# FATCA for all?



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Just saw a burst of articles in the US news sources saying that folks in the US are up in arms about recent proposals that the banks in the US should have to report information about their customers to the IRS. The avowed purpose is to help the IRS find tax evaders - among the upper income brackets.

Perhaps the overseas taxpayers should start by suggesting that the existing provisions of FATCA simply be extended to US residents - force the banks to report bank accounts over a set amount and ask US based taxpayers to fill out something like an FBAR report each year. 

Anyhow, someone make the popcorn. It's going to be "exciting" to see how these latest proposals are received back in the old US of A.


----------



## tomwins (Dec 27, 2014)

Bevdeforges said:


> {original message clipped}
> Perhaps the overseas taxpayers should start by suggesting that the existing provisions of FATCA simply be extended to US residents - force the banks to report bank accounts over a set amount and ask US based taxpayers to fill out something like an FBAR report each year.
> 
> Anyhow, someone make the popcorn. It's going to be "exciting" to see how these latest proposals are received back in the old US of A.


This is just another example of how broken the US is right now. And I see little hope for it moving toward becoming a less partisan, less angry place where people are treated equally under the law and given close to equal opportunities for success.

To be clear, the rules for reporting non-US bank accounts already apply to US residents. If any US citizen (living in the US or not) has a qualifying account, they are required to report it. But I think you are saying that even US banks should report to the US government the amount of accounts over a certain threshold. While that is a nice idea it would prohibit much due to how most of the wealthiest have hidden their funds in trusts.

A main problem with US tax avoidance is the decades long de-funding of the IRS and rewriting of the tax code to benefit the wealthiest. This was done in plan sight and with the excuse that these wealthy folk are the engines that drive the US economy and giving them more money means it "trickles down" to everyone else. Of course, this has been shown over and over NOT to work and is a key reason for the income disparity in the US.

Every US employee has their income reported to the IRS by their employer so why not have the banks report this important financial information too? It is just another way the wealthiest don't want to be held accountable.

I hope there is growing anger from more US tax payers over how the mega-rich have written the tax code to benefit them at the expense of working class tax-payers. But not just that, more and more reports of "hidden money" is occurring. Some of it are in trust in the US that have been specifically designed to hide money from taxation.

I'd love to see the US IRS do what other countries do and send a completed tax form that just needs to be reviewed for accuracy and then signed and returned. But that will never happen as long as tax preparers and tax preparation software companies are making boatloads of money over the complicated system that is the US tax code.

Regarding Biden's proposal, it may bring in additional tax money to the US Treasury and help pay for the infrastructure plans. That along with making the tax burden fairer - I hope they do it.


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

I agree completely. But I also remember back to the first days that the IRS got into "e-filing" of returns. The IRS specifically chose not to offer up a form online for the "little guys" to use directly because of the fear of competing with the various tax preparers that were charging for e-filing. (Never mind the fact that overseas residents couldn't e-file for the first several years that this option was in place.)

Back in my accountant days, I always felt that a simple "fix" to the whole dual books for companies issue would be that big companies should pay taxes based on the same results they report to their investors. If they show big profits, then they pay tax on those profits and not on all the massaged numbers in their tax accounts. Obviously that isn't a popular idea, either.


----------



## 255 (Sep 8, 2018)

@tomwins is correct, the FBAR is already a requirement for U.S. residents and has been long before FATCA was enacted. My own mother filed FBARs for decades after finally settling in the U.S. after living overseas for years.

I think all the hullabaloo about bank reporting is the proposed threshold of $600.00 (the current threshold for 1099 reporting.) The banks already report transactions over $10K or anything deemed suspicious. Food in the U.S. is becoming so expensive now, that a trip to the grocery store for a family, with children, could easily surpass $600.00!


----------



## Bevdeforges (Nov 16, 2007)

Yes, as tomwins says, I mean that the US banks have to do full reporting to the IRS on all bank accounts. Actually, here in France the bank provides each customer with a statement regarding their bank accounts, telling people which line on their tax declaration what number goes on. (And then these numbers are "pre-printed" on the customers' electronic declarations - subject simply to any addition of foreign or other account information.) Obviously, most investment accounts are done in a different format, but all the relevant income information for the tax returns is provided as a routine paperwork thing. It really does make income tax time far less stressful. But then again, the banks here were always the first "industry" nationalized and usually among the last to be "liberated" (in the US they call it "deregulated" but the term is a misnomer - banks are always highly regulated).

Actually, I find it kind of funny to hear all the complaints over these latest proposals. It wouldn't be that difficult to make the information useful to both the IRS and to the bank customers. But it isn't so much the banks who need to be held accountable, as the "trusts" and "PFICs" (called something else when they're domestic, but the same idea) held over there in the US.


----------



## Francis M. Brown (Oct 11, 2021)

Thank you! I needed this!


----------

