Skip to content
Tax Law Center Blog

Tax Law Center Blog

  • Tax & Foreign Assets
    • Tax Law Services
    • Foreign Asset Planning
  • About
  • Contact Us
Close Button

Opting-out of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative: FBAR Penalty Mitigation Guidelines

19 May, 2012 Parag Patel 0 Comments 1 category

Parag P. Patel, Esq.By Parag P. Patel, Esq. | Updated May 19, 2012

Depending on the circumstances, we sometimes recommend some taxpayers to opt out of the voluntary disclosure initiative and allow us to demonstrate the absence of willfulness and avoid the normal FBAR penalty regime. We have been aggressively pursuing OVDI opt-outs for some of our clients. In doing so we have been advocating for Normal FBAR Penalty Mitigation to apply. For those who do not know about the Normal FBAR Penalty Mitigation, you should see http://www.irs.gov/irm/part4/irm_04-026-016.html#d0e1317. The Normal FBAR Penalty Mitigation are also provided below.

Normal FBAR Penalty Mitigation Guidelines for Violations Occurring After October 22, 2004

The Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) allows the Secretary of the Treasury some discretion in determining the amount of penalties for violations of the FBAR reporting and record keeping requirements. There is a penalty ceiling but no minimum amount. This discretion has been delegated to the FBAR examiner.

  • The examiner may determine that the facts and circumstances of a particular case do not justify a penalty.
  • If there was an FBAR violation but no penalty is appropriate, the examiner should issue the FBAR warning letter, Letter 3800.

When a penalty is appropriate, IRS has established penalty mitigation guidelines so that the penalties determined through the examiner’s discretion are uniform. The examiner may determine that:

  • A penalty under these guidelines is not appropriate, or
  • A lesser amount than the guidelines would otherwise provide is appropriate.

The examiner must make this determination with the written approval of the examiner’s manager. The examiner’s workpapers must document the circumstances that make mitigation of the penalty under these guidelines appropriate . To qualify for mitigation, the person must meet four criteria:

  1. The person has no history of criminal tax or BSA convictions for the preceding ten years and has no history of prior FBAR penalty assessments;
  2. No money passing through any of the foreign accounts associated with the person was from an illegal source or used to further a criminal purpose;
  3. The person cooperated during the examination; and,
  4. IRS did not determine a fraud penalty against the person for an underpayment of income tax for the year in question due to the failure to report income related to any amount in a foreign account
Normal FBAR Penalty Mitigation Guidelines for Violations Occurring After October 22, 2004 – Per Person Per Year
Non-Willful (NW) Penalties
To Qualify for Level I-NW – Determine Aggregate Balances If the maximum aggregate balance for all accounts to which the violations relate did not exceed $50,000 at any time during the year, Level I – NW applies to all violations. Determine the maximum balance at any time during the calendar year for each account. Add the individual maximum balances to find the maximum aggregate balance.
Level I-NW Penalty is $500 for each violation, not to exceed an aggregate penalty of $5,000 for all violations.
To Qualify for Level II-NW – Determine Account Balance If Level I-NW does not apply and if the maximum balance of the account to which the violations relate at any time during the calendar year did not exceed $250,000, Level II-NW applies to that account.
Level II-NW Penalty is $5,000 for each Level II-NW account violation, not to exceed 10% of the maximum balance in the account during the year
To Qualify for Level III-NW If Level I-NW does not apply and if the maximum balance of the account to which the violations relate at any time during the calendar year was more than $250,000, Level III-NW applies to that account.
Level III-NW is $10,000 for each Level III-NW account violation, the statutory maximum for non-willful violations.
Willfulness Penalties
To Qualify for Level I – Determine Aggregate Balances If the maximum aggregate balance for all accounts to which the violations relate did not exceed $50,000, Level I applies to all accounts . Determine the maximum balance at any time during the calendar year for each account. Add the individual maximum balances to find the maximum aggregate balance.
Level I Penalty is The greater of $1,000 per violation or 5% of the maximum balance during the year of the account to which the violations relate for each violation.
To Qualify for Level II – Determine Account Balance If Level I does not apply and if the maximum balance of the account to which the violations relate at any time during the calendar year did not exceed $250,000, Level II applies to that account .
Level II Penalty is per account The greater of $5,000 per violation or 10% of the maximum balance during the calendar year for each Level II account .
To Qualify for Level III If the maximum balance of the account to which the violations relate at any time during the calendar year exceeded $250,000 but did not exceed $1,000,000, Level III applies to that account .
Level III Penalty is per account. The greater of (a) or (b):
(a) 10% of the maximum balance during the calendar year for each Level III account, or
(b) 50% of the closing balance in the account as of the last day for filing the FBAR .
To Qualify for Level IV If the maximum balance of the account to which the violations relate at any time during the calendar year exceeded $1 million, Level IV, the statutory maximum, applies to that account.
Level IV Penalty is per account the statutory maximum The greater of (a) or (b):
(a) $100,000, or
(b) 50% of the closing balance in the account as of the last day for filing the FBAR.Our law firm expects unabated aggressive enforcement of the US tax laws, including increased criminal prosecutions and civil audit examinations. We have been advising our clients to expect the unexpected (and the worst) in their tax treatment and disclosure of offshore assets.

Patel Law Offices is a law firm dedicated to helping clients resolve complicated tax, criminal tax, and international tax problems. Our firm assists (and defends) clients and their advisors to legally disclose (and legitimize) foreign accounts.

Parag P. Patel, Esq.About the Author

Parag P. Patel, Esq. brings over three decades of experience to individuals and businesses facing complex tax problems. Holding advanced degrees from Georgetown University Law Center (J.D.) and New York University School of Law (LL.M. in Tax Law), the nation’s top tax programs, Mr. Patel delivers sophisticated and creative strategies in complicated federal and state audits, penalty abatements, and foreign asset/income reporting. His practice emphasizes international tax matters, specifically foreign financial account reporting (FBAR), voluntary disclosures, and penalty defense.

Book a Paid Legal Consultation

Related Posts

  • Obama to Keep 2009 Estate Tax Level

    President Obama wants to freeze the current estate tax level to $3.5 million which is…

  • Willful FBAR Penalties

    U.S. Citizens who have a financial interest in or signature authority over foreign bank accounts…

  • New IRS Guidelines for Willful FBAR violations

    Last week, the Internal Revenue Service released interim guidance (SBSE-04-0515-0025) on foreign bank account report…

Tags: amnestyAsset Protection FBAR foreign account offshore accounts OVDP penalties and interest voluntary disclosure
Category: Planning for Tax Minimization

Post navigation

Previous: The legal standard of “willfulness”: Opt out to avoid high penalties
Next: OVDI: Requesting issuance of a FBAR warning letter instead of penalties

Related Posts

HSBC Customer Avoids Jail in Tax Evasion Case

A New Jersey businessman who cooperated with prosecutors avoided prison…

Read More

Silent Disclosure: The Qualified Amended Return (QAR)

Can I Disclose Issues to the IRS After the Tax…

Read More

$3.5 Million Federal Estate Tax Exemption for 2009 Could Mean Higher State Death Taxes

  The federal estate tax exemption increases from $2 million…

Read More

Recent Posts

  • The Enforcement Surge: What the DOJ and IRS Campaign Means for Tax Professionals and Their ClientsOctober 17, 2026
  • The High Price of Payroll Tax Non-Compliance: Lessons from United States v. PittsSeptember 15, 2026
  • FBAR Willfulness, Recklessness, and the Excessive Fines Defense: Key Takeaways from United States v. RundSeptember 11, 2026
  • FBAR Enforcement and Penalty Analysis: United States v. NiksichSeptember 5, 2026
  • Billions Offshore, Millions Missed: What TIGTA’s Report Means for FATCA EnforcementSeptember 2, 2026
  • Criminal Tax Enforcement Takes Center Stage: The National Fraud Enforcement Division MemorandumAugust 21, 2026
  • Navigating New Jersey Tobacco and Vapor Excise Tax AuditsAugust 11, 2026
  • Navigating the US Estate Portability Election: Strategic Timing and Compliance Procedures for Form 706July 13, 2026
  • IRS Transitions from First Time Abatement to Automated Penalty Relief: Strategic Impacts for Tax AdvisorsJuly 11, 2026
  • Parag Patel to Present on IRS Foreign Asset Enforcement at the 2026 NATP TaxposiumJuly 9, 2026

Search

Archives

  • October 2026
  • September 2026
  • August 2026
  • July 2026
  • June 2026
  • May 2026
  • April 2026
  • March 2026
  • February 2026
  • January 2026
  • November 2025
  • October 2025
  • September 2025
  • August 2025
  • July 2025
  • June 2025
  • May 2025
  • March 2025
  • February 2025
  • January 2025
  • December 2024
  • November 2024
  • October 2024
  • August 2024
  • July 2024
  • June 2024
  • May 2024
  • April 2024
  • March 2024
  • February 2024
  • January 2024
  • December 2023
  • November 2023
  • October 2023
  • August 2023
  • July 2023
  • June 2023
  • May 2023
  • April 2023
  • March 2023
  • February 2023
  • January 2023
  • December 2022
  • November 2022
  • October 2022
  • September 2022
  • August 2022
  • July 2022
  • June 2022
  • April 2022
  • March 2022
  • January 2022
  • December 2021
  • November 2021
  • October 2021
  • September 2021
  • August 2021
  • July 2021
  • June 2021
  • May 2021
  • April 2021
  • March 2021
  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • September 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • February 2018
  • January 2018
  • December 2017
  • November 2017
  • October 2017
  • September 2017
  • August 2017
  • June 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • December 2016
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • July 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • February 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • November 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • October 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • July 2014
  • June 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • May 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • October 2010
  • September 2010
  • August 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • September 2009
  • August 2009
  • July 2009
  • May 2009
  • April 2009
  • March 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2008
  • September 2008
  • August 2008
  • July 2008
  • June 2008
  • May 2008
  • April 2008
  • March 2008
  • February 2008
  • January 2008
  • December 2007
  • November 2007
  • August 2007
  • July 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • December 2006
  • July 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • March 2001
  • March 1999
  • February 1998
  • August 1996
  • July 1996

Meta

  • Log in

Categories

  • Estate Planning and Probate
  • Planning for Tax Minimization

Law Firm Attorney WordPress Theme By Themespride