Tag Archives: CRS

The OECD reviews the Common Reporting Standard

Emily Deane TEPHM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) invited some of the UK’s financial industry experts, including STEP, to join an overview of the OECD’s current review of the Common Reporting Standard (CRS).

The OECD will launch a consultation later this year, but has requested early input from industry experts on the improvements and changes that they would like to see. The purpose of the review is to enhance the general efficiency and operation of the CRS, and especially the quality and usability of its data.

In recent years there has been increasing use of innovative financial products that were not envisaged when the CRS was originally implemented. Some gaps and ambiguities in the legislation have been identified, and the OECD believes the time is now right to review and consolidate it. HMRC intends to consult the crypto-asset industry on technical changes and improvements and e-money industry experts, an area which was previously excluded, but some countries have called for it to be included in order to reach a single and consistent view.

HMRC also discussed some trust related issues for consultation, including:

Rules on reporting of joint accounts

While each joint account holder is required to report specific information, the schema does not recognise the number of account holders. HMRC suggests developing an indicator or flag to identify each individual account holder.

Controlling persons of passive non-financial entities (NFEs)

The schema is currently unable to assess the identity of the controlling person (ie settlor, protector) making the data less useful for tax risk purposes. HMRC suggests introducing  a mandatory field to specify the role of the controlling person.

Account holder where a trust is a financial institution (FI)

HMRC suggests the schema should be able to identify the type of equity interest the account holder has for risk assessment purposes.

Other trust-related issues that will be addressed in more detail include:

  • the treatment of reporting in relation to trustees, protectors and controllers;
  • inconsistent value reporting on the value of trust accounts;
  • reporting of trust loans as payments and potential avoidance issues;
  • consistency over reporting of issues on protectors and other ‘controllers’ who have no financial interests in the trust;
  • cross-over issues on reporting controllers – AML principles and FATF guidance;
  • reporting on ownership of corporate trustees in the context of controlling persons/equity interest holders;
  • relevance of cash as an asset in the context of classifying entities, particularly in the financial institution/passive NFE distinction.

HMRC has confirmed that it will form a focus group to look at the CRS and specific trust aspects, and we will keep members updated as the consultation progresses. In the meantime if members have any additional trust-related feedback please email the policy team at [email protected] by 1 February 2021.

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

The five most common reporting errors for trusts to avoid

HM Revenue & Custom’s (HMRC) compliance team has identified the five most common errors made by UK administered trusts which are Financial Institutions (FIs) when fulfilling their obligations under the International Tax Compliance Regulations 2015.

These obligations relate to Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) which includes the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Any errors should be rectified by submitting amendments using an online HMRC AEOI account, or if relating to the FATCA FFI list, an IRS FATCA online account.

1.Trusts wrongly classified for AEOI purposes

A trust can be either a FI or a non-financial entity. A trust will be classified as an FI where more than 50 per cent of its income is from investing, reinvesting, or trading in financial assets, and another FI has discretionary authority to manage these assets wholly or in part. A trust or settlement is regarded as being managed by an FI where either one or more of the trustees is an FI or the trustees have appointed an FI, such as a discretionary fund manager, to manage the trust’s assets or the trust itself. Trusts that are FIs have to register and submit AEOI returns to HMRC if they have reportable accounts. More information.

2.Due diligence requirements incorrectly carried out

Trusts that are FIs must carry out due diligence on their financial accounts to determine whether any are reportable accounts.  For trusts, financial accounts are the debt or equity interests in the trust. The equity interests are deemed to be held by any person treated as a settlor or beneficiary of all or a portion of the trust, or any other person exercising ultimate effective control, including trustees and protectors.

The debt and equity interests of the trust are reportable accounts if they are held by a reportable person. For example, if a settlor or beneficiary is resident in a reportable jurisdiction (outside of the UK), their equity interest is a reportable account.

The trust that is an FI must apply the due diligence rules in order to determine the identity and residence of its debt and equity interest holders. Please see the due diligence rules.

A trust that has reportable accounts must report the account information and the financial activity for the year in respect of each reportable account. The account information includes the identifying information for each reportable person (such as name, address, jurisdiction of residence, taxpayer identification number, date of birth and account number), and the identifying information of the trust (name and identifying number).

3.Mistakes when reporting discretionary beneficiaries and trustees.

A discretionary beneficiary will only be treated as an account holder in the years in which it receives a distribution from the trust. Other reportable accounts are reportable regardless of whether a distribution is made in the calendar year. More information (para 253).

4.Reporting entities as controlling persons.

Where an equity interest (such as the interest held by a settlor, beneficiary or any other natural person exercising ultimate effective control over the trust) is held by an entity, the equity interest holder will instead be its controlling persons. As such, the trust will be required to look through a settlor, trustee, protector or beneficiary that is an entity to locate the relevant controlling persons. (This obligation corresponds to the obligation to identify the beneficial owners of a trust under anti money-laundering rules). More information (para 253).

5.Errors relating to the IRS FATCA Foreign Financial Institution (FFI) list.

A trust that registers on the IRS FATCA registration website as being a FFI, will receive a Global Intermediary Identification Number (GIIN) from the IRS, upon approval. Some UK administered trusts are incorrectly registered on the FFI list, including trusts that do not meet the definition of being an FFI, or that have already been terminated.

Where FFI registration has been approved but is no longer appropriate, the trust should cancel the agreement. Cancelling a registration agreement that is in approved status will mean it will no longer be published on the FFI List and the GIIN will no longer be valid. The FATCA registration user guide contains guidance on deregistration and cancelling the agreement.

 

Emily Deane TEP, STEP Technical Counsel

HMRC’s five traps to avoid with CRS/FATCA reporting

Emily Deane TEPHMRC has identified the most common errors made by financial institutions (FIs) when filing their Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) returns, which include Common Reporting Standard (CRS) and Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA) reportable information.

1. The FI misunderstands what constitutes an undocumented account

FIs are wrongly reporting accounts as ‘undocumented’ on the basis that a self-certification requested from an account holder has not been completed.

Accounts should only be reported as undocumented where they meet specific criteria, which include that the account has either a hold-mail instruction or a ‘care-of’ address. The full criteria can be found in CRS, Section III: Due Diligence for Preexisting Individual Accounts, subparagraphs B(5) and C(5). HMRC guidance is available at IEIM402850 and IEIM403040.

Any accounts that are correctly reported as ‘undocumented’ must show Great Britain as the residential country code.

2. The FI misunderstands what information is required to be reported 

Some FIs only complete the mandatory fields in the schema or portal, even though they hold additional information which is legally required to be reported. In addition, some FIs fill in mandatory fields with ‘n/a’ or similar.

CRS and the UK-US FATCA Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) state which information is required to be reported. Where a schema or portal field is not mandatory, there can still be a legal requirement to provide this information. For example, where a Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) or date of birth is held or obtained by the FI, it is required to be reported even though it is not down as a mandatory field within the portal or schema. Where an address is held, the full address must be provided, even though the only mandatory field is for ‘city’ in the schema or portal.

3. The FI reports accounts held by persons who are not reportable persons

FIs are reporting publicly traded corporations, as well as related entities, governmental entities, international organisations, central banks, and financial institutions. In most cases, such accounts are not reportable. HMRC guidance at IEIM402010 outlines which accounts are not reportable.

4. The FI misreports joint accounts and/or partnership account

Some FIs confuse the treatment of joint individual accounts and partnership accounts.

Joint individual accounts must be reported as individual accounts with the entire balance or value of the account, as well as the entire amounts paid or credited, attributed to each holder of the account.

A partnership is defined as an entity for reporting purposes, and accounts held by partnerships should be reported as entity accounts, with the respective due diligence and reporting requirements applied.

5. The FI reports entities as controlling persons 

Some FIs report entities as the controlling persons of entity accounts, resulting in trusts and companies being reported as controlling persons. However, entities cannot be controlling persons; under CRS and FATCA, ‘controlling persons’ means‘natural persons who exercise control over an entity. In the case of a trust, such term means the settlor, the trustees, the protector (if any), the beneficiaries or class of beneficiaries, and any other natural person exercising ultimate effective control over the trust, and in the case of a legal arrangement other than a trust, such term means persons in equivalent or similar positions. The term ‘Controlling Persons’ shall be interpreted in a manner consistent with the Recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force.’

Full HMRC guidance on AEOI reporting can be found at: International Exchange of Information Manual.

Please email [email protected] with any further queries.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

Top 10 FATCA/CRS reporting issues

Top 10 issuesWith reporting now underway in the UK for both FATCA (the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) and the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), STEP has been liaising with HMRC on some of the more common reporting issues:

1. The financial institution (FI) has to re-register and is not able to view previous returns on the portal, because login details are unknown following staff changes.

Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI) portal login details should be held securely and known only by those who need them. The FI should ensure that there is an appropriate procedure to maintain access to their portal. A pseudo email account might be an appropriate solution, providing the FI has robust security and data protection safeguards in place.

2. The FI misunderstands what constitutes an undocumented account.

HMRC has advised that FIs are wrongly reporting accounts as ‘undocumented’ when a self-certification requested from an account holder has not been completed. This has led to numerous accounts being erroneously reported with a GB resident country code. The definition of an undocumented account can be found at IEIM403100.

3. The FI makes a submission using the XML schema which is rejected due to inappropriate re-use of MessageRef, FIReturnRef and AccountRef.

The schema guidance gives comprehensive advice on use of references and can be found here.

4. The FI reports accounts where the account holder is not resident in a reportable jurisdiction.

Individuals who are not resident in a reportable jurisdiction (see IEIM402340) should not be reported. Some jurisdictions which have signed up to CRS are non-reciprocal, and some which have signed up are not yet ready to receive exchanges.

5. The FI reports accounts as being NPFFIs but resident country code is not US.

The term non-participating foreign financial institution (NPFFI) is for FATCA only, in respect of years up to 2016, and not applicable for CRS purposes. If used, the resident country code should be US.

6. The FI reports accounts that are excluded accounts and therefore non-reportable, such as registered pension schemes.

A full list of excluded accounts can be found at IEIM 401720.

7. The FI reports persons who are not reportable.

Under CRS, corporations with regularly traded stock and related entities are not reportable account holders, nor are governmental entities, international organisations, central banks or financial institutions. A list of exemptions to the term ‘specified US person’ under FATCA can be found in Article 1 (gg) of the UK-US Inter-Governmental Agreement (IGA).

8. The FI reports joint individual accounts as entity accounts.

A jointly-held individual account is not an entity account and the account information to be exchanged can be found at IEIM402140. However, partnerships, including general partnerships, are treated as entities, irrespective of their legal form (see IEIM400860).

9. The AEOI enquiry helpline is for financial institutions only.

HMRC requests that you don’t share details of the AEOI enquiry helpline with your account holders. This inundates its AEOI filing team and prevents it from being able to assist FIs with their reporting obligations.

10. The FI leaves filing to the last minute.

Filing submissions sufficiently in advance of the 31 May 2018 deadline allows FIs extra time to deal with any unexpected issues such as missing information, or inaccurate XML schema, that might lead to the submission being rejected.

STEP will continue to consult with HMRC on ongoing technical issues.

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

2017: A brief editorial review

STEP Journal covers 2017As 2017 draws to a close, and with the final STEP Journal (Dec/Jan) having recently landed on your (or your office’s) doormat, this seems the perfect juncture take a quick look back on our member publications and bulletins this year.

Above are the varied, colourful covers of this year’s ten STEP Journal issues, each of which is an undertaking by itself; for example, readers would be surprised – and perhaps a little concerned – by the amount of discussion regarding the width of the pneumatic tubes on November’s ‘knowledge’ edition. President Trump narrowly missed an appearance on the cover of May’s US/Canada focus, but will surely take comfort that his proposed tax reforms were considered in that issue (‘Trump yet to play his cards‘🔒, by Bruce Zagaris TEP). Two covers particularly stood out for us: August/September’s attention-grabbing pop-art graphic, and March’s sensitive, understated design for that issue’s vulnerable client focus.

According to our web statistics, this year’s most popular STEP Journal feature so far (online) is ‘Will survivorship clauses survive?’🔒, in which John FitzGerald warns of the potential pitfalls of using such clauses when will-drafting in the UK. Our most-read Trust Quarterly Review (TQR) article of 2017 is ‘Signs of convergence‘🔒 by John Riches TEP, on the potential expansion of CRS disclosure.

STEP’s global outlook was reflected in the wide range of jurisdictions covered by this year’s articles, which covered developments in Australia, Austria, Bermuda, Brazil, the British Virgin Islands, Canada, the Cayman Islands, China, Colombia, the UK Crown Dependencies, Dubai, Estonia, France, Germany, Hong Kong, India, Italy, Luxembourg, Mauritius, New Zealand, Panama, Scotland, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Switzerland, the UK, and the US. Members can access all of this year’s issues of the STEP Journal and TQR, and those of previous years, at our back-issue archive.

All that content has been well-received by members, according to the results from this year’s STEP Member Satisfaction Survey: out of the six most valuable member benefits, the STEP Journal – our flagship title – was ranked highest, followed by the News Digests (second), Membership Newsletter Emails (third) and TQR, (fifth). The editorial team is delighted with these results, and will strive to do even better next year.

A huge amount of behind-the-scenes work goes into our editorial output. Following her promotion in December 2016 to Managing Editor of Publications, Blathain Iqbal has diligently managed the production of the STEP Journal and TQR to a consistently excellent standard – from planning and commissioning, to editing and production; a massive undertaking. Helen Swire, who joined in August as Editor, took over our News Digests and has quickly adapted to the subject matter, ably supported by Peter Mitchell, our longstanding news freelancer. We wish the very best to Colette Hagan, who recently departed for a new position; as Communications Executive, she was responsible for the Membership Newsletter Emails this year, and contributed to our other editorial streams. We look forward to welcoming, in January, an Assistant Editor to strengthen the team. Thanks also to Think, our publisher, which handles the production and commercial elements of the STEP Journal and TQR.

Finally, special mention goes to the members of our respective Editorial Boards for the STEP Journal and TQR, who provide invaluable expert feedback on articles before publication. Stan Barg TEP and David Wallace Wilson TEP have just stepped down, and we thank them for their commitment and help over many years.

In 2018, we will continue our efforts to ensure that our editorial content accurately reflects the breadth of jurisdictions and disciplines that STEP represents. The STEP Journal content calendar for 2018 is now available here, and if you have any feedback, suggestions or questions about our editorial output, please do remember to get in touch at [email protected].

We wish our readers and members a very happy festive period.

John Read, Head of Editorial, STEP

STEP’s Special Interest Groups under the spotlight

SIG Spotlight Sessions 2017The end of November saw STEP Special Interest Groups’ (SIGs’) annual day of conferences, the ‘Spotlight Sessions’, held at the Montcalm Hotel in London and attracting over 300 international delegates.

The day started early with a breakfast-time Philanthropy Advisors SIG session. Outgoing chair Suzanne Reisman TEP welcomed attendees and contributed to a panel discussion, which also included Keyvan Ghavami of Act On Your Future, Jacqueline Lazare TEP of Royds Withy King and Julie Wynne TEP of Froriep. A lively discussion ensued, the takeaway point being that advisors are missing a business opportunity if they do not at least raise the issue of charitable giving with their clients.

The International Client SIG session began with Joseph Field TEP of Withers Bergman LLP delivering the keynote lecture on the changing landscape for international clients, quipping that events move so fast, that if you miss the news for 15 minutes, you can get completely behind. Tony Pitcher TEP of LGL Trustees Limited moderated a discussion on tax regimes, which included contributions from Luxembourg, Cyprus, the US, the UAE, Italy and Switzerland.

Bill Ahern TEP of Ahern Lawyers, David Russell QC TEP of Outer Temple Chambers and Wendy Martin of EY – Channel Islands discussed ‘attacks on intermediaries’ and practical issues in relation to the Common Reporting Standard (CRS). Wendy said that implementing CRS was a massive challenge, and depended hugely on how you interpret the law. She asked what might happen to all the data required, and what could go wrong, before pointing out the gaping contradiction with data protection legislation that mandates privacy. David expressed his concern that regulatory requirements are making it increasingly difficult to open a bank account and many entirely legitimate people are being excluded from the banking system, and Bill noted that in a number of countries there were very good reasons for not wanting the government to know about your financial affairs, not least personal security.

The day marked the official launch event of the newest of STEP’s SIGs, the Digital Assets SIG. Leigh Sagar TEP of New Square Chambers gave an introduction to digital assets and the issues they present for estate planning and administration. Together with the panel, he presented the audience with some quite alarming scenarios which left not a few squirming in their seats. If someone has your computer password, they could empty your bank account. If you let someone else use your Facebook account, you’ve committed an offence. If a family member dies, you may not be able to read their emails, or access their accounts. If your relative left online gambling debts that needed to be paid, but you didn’t have the passwords, you would not be able to settle their estate. The panel discussed a number of ways of ensuring passwords stay secure and yet are accessible to those who need them. One of the simplest ideas was to keep a list in a sealed envelope. The session concluded with discussions on electronic signatures and wills and the important, and growing, subject of cryptocurrencies and their taxation.

This year saw the Mental Capacity SIG and the Cross-Border Estates SIG partner on connecting sessions looking at cross-border capacity. Drawing the largest attendance of all the sessions, the panels comprised speakers from 12 jurisdictions providing a round-up of existing and new laws in each, followed by an active panel discussion.

The Business Families SIG session then explored the unique considerations an advisor must consider in an advisory position to a family business wishing to sell, as opposed to non-family entities. The audience heard first-hand accounts from family business owners Ian McKernan of Molecular Products Group and Alex Scott of Sandaire, alongside experts from the advisor community.

The final session was presented by the Contentious Trusts and Estates SIG and focused on the rules against self-dealing, fair dealing, no conflicts and their exceptions, considering the rules in light of recent decisions. Their session welcomed speaker Vicki Ammundsen TEP, who had come all the way from New Zealand.

Joanna Pegum, STEP PR & Media Executive

STEP LatAm Conference 2017 in Colombia

CartagenaA sell-out audience of over 370 delegates has been attending the 2017 STEP LatAm Conference in Cartagena, Colombia this week. The fact that they managed to get here in spite of a local transport strike made me feel, as a Brit, rather at home, but it also shows what a strong following the annual STEP Latam Conference now has.

Looking at STEP in the Americas, we now have a network of well over 40 branches with, between them, almost 5,500 members. This makes our major conferences a major meeting place for practitioners across both North and South America.

STEP Colombia is one of our newer STEP branches, but has a group of committed volunteers working hard to establish STEP in the jurisdiction as a way of enhancing professional knowledge and building international links in the fast-developing country. Cartagena was an inspired choice of venue for the event; as a major UN World Heritage site with an immaculately preserved historic centre, it proved highly appealing for delegates from further afield.

The twin issues of the European pressures for public registers of beneficial ownership and the implications of the US’ non-participation in the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) were just two of the key themes explored in the conference, which Patricia Wass TEP, Chair of STEP Worldwide and Luz Alfonso TEP, Conference Chair and one of the founder members of STEP Colombia, jointly opened.

After this year’s enormous success, many are already looking forward to next year’s STEP LatAm Conference in Mexico.

George Hodgson is Chief Executive of STEP

Information exchange reporting FAQs

Emily Deane TEPWith reporting now underway in the UK for both FATCA and the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), STEP has been liaising with HMRC on some of the finer points of reporting.

Can I still submit CRS amendments?

There is some time available following the 31 May 2017 deadline for submission of amendments or corrections. If you need to submit an amendment within the first few weeks of filing then HMRC should be able to include the amendments in the first exchange scheduled for 30 September and the information will be sent to the relevant jurisdiction.

What are the penalties for late CRS reporting?

HMRC has confirmed that they will take a soft approach towards penalties in the early stages of CRS (like FATCA, the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act ) – particularly if there are CRS system errors that incur late filing. However, a harder approach may be taken towards people who are deliberately negligent with their filing.

FATCA: what do I do if a US TIN is unavailable?

It has previously been identified that in some cases a nine-zero approach will be accepted when a TIN (Taxpayer Identification Number) is unavailable. Some accounts are being filed with missing TINs which causes difficulties because the system will respond that it has been submitted in an incorrect format. The ‘missing TIN’ cases are inevitably causing issues for users and HMRC and HMRC is waiting for feedback from the IRS later this year on how to resolve it. It may be deemed acceptable that the nine-zero approach continues in the short term.

I have received a FATCA renewal message, what do I do?

If you have received a FATCA renewal message for an FI (Financial Institution) from the IRS then you will need to login, check that renewal is not required and confirm that. For further information see p 84 of FATCA Online Registration, which says ‘FIs notified of the potential need to renew their agreement should login to the FATCA Online Registration System and view the ‘Renewal of FFI Agreement’ page … FIs must determine if they need to renew their agreement and then must submit their determination … All FIs should follow steps 1 through 4 below to determine if they must renew their agreement’.

What is the deadline for client notification?

The UK Client Notification Regulations came into force on 30 September 2016. The obligation for practitioners to notify any clients with offshore accounts and assets that HMRC will soon begin to automatically receive data from over 100 jurisdictions relating to UK tax residents and their offshore accounts, in accordance with the UK’s automatic exchange of information agreements, must be met by 31 August 2017. See this STEP blog for more information.

STEP will continue to consult with HMRC on ongoing technical issues.

Resources:

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

CRS reporting update, June 2017

Emily Deane TEPSTEP attended the most recent CRS Business Advisory Group hosted by HMRC and discussed the following issues:

FAQs

HMRC advised that new documents on the OECD portal have been published along with some additional FAQs.

Anti-avoidance

Members were interested to know when the OECD will publish its loophole paper which will review loophole reporting strategies.

HMRC advised it does not expect imminent changes to the OECD’s anti-avoidance strategy but does expect a review prior to that planned in 2019.

In the meantime, the OECD has launched a facility for parties to disclose CRS schemes which are potentially used to circumvent CRS reporting.

US TINs – invalid format

The number of the US Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN) to be submitted has to be in a certain format, otherwise the return will be rejected.

In some cases a nine-zero approach will be accepted but some accounts with missing TINs are causing difficulties having been submitted in an incorrect format. The ‘missing TIN’ cases are inevitably causing issues for users and HMRC. Members agreed that there will be problems next year when the nine-zero approach will no longer be accepted.

HMRC recognises these difficulties and has been liaising with the IRS regarding the TIN issues. A member also mentioned that the issue was being raised by industry groups in EU circles.

Invalid self-certifications

Members agreed that HMRC’s guidance is ambiguous if a self-certification is returned to the financial institution but contains errors. For example, would HMRC accept a self cert that had been returned, but not signed, in a time sensitive case?

HMRC declined to generalise on self-certification issues, stating that each example has to be judged on its own specific issues. It confirmed that it is up to the financial institution to decide whether it is satisfied that a person is non reportable. The financial institution should apply due diligence procedures based on guidance and common sense.

The mediation period and the cut off timing were also discussed. HMRC stated that it is up to the individual financial institution’s procedures as to the cut off. It was agreed that it can be a grey area with some contradictions, and in some cases the financial institution may need to decide whether a person is reportable, whilst the validation is undertaken. More clarity on this issue was requested from HMRC.

HMRC customer support

HMRC has been receiving increasing numbers of calls from clients of financial institutions, rather than the financial institutions themselves. This is causing problems, particularly when close to filing dates. As a result, HMRC has asked financial institutions to omit its contact details from notes that accompany the self-certifications, stating these are not relevant to clients and it does not have the resources to deal with additional queries.

STEP will continue to attend the periodic working group to discuss ongoing technical issues with HMRC.

Resources:

• STEP Guidance Note: CRS and trusts
• Live STEP webinar on ‘CRS and Trustees’ with John Riches TEP and Samantha Morgan TEP, 13 June

 

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel

CRS and Charities: January 2017 update

Donations boxHMRC hosted another Charities CRS working group on 16 January. The following issues were on the agenda for discussion:

Anti-Avoidance Rules

HMRC would like to refine its currently broad regulation regarding anti-avoidance. It is scheduled to discuss it with the compliance team shortly. It will also be reviewing the anti-avoidance issues surrounding donations channelled through other charites and some more detailed guidance is expected to be issued shortly thereafter.

Trust Guidance

HMRC is in the process of preparing some guidance with the OECD focusing on some of the grey areas surrounding trusts. STEP has produced a memorandum on the issues of concern on how the CRS is intended to apply to trusts, persons connected with trusts and trust assets. The memorandum sets out our understanding of the application of the CRS in certain circumstances and highlights points of uncertainty in the reporting framework. We have submitted the paper to HMRC and the OECD and hope that it will form part of the additional new OECD guidance.

Human Rights

HMRC has issued new guidance, Charities: Protection on Human Rights Grounds, which will assist charities concerned about the human rights implications associated with information they are required to report under the automatic exchange of information (AEOI) agreements. HMRC recognises that there may be cases where the threat to an individual’s human rights as a result of his or her information being exchanged may justify information being redacted from that transmitted. The guidance covers the redaction of information on human rights grounds; threats to human rights, and safeguards already in place; and how to apply for redaction of information, including the HMRC process and the documentation required.

STEP will continue to attend the periodic working group to discuss ongoing technical issues with HMRC.

 

Emily Deane TEP is STEP Technical Counsel