Automatic Exchange of Information [CbC Reporting]

Automatic Exchange of Information [CRS Regime]

Automatic Exchange of Information [FATCA Regime

Comparing CRS with FATCA [Read]

  • Comparing CRS with FATCA
  • Comparing Model 1-IGA and Model 2-IGA
  • List of jurisdictions signing Model-1 and Model 2 IGA 

More on international tax cooperation [Read]​





Exchange of Information on Request [EOIR]

Under the EOIR framework, all the double tax treaties (DTT's / DTA's) and tax information exchange agreements (TIEA's) are not working, unless a treaty state takes the initiative to make a request, which is foreseeably relevant to the administration or enforcement of its domestic tax rules, to another treaty state in accordance with the agreed-upon procedures. 
Under the AEOI framework, the reporting financial institution in a state [A] will automatically disclose to its treaty state [B] the information about the bank accounts maintained with the reporting financial institutions in the former state [A] and held by the tax residents of the latter state [B], and vice versa.





Automatic exchange of information [AEOI


In 2014, the OECD published the common reporting standard on automatic exchange of financial account information (AEOI). Jurisdictions that have publicly committed to implementing the AEOI standard on a timeline will first exchange tax information in 2017 or 2018.  


Listed below are the summaries of the intended timelines for the automatic exchanges of tax information in compliance with the Common Reporting Standard. See latest update on AEOI : Status of commitment {Read}.



Anguilla, Argentina, Barbados, Belgium, Bermuda, British Virgin Islands, Bulgaria, Cayman Islands, Colombia, Croatia, Curaçao, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominica, Estonia, Faroe Islands, Finland, France, Germany, Gibraltar, Greece, Greenland, Guernsey, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Isle of Man, Italy, Jersey, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mauritius, Mexico, Montserrat, Netherlands, Niue, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, San Marino, Seychelles, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Trinidad and Tobago, Turks and Caicos Islands, United Kingdom



Albania, Andorra, Antigua and Barbuda, Aruba, Australia, Austria, The Bahamas, Bahrain, Belize, Brazil, Brunei Darussalam, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Cook Islands, Costa Rica, Ghana, Grenada, Hong Kong (China), Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Marshall Islands, Macao (China), Malaysia, Monaco, Nauru, New Zealand, Panama, Qatar, Russia, Saint Kitts and Nevis, Saint Lucia, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Samoa, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Sint Maarten, Switzerland, Turkey, United Arab Emirates, Uruguay, Vanuatu



Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters


The Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (the "Convention"), by virtue of its Article 6, requires the Competent Authorities of the Parties to the Convention to mutually agree on the scope of the automatic exchange of information and the procedure to be complied with. 

  • Jurisdictions Participating in the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters - Status of the Convention



Multilateral Exchange Agreement


The Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on the Exchange of CbC Reports (the "CbC MCAA") for the automatic exchange of Country-by-Country Reports, and the Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement on Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information (the "CRS MCAA") for the automatic exchange of financial account information pursuant to the Common Reporting Standard (CRS), have been developed under Article 6 of the Convention.



Bilateral Exchange Agreement - Competent Authority Agreements (CRS CAA's)


A competent authority agreement (CAA) is a bilateral agreement. It enables the implementation of the exchange of information upon request (EOIR) or automatic exchange of information (AEOI) based on existing legal instruments:

(i) Article 6 of the Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters (the "Convention"),

(ii) a bilateral tax information exchange agreement (TIEA), OECD Model Agreement on Exchange of Information on Tax Matters (A TIEA is applicable to Exchange of Information upon Request)

(iii) a bilateral double tax agreement (DTA) under Article 26 of the OECD Model Tax Convention (applicable to AEOI and EOIR).  



Standard for Automatic Exchange of Financial Account Information in Tax Matters


  • OECD official publications of CRS [Read]
  • OECD official publication of CRS - Implementation Handbook [Read]




Activated Exchange Relationship on CRS information


The OECD portal also contains information on bilateral Competent Authority Agreements that jurisdictions have concluded, to the extent communicated to the OECD Secretariat. In respect of non-reciprocal exchange relationship, the non-reciprocal jurisdiction will be shown on the "from" column only, with the "to" column left blank. [read]




AEOI at Selected Country (Region) Level 



** Hong Kong's position relating to the exchange of information


(1) Hong Kong has the power to enter CAA under the CDTA or TIEA conclued with other jurisdictions under S49 of the Inland Revenue Ordinance, pursuant to Article 151 of the Basic Law of the HKSAR. 

(2) The Multilateral Convention is open to sovereign states only. At the time of China's joining the Convention, the Government of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region (and Macau Special Administrative Region) opted out of the Convention after consultation between Hong Kong government and the Central Government of China, as provided under Article 153 of the Basic Law of Hong Kong. Therefore, Hong Kong is not a party to the Multilateral Convention. See the decision by the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress {Read}.

(3) Hong Kong is falling behind meeting the standards for transparency and the timely implementation of AEOI and BEPS initiative, as imposed by the OECD and the EU respectively. In order not to get included under the list of "non-cooperative" tax jurisdiction, Hong Kong has changed its stance and sought to join the Multilateral Convention. Thus it requested the Central People Government, and the CPG has agreed in principle, to extend the application of the Multilateral Convention to Hong Kong.

(4) In this regard, Hong Kong has amended section 49 of the Hong Kong Inland Revenue Ordinance to pave the way for further participation in international tax cooperation. [read

(5) Eventually, in May 2018, China extended the territorial scope of the Convention to the Hong Kong and Macau Special Administrative Regions pursuant to Article 29 of the Convention. As such, the Convention will enter into force for both Hong Kong and Macau on 1st Sept 2018.


## The State Administration of Taxation in China has been late in publicly release the list of reportable jurisdiction. Instead of waiting for such information from the Chinese authority, one can access the OECD Automatic Exchange Portal, which provides the activated exchange relation between China and other jurisdictions under MCAA.


Glossary for AEOI


  • Common reporting standards - The AEOI standard consists of (i) a model competent authority agreement (Model CAA); and (ii) the common standard on reporting and due diligence for financial account information (CRS)  [Read];
  • Reportable jurisdictions - the countries/regions with which competent authority agreements have signed that impose obligation to report financial account information for AEOI purpose; 
  • Participating jurisdictions - the countries/regions having made commitments to implement the CRS, including the enactment of domestic laws for AEOI purposes in compliance with the CRS.

Glossary (EOI up request)


Spontaneous exchange of information - the provision of information to another contracting party that is foreseeably relevant to that other party and the information has not been previously requested.



Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes


The OECD Global Forum is an international tax body. It operates under a multilateral framework, within which work in the area transparency and exchange of information has been carried out by over 130 jurisdictions, which participate in the work of Global Forum on equal footing, irrespective of whether the individual member is a developed or developing country.


The membership of the Global Forum: G8, G20, OECD countries and other non-OECD countries. But there are overlappings of members among those bodies. Some countries like Canada, Japan and the UK are members of G8, G20 and OECD. [read]




Global Forum has been charged with in-depth monitoring and peer review on member states, in respect of the implementation of the standards of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.


Peer review and ratings


Peer review and rating on each of the individual member states (countries) are the main activities for the exchange of information on request (EOIR). Peer reviews on the exchange of information on request (EOIR) are generally conducted via a two-stage process, involving a Phase 1 review, which assesses the legal and regulatory framework for transparency and the exchange of information for tax purposes, and a Phase 2 review, which assess the implementation of the standard in practice.


The result of peer review for a country (jurisdiction) is a report adopted by the Global Forum, which includes recommendations for improvement (where relevant) and ratings on effectiveness, which may range from having a compliantlargely compliantpartially compliant or non-compliant status.


The first round of peer review on the exchange of information on request (EOIR) has been completed in 2015. The Global Forum has published 215 peer review reports on a country-by-country basis since 2010.


The secon round of peer review on EOIR will commence in 2016 and is expected to have completed in 2020.


All the reviews under the second round will be carried out against the new terms of reference as a combined process assessing both the legal framework and practical implementation. The terms of reference of the 2016 EOIR include a new requirement that beneficial ownership information be available and the EOIR exchanges be assessed for the quality as well as addressing the issue of group requests.


See the Schedule of Review: {Schedule}


Global Forum and Reports


  • See more information about Global Forum's background, membership, administration (the secretariat), peer view, rating, and automatic exchange of information for tax purposes: {Global Forum}
  • Global Forum annual report 2015 {Read} ; and 2016 {Read}
  • See the update reports to the G20 finance ministers and central bank governors at {Read-1} and {Read-2}. 



Automatic Exchange of Information (FATCA Regime)


Legal texts


  • HK: Bilateral Agreement between the U.S. and Hong Kong to implement FATCA - Model II IGA [Read]
  • HK: Tax Information Exchange Agreement - HK and U.S. [Read]
  • Singapore: Bilateral Agreement between the U.S. and Singapore to implement FATCA - Model I IGA [Read]
  • Singapore: Income Tax (International Tax Compliance Agreements) (USA) Regulations 2015 [Read]




Q: What are the regimes for Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI)?
A: The AEOI has two regimes. One is the FATCA and the other is CRS. The U.S. is a non-participating jurisdiction under the CRS regime.

Q: What is the main difference between FATCA and CRS?

A1: Foreign financial institutions (FFI's) have an obligation to withholding tax on certain U.S. source income under model 2-IGA of FATCA, but there is no withholding tax obligation under the CRS framework.

A2: Under Model 2-IGA, the reporting FFI's are required to obtain consent from the account-holder for EOI purposes under FATCA, while the reporting FI's need not obtain such consent for EOI purposes under the CRS framework.


Q: What is the difference between model 1-IGA and model 2-IGA?
A: See below.

The FFI under model 1-IGA is required to perform due diligence procedure to review financial accounts, to identify U.S. accounts (reportable accounts under CRS) and reporting the information to the tax authority in the jurisdiction in which it is resident. Then the tax authority will forward the reported information to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (the IRS).

Model 1-IGA has two variants: reciprocal and non-reciprocal. Irrespective of whether it is a reciprocal IGA or not, the tax authority in the jurisdiction of which the FFI is a resident (or foreign FFI branch located in the jurisdiction) will be collecting US data and automatically disclose the same to the IRS. But the IRS has no obligation to reciprocate under the non-reciprocal IGA.

The FFI under model 2-IGA is required to report the same information to the IRS directly, without the tax authority in its jurisdiction acting in between. Therefore, one can say that Model 2-IGA must be a non-reciprical Intergovernmental agreement.

Q: Why some jurisdictions sign non-reciprocal IGA's?

A: Two reasons. Some jurisdictions do not care about to receive information from the USA about there residents and have therefore entered into "non-reciprocal" IGA's. These countries/jurisdictions include the ones that either do not impose any income tax (i.e. The British Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands) or only adopt a territorial income tax system (i.e. Hong Kong and Macau).