Fluent in English, Spanish & Italian | 888-882-9243

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: August 2012

Reliance on Accountant May Provide Reasonable Basis to Avoid Penalty for Failure to File Foreign Trust Form

 

A district court has denied IRS's motion for summary judgment in a case dealing with the Code Sec. 6677 penalty for failure to file Form 3520, Annual Return To Report Transactions With Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts. The court concluded that there was a genuine issue of material fact about whether the taxpayer's accountant provided him with advice on which he reasonably relied in not filing the form.
 


If you have been unjustifiably Assessed a Tax Penenalty, contact the Tax Lawyers at Marini & Associates, P.A. for a FREE Tax Consultation at www.TaxAid.us or www.TaxLaw.ms or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).


________________________________



United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division.

Brian Chivas JAMES, Plaintiff,

v.

UNITED STATES of America, Defendant.

No. 8:11–cv–271–T–30AEP.

Aug. 14, 2012.

Dwaune L. Dupree, Kendall C. Jones, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, LLP, Washington, DC, Patricia A. Gorham, Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, LLP, Atlanta, GA, for Plaintiff.

Michael W. May, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant.

ORDER

JAMES S. MOODY, JR., District Judge.

Background

Plaintiff Brian Chivas James is a Sarasota physician specializing in pain management. In 2001, looking to protect his assets from potential malpractice claims, James proceeded to create an irrevocable foreign trust in Nevis, West Indies, with First Fidelity Trust Limited (FFT) as its trustee. James initially funded the trust in 2001 with a contribution of $192,000. He made additional contributions of $805,000 in 2002 and $607,146 in 2003.

Under 26 U.S.C. sec. 6048, the trust was required to file Form 3520–A, Annual Information Return of Foreign Trust with a U.S. Owner, which the trust timely filed for all relevant years. In addition, as owner of the trust, James was required to file IRS Form 3520, Annual Return to Report Transactions with Foreign Trusts and Receipt of Certain Foreign Gifts. James failed to file the required Form 3520 for the years 2001, 2002, and 2003.

James argues that his failure to file Form 3520 is the fault of his former accountant, George Famiglio. Famiglio had prepared James's personal and business taxes for a number of years, and James relied on Famiglio to properly oversee and advise him about the tax requirements of the foreign trust. According to James, he or his agent timely provided Famiglio with all appropriate trust documents and information, for each year in question, yet Famiglio failed to timely file Form 3520, and/or advise James that it should be filed. James further contends that he was personally unaware of the requirement to file Form 3520.

James argues that he acted prudently and with sound business judgment in engaging Famiglio to handle all issues related to the foreign trust, and that his accountant simply dropped the ball. Although James does not remember the details of most conversations he had with Famiglio, or any specific advice he received, he recalls that they "talked a pretty good bit" about the trust, and he believed at the time that "[Famiglio] had filed all the-everything required with the IRS." In short, James argues that he had "reasonable cause" in failing to file Form 3520 by reasonably relying on Famiglio.

The Government contends that James lacks reasonable cause. Noting that James was put on notice of the requirement to file Form 3520, the Government argues that his reliance on Famiglio cannot constitute reasonable cause. In 2006, the Government assessed penalties of $67,200, $281,750, and $230,000, for failure to file Form 3520 in years 2001, 2002, and 2003, respectively. James now sues for a refund of tax penalties, arguing that his failure to file Form 3520 was due to reasonable cause and not willful neglect.
The district court said it was clear that a taxpayer may reasonably rely on an expert's advice that no return is required; thus, if an expert erroneously advises him that no return is required, or erroneously advises him that it can be filed beyond the due date, reasonable cause may be found. The court pointed to these factors in deciding that there was a genuine issue of material fact about whether Famiglio provided Dr. James with advice upon which the latter reasonably relied:

  • Dr. James timely provided all required trust forms to Famiglio and relied on Famiglio to advise him on all matters related to the trust;
  • Famiglio advised him on at least some trust matters (for example, he advised on how to report loans from the trust for tax purposes and that the trust loans did not result in taxable income);
  • Dr. James relied on Famiglio to advise him about making the appropriate filings for the trust, but Famiglio failed to so advise him; and
  • Dr. James, based on his conversations with Famiglio, believed that he had filed all required forms.

In addition, the court pointed out that Famiglio prepared James's personal tax returns. On Schedule B of his Form 1040 tax returns, Famiglio answered “no” to the question asking whether the taxpayer received a distribution from, or was the grantor of or transferor to, a foreign trust. The court said that answering “no” to this question could be construed as Famiglio providing advice that Dr. James need not file Form 3520, advice upon which James could have potentially reasonably relied.

As a result, the court denied IRS's motion for summary judgment.
 
 James v.U.S., 2012 WL 3522610 (M.D.Fla., Slip Copy, Aug. 14, 2012).

Read more at: Tax Times blog

US Decrypts Swiss Bank Data – Swiss Privacy Regulator Orders Banks to Stop Information Transfer to the US – Swiss Reaction to US Detention of Banker’s Children


Earlier this month, a Swiss bank employee's two children were detained on arrival in the US on a visit to their grandparents, and questioned for several hours about their father's whereabouts. The incident has prompted Switzerland's data protection watchdog to forbid banks to pass any more employee information to the American authorities.

Hanspeter Thür has written to several banks to determine what data has already been transferred to the US Department of Justice and how they justified including telephone numbers and written correspondence.

“We have informed them that we are opening an analysis to verify the legality of the data transmitted to the US,” Thür told the Tages Anzeiger on Wednesday. “Until we have the results, we have demanded that no further bank employee data be sent to the US.”

In April, the Swiss government authorized some banks to transfer records after the US threatened to open criminal proceedings against them.

The data was supposed to be encoded to protect the identity of individuals, but it has since come to light that key information has been pieced together to reveal the names of client advisors and other bank employees.

Dozens of bank workers have sought legal advice, resulting in test cases being launched against the banks involved, the government and the Financial Market Supervisory Authority.

The Swiss Federal Prosecutor’s Office announced on Monday it had dismissed one case, saying there was nothing to indicate any laws had been broken.

Defending the government's April decision to allow the data transfer, Finance Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf told the Tribune de Genève newspaper it was the only way to avoid "destroying workplaces".

If you have Criminal Exposure as a Swiss Bank Employee, contact the Lawyers at Marini & Associates, P.A. for a FREE Consultation at www.TaxAid.usor www.TaxLaw.msor Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).

Call US before Uncle Sam finds you!
 

Sources
 
 

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Bond in lieu of Notice of Federal Tax Lien

Office of Chief Counsel

Internal Revenue Service




memorandum



Number:


Release Date: 8/3/2012

CC:PA:04 :DSkinner

GL-105093-12

UILC: 7101.00-00


date

: April 13, 2012


to

: Michael R. Fiore


Associate Area Counsel (Boston, Group 2)

(Small Business/Self-Employed)


from

: Mitchel S. Hyman


Senior Technician Reviewer, Branch 3

(Procedure & Administration)


subject

: Bond in lieu of Notice of Federal Tax Lien


This Chief Counsel Advice responds to your request for assistance. This advice may

not be used or cited as precedent.

ISSUES

Whether it is appropriate for the Service to accept a collateral agreement and bond in

lieu of the Service’s filing a Notice of Federal Tax Lien (NFTL)?

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Credit Suisse & Wegelin Client Pleads Guilty to FBAR Violation.

An 83-year-old Massachusetts man who held Swiss bank accounts at Credit Suisse Group AG (CSGN) and Wegelin & Co. pleaded guilty to hiding $5.7 million from U.S. tax authorities.

Jacques Wajsfelner admitted in federal court in Manhattan that he failed to file Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Reports. He will pay civil penalties of $2.84 million and restitution of $419,940 and under advisory guidelines, he faces 30 months to 37 months in prison at sentencing on Dec. 20.

Wajsfelner’s former Swiss adviser, Beda Singenberger, was indicted last year on a charge of conspiring to help more than 60 U.S. taxpayers hide $184 million from the Internal Revenue Service in offshore accounts.

Wajsfelner admitted that he held an account in his own name at Credit Suisse in 1995, and Singenberger helped him open one there in 2006 in the name of Ample Lion Ltd. At the end of 2007 the account held almost $5.7 million, court records show.
 

If you have have Unreported Income From a Foreign Bank, contact the Tax Lawyers at Marini & Associates, P.A. for a FREE Tax and/or Criminal Consultation at www.TaxAid.usor www.TaxLaw.msor Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243).

 

Sources:

Business Week

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help