FATCA: Reporting Requirements for U.S. Owners of a Foreign Trust .

lagrimas85

AKA Carnac
To me the reporter for the baja insider is misinterpreting the new way of doing things. The other article talks about accounts above $50000.00 dllrs. that are subject to the FFI reporting guidelines. We dont rent any of our properties in Mexico but we do sell them and when they sell in Mexico at close they take our capital gains tax from the proceeds and give us what is left, since the U.S. gives us dollar for dollar foreign tax credit we report every penny we make in Mexico to the IRS and we pay very little U.S. tax. I am sure if the people that have rentals pay Mexican income tax the tax credit would also apply.
 
Has nothing to do with renting or not renting It has to do with property that as a trust or not. That is unfair to those who own in the restricted zone Does anyone have any other info on this.
 

Terry C

Guest
Unless I missed something Joe, It's all about renting out. Nothing to do with owning a home in Mexico and not renting out in the in the restricted zone. Out of the restricted zone no reporting is required for renting. Explian that to me?
 

lagrimas85

AKA Carnac
It's all about rooting foreign income and unreported foreign assets which includes real estate. It has always been the law in the U.S. that foreign assets and income be reported. They are asking the FFI's to do what apparently U.S. citizens aren't doing with their foreign holdings(not reporting) . I doubt they will tax a vacation home but it still will be reported as an asset in a foreign country. The reporter for the baja insider says it wont affect US citizens with a house not in the restricted zone and he is right but only because the asset wont be reported to the US govt by the FFI's but the citizen is still breaking federal foreign asset reporting laws.
 
Last edited:

Roberto

Guest
From the Baja Insider article:

" 4. An American taxpayer owns a a home or condominium in Mulege, Baja California Sur and lives there full time. Being in the restricted zone, he has a Fideicomiso. Looking at the numerous advertisements to rent these homes to Americans on vacation, as they appear in Craigslist and Baja real estate agents websites, that taxpayer's home or condominium has a fair market rental rate of $175 per day. Under FATCA, the taxpayer should report $63,875 of taxable income to the IRS, commencing in 2011. Individual tax rates in 2011 vary from 15% to 39.6%, so this could create an additional federal income tax liability of $9,580 to as much as $25,300, in the example. "

Sorry, this does not pass the straight face test. Income tax is a tax on income, not based on 'fair market rental rate'. It is possible that if the IRS can demonstrate that you rented it out and did not declare the income that they could 'estimate' your maximum tax liability that way.

There is no US Govt. or other organization that I despise more than the IRS. 3 years of audit, huge tax liabilities declared, leins filed, tens of thousands of dollars to CPAs nd Attorneys, thousands of hours on the telephone, hundreds of unanswered letters, they finally agree there was no tax liability. No SORRY, no NADA.
 

Roberto

Guest
From "Tax News.com article quoted above"
FFIs (Foreign Financial Institutions) are required to deduct and withhold a tax equal to 30% of the amount of any payment to an FFI unless the FFI agrees to disclose the identity of the US residents and report on their bank transactions. The IRS intends to publish a draft FFI Agreement and draft information reporting and certification forms, which will be electronically filed.
The name, address and taxpayer identification number (TIN) is required of each account holder which is a specified US person; and, in the case of any account holder which is a US-owned foreign entity, the name, address, and TIN of each substantial US owner of such entity. The account number is also required to be provided, together with the account balance or value, and the gross receipts and gross withdrawals or payments from the account.

This surely applies only to financial institutions doing business in the US. Do you think for one minute that the Mexican Banking system and government would take orders from the US IRS ??

This certainly needs more exploration, but both of these artilcles smell like an attempt to cause worry and concern and create some consulting business by the writers. To vague and incomplete to be really useful. Both written by private, vested interests.Note the discrepancies in effective dates quoted in the articles. Anything from the Economist or the Wall Street Journal ? They are a ittle more credible!
 
From Journal of Accountancy

The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act


Taxpayers face more disclosures and potential penalties.


By KEVIN E. PACKMAN, ESQ. and MAURICIO D. RIVERO, ESQ.

AUGUST 2010




A key component of the federal government’s push for heightened tax compliance among U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts and assets is the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). In an interview in February this year with the JofA, IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman called the then-pending legislation “the next big thing” in international tax compliance and enforcement (“Tax From the Top: Q&A With IRS Commissioner Doug Shulman,” JofA, April 2010, page 16). Barely a month later, FATCA was law, part of the Hiring Incentives to Restore Employment (HIRE) Act.

Despite its supporting role as a revenue offset for HIRE’s employment stimulus incentives and relatively little public discussion of it to date, FATCA’s potential effect on U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts and assets is hard to overstate. U.S. taxpayers and their CPAs will quickly realize that, as a result of FATCA, the costs of reporting their foreign activities to the IRS have increased, as there are additional disclosures. In addition, once the various provisions become effective, the penalties associated with foreign noncompliance will increase, and the statute of limitations within which the IRS can audit a taxpayer will double. FATCA is generally effective for tax years beginning after March 18, 2010, the day the HIRE Act was enacted.

INCREASED DISCLOSURE
Foreign accounts and assets. As if U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts and assets did not already have enough cause for confusion regarding the filing requirements for Form TD F 90-22.1, Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR), FATCA now imposes a second filing requirement on them. Section 511 of FATCA creates new IRC § 6038D, which requires U.S. taxpayers with foreign accounts and assets with an aggregate value exceeding $50,000 to report them on an informational return. It is unclear whether the $50,000 threshold applies if the balance of foreign accounts and assets exceeds $50,000 at the end of the tax year or at any time during the tax year, as in the case of the FBAR $10,000 requirement. FATCA’s provisions of IRC § 6038D apply to assets held during tax years beginning after March 18, 2010. The new reporting requirement is much broader than the FBAR, so individuals who do not have an FBAR filing obligation may be subject to the new reporting requirement. For example, FATCA requires taxpayers with investments in foreign entities, such as foreign hedge funds and private equity funds, to report these investments. The FBAR regulations issued by FinCEN on Feb. 26, 2010, exempt these assets from FBAR reporting.

It is not clear if the IRS will create a new form on which this disclosure will be made or whether it is up to taxpayers to make the disclosure in the way they deem best, or whether a Form 8275, Disclosure Statement, should be used. What is clear is that taxpayers are to attach the disclosure to their Form 1040. Consequently, the disclosure should be protected by the same confidentiality rules that govern tax returns. As mentioned earlier, this disclosure would be in addition to the FBAR, which is filed with the Treasury Department under Title 31 and not subject to the same confidentiality protections as tax returns under the IRC.

The FATCA disclosure must include the name and address of the financial institution and account number of the taxpayer’s account or, in the case of a stock or security, the name and address of the issuer and the class or issue of the stock or security. Similar identification must be disclosed for other types of assets. The disclosure must include the maximum value of the asset during the tax year.

The FBAR is generally required to be filed by a U.S. person with a financial interest, signature authority or other authority over foreign financial accounts if at any point during the calendar year the aggregate value of all such foreign accounts equaled or exceeded $10,000, even if for one day. The section 6038D disclosure is required to report “specified foreign financial assets” when the aggregate value exceeds $50,000.

Section 6038D(b) defines a “specified foreign financial asset” to include ownership of (1) any financial account maintained by a foreign financial institution, (2) any stock or security issued by a non-U.S. person, (3) any financial interest or contract held for investment that has a non-U.S. issuer or counterparty, and (4) any interest in a foreign entity. Section 6038D(b) defines a foreign entity by reference to section 1473(5): any entity that is not a U.S. person. Consequently, taxpayers who purchase foreign real estate through an entity will have a filing obligation.

While section 6038D requires individuals to file this disclosure, the secretary of the Treasury can require “any domestic entity which is formed or availed of for purposes of holding, directly or indirectly, specified foreign financial assets” to file the disclosure as if it were an individual (section 6038D(f)). Similarly, the secretary is to issue regulations exempting nonresident aliens and bona fide residents of any U.S. possession from the disclosure. The secretary also has authority to exempt certain assets from being reported (section 6038D(h)).

The minimum penalty for failing to submit the required disclosure is $10,000, and it increases by $10,000 for each 30-day period following notification from the Treasury Department, with a maximum penalty of $50,000. There is, however, a 90-day grace period following notification from the Treasury before the additional $10,000 penalties accrue (section 6038D(d)). This is similar to the penalty for failure to file Form 5471, Information Return of U.S. Persons With Respect To Certain Foreign Corporations, and Form 3520, Annual Return To Report Transactions With Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts. As with those forms, the penalty may be waived if the taxpayer is able to demonstrate the failure to file was due to reasonable cause. It is important to realize that taxpayers who have this disclosure requirement will likely also have an FBAR filing requirement. While the penalty for failure to file the FBAR is much harsher than the penalty under section 6038D, both of these penalties will be assessed.

Interestingly, there is a presumption that a taxpayer with “specified foreign financial assets” has a filing obligation for purposes of the penalty if the IRS believes the taxpayer has an interest in one or more such assets and the taxpayer does not provide sufficient information to demonstrate the aggregate value is less than $50,000 (section 6038D(e)).
 
Foreign companies. Generally, a foreign corporation will qualify as a passive foreign investment company (PFIC) if (1) 75% or more of its gross income in the tax year is passive income, or (2) on average during the tax year, at least 50% of the assets held by the corporation produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income (section 1297). Section 521 of FATCA amends section 1298 of the Code to require shareholders in a PFIC to file an annual information return disclosing their ownership of the PFIC (section 1298(f)). Under previous law, such disclosure was required only when taxpayers made a qualifying elective fund election, received certain distributions from the PFIC, or disposed of their interest in the PFIC. The PFIC disclosure was effective March 18, 2010.

Financial institution disclosure. Section 501 of FATCA added a new withholding system described in a new chapter 4 to the Code and created new sections 1471 and 1472. These provisions are generally applicable to payments made after Dec. 31, 2012. Taken together, these sections require foreign financial institutions with U.S. customers and foreign nonfinancial entities with substantial U.S. owners to disclose information regarding the U.S. taxpayers.

Failure to disclose the information will result in the U.S. payor being required to withhold a 30% tax on U.S.-source income. The withholding will occur on income normally subject to U.S. taxation when received by nonresident aliens, such as dividends, as well as to certain types of income that are traditionally excluded from taxation for nonresident aliens under section 871, such as certain bank interest and capital gains not effectively connected to a U.S. trade or business. Failure to comply will subject the U.S. withholding agents to financial penalties. Foreign financial institutions include banks, brokerages and investment funds. Furthermore, non-publicly traded equity and debt interests in foreign financial institutions are deemed to be accounts for purposes of this section. Failure to comply will subject such institutions to financial penalties.

The rules described above do not apply to any payment beneficially owned by (1) any corporation that is a member of an expanded affiliated group that includes a publicly traded corporation; (2) any foreign government (or political subdivision, wholly owned agency or instrumentality); (3) any international organization (or wholly owned agency or instrumentality); (4) any foreign central bank of issue; or (5) any other class of persons identified by the Treasury secretary. Further, under new section 1471(d)(1)(b), a foreign financial institution is not required to disclose account information if the account holder is an individual whose aggregate value of depository accounts held (in whole or in part) and maintained by the same financial institution which maintains such account does not exceed $50,000.

PENALTIES
Section 6662 permits the IRS to impose a 20% penalty on a substantial understatement of income tax or for negligence or disregard of rules or regulations that is not attributable to fraud (for which a 75% penalty applies). Section 512 of FATCA amended section 6662 to add a penalty of 40% on any portion of an underpayment attributable to a transaction involving an undisclosed financial asset that should have been reported under sections 6038, 6038B, 6046A, 6048 or new section 6038D. The increased penalty structure is effective for tax years beginning after March 18, 2010.
 
PENALTIES
Section 6662 permits the IRS to impose a 20% penalty on a substantial understatement of income tax or for negligence or disregard of rules or regulations that is not attributable to fraud (for which a 75% penalty applies). Section 512 of FATCA amended section 6662 to add a penalty of 40% on any portion of an underpayment attributable to a transaction involving an undisclosed financial asset that should have been reported under sections 6038, 6038B, 6046A, 6048 or new section 6038D. The increased penalty structure is effective for tax years beginning after March 18, 2010.

EXPANDED STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS
Generally, the IRS has three years from the filing of a return in which to audit a taxpayer and assess additional tax (section 6501(a)). This statute of limitations also applies to information required to be reported on certain foreign transfers, now including those under FATCA. The period is increased to six years if a taxpayer omits 25% or more of gross income (section 6501(e)). Section 513 of FATCA amended section 6501(e) to also extend the statute of limitations to six years where a taxpayer omits more than $5,000 of income attributable to one or more assets required to be reported under section 6038D. Thus, even if the taxpayer does not have a substantial understatement, the IRS will have six years in which to investigate and audit the taxpayer. Additionally, however, the three-year and six-year statutes of limitations will be suspended until the information required to be reported under sections 1295(b), 1298(f), 6038, 6038A, 6038B, 6046, 6046A, 6048 or new section 6038D is provided to the IRS.

The extended statute of limitations is applicable to (1) returns filed after the March 18, 2010, date of enactment and (2) returns filed on or before such date if the limitation period under section 6501 has yet to expire. Thus, the extended six-year statute and suspended three-year statute could theoretically apply to tax returns that were filed as early as 2004 if a six-year statute applies, or 2007 if the normal three-year statute applies.

FOREIGN TRUSTS
Penalties. The penalty under section 6677 for failure to file a Form 3520 is 35% of the gross reportable amount (generally the amount transferred to or received from the trust). Section 535 of FATCA amended section 6677 so that a failure to file Form 3520 would have a minimum penalty of $10,000. Thus, the penalty is now the greater of $10,000 or 35% of the gross reportable amount. The penalty increases by $10,000 for each 30-day period following notification from the Treasury that the filing is delinquent. There is, however, a 90- day grace period following notification from the Treasury before the additional $10,000 penalties accrue. The penalty is effective for Forms 3520 filed after Dec. 31, 2009.

Grantor trust status. When a U.S. person transfers assets to a foreign trust that has U.S. beneficiaries, IRC § 679 deems the trust to be a grantor trust, and the U.S. transferor is responsible for reporting the trust’s income. The regulations under section 679 make the presumption that the trust will have U.S. beneficiaries; thus, it is rare that a U.S. person will fund a foreign trust and it will not be qualified as a grantor trust. Whether taxpayers simply failed to look at the regulations or intended to avoid paying U.S. income tax on the trust’s income, the IRS felt that it needed to codify the regulations into the statute. Sections 531 and 532 of FATCA add several new provisions to section 679, including three subparagraphs to section 679(c), which are designed to find a U.S. beneficiary of the foreign trust. The FATCA additions are effective for transfers to a foreign trust after March 18, 2010.
 

Roberto

Guest
Section 6038D(b) defines a “specified foreign financial asset” to include ownership of (1) any financial account maintained by a foreign financial institution, (2) any stock or security issued by a non-U.S. person, (3) any financial interest or contract held for investment that has a non-U.S. issuer or counterparty, and (4) any interest in a foreign entity. Section 6038D(b) defines a foreign entity by reference to section 1473(5): any entity that is not a U.S. person. Consequently, taxpayers who purchase foreign real estate through an entity will have a filing obligation.

So the hooker is that a Fidiecomiso, Bank Trust is considered a foreign entity?
 

moore_rb

Stay Thirsty My Friends
Sorry, this does not pass the straight face test. Income tax is a tax on income, not based on 'fair market rental rate'. It is possible that if the IRS can demonstrate that you rented it out and did not declare the income that they could 'estimate' your maximum tax liability that way.

Bingo.


"Under FATCA, the taxpayer should report $63,875 of taxable income to the IRS, commencing in 2011"


This would only be accurate if you rented it 100% of the time, and the $10k IRS reporting minimum seems to apply as well.

So, if you own a condo under a Fideicomiso, and you don't earn more than 10k per year in rent on the property, then you are not required to report anything to the IRS.
 

Roberto

Guest
The way I am reading this is that if you own property held in a Bank Trust, you have to report the value of it every year.?!?! It's a filing regulation that might reveal income.
 

moore_rb

Stay Thirsty My Friends
Also-

Remember that if the IRS were to audit you to try to get at the income you earn from property held under a foreign grantor trust, then the burden of proof that you earned said income is on THEM. They could not succesfully apply a blanket estimate based on the maximum possible market rent. To get this evidence would require the cooperation of the foreign settlor in the trust- just look at how difficult Switzerland is making it for them, would Mexico really make it any easier?

Despite how they word the penalties, no tax judge ever rules on the basis of the maximum allowable.
 

Roberto

Guest
Also-

Remember that if the IRS were to audit you to try to get at the income you earn from property held under a foreign grantor trust, then the burden of proof that you earned said income is on THEM. They could not succesfully apply a blanket estimate based on the maximum possible market rent. To get this evidence would require the cooperation of the foreign settlor in the trust- just look at how difficult Switzerland is making it for them, would Mexico really make it any easier?

Despite how they word the penalties, no tax judge ever rules on the basis of the maximum allowable.
My direct experience with the IRS is that they can and will make any assesment they want, with or without proof. They can and will make an assessment with evidence to the contrary of the assesment. It happended to me. Yeah, you'll perhaps win in Federal Court, after $100K or so in legal bills just for the court and 3 or 4 years of legal bills fighting the IRS, not to mention the almost debilitating stress. I guarantee that irrespective of the outcome of such a dispute you won't feel as if you won, you'll be bleeding from every orifice of your body after they get through with you.

Believe it or not the Mexican Hacienda (IRS) and the IRS have a good cooperative working relationship. A friend here in Mexico had a problem with the Hacienda and they were able, in a short time, to get copies of statements, etc. for a Bank Account in AZ, so don't fool your self on that one. I know this first hand, no rumor.

The troubling thing about this to me is that it is a reporting requirement and you can be fined for not reporting. The way I read it you are required to report the value of property you hold with a bank trust every year. It does not seem to talk about income, that's established in the tax code. I really don't think it was set up to be concerned with real estate held this way but it apprears to be an unintended effect that cold give you major heartburn if they choose to enforce it. SH*T I've got heartburn thinking about the IRS. I think I've only got a couple of more years before I can apply for Mexican citizenship. Where is that damned tequila bottle.
 
long discussion today with my CPA Recommendation do not rent and do not have foreign bank accounts of any amount. Just owning does not excuse the filingof the forms Extremely long, and expensive but on those that they have filed already there has been no tax due to date but one never knows
 
Top