OECD will not allow political committed timelines to implement CRS to be delayed

1. The OECD is to ensure jurisdictions are not permitted to delay implementation of CRS as per their committed timetables to start collecting information by the latest 1 January 2017

The 2016 OECD report to the G20 Finance Ministers, updating on automatic exchange of information that .

missing committed  timelines graphic
April 2016 OECD report to G20 Finance Ministers
2.3. The implementation of the Common Reporting Standard (CRS) needs to be implemented on time

The CRS is the new internationally agreed standard for automatic exchange of information and is to be implemented by 2017 or 2018. The Global Forum and the OECD working with G20 countries are assisting all committed jurisdictions in the implementation of the standard.

Work is underway on all fronts and the OECD has already well advanced the establishment of the IT system which will support the CRS implementation, which is expected to be adopted by tax administrations by mid-2016.

It is of the utmost importance that all countries and jurisdictions implement the CRS in accordance with the timelines to which they have already committed and dedicate the necessary resources so that the political commitment turns, on time, into a practical reality.

Some delays, whether in legislation, guidance or other forms of readiness may risk undermining taxpayers’ confidence in its imminent and global implementation. The Global Forum has already started its review process with respect to implementation of the standard for AEOI .
2. Late adopter countries are abusing their commitment dates by allowing an extra year due diligence for low value accounts, i.e. less than USD 1 million balance.

The EU Commission has admonished Andorra for allowing an extra year due diligence on low value accounts.
Due to the rush to get early adopters to implement CRS by January 2016, te OECD allowed due diligence on the smaller accounts to be delayed for one year. Late adopters were given an extra year to do due diligence on everyone.

However some late adopters such as Switzerland has abused this, by also granting an extra year to do due diligence on smaller accounts.

The OECD never intended to grant late adopters two years delay on due diligence for smaller accounts. Late adopters were already given an extra year to implement CRS. They weren't given two year delay on smaller accounts!
3. So how will OECD ensure committed timetables for implementing CRS will not be delayed


PROPOSED ACTION by OECD: Countries and jurisdictions should speed up their implementation efforts of the CRS to ensure they deliver in accordance with the timelines to which they committed and the Global Forum should report to the G20 in July 2016 on the state of the implementation, with a plan to address possible deficiencies.
  1. Peer reviews

  2. Through the mandatory election of the Wider Approach implementation of CRS by no later than 1 January 2017.

4. Global Transparency Peer Review on implementation of the CRS in 2017

missing 2nd peer review graphic
April 2016 OECD report to G20 Finance Ministers
Although countries like Switzerland have been appraised in a recent peer review that they are largely compliant, there will be an expedited peer review by OECD on coutries effective implementation of the Standard. Switzerland's delaying of collecting info will not be acceptable.

The Secretary General of the OECD July 2016 report to the G20 Finance Ministers states a peer review for a first assessment against benchmark criteria would be:
  1. A 'Largely Compliant' rating with respect to the EOIR standard
  2. A commitment to implement the AEOI standard, with first exchanges in 2018 (with respect to the year 2017) at the latest, and
  3. Participation in the multilateral Convention or a sufficiently broad exchange network permitting both EOIR and AEOI.
Those benchmarks would be adjusted over time according to an agreed plan as implementation of the standards progresses.

Although Switzerland participates in the Multilateral Convention in Mutual Assitance in Tax Matters, it is still only does CAAs on a bilateral basis based on unacceptable pre-conditions and delays collection by years, will mean it won't pass the OECD peer review.