Blog

On January 9, 2023 we posted An Expatriating Taxpayer, With FBAR Penalties, May Create New Precedent For Collection Outside the US? - Don't Think So! where we discussed a Floridian who moving his assets offshore and sold himself in the wake of an $18 million penalty for failing to report foreign bank accounts, the U.S. should be allowed to seize the overseas funds, the U.S. told a Florida federal court on January 6, 2023. Isac Schwarzbaum has not paid any amount he owes, forcing the U.S. to repatriate the funds he has deposited in several Swiss banks, the U.S. said in a motion to repatriate foreign assets.

Now according to Law360, he has been ordered to transfer enough money from his overseas accounts to cover the debt, a Florida federal judge ruled, rejecting the man's arguments the court lacked authority to order the repatriation.

While Schwarzbaum had argued the court lacked authority to order the money transfer while his appeal of the judgment in the Eleventh Circuit is pending, Judge Bloom said an appeal alone does not automatically pause the enforcement of a judgment. Further, Schwarzbaum never asked the court for a stay, Judge Bloom said.

The government asked the court for the repatriation order in January, alleging Schwarzbaum "has no intention" of paying the court's judgment. Judge Bloom found that he owed over $17.9 million — including interest and late-payment penalties — for willfully failing to file foreign bank and financial account forms.

According to the government, Schwarzbaum sold his home in Florida in June 2020, less than three months after Judge Bloom concluded that he showed reckless conduct that amounted to a willful failure to file FBARs for 2007 through 2009. After "fleeing the country," Schwarzbaum has kept no assets in the U.S., yet reported to the government in 2021 that he had more than $37 million in three Swiss banks, according to the government.

Schwarzbaum argued it was improper for the court to rule on the merits of the government's motion for repatriation while his appeal was pending. Further, he claimed he couldn't repatriate assets that were never originally in the U.S. He also rejected the government's allegations that he fled the country or aimed to render himself judgment-proof, saying he "lives a highly mobile lifestyle, never living in the United States full time."

Judge Bloom said Tuesday that the court already had struck down Schwarzbaum's argument that the assets needed to have originated in the U.S. to qualify for repatriation. The court also rejected Schwarzbaum's argument that only outstanding tax liabilities are subject to repatriation.

The Question Now Is How Does The IRS
Levy On Assets Outside The US? 

or 

Against a Taxpayer Who Is No Longer AUS Resident,
Where Mr. Schwarzbaum Leaves The US?

Can't Wait To See The Answer To This One!

Do You Have Undeclared Offshore Income?

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

Read more at: Tax Times blog

According to DoJ, a former CFO of a russian natural gas company was convicted of making false statements to the IRS, failing to disclose offshore accounts and failing to file tax returns.

A federal jury found a Florida man guilty of failing to file a Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR), making a false statement to the IRS, and willfully failing to file tax returns. 

According to court documents and evidence presented at trial, from 2005 to 2015, Mark Anthony Gyetvay of Naples, Florida, concealed his ownership and control over substantial offshore assets and failed to file and pay taxes on millions of dollars of income. 

After working as a certified public accountant (CPA) in the United States and Russia, Gyetvay became the chief financial officer of Novatek, a large Russian gas company. 

Beginning in 2005, Gyetvay opened two different accounts at a bank in Switzerland to hold substantial assets, which at one point had an aggregate value of over $93,000,000. 

Over a period of several years, Gyetvay took steps to conceal his ownership and control over these funds, including removing himself from the accounts and making his then-wife, a Russian citizen, the beneficial owner of the accounts. Additionally, despite being a CPA, Gyetvay did not file his 2013 and 2014 U.S. tax returns.

Gyetvay did not file FBARs, as required, to disclose his control over the Swiss bank accounts, at times, rejecting his accountant’s recommendation to do so. 

In An Unsuccessful Attempt To Avoid Significant Financial Penalties, Gyetvay Made A False Filing With The IRS Using
The Streamlined Foreign Offshore Procedures, Available
Only To Taxpayers Whose Failure To Report Offshore
Assets And Income Is Due To Non-Willful Conduct.

He is scheduled to be sentenced on September 21, 2023, and faces a maximum penalty of 

• five (5) years in prison for failing to file an FBAR, 
• five years (5) in prison for making a false statement and 
• one  (1) year in prison for each willful failure to file a tax return. 

Read more at: Tax Times blog

According to ProcedurallyTaxing, Chief Counsel’s office issued Program Manger Technical Assistance (PMTA) 2023-001 to address the issue of a $1 claim filed in order to try to protect the statute of limitations for filing claims.  The advice concludes that the $1 or any nominal claim will not protect the taxpayer but it also distinguishes nominal claims from protective claims. 

It then goes on to state that "A late-filed claim will not be treated as an amendment or “supplement” to an original claim if it would require the investigation of new matters that would not have been disclosed by the investigation of the original claim."

Essentially, the PMTA takes the position that putting down a nominal amount does not create the type of informal claim a taxpayer can later fix.  

For more regarding exceptions to this rule go to ProcedurallyTaxing.

Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact us at:
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or Toll Free at 888 8TAXAID (888-882-9243)

Read more at: Tax Times blog

In Notice 2023-27 the Treasury Department and the IRS announced that they intend to issue guidance related to the treatment of certain NFTs as section 408(m) collectibles. 

This treatment is also relevant for other purposes of the Code, including the long-term capital gains tax rate under section 1(h). The notice also describes how the IRS intends to determine whether an NFT constitutes a section 408(m) collectible, pending the issuance of that guidance, and requests comments generally on the treatment of NFTs as a section 408(m) collectible, as well as comments on specific questions listed in the notice.

A Nonfungible Token (NFT) Is A Unique Digital
Identifier That Is Recorded Using Distributed Ledger
Technology And May Be Used To Certify Authenticity
And Ownership Of An Associated Right Or Asset.

Distributed ledger technology, such as blockchain technology, uses independent digital systems to record, share and synchronize transactions, the details of which are recorded simultaneously on multiple nodes in a network. A token is an entry of data encoded on a distributed ledger. A distributed ledger can be used to identify ownership of both NFTs and fungible tokens, such as cryptocurrency, as described in Rev. Rul. 2019-24.

Section 408(m)(2) of the tax code provides for a specific list of items that constitute collectibles for certain purposes. Acquisition of a collectible by an individual retirement account (IRA) or individually-directed account of a qualified plan is treated as a distribution from the account equal to the cost to the account of the collectible. Generally, collectibles also do not have as advantageous capital-gains tax treatment as other capital assets.

Until additional guidance is issued, the IRS intends to determine when an NFT is treated as a collectible by using a “look-through analysis.” Under the look-through analysis, an NFT is treated as a collectible if the NFT’s associated right or asset falls under the definition of collectible in the tax code. For example, a gem is a collectible under section 408(m); therefore, an NFT that certifies ownership of a gem is a collectible.

In Notice 2023-27, the Treasury Department and the IRS are requesting comments on any aspect of NFTs that might affect the treatment of an NFT as a collectible as well as certain comments specifically set out in the notice.

Have an IRS Tax Problem?

     Contact the Tax Lawyers at

for a FREE Tax HELP Contact us at:
www.TaxAid.com or www.OVDPLaw.com
or Toll Free at 888 8TAXAID (888-882-9243)

Read more at: Tax Times blog