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

call us toll free: 888-8TAXAID

Blog

U.S./U.K. Treaty Does Not Override Code Requirements for Tax-Deferred Rollover

Office of Chief Counsel
Internal Revenue Service


Memorandum


Number: AM2008-009
Release Date: 8/29/2008


CC:INTL:B01:QPHuynh
PRENO-136253-08
UILC: 9114.03-42


date

: August 21, 2008

to

: Michael Julianelle

Director, Employee Plans
(Tax Exempt and Governmental Entities)


from

: Associate Chief Counsel (International)

subject

: UK Pension Rollovers

This memorandum addresses the possible application of Article 18 (Pension Schemes)
of the U.S.-U.K. income tax treaty to a rollover distribution from a U.K. pension scheme
to a U.S. retirement plan. This document may not be used or cited as precedent.
ISSUE
Whether an individual who is a resident of the United States may rely on the
parenthetical language in Article 18(1) of the U.S.-U.K. income tax treaty

1 (the “Treaty”)

to make a tax-deferred rollover distribution from a U.K. pension scheme to a U.S.
retirement plan in circumstances where the distribution would not qualify as an “eligible
rollover distribution” within the meaning of section 402(c)(4).

2

CONCLUSION
No. Nothing in Article 18(1) of the Treaty overrides the requirement that the distribution
must qualify as an “eligible rollover distribution” within the meaning of section 402(c)(4).
FACTS


1

Convention Between the Government of the United States of America and the Government of the United

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention
of Fiscal Evasion with Respect to Taxes on Income and Capital Gains, signed on July 24, 2001, as
amended by a Protocol signed on July 19, 2002.


2 All references to “section” are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended.

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Jail & Big Fines for Undeclared Swiss Accounts!

Two former clients of UBS AG were sentenced on Monday to a year and a day in prison, matching what records show as the longest prison term ordered so far in a sprawling investigation of offshore tax avoidance involving the Swiss banking giant.

Sean and Nadia Roberts of Tehachapi, California, were also ordered to pay $3.2 million in restitution and fines, the U.S. Justice Department said. He is 77 years old and she is 64.
The couple pleaded guilty in 2011 to filing a false income tax return. From 2004 to 2008, they failed to report interest income from millions held in offshore accounts, falsely deducted bank transfers and under-reported income, prosecutors said.

One other former UBS client, Richard Werdiger, has received a prison term that long, according to an Internal Revenue Service-maintained list of UBS cases. Other clients have received a combination of probation, home confinement and fines.

The Robertses had requested probation, and their lawyer Nina Marino on Monday called the prison sentence "a travesty of justice" because of their age, restitution and other factors.

The sentence is likely to discourage restitution in future cases and reflects the Justice Department's "rigid and barbaric approach to these matters," Marino said.

Prosecutors asked the court to impose a two-year prison sentence because, according to court papers, the couple took steps to keep their offshore holdings secret after the investigation into UBS became publicly known.

The tax returns in question covered both individual income and the couple's income from two corporations they ran, a pilot-testing school and an aircraft-maintenance company.

If you have a Swiss Bank Account, 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).

For more information on this story go to Reuters

Read more at: Tax Times blog

IRS Continues Extreme Pressure on Swiss Banks for More Information

The US government is piling further pressure on Credit Suisse for the release of more information on its clients.

Switzerland's Finance Minister Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf says the US is 'constantly making new demands that we cannot accept', thus delaying resolution of their dispute over the prosecution of 11 Swiss banks.

If you have a Credit Suisse or other Swiss Bank Account , 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). 

For more information on this story go to Reuters

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Trouble for Offshore Bank Account Owners at Liechtensteinische Landesbank AG (LLB)

According to a spokesman for LLB quoted in the article, changes in Lichtenstein law allow the IRS to make group requests without providing the names of the specific individuals that the IRS is seeking. The spokesman also stated that in the Liechtenstein group request, U.S. authorities are also targeting lawyers, accountants, financial advisers, asset managers and those responsible for professional asset protection, who "conspired "with U.S. taxpayers to commit tax evasion, or other crimes. Apparently the IRS may be seeking information all the way back to 2001.

Liechtensteinische Landesbank AG (LLB) is Lichtenstein's second largest bank. Tax problems for offshore bank account holders in Lichtenstein date back to 2008 when information stolen from LGT Group was used by German authorities to prosecute tax fraud.

The fallout extended to U.S. depositors at LGT who were investigated by the IRS. Since then the IRS has promoted several voluntary disclosure initiatives to attempt to convince U.S. persons who failed to file FBARs to settle up with the IRS. To date those programs have resulted in over 30,000 individuals making voluntary disclosures of the offshore bank accounts to the IRS. These programs have been accused by some tax lawyers as being too much stick, and not enough carrot.

U.S. owners of these offshore accounts have difficult choices to make in a short period of time. Should they enter the IRS' Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Program (OVDP), before it's not too late? Should they appeal the turnover of information by LLB through the Lichtenstein court system? Should they wait and do nothing?

Each of these solutions has its own set of risks and rewards. Entering the OVDP will be expensive. Penalties of 27.5% of the offshore account balances can be expected. In addition, other non-financial assets may also be subject to the 27.5% penalty. In addition, back taxes must be paid, generally going back to 2004. On top of that expect additional penalties, and interest.

On the other hand not entering the OVDP can lead to FBAR penalties equaling 300% of the foreign bank account balances, as well as possible criminal tax evasion charges. The bottom line is that everyone's situation is different, and only consultation with a tax lawyer experienced in these offshore issues will begin to help in coming to the right personal decision.

If you have undisclosed Offshore Financial Accounts, contact the 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).

Read more at: Tax Times blog

Live Help