Arbusers

For some reason the PayPal employee does not tell the truth.

1) PayPal is a bank and it's a reporting financial institution under the laws of FATCA and CRS.
2) When you ask about the things in 1), they reply only about FATCA "only for U.S. persons".  Clearly, CRS is for ALL residents of many other signatory countries.
3) I guess 1) and 2) happens because they are still talking about the CURRENT privacy policy which is still in effect till 27th of April. Then they will reply that yes, we AUTOMATICALLY share your data with the Luxembourg tax authority which will forward your data to the tax authority of your country of residence.

Pistu wrote: For some reason the PayPal employee does not tell the truth.

1) PayPal is a bank and it's a reporting financial institution under the laws of FATCA and CRS.
2) When you ask about the things in 1), they reply only about FATCA "only for U.S. persons".  Clearly, CRS is for ALL residents of many other signatory countries.
3) I guess 1) and 2) happens because they are still talking about the CURRENT privacy policy which is still in effect till 27th of April. Then they will reply that yes, we AUTOMATICALLY share your data with the Luxembourg tax authority which will forward your data to the tax authority of your country of residence.

I think there is not difference between "before" and "after" 27.04. Closed accounts will be also reported by  CSR, otherwise CRS does not make sense. You can pick up the money, close the account and nobody  can you not anything.  So, paypal can you reply same answer now and after 27th of April.

CRS is a standard. Financial institutions can't make their own judgement on what data will be exchanged; these are specified.

If they are going to send data, then they will have less than 60 days to ask 50+ million account holders for their identity documents and tax id numbers.  Time should be given for raised objections, too
Someone's physical residence is just an indicator, does not prove a tax residence.
For example, PP cannot process the data of a Serbian tax resident living in an EU country for CRS purposes

mario21 wrote: CRS is a standard. Financial institutions can't make their own judgement on what data will be exchanged; these are specified.

If they are going to send data, then they will have less than 60 days to ask 50+ million account holders for their identity documents and tax id numbers.  Time should be given for raised objections, too
Someone's physical residence is just an indicator, does not prove a tax residence.
For example, PP cannot process the data of a Serbian tax resident living in an EU country for CRS purposes

Yes and PayPal nothing like this not doing.

Pistu wrote: For some reason the PayPal employee does not tell the truth.

1) PayPal is a bank and it's a reporting financial institution under the laws of FATCA and CRS.
2) When you ask about the things in 1), they reply only about FATCA "only for U.S. persons".  Clearly, CRS is for ALL residents of many other signatory countries.
3) I guess 1) and 2) happens because they are still talking about the CURRENT privacy policy which is still in effect till 27th of April. Then they will reply that yes, we AUTOMATICALLY share your data with the Luxembourg tax authority which will forward your data to the tax authority of your country of residence.

My question was on the CRS and not on FATCA. The specific question at point: 3. How We Share Information with Other Third Parties (section 6.a.) with www link: https://www.paypal.com/si/webapps/mpp/ua/upcoming-policies-full. Answer already you know.

"My question was on the CRS and not on FATCA. " - Yes, exactly this is what troubles me. I also asked this about a year ago! And I got the same answer.

I was asking about CRS and they replied about FATCA ( only applicable to US. persons). As if CUSTOMER SERVICE would still have exact info only about FATCA and NOT about CRS.

In other words, how do you justify the answer you got from them, that that section is applicable only to US persons while CRS is clearly applicable for "everyone" ?

The tables are up side down once again. I received the following e-mail from FCA:

Dear XXXXX

Further to our previous responses to you in relation to your query about the Common Reporting Standards of the OECD we have completed some further investigations into this and this may of originally been looked as income reporting for the firms you have mentioned. The Common Reporting Standards are specifically implemented by the UK HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) for taxation purposes and although there may be some implications under the CRD IV legislation you may wish to speak to HMRC directly for further guidance.

Please accept my apologies for the initial confusion, but I hope you find this additional information helpful.

Yours sincerely


Darren Cotton
Customer Contact Centre
Financial Conduct Authority

Consumer Helpline: 0800 111 6768
Website: www.fca.org.uk
Email: consumer.queries@fca.org.uk

Crazy situation really..it seems like end outcome is inevitable but no one wants to confirm it.

@arbusers:  so what does it mean?

Jarora, which country are you from? If you are from a non signatory county regarding CRS then they will not send info about you, maybe this justifies the answer you got from PP?

Pistu wrote: @arbusers:  so what does it mean?

FCA now claim that they have nothing to do with CRS, and we must ask the HMRC.

Anyone asked HRMC on this situation?

M@chibist wrote: Anyone asked HRMC on this situation?

I asked HMRC and they responded with this:

"Thank you for your email.  The question of whether any entity has reporting obligations under the CRS is for that entity to determine by reference to the OECD rules.  The entity needs to determine whether or not it is a Financial Institution within the relevant definitions.

We have published guidance on Gov.uk on how the rules apply to UK electronic money institutions and I attach a link to the relevant page.
https://www.gov.uk/hmrc-internal-manuals/international-exchange-of-information/ieim400750

Kind regards"

So I believe there's still hope. The reply Arbusers got I already had last week and posted the findings here. COREP is different than CRS however there ARE some common grounds and similar basis of determining.

What I don't understand is, how can HMRC says it's up to each entity to decide? If there are reporting obligations, they have to be determined and enforced, how can each entity decide on their own?

I mean Skrill is STILL responding with this:

Dear XXXXX,
Thank you for contacting the Skrill Help Team.


Further to your enquiry, please be advised that Skrill Limited is a regulated Electronic Money Institution and therefore is not required to participate in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Common Reporting Standards (CRS).

For information on how we use your personal information, please see the Privacy Notice on our website.

Kind regards,

Mihaela
Skrill Help Team
---------------------------

This is from last week.


So I believe there'll be some obstacles and compliance takes time. If you ask me if they're going to have to report in 2021, probably yes, but for 2016 and possibly 2017, I think it could be ok.

The only thing that I do not understand is why Paysafe is hinting they will participate, if both their e-money providers (Neteller and Skrill) are not obligated to report. Why shoot themselves in the foot?

Also, someone raised a great point. Banks that are reporting have started gathering TINs from JAN 2016 already, whereas here no one asked anything. So what, they will have less than 2 months to gather 70 million TINs and cure indicia? I don't think it's that easy.

So for this year it could be ok

Pete1928 wrote:

The only thing that I do not understand is why Paysafe is hinting they will participate, if both their e-money providers (Neteller and Skrill) are not obligated to report. Why shoot themselves in the foot?

Paysafe dont own just Neteller and Skrill. They have 5 company in their portofilio. Maybe they will and must participate with their rest companies.

ps.

Pete1928 thank you for your effort  and sharing here about this issue.
Kind regards