Anyone willing to engage one of the architects of FATCA?

Today I got curious about who actually designed this horrific albatross around our necks called FATCA. I found out that one responsible person is J. Richard (Dick) Harvey, who proudly says he was one of the architects of FATCA. He has published an article that discusses his perception of FATCA, how it came to be, issues with it and what he sees as recommendations needed to make FATCA successful. His article consistently refers to “tax cheats” (29 times), and there is no discussion of how this would affect regular, normally law-abiding people.  He argues extensively for GATCA. His paper, Offshore Accounts: Insider’s Summary of FATCA and Its Potential Future’ can be found at:

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1969123

He is the Distinguished Professor Of Practice at Villanova University School of Law.

His email address is published, and is: rharvey@law.villanova.edu

I’m wondering if anyone wants to take on trying to contact him and get him engaged, as I know I am not the right person for something like this.

At any rate, throwing it out there in case someone’s interested.

Advertisements

15 thoughts on “Anyone willing to engage one of the architects of FATCA?

  1. I’m going to read it and see what he has to say. I would think that if we can get several of us to look at this and give their critiques that that would be the best way to go.

  2. @outraged:

    Thanks for posting that. I’ll probably try to hit him up for an interview for my magazine piece — but FYI: I won’t be able to share any of what he says until the piece is published in September.

    DW

  3. I read this paper when it came out late last year. I wrote this about it on another blog site:

    “The author is visibly defensive about the damage his legislation is causing, yet remains unapologetic, and appears either unwilling or unable to grasp the full horror of what he has created. I count eleven occurrences of some form of the word “hope” in this paper. That pitches it somewhere around wishful thinking, and certainly far from than anything rigorously thought out. Like FATCA itself, this paper is worthless trash from beginning to end.”

    In retrospect, I think I was too lenient 🙂

  4. @zuludogm, interesting to see this popping up in multiple places. good to have a countervailing message – instead of the ‘resistance is futile’ ‘fatca inevitable, surrender now ‘ advertising by ‘compliance’ ‘experts’.

  5. @Watcher, ‘unwilling or unable to grasp the full horror of what he has created’. Absolutely! Aptly stated. I am hoping someone is willing to take him on. I’d love to hear what he has to say now that all the feedback from world wide banks and institutions has come in. And to have some of our guys tear him to pieces if he continues in his ‘FATCA is wonderful’ stance. Of course, by tear him to pieces, I mean intellectually and in correspondence or writing, keeping in mind that we are ‘peaceful resistors’ on this site 🙂

  6. FATCA is evil indeed. But the real dragon to be slain is citizenship-based taxation.

  7. It wasn’t some university type that passed FATCA. Sure, we can let him share the blame. But, the real culprits are lazy congresscritters who don’t keep the full ramifications of what they vote in perspective.

  8. If every country engaged in citizenship-based taxation cost would have no relationship to benefits.

    It’s like saying I’ll order my office supplies from Company ABC but send the check for payment to Company XYZ. In the real world that would land you in the nut house.

    If the US thinks their citizenship is worth so much why don’t they auction it off to see how much it will fetch? We have a billionaire who was willing to pay hundreds of millions of dollars to be free of US citizenship. That’s a powerful message.

  9. It is also interesting that GATCA was envisioned from the start.

    “Just me” had it right all along.

  10. When it comes to GATCA, on this one, I would rather be wrong! 🙂

    BTW, for those who like keeping up with Jack Townsend, there is a good post tonight on the DOJ/IRS chest thumping on their offshore successes. I have posted a comment there that got posted without paragraph breaks, for reasons unknown. I hate that….

    http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.com/2012/06/doj-tax-promo-piece-to-house-oversight.html

    I am re-posting here for better readability…

    Well, well… PR Promo indeed!

    Rolling out the same old tired stats that will be repeated endlessly by our scribe journalist without a question asked. While I agree, “deterrent effect has been substantial”, could the IRS have accomplished similar compliance or even better without the all the harm they have done with the application of their OVDP / OVDI programs? At what cost has this program been a “success”? There is always a balance sheet.

    If I was the IRS I would not want to mention the other side of the Ledger. The TAS report to Congress and Nina Olson’s TAD is an embarrassing counter balance to their assertions. Of course there is no mention of the anger in the Expat community, and the “bait and switch” nature of FAQ 35 in the OVDP program. Not a word about the inefficiency and cost of a 2 year bureaucratic process just to end up in an Opt Out where discretion is finally applied. They haven’t mentioned the increasing number of expatriations, directly tied to these IRS actions, but never mind. We are not searching for truth here. Let’s not question the narrative. Mission accomplished! That is all you need to know, Congress. Allow us our victory lap. Let us brag about the new notches in our gun before we march onward to FATCA fallout which is coming!

    Also, notice the lack of any mention of the Whale to Minnow ratio or number of expats or new immigrants in those 30,000 tax payer who they tout as prime examples of their program success in ferreting out those “hidden foreign accounts.”

    Do you think anyone in Congress will ask or question whether the IRS really needs a global FATCA (GATCA) that they are now orchestrating as a follow on to their “success”? Is there really $100 Billion in revenues out there that merits all the systemic risk such a program creates? What is the documentation for that $100B assertion? America has been asleep while the rest of the worlds FFI’s seethe at this hubristic action by our Congressman who probably never read or knew what they were voting for when they passed the Hire Act in 2010. It is just now starting to get homeland attention when the IRS unilaterally applied it domestically, in the DATCA version of FATCA. See Senator Rubios editorial in the Miami Herald, or Congressman Boustany’s demand of Geither to stop stonewalling and produce the cost benefit analysis for these actions.

    I read an interesting piece in the Asian Investor tonight, with quotes from a DC lobbyist, that merit attention. (I know he is drumming up business, but just the same, I do take note. )

    “Outside a handful of legislators who slipped it into the 2010 ‘Hire Act’ with no debate and a few Treasury officials tasked with enforcing it, hardly anyone here has even heard of Fatca,” Jatras says. The looming costs to domestic financial institutions are just beginning to be understood.

    “The window for impacted industries to delay Fatca’s enforcement and to set the stage for its repeal not only has not closed – it really is just beginning to open,” Jatras says. “If Hong Kong interests want to ‘fire back’ at Fatca, they have to aim at the right target: Congress.”

    You can read more here: http://ht.ly/1k9rhD

  11. btw, this is posted on another thread, but good to have it here too…

    This is a release on FATCA when it first came out with all the Senator and Representative names associated with this disaster…

    http://bit.ly/14VRMo

  12. How much of the damage of FATCA has already been done, even if it is repealed?
    The mere concept of a GATCA is scary as H-E-double hockey sticks, Dr FrankenFATCA here is mad!

Comments are closed.