million a year). [57] A later analysis from Texas A&M includes an estimate that revenues would be less than US$250 million per year (US$2.5 billion total). [35] (Jane Gravelle, a specialist in economic policy at the Congressional Research Service, has asserted that this figure is small relative to her estimate of $40 billion per year as the cost of international tax evasion.) [34] : 36 "The actual annual tax revenue generated since 2009 from offshore voluntary disclosure initiatives and from prosecutions of individual's tax evasion is running significantly lower than the JCT's estimated annual average, at less than $400 million, and will probably result in less than that over the decade 2010 to 2020." [35] "The IRS has claimed that over ten billion dollars in additional tax revenues will be recovered from offshore accounts over the next decade. Since the enactment of FATCA the IRS has received approximately $8.0 billion nearly entirely from FBAR penalties and not from tax collection." [58] Recently, a calculation showed that $771 million of tax revenue loss from U.S. banks could nearly nullify the reported revenue gain reported by the Joint Committee. [59]
According to the Lebanese business magazine Executive , "FATCA requires major initial investment within an institution, estimated at $25,000 for smaller institutions, to $100,000 to $500,000 for most institutions and $1 million for larger firms. While a boon for the financial consultancy and IT industry, it is an extra cost that institutions would rather not have." [60]
Annual Costs of FATCA
Yr 2012: $8,177,055
Yr 2013: $27,554,441
Yr 2014: $33,625,624
Yr 2015: $110,955,823
Yr 2016: $101,846,152
Yr 2017: $97,614,710
Total: $379,773,805
Previously, there had been few reliable estimates for the additional cost burden to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, although it seems certain that the majority of the cost seems likely to fall on the relevant financial institutions and (to a lesser degree) foreign tax authorities who have signed intergovernmental agreements. [78] [79] The FATCA bill approved 800 additional IRS employees (cost estimated to be $40 – $160 million per year). According to a TIGTA report, the cost to develop the FATCA XML data website is $16.6 million (which is $2.2 million over the budgeted amount). However, "IRS also submitted a budget request of $37.1 million for funding FATCA implementation for 2013, including the costs to staff examiners and agents dedicated to enforcing FATCA, along with IT development costs. This budget request does not identify the resources needed for implementation beyond fiscal year 2013." [80] The I.R.S. "has been unable to ascertain all potential costs beyond those for IT resources." [80]
Certain aspects of FATCA have been a source of controversy in the financial and general press. [81] The Deputy Assistant Secretary for International Tax Affairs at the US Department of the Treasury stated in September 2013 that the controversies were incorrect (myths). [82] In April 2017 the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, led by Congressman Mark Meadows, held a hearing on unintended consequences of FATCA. [83]
The controversies primarily relate to the following issues:
Whereas the Federal Register stated that 3,415 people renounced or relinquished their citizenship or long-term residence in 2014, the IRS stated that 1,100 people renounced citizenship at only one particular US consulate during the first ten months of 2014. [109] This contradicted prior claims that such statistics are not maintained at the consulates. [110] [111]
In 2017, bills to repeal FATCA were introduced in Congress: Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) introduced S. 869 [169] in the Senate [16] [170] [171] and Representative Mark Meadows (R-NC) introduced H.R. 2054 in the House of Representatives. [172] On 26 April 2017, the Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee on Government Operations held a hearing called 'Reviewing the Unintended Consequences of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act', chaired by Congressman Meadows. [173]
On January 24, 2014, the Republican National Committee passed a resolution calling for the repeal of FATCA. [174]
American Citizens Abroad, Inc., (ACA) a not-for-profit organization claiming to represent the interests of the millions of Americans residing outside the United States, asserts that one of FATCA's problems is citizenship-based taxation (CBT). Originally, ACA called for the US to institute residence-based taxation (RBT) to bring the United States in line with all other OECD countries. [175] Later in 2014, two ACA directors commented on the situation of Boris Johnson. [176] In 2015, ACA decided on a more refined stance. [177] ACA's current position on FATCA as of 2019 is published on its website. [178]
In March, 2015, the United States Senate Committee on Finance sought public submissions to a number of Tax Reform Working Groups. [179] Over 70 percent of all submissions to the International Taxation Working Group [180] and close to half of all submissions to the Individual Taxation Working Group [181] came from individual US expatriates, many citing specific consequences of FATCA in their countries of residence, and nearly all calling both for residence-based taxation and the repeal of FATCA.
In 2014, attorney James Bopp, Republicans Overseas, and Senator Rand Paul of Kentucky, Mark Crawford, among others, brought suit challenging the constitutionality of FATCA. Paul is among the individuals suing the U.S. Treasury and IRS. The plaintiffs, in the case Crawford v. U.S. Department of Treasury, argued that FATCA and related intergovernmental agreements violated the Senate's power with respect to treaties, the Excessive Fines Clause of the Eighth Amendment, or the Fourth Amendment right against unreasonable search and seizures. [182] [183] In 2016, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Ohio dismissed the suit, determining that the plaintiffs lacked standing. [184] In 2017, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit upheld the dismissal. [185]
Two American-Canadian dual citizens living in Canada, Virginia Hillis and Gwendolyn Louise Deegan, sued the Canadian government (specifically the Attorney General of Canada and the Minister of National Revenue) in 2014 in the Federal Court of Canada, claiming (among other things) that the intergovernmental US-Canadian agreement that implements FATCA violates the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, particularly the provisions related to discrimination on the basis of citizenship or national origin. [186] [187] [188] [189] The suit was prepared by a group called the Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty (ADCS). [189] In 2015, the Federal Court of Canada dismissed the suit, upholding the intergovernmental agreement. [189] [190] The Federal Court also rejected the claims in 2019, [191] [192] although a further appeal to the Federal Court of Appeal may follow. [192]
In April 2022, Democrats Abroad's Taxation Task Force voted to update its position, supporting the repeal of FATCA. [193]
On September 11, 2018, the U.S. Government successfully prosecuted its first case against an individual for conspiracy to defraud the United States by failing to comply with FATCA. Former CEO of (liquidated) Loyal Bank Limited, [a] Adrian Paul Baron (a British citizen) was arrested in Hungary, then transported to the U.S. for trial. Baron pleaded guilty, and was subsequently removed to England by authorities. [194]
FATCA added 26 U.S.C. § 6038D (section 6038D of the Internal Revenue Code) which requires the reporting of any interest in foreign financial assets over $50,000 after March 18, 2010. FATCA also added a requirement in 26 U.S.C. §§ 1471 – 1474 that US payors withhold taxes on payments to foreign financial institutions (FFI) and nonfinancial foreign entities (NFFE) that have not agreed to provide the IRS with information on accounts held by US persons. FATCA also added 26 U.S.C. § 1298(f) requiring shareholders of a passive foreign investment company (PFIC) to report certain information.
The US Department of the Treasury issued temporary and proposed regulations on December 14, 2011, ( 26 CFR 1.6038D-0T et seq.) for reporting foreign financial assets, requiring the filing of Form 8938 Archived April 21, 2016, at the Wayback Machine with income tax returns. [195] [196] The Department of the Treasury issued final regulations and guidance on reporting interest paid to nonresident aliens on April 16, 2012 ( 26 CFR 1.6049-4 et seq., 26 CFR 31.3406(g)-1 ). [197] Treasury issued proposed regulations regarding information reporting by, and withholding of payments to, foreign financial institutions on February 8, 2012, [198] [199] [200] and final regulations on January 17, 2013 ( 26 CFR 1.1471-0 et seq.). [201] [202] On December 31, 2013, the IRS published temporary and proposed regulations ( 26 CFR 1.1291-0T et seq.) on annual filing requirements for shareholders of PFICs. [203] On February 20, 2014, the IRS issued temporary and proposed regulations making additions and clarifications to previously issued regulations and providing guidance to coordinate FATCA rules with preexisting requirements. [204] [205]
On April 2, 2014, the U.S. Department of the Treasury extended from April 25, 2014, to May 5, 2014, the deadline by which an FFI must register with the IRS in order to appear on the initial public list of "Global Intermediary Identification Numbers" (GIINs) maintained by the IRS, also known as the "FFI List." [206] [207] In June 2014, the IRS began publishing a monthly online list of registered FFIs, intended to allow withholding agents to verify the GIINs of their payees in order to establish that withholding is not required on payments to those payees. [208]
Implementation of FATCA may encounter legal hurdles. It may be illegal in foreign jurisdictions for financial institutions to disclose the required account information. [209] There is a controversy about the appropriateness of intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) to solve any of these problems, intellectually spearheaded by Allison Christians. [210] [211]
France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom announced in 2012 they consented to cooperate with the U.S. on FATCA implementation, [212] [213] as did Switzerland, Japan [214] and South Africa.
The deputy director general of legal affairs of the People's Bank of China, the central bank of the People's Republic of China, Liu Xiangmin said "China's banking and tax laws and regulations do not allow Chinese financial institutions to comply with FATCA directly." [215] The U.S. Department of the Treasury suspended negotiations with Russia in March 2014. [216] Russia, while not ruling out an agreement, requires full reciprocity and abandonment of US extraterritoriality before signing an IGA. [217] [218] Russian President Vladimir Putin signed a law on June 30, 2014, that allowed Russian banks to transfer FATCA data directly to US tax authorities—after first reporting the information to the Russian government. [219] Russian banks are required to obtain client consent first but can deny service if that consent is not given. [220] Bangladeshi banks, which have accounts of US taxpayers, may report to the IRS, However they need prior approval of their clients. [221]
A 2014 Swiss referendum against the act did not come to fruition. [222]
In 2019, only Japan has signed a protocol to assist in collection of taxes to residents, including penalties for willful failure to file tax return. [223]
As enacted by Congress, FATCA was intended to form the basis for a relationship between the U.S. Department of the Treasury and individual foreign banks. Some FFIs responded [224] however, that it was not possible for them to follow their own countries' laws on privacy, confidentiality, discrimination, and so on and simultaneously comply with FATCA as enacted. [225] [226] This resulted in the creation of intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) between the Executive Branch of the United States government and foreign governments. [227] This development resulted in foreign governments implementing the US FATCA requirements into their own legal systems, which in turn allowed those governments to change their privacy and discrimination laws [228] to allow the identification and reporting of US persons via those governments. [228]
The United States Department of the Treasury has published model IGAs which follow two approaches. Under Model 1, financial institutions in the partner country report information about U.S. accounts to the tax authority of the partner country. That tax authority then provides the information to the United States. Model 1 comes in a reciprocal version (Model 1A), under which the United States will also share information about the partner country's taxpayers with the partner country, and a nonreciprocal version (Model 1B). Under Model 2, partner country financial institutions report directly to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, and the partner country agrees to lower any legal barriers to that reporting. [229] Model 2 is available in two versions: 2A with no Tax Information Exchange Agreement (TIEA) or Double Tax Convention (DTC) required, and 2B for countries with a pre-existing TIEA or DTC. The agreements generally require parliamentary approval in the countries they are concluded with, but the United States is not pursuing ratification of this as a treaty.
In April 2014, the U.S. Department of the Treasury and IRS announced that any jurisdictions that reach "agreements in substance" and consent to their compliance statuses being published by the July 1, 2014, deadline would be treated as having an IGA in effect through the end of 2014, ensuring no penalties would be incurred during that time while giving more jurisdictions an opportunity to finalize formal IGAs. [206] [229]
The Securities and Exchange Board of India (SEBI) said "FATCA in its current form lacks complete reciprocity from the US counterparts, and there is an asymmetry in due-diligence requirements." Furthermore, "Sources close to the development say the signing has been delayed because of Indian financial institutions' unpreparedness." [230]
With Canada's agreement in February 2014, all G7 countries have signed intergovernmental agreements. As of 2024 [update] , the following jurisdictions have concluded intergovernmental agreements with the United States regarding the implementation of FATCA, most of which have entered into force. [229]
Jurisdiction | Model | Signature | Entry into force | Notes |
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() | 1 | October 13, 2015 | January 18, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | November 9, 2015 | October 2, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | January 15, 2017 | June 22, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | August 31, 2016 | June 7, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | November 18, 2022 | January 1, 2023 | |
![]() | 2 | February 12, 2018 | July 7, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | April 28, 2014 | June 30, 2014 [231] | |
![]() | 2 | April 29, 2014 | December 9, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | September 9, 2015 | November 5, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | November 3, 2014 | September 17, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | January 18, 2017 | March 5, 2018 | |
![]() | 1 | November 17, 2014 | September 25, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | March 18, 2015 | July 29, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | April 23, 2014 | December 23, 2016 | |
![]() | 2 | December 19, 2013 | August 19, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | September 23, 2014 | June 26, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | June 30, 2014 | July 13, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | December 5, 2014 | June 30, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | September 14, 2015 | December 23, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | February 5, 2014 | June 27, 2014 [234] | Implementation act published. [235] |
![]() | 1 | March 30, 2021 | February 7, 2024 | |
![]() | 1B [236] | November 29, 2013 | July 1, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 2 | March 5, 2014 | ||
![]() | 1 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | May 20, 2015 | August 27, 2015 | |
![]() | 1A [236] | November 26, 2013 | July 8, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | March 20, 2015 | December 27, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | December 16, 2014 | August 3, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | December 2, 2014 | September 21, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | August 4, 2014 | December 18, 2014 | |
![]() | 1 | November 19, 2012 | September 30, 2015 [233] | Implementation law L67 passed December 20, 2013. [237] Draft implementation regulation published, hearing ended May 8, 2014. [238] Due diligence deadlines June 30, 2015, and June 30, 2016. [239] |
![]() | 1 | June 15, 2018 | August 12, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | September 15, 2016 | July 17, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | April 11, 2014 | July 9, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | March 5, 2014 | February 20, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | November 14, 2013 | October 14, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | July 10, 2015 | September 18, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | May 31, 2013 | December 11, 2013 [240] | |
![]() | 1 | May 8, 2014 | September 17, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | January 19, 2017 | December 13, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | January 17, 2017 | November 30, 2018 | |
![]() | 1 | October 17, 2016 | April 6, 2018 | |
![]() | 1 | December 13, 2013 | August 26, 2015 | Draft implementation regulation published. [241] |
![]() | 1 | August 29, 2016 | September 29, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | March 31, 2014 | February 19, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 2 | November 13, 2014 | July 6, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | February 4, 2014 | July 16, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | May 26, 2015 | September 22, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | July 9, 2015 | August 31, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | in substance | ||
![]() | 2 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | January 23, 2013 | April 2, 2014 | |
![]() | 1 | December 13, 2013 | August 26, 2015 | Draft implementation regulation published. [241] |
![]() | 1 | June 30, 2014 | August 29, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | January 10, 2014 | August 17, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | May 2, 2014 | September 24, 2015 | |
![]() | 2 | June 11, 2013 | June 11, 2013 | |
![]() | 1 | December 13, 2013 | October 28, 2015 [233] | Draft implementation regulation published. [241] |
![]() | 1 | September 11, 2017 | April 5, 2022 | |
![]() | 1 | February 26, 2015 | November 4, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | April 29, 2015 | January 28, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | June 27, 2014 | December 15, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | May 19, 2014 | January 22, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | August 26, 2014 | October 7, 2014 | |
![]() | 1 | March 28, 2014 | July 29, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 2 | December 14, 2016 | July 30, 2021 | |
![]() | 1 | July 21, 2021 | October 3, 2022 | |
![]() | 1A [242] | December 16, 2013 | June 26, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | December 27, 2013 | August 29, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | November 19, 2012 | January 1, 2013 [243] | Replaced by revised treaty on April 9, 2014, with no break in enforcement. [244] |
![]() | 2 | November 26, 2014 | January 21, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | June 1, 2017 | March 28, 2018 | |
![]() | 1 | September 8, 2015 | October 28, 2016 | |
![]() | 1A [245] | December 18, 2013 | April 9, 2015 [246] | |
![]() | 2 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | June 12, 2014 | July 3, 2014 [247] | |
![]() | 1 | April 15, 2013 | January 27, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | April 27, 2016 | October 25, 2016 | |
![]() | 2 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | in substance | ||
![]() | 1 | July 13, 2015 | ||
![]() | 1 | October 7, 2014 | July 1, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | August 6, 2015 | August 10, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | January 7, 2015 | June 23, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | May 28, 2015 | November 3, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | August 31, 2015 | April 28, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | November 19, 2015 | September 1, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | August 18, 2015 | May 13, 2016 | |
![]() | 2 | October 28, 2015 | August 30, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | November 15, 2016 | February 28, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | April 10, 2019 | January 8, 2020 | |
![]() | 1 | July 1, 2019 | ||
![]() | 1 | December 9, 2014 | March 28, 2015 | Replaced by revised agreement signed on November 18, 2018, entered into force on January 1, 2021. [248] |
![]() | 1 | July 31, 2015 | November 9, 2015 | |
![]() | 1 | June 2, 2014 | July 1, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | June 9, 2014 | October 28, 2014 [232] | |
![]() | 1 | June 10, 2015 | September 8, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | May 14, 2013 | December 9, 2013 [249] | |
![]() | 1 | August 8, 2014 | March 1, 2015 | |
![]() | 2 [250] | February 14, 2013 | June 2, 2014 [222] | Parliamentary approval obtained; [251] insufficient supporters for a referendum. [252] |
![]() | 2 | December 22, 2016 | ||
![]() | 1 | March 4, 2016 | April 29, 2024 | |
![]() | 1 | August 19, 2016 | September 22, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | May 13, 2019 | September 9, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | July 29, 2015 | June 14, 2021 | |
![]() | 1 | July 28, 2017 | November 6, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | December 1, 2014 | July 25, 2016 | |
![]() | 1 | February 7, 2017 | November 18, 2019 | |
![]() | 1 | June 17, 2015 | February 19, 2016 | |
![]() | 1A | September 12, 2012 | August 11, 2014 [b] | |
![]() | 1 | April 3, 2015 | July 7, 2017 | |
![]() | 1 | June 10, 2015 | June 10, 2015 [233] | |
![]() | 1 | April 1, 2016 | July 7, 2016 |
Many jurisdictions are required to have their IGAs in effect and start exchange of information by 30 September 2015. The US IRS has issued Notice 2015–66, which relaxes the deadline for countries which have signed Model 1 IGAs "to hand over information regarding accounts held by U.S. taxpayers", [253] [254] if the jurisdiction requests more time and "provides assurance that the jurisdiction is making good faith efforts to exchange the information as soon as possible." [253]
Implementation is noted as delayed in the following countries:
In 2014, the OECD introduced its Common Reporting Standard (CRS) proposed for the automatic exchange of information (AEOI) through its Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes. The G-20 gave a mandate for this standard, and its relation to FATCA is mentioned on page 5 of the OECD's report. [259] Critics immediately dubbed it "GATCA" for Global FATCA. [260]
The Common Reporting Standard requires each signatory country to gather the full identifying information of each bank customer, including additional nationalities and place of birth. Prior to the implementation of CRS, there had been no other method of fully and globally identifying immigrants and emigrants and citizens by way of their identification numbers, birthplaces, and nationalities. Each participating government is tasked with collecting and storing the data of all its citizens and immigrants and of transferring the data automatically to participating countries. CRS is capable of transmitting person data according to the demands of either residence-based taxation, citizenship-based taxation (CBT) or personhood-based taxation.
The number of Americans renouncing their citizenship has risen each year since the enactment of FATCA, from just 743 in 2009 to 3,415 in 2014, [261] 4,279 in 2015, [262] and 5,411 in 2016. [112] Among those who renounced was the then Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, who did so after the IRS taxed the sale of his house in London. [261] Due to the rise in applications and resulting backlog, the fee for renouncing citizenship was raised by roughly 400 percent in 2015 to $2,350. [262] The 5,411 renunciations in 2016 were a 26% increase from the previous record, set in 2015. [112] The number of renunciations for the first three quarters of 2017 was 4,448, which exceeds the entire year's total for 2015. [263]
The economy of the Cayman Islands, a British overseas territory located in the western Caribbean Sea, is mainly fueled by the tourism sector and by the financial services sector, together representing 50–60 percent of the country's gross domestic product (GDP). The Cayman Islands Investment Bureau, a government agency, has been established with the mandate of promoting investment and economic development in the territory. Because of the territory's strong economy and it being a popular banking destination for wealthy individuals and businesses, it is often dubbed the ‘financial capital’ of the Caribbean.
The United States has separate federal, state, and local governments with taxes imposed at each of these levels. Taxes are levied on income, payroll, property, sales, capital gains, dividends, imports, estates and gifts, as well as various fees. In 2020, taxes collected by federal, state, and local governments amounted to 25.5% of GDP, below the OECD average of 33.5% of GDP.
The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (BSA), also known as the Currency and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act, is a U.S. law requiring financial institutions in the United States to assist U.S. government agencies in detecting and preventing money laundering. Specifically, the act requires financial institutions to keep records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments, file reports if the daily aggregate exceeds $10,000, and report suspicious activity that may signify money laundering, tax evasion, or other criminal activities.
An offshore bank is a bank that is operated and regulated under international banking license, which usually prohibits the bank from establishing any business activities in the jurisdiction of establishment. Due to less regulation and transparency, accounts with offshore banks were often used to hide undeclared income. Since the 1980s, jurisdictions that provide financial services to nonresidents on a big scale can be referred to as offshore financial centres. OFCs often also levy little or no corporation tax and/or personal income and high direct taxes such as duty, making the cost of living high.
International taxation is the study or determination of tax on a person or business subject to the tax laws of different countries, or the international aspects of an individual country's tax laws as the case may be. Governments usually limit the scope of their income taxation in some manner territorially or provide for offsets to taxation relating to extraterritorial income. The manner of limitation generally takes the form of a territorial, residence-based, or exclusionary system. Some governments have attempted to mitigate the differing limitations of each of these three broad systems by enacting a hybrid system with characteristics of two or more.
Tax amnesty allows taxpayers to voluntarily disclose and pay tax owing in exchange for avoiding tax evasion penalties. It is a limited-time opportunity for a specified group of taxpayers to pay a defined amount, in exchange for forgiveness of a tax liability relating to previous tax periods. It typically expires when some authority begins a tax investigation of the past-due tax.
Republicans Overseas (RO) is a political organization created in 2013 for United States citizens who are living outside of the United States. RO is recognized by the Republican National Committee (RNC), and by other affiliated groups, such as College Republicans. It operates in the majority of countries around the world where there are large numbers of United States citizen residents. Similar to political action committees (PAC) and Super Pacs; RO is a 527 political organization that operates as a corporation with specific interests of repealing the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) and of generally representing Republicans living overseas.
Renunciation of citizenship is the voluntary loss of citizenship. It is the opposite of naturalization, whereby a person voluntarily obtains citizenship. It is distinct from denaturalization, where citizenship is revoked by the state.
The United States Internal Revenue Service (IRS) uses forms for taxpayers and tax-exempt organizations to report financial information, such as to report income, calculate taxes to be paid to the federal government, and disclose other information as required by the Internal Revenue Code (IRC). There are over 800 various forms and schedules. Other tax forms in the United States are filed with state and local governments.
Internal Revenue Service, Criminal Investigation (IRS-CI) is the United States federal law enforcement agency responsible for investigating potential criminal violations of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code and related financial crimes, such as money laundering, currency transaction violations, tax-related identity theft fraud and terrorist financing that adversely affect tax administration. While other federal agencies also have investigative jurisdiction for money laundering and some Bank Secrecy Act violations, IRS-CI is the only federal agency that can investigate potential criminal violations of the Internal Revenue Code, in a manner intended to foster confidence in the tax system and deter violations of tax law. Criminal Investigation is a division of the Internal Revenue Service, which in turn is a bureau within the United States Department of the Treasury.
Exchange of Information is an umbrella term which refers to international co-operation in the field of taxation through the exchange of information on taxpayers between tax authorities.
A Qualified Intermediary refers to a person that acts as an intermediary qualified under certain sections of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code (IRC) to undertake specified activities.
The Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act of 2010 is a law in the 111th United States Congress to provide payroll tax breaks and incentives for businesses to hire unemployed workers. Often characterized as a "jobs bill", certain Democrats in Congress state that it is only one piece of a broader job creation legislative agenda, along with the Travel Promotion Act and other bills.
American Citizens Abroad, Inc. (ACA) is a 501(c)(4) non-profit, non-partisan organization, organized as a Delaware corporation. Its sister organization, American Citizens Abroad Global Foundation (ACAGF), is a 501(c)(3) non-profit non-partisan charitable organization focused on education and research. ACA is a leading representative of American citizens residing outside the USA.
Under the federal law of the United States of America, tax evasion or tax fraud is the purposeful illegal attempt of a taxpayer to evade assessment or payment of a tax imposed by Federal law. Conviction of tax evasion may result in fines and imprisonment. Compared to other countries, Americans are more likely to pay their taxes on time and law-abidingly.
The Swiss Banking Act or Federal Act on Banks and Savings Banks is a Swiss federal law and act-of-parliament that operates as the supreme law governing banking in Switzerland. Although the federal law has only been amended seven times, it has been revised multiple times to limit and expand its banking secrecy provisions since its ratification. The banking secrecy provisions in the Federal Act are additionally enforced through multiple civil codes in the federal Swiss Civil Code and locally through cantonal law. In December 2017, the Swiss parliament launched a standing initiative and expressed an interest in formally embedding banking secrecy within the Swiss Federal Constitution rendering it a federally-protected constitutional right.
The FATCA agreement is an international agreement signed between Canada and the United States that allows the implementation of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act in Canada. It is one of 30 intergovernmental agreements the US has concluded with other countries to implement the FATCA.
The Common Reporting Standard (CRS) is an information standard for the Automatic Exchange Of Information (AEOI) regarding financial accounts on a global level, between tax authorities, which the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) developed in 2014.
An accidental American is someone whom US law deems to be an American citizen, but who has only a tenuous connection with that country. For example, American nationality law provides that anyone born on US territory is a US citizen, including those who leave as infants or young children, even if neither parent is a US citizen. US law also ascribes American citizenship to some children born abroad to a US citizen parent, even if those children never enter the United States. Since the early 2000s, the term "accidental American" has been adopted by several activist groups to protest tax treaties and Inter-Governmental Agreements which treat such people as American citizens who are therefore potentially subject to tax and financial reporting requirements – requirements which few other countries impose on their nonresident citizens. Accidental Americans may be unaware of these requirements, or their US citizen status, until they encounter problems accessing bank services in their home countries, for example, or are barred from entering the US on a non-US passport. Furthermore, the US State Department now charges USD 2350 to renounce citizenship, while tax reporting requirements associated with legal expatriation may pose additional financial burdens.
Allison Christians is a tax law scholar and the H. Heward Stikeman Chair in Tax Law at the McGill University Faculty of Law/Faculté de Droit in Montreal, Quebec, Canada. Her research and teaching focus on Canadian and U.S. domestic and international tax law and policy issues, with an emphasis on the relationship between taxation and economic development and on the role of government and non-government institutions and actors in the creation of tax policy norms.
Right now, thousands of U.S. tax dodgers conceal billions of dollars in assets within secrecy-shrouded foreign banks, dodging taxes and penalizing those of us who pay the taxes we owe. The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations... estimated that these tax-dodging schemes cost the Federal Treasury $100 billion a year.
According to one commentator, Congress enacted FATCA 'to make it more difficult for U.S. taxpayers to conceal assets held in offshore accounts'.
[R]equest Form W-8BEN if you are a ... FFI required to establish the foreign status of an individual account holder for chapter 4 purposes or under the requirements of an applicable IGA[.]
Regelrådet anser att konsekvensutredningen inte uppfyller de krav som ställs i 6 och 7 §§ förordningen (2007:1244) om konsekvensutredning vid regelgivning. [The Swedish Regulatory Council considers that the consequence assessment does not meet the requirements set out in Sections 6 and 7 of the Ordinance (2007: 1244) on consequence assessment in regulations.]
In order to improve FATCA implementation... we recommend that the Commissioner of Internal Revenue take the following (action) ... establish and document a timeline for completing a comprehensive FATCA cost estimate.
Accidental Americans may also include, but much fewer in number, those who innocently did not understand they were a US citizen and, therefore, had US tax and reporting obligations.
The legislation caused an increase in consular workload that must be paid for by user fees... At one post alone, renunciations rose from under 100 in 2009 to more than 1,100 in the first ten months of 2014.
The Parties are committed to working with Partner Jurisdictions and the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development on adapting the terms of this Agreement and other agreements between the United States and Partner Jurisdictions to a common model for automatic exchange of information, including the development of reporting and due diligence standards for financial institutions.
None of these sources of law contain any authorization to enter into or implement the IGAs. It is clear that no such authorization has been made by Congress, and that the IGAs are sole executive agreements entered into by the executive branch on its own under its 'plenary executive authority'. As such the agreements are constitutionally suspect because they do not accord with the delineated treaty power set forth in Article II.
Neither the IGAs nor the OECD Common Reporting Standard (CRS) or the new achievements on automatic exchange of information at the EU level say much about this. In this regard, a coordinated international standard of data protection rules for taxpayers would seem reasonable.
...the US legislation prima facie breaches New Zealand privacy and tax laws, which will impact on NZFIs' ability to comply
Article 10, Term of Agreement, para 1. The Agreement shall enter into force on January 1st, 2013 and shall continue in force until terminated.
The Federal Council approved the mandate for negotiations with the United States on switching to Model 1 on 8 October 2014.
The CRS is also informally called 'GATCA', referring to the 'globalization' of FATCA.