Started By
Message

re: So I got this email from my CPA today.....

Posted on 9/22/24 at 7:13 pm to
Posted by Billy Blanks
Member since Dec 2021
4771 posts
Posted on 9/22/24 at 7:13 pm to
quote:

Then they can go find the info themselves. I won’t provide it and will toss the form.


It's a $500 DAILY fine. Yes, you read that right. I'd encourage you to not toss it.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452308 posts
Posted on 9/22/24 at 8:57 pm to
There are about 10,000 more important things to fight in politics/government than filling out a simple form to provide information the government already has.
Posted by JohnnyKilroy
Cajun Navy Vice Admiral
Member since Oct 2012
38715 posts
Posted on 9/22/24 at 10:21 pm to
quote:

I won’t provide it and will toss the form.
What industry are you in?
Posted by iknowmorethanyou
Paydirt
Member since Jul 2007
6591 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 5:49 am to
Papers, comrade.
Posted by Dixie2023
Member since Mar 2023
3600 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 6:45 am to
Just a lowly employee. But if I were someone who was sent this form and it is a new procedure, into the trash it goes. They have the info already via tax forms.
Posted by rocksteady
Member since Sep 2013
1808 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 7:41 am to
quote:

I never understood why people were losing their minds over this, for this reason.


It does, at first, appear like something that should not be making all these single member grass cutting LLCs so angry
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452308 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 8:06 am to
On another note, I've noticed there is a demographic overlap in people who think they're fighting tyranny by complaining about this and people who think China is buying our country...and a major reason this reg was put into place specifically to identify foreign interests/ who are doing things like buying property hidden in American LLCs, due to concerns over money laundering and national security interests.

I also read an article on the ruling referenced earlier, and the reasoning is very shaky.

quote:

In addressing Congress’ authority under the Commerce Clause, the Court acknowledged that Congress could issue legislation regulating commercial intermediaries, such as banks, and cited to Supreme Court precedent upholding aspects of the BSA. However, the Court found that the CTA was unlike the BSA’s regulation of financial institutions as those institutions move funds in foreign and interstate commerce. The Court rejected the government’s argument that state-registered entities would almost certainly engage in interstate commerce, finding that the act of incorporation of an entity under state law, without more, was insufficient to implicate the Commerce Clause. In so ruling, the Court expressed a narrow view of the question presented: “‘Does Congress have authority under the Commerce Clause to regulate non-commercial, intrastate activity when ‘certain entities, which have availed themselves of States’ incorporation laws, use the channels of commerce, and their anonymous operations substantially affect interstate and foreign commerce?’” The Court concluded Congress does not.


While I would like our ICC interpretation to move towards being more limited like this ruling, the current ICC jurisprudence does not agree with the reasoning.

Posted by Drizzt
Cimmeria
Member since Aug 2013
14441 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 8:36 am to
quote:

You should flex some muscle then and stop paying income taxes.


Oh I do. I pay as little tax as possible. I have no problem screwing the federal government. Paying taxes is not patriotic. I’m not a fed simp like SFP.
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452308 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 9:22 am to
quote:

. I’m not a fed simp like SFP.

Posted by Drizzt
Cimmeria
Member since Aug 2013
14441 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 9:32 am to
Autism is a crippling condition
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452308 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 9:33 am to
As has been stated

quote:

There are about 10,000 more important things to fight in politics/government than filling out a simple form to provide information the government already has.

Posted by lsujro
north of the wall
Member since Jul 2007
4031 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 9:35 am to
quote:

Do those members not file taxes?


you don't have to list LLC membership interest on your tax return. the people who i've spoken with who are most concerned are those using LLC as asset holding vehicles.

it's also common in my industry for people to try and hide the identity of entity owners for various reasons. the last i checked into it (several months ago), the regs on who can access the fincen info were pretty vague.

quote:

For a civil judgment, this should be disclosed in a judgment debtor rule once the judgment is rendered.


not talking about the kind of people getting called to judgment debtor exams
This post was edited on 9/23/24 at 9:36 am
Posted by SlowFlowPro
Simple Solutions to Complex Probs
Member since Jan 2004
452308 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 9:46 am to
quote:

it's also common in my industry for people to try and hide the identity of entity owners for various reasons.


People complained about China and foreigners doing this, so the government responded to the complaints.

The feds aren't arguing this is a potential national security issue from citizens hiding associations/assets.

Posted by JohnnyKilroy
Cajun Navy Vice Admiral
Member since Oct 2012
38715 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 10:15 am to
quote:

Just a lowly employee.


Well that’s not surprising lol
Posted by lsujro
north of the wall
Member since Jul 2007
4031 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 10:31 am to
quote:

People complained about China and foreigners doing this, so the government responded to the complaints.

The feds aren't arguing this is a potential national security issue from citizens hiding associations/assets.



i understand the reasoning behind it. and the complaint isn't always with feds necessarily. for instance, LA dept of revenue may take a keen interest in the ownership of non LA entities to which RV's in TD village are registered. i'm not arguing it's good or bad, just pointing out that i am aware of many people who are concerned about it.
Posted by FinleyStreet
Member since Aug 2011
8000 posts
Posted on 9/23/24 at 10:35 am to
quote:

There are about 10,000 more important things to fight in politics/government than filling out a simple form to provide information the government already has.


It's a weird hill to die on, for sure.
Posted by LSUFanHouston
NOLA
Member since Jul 2009
39276 posts
Posted on 9/24/24 at 11:51 am to
As others have said, this is really an attempt at learning who actually owns and benefits from the profits of complicated structures, especially if those benefits accrue to foreign owners.

One of the unintented consequences here is a paperwork burden for just about all businesses.

This really has little to do with tax, which is why many CPAs (not all) are avoiding this. Kinda like how many CPAs (not all) will not file your Secretary of State annual report for you.
first pageprev pagePage 2 of 2Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram