Have you received a notice from your Thai bank? Americans.

[watcharacters]

We heard a motorcycle drive up in front of the house two days ago and the doorbell rung. The Missus jumped up and I asked if she expected a package. She said yes. She occasionally orders things online for delivery.

Surprise surprise it was for me.

Kbank sent me several pages in a large envelop I needed to fill out on request of the IRS.

I pay my taxes and do the best job I can. I tell them what is required. I simply haven't lied or cheated. I realize taxes are a necessary lubricant for society to function.

Now I have this to deal with:

Is one of the unforeseeable consequences "death by bonga"?

Have you received the same kind of notice from your Thai bank. MY general impression is governments worldwide can never get enough information on citizens over which they have authority.

I'll comply but not with a smile.

[Crossy]

Whilst I'm not with Kasikorn and I'm not even American I have had to fill in similar FATCA reporting forms at both Bangkok Bank (when renewing an expired ATM card) and Siam Commercial Bank (when opening an account).

I suspect the instruction is to get anyone who isn't Thai to fill the form, covering their asses.

[watcharacters]

Whilst I'm not with Kasikorn and I'm not even American I have had to fill in similar FATCA reporting forms at both Bangkok Bank (when renewing an expired ATM card) and Siam Commercial Bank (when opening an account).

I suspect the instruction is to get anyone who isn't Thai to fill the form, covering their asses.

Your reply seriously surprises me, Crossy.

"The Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, better known as FATCA, was passed in 2010 as part of the HIRE act. FATCA requires foreign financial institutions (FFIs) such as local banks, stock brokers, hedge funds, insurance companies, trusts, etc. to report the accounts of all US citizens (living in the US and abroad), US "persons," green card holders and individuals holding certain US investments to the IRS or to the government of the bank’s country for further transmission to the US through Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) or be subject to a 30% withholding on their US investments"

If you're not an American I wonder why you have to deal with FATCA?

As an American, I'm wondering why the Thai banks are enforcing a rule imposed on them by the IRS on nationals other than American.

Did you send in a W9 form?

[Crossy]

As I noted in my previous post, I suspect they have been given a catch-all instruction.

Fill in the form to save aggravation, it took a minute or two and they provided the ink.

I have never had any dealings with the IRS, or for that matter, ever been to the US.

TiT

[vaultdweller0013]

Yes, this is related to FACTA, but it is not a big deal for Americans if you have been filing your taxes and FBARs accurately. (You have been filing your FBARs if required, right?)

Banks were given a grace period for FACTA compliance. In the first step, they started identifying "US persons" opening new accounts and collecting the W-9 forms from them. The next step was to do the same for existing account holders. The Thai banks are now in this second step and are collecting the information or existing accounts. And yes, it seems they are covering themselves by asking all non-Thais.

Crossy, did your banks ask you to fill out a W-8BEN (https://www.irs.gov/pub/irs-pdf/fw8ben.pdf) or just a questionnaire asking questions like: "Were you born in the US?", "Are you a US greencard holder?", "Do you have a mailing address in the US?", or similar?

[AyG]

I suspect the instruction is to get anyone who isn't Thai to fill the form, covering their asses.

I suspect you're right (based upon personal experience). And it's ludicrous. Why should Uncle Sam be able to require non-Americans living outside the paradisical United States of America to do anything?

And why is Uncle Sam ignoring Thai people with dual US-Thai nationality?

[vaultdweller0013]

I suspect the instruction is to get anyone who isn't Thai to fill the form, covering their asses.

I suspect you're right (based upon personal experience). And it's ludicrous. Why should Uncle Sam be able to require non-Americans living outside the paradisical United States of America to do anything?

And why is Uncle Sam ignoring Thai people with dual US-Thai nationality?

Because banks want access to the financial system in the US, and technically it is the banks that are requiring action from their customers, not the US government. Now they are requiring this due to the US placing additional conditions on the bank's access to the US financial system, so pragmatically, it is the US government requiring it. However, this is no different than, say, the EU having the ability to tell Thai fisherman how they can and cannot obtain their catch -- if you don't take actions to to prevent IUU fishing, you don't get access to the EU seafood market. Similarly, if you don't take actions to prevent tax evasion by US citizens, you don't get access to the US financial markets (or more properly, you get hit with a 30% penalty on transactions in the US system). The banks have decided the best way to comply is requiring all non-Thais to confirm whether or not they are "US persons," ikely by balancing the costs of confirming with the potential risk.

Also, note that there wasn't a lot of push back from countries around the world. In fact, a lot of countries supported the system by setting up the frameworks that would allow information normally protected by privacy regulation to be sent to the US government -- they would establish a government bureaucracy in their country to collect the information who then passes on the information to the US. They supported this because tax evasion is a problem worldwide, and as part of FACTA agreements with the US, they can get the information on their own citizens who have accounts in the US. Also, push back on this would make it more difficult for them to take action against countries supporting their own tax evaders. For example, I don't see the EU being able to convince the Swiss to share their data (http://www.bbc.com/news/business-32900892) if they had just recently told the US to shove off when they asked for the same from the EU.

[Jingthing]

Have K-bank account. Have not received that notification. I need to go in there soon with my new passport. That will be interesting.

[55Jay]

If you already had the account, maybe it just took them a while to go through all their records, and they found they didn't have a W9 for you.

Krungsi got me when I had to open a new account.

So far though, Bangkok Bank hasn't said anything to me and in fact, I opened a new account after all the W9 business started, and they never had me fill one in. Hit and miss but if they ask me to, I will.

[JimGant]

As an American, I'm wondering why the Thai banks are enforcing a rule imposed on them by the IRS on nationals other than American.

Maybe they're not. You, as an American, opened your bank account by showing your US passport. That's in their data base, and under the FATCA agreement signed between the Thai and US gov'ts, existing accounts are now being perused for "US indices" of belonging to a US person. Certainly the fact that you opened the account with a US passport is pretty indicative of your "US person" status. And, only information already on file need be looked at to comply with the FATCA "due dilligence" requirement. Sending out queries to further ascertain "US person" status is not required (so, sending notices like that in the OP to everyone having a Western surname would be ludicrous, not to mention cost prohibitive, nor required). Having said that, has any non-US exisiting account holder received any FATCA related queries? Doubtful, I would hope....

If you're not an American I wonder why you have to deal with FATCA?

Per the above, I doubt you do. Yes, opening a new account, you have the added paperwork to declare, "Nope, I'm not a Yank." But, that's the extent of dealing with FATCA. But, pretty soon, since all OECD countries are implementing FATCA-like reporting, yes, non Americans will be dealing with questions of their tax nationality. Thus, the cost of dealing with tax cheats. C'est la vie -- by today's standards.

And why is Uncle Sam ignoring Thai people with dual US-Thai nationality?

'Cause the due diligence required to root them out isn't extensive enough, i.e., no queries required of existing account holders -- which is a good thing for all involved. And, indices that would point to dual citizenship -- like money only filling the account from US sources -- is not an indices. Only money from a Thai account "going" (being repatriated) to the US.

[mmh8]

first question I get in banks now a days is are you us. not a form to be filled in without that fatca stuff.

I hope europe in general remains above this, it will be a balance between how much european banks obtain by operating their offshore arms and how much they see the us raking back in.

I pay tax here and its insult enough to see what they do with it - build roads in national parks destroy whatever true heritage they have ( not the 80 yrs or so crap in bkk), I'd be pissed off to also be paying the incompetants back in my home country too.

[Pib]

When you go open a "new" Thai bank account now days and if you are are foreigner, the bank will likely present you with a FATCA related questionnaire (bank written/generated...varies from bank to bank as to the wording) asking if you are a U.S. citizen/resident alien or hold dual citizenship of which one is U.S. Even if you are a Thai and the bank rep thinks you might hold dual citizenship with that other citizenship being U.S. then they may still present you with the questionnaire. If you don't have U.S. citizenship then check the appropriate boxes on the questionnaire/form and sign it...done...the bank has just covered its butt/done its "due diligence" for new accounts under FATCA.

They probably won't present you with any other FATCA related doc. But if you are a U.S. citizen/resident alien then you'll also get to compete the IRS W-9 or W-8 form...the same form you have probably completed a couple times with any employment in the U.S., opening mutual fund accounts, bank accounts, 401K accounts, etc....these forms have been around a l....o....n.....g time.

Based on some posts I've seen the Thai bank may even ask/want a copy of your Social Security Card to help ensure you are not putting a false SSAN on the W9/W8 form and/or help ensure they don't make a typo in reading the SSAN you entered in the form.

Now, what about "old" accounts? Since FATCA started being implemented 1 Jul 14 (last year) the FATCA rules and agreements have a timeline for foreign banks to get certain docs from U.S. citizens for accounts opened before 1 Jul 14...it's all part of the "due diligence" provisions in the FATCA agreements...it gave the bank lattitude and I think to around 2 years after 1 Jul 14 to round up the paperwork for customers with accounts opened before 1 Jul 14...and it's up to the bank how that get that documentation. They may mail you something, they may hit you up at the bank when doing a transaction, etc.

I have opened a Bangkok Bank account and Krungsri Bank account since 1 Jul 14...I'm a U.S. citizen...in each case the banks had me complete their FATCA questionnaire and the IRS W-9...took a few extra minutes...no drama....accounts opened. They did not ask me for my SSAN card. And I also have Bangkok Bank accounts opened before 1 Jul 14 as does my dual Thai/US citizen wife....we have not got any FATCA forms for completion from Bangkok Bank yet regarding those old accounts and we have visit the bank in some cases to do teller transaction with these accounts opened before 1 Jul 14...but I have no doubt we will at some point in the near future we'll get hit-up to sign the docs for those specific accounts. Time will tell.

[IMA_FARANG]

I suspect the instruction is to get anyone who isn't Thai to fill the form, covering their asses.

I suspect you're right (based upon personal experience). And it's ludicrous. Why should Uncle Sam be able to require non-Americans living outside the paradisical United States of America to do anything?

And why is Uncle Sam ignoring Thai people with dual US-Thai nationality?

-------------------------------

Unfortunately if you are a U.S. citizen, even a dual national hat MAY have derived income (even interest income) from a U.S. source...the IRS can tax you if you owe them money even if you are a current non resident of the U.S.

That is why you got the form from the bank....so the bank can cover its a---.

As far as the IRS is concerned you are presumed guilty until proven innocent.

[purushanti]

Rather than wait for Thai banks or Thai mail to catch up with me, i pro-actively went to each Thai bank, and asked them to take my info, even bringing along my own blank W9 forms, just in case.

Could get more than messy for any American or perhaps, eg, a foreigner dealing with an American bank, not to comply.;

Do not have rhe finances to qualify for FBAR reports, so for me it is very simple---just fill out the same form-W9 for the Thai banks that I filled out when in the USA at an American bank.

[phuketrichard]

i have not gotten any letter and have scb an Bangkok bank accounts, ( all opened years and years ago)

i always keep under $10,000 in all my foreign accounts so do not fubar

I file my tax return every year, ( have never earned enough to pay anything) as also do a FAFSA ( for my daughter to get funds in the states)

[Jingthing]

I don't see any logical reason to approach Thai banks to volunteer to fill out any form. If they need the form, they'll either contact you or bring it up the next time you go in for some official business, like a new passbook or ATM card, etc. I do suggest complying with all filing requirements, such as filing FBAR's faithfully, whether you've filled out forms at your Thai banks, or not.

[watcharacters]

i have not gotten any letter and have scb an Bangkok bank accounts, ( all opened years and years ago)

i always keep under $10,000 in all my foreign accounts so do not fubar

I file my tax return every year, ( have never earned enough to pay anything) as also do a FAFSA ( for my daughter to get funds in the states)

No idea of your visa arrangement in Thailand but where I live the immigration asks at least 18,000 THB for a "look the other way" OK for anyone not having enough seasoned cash in a Thai bank, or adequate income documentation such as a letter from the Embassy. Do you know important people that allow you circumvent the income/banking requirement?

No matter what we have to deal with it one way or the other.

I follow laws but it does not mean I have to do it with a smile.

I'll have to goggle FAFSA as I have no idea what that is.

[watcharacters]

I don't see any logical reason to approach Thai banks to volunteer to fill out any form. If they need the form, they'll either contact you or bring it up the next time you go in for some official business, like a new passbook or ATM card, etc. I do suggest complying with all filing requirements, such as filing FBAR's faithfully, whether you've filled out forms at your Thai banks, or not.

Sounds reasonable, Jing, but as you may or may not know, people who claimed they were unaware of their driver license being expired could not use the excuse of not receiving a notice of expiration. That serves legally as a courtesy.

[phuketrichard]

i have not gotten any letter and have scb an Bangkok bank accounts, ( all opened years and years ago)

i always keep under $10,000 in all my foreign accounts so do not fubar

I file my tax return every year, ( have never earned enough to pay anything) as also do a FAFSA ( for my daughter to get funds in the states)

No idea of your visa arrangement in Thailand but where I live the immigration asks at least 18,000 THB for a "look the other way" OK for anyone not having enough seasoned cash in a Thai bank, or adequate income documentation such as a letter from the Embassy. Do you know important people that allow you circumvent the income/banking requirement?

No matter what we have to deal with it one way or the other.

I follow laws but it does not mean I have to do it with a smile.

I'll have to goggle FAFSA as I have no idea what that is.

??? you don't know me so please dont presume to much LOL

i am on a retirement extension and use the combo method, :-)

i NEVER do anything illegal here.

[maphraw]

I have four bank accounts in Thailand with Thai banks. Not one of them has asked me to fill out a form for the IRS. I have a Thai mutual fund and they sent me a form for the IRS, I filled it out and sent it in. I asked the Thai mutual fund company what kind of information about my account they provide the US with and they told me they don't send anything to the US. They send it to the Bank of Thailand which in turn forewords it to the US. They then told me they have yet to send any information about my mutual fund to the Bank of Thailand. This was last year. Actually, I think the Treasury Department gets this info which can then be accessed by the IRS. Not sure though. But if you fill out your tax forms correctly and your FBAR, you should be covered no matter what Thailand reports or doesn't to the US about your stuff.

[Pib]

It's not a cut and dried process that foreign financial institutions such as banks must follow under the FATCA reporting....it depends on the agreement they signed with the U.S.....amount and type of account...just a variety of things as to what type of "due diligence" foreign banks must do in reporting account info and when to do it. It is also my understanding that Thai banks will send their data to the Bank of Thailand who in turn will send it to the U.S. Treasury.

Take a look a the FATCA Model Agreement 1GA at this FATCA web site which Thailand has agreed to follow. It's in lawyer language but addresses the "due diligence" requirement for financial institutions. It's not that long...read it a few times and it starts making a little sense as to what foreign financial institutions must do, report, and when to do it. But even with that being said, foreign financial institutions have some small leeway in the due diligence and reporting requirement.

A few partial quotes from above weblink/agreement are below...primarily dealing with Preexisting accounts before 1 Jul 14 in amounts below $50K equivalent. Different rules for higher amounts....when the account was opened....etc. Read the whole agreement...slowly and a few times...and you should see different rules for different accounts, amounts, opening dates, etc.

ANNEX I

DUE DILIGENCE OBLIGATIONS FOR IDENTIFYING AND REPORTING ON U.S. REPORTABLE ACCOUNTS AND ON PAYMENTS TO CERTAIN NONPARTICIPATING FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS

General.

A. [FATCA Partner] shall require that Reporting [FATCA Partner] Financial Institutions apply the due diligence procedures contained in this Annex I to identify U.S. Reportable Accounts and accounts held by Nonparticipating Financial Institutions.

II. Preexisting Individual Accounts. The following rules and procedures apply for purposes of identifying U.S. Reportable Accounts among Preexisting Accounts held by

individuals (“Preexisting Individual Accounts”).

A. Accounts Not Required to Be Reviewed, Identified, or Reported. Unless the Reporting [FATCA Partner] Financial Institution elects otherwise, either with respect to all Preexisting Individual Accounts or, separately, with respect to any clearly identified group of such accounts, where the implementing rules in [FATCA Partner] provide for such an election, the following Preexisting Individual Accounts are not required to be reviewed, identified, or reported as U.S. Reportable Accounts:

1. Subject to subparagraph E(2) of this section, a Preexisting Individual Account with a balance or value that does not exceed $50,000 as of June 30, 2014.

C. Additional Procedures Applicable to Preexisting Individual Accounts That Are Lower Value Accounts.

1. Review of Preexisting Individual Accounts that are Lower Value Accounts for U.S. indicia must be completed by June 30, 2016.

[JimGant]

Accounts Not Required to Be Reviewed, Identified, or Reported:

- a Preexisting Individual Account with a balance or value that does not exceed $50,000 as of June 30, 2014....

.....unless the Reporting [FATCA Partner] Financial Institution elects otherwise

Presumably, most US person accounts, even in aggregate, don't exceed the $50,000 de minimis threshold. So why would a bank waste resources on all those US person account holders that don't have anything near $50,000? So, as a US person with pre-existing Bangkok Bank accounts of modest means, I don't expect a letter from Bangkok Bank. Of course, they could always "elect otherwise," and send letters to all preexisting US account holders. But, the cost of doing that vs. the cost of checking de minimis values would seemingly make such a course foolish.

For our European cousins, the son of FATCA (the Common Reporting Standard -- CRS) has 61 subscribers as of July, not including (yet) Thailand.

http://www.expatbriefing.com/expat-features/The-Common-Reporting-Standard-The-Global-FATCA-572925.html

But, there's no $50,000 de minimis reporting threshold:

Also, unlike FATCA, the CRS does not provide for thresholds for pre-existing individual accounts,

But, as I understand it, most European countries don't subject interest earned in a Thai bank to their taxation (unlike the US). So why would these countries want any such information from Thai banks? Hmmm, CRS appears to be a work in progress. Hopefully -- for the sake of Thai banks -- they won't be required to report information on non taxable income. Or, maybe European countries, now that they can finally get a snapshot of foreign earnings, just might change what earnings are subject to their taxes.

[Pib]

Jim,

Interesting about the CRS, or the OECD reporting name that it's also referred to sometimes. I see that the U.S. is one of the G20 nations that supports the concept but at this time will not be involved in using the CRS format for financial information exchange but FATCA format for financial information exchange. I heard that on TV news report this week also.

See below weblink/snapshot for more info...shows the current list of countries adopting CRS/OECD and when they plan to implement. The U.S. supports the CRS/OECD concept but I guess will not implment at this time...use FATCA instead. See what the "note" says regarding U.S. CRS/OECD reporting implementation.

Sounds like the U.S. just wants to use FATCA and not CRS/OECD probably due to the major difference in how U.S. taxes are based on citizenship regardless of where a U.S. person resides in the world, but for most other countries taxes are based on residence which the CRS/OECD reporting is apparently based on. Competing standards of financial information exchange...but give all the countries 10 or so more years and they probably come to agreement on just one standard by merging the two together in one standard. But until then, maybe some non-U.S. folks would be better off hiding their financial assets in the U.S. especially if those non-U.S. folks are from countries which did not sign-in to FATCA but did to CRS/OECD.

I think its just a matter of a decade or so before many home countries governments who are always hungry for more tax revenue and ways to reduce benefits fruad such as those benefits programs based on "means testing" and/or physical residence (e.g., needing to live in home country to get certain benefits, all financial assets to be declared in means testing of the benefit, etc) will be using international agreements such as FATCA/CRS/OECD with the power of computer/IT information exchange to sniff-out all of a person's financial assets even if living in the sticks of Thailand.

Might be time to start hiding assets in person's mattress...at least the mattress won't report back to the home country govt. But then again they'll probably start making smart mattresses soon which will include mandatory and automatic FATCA/CRS/OECD reporting capability via satellite....we may have to revert to burying our money in the backyard but I expect IRS surveillance satellites will spot us digging the hole....we're screwed.

http://www.oecd.org/tax/transparency/AEOI-commitments.pdf

[JimGant]

Yeah, tax cheats are running out of places to hide.So sad (not!).