Americans: Major Fbar News, E-Filing Now Possible And Set To Become Required In 2013

[tutsiwarrior]

a lot of this FBAR BS has to do with the US successfully browbeating and intimidating foreign banks and forcing them to reveal the details of US citizens' accounts ('it's our way or the highway and if you don't play ball according to our rules then you can forget doing business in the US) and now many non-US banks don't want to do business with US expats because of the associated hassles...in large part we're just little folks but have been criminalised by the US Treasury Dept...time to stand up and collectively give them the finger...

[Sateev]

If we interpret the requirement as having to report the aggregate of the highest balances of each account for the year, a la JingThing, then the act of changing banks, i.e., closing an account with, say Bangkok Bank, and moving the funds into Kasikorn, with a balance of $5000, would trigger the requirement to file. While I don't put it past the US Government to have such a stupid rule, the language seems clear enough for a reasonable person to have a strong defense against any action for interpreting it as the highest aggregate balance on any given day.

I feel like I can pretty much pinpoint the day when the US Government and its citizens became adversaries: the day George Bush announced the formation of the Department of Homeland Security, a name which immediately brings imagery such as "The Fatherland" to mind. A pox upon Bush, and his minions.

This adversarial relationship between the government and its citizens, manifest in so many ways, is going to be the undoing of what was once the greatest country on earth.

[meand]

^Thoreau's modern day Civil Disobedience on a mass scale. He went to jail, easier to get on a plane nowadays. You simply can't compel citizens to pay for things which disgust them.

[MrRealDeal]

The confusion on this matter is that ...... If you had 9999 in one account and then transfered it to another account you would NOT need to file , the confusion is in the defenition of agregate ..... it's the agregate AT THE SAME TIME , not the agregate over different banks on different days when one is closed and another opened. Because in that situation the agregate value never excedded 10,000 dollars.

However Jing you are not correct , you only need to file if and WHEN the value is over 10K ..... you are not required to report things prior to when you were not required to report as they are irelevant , however AFTER you have met the requirement you are required to report ALL accounts that made that happen , you need to report the maximum of said accounts during the year however if you maximum dropped and you closed an account it would not need to be reported because it's not one "you have an intrest in" because it's closed ..... UNLESS it was one of the accounts that made the requirement at any time during the year............ It's fairly unusual for that to happen but it's certianly possible. You were required , then you spent your money , opened a new account and closed it .... that account is not needed to be reported , because it is not part of the requirement and does not make a new requirment. You need to report the maximum value anything other than that is not relevant to the reporting , prior or afterwards. Although obviously most accounts would be held both prior and afterwards in most situations and would by hapenstance be reported.

This as well as all the other new complaints people have are really very old , yes the us requires citizens to pay tax no matter where they live nothiing new , what is new is they are trying to enfoce it thats all.

It's a simple form that takes about 3 min to finish, get over it people. And has NOTHING to do with paying anything extra beyond what you already should be paying , ie: intrest over 5 dollars on bank accounts

[MrRealDeal]

The reason people don't understand the language is thet they don't understand that the wording of "at any time", at any time does in fact mean at any single time not the addition of things "at all times" , and aslo means under law that if "at no time" you had over 10K you do not need to file. Case law makes this concept very clear and is why it doesn't say it specificly because lawyers know this already.

I dont mean to point fun but it's that same as saying you will be fined for going over 55 mph "at any time", and then have a cop write a ticket saying since you were going 55 over two miles, he can write a ticket for 110 mph over a two mile stretch.

Edited June 9, 2012 by MrRealDeal

[vagabond48]

This will be my 1st time to file so this is great news for me and those of us who are forced to file.

Thanks JT!

[parallaxtech]

Has anyone ever received a letter from this agency or know of anyone who has ever heard from this US Treasury office that handles the FBAR? I suppose if they have a question it passes overr to the IRS to decide on an audit.

[MrRealDeal]

The treasury dept does it's own investegating , if you are found to be in non compliance you probabbly also didnt pay the irs and THEN they would send it to them , however if say you put 15,000 in a bank on Dec 31 you would not owe the irs and they would obviously not send the matter to them.

The reporting question and the , do you owe the irs question is decided by the Treasury ...... which in case you never noticed is who you make your IRS check out to if you owe.

The IRS is the Judge Jury and executioner , the Treasury is the cop

Edited June 9, 2012 by MrRealDeal

[MrRealDeal]

BTW your assertion that one would be REQUIRED to E file .... is a misreading of what you posted in the link,....... UNLESS they stop providing forms to paper file

[Jingthing]

OK, I have done some more "research" on the "internets" and these are my current positions:

1. CHANGE OF OPINION: While I found no place talking about this issue EXPLICITLY, I have now CHANGED my position and agree that to determine if you need to file, you do if the total aggregate is over 10K USD at any time, and you don't, if not. In other words, to determine if you need to file you do not (as I previously concluded) need to add the highest annual balance of all your accounts at any time in the year. I still haven't found a definitive link actually saying that, but I think it is a fair conclusion. Sorry if I opened a can of worms on that one.

2. On the point about reporting if you are required to file, I have no doubt whatsoever, that you are required to report the highest balance in each and every foreign account. For example, if one account was $1000 dollars for six months, and then for three days was $35000 and then for the rest of year it was $500, the figure you enter on the form needs to be $35000. No doubt about this whatsoever. And yes depending on your history of bank transfers, etc. it most certainly can appear that you have more in your foreign accounts than you actually do. This can become an issue if you become subject to penalties when they are based on the amounts reported in your accounts.

3. Read the OP. I never said there was a requirement NOW to e-file. I EXPLICITLY said you have the choice of mailing or e-filing. There had been a push to move the requirement to e-file earlier which would have included now, but it didn't happen. Apparently, the requirement to e-file with mailing no longer being an option is set to go into effect later. Stay tuned for that when we know for certain if this actually goes into effect. Again, not now. (Any requirement to file, e-file or mail, only applies if you are required to file at all, of course. Also note if you spill very hot coffee, you may experience burns .)

Edited June 9, 2012 by Jingthing

[SurfRider]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

.

[Sateev]

This as well as all the other new complaints people have are really very old , yes the us requires citizens to pay tax no matter where they live nothiing new , what is new is they are trying to enfoce it thats all.

It's a simple form that takes about 3 min to finish, get over it people. And has NOTHING to do with paying anything extra beyond what you already should be paying , ie: intrest over 5 dollars on bank accounts

Actually, it has nothing to do with taxes. The FBAR is required in order to uncover potential sources of terrorist funding and/or money laundering. It is separate and distinct from the need to report interest income on money in foreign banks. You may thank the Department of Homeland Security ultimately for this strident intrusion into your financial affairs. As citizens, we have become guilty until/unless we can prove innocence.

This is yet another example of how Messrs Atta, et al, actually won the game of terrorism, and the US lost. We are no longer a free society. Pathetic.

[Sateev]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

.

The problem with your scenario is that, increasingly, the abuse of the income affidavit is leading toward increased scrutiny by Thai authorities. They are fully aware that the paper is only as good as the word of the person attesting to its veracity. This doesn't even address the fact that you are committing perjury if you misstate your actual income.

Bad idea.

[Jingthing]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

.

Oh please! Have you considered people who don't HAVE the income for the embassy letter?

[Sateev]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

.

Oh please! Have you considered people who don't HAVE the income for the embassy letter?

He's implying that you should fudge the letter, and remove the 800K to better use. Again, not a good idea.

[Sateev]

Here's an idea: put THB799,999 in an account for a day. Claim income of THB1 per annum. Since you're using the combination method, there is no seasoning requirement for the 799,999K. Remove it and deposit it in your 5.8%(?) interest-bearing account, and get that THB47,000! Repeat each year!

[SurfRider]

.

"He's implying that you should fudge the letter, and remove the 800K to better use."

I was implying no such thing! I know many Expats who can use either method (800K deposit or Embassy letter) and they're either not aware of the letter option, or simply have always done the 800K, so they continue with that method.

If you choose to lie to your Embassy, that's your business.

.

[Sateev]

.

"He's implying that you should fudge the letter, and remove the 800K to better use."

I was implying no such thing! I know many Expats who can use either method (800K deposit or Embassy letter) and they're either not aware of the letter option, or simply have always done the 800K, so they continue with that method.

If you choose to lie to your Embassy, that's your business.

.

Your post wasn't clear, and seemed to address those with only the 800K option. Sorry if I misinterpreted it.

However, please don't try to turn it around by your last sentence: I clearly stated that lying to your Embassy is a BAD IDEA.

In the end, anyone who can avail of the income verification option, but chooses to incarcerate 800K, either through ignorance or habit, deserves what he gets. The info is abundantly available...

And I'm still not sure about what you were implying.

[SurfRider]

.

"Here's an idea: put THB799,999 in an account for a day. Claim income of THB1 per annum."

Might be a little "dicey" in actual practice-- but it does point out the absurdity of the Thai immigration requirement to prove so called "income" as opposed to net worth or ability to support yourself in a foreign country.

.

[Naam]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

invested with the Tooth Fairy who got a triple A rating from S&P?

[SurfRider]

.

"invested with the Tooth Fairy who got a triple A rating from S&P?"

Your breadth of investment knowledge obviously leaves a bit to be desired

Check out the Dividend Champions - Solid US companies that have been in business for many years and have continuously increased or maintained their dividend yield for at least 25 years (some much longer).

Top five are currently yielding 7.07% and top ten, 6.02%

.

U.S. Dividend Champions 5-31-2012.xls

[el jefe]

.

US Expats who keep 800,000 Baht wasting away in a Thai bank just to satisfy a Visa requirement should learn that it's not necessary. Simply use the Embassy income verification letter instead and send your money back to where it can be working for you.

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

.

We're totally off on a tangent, (of course; why are we even discussing FBAR requirements again when it's just a poor excuse to bash the US gov't), but several of us are looking forward to where we can get 5.875% return "at no real risk of loss".

[SunSeek01]

To do the Form TD F 90-22. (FBAR) with Adobe Reader and print it out took me about 15 minutes or less and I have 2 foreign accounts. It's a one page form unless you have more than about 10 accounts, then you go to page two. I did have the address info on the accounts from 2010 already so that saved me a bit.

All that being said, I think it's a giant waste of time and money. Government bureaucracy gone wild in my view. All Jing's comments are true I believe.

Edited June 9, 2012 by SunSeek01

[Tywais]

I did have the address info on the accounts from 2010 already so that saved me a bit.

That does probably take the most time. Just went to the Thai institution website though and sometimes have to dig around for a full mailing address.

[MrRealDeal]

On a side note the IRS is lot more people friendly than people give it credit for , Any tax form can be amended if you make a mistake , They will really try and help anyone as much as they can unless they refused to file and cliam they are a soverign nation unto themselves , they own an establsihment and not a bisness , the amendment wasn't properly ratafied , or any of the other lame excuses people try and give for REFUSING to pay.

[SurfRider]

.

"several of us are looking forward to where we can get 5.875% return "at no real risk of loss".

el jefe,

See spreadsheet attached to Post #51 above.

http://www.thaivisa....50#entry5374869

.

[JimGant]

That 800K could be earning over US$1500 annually (over 47,000 Baht) if invested properly at no real risk of loss. Keeping it in a Thai bank is the equivalent of tossing it out the window, bit by bit, over the years.

One size does not fit all.

Many of us here already have well-balanced portfolios, including some of those dividend paying stocks your reference points out. And, your "no real risk of loss" is fanciful -- I couldn't find an overall Beta for this group -- but AT&T's .44 sure doesn't indicate that it's risk free. Yes, a nice, comfortable stock to be in -- but not if your portfolio is already overweighted in stocks, particularly for those of us getting long of tooth.

Now, on the zero Beta end of my holdings, I have a CD coming due soon. If I roll it over into a new 3-year CD (USAA), I'll get the underwhelming return of 1.31%. So, why not take the equivalent of 800K baht and open a fixed account for 3 years. BB is paying 3.25% -- so it's 26000 baht per year vs. 10480 for the USAA CD. And I won't have to trek to the Embassy every year.

So, if you've got CDs in your portfolio, and they're about to mature, replacing them with a fixed account in Thailand certainly is an option, particularly if your overall portfolio's risk is already maxed out.

(Yeah, you might need to consider the 1M baht cap on bank insurance soon to take effect. In my case, I'd probably need to go outside BB, since my other accounts there would aggregate to over 1M. But not really worried about trading FDIC coverage for Thai bank insurance. And, too, maybe a little forex serendipity (or not).)

[JimGant]

Oh, I found the Beta numbers in your reference, Surf. The top five average .99 -- all 10 average .90.

no real risk of loss

Only if you believe the stock market has no risk of loss......

[SurfRider]

.

if your portfolio is already overweighted in stocks

If I roll it over into a new 3-year CD (USAA), I'll get the underwhelming return of 1.31%

if you've got CDs in your portfolio, and they're about to mature

if your overall portfolio's risk is already maxed out

if, if, if, if . . .

I was simply identifying a relatively safe method of obtaining an annual 6% to 7% return on investment income. No "ifs" involved.

People who keep 800,000 Baht in a Thai bank account are NOT getting that! . . . end of story.

Many people who invest consider historical performance to be of some worth in evaluating a portfolio:

"What makes the Dividend Champions list so valuable is in the wealth of information the list provides. Not only does it include almost everything you could possibly want to know about the Champions and their payouts, but it includes soon-to-be champions/aristocrats (20-24 year streaks) and the extent to which a company is a champion. For example, eleven companies have been on Champions for over 50 years"

Diebold Inc. (DBD) – 56 years

American States Water (AWR) – 55 years

Dover Corp. (DOV) – 54 years

Northwest Natural Gas (NWN) – 54 years

Genuine Parts Co. (GPC) – 53 years

Procter & Gamble Co. (PG) – 53 years

Emerson Electric (EMR) – 53 years

Parker-Hannifin Corp. (PH) – 52 years

3M Company (MMM) – 51 years

Integrys Energy Group (TEG) – 51 years

Vectren Corp. (VVC) – 50 years

http://www.bargainee...-champions.html

.

[Naam]

.

"invested with the Tooth Fairy who got a triple A rating from S&P?"

Your breadth of investment knowledge obviously leaves a bit to be desired

Check out the Dividend Champions - Solid US companies that have been in business for many years and have continuously increased or maintained their dividend yield for at least 25 years (some much longer).

Top five are currently yielding 7.07% and top ten, 6.02%

your breadth of yield calculation (not taking share value into consideration) leaves a lot to be desired

here's P&G's share price of the last 5 years, unfortunately not priced in USD but in €UR: