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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Monthly Archives: August 2013

An IRS Debt May Cost You Your US passport in the Future!

irs revoke passport

Anthony Parent posted that tacked into a  highway bill that has recently passed the U.S. Senate has a provision that would allow the State Department to deny passports to US taxpayers who owe delinquent tax debts to the IRS.
 
If you owe more than $50,000 to the IRS, and if this Bill is signed into law by the president, you could be denied your right to leave the United States. 

Who can be denied a passport for delinquent IRS tax debts?

The Bill, if signed into law, would have dire consequences for those with big unpaid and unresolved tax bills. The law would apply to those who (1) owe more than $50,000 to the IRS, and in addition, have been issued a (2) notice of federal tax lien, or a final notice of intent to levy. Those with smaller tax debts, and those tax debt proposed by an IRS audit and not finalized are not affected.

Does this mean if you owe money to the IRS, you can’t get a passport? Or your passport will be revoked?

No. First of all this bill is not law yet. Second, even if it become law, the bill clearly states that if you are in a repayment plan, or installment agreement with the IRS, your passport will not be denied.  The same is true even if you settle your back taxes with an Offer in Compromise, you can still get a passport.
If your case is still pending with IRS appeals with a Collection Due Process hearing, and there is no final determination letter, you can still get your Passport renewed.

Also there are exceptions for those attempting to return to the US and those who wish to leave the US for family emergencies. It is unclear who will be in charge of who will be determining what a family emergency is.


But what about those in Currently Non-Collectible status?

There it is a little tricky. Currently Non-Collectible status is when the IRS agrees the taxpayer is in a hardship and agrees not demand any money, aside from holding on to tax refunds (there is an additional requirement is that a taxpayer not run up any new tax debts).  But believe it or not, there is actually no statute that authorizes Currently Non-Collectible or “hardship” status.

Known as Code 530 to IRS insiders, “CNC status” is authorized by IRS policy statement 5-71 as referenced in the Internal Revenue Manual 5.16.1.1.  This bill makes no reference to those in CNC.

Probably not lose your passport for FBAR penalties?

FBAR penalties are penalties the IRS imposing for failure to properly report foreign bank accounts. So can you lose you passport for unpaid FBAR penalties? Probably not.

First, the bill is written rather vaguely. It says a “tax.” Well, FBAR penalties aren’t really a tax and this is why it makes a difference. The basis for the imposition of taxes comes from Title 26 of the US tax code. The basis for the implementation of FBAR penalties comes from Title 31, and in particular the Bank Secrecy Act.  This bill seeks to amend would amend Title 26, and not Title 31. So liabilities from Title 31 would, arguable, be exempt.

Further supporting the argument that this would not apply to outstanding FBAR penalties is the fact that the administrative remedies available to past due tax obligations are not available to FBAR penalty assessments.

Conclusion

This Bill will not impact most people who owe money to the IRS but have come up with a solution to pay or settle back taxes. But rather, only those who have not addressed their tax debts are subject to having their passports revoked.  And as far as can be determined, will not impact those who have unpaid FBAR penalties. The text of the relevant section of the Bill is here

 
Want To Keep Your Passport...Get Right With the IRS!
Contact the Tax Lawyers

at Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243)

 

Source:

Anthony Parent


Read more at: Tax Times blog

Swiss-US Tax Treaty – Think You Need to Declare Your Swiss Bank Account NOW?

There have been new developments in the resolution of the ongoing tax dispute between Switzerland and the US: the Swiss government confirmed it will set out parameters for the cooperation of Swiss banks with the US within the existing legal framework and the Swiss Supreme Court, for the first time, considered a group request made by the IRS under the existing Swiss-US double-taxation treaty.

The authorisation will in particular cover the provision by the banks to the DOJ of information regarding employees, third-party service providers and what has been referred to as ‘leaver lists’.

The ‘leaver lists’ would concern non-personalised data in connection with the closure of accounts and the associated transfer of funds to other banks in Switzerland or abroad.
Undeclared Income from a Swiss Bank Account?

 
Contact the Tax Lawyers
at Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888 882-9243 FREE  end_of_the_skype_highlighting).


Source:

STEP

 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Rockefeller Intoduces Bill Targeting Cruise Lines

 

Feature Image: Capitol 1On Aug 01 2013, John D. (Jay) Rockefeller IV  introduced legislation to close a tax loophole, currently exploited by the cruise industry, that has given cruise lines the ability to avoid paying U.S. income tax.
 
For the past seven years, Carnival and Royal Caribbean – which represent 71 percent of the global cruise industry – paid an effective worldwide tax rate of just 1.3 percent on more than $17 billion in profits. Because this figure includes foreign taxes, the cruise industry’s effective U.S. tax rate is actually much lower than 1.3 percent.
 
Rockefeller’s legislation would eliminate this outrageous exemption by requiring cruise lines to pay their fair share of taxes and support the federal resources on which they heavily rely.
 
 Need Help Understanding the Shipping Exemption?
 
 Contact the Tax Lawyers

at Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888 882-9243 FREE  end_of_the_skype_highlighting).
 
 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Joint Filing Does Not Automatically Make a NRA Spouse a RA!

The Chief Counsel's Office release on 6/21/13, CCA 201325013 which addresses whether a nonresident alien who filed, possibly in error, Forms 1040 income tax returns jointly with his wife, who is a U.S. citizen, is now subject to the §6677 penalty for the failure to file information returns required under §6048 with respect to certain foreign trusts as a result of §6013(g).
 
The Chief Counsel's Office advised that if the nonresident alien did not make a proper election under §6013(g) to be treated as a resident alien for certain tax purposes, then the answer is no, and he is not subject to the §6677 penalty for the failure to file information returns required under §6048.
 
______________________________________________
From: -------------------------
Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2013 8:43 AM
To: ----------------------
Cc: ------------------------
Subject: Question Concerning the Interaction Between Sections 6013(g) and 6677--------------------------
--------
You asked for our opinion on whether a nonresident alien who filed a joint income tax return becomes subject to the section 6048 reporting requirements and section 6677(a) penalties as a result of section 6013(g). We specifically address the situation in which the nonresident alien and his spouse did not make a proper election under section 6013(g).
 
Section 6013(g) allows a nonresident alien individual who is married to a citizen or resident of the United States to elect to be treated as a resident of the United States for purposes of chapter 1 and 24 of the Internal Revenue Code. Sec. 6013(g)(1) and (2). The regulations require the nonresident alien and his spouse to make the election by attaching a statement to a joint return for the first taxable year for which the election is to be in effect. Treas. Reg. §1.6013-6(a)(4)(i). The statement must contain a declaration that the election is being made and that the requirements of Treas. Reg. §1.6013-6(a)(1) are met for the taxable year, it must contain the name, address, and TIN of each spouse, and it must be signed by both persons making the election. Treas. Reg. §1.6013-6(a)(4)(ii). Failure to make such an election renders section 6013(g) inoperative. See Kravetz v. Commissioner, T.C. Memo. 1985-486.

Because the nonresident alien and his spouse did not make a proper election, section 6013(g) is

inoperative and does not affect the taxpayer’s status as a nonresident alien for purposes of chapters 1 and 24 of the Internal Revenue Code. Although section 6048 is under jurisdiction, it is our understanding that a nonresident alien is not subject to section 6048 reporting requirements. See Treas. Reg. §§ 16.3-1, 404.6048-1.  
Please note that our answer may potentially be different if a proper section 6013(g) election was made or if the nonresident alien has since become a United States person. ______________________________________________
 
Have a US Taxpayer Spouse?  
 
Been Filing Jointly?
Wish That You Did Not? 
Contact the Tax Lawyers
at Marini & Associates, P.A.
 
for a FREE Tax Consultation
or Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888 882-9243 begin_of_the_skype_highlighting 888 882-9243 FREE  end_of_the_skype_highlighting).

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help