درباره این اپیزود
September 18, 2026 - Participants include:
Virginia La Torre Jeker - @VLJeker
John Richardson - @ExpatriationLaw
Today Virginia and John discussed the penalty situation of a U.S. citizen who had always lived in Mexico. He received gifts from his Mexican father and failed to notify the IRS of the gifts. This is a common and very expensive (from a penalty perspective) mistake.
What follows is the ai generated description of the podcast.
________________________________________________
"John Richardson and tax lawyer Virginia La Torre-Jeker dissect the recent Antonio Cesar Fuentes case involving Form 3520 foreign gift reporting. The IRS assessed a 25% penalty - under IRC 6039F - after Mr. Fuentes failed to report gifts from his non‑U.S. father that exceeded the $100,000 threshold, sparking a $90,000 penalty, refund litigation, and administrative confusion.
The conversation explains how filing suit can transfer settlement authority from the IRS to the Department of Justice (26 U.S.C. §7122), create forum issues for U.S. citizens living abroad (they are presumed to live in Washington, DC) , and reveal clashes between IRS and DOJ procedures.
The episode highlights the complexity of international gift rules, the severe penalties for noncompliance, and the need for careful reporting."
یادداشت ها را نشان دهید 🔗
رونوشت 🔗
00:00:00.517 --> 00:00:05.577
Good morning, this is John Richardson speaking with you from Toronto, Canada.
00:00:05.577 --> 00:00:10.833
Today is Friday, September the 18th, 2026,
00:00:11.577 --> 00:00:17.327
and the world moves on, and so does the outrageousness of the Internal Revenue
00:00:17.327 --> 00:00:22.055
Code and the way that it is administered in certain circumstances.
00:00:22.572 --> 00:00:31.475
And who better to discuss and dissect this with me today then-tax lawyer Virginia Latoura-Jeker.
00:00:32.177 --> 00:00:37.627
And today we are going to begin by revisiting a topic that we have talked about
00:00:37.627 --> 00:00:42.417
in the past, but it's such an important topic that I feel like we are playing
00:00:42.417 --> 00:00:45.674
the role of evangelists, educating the world about this.
00:00:46.742 --> 00:00:53.037
And so we're actually going to begin talking about this requirement that if a U.S.
00:00:53.037 --> 00:00:59.097
Person receives a gift of over $100,000 from a non-U.S.
00:00:59.097 --> 00:01:03.947
Person individually, or I think $20,000 if it's a corporation or something like
00:01:03.947 --> 00:01:09.880
that, then there is a reporting requirement subject to massive penalties.
00:01:10.478 --> 00:01:14.477
And with that, Virginia, what is it that brings us together today?
00:01:15.218 --> 00:01:21.287
Okay, so we've had a very interesting case come up with a tax penalty case.
00:01:21.792 --> 00:01:29.877
And it shows the harshness, of course, of this foreign gift reporting rule that
00:01:29.877 --> 00:01:35.597
if you miss out, you have a 25% penalty on the value of the gift.
00:01:35.597 --> 00:01:41.819
If you miss out on that filing requirement and you can't prove you have reasonable cause for missing out.
00:01:43.224 --> 00:01:47.032
But worse than that, this case,
00:01:47.572 --> 00:01:54.637
to my mind, shows us when the IRS and Department of Justice kind of collide,
00:01:55.490 --> 00:01:59.414
and have a total breakdown with the poor taxpayers stuck in the middle.
00:01:59.989 --> 00:02:06.402
So this case was just decided September 4th, so not too long ago, two weeks ago.
00:02:07.060 --> 00:02:09.927
And it's the Antonio Cesar Fuentes case.
00:02:10.600 --> 00:02:16.666
And what what happened to this poor gentleman was that he was he was a u.s citizen
00:02:16.666 --> 00:02:20.397
but he was living his entire life in mexico he.
00:02:21.629 --> 00:02:26.429
And over several years his father who was a non-us citizen provided him with,
00:02:26.923 --> 00:02:28.914
financial support every month,
00:02:29.534 --> 00:02:35.616
and they came out to be over you know the hundred thousand dollar filing requirement
00:02:35.616 --> 00:02:38.520
to say you've gotten gifts from a foreign person.
00:02:39.165 --> 00:02:43.966
So even though the gift transfers were not taxable to Mr.
00:02:43.966 --> 00:02:48.226
Fuentes, they did trigger this little-known reporting rule that,
00:02:48.226 --> 00:02:53.916
as you and I have been aware, is one of the most punitive features of the international
00:02:54.216 --> 00:02:57.227
tax compliance regime that we have.
00:02:57.837 --> 00:03:02.446
You know, Virginia, if we shouldn't pause here and just read this section of
00:03:02.446 --> 00:03:09.003
the code in, you know, just to give the reality. It's 6093F.
00:03:09.490 --> 00:03:11.726
I can read it. Do you have it in front of you? You can read it.
00:03:11.726 --> 00:03:13.228
I can read it. Somebody should read it.
00:03:13.853 --> 00:03:21.876
Sure. Okay. So essentially what 6039F of the Internal Revenue Code says is if
00:03:21.876 --> 00:03:27.233
the value of the aggregate foreign gifts received by a United States person,
00:03:27.921 --> 00:03:30.784
exceeds a certain amount, which is the $100,000.
00:03:31.883 --> 00:03:38.089
Then they have to report that according to how this IRS prescribes.
00:03:38.759 --> 00:03:43.153
And then it says, penalty for failure to file the information.
00:03:43.728 --> 00:03:49.243
If a United States person fails to furnish the information within the time prescribed.
00:03:50.328 --> 00:03:55.529
The tax consequences of the receipt of that gift shall be determined by the secretary,
00:03:56.092 --> 00:04:02.264
and the United States person shall pay an amount equal to yada yada not to exceed
00:04:02.264 --> 00:04:08.833
25 percent of the amount of the gift in the aggregate so.
00:04:09.911 --> 00:04:14.804
What that essentially means is that the IRS can re-characterize this and say
00:04:14.804 --> 00:04:20.285
maybe it's not a gift maybe it's hidden compensation of some sort and it's fully taxable.
00:04:20.807 --> 00:04:26.740
And if they determine that it was a gift and you didn't file the special form,
00:04:27.227 --> 00:04:32.359
then you can be hit with a 25% penalty based on the value of the gift.
00:04:32.690 --> 00:04:37.597
And that's exactly what happened to poor Mr. Fuentes.
00:04:38.508 --> 00:04:47.784
The IRS hit him with a $90,000 penalty for one of the tax years and he filed
00:04:47.784 --> 00:04:51.324
a refund claim, but the IRS denied the claim.
00:04:51.972 --> 00:04:59.644
And then he submitted an amended claim for a refund, which the IRS didn't respond.
00:04:59.644 --> 00:05:04.864
So then he filed a lawsuit in federal court stating the failure to timely file
00:05:04.864 --> 00:05:09.443
this form about the father's gifts was due to reasonable cause.
00:05:10.109 --> 00:05:13.871
And he was seeking a refund of the $90,000 penalty.
00:05:14.529 --> 00:05:17.614
Virginia, where was the court that he filed this in initially?
00:05:17.614 --> 00:05:18.982
Where was the court located?
00:05:20.692 --> 00:05:22.625
It was in Texas, wasn't it? I thought it was.
00:05:23.709 --> 00:05:28.870
Yes, that's correct. It was Texas. Not Washington, D.C., right?
00:05:28.870 --> 00:05:30.894
No. It was not Washington, D.C.?
00:05:31.601 --> 00:05:36.490
It was Texas. Okay. So then what happened, and you and I know,
00:05:36.490 --> 00:05:42.100
by the way, it's not easy to get reasonable cause, to get the IRS to agree that
00:05:42.100 --> 00:05:43.430
you have reasonable cause.
00:05:43.430 --> 00:05:53.239
But in any event, what happened was suddenly he was given a refund of his $90,000 loan.
00:05:55.031 --> 00:06:00.190
And he was so happy and he thought well this is the end of the issue and the
00:06:00.190 --> 00:06:07.738
IRS also abated the other year's penalties so I guess they accepted his reasonable cause argument,
00:06:08.638 --> 00:06:13.090
and paid attention to it sometimes they don't pay attention to it initially
00:06:13.090 --> 00:06:18.510
because there's an automatic assessment of this this penalty amount and maybe
00:06:18.510 --> 00:06:22.200
they get to the reasonable cause thing later if you bring it to their attention.
00:06:22.200 --> 00:06:27.370
That should have changed under the IRS procedure, but maybe when all of this
00:06:27.370 --> 00:06:33.222
was going on, that had not yet been effective in the IRS procedure,
00:06:33.831 --> 00:06:38.713
that they read the statement first before they determine if a penalty should be paid.
00:06:39.509 --> 00:06:48.091
So unfortunately, because Mr. Fuentes had filed that lawsuit claiming the refund,
00:06:49.305 --> 00:06:53.305
what happened was another code section kicked in.
00:06:53.984 --> 00:06:56.579
It's code section, if anyone wants to look it up.
00:06:59.555 --> 00:07:08.040
7122A, paragraph A. And what that means is once the taxpayer initiates any kind
00:07:08.040 --> 00:07:11.659
of litigation over a tax liability, you,
00:07:12.477 --> 00:07:17.283
Only the attorney general who acts through the Department of Justice has the
00:07:17.283 --> 00:07:23.603
authority to compromise or settle or change that liability.
00:07:23.603 --> 00:07:32.725
So the IRS essentially lost jurisdiction the minute Mr. Fuentes filed his refund claim in court.
00:07:33.382 --> 00:07:38.263
And the IRS could not, therefore, abate the penalty or adjust his account.
00:07:38.263 --> 00:07:43.064
They couldn't issue the refund unless the Department of Justice authorized it.
00:07:43.656 --> 00:07:46.543
So this hadn't happened, of course.
00:07:47.263 --> 00:07:52.583
Let's just pause for a second. I think this is important, and it introduces a procedure in sex.
00:07:53.123 --> 00:07:56.209
I don't believe we've ever talked about in a podcast, right?
00:07:56.857 --> 00:08:02.294
So Section 7122, this is a procedural thing, right?
00:08:02.933 --> 00:08:08.803
It says, Correct. The secretary may compromise any civil or criminal case arising
00:08:08.803 --> 00:08:14.896
under the internal revenue laws prior to reference to the Department of Justice for prosecution.
00:08:15.461 --> 00:08:20.503
Prior, right? Mm-hmm. The devil case is being there that once it's sent over
00:08:20.503 --> 00:08:24.463
there, as you point out, the IRS lost jurisdiction.
00:08:24.463 --> 00:08:31.173
Now, I'm inferring from your description that the refunds were made after the
00:08:31.173 --> 00:08:34.282
referral to the Department of Justice. Is that correct?
00:08:34.915 --> 00:08:39.793
Yes. Yes. Must have been, right? But now, remember, there wasn't a referral
00:08:39.793 --> 00:08:44.900
to the Department of Justice, as we're thinking, like the IRS said. You just put a lawsuit.
00:08:45.675 --> 00:08:51.996
I'm sorry? The taxpayer brought a lawsuit essentially against the government for the refund, right?
00:08:52.675 --> 00:08:57.787
That's right. And that's when the IRS lost jurisdiction. God.
00:08:58.784 --> 00:09:02.323
Who could have known? Yeah. Incredible. Who could have known?
00:09:02.323 --> 00:09:06.953
Who could have known? And by the way, Mr. Fuentes was represented,
00:09:06.953 --> 00:09:09.703
I mean, he was having his tax returns done by,
00:09:10.737 --> 00:09:13.337
an attorney who was also a tax
00:09:13.337 --> 00:09:18.531
specialist and was working with him on this entire matter, I'm assuming.
00:09:19.184 --> 00:09:21.214
And so, yeah, who could have known?
00:09:22.120 --> 00:09:28.957
I'm sure, you know, Mr. Fuentes, when he filed the lawsuit in Texas.
00:09:30.484 --> 00:09:32.591
He had the assistance of an attorney.
00:09:32.730 --> 00:09:36.317
I don't know that, you know, all of the raps of the teachers were.
00:09:36.617 --> 00:09:38.754
I mean, he doesn't even live in the United States, right?
00:09:39.416 --> 00:09:42.202
Exactly. He lives in Mexico.
00:09:42.943 --> 00:09:48.697
So, what we have here, you know, I'm reminded again of that TV show that I used
00:09:48.697 --> 00:09:51.330
to watch when I was growing up with Twilight Zone, right?
00:09:51.990 --> 00:09:59.268
You know, here we have this case of this absolutely unforeseeable law, right?
00:09:59.941 --> 00:10:02.303
Because, I mean, you know, gifts are not taxable.
00:10:02.981 --> 00:10:07.212
If you receive a gift, they're not taxable to a person receiving them.
00:10:07.634 --> 00:10:11.917
And, but yet there's this reporting requirement, right? That if it's somehow
00:10:11.917 --> 00:10:14.279
a foreign gift, right? That's right.
00:10:14.906 --> 00:10:19.497
You know, and, and why do they put the requirement on the person receiving it?
00:10:19.497 --> 00:10:21.680
Precisely because it's a foreign gift, right?
00:10:22.445 --> 00:10:26.117
You know, they don't have an exception over the foreigner. But one thing that's
00:10:26.117 --> 00:10:30.398
interesting here is it's this culture of report everything, right?
00:10:31.149 --> 00:10:35.217
Everything has to be reported. I mean, you know, if this were a U.S.
00:10:35.217 --> 00:10:38.655
Person making the gift, there'd be a form 709 filed, right?
00:10:39.745 --> 00:10:43.687
That's correct. Yeah. That's correct. They would have to file a gift tax return
00:10:43.983 --> 00:10:49.981
even if they didn't have to pay gift tax because they can use their lifetime
00:10:49.981 --> 00:10:52.831
exemption amount, use some of that in making the gift.
00:10:52.831 --> 00:10:57.891
They still have to report it so that there can be kind of this accounting mechanism
00:10:57.891 --> 00:11:02.134
to say, well, I made a taxable gift, but I'm using part of my lifetime exemption amount.
00:11:02.922 --> 00:11:07.751
And therefore I don't have to pay you a gift tax, but you just kind of deduct
00:11:07.751 --> 00:11:09.703
it from my lifetime exemption amount.
00:11:10.382 --> 00:11:15.201
Yeah, in other words, I think it's important to understand here and be interested
00:11:15.201 --> 00:11:18.981
in your view of this, but in explaining the U.S.
00:11:18.981 --> 00:11:24.741
Gift tax, right, would it be fair to say that there's a presumption of any gift
00:11:24.741 --> 00:11:29.850
being subject to a tax and then there are just a bunch of exclusions?
00:11:30.155 --> 00:11:37.544
You know, if it's below whatever it is, $17,000 a year or below your lifetime exclusion, et cetera.
00:11:38.421 --> 00:11:41.381
Isn't that right? I think that's a good way to look at it.
00:11:42.803 --> 00:11:46.771
That anytime you make a gift, yes, you have issues.
00:11:46.771 --> 00:11:52.251
Even if you're a foreign person, right? And I mean, if you're making a transfer
00:11:52.251 --> 00:11:57.582
of money to someone you love in the United States and you're sending it from your,
00:11:58.236 --> 00:12:07.375
foreign bank account into the U.S., argue that the transfer took place in America and that
00:12:07.793 --> 00:12:13.471
cash is treated as, you know, a tangible item, then you as the foreigner are subject to a gift tax.
00:12:14.278 --> 00:12:20.303
If that comes down that way, I mean, you just don't know. But people are so unaware.
00:12:21.550 --> 00:12:25.147
Of all of these crazy rules, then why shouldn't they be? I mean,
00:12:25.147 --> 00:12:30.627
we don't go about our lives thinking, oh, if I make a gift, I may have to think about X, Y, and Z.
00:12:31.497 --> 00:12:34.967
But I mean, if you were to educate Americans in a simple way,
00:12:34.967 --> 00:12:39.119
I mean, let's say that you were preparing the U.S. citizenship test.
00:12:39.739 --> 00:12:44.737
Don't you think a good question would be true or false? Any gift made by a U.S.
00:12:44.737 --> 00:12:50.570
Citizen is subject to a gift tax, is potentially subject to a gift tax? Yeah, great question.
00:12:51.285 --> 00:12:52.882
No answer, of course, yes.
00:12:54.487 --> 00:13:01.587
So, you know, really what we're talking about here is this reporting obligation. It's on Form 3520.
00:13:02.250 --> 00:13:09.417
You know, it's really a way to, you know, impose a continuing reporting obligation
00:13:09.417 --> 00:13:14.157
on the existence of the gift, sometimes on the donor, sometimes on the donee,
00:13:14.157 --> 00:13:17.021
depending on the nationality of the donor, right?
00:13:19.353 --> 00:13:25.100
Yeah. Yeah. So, I mean, that's the first part. We've got this total insanity, right?
00:13:25.506 --> 00:13:28.821
You know, and then this outrageous penalty, right?
00:13:29.173 --> 00:13:35.071
You know, for the failure. It really is a severe penalty for an informational
00:13:35.071 --> 00:13:40.915
form. I mean, it's not, there's no loss to the government in terms of tax dollars.
00:13:41.322 --> 00:13:46.321
This is just an informational form to say, I got a gift from my foreign father
00:13:46.321 --> 00:13:51.282
or mother or friend or whatever that exceeds this amount.
00:13:52.491 --> 00:13:56.480
I mean, one could do it as simply sort of a fundraising mechanism,
00:13:57.082 --> 00:13:59.421
right? You know, for the government, would you think? Well, this is,
00:13:59.421 --> 00:14:02.091
I think, how this form and the penalty have been viewed.
00:14:02.827 --> 00:14:12.581
Because, as you know, in earlier, not too long ago, it was an automatic assessment of this penalty.
00:14:12.581 --> 00:14:17.291
People at the IRS were not reading reasonable cause statements.
00:14:17.291 --> 00:14:22.291
Now, the then commissioner at the time said that this was going to change.
00:14:22.291 --> 00:14:26.527
I'm not sure if it's truly changed. I don't know. I haven't.
00:14:27.944 --> 00:14:31.888
You know, seen that in action. But I hope it's changed.
00:14:31.888 --> 00:14:35.548
I hope they're reading the reasonable cause statements because if they're not
00:14:35.548 --> 00:14:42.238
and the penalty is assessed, then the poor taxpayer has to go and fight to try and get the money back.
00:14:42.238 --> 00:14:47.528
Very high cost. Very high cost. Plus, you know, I mean, I think a,
00:14:48.008 --> 00:14:51.058
I mean, no disrespect to any of the judges hearing these cases,
00:14:51.058 --> 00:14:55.608
but I think a continual thing that we're seeing as cases heard by judges with
00:14:55.608 --> 00:14:57.250
a very limited knowledge.
00:14:58.948 --> 00:15:01.629
Of the tax code in that. Would you agree with that?
00:15:02.357 --> 00:15:08.748
I think, especially in the foreign area, John, it's so complicated for practitioners.
00:15:09.268 --> 00:15:14.048
People who've been studying this area of law and working in it for years and
00:15:14.048 --> 00:15:17.988
years still come up with, oh my goodness, what does this mean?
00:15:17.988 --> 00:15:22.089
What is this law saying? What are these regulations? How do we interpret them?
00:15:23.048 --> 00:15:26.435
It's very, very difficult. It's such a complicated area, and,
00:15:26.882 --> 00:15:30.841
you know, judges are not geared toward understanding that area.
00:15:30.963 --> 00:15:35.138
Well, there's no time to understand it. The problem is that the expertise in
00:15:35.138 --> 00:15:40.888
this, as you know from being one of the experts, is something that's acquired over years and years.
00:15:41.564 --> 00:15:45.908
And it's a tremendous amount of, you know, let's call it muscle memory or whatever.
00:15:45.908 --> 00:15:52.098
I mean, I think it's almost impossible for somebody without some kind of background
00:15:52.098 --> 00:15:56.045
in this to, you know, just read these sections and know what to do with them,
00:15:56.312 --> 00:15:57.508
or do you think that's correct?
00:15:58.117 --> 00:16:01.438
Do you think that's correct? That's absolutely correct, yes.
00:16:02.326 --> 00:16:07.079
All right, you know, we've got the tax issue itself, or the reporting issue,
00:16:07.798 --> 00:16:12.768
but then all of a sudden, you know, we get into this huge procedural mess, and you know, we've got.
00:16:14.486 --> 00:16:19.104
I didn't read this case very carefully, but I thought that one element of it
00:16:19.104 --> 00:16:24.634
was that because he was a U.S. citizen abroad, the proper forum was in the District
00:16:24.634 --> 00:16:27.622
of Columbia to bring this law. That's right.
00:16:27.820 --> 00:16:30.397
That's right. Out of Texas. Have I got that right?
00:16:31.051 --> 00:16:32.944
That's correct. Whenever the
00:16:32.944 --> 00:16:39.416
taxpayer is residing abroad, the forum is automatically Washington, D.C.
00:16:40.483 --> 00:16:44.904
So there was some aspect of this case. Wasn't there about having to transfer
00:16:44.904 --> 00:16:48.975
this thing from Texas to the District of Columbia?
00:16:49.924 --> 00:16:57.173
Yes, I think because that's why the Department of Justice is now suing to get,
00:16:57.823 --> 00:17:03.186
the money back, the refund that was paid to the taxpayer, the $90,000,
00:17:03.575 --> 00:17:11.564
and to assess penalties for the other years that the gift reporting forms were not filed.
00:17:11.564 --> 00:17:14.408
Oh, my God. So they're not just trying to get the 90 grand.
00:17:14.634 --> 00:17:18.681
I understand they're also hitting him for the other years.
00:17:19.646 --> 00:17:24.964
Okay. Virginia, could I ask you to summarize the sheer magnitude of what they're
00:17:24.964 --> 00:17:27.632
trying to get from this guy at this point now?
00:17:31.000 --> 00:17:35.130
I don't know the dollar number. Well, just structurally. They're trying to get
00:17:35.130 --> 00:17:36.839
penalties for every year, right?
00:17:37.490 --> 00:17:40.485
Yes, and we have four years at issue here.
00:17:40.764 --> 00:17:46.940
And they're trying to get a refund of what the IRS returned to him. Is that correct? Yes.
00:17:47.800 --> 00:17:56.472
The IRS gave him back the penalty, the 25% penalty for the 2010 year, and that was $90,000.
00:17:57.175 --> 00:18:01.600
So do you think a possible lesson here is that contrary to popular wisdom,
00:18:01.600 --> 00:18:05.686
the IRS is not, in fact, the most egregious arm of the U.S. government?
00:18:07.751 --> 00:18:16.566
Well, I think what bothers me the most is that I felt like,
00:18:17.577 --> 00:18:25.010
the IRS is the party that read his reasonable cause statement and determined,
00:18:25.010 --> 00:18:28.467
And, okay, he really did meet the standards for reasonable cause.
00:18:28.920 --> 00:18:37.160
Let's give him back the $90,000 penalty and let's drop the other penalty years
00:18:37.160 --> 00:18:40.100
that we assess the penalty.
00:18:41.615 --> 00:18:48.477
So I felt like that agency is the one that probably has the most knowledge about the case.
00:18:48.820 --> 00:18:53.460
Now, I don't know how much knowledge the Department of Justice would really
00:18:53.460 --> 00:19:00.441
have at this point. I just don't know. I don't understand why they're acting at cross purposes.
00:19:01.406 --> 00:19:07.210
And they're spending taxpayers' money doing it, right? Yes. You know, that's interesting.
00:19:08.453 --> 00:19:14.246
So it's a structural failure, you know, in this tax administration.
00:19:16.596 --> 00:19:22.268
It's administrative fragmentation of some sort that shouldn't be happening.
00:19:22.837 --> 00:19:26.770
By the way, was this a case of the taxpayer realizing the omission and coming
00:19:26.770 --> 00:19:29.240
forward voluntarily to try to correct this?
00:19:30.456 --> 00:19:35.800
No, the IRS had told him to file these forms. I don't know how they found out
00:19:35.800 --> 00:19:39.520
about the gifts from his father, maybe because he was getting monthly amounts
00:19:39.520 --> 00:19:43.150
into a bank account, and that triggered something.
00:19:44.561 --> 00:19:47.610
But they should file the forms, and so he filed the forms, right?
00:19:47.783 --> 00:19:52.250
Yes, that's correct. Surprise! Yeah.
00:19:54.183 --> 00:19:57.534
You never told me about that. Yeah, yeah, yeah. The chances are he didn't even
00:19:57.534 --> 00:20:01.915
know about the penalties when he filed the forms. Probably didn't.
00:20:03.064 --> 00:20:07.444
But, you know, here's, it's a real eye-opener,
00:20:08.736 --> 00:20:14.184
for everyone that, you know, when a case moves to the Department of Justice,
00:20:14.184 --> 00:20:18.239
which can be automatic when the taxpayer sues to get a refund, And,
00:20:19.131 --> 00:20:27.367
then everyone has to be aware that they understand IRS administrative authority is now finished.
00:20:28.434 --> 00:20:30.934
Would this be an argument? I mean, let's say that, you know,
00:20:30.934 --> 00:20:35.190
you've discovered that you didn't know the law, you haven't filed the forms.
00:20:36.049 --> 00:20:43.244
You know, no matter how I look at this case, right, it seems to me that it wouldn't
00:20:43.244 --> 00:20:48.124
be a big step for somebody to say, oh, my God, I'm not going to get involved in this.
00:20:48.124 --> 00:20:52.563
No way am I going to risk filing anything as a consequence. Mm-hmm.
00:20:53.360 --> 00:20:56.104
You know, I mean, I just do not, I guess what I'm saying is,
00:20:56.104 --> 00:21:01.723
I do not see how this serves the interests of the taxpayer, the government,
00:21:02.357 --> 00:21:05.817
the perception of the fairness of administration, of justice.
00:21:06.345 --> 00:21:10.391
I just don't see how this serves any interest at all. Maybe,
00:21:10.536 --> 00:21:13.467
can you find one? What interest does it serve?
00:21:14.165 --> 00:21:19.828
I mean, at this point, at this point, they haven't even actually extracted anything from it, right? No.
00:21:22.119 --> 00:21:25.222
Well, I don't know what to say about that, John.
00:21:26.644 --> 00:21:34.896
It's chaos. Maybe this is something that Taxpayer Advocate Service can start to push for.
00:21:36.014 --> 00:21:41.384
Maybe they need to require stronger internal controls so that there's no automated
00:21:41.384 --> 00:21:45.974
actions after a Department of Justice referral. I mean, this shouldn't have
00:21:45.974 --> 00:21:47.475
happened. This shouldn't have happened.
00:21:48.420 --> 00:21:51.014
You know, shouldn't have happened. It's a horrible thing. But,
00:21:51.014 --> 00:21:56.894
I mean, I would bet my last dollar that this man is really, really regretting, you know.
00:21:57.294 --> 00:21:59.310
Yes. Seeking a refund, right? Yeah.
00:22:00.536 --> 00:22:05.419
Really? Of course. Oh, well. So I, but people should know, right?
00:22:06.083 --> 00:22:10.686
John, people should, this could be the consequence.
00:22:11.678 --> 00:22:16.326
That's exactly right. I mean, there's the complexity of this stuff for anybody
00:22:16.326 --> 00:22:20.859
with non-US connections, whether Americans are abroad or not,
00:22:21.715 --> 00:22:25.886
the complexity is so, is so significant, right?
00:22:25.886 --> 00:22:28.398
It's so vast that.
00:22:30.909 --> 00:22:34.426
Now, understanding this stuff I mean, I don't know what you could do to get
00:22:34.426 --> 00:22:38.780
people to anticipate These completely unanticipated laws, right?
00:22:39.469 --> 00:22:46.672
There's nothing but a penalty trap The other thing I find amazing about this stuff is that You know,
00:22:47.319 --> 00:22:54.403
so these gifts I mean, it's one, you know, these gifts are Usually,
00:22:54.995 --> 00:22:58.966
but not always is usually coming from non-U.S.
00:22:58.966 --> 00:23:03.136
Resources, right? Non-U.S. money. It's stuff that never had anything to do with
00:23:03.136 --> 00:23:05.235
the U.S. taxes in the beginning, right?
00:23:05.948 --> 00:23:09.274
I mean, maybe the government's going to ask, well, you know,
00:23:09.390 --> 00:23:13.256
you want to inject this dirty money, this non-U.S. money into our economy?
00:23:13.256 --> 00:23:14.760
We're entitled to a cut of it.
00:23:15.353 --> 00:23:21.192
I mean, it is so indefensible, you know? It's so indefensible.
00:23:22.130 --> 00:23:25.153
But anyway, you're going to write about this, I assume, fairly soon, right?
00:23:26.003 --> 00:23:31.376
Yes, yes. I'm going to prepare an article that will be, you know, up on Forbes soon.
00:23:31.789 --> 00:23:38.976
Maybe next week I'll get that up and then later it'll be on my tax blog so people can read all about it.
00:23:39.716 --> 00:23:43.716
You know, the case just came down to me. People find the Forbes and I guess
00:23:43.716 --> 00:23:46.932
they just Google Virginia Latoura Deaker for Forbes.
00:23:47.553 --> 00:23:50.176
Yes, they'll find me there. They're going to find the tax blog.
00:23:51.156 --> 00:24:00.912
Blog is www.us-tax.org and we have,
00:24:01.354 --> 00:24:06.386
you know categories for all the different areas of international tax that the
00:24:06.386 --> 00:24:08.912
individual would probably be interested in,
00:24:09.370 --> 00:24:14.526
you know do you have foreign corporations do you have gifts do you have expatriation
00:24:14.526 --> 00:24:18.850
issues dual nationality check Check out the categories because,
00:24:19.535 --> 00:24:20.864
the blog posts are,
00:24:21.916 --> 00:24:27.374
under each category heading that the person might have an interest in.
00:24:28.191 --> 00:24:33.746
Well, I can say that it's a fantastic blog. You know, to borrow a tagline from
00:24:33.746 --> 00:24:37.996
American Express, no American abroad should leave home without it.
00:24:39.056 --> 00:24:42.356
Oh, thank you, John. Absolutely. It's great work.
00:24:42.983 --> 00:24:50.046
Okay, well, I thank you for this conversation and for your efforts and talents
00:24:50.046 --> 00:24:53.302
at simplifying some very, very complex things.
00:24:54.108 --> 00:25:01.527
And I look forward to further simplification and education for the masses in your Forbes article.
00:25:02.570 --> 00:25:06.995
Thank you, John. I'll send you an advance notice when it's coming up.
00:25:07.407 --> 00:25:09.381
Wonderful. Appreciate that.
00:25:10.008 --> 00:25:14.226
Okay. Thank you so much. until next time. I mean, you know, and there will be
00:25:14.226 --> 00:25:20.479
many more times because there is no end to the U.S. tax problems out there.
00:25:22.943 --> 00:25:25.312
Thanks very much. Thank you, John.