(...or possibly not...)

Regular watchers of the way U.S. officials have been prosecuting American taxpayers whom they deemed to have committed "non-willful" breaches of the government's so-called FBAR regulations didn't have to be asked twice for their thoughts on Tuesday's landmark U.S. Supreme Court decision that – at long last – finally established how penalties for such breaches are to be determined. 

In what is being seen as a major victory for Americans with non-U.S. bank accounts that they've failed to report to U.S. officials, the U.S. Supreme Court today ruled that the US$10,000 maximum penalty for such non-disclosure, if it's found to have been "non-willful," is to be applied on a per-form basis, and not per account.

Tomorrow – Nov. 2nd – the U.S. Supreme Court will begin to hear arguments in a closely-watched case that's expected to result in clarification, at last, as to how the penalties in so-called "non-willful Foreign Bank Account Report (FBAR)" cases should be determined.

In what many tax lawyers and others have long hoped it would do, the U.S. Supreme Court has at last agreed to consider a so-called "non-willful FBAR penalty" case, which is expected to result in clarification as to how the penalties in such non-willful FBAR matters should be determined.

Alexandru Bittner, who has been one of the most visible challengers of the United States' notoriously persecutory FBAR penalty regime in recent years, has now become the latest FBAR litigant to urge the U.S. Supreme Court to rule, once and for all, on the way non-willful FBAR penalties should be determined. 

...citing disproportionate penalties, pan-EU capital movement infringement 

Europe's top court has ruled against Spain's Modelo 720 "foreign asset law", declaring that its disproportionate penalties and potentially restrictive effects on the free movement of capital and payments across EU borders were violations of European regulations. 

Foreign Bank Account Report-watchers have long wondered when an FBAR case would finally reach the Supreme Court, and in so doing, at last begin settling questions having to do with the scope of FBAR penalties, which can be draconian.

But as Monday's Supreme Court announcement denying Alice Kimble the writ of certiorari that she had petitioned for back in June showed, the wait for the great, long-awaited FBAR showdown is set to run a little longer than some might have hoped it  would...

In the latest in a series of cases that experts say has potentially major repercussions for expatriate Americans, a U.S. District Court in California has ruled that the penalty for a so-called "non-willful" failure to file foreign bank account reports (FBARs) should be calculated on a "per-FBAR", annual form basis, rather than for each bank account held by the American taxpayer in question outside the U.S.

The introduction of the Foreign Bank Account Report (FBAR) requirement in 1970, as a result of the Bank Secrecy Act of that year, may well be one of the most enduring legacies of the Nixon administration, says John Richardson, a Toronto-based lawyer who helps Americans with citizenship issues. Here, he reveals a little-known aspect of what the fine print of the FBAR legislation actually says, with respect to non-Americans who travel to the U.S., and who happen to have bank accounts back home...