Archive for September 2012
What taxes taught me about the power of the asterisk
Globe and Mail (30 Sept 2012)
Essay by ill-advised “US person” in Canada who goes through hell to obtain Social Security number in order to enter second hell of filing tax paperwork.
European banks shut Americans out over U.S. tax rules
USA Today (27 Sept 2012)
“FBAR and FATCA seem to be tipping points,” says Mike Heimos, an American attorney based in Uruguay who specializes in cross-border issues.”
Taxing move could end “quiet disclosure”
Winnipeg Free Press (21 Sept 2012)
Comment is based on attendance at a recent presentation “put on by Terry Ritchie, whom I consider to be the best-informed adviser in Canada on such matters. … A harsh reality is the IRS is getting more sophisticated and aggressive in going after the billions in taxes that are unpaid by U.S. citizens.” Christianson seems to believe that the 31 August 2012 IRS guidelines in some sense signal the end of quiet disclosure.
Uncle Sam unleashes tax hounds to hunt a Canadian citizen [featured letter]
Edmonton Journal (20 Sept 2012)
A Canadian-born woman in Edmonton reports filing a 2011 US tax return after about 20 years of non-compliance as a returned-to-Canada resident, and then receiving a no-detail IRS demand for immediate payment of $2,616.95 US. One factor was denial of claim for 14-year-old daughter as dependent.
US tax net closes on Americans living in Britain
Financial Times (19 Sept 2012)
“Banks will have to identify all their US customers by 2015.” Advisory costs for an individual to come into tax compliance with the US can reach £20,000 to £30,000. One tax accountant reports a five-fold increase in that portion of their business.
Overseas tax dragnet refocuses on country partnerships
Reuters US (18 Sept 2012)
“The UK on Friday became the first country to finalize a tax information-sharing pact with the United States under FATCA.”
Swiss banks stand to lose hundreds of billions
Epoch Times (17 Sept 2012)
“U.S. citizens will face repercussions, as banks worldwide will deem it too expensive to cater to U.S. clients due to the high regulatory costs.”