tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post8505837540936035944..comments2023-10-24T08:00:53.865-05:00Comments on Federal Tax Crimes: Key points of Article on ABA Webcast on Offshore Accounts (1/25/15)Jack Townsendhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14469823736335455874noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post-54946246622672417222015-02-26T18:21:03.593-06:002015-02-26T18:21:03.593-06:00I've been saying for a long time that the OVDP...I've been saying for a long time that the OVDP was a boldfaced lie, sort of like the witch with the candy house seducing the little children into her oven. It was never an amnesty program, prosecution was never off the table. You waive all of your constitutional rights, agree to things that under the law, the government has no right to go after and in exchange you get...um what do you get again? The OVDP documentation (at least the old programs before 2014) said very clearly that criminal prosecution was still on the table. So by fully cooperating you hand them the rope and they decide whether or not you're juicy enough to actually string up. Problem is, you don't know if you're juicy or not, that's for them to decide and quite frankly, the risk is far to great. We already know their threshold for "willfulness" is a low bar that basically encompasses everyone. Did you have a foreign account and check no on your tax return? Congratulations, that was enough to be willful! Case closed. <br /><br /><br />The problem with these initiatives is that they aren't about justice or the law, its about shaking people down and scaring all the little sheep. We know this because the government has never given people a true "way out", a real way to actually get into compliance and get back into the system. From the information above and other things I've read, the supposed "streamlined" version doesn't change anything. Taxpayers who for whatever reason didn't get their documentation correct, are still just as screwed as ever because the government has left them with no decent alternatives. The closest thing to a way out is probably a quiet disclosure, but in doing so the act of filing amended returns and back FBAR forms is inherently an admission of guilt that can be used in a prosecution. It's the closest you get though to coming clean without forfeiting your rights as an American.Kristin Kaileynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post-76516898839599483812015-02-26T11:40:45.306-06:002015-02-26T11:40:45.306-06:00I am not aware of any other publicly available dat...I am not aware of any other publicly available data. I am aware of one case where the IRS insisted on it as a way to get something out of a failed willful penalty. <br /><br /><br />Jack TownsendJack Townsendhttp://www.tjtaxlaw.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post-55608810518682161202015-02-26T08:01:04.589-06:002015-02-26T08:01:04.589-06:00Thanks Jack. From my reading of the streamlined pr...Thanks Jack. From my reading of the streamlined program, anyone filing under this program should also be prepared for an audit since there is no acknowledgment or closure. Is there any data yet on how the streamlined program is faring so far in terms of acceptance and/or audit requests. Similarly is there any directional data on the volume QDs being audited. Your points are perfectly valid because on the one hand this persons case seems to be very straightforward. On the other hand due to the number of accounts (6 bank accounts plus mutual funds) the penalty calculation would be harsh as well.Isacnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post-41569367485920865832015-02-26T03:26:07.018-06:002015-02-26T03:26:07.018-06:00Is there any info on how often and under what circ...Is there any info on how often and under what circumstances the IRS does apply multiple non-wilful penalties, both in terms of accounts and years? The only publicised case seems to be the offshore gambling accounts last year.gottaloveUStax1noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1519969502186924526.post-65813202672887689042015-02-25T15:10:33.009-06:002015-02-25T15:10:33.009-06:00Jack, what in your opinion, is the threshold betwe...Jack, what in your opinion, is the threshold between doing a simple quiet disclosure or going for streamlined domestic. I have a client originally from India who moved to the US in 2006 and recently became a US citizen. He sent some money to India (around 120K) in 2008/2009 and then another amount ($260K) in 2011/2012 with the intent of purchasing property but could not close the deal. He also had some previously earned savings in India This money was left in bank accounts and some was invested in Indian mutual funds. He also has a small rental income from a jointly held property in India ($3000/year) He was not aware of including this India income in his US tax returns (which he has been filing regularly) or about filing FBAR and 8938. He has been filing tax returns in India for this income. his total holding in India is around $450K. If he opts for streamlined he would have to pay the 5% penalty which for him could be considerable (around $23K). What, in your opinion, is the potential audit/penalty risk for him to pursue a quiet disclosure amending tax returns for the last 6 years and filing the delinquent FBARs.Isacnoreply@blogger.com