Printer Friendly

Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act aims to close individual tax gap.

Last October, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont), Rep. Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.), Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Rep. Richard Neal (D-Mass.) took a big step toward closing the United States individual tax gap by introducing the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).

FATCA creates new mechanisms for identifying Americans with foreign financial assets. It's a cumbersome process and one that the U.S. has been hard-pressed to implement effectively. The bill takes a different approach to an old problem.

Rather than targeting tax evaders, FATCA focuses on the foreign financial and nonfinancial entities that might hold the assets. Foreign entities must disclose their U.S. customers and interest holders to the IRS--they must even agree to face down bank secrecy rules or, failing that, to relinquish U.S. accounts altogether or face a 30-percent withholding tax on their own U.S. income. It's an unexpected twist on the "pay to play" concept: Offer up U.S. investor names or take your money elsewhere.

FATCA would also repeal current tax benefits for foreign-marketed bearer bonds. Congress shut down U.S.-marketed bearer bonds in the early 1980s by imposing stiff tax sanctions on U.S. issuers and holders. Foreign-marketed bearer bonds were excepted from sanction, but FATCA would end the reprieve. Among other things, interest would become subject to a 30-percent withholding tax, effectively eliminating foreign-marketed bearer bonds as a financing source for U.S. companies. The U.S. is urging other countries to follow suit, cutting off an easy avenue for U.S. tax evasion. The approach is not without risk, especially if countries perceive FATCA as an opportunity to attract capital to their own markets.

These specific proposals are expected to garner $3.1 billion in tax revenues over a 10-year period (together with other portions of the bill, $8.5 billion over 10 years). All things considered, that's a tiny number. Conversely, U.S. capital demand isn't expected to fall, and constricting the supply of available funding won't help. Even a "small" rise in U.S. cost of capital could quickly swamp the anticipated revenue gain.

On balance, does FATCA represent good tax policy? Absolutely. No one wants evasion to continue. It's much easier to deal with visible foreign entities than their invisible U.S. customers. The big question is whether corporate America will suffer collateral damage in the crusade against U.S. tax evasion, and whether government has another choice.

--Kimberly Tan Majure, member of the International Tax and Tax Controversy practice, groups at law firm Miller & Chevalier Chartered

COPYRIGHT 2010 Financial Executives International
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2010 Gale, Cengage Learning. All rights reserved.

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Title Annotation:LEGISLATION
Author:Majure, Kimberly Tan
Publication:Financial Executive
Geographic Code:1USA
Date:Jan 1, 2010
Words:421
Previous Article:International trade.
Next Article:Supreme Court and PCAOB constitutionality.
Topics:


Related Articles
Canada's foreign affiliate rules.
Misrepresentation of a tax matter by a third party.
IRS study: gap in tax collections exceeds $300 billion per year.
Tax information reporting and compliance in the cross-border context.
Cart before the horse? TEI takes on tax gap: FIN 48, liaison meetings, Canadian issues also focus of advocacy activities.
Minding the gap: a ten-step program for better tax compliance.

Terms of use | Privacy policy | Copyright © 2021 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters