Yearly Archives: 2019

The Internal Revenue Service in IR-2019-141 urged taxpayers to resolve their significant tax debts to avoid putting their passports in jeopardy. They should contact the IRS now to avoid delays in their travel plans later.

Under the Fixing America’s Surface Transportation (FAST) Act, the IRS notifies the State Department (State) of taxpayers certified as owing a seriously delinquent tax debt, which is currently $52,000 or more. The law then requires State to deny their passport application or renewal. If a taxpayer currently has a valid passport, State may revoke the passport or limit a taxpayer’s ability to travel outside the United States.

When the IRS certifies a taxpayer to State as owing a seriously delinquent tax debt, the taxpayer receives a Notice CP508C from the IRS. The notice explains what steps the taxpayer needs to take to resolve the debt. IRS telephone assistors can help taxpayers resolve the debt. For example, they can help taxpayers set up a payment plan or make them aware of other payment options. Taxpayers should not delay because some resolutions take longer than others.

Don’t Delay!
It’s especially important for taxpayers with imminent travel plans who have had their passport applications denied by State to call the IRS promptly. The IRS can help taxpayers resolve their tax issues and expedite reversal of their certification to State. When expedited, the IRS can generally shorten the 30 days processing time by 14 to 21 days. For expedited reversal of their certification, taxpayers will need to inform the IRS that they have travel scheduled within 45 days or that they live abroad.

For expedited treatment, taxpayers must provide the following documents to the IRS: 

• Proof of travel. This can be a flight itinerary, hotel reservation, cruise ticket, international car insurance or other document showing location and approximate date of travel or time-sensitive need for a passport.
• Copy of letter from State denying their passport application or revoking their passport. State has sole authority to issue, limit, deny or revoke a passport.

The IRS may ask State to exercise its authority to revoke a taxpayer’s passport. For example, the IRS may recommend revocation if the IRS had reversed a taxpayer’s certification because of their promise to pay, and they failed to pay. The IRS may also ask State to revoke a passport if the taxpayer could use offshore activities or interests to resolve their debt but chooses not to.

Before contacting State about revoking a taxpayer’s passport, the IRS will send Letter 6152, Notice of Intent to Request U.S. Department of State Revoke Your Passport, to the taxpayer to let them know  what the IRS intends to do and give them another opportunity to resolve their debts . Taxpayers must call the IRS within 30 days from the date of the letter. Generally, the IRS will not recommend revoking a taxpayer’s passport if the taxpayer is making a good-faith attempt to resolve their tax debts.

Ways to Resolve Tax Issues
There are several ways taxpayers can avoid having the IRS notify State of their seriously delinquent tax debt. They include the following:

• Paying the tax debt in full,
• Paying the tax debt timely under an approved installment agreement,
• Paying the tax debt timely under an accepted offer in compromise,
• Paying the tax debt timely under the terms of a settlement agreement with the Department of Justice,
• Having a pending collection due process appeal with a levy, or
• Having collection suspended because a taxpayer has made an innocent spouse election or requested innocent spouse relief. 

Relief programs for unpaid taxes
Frequently, taxpayers qualify for one of several relief programs including the following:

• Payment agreement. Taxpayers can ask for a payment plan with the IRS by filing Form 9465. Taxpayers can download this form from IRS.gov and mail it along with a tax return, bill or notice. Taxpayers who are eligible can use the Online Payment Agreement system to set up a monthly payment agreement. Using the Online Payment Agreement system is cheaper and can save time.
• Offer in compromise. Some taxpayers may qualify for an offer in compromise, an agreement between a taxpayer and the IRS that settles the tax liability for less than the full amount owed. The IRS looks at the taxpayer’s income and assets to determine the taxpayer’s ability to pay. Taxpayers can use the Offer in Compromise Pre-Qualifier tool to help them determine whether they’re eligible for an offer in compromise.

Subject to change, the IRS also will not certify a taxpayer as owing a seriously delinquent tax debt or will reverse the certification for a taxpayer:

• Who’s in bankruptcy,
• Who’s identified by the IRS as a victim of tax-related identity theft,
• Whose account the IRS has determined is currently not collectible due to hardship,
• Who’s located within a federally declared disaster area,
• Who has a request pending with the IRS for an installment agreement,
• Who has a pending offer in compromise with the IRS, or
• Who has an IRS accepted adjustment that will satisfy the debt in full.

For taxpayers serving in a combat zone who owe a seriously delinquent tax debt, the IRS postpones notifying the State Department of the delinquency and the taxpayer’s passport is not subject to denial during the time of service in a combat zone.

Once You’ve Resolved Your Tax Problem With The IRS,



The IRS Will Reverse The Certification Within 30 Days Of Resolution Of The Issue And Provide Notification To The State Department As Soon As Practicable.

Travel

  

 

 Want To Keep Your US Passport?
 

 

Contact the Tax Lawyers at 

Marini & Associates, P.A.

 

 

for a FREE Tax Consultation Contact us at:

www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com or

Toll Free at 888-8TaxAid (888)882-9243.

In United States v. Schwarzbaum (S.D. Fla. No. 18-cv-81147) a federal district court rejected an individual's claims that FBAR penalties assessed against him should be set aside because they were assessed after the limitations period expired.

Between 2006 and 2009, the taxpayer, Isac Schwarzbaum, maintained several foreign financial accounts, including accounts in Costa Rica and Switzerland. Isac did not file FBARs for his accounts in Switzerland before 2011. 

Isac then opted out of OVDI and underwent full examinations of his returns. After the examinations, the IRS decided to assert willful FBAR penalties against Isac. Those FBAR penalties (for tax years 2006-2009) were assessed in Sept. 2016.

• To the extent that Schwarzbaum argues that the penalties are time-barred, the argument lacks merit. Although Title 31 does not expressly authorize the extension of the applicable statute of limitations by agreement, it does not expressly prohibit such extensions. Schwarzbaum has failed to point to any legal authority indicating that such extensions would be improper. See Melford v. Kahane & Assocs., 371 F. Supp. 3d 1116, 1126 n.4 (S.D. Fla. 2019) (“Generally, a litigant who fails to press a point by supporting it with pertinent authority, or by showing why it is sound despite a lack of supporting authority or in the face of contrary authority, forfeits the point. The court will not do his research for him.”) (internal quotations and citation omitted).  

• Notably, Schwarzbaum does not dispute that he signed consents agreeing to extend the time during which FBAR penalties could be assessed and collected. See ECF Nos. [44-5], [44-6], [44-7].  

• Rather, in his Reply he acknowledges the lack of authority, argues that the USA relies upon three irrelevant cases in its Response, and then endeavors to distinguish them.  

• However, Schwarzbaum ignores that it is he who bears the burden of establishing the defense of statute of limitations in the first instance. See, e.g. Feldman v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, 20 F.3d 1128, 1132 (11th Cir. 1994) (“When a taxpayer raises the affirmative defense of the statute of limitations, the taxpayer bears the burden to prove that defense.”) (citation omitted).  

• Here, Schwarzbaum has failed to provide any authority to support his argument that an agreement to extend the time to assess FBAR penalties under Title 31 is invalid.

Have Undeclared Income from an Offshore Bank Account?  

According to DoJ, a former CPA Indicted for Failing to Report Foreign Bank Accounts and Filing False Documents with the IRS A federal grand jury returned a superseding indictment charging Brian Booker, a former resident of Fort Lauderdale, Florida, whose business specialized in international trade, with failing to file Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBARs) and filing false documents with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).

According to the superseding indictment, Booker, a former Certified Public Accountant, owned a cocoa trading company that was organized under the laws of the Republic of Panama. Booker allegedly operated that company from Venezuela, Panama, and his former residence in Fort Lauderdale, Florida. The superseding indictment further alleges that, for calendar years 2011 through 2013, Booker failed to disclose his interest in financial accounts located in Switzerland, Singapore, and Panama on annual Reports of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBARs) as required by law. Booker also allegedly filed false individual income tax returns for tax years 2010 through 2012 that failed to report to the IRS all of Booker’s foreign bank accounts.

Booker is also charged with filing a false “Streamlined Submission” in conjunction with the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Procedures. The IRS Streamlined procedures allowed eligible taxpayers residing within the United States, who failed to report gross income from foreign financial accounts on prior tax returns, failed to pay taxes on that gross income, or who failed to submit an FBAR disclosing foreign financial accounts, to voluntarily disclose their conduct to the IRS. The superseding indictment alleges that Booker’s Streamlined submission falsely claimed that his failure to report all income, pay all tax, and submit all required information returns, such as FBARs, was due to non-willful conduct.

If convicted, Booker faces a maximum sentence of five (5) years in prison for each count (15 years in total) relating to his failure to file an FBAR. He also faces a maximum sentence of three (3) years in prison for each of the counts related to filing false tax documents (another 9 years in total). An indictment is an accusation. A defendant is presumed innocent unless and until proven guilty.
 

The linchpin for qualification for the Streamlined Domestic Offshore Filingis that the taxpayer must certify that their failure to report the income and/or file a correct FBAR report resulted from non-willful conduct.