Now that the dust has almost settled around the first FATCA submissions (for some the dust cloud might linger for a while longer), financial institutions have had a chance to take stock and try to make sense of their current regulatory position and strategies. However, now that they have had a chance to look ahead, a number of financial institutions have come to realise that FATCA wasn\u2019t just a storm that had to be weathered after which the sailing would be plain. Other financial submissions such as IT3b and DWT continue to keep the pressure constant, and we are almost due for the next round of FATCA submissions. For institutions that followed a tactical rather than strategic approach the first time round, it might mean \u201cthe same procedure as last year\u201d. In addition to this, a new buzzword has started doing the rounds: CRS.<\/p>\n
CRS (Common Reporting Standard), aka \u201cthe Standard for Automatic exchange of financial account information\u201d (formal definition), is also sometimes referred to as \u201cOECD reporting\u201d, \u201cGATCA\u201d (colloquially – \u201cGlobal FATCA”), or \u201cAEOI – OECD\u201d (Automatic Exchange of Information \u2013 Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development). This standard spawned as a result of FATCA, and does bear some large similarities. In effect the agreement allows for the automated and systematic reciprocal sharing of tax information (specifically relating to assets and income) between the various tax authorities that are signatories of the agreement. <\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n What are the main differences between OECD reporting and FATCA? <\/strong><\/p>\n\n
\n
\n