The Internal Revenue Service’s decision to modify the timelines for withholding agents and foreign banks to comply with the stiff new due diligence requirements under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act is providing them, as well as taxpayers and preparers, with some welcome relief.

Mike Laveman
FATCA was included as part of the HIRE Act of 2010 and requires foreign financial institutions, including hedge funds, to report to the Internal Revenue Service on the foreign holdings of U.S. taxpayers or else face large penalties. The requirements have provoked an outcry abroad, particularly from dual citizens and expatriates, in addition to the financial institutions that are expected to comply. Some foreign banks reportedly have been reluctant to do business with U.S. customers, and some expats have even renounced their U.S. citizenship.
Late last month, the IRS announced that it has delayed the timelines for withholding agents and foreign banks in completing the due diligence requirements (see IRS Modifies FATCA Timelines). Foreign financial institutions will have until Jan. 1, 2017 to start withholding taxes from U.S. taxpayers’ investment gains and until Jan. 1, 2014, to put in place the reporting requirements mandated by FATCA.
Mike Laveman, a tax partner in EisnerAmper’s financial services practice who works with hedge funds and private equity firms, sees the delay as a positive for his clients. “The most important effect of the announcement is that we now have alignment of new account and due diligence procedures for withholding agents such as U.S.-based funds, foreign financial institutions, and entities that may fall under the purview of the intergovernmental agreements being worked on,” he said. “Before this announcement, all three have had a different set of rules, which has led to a lot of confusion as to how and when to implement FATCA. These new rules essentially give everyone a little more time to create a FATCA process. In addition, the announcement pushed off withholding taxes from the gross proceeds from the sale of U.S. securities two years. This is significant because most of the dollars generated from FATCA would likely come from this, as opposed to dividend and interest income.”
However, Laveman cautioned that the delay does not mean FATCA registration won’t take place in 2013. It only means the pressure is off to do it immediately at the beginning of 2014.
When the IRS and the Treasury Department issued the proposed regulations in February, they heard grumbling from many quarters about the requirements they had contemplated (see IRS and Treasury Propose New FATCA Requirements). On top of that, they simultaneously issued a joint statement with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy and Spain on an intergovernmental approach to implementing FATCA and improving international tax compliance, which would mean sharing U.S. taxpayers’ information with foreign tax authorities. That didn’t fly with some members of Congress. Banks and their accountants were also puzzled.
“Originally when the proposed regs came out at the same time as the concept of these intergovernmental agreements, when you look at some of the timing requirements between the two, there were a lot of inconsistencies,” said Laveman. “For example, U.S. withholding agents, such as a U.S. bank or a U.S. fund, had different rules for opening account procedures than a foreign institution would, versus someone that would be covered under the intergovernmental agreements. Because there’s been so much push to this concept of intergovernmental agreements, I think what happened was rather than releasing a lot of the final regulations on FATCA, I think the IRS is letting some of these intergovernmental agreements work out a little bit, and they needed to push back a lot of the implementation points, anywhere ranging from six months to one year.”
For many of Laveman’s clients, the delay has been a huge relief. “Many of these clients who are facing FATCA are also facing all sorts of other regulatory concerns, like Dodd-Frank,” he pointed out. “I think there’s going to be less push to have to register your fund or entity as soon as the final regs come out. Essentially you had to be registered by June 30. In most cases, you really have an extra six months, if not longer. So I think it’s giving organizations more time to develop systems, to think about what entities they have to register, and it’s definitely a welcome relief to not only the banks and investment funds out there, but also the service providers like us that are going to assist our clients with this.”
While the timing is one aspect of the IRS reprieve, the other significant aspect is the type of withholding taxes, Laveman observed. “Originally FATCA would impose withholding on interest, dividends and gross proceeds from the sale of U.S. securities,” he added. “The gross proceeds on the sales of securities was the one that most investment funds and banks were concerned about, because there are big dollars involved in that. That was set to take place on Jan. 1, 2015. They actually pushed that back two additional years to Jan. 1, 2017. So I think that’s taking a lot of the bite out of FATCA. Once people register and withholding takes place, the big piece on gross proceeds from sales of U.S. securities is delayed an additional two years. That also is very, very significant.”
The IRS has also expanded the rules governing the types of obligations that were exempt under FATCA, and that too was fairly significant, in Laveman’s view.
However, he warned that banks and taxpayers should not assume from the IRS announcement that the FATCA requirements have been postponed indefinitely. Withholding agents and financial institutions need to start planning now for how they will eventually need to comply with FATCA, and not simply push off thinking about FATCA for another year, he cautioned.
The IRS will be busy readying the final requirements in the meantime, according to officials who have spoken at recent conferences. “The IRS claims that the final regulations, the final forms and a final FFI agreement, which is the agreement that these institutions will sign, will be done by the end of this year,” said Laveman. “Then the question is how soon do you register? I think we have some additional time to register, but certainly once all those final rules come out, banks and investment funds are going to have to come up with a plan pretty quickly to figure out how they’re going to tackle FATCA. People were about to start doing it now. I really have seen a lot of movement in the last few weeks on FATCA. I think what we have now is a six-month window of taking a deep breath a little bit and moving forward. They don’t plan on pushing this back any further. Everything they’re saying indicates that they’re going to come out with the final rules by the end of the year. I think this is more a matter of getting a little bit of extra time to consider what to do.”













4 Comments
PLEASE JOIN ME WHILE WE REARRANGE THE CHAIRS ON THIS SINKING SHIP. NO MATTER HOW YOU REARRANGE THEM THE SHIP IS STILL SINKING. PASS THE FAIRTAX AND THE NONSENSE WILL STOP.
Posted by: wjeretidwell | November 7, 2012 8:02 PM
Report this Comment
Instead of all the ink wasted and all the time wasted and all the anguish expressed, the U.S. Congress should pass the FairTax and nobody would give a rats a where in the world your money was and foreigners who want U.S. stability, would do no better anywhere than leaving and indeed moving their capital here. Stop the nonsense and start guiding your efforts to passing the FairTax.
Posted by: wjeretidwell | November 7, 2012 7:59 PM
Report this Comment
Yes, additional time to think about what to do? But in usual manner, the FCC, or FATCA Compliance Complex advises you to get to work to be ready to comply. By the way, we have a service we can sell you to help! Oh, the regulatory teat, how sweet is its milk!
This delay also provides some time for growing Congressional opposition to the manner in which the IRS has gone about the FATCA compliance implementation, like Congressman Reichart from Washington's 8th district. Google: "Rep. Reichert Demands Answers on FATCA Implementation from IRS Commissioner."
This too does allow more time for those that are opposed to this extra territorial overreach come up with a better strategies to counter this disastrously broad brushed legislation. Even Americans Abroad for Obama recognize it as creating a Typhoid America, that should be avoided at all costs.
I think the Achilles heel, or maybe this is just a wishful hope, is the inherent problems with IGA reciprocity. It will become pretty clear quickly, that this is a faux reciprocity, due to the differences in US Citizenship taxation model, and residency taxation model of the rest of the world. Germany doesn't care about the details of the German citizens residing in America, but how will a US bank, pushed into providing this data handle the distinction between German citizen and/or US resident?
This is going to be as complex for US banks as the FFIs have in identifying all those with US indicies residing on their shores.
Therein, with the IGA, the domestic version of FATCA, or DATCA is going to repatriate the cost of compliance back onto the US shores and US financial system.
Congress never intended that, if you can make any statement about what they intended. Most never read the bill or understood what FATCA was going to be about in reality. Call it unintended consequences, if you like. It was created in response to homeland tax evasion offshore schemes like what UBS marketed onshore, but few realized that it would also target US persons living all over the globe.
For governments entering the IGA, they might come to recognize that the International Revenue Service is reaching into its treasury and taxing a lot of their dual citizen residents, and accidental Americans by birth who reside in their country.
Are they just willingly going to turn them over to the IRS based upon a faux reciprocity deal for the greatest Tax Haven in the world, the USA? Time will tell, but they should read carefully and understand the language of their IGAs. US persons residing in their countries are considered tax resident in the US. Strange concept, and illogical, and they will have to deal with it.
Posted by: Just Me | November 7, 2012 12:52 PM
Report this Comment
This kicks the can down the road, but does not affect the inevitability of the FATCA fiscal clff. Faced with a growing job-destroying trade deficit, it literally makes it impossible for many US persons to survive living abroad precisely when we desperatey need more, not fewer, of our citizens relocating abroad to recapture markets deliberately handed over to our industrialized foreign competitors through our unique citizenship based taxation which continues to subject Americans who go abroad to home country taxation as if they had never left home.
So citizens of our industrialized trade competitors continue to be considered as patriots when they create jobs by going abroad to capture the jobs that are giving countries like Germany, Switzerland, etc. their lowes unemployment rates (6.8% and 2.9% respectively), and record trade surpluses. Though their wage levels are 23% and 56% respectively higher than ours their per-capita exports to China are 7.9 and 9.3 times greater than ours.
So much for the universally proclaimed theory that all our deficit problems with China are because of China's monitary policies. Doubltess the Germans and Swiss don't like them either, but they do not use them as an excuse. They continue to encourage their citizens to go there and capture export sales and with the denial of foreign banks to allow them to have simple checking accounts where they live abroad, we punish Americans so they can't survive living abroad and will stay home rather than living and working abroad and selling job creating US exports.
Americans who go abroad to sell our exports are branded as tax evading traitors. Citizens of other countries who do the same thing are patriots. With Cuba's recently-announced elimination of the requirement for an exit visa to relocate abroad, Cubans now have greater freedom to do this than Americans. Cuba does not tax the income of its citizens living abroad, but we do.
Posted by: RogerC | November 7, 2012 8:57 AM
Report this Comment
Add Your Comments...
Already Registered?
If you have already registered to Accounting Today, please use the form below to login. When completed you will immeditely be directed to post a comment.
Not Registered?
You must be registered to post a comment.