First Friday FATCA Update

Since our last monthly FATCA update, no new intergovernmental agreements (IGA) or competent authority agreements (CAA) have been released.  The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

On October 24, 2017, the United States and Singapore released a joint statement following the meeting between President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong the previous day.  The statement indicated that the two countries have substantially completed negotiations on a Tax Information Exchange Agreement and a reciprocal Model 1A IGA.  The countries plan to sign the agreements before the end of the year.

First Friday FATCA Update

Since our last monthly FATCA update, the IRS has issued Notice 2017-46, providing welcomed reprieve for U.S. financial institutions with respect to the collection of foreign taxpayer identification numbers (FTINs) required of them by FATCA to avoid Chapter 3 withholding.  The notice delays the date on which U.S. financial institutions must begin collecting FTINs to January 1, 2018, provides a phase-in period for obtaining FTINs from account holders documented before January 1, 2018, that will end on December 31, 2019, and limits the circumstances in which FTINs are required (see prior coverage).  This week, an IRS official reiterated that a change in an accountholder’s address to another jurisdiction is a change in circumstances that will invalidate the Form W-8 for payments made after the change provided an FTIN is otherwise required, necessitating the collection of an FTIN if an FTIN is otherwise required with respect to the payment(s).

Additionally, the Treasury Department has also released the Model 1A intergovernmental agreement (IGA) between the United States and Kazakhstan.

Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A competent authority agreement (CAA) is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

IRS Makes Good on Promise to Issue Guidance Loosening Certain FATCA Reporting Requirements

Yesterday, the IRS issued Notice 2017-46, representing a welcome reprieve for U.S. financial institutions with respect to the collection of foreign taxpayer identification numbers (FTINs) required of them by the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) to avoid Chapter 3 withholding.  As we discussed in a prior post, an official with the IRS Office of Chief Counsel previewed this forthcoming guidance earlier this month and communicated that it was intended as a response to comments received by the IRS from withholding agents.  The new guidance delays the date on which U.S. financial institutions must begin collecting FTINs to January 1, 2018, provides a phase-in period for obtaining FTINs from account holders documented before January 1, 2018 that will end on December 31, 2019, and limits the circumstances in which FTINs are required.  For example, withholding agents will not be required to obtain FTINs on Forms W-8 that the withholding agent would otherwise obtain solely to avoid Form 1099 reporting or backup withholding, or in situations where a payment is not otherwise subject to reporting on Form 1042-S.  Additionally, withholding agents will not be required to obtain FTINs from an account holder in a jurisdiction that has not entered a reciprocal tax information exchange treaty with the United States or in a jurisdiction that does not issue FTINs to its residents.  Finally, withholding agents need not acquire FTINs for governments, international organizations, foreign central banks of issue, or residents of a U.S. territory.  The IRS will revise the Instructions for Form 1042-S, “Foreign Person’s U.S. Source Income Subject to Withholding,” to reflect the amended FTIN requirements.

In addition, Notice 2017-46 also provides a reprieve for certain Model 1 FFIs with respect to their reporting requirements, extending the time by which they must obtain and report U.S TINs for preexisting accounts that are U.S. reportable accounts.  For such accounts, the U.S. Competent Authority will not determine that there is “significant non-compliance” with obligations under a Model 1 intergovernmental agreement solely because of a failure to obtain and report a U.S. TIN, provided that the Model 1 FFI follows certain alternative procedures specified in Notice 2017-46.

The IRS intends to amend the regulations to reflect the rules announced in Notice 2017-46, but taxpayers may rely on the Notice until it issues such regulations.

First Friday FATCA Update

Since our previous monthly FATCA update, we have addressed the following recent FATCA developments:

  • The Sixth Circuit issued an opinion on August 18, 2017 upholding the dismissal of a challenge to FATCA brought by Senator Rand Paul and several current and former U.S. citizens living abroad who hold foreign accounts (see prior coverage).
  • The IRS posted draft instructions to the Form 8966 (FATCA Report) dated August 9, 2017, with some changes pertaining to participating foreign financial institutions (PFFIs) and other changes reflecting the final and temporary Chapter 4 regulations released in January of this year (see prior coverage).

Additionally, an official with the IRS Office of Chief Counsel recently stated that the IRS will delay the date on which U.S. financial institutions must start treating an otherwise valid Form W‑8 as invalid merely because it does not include a foreign taxpayer identification number (FTIN) or a reasonable explanation for its absence, to avoid Chapter 3 withholding.  Specifically, a valid Form W-8 obtained before January 1, 2018, will not be treated as invalid on that date if the form simply lacks the FTIN or a reasonable explanation for its absence (e.g., the account holder’s country of residence does not provide TINs).  It is unclear what form the relief will take, but it is possible the IRS will continue to allow a U.S. financial institution to treat a Form W-8 as valid if the financial institution does not have actual knowledge that the beneficial owner has an FTIN for some period of time.

This informal relief from the new FTIN requirement (issued in final and temporary regulations in late 2016) is welcomed by banks and withholding agents that report income for foreign account holders.  The relief is still reflected in FAQs on the IRS website (see prior coverage).  But since Form W-8s expire on three-year cycles, banks and agents still have to update their withholding policies and annual re-solicitation processes to comply with the new FTIN requirements.  Additionally, banks and agents are still waiting for further guidance on how they can update Form W‑8s issued before 2018 with the newly‑required FTIN or reasonable explanation.  An IRS FAQ posted in April 2017 specifies that the information can be provided in a written statement, including an email, but it is unclear what other requirements might apply to such a statement.

Since our previous monthly FATCA update, the IRS has also released the Competent Authority Agreements (CAAs) implementing intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) between the United States and the following treaty partners:

  • Anguilla (Model 1B IGA signed on January 15, 2017);
  • Italy (Model 1A IGA signed on January 10, 2014).

Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A CAA is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

Sixth Circuit Upholds Dismissal of Sen. Rand Paul’s Challenge to FATCA

On August 18, the Sixth Circuit issued an opinion upholding the dismissal of a challenge to the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) brought by Senator Rand Paul and several current and former U.S. citizens living abroad who hold foreign accounts.  In the case, Crawford v. United States Department of the Treasury, Senator Paul and his co-plaintiffs argued that FATCA’s withholding and reporting requirements imposed on individuals and foreign financial institutions (FFIs), certain intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) negotiated by the Treasury, and the requirement to file a foreign bank account report (FBAR) by U.S. persons with financial accounts that exceed $10,000 in a foreign country were unconstitutional.

In 2016, the district court dismissed the case on standing grounds (earlier coverage here).  The court evaluated the requirements necessary for Article III standing and concluded that no named plaintiff alleged actual or imminent injury from the FATCA withholding tax, and none of the named plaintiffs were FFIs subject to the requirements imposed on such entities.  Instead of asserting concrete particularized injuries, such as penalties brought for failure to comply with FATCA or FBAR requirements, the plaintiffs argued general “discomfort” with the disclosure requirements, which the court deemed too abstract and thus insufficient to confer Article III standing.

The Sixth Circuit panel upheld the dismissal on standing grounds, explaining that the injuries suffered by the account holders resulted from the independent and voluntary actions of foreign financial institutions, not the Treasury.  The court explained that no plaintiff has alleged “any actual enforcement of FATCA” or FBAR, such as a demand for individual reporting or the imposition of a penalty for noncompliance, and no plaintiff holds sufficient foreign assets to bring a pre-enforcement challenge to FATCA or has alleged an intent to violate FBAR, a prerequisite for standing to bring a pre-enforcement FBAR challenge.  The court also rejected Senator Paul’s IGA-specific claim that  he was stripped of his constitutional right to vote against the IGAs, explaining that Senator Paul can still seek repeal of or amendment to FATCA itself.  The court denied the plaintiffs leave to amend their complaint, reasoning that amendment would be futile because the facts simply do not provide them standing to bring the alleged claims.

First Friday FATCA Update

August 4, 2017 by  
Filed under FATCA, Information Reporting, IRS

Since our last monthly FATCA update, the IRS has updated its FATCA frequently asked questions to include four new FAQs addressing the renewal of foreign financial institution (FFI) agreements and extending the deadline for renewing FFI agreements to October 24, 2017 (discussed here and here).

Recently, the Treasury released the Model 1B Intergovermental Agreement (IGA) between the United States and Turkmenistan.

Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A Competent Authority Agreement (CAA) is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

First Friday FATCA Update

Since our last monthly FATCA update, the IRS has updated its online FATCA portal to allow foreign financial institutions to renew their FFI agreements (see prior coverage).

Recently, the Treasury released the Model 1B Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) between the United States and Montenegro.  The IRS also released the Competent Authority Agreements (CAAs) implementing IGAs between the United States and the following treaty partners:

  • Bahrain (Model 1B IGA signed on January 18, 2017);
  • Croatia (Model 1A IGA signed on March 20, 2015);
  • Greenland (Model 1A IGA signed on January 17, 2017); and
  • Panama (Model 1A IGA signed on April 27, 2016).

Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A CAA is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

First Friday FATCA Update

Since our last FATCA Update, the IRS has published a reminder that foreign financial institutions (FFIs) required by FATCA to renew their FFI agreements must do so by July 31, 2017.  The IRS released an updated FFI agreement on December 30, 2016, that is effective on or after January 1, 2017 (see prior coverage).  All financial institutions (FIs) whose prior FFI agreement expired on December 31, 2016, and that wish to retain their Global Intermediary Identification Number (GIIN) must do so by July 31, 2017 to be treated as having in effect an FFI agreement as of January 1, 2017.  According to the IRS, a new “Renew FFI Agreement” link will become available on the FFI’s account homepage in a future update to the FATCA registration portal.

Generally, FATCA requires the following types of FIs to renew their FFI agreements: participating FFIs not covered by an intergovernmental agreement (IGA); reporting Model 2 FFIs; reporting Model 1 FFIs operating branches outside of Model 1 jurisdictions.  By contrast, renewal is not required for reporting Model 1 FFIs that are not operating branches outside of Model 1 jurisdictions; registered deemed-compliant FFIs (regardless of location); sponsoring entities; direct reporting non-financial foreign entities (NFFEs); and trustees of trustee-documented trust.

Since our last update, Treasury has not published any new intergovernmental agreements (IGAs), and the IRS has not published any new competent authority agreements (CAAs).  Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions (FFIs) operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A CAA is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

IRS Negotiating CbC Information Exchange Agreements

The IRS is engaging in negotiations with individual countries to implement country-by-country (CbC) reporting according to Douglas O’Donnell, Commissioner of IRS’s Large Business and International Division.  In a March 10 speech at the Pacific Rim Tax Institute that, he clarified that the IRS is only negotiating with jurisdictions that have both an information exchange instrument and adequate information safeguards.  Mr. O’Donnell did not provide a definitive timeline for those negotiations, but he said that they would be completed in a timely manner.  The IRS’s approach to negotiating information exchange agreements is consistent with the United States’ existing approach to negotiating IGAs and related agreements under FATCA.

Companies are anxiously awaiting the agreements, as they could face reporting obligations in certain jurisdictions with which the United States does not have agreements in place, causing them to potentially prepare multiple CbC reports. Companies are also urging the IRS to release information on the expected scope of the U.S. information exchange network, as lack of knowledge on the scope could negatively impact companies’ ability to do business in certain countries if the companies do not comply with local filing requirements.

These information exchange agreements arise from recent recommendations provided by the Organization for Economic Co-Operation and Development (OECD) (additional information on OECD guidance on CbC reporting available here) on jurisdictions with respect to information on multinational corporations, requiring jurisdictions to exchange such information in a standardized format beginning in 2018 (please see prior post for additional background).  The IRS released final regulations in June 2016 imposing CbC reporting on U.S. persons that are the ultimate parent entity of a multinational enterprise group with revenue exceeding $850 million in the preceding accounting year (prior coverage).

First Friday FATCA Update

March 3, 2017 by  
Filed under FATCA, Information Reporting, IRS

Recently, the Treasury released the Model 1B Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) entered into between the United States and Ukraine. The IRS released the Competent Authority Agreements (CAAs) implementing the IGAs between the United States and the following treaty partners:

  • Antigua and Barbuda (Model 1B IGA signed on August 31, 2016);
  • Vietnam (Model 1B IGA signed on April 1, 2016).

Under FATCA, IGAs come in two forms: Model 1 or Model 2.  Under a Model 1 IGA, the foreign treaty partner agrees to collect information of U.S. accountholders in foreign financial institutions (FFIs) operating within its jurisdiction and transmit the information to the IRS.  Model 1 IGAs are drafted as either reciprocal (Model 1A) agreements or nonreciprocal (Model 1B) agreements.  By contrast, Model 2 IGAs are issued in only a nonreciprocal format and require FFIs to report information directly to the IRS.

A CAA is a bilateral agreement between the United States and the treaty partner to clarify or interpret treaty provisions.  A CAA implementing an IGA typically establishes and prescribes the rules and procedures necessary to implement certain provisions in the IGA and the Tax Information Exchange Agreement, if applicable.  Specific topics include registration of the treaty partner’s financial institutions, time and manner of exchange of information, remediation and enforcement, confidentiality and data safeguards, and cost allocation.  Generally, a CAA becomes operative on the later of (1) the date the IGA enters into force, or (2) the date the CAA is signed by the competent authorities of the United States and the treaty partner.

The Treasury Department website publishes IGAs, and the IRS publishes their implementing CAAs.

Next Page »