Jump to content

U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act


Recommended Posts

Posted partial story without comment:

 

http://online.wsj.co...2987119796.html

How to Lose Friends, Citizens and Influence

 

The U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act seeks to co-opt foreign banks as long-arm enforcement agencies of the IRS.

 

 

COLLEEN GRAFFY


  •  

London

 

Beware the sledgehammer used to crack the nut. In this case, the nut is the U.S. government's laudable goal of catching tax evaders. The sledgehammer is the overreaching effect of legislation that is alienating other countries and resulting in millions of U.S. citizens abroad being forced to either painfully reconsider their nationality, or face a lifetime of onerous bureaucracy, expense and privacy invasion.

 

The legislation is Fatca, the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act. To appreciate its breathtaking scope along with America's unique "citizen-based" tax practices, imagine this: You were born in California, moved to New York for education or work, fell in love, married and had children. Even though you have faithfully paid taxes in New York and haven't lived in California for 25 years, suppose California law required that you also file your taxes there because you were born there. Though you may never have held a bank account in California, you must report all of your financial holdings to the State of California. Are you a signatory on your spouse's account? Then you must declare his bank accounts too. Your children, now adults, have never been west of the Mississippi but they too must file their taxes in both California and New York and report any bank accounts they or their spouses may have because they are considered Californians by virtue of one parent's birthplace.

 

Extrapolate that example to the six million U.S. citizens living around the globe. Many, if not most, don't know about these requirements. Yet they face fines, penalties and interest for not complying—even if they owe no U.S. taxes, own no U.S. property, have no U.S. bank account and haven't lived there in years—if ever.

Edited by TakeYouToTasker
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's the governments money. Don't you get it? They printed if. It belongs to them. You didn't earn it... Someone else made that happen. The government needs its money so it can continue doing good things for those who believe in government.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

imagine this: You were born in California, moved to New York for education or work, fell in love, married and had children. Even though you have faithfully paid taxes in New York and haven't lived in California for 25 years, suppose California law required that you also file your taxes there because you were born there. Though you may never have held a bank account in California, you must report all of your financial holdings to the State of California. Are you a signatory on your spouse's account? Then you must declare his bank accounts too. Your children, now adults, have never been west of the Mississippi but they too must file their taxes in both California and New York and report any bank accounts they or their spouses may have because they are considered Californians by virtue of one parent's birthplace.

 

Meanwhile in CA.....

 

http://blog.dougknight.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/idea_guy.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Meanwhile in CA.....

 

http://blog.dougknig...12/idea_guy.jpg

 

NY already tries to pull similar **** - I know one case where NY tried to collect income tax from a resident of Erie, PA, based on the excuse that he had season tickets to the Bills.

 

I still have NY coming after me for income taxes every year, even though I haven't lived there for 15 years. Related to not having my '88 Saab insured in NY AFTER I moved to DC.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article smells as though it is likely misrepresenting the bill. However, I am too lazy to care right now.

 

Also, Tasker, you may want to cut that post off after the first paragraph or 2....and then leave the link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The article smells as though it is likely misrepresenting the bill. However, I am too lazy to care right now.

 

Also, Tasker, you may want to cut that post off after the first paragraph or 2....and then leave the link.

Why? I'm not going to edit other people's work. If I'm sourcing them, as part of a larger independent idea, I'll quote segements, and provide links; but in this instance I wasn't posting unique thoughs or editorializing. I was simply sharing an article I thought was thought provoking.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Why? I'm not going to edit other people's work. If I'm sourcing them, as part of a larger independent idea, I'll quote segements, and provide links; but in this instance I wasn't posting unique thoughs or editorializing. I was simply sharing an article I thought was thought provoking.

It's against the tos of this site. No reposting of entire articles that appear on other sites.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Is it really? I've never heard of anything like that before.

 

Though... on a sports site I suppose that make sense...

 

Huh..

 

Appologies, I'll edit.

 

It came up a few years ago, when people were pasting full pieces without attribution. I think someone even contacted Scott about copyright infringement, so he put a stop to it on the site. You know the whole intellectual property protection thing.

Edited by GG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...