UK/US dual citizen fatca pension nightmare

SWsmith

The Royal Family will have a shock with FATCA knocking on their door. Boris was VERY shocked when he had to comply. I believe he renounced. And yes British citizen - not subject OK.

Here is some info that FFIs use to make account decisions (ie close or deny)

US person under FATCA.

US citizenship or US residence.
US place of birth.
US address including US PO boxes.
US telephone number.
Repeating payment instructions to pay amounts to a US address or an account maintained in the US.
Current power of attorney or signatory authority granted to a person with a US address.
In care of or hold mail address which is the sole address for the account holder.

SWsmith

@bostonerimus

Please could you expand a little on your comment:
"Inside a UK pension wrapper that should not be an issue"

Thanks. Much appreciated!

EdSwippet

grey_gym_sock wrote: »

it sounds to me more like they're concerned about the lack of reciprocity in FATCA (other countries give the USA info, but the USA doesn't reciprocate), as opposed to CRS (which is reciprocal, and is otherwise similar to FATCA, but the USA hasn't signed up to it). and they're only floating the idea of not fully complying with FATCA as a way of pressuring the USA to agree to reciprocity in some form. and they're only floating it, not doing it.

Reciprocity is one angle, but they are also concerned about GDPR issues and banking access problems for EU residents caught up in this US-constructed mess. Did you read the rest of the Motion for a resolution? There is more to it than I quoted earlier. For example:

E. whereas the Commission has acknowledged that FATCA and the related IGAs have had the unintended effect of hindering access to financial services in the EU for US citizens and any person presenting indicia suggesting that he or she may be subject to FATCA (‘US person’);

F. whereas the lives and livelihoods of thousands of law-abiding EU citizens and their EU families are being very seriously affected by FATCA on a daily basis, as those falling within the definition of ‘US persons’ have their savings accounts frozen and are denied access to all banking services, including life insurance, pensions and mortgages, due to the reluctance of financial institutions to follow costly FATCA reporting; whereas, in addition, their EU family members are seeing their personal data shared with the US and their access to EU banking services curtailed (e.g. joint accounts and/or mortgages);

This is actually something the EU should have taken an interest in when FATCA first arrived, but the UK and a couple of other assorted governments jumped on the IGA bandwagon with indecent haste, clearly seeing something in this for them, and so the initial opportunity for an EU wide response was lost. The EU is now playing catch-up.

All talk for now, as you say. The vote on this is in less than a week, and only then can action follow. Or not, depending on the vote and then the willingness of the called-upon government to actually do something.

Given the current US-initiated trade war, the US is not exactly flavour-of-the-month at the EU, so my guess is that this resolution will pass. We'll see, anyway.

bostonerimus

SWsmith wrote: »

@bostonerimus

Please could you expand a little on your comment:
"Inside a UK pension wrapper that should not be an issue"

Thanks. Much appreciated!

UK pension plans are covered under the US/UK tax treaty and anything inside is protected from taxation in both the US and the UK. When you make withdrawals income tax must be paid according to the terms of the tax treaty and US and UK domestic laws. The issue with the SIPP is that it is debatable as to its status with many financial institutions treating it as a foreign grantor trust rather than a pension plan.

I would recommend the OP talk to someone like Ross Noble-Warren at Independence Wealth Management or simply renounce US citizenship.

http://www.iwm.eu.com/

EdSwippet

EdSwippet wrote: »

The vote on this is in less than a week, and only then can action follow. Or not, depending on the vote and then the willingness of the called-upon government to actually do something.

The resolution passed by a wide margin, 470 votes to 43.

Now we get to see if the UK and other governments will act as they should have some years ago and stand up to protect their citizens and residents, or if they weasel out of this. France will probably not weasel, since it provided a lot of the impetus for this EU effort in the first place. The UK, on the other hand...

badmemory

bowlhead99 wrote: »

But perhaps they asked you to confirm (rather than 'prove') that you weren't US resident or citizen so that they could tick you off the list as having confirmed your residency and non-US citizenship which they would accept and record for their files as long as it didn't conflict with other information they had. It's now standard to do a self-certification form for tax status when opening a new account.

I had one of the very first letters about this FATCA & whilst it did not actually say we believe you are a US citizen it made that assumption & asked for my tin? no as if I must have one not my NI No or my UTR No. It looked like fraud with threats. Even stating where you are born does not prove that you are not a US citizen. There is a whole thread about this starting in April 2016.