Excellent article by @HelenBurggraf explaining that the new Argentina IGA (like previous #FATCA IGAs) is NOT reciprocal. An earlier and lengthy expose explaining in detail why #FATCA IGAs are NOT and likely will never be reciprocal agreements is here ... citizenshipsolutions.ca/2022/07/24/the…
The remarks from Ambassador Stanley are clearly designed to suggest the US Argentina #FATCA IGA is "reciprocal". Whether by accident or design this statement is not accurate.
It is useful to examine the exact text of the US Argentina #FATCA IGA to determine what Argentina is required to do and what the US is required to do and decide whether the agreement is reciprocal. home.treasury.gov/system/files/1…
Beginning with par 2 of Article 6 (on pg 14) where the agreement specifically states equal/equivalent levels of information are NOT required in the current #FATCA agreement. The US is not required to give as much as it is entitled to get. Here is the original source.
Beginning with "Reportable Accounts. Notice that an Argentine Account is based on "residence" in Argentina. A US account is based on US citizenship regardless of residence. Note also that there must be "activity" in an Argentine account to qualify as reportable (not true for US).
Here is what Argentina is required to report to the US (3 screenshots of information) under the #FATCA IGA. Note that Argentina is reporting on residents of Argentina to the US (where they are not residents). Compare this to what the US gives Argentina.
Here is what US is required to report to Argentina (1 screenshot of info) under the #FATCA IGA. Note US is reporting on residents of Argentina to Argentina. Compare this to what the Argentina gives the US. Journalists should read the "agreements" and not listen to gov statements!
Suggest those who oppose #FATCA IGAs take the time to read and understand these agreements and NOT rely on government statements and third party commentators. It's takes time to understand them, but it's worth it! (All Model 1s and Model 2s are the same.) home.treasury.gov/policy-issues/…
In summary, yes there is more to it, but this thread has been an attempt to give you the #FATCA IGA "Bare Necessities" (an important principle for living) ...
Notice 2023-11: Temp relief provided to banks under Model 1 #FATCA IGAs who can't provide SSN numbers of #Americansabroad ("preexisting accounts only") if the gov joins banks in taking specific steps to educate individuals about FATCA + @CitizenshipTax. home.kpmg/us/en/home/ins…
Purpose of Notice 2023-11 is to ensure that banks in a Model 1 #FATCA jurisdiction won't be deemed to be "non-compliant" with the IGA if they can't provide a US SSN for "pre-existing accounts". The notice can be accessed and read in its entirety here ... irs.gov/pub/irs-drop/n…
Step 1: The relief is available to the banks in a Model 1 #FATCA IGA jurisdiction and ONLY if the government of the jurisdiction commits to engaging with (1) individual US citizens (2) the banks and (3) US Treasury to facilitate compliance.
Lots of discussion on "reciprocity" question. What does "reciprocity" mean? Q. Is it possible for there to be "reciprocity" when "obligations" are in the form of an agreement (possible contract) or where the contract is the result of duress? Consider the following examples ...
What if Mr. A makes Mr. B "an offer he can't refuse"? Mr. B agrees to the obligation. Is this "reciprocal" or is this an agreement under duress? Can one really say this "classic" staple of American culture - is an example "reciprocity? Is it thuggery?
A second example ... neither Roxie nor Mamma Morton is behaving in a spirit of kindness/generosity. What is called "reciprocity" is about avoiding sanction (which is why all governments entered into #FATCA IGAs).
IRC 1471 imposes sanctions. Reciprocity?
#RBT countries understand "saving clause" to protect the internal tax base. Bc of @citizenshiptax + #FATCA US uses "saving clause" to BOTH PROTECT internal tax base + EXPAND tax base by claiming people with @taxresidency in other countries as US taxpayers. taxconnections.com/taxblog/croati…
Both OECD + UN Treaties include a "saving clause" which "saves" right of a country to tax its "residents". All countries (including the US) make "residency" a sufficient condition for @taxresidency. Only the US has @citizenshiptax. Hence, "saving clause" speaks only of residents.
The evolution of the "saving clause" found in US Tax Treaties is VERY (really) interesting. Watch how they become tighter over time. Here is paragraph 3 of Article 4 of the 1973 US Romania Tax Treaty. It applies to (1) "residents" (as defined by treaty) and (2) "citizens".
Appears a delay in processing US tax forms is making it difficult for Canadian residents to comply with their Canadian tax obligations. Nobody told them about the perils of the cross border tax world when one lives in Canada and is paid for working in US. cbc.ca/news/canada/wi…
Article XV says that the salary earned by the Canadian resident nurses who work in the USA "may" be taxed by the USA. Article XXIV par 3 says that the income is "sourced" to the USA which gives the USA the first right of taxation ... canada.ca/en/department-…
To clarify it is US citizens with @taxresidency in another country that are subject to #doubletaxation. Think pilots, cruise ship employees and #Americansabroad who work on the plane. See this podcast with Jim Gosart of @RepOverseas where we discuss.
.@NYTimes author @AmandaTaub discusses Brittney Griner trade for Victor Bout. The following excerpt suggests Russia may not see the trade as "an arms dealer for a minor drug offender". Russia may see the trade as securing the return of a person victimized by unfair US process.