Free Site Registration

Can Financial Institutions Navigate the Labyrinth of 871(m) Compliance?

Traders Magazine Online News, May 30, 2017

Phillip Lynch

 

For some time, one of the most persistent problems bedeviling US tax officials has been the collection of tax from overseas income. Inevitably, corporations and individuals have complex and disparate financial pictures, with assets often held outside the US for a variety of reasons, including to minimize income tax liabilities. In its quest to get its hands on the billions of dollars’ worth of revenue lost abroad, the US Government has trained its focus on regulation specifically designed to capture these foreign earnings.

The government’s first move on this front came in the form of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which was signed into law by President Obama in 2010 and came into force on July 1st, 2014. FATCA requires US persons, including those living abroad, to file annual reports on any foreign financial accounts. It also requires foreign financial institutions to report any US-sourced assets held by US persons to the US Government. Now, the American government is continuing its efforts in the area of tax compliance by honing in on “dividend equivalent” payments from derivative transactions involving US equities through an IRS regulation known as 871(m), the implementation of which began in January of 2017.

It will come as little surprise that the implementation of 871(m) has created an array of compliance headaches for financial institutions. Firms are scrambling to establish the appropriate withholding and reporting processes for the financial instruments falling under the jurisdiction of the new regulation. For instance, 871(m) applies to equity-linked instruments (ELIs) where the delta (ratio of change in the value of the instrument vs. the value of the underlying security) of the underlying instrument is 0.8 or greater. In order to determine which instruments are affected, firms must make these often complicated calculations on their own.

In short, to ensure effective compliance with 871(m) without specialist support involves a herculean degree of research, record-keeping, monitoring, and calculations from already overburdened designated teams. The IRS, recognizing the complexity of the regulation’s implementation, relaxed compliance mandates for the first year (2017), raising the delta requirement for affected securities to 1.0 from 0.8 and announcing that for the first year of implementation they would take into account whether a firm made a “good faith” effort to comply with the law when assessing penalties. This simplified standard only applies to withholding agents, however, and does not cover taxpayers that are long parties (the buyers), meaning the hardest burden may fall on foreign investors.

Regardless, any foreign investors that trade in US-backed ELIs will need to take concrete steps to prove that they are complying with the reporting provisions of the new law. In order to comply with 871(m), firms will need up-to-date and comprehensive information provided to investors on the financial instruments affected by the Rule.

For more information on related topics, visit the following channels:

Comments (0)

Add Your Comments:

You must be registered to post a comment.

Not Registered? Click here to register.

Already registered? Log in here.

Please note you must now log in with your email address and password.