This is one more in a series of posts discussing the FBAR rules. The FBAR rules were born in 1970, laid virtually dormant until the 2000s and then were then unleashed in their full “ferocity” on U.S. persons.
Mr. FBAR has not visited Canada, but he has visited Canadian citizens Read more
A recent U.S. District court case has again shone a spotlight on the lack of a clear statutory or regulatory definition of “willful” for purposes of applying the more severe penalties for failure to file the FBAR.
In Bedrosian v. United States, 2017 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 56535 (ED PA 2017), the Court denied summary judgments by the both taxpayer and government on the issue of the taxpayer’s culpability in failing to report a Swiss bank account on a timely-filed FBAR.
In 2015, Congress changed the due date for several types of entities as well as for the FBAR (for foreign financial accounts). The AICPA has a wonderful chart with all of the new dates noted.
When Congress made the changes for C corporations, they apparently had a concern with a change that would move a due date from one government fiscal year into the next fiscal year. The federal government’s fiscal year ends September 30.
The “unfiled FBAR” continues to be a problem for certain Homeland Americans with “offshore accounts” and all Americans abroad, who continue to “commit personal finance abroad”.
Introducing Mr. and Mrs. Kentara
If you thought FBAR penalties were more bark than bite, a recent U.S. District court case is sure to change your mind.
In United States v. August Bohanec et ux, USDC CD Ca., No. 2:15-cv-04347 (December 2016), the Court found that the taxpayer’s failure to file the FBAR was willful and affirmed the IRS’s enhanced FBAR civil penalty, i.e., a fine equal to the greater of $100,000 or 50% of the balance in their unreported accounts.
I suspect that history will show that that the growth in renunciations of U.S. citizenship (and abandonment of Green Cards) continued in 2016. Absent a change in the way that the United States treats its “U.S. Persons Abroad”, I suspect that the growth in renunciations of U.S. citizenship will continue.
The purpose of this post and a short summary:
A district court has found that the taxpayers’ failure to timely file a Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Report (FBAR) was willful where, among other things, they stopped employing a bookkeeper or keeping any books after opening a foreign bank account and made several misrepresentations under penalty of perjury when they applied to participate in IRS’s Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP).
It has been widely reported that American actor Steven Seagal has joined American boxer Roy Jones in becoming a citizen of Russia. By becoming Russian citizens, Mr. Seagal and Mr. Jones are now subject to Russia’s Currency laws, which include the requirement to report their non-Russian bank accounts to the Kremlin. Messrs Seagal and Jones may admire Russia. That said, it’s clear that the Kremlin admires the U.S. Treasury in general and Mr. FBAR – America’s most important citizen – in particular.
The IRS announced that over 100,000 taxpayers have now participated in its disclosure programs, which have been available to delinquent filers since 2009. More specifically, according to the IRS, 55,800 taxpayers have used the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP) to resolve their tax obligations, paying more than $9.9 billion in taxes, interest and penalties, while an additional 48,000 taxpayers have used the Streamlined Procedures, paying approximately $450 million.
The primary story is of a U.S. professor who pleaded guilty to an FBAR violation and was subjected to a 100 million FBAR penalty. Notably the “tax loss” was 10 million dollars and the FBAR penalty was 100 million dollars. It appears that Mr. FBAR is becoming an important tool in the arsenal used by the United States Treasury.
FINCEN114 due June 30th for the 2015 taxation year, reporting beneficial interest or signature authority in non-U.S. financial accounts where the annual aggregate highest balance is greater than $10K U.S., may have to be filed by Canadian taxpayers.
According to a spokesman for Liechtensteinische Landesbank AG (LLB), changes in Liechtenstein law allow the IRS to make group requests without providing the names of the specific individuals that the IRS is seeking. The spokesman also stated that in the Liechtenstein group request, U.S. authorities are also targeting lawyers, accountants, financial advisers, asset managers and those responsible for professional asset protection who “conspired” with U.S. taxpayers to commit tax evasion or other crimes. Apparently, the IRS may be seeking information all the way back to 2001.
The IRS’s New Passport Program (Part 1 of 2)
An IRS Hot Button – What Is Really The Cost? Part II
Using Video to Grow Your Tax Business – Webinar June 29
Everything About New York’s Online Sales Tax
Practice Ignition Training Webinar – Wednesday, June 28th
™
