The Creeping Financial Lock-Up
by
Jeff Snyder
by
Jeff Snyder
Recently by Jeff Snyder: Plastic
People
J.H. Huebert
had an excellent article
last Friday about the US attempts to force the Swiss bank, UBS,
to divulge information about US account holders to the IRS. These
efforts are nothing less than an attack on Switzerland’s sovereignty
in the form of its ability to establish and maintain its own banking
laws.
This is the
kind of arcane financial news that is easy to disregard. When people
hear "Swiss bank accounts," they may brush off the attacks
as the problems of the ultra rich. If only we were so "unfortunate"
to have this kind of problem to worry about, right? Unfortunately,
however, I think we do. I believe that there is far more to this
than a temporary, one-time money grab by the IRS from tax evaders.
I believe this is also very bad news even for us "wage slaves."
The day Mr.
Huebert’s article appeared, the Justice Department announced
that the US and Switzerland had reached an agreement in principle
to settle the US lawsuit against UBS AG seeking the names of 52,000
account holders. No details of the agreement were released but,
given the amount of leverage that the US can bring to bear on UBS’s
operations in the United States, it would be astounding if UBS had
not agreed to some major accommodation to US demands.
Let’s go back
and supply a little context about how we get to this issue in the
first place.
Like most countries,
the US taxes its residents on income that they earn outside of the
US. Unlike most countries, the US also taxes its nonresident citizens
on their worldwide income. Solely by virtue of being born here,
the US claims lifelong rights to your earning stream even if you
take up permanent residency in another country. As a result, the
US is constantly seeking ways, through treaties, laws or, now we
see, international strong arm measures, to track the international
financial transactions of its citizens, whether in the name of preventing
drug trafficking, money laundering, tax evasion or other crimes.
US taxpayers
are required to report, and pay taxes, on interest or other earnings
derived from foreign accounts. Unlike US banks, which will send
you and the IRS a Form 1099 each year, foreign banks do not have
an obligation to report your earnings to the IRS. Accordingly, the
IRS is keenly interested in finding out from you whether or not
you have any such foreign accounts.
Schedule
B to Form 1040 (used for reporting interest and dividends) asks,
"At any time during (the previous year), did you have an interest
in or a signatory or other authority over a financial account in
a foreign country, such as a bank account, securities account, or
other financial account?" As described
by the law firm of Bove & Langa in an on-line article about
this matter, the answer to this question has serious potential consequences:
The question
calls for nothing more than checking a "yes" or "no"
box in response, but most taxpayers (and many tax preparers) just
ignore it. The yes box or the no box, that’s it. There are no
boxes that say, "maybe" or "I don’t understand
the question," or "I decline to answer on the grounds
that an answer may incriminate me." Maybe there should be
such choices, since there are many who do not fully understand
the serious implications of ignoring the question when such an
account exists, or worse, of intentionally providing an incorrect
answer, which, surprisingly, may include no answer at all. That
is to say, intentionally leaving both boxes blank could be deemed
a false answer by the IRS or a court."
In addition
to this reporting obligation on Form 1040, a U.S. citizen, resident
alien and even certain persons who are not resident but are doing
business in the US with no other connection are also required, by
the Bank Secrecy Act, to report the existence of a foreign account
to the IRS on Treasury Department Form 90-22.1
if the combined total value of all such accounts exceeds $10,000
at any time during the year. The definition of the type of accounts
that must be reported is very broad and includes even prepaid credit
card and debit card accounts. The report must be filed even if the
accounts generate no interest or other taxable income. As described
by Bove & Langa, the penalties for a willful failure are quite
severe:
"[t]he
civil penalties for failing to report the account on the prescribed
form . . . can range from up to $10,000 for a "non-willful"
failure, and for a willful failure the greater of $100,000
or half the balance in the foreign account. [emphasis supplied.]
If criminal activities are involved, the monetary penalties
are increased and may be accompanied by possible imprisonment
for up to ten years.[footnote omitted] . . . [F]ailure to maintain
adequate records of the foreign account may result in additional
civil and criminal penalties. The IRS states that records should
be kept for five years."
As Mr. Huebert
pointed out, while the IRS is seeking information about approximately
some $20 billion in UBS accounts, because of the possibility that
most people with these accounts may have been accurately reporting
all earnings and paying all applicable income taxes on those earnings,
it is possible that the IRS will not obtain all that much money,
especially when judged against the current federal deficit. However,
since the intentional failure to report an account can result in
loss of one-half of the entire account, the IRS does indeed have
a very strong financial motivation to obtain the UBS information,
because even a relatively small number of noncompliant taxpayers
with very large foreign accounts could generate sizable revenues.
The threat of this penalty alone will give the IRS considerable
leverage for nonreporting taxpayers to settle somewhere between
the penalties for unintentional and intentional failure, likely
resulting in considerable tax revenues from persons who honestly
didn’t know they were violating the law.
More importantly,
the IRS’s highly visible targeting of the "establishment"
Swiss banking system will likely garner much greater future compliance
with these reporting obligations, so that the IRS and US government
will likely obtain detailed information about many more foreign
accounts from people who have either intentionally hidden these
accounts or who just want to "play it safe." In this regard,
please note that TDF-90-22.1 requires the reporting individual to
provide the account number of the account itself, as well as the
names of the account holders and name and address of the financial
institution, thus providing all the information necessary to enable
the governmental to file tax liens, seek the freezing of accounts
or other enforcement actions available to it under tax treaties
or applicable foreign laws.
Still, it is
very likely that these consequences will fall predominantly upon
very high-income taxpayers. Unfortunately, the US strong arm tactics
to compel foreign banks to disclose US account holders’ information
are having an additional, and more disturbing effect on a far greater
number of people, and one that is quite possibly also intended by
our lords and masters. And that is this: to make it extremely difficult
for Americans to have accounts abroad, and therefore to prevent
both the safeguarding of wealth outside the United States and living
outside of the United States.
According to
this Forbes
article, Americans are fast becoming pariahs of foreign banks. Because
of US demands and pressures, foreign banks in countries around the
world are deciding to close Americans' accounts, or are not permitting
Americans to open new ones. In some cases, the banks are not terminating
or rejecting new applications for just securities or investment
accounts, but also current accounts, i.e., the standard checking
accounts people use for their living expenses. In other words, the
US is making it more difficult for you to live in another country,
by creating international difficulties that, in the end, will seriously
obstruct your ability to conduct everyday financial transactions
in a foreign country. By creating high costs for foreign banks to
permit US citizens to open and maintain even checking and savings
accounts in foreign countries, US citizens will be unable to have
the normal banking services they need to live in a foreign country,
and will not be able to do things like pay rent, utilities, travel
on public transportation and buy groceries.
Possibly the
most unequivocal sign that distinguishes a totalitarian system from
a relatively free society is the simple right to leave. In totalitarian
societies, the "iron curtain" falls, and "citizens"
are not free to leave. The people and their assets are effectively
property of the state. They, and everything they produce, are "human
resources" that belong to the government. The "citizens"
are more accurately described as prisoners confined within their
national borders.
The US government’s
attacks on foreign financial institutions are one more means by
which the US is slowly establishing controls that will prevent the
populace from escaping their indentured servant status here, or
just escaping, period. One of the effects of these attacks will
be, to some extent, to lock American assets into American banks
and keep funds here, onshore, where they are readily controllable,
seizable and debasable. These attacks are a way of closing the borders,
are the makings of a banking "Berlin Wall."
Slowly and
methodically, we are being locked in.
August
11, 2009
Jeff
Snyder [send
him mail]
is an attorney who works in Manhattan. He is the author of
Nation
of Cowards – Essays on the Ethics of Gun Control, which examines
the American character as revealed by the gun control debate. He
occasionally blogs at The
Shining Wire. Read
this interview with him.
Copyright
© 2009 by LewRockwell.com. Permission to reprint in whole or in
part is gladly granted, provided full credit is given.
The
Best of Jeff Snyder
|