Uniform Exchange Of Information Agreement

There are other provisions that are not clear either. For example, in Article III, “undersigned agency” means “any state agency, instrument or agency, or instrument of the District of Columbia or the City of New York that has executed the agreement for as long as the agreement with that agency remains in effect.” Does this mean that localities and municipalities other than the District and New York City are excluded from the use of this agreement? And I could go on with other issues raised by the agreement, but I will reserve them for a longer article. Whether such provisions are necessary for the effective exchange of information between States on taxpayers should be the subject of lively debate, particularly in the face of the growing threat of a cyber-attack. The protection of taxpayers` confidential information is essential. Estv and national and local tax authorities should be more transparent about how they exchange information and what they do to protect it. Last month, I spent more time than I admit on how, when and with whom public tax authorities share confidential taxpayer information and what security measures are taken to prevent it from being abused. What I have learned is that very little information is publicly available about this. Taxpayers are expected to blindly provide huge amounts of information to tax authorities, but not to know through what process one state or municipality communicates information with another. Questions about how a client spends their money or the financial products in which they invest are confidential information and are not subsequently disclosed. The Swiss tax authorities will continue not to have access to the bank accounts of persons residing in Switzerland, whether foreign or Swiss, unless Parliament introduces laws amending national banking secrecy. On the other hand, a Swiss resident who has an account abroad in a jurisdiction with which Switzerland has concluded an agreement for the automatic exchange of information could be under the control of the Swiss tax authorities. Indeed, several provisions of the agreement should be the subject of debate and debate. For example, Article VI provides that signatories should exchange information on taxpayers “with respect to the likely fiscal capacity of a taxpayer in the State of the undersigned agency, if feasible”.

In other words, whenever information can be useful, it should be shared. The agreement also encourages both the massive exchange of information and informal requests regarding the availability of information. The Federal Prison Act was adopted at the beginning of December. International bilateral agreements and the MCAA have yet to be approved by Parliament. In the event of a positive result and a possible referendum, the swiss financial institutions concerned could start collecting data on their customers living abroad in 2017. . .


Published on: October 13, 2021  -  Filed under: Uncategorized