Nuñez Law Group

Hello world!

admin — Wed, 03 Aug 2011 00:31:17 +0000

Welcome to WordPress. This is your first post. Edit or delete it, then start blogging!

Kovel Arrangements at Risk?

admin — Mon, 10 May 2010 23:01:03 +0000

Confidential communications between attorneys and their clients are protected by the attorney-client privilege. This privilege does not extend to communication with accountants. Under an arrangement commonly known as a Kovel arrangement, attorneys will often hire accountants to work with them on tax cases and have successfully asserted that the communications with the accountants are also privileged. A senior criminal tax lawyer at the IRS has reportedly said at an American Bar Association conference that the IRS will oppose such assertions of privilege and that assertion of such privilege may cause the case to be handled differently.

Switzerland is attempting to overcome legal obstacles to compliance with its agreement to turn over UBS account information to the US

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 19:38:42 +0000

Switzerland is attempting to comply with its agreement to turn over information concerning 4,450 undisclosed bank accounts by the August 2010 deadline. By seeking parliament approval for the agreement, Switzerland hopes to overcome legal obstacles (raised in a Swiss court ruling) to its compliance with the agreement.

http://www.lawandtax-news.com/asp/Switzerland_To_Allow_Information_Exchange_In_UBS_Case_xxxx41937.html

Switzerland under pressure and looking at ways to work with other countries to address tax evasion.

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 05:26:16 +0000

Switzerland appears to be looking for the elusive balance between protecting the privacy of financial institution customers and permitting or promoting tax evasion.

Andorra and Malaysia move to the OECD’s “white list.”

admin — Fri, 26 Feb 2010 05:18:04 +0000

In its efforts to promote tax transparency and prevent tax evasion, the OECD established a standard requiring jurisdictions to enter into at least 12 qualifying bilateral tax information exchange agreements or equivalent (based on Article 26 of the OECD’s Model Tax Convention and produced a report listing 3 categories of jurisdictions: (a) a white list of jurisdictions that have substantially implemented the standards, (b) a gray list of jurisdictions that have committed to but have not yet substantially implemented the standards, and (c) a blacklist of jurisdictions that have neither substantially implemented or committed to substantially implement the standards. Andorra moved to the white list on February 25, 2010. Malaysia moved up to the white list on February 22, 2010.

You can follow the work of the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes at www.oecd.org/tax/transparency

The 2/25/10 progress report on the jurisdictions surveyed by the OECD global forum in implementing the internationally agreed tax standard can be found here: oecd-progress-report (PDF).

UK has updated its Residence, Domicile and Remittance Basis Guidance

admin — Tue, 23 Feb 2010 05:28:03 +0000

The guidance issued by the UK tax authorities (HMRC) was updated to reflect legislative changes made to the remittance basis rules applicable to taxpayers who are residents but not domiciled in the UK. The changes in the new version compared to the earlier version (published in April of 2009) are in part 5 of the document.

Download the document here: uk-domicile-residence-guidance (PDF).

Establishing the existence of an attorney-client relationship can be tricky.

admin — Wed, 17 Feb 2010 19:36:42 +0000

Taxpayer charged with tax evasion was unable to establish a violation of the attorney-client privilege when a Canadian attorney representing a partnership of which the taxpayer was a partner mailed letters to the Internal Revenue Service disclosing the taxpayer’s tax evasion. The court held that the taxpayer, as an individual, was unable to establish an attorney-client relationship with the attorney or to establish that the attorney’s disclosures were confidential communications.

Enforcement of Swiss Government Agreement to Turn Over UBS Account Information

admin — Tue, 16 Feb 2010 00:58:01 +0000

The Swiss government appears to be struggling to comply with its agreement to turn over to US authorities information concerning 4,450 accounts held by U.S. taxpayers with UBS in light of a Swiss court ruling that bars the Swiss government from turning over details concerning most of the accounts. The U.S. does not wish to renegotiate the agreement and the Swiss government wants to avoid the consequences of its failure to comply with the agreement.

Europe, The March Toward Transparency

admin — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 19:35:33 +0000

The march towards transparency continues in Europe. The European Parliament is putting pressure on Austria and Luxembourg to give up bank secrecy. The European Commission is proposing rules that would require all EU member states to exchange information on banking interest income but Austria and Luxembourg do not agree because competing offshore centers (e.g. Switzerland) have not given up bank secrecy. The European Parliament has also resolved to push the OECD to revise its model tax convention requiring automatic exchange of information rather than providing tax information only upon request. As European countries crackdown on tax evasion and obtain or are offered stolen Swiss bank information, the outflow of EU funds in Swiss bank accounts has begun and is expected to grow.

Added Perils for Financial Institutions Dealing with Undeclared Funds

admin — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:57:19 +0000

LGT (Liechtenstein’s largest bank) had enough trouble when it was revealed in 2008 that a former employee of the bank stole client information that it later sold to tax authorities in Germany for more than 4 million euros. Germany and other countries, including the U.S., who also ultimately received the information, used the information to prosecute taxpayers for tax evasion. One of the clients pursued by the German tax authorities sued a trust fund previously owned by LGT for its failure to inform him that information concerning his account has been stolen by a former employee. The client argued that, had he been informed, he would have been able to declare his account to the German tax authorities before they used the stolen data to pursue the account holders. A Liechtenstein court has ruled that the trust fund is liable to the client for the US$10 million fine imposed upon the client. The Liechtenstein trust intends to appeal.