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

OVDI: Requesting issuance of a FBAR warning letter instead of penalties

29 May, 2012 Parag Patel 0 Comments 1 category

Parag P. Patel, Esq.By Parag P. Patel, Esq. | Updated May 29, 2012

In a Tax Notes Today report of statements made at the Eastern Pennsylvania Working Together Conference in Malvern, PA, Jason Kuratnick, IRS Associate Area Counsel (Philadelphia), Small Business / Self-Employed Division is reported to have said:

The IRS may send a warning letter in lieu of asserting penalties for failure to file a Form TD F 90-22.1, “Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts,” if it would be sufficient to bring the individual into compliance, an IRS official said May 17. See Matthew Dalton, IRS May Issue Warning Letters on FBARs Instead of Penalties, 2012 TNT 97-3 (5/18/12).

The statement is too vague make any conclusions and certainly is not a definitive statement of the IRS position. In terms of background, IRS agents should generally either issue the FBAR warning letter, Letter 3800, or determine a penalty. See IRM 4.26.17 for the Letter 3800 procedures. See below.

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. In doing so we have been advocating for the IRS Agent to issue the FBAR warning letter instead of penalties.

IRM 4.26.16.4 (07-01-2008)
FBAR Penalties

  1. The IRS has been delegated authority to assess FBAR civil penalties.
  2. There are civil penalties for negligence, pattern of negligence, non-willful, and willful violations.
  3. Whenever there is an FBAR violation, the examiner will either issue the FBAR warning letter, Letter 3800, or determine a penalty. See IRM 4.26.17 for the Letter 3800procedures .
  4. Penalties should be asserted only to promote compliance with the FBAR reporting and recordkeeping requirements. In exercising their discretion, examiners should consider whether the issuance of a warning letter and the securing of delinquent FBARs, rather than the assertion of a penalty, will achieve the desired result of improving compliance in the future.
  5. FBAR civil penalties have varying upper limits, but no floor. The examiner has discretion in determining the amount of the penalty, if any. Examiner discretion is necessary because the total amount of penalties that can be applied under the statute can greatly exceed an amount that would be appropriate in view of the violation.
  6. Examiners are expected to exercise discretion, taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case, in determining whether penalties should be asserted and the total amount of penalties to be asserted. Because FBAR penalties do not have a set amount, IRS has developed penalty mitigation guidelines to assist examiners in the exercise of their discretion in applying these penalties. The mitigation guidelines are only intended as an aid for the examiner in determining an appropriate penalty amount. The examiner must still consider whether a warning letter or a penalty amount that is less than what would be called for under the mitigation guidelines would be more appropriate given the facts and circumstances of a particular case. For example, if an individual failed to report the existence of five small foreign accounts with a combined balance of $20,000 for all five accounts but the income from each account was properly reported and the taxpayer made no effort to conceal the existence of the account, it may be more appropriate to issue a warning letter rather than assert penalties under the mitigation guidelines.
  7. FBAR penalties are determined per account, not per unfiled FBAR, for each person required to file. Penalties apply for each year of each violation. As noted above, however, examiners are expected to exercise discretion, taking into account the facts and circumstances of each case, in determining whether penalties should be asserted and the total amount of penalties to be asserted.
  8. There may be multiple FBAR civil penalty assessments arising from one account. FBAR civil penalties can apply to each person with a financial interest in, or signature or other authority over, the foreign financial account. Thus there may be multiple penalty assessments if there is more than one account owner or if a person other than the account owner has signature or other authority over the foreign account. Each person can be liable for the full amount of the penalty.

     

    In the meantime, 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. Taxpayers, who have not done so already, should explore the OVDP program to avoid criminal prosecutions and civil audit examinations.

    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

  • Opting Out of the OVDI Program: Argue for No Penalty and a Warning Letter

    The revised IRS OVDP FAQs offer helpful guidance on the opt-out option. The newly revised…

  • IRS Criminal Investigations: A Serious Threat With Warning Signs

    Criminal investigations are the most potent (and severe) tool in the IRS's enforcement toolkit. While…

  • Argue for No Penalty and a Warning Letter for FBAR Violations

    The IRS may send a warning letter in lieu of asserting penalties for failure to…

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

Post navigation

Previous: Opting-out of the Offshore Voluntary Disclosure Initiative: FBAR Penalty Mitigation Guidelines
Next: Plan Now for Dynasty Trusts

Related Posts

Visited by IRS Special Agents?

IRS Special Agents are employed by the Criminal Investigation Division…

Read More

New IRS Enforcement Letters Warn of Cryptocurrency Non-Compliance

Last week, the Internal Revenue Service began sending letters to…

Read More

REPORTING FOREIGN ASSETS & ACTIVITIES: REQUIREMENTS AND CHALLENGES: Complimentary CPE Presentation

Join us for a Complimentary CPE Presentation on Reporting Foreign…

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