Connect with us

Accounting

Congressman introduces bill to offer residence-based tax system to expatriates

Published

on

Expatriate advocacy groups are applauding legislation introduced this week that would implement a residence-based taxation system for U.S. citizens living overseas.

Rep. Darin LaHood, R-Illinois, a member of the tax-writing House Ways and Means Committee, introduced the Residence-Based Taxation for Americans Abroad Act on Wednesday, a bill that would implement a residence-based taxation system for U.S. citizens currently living overseas.

The bill would enable Americans living overseas to elect to be treated as a nonresident American, allowing them to be subject to U.S. tax only on U.S.-sourced income and gains.

“This is a non-partisan issue that impacts U.S. citizens with roots in districts across the country. In today’s world, Americans choose to live and work abroad for a host of reasons, and that does not mean that they should be subject to more onerous tax and compliance burdens,” LaHood said in a statement Wednesday. “I look forward to working with President-elect Trump and my House colleagues on both sides of the aisle to modernize our Tax Code to ensure Americans are not punished for living and working abroad.”

The issue received more attention this past fall during the election campaign when Donald Trump told the Wall Street Journal, “”I support ending the double taxation of overseas Americans.”

According to recent estimates, over 5 million U.S. citizens are currently living abroad, including both Americans who were born and raised in the United States but have since moved abroad indefinitely, as well as “accidental Americans,” or individuals who hold dual citizenship in the United States and a foreign country but are unaware of their status as U.S. citizens.  The U.S. is the only major country that uses citizenship-based taxation, levying taxes on individuals regardless of where they live or whether they earn income in the U.S.

The bill establishes an elective process for a U.S. citizen living abroad to be treated as a non-resident without having to renounce his or her U.S. citizenship. Under this new tax regime, an electing taxpayer would be subject to U.S. tax only on U.S.-sourced income and gains (such as income from ownership in a U.S. business), distributions from U.S. retirement and deferred compensation plans, income from assets physically located in the U.S. (such as rent from real-estate investments), and other U.S.-sourced income or gains.

The electing individual would be treated for tax purposes like a foreign individual residing outside the United States with U.S.-sourced income.

An electing individual would need to certify compliance with U.S. tax obligations for the five years prior to the election date, with exceptions for certain existing, long-term Americans abroad.

Once the election is made, it would be effective for the current and all future taxable years until terminated (either by the non-resident American self-withdrawing the election or if the individual again becomes a U.S. resident for tax purposes).

Since the election is intended for Americans living abroad over the long term, the bill requires the non-resident American to live abroad for at least three years from the election date or the election would be reversed entirely.

For purposes of Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act only, a non-resident American would be able to apply to the IRS for a certificate of non-residency to use with foreign financial institutions.

By allowing the non-resident American to establish that he or she is not a “specific United States person,” foreign financial institutions would not be required to undertake burdensome reporting requirements under FATCA, which frequently discourage them from offering banking services to Americans living and working abroad.

Similarly, the non-resident American would be exempt from certain reporting requirements (and substantial associated penalties) with respect to foreign assets and transactions, including Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts Reports, or FBARs.

To help ensure fiscal balance and prevent abuse, the electing individual must also pay a departure tax on deferred income, with certain exceptions.

An election would require the individual to pay a departure tax based on deferred income, treating all property as if sold for fair market value on the day before the election with the gains and losses taken into account for purposes of determining the departure tax.

Once the departure tax is paid, the individual’s basis in each asset subject to tax would be the fair market value (stepped up basis).

The bill provides three exceptions to the departure tax, for an individual who:

  • Has a net worth (i.e., fair market value of all assets over liabilities) of less than the applicable estate tax exemption amount ($13.61 million for 2024, $13.99 million for 2025); or
  • Is a tax resident of a foreign country where the individual has regularly, normally, or customarily lived for three of the past five years, and such individual certifies that he or she has been in compliance with U.S. tax requirements for the three years prior to the bill’s introduction; or
  • Has not been a U.S. resident at any time since turning 25 years old or after March 28, 2010 (date that FATCA was adopted) through the date of enactment of the bill.

Expat support

The bill has received support from expatriate advocacy organizations, including American Citizens Abroad and Tax Fairness for Americans Aboard. 

“This long-awaited legislation is a critical step forward in bringing about something ACA has worked hard to achieve over many years,” said ACA executive director Marylouise Serrato in a statement.The bill builds on Congressman [George] Holding’s Tax Fairness for Americans Abroad Act of 2018 and we’re pleased to note, includes multiple features of ACA’s RBT modeling in our Side-by-Side Analysis dated 2022 and studies.” 

She pointed out that the introduction of LaHood’s legislation aims to set the groundwork for tax language that would ultimately be included in a new bill in the next Congress. It’s not expected to be passed before the current Congress recesses. 

The ACA has drafted a side-by-side analysis of Congressman LaHood’s “Residence Based Taxation of Americans Abroad Act” which provides an overview of the structure of the bill and addresses many of the details. It describes not only what is in the bill but also what is not.

Some of the main aspects of the legislation include:

  • U.S. citizens, but not “green card” holders, residing overseas (newly called “nonresident U.S. citizens”), in general, would be removed from the category of individuals subject to U.S. income tax and taxed like nonresident aliens (foreign individuals).
  • Individuals need to make a one-time election and continually meet residency and other requirements.
  • Electing individuals must certify under penalty of perjury that they have met all tax requirements for the five preceding taxable years and submit all required evidence.
  • Individuals resident in a so-called “tax haven” country can qualify for elective RBT.
  • Foreign banks can treat individuals who elect RBT as not subject to FATCA reporting rules provided they obtain a certificate of non-residency and give a copy to the bank. (This is similar to treatment of individuals who renounce US citizenship and file a Form 8854.
  • There is a tax, commonly called a “transition tax”, on deferred income of certain individuals electing to be subject to the new RBT rules. The tax applies to a deemed sale of all property. Individuals with a net worth not exceeding $13.6 million ($27.2 million-married couples) are excluded. Tied to estate tax unified credit. These amounts revert to $5 million or approximately $7 million when adjusted for inflation, if the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act is not extended.  
  • There are a number of exceptions, including Individual Retirement Accounts (IRA)s, which will not be subject to “transition tax.”
  • A special rule, a type of “grandfather” rule, will exempt many Americans residing abroad from the transition rules.

The National Taxpayers Union also praised the bill. NTU president Pete Sepp, an advisor to Tax Fairness for Americans Aboard, which helped LaHood develop the legislation, expressed its support:

“Americans living abroad face some of the toughest financial and compliance burdens that the U.S. tax system can possibly inflict,” Sepp said in a statement. “It is long past time that American tax laws deliver fairness and relief for these citizens. Congressman LaHood deserves praise from all American taxpayers, not just those living overseas, for developing this tax reform in collaboration with TFFAA and other organizations so quickly and holistically. Now taxpayers have a head start for 2025 on addressing a problem that prominent Democrats as well as Republicans (including President-elect Trump) have acknowledged. With this legislation, we have a very effective tool for the job of righting a great wrong for taxpayers.”

LaHood worked closely with Tax Fairness for Americans Abroad in drafting the bill. TFFAA is a U.S. nonprofit organization whose board members have deep personal experience navigating the pitfalls of U.S. tax and financial services laws that affect Americans abroad. The group’s sole mission is to advocate for a U.S. tax system for Americans abroad that is based on residence and source, not citizenship.

“For the first time in our lifetimes, Americans abroad can see the light at the end of the long, dark tunnel that has cost them huge amounts in accounting fees, ruined relationships, and made it impossible for them to live normal lives,” said Brandon Mitchener, executive director of Tax Fairness for Americans Abroad, in a statement. “We thank Mr. LaHood for his leadership and look forward to working with him to collect feedback on this non-partisan approach and to help advance the bill to the president’s desk next year.”

Continue Reading

Accounting

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Published

on

Mandatory ESG Reporting Standards Demand Standardized Non-Financial Audit Trails

Corporate accounting departments face an expanded regulatory mandate as mandatory sustainability and Environmental, Social, and Governance (ESG) reporting frameworks take full effect internationally. Governed by the European Union’s Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD) and the International Sustainability Standards Board (ISSB) IFRS S1 and S2 standards, enterprise financial controllers are now legally required to track, verify, and report non-financial data with the same internal controls and auditability as traditional financial statements.

The expansion shifts ESG compliance

This regulatory expansion shifts ESG compliance from marketing departments to corporate accounting offices. Financial managers are now responsible for gathering, consolidating, and verifying carbon emissions metrics, supply chain labor conditions, water usage, and climate risk exposures across multi-tiered corporate structures. These non-financial metrics must be integrated into standardized general ledgers to withstand rigorous third-party audit assurance processes.

To comply with these rigorous reporting mandates, accounting software providers have added dedicated ESG modules designed to aggregate data from IoT sensors, utility platforms, and vendor management systems. Controllers are implementing internal control frameworks—modeled after traditional COSO frameworks—to ensure the completeness, accuracy, and consistency of sustainability disclosures, protecting organizations against greenwashing penalties and litigation risks.

The transition requires significant cross-functional collaboration between accounting teams, legal counsel, and operational directors. Accounting professionals are expanding their technical expertise beyond financial ledgers to master carbon accounting methodologies, lifecycle assessment standards, and non-financial data governance protocols, fundamentally expanding the role of the modern corporate accountant.

Why This Information Matters
Mandatory ESG disclosures require companies to treat environmental and social metrics as audited financial records. Executives, accountants, and board members must institute formal tracking and assurance processes to satisfy legal mandates, maintain investor confidence, and mitigate regulatory non-compliance risks.

Continue Reading

Accounting

SEC’s Semiannual Reporting Proposal Faces Investor Pushback: What CFOs Need to Know

Published

on

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)

A proposal from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to potentially shift some public companies away from quarterly financial reporting toward a semiannual model is drawing significant pushback from investors, even as it continues moving through the regulatory process. The debate has direct implications for corporate finance teams, auditors, and the broader transparency of U.S. capital markets.

What the SEC Proposed

According to a summary published by accounting advisory firm Cohen & Co., the SEC issued a proposed rule on May 19, 2026, aimed at simplifying financial reporting requirements for many U.S. public companies. The proposal would potentially reduce the frequency of certain mandatory disclosures from quarterly to semiannual, a structural change that has not been made to core U.S. reporting requirements in decades.

The proposal follows an extended debate within U.S. policy circles, with proponents arguing that reduced reporting frequency could lower compliance costs and free up management time for longer-term strategic planning rather than quarter-to-quarter results management.

Why Investors Are Pushing Back

Comment letters submitted in response to the proposal have been extensive, and according to Cohen & Co.’s review of the public record, investors “appear to be largely opposed” to the shift, viewing frequent interim reporting as a core benefit of U.S. capital markets relative to other jurisdictions.

Accounting and law firms have taken a more measured position, generally urging any changes to remain aligned with the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), whose existing disclosure requirements and guidance are built around a quarterly reporting cadence. A shift to semiannual reporting without corresponding changes to FASB guidance could create friction between SEC filing requirements and GAAP-based disclosure expectations.

Lessons From the U.K. Experience

The debate is not without precedent. The United Kingdom moved away from mandatory quarterly reporting for listed companies in 2014, returning to a semiannual disclosure requirement. According to Cohen & Co.’s analysis, that experience offers a cautionary data point: there was no measurable increase in capital expenditure or R&D investment following the change, while analyst coverage of affected companies declined as reliable interim information became less available — a particular risk for smaller and newly public companies that rely on analyst coverage to maintain investor visibility.

Practical Implications for Finance Teams

Beyond the debate over disclosure philosophy, the proposal carries practical complications. Many companies have debt covenants and credit agreements structured around quarterly financial delivery; a shift to semiannual reporting could require renegotiating those terms. Reduced reporting frequency would also extend the “window of market silence” between disclosures, a factor that governance and investor-relations teams would need to manage carefully to avoid information asymmetry.

Separately, and unrelated to the reporting-frequency debate, the SEC and FASB have continued finalizing more routine updates this year. New Accounting Standards Updates are taking effect for December 31, 2026, fiscal year-ends covering income tax disclosures, credit loss measurement, induced debt conversions, and stock compensation, according to Eide Bailly’s review of 2026 ASU activity. Additional guidance on paid-in-kind dividends and environmental credits is also on the near-term horizon.

What to Watch Next

The semiannual reporting proposal remains in the comment and review phase, and no final rule has been adopted as of this writing. Finance leaders should monitor the SEC’s regulatory agenda for further movement, while treating the current quarterly reporting requirement as the operative standard until any final rule is issued and an effective date is set.

Given the extent of investor opposition documented in the comment file, a full shift to mandatory semiannual reporting appears more likely to result in either a scaled-back compromise or continued study rather than swift adoption — though the SEC’s ultimate direction remains uncertain.

 

Continue Reading

Accounting

AI-Driven Automation and Continuous Accounting Frameworks

Published

on

The accounting profession is undergoing a fundamental structural transition as enterprise finance departments shift from periodic month-end closes toward automated continuous accounting models. By integrating specialized machine learning algorithms directly into enterprise resource planning (ERP) platforms, chief accounting officers are transforming financial reporting from a retrospective exercise into a real-time operational asset.

The Shift from Periodic Close to Continuous Financial Reporting
Traditional accounting workflows heavily relied on manual data reconciliation, spreadsheet calculations, and multi-week closing cycles at the end of each fiscal period. In contrast, continuous accounting frameworks utilize automated software agents to process, validate, and post transactional data in real time as business activities occur.

Automated bank reconciliation tools cross-reference incoming bank feeds, invoice records, and purchase orders automatically. By resolving transactional variances instantly throughout the month, corporate accounting teams eliminate the traditional workload spikes associated with quarterly and annual closes.

Machine Learning in Audit Trails and Anomaly Detection
Advanced natural language processing (NLP) and machine learning tools are redefining internal audit and financial control environments. Automated systems analyze 100% of general ledger entries, identifying anomalous transactions, duplicate payments, and unauthorized journal entries in real time.

Rather than relying on random statistical sampling, corporate internal auditors can focus their attention on high-risk flags automatically surfaced by algorithmic monitoring platforms. This continuous risk assessment strengthens internal controls over financial reporting (ICFR) and significantly reduces fraud risk.

Evolving Roles for Accounting Professionals
As routine data entry and manual reconciliation tasks become fully automated, the skill set required for accounting professionals is shifting toward data analysis, system design, and strategic business advisory.
– Systems Governance: Accountants are increasingly responsible for monitoring algorithmic accuracy and managing data integration pipelines.
– Business Partnership: Finance professionals leverage real-time financial dashboards to advise operational leaders on margin management and working capital allocation.
– Regulatory Compliance Management: Accounting teams utilize automated platforms to ensure compliance with dynamic tax codes and international accounting standards.

Core Implementation Recommendations
1. Deploy Automated Reconciliation Tools: Integrate continuous transaction processing modules into existing enterprise ERP architectures.
2. Establish Algorithmic Governance Controls: Implement strict internal testing protocols to ensure automated accounting rules comply with GAAP/IFRS standards.
3. Reskill Accounting Teams: Invest in training finance staff on data analytics, workflow automation, and predictive financial modeling.

Continue Reading

Trending