By: Karim Daher

HBD-T Law Firm | Partner

President of the Lebanese Association for Taxpayers’ Rights (ALDIC)

It becomes obvious nowadays that the definition of resident as regards to the determination of the scope of application of taxes on a person or a business becomes a matter of sovereignty in international taxation. Indeed, countries usually extent or limit the scope of their income taxation in some manner by adopting one of the three current tax systems: territorial or residential or citizenship. Many countries have attempted to mitigate the advantages and limitations of each of those three systems by enacting hybrid systems with characteristics of two or more like UK, USA and Lebanon.

However and since major conceptual differences can exist between tax systems adopted by each country and may lead to cases of double taxation or no taxation in international trade and bilateral transactions, many countries have signed tax treaties with each other to eliminate or reduce double taxation. Besides, and as a result of the OECD fight against tax havens and offshore centers, many countries have been compelled to sign lately or commit to a multilateral treaty (MCAA) for transparency and automatic exchange of information for tax purposes (Global Forum) which applies and endorses the common reporting standard (CRS). The principle aim of the new automatic standard is to expose the financial assets of non-residents held in off-shore financial centers so that they may be subject to tax by home revenue authorities. The main mechanisms and objectives of both DTTs and Treaties will be exposed hereinafter.

Besides and insofar territorial systems usually tax local income regardless of the residence of the taxpayer and whereas the key problem argued for this type of system is the ability to avoid taxation on portable income or movable capital by moving it outside the country, some concerned countries adopting this system have been forced to develop their legislation and to enact hybrid system in order to avoid tax evasion or recover lost revenue. Lebanon is one of those concerned countries with its particular system of schedule tax (impôts cédulaires). We will tackle in brief all those systems in the following development in order to clarify the issues at stake for many persons facing such problems for the first time in their life owing to the profound fiscal scene’s change in the world.

• International Income Tax systems.

One of the main characteristic of a State’s sovereignty recognized by international law and accepted by its peers is the right to levy taxes and decide upon the geographical extent of its jurisdiction. Accordingly, States may levy taxes on both local and foreign income (worldwide taxation) from both residence and citizenship standpoints or solely derived in territory (taxation based on the territoriality principle). Needless to precise that major conceptual differences can exist between those tax systems.

• Residential Taxation.

This is the most common and applied system for the majority of countries in the world notably the developed countries with the exception however of the USA (177 countries out of 244). In the residential system, residents of the country are taxed on their worldwide (local and foreign) income, while nonresidents are taxed only on their local income.

In point of fact, as regards to this system and without prejudice to international double taxation treaties, the country where a natural person is resident for tax purposes can usually tax his total worldwide income, earned or unearned. This includes wages, pensions, benefits, income from property or from any other sources, or capital gains from sales of property, from all countries worldwide even though all or part of those are already taxed in other countries applying territorial or citizenship taxation. Generally, where worldwide income is taxed, countries with a residential system of taxation usually allow deductions or foreign tax credits for taxes that residents already paid to the aforesaid other jurisdictions.

Practically, residential systems face the problem of defining the “resident” since such definition vary by countries and type of taxpayers. The term resident means usually under the laws of the concerned countries, the person who is liable to tax therein by reason of his domicile, permanent residence, place of customary business or any other criterion of similar nature. However the determining criterion is undoubtedly the location of the person’s main home and number of days (more than 183) the person is present in the country. Indeed, some countries like the United Kingdom (UK), make a difference between domicile and residence. The domicile is the country which a person officially has as his permanent home, or has a substantial connection with. For instance, when someone is born in the UK, he is automatically assigned to the same domicile as his parents, which is defined as his domicile of origin and will continue until he acquires a new domicile abroad. The domicile is important when it comes to determining the tax liabilities in three main areas: income tax, Capital Gains Tax and Inheritance Tax and is of particular importance in this latest case if the concerned person was to own property or financial assets in foreign jurisdictions.

• Territorial Taxation:

In the territorial system, only local generated income (i.e. only income from a source or project or work inside the country) is taxed regardless the residence or the citizenship of the taxpayer earning such income.  This system allows avoidance of tax payment for portable income (mainly movable capital and assets) by moving it outside the country.

Actually, the manner of determining the source of income in this system is generally dependent on the nature of income. For instance, income from the performance of services (i.e. wages or consultancy) is generally treated as arising where the services are performed. To the contrary, financing income (dividends, interests, etc.) is generally treated as arising where the user or the beneficiary of the financing resides. Income related to real estates and tangible properties is considered as arising where the property is located.

• Citizenship Taxation:   

Only two countries in the world, United States and Eritrea, systematically tax the worldwide income of residents (whether citizens or not) as well as nonresident citizens. In other words, citizens are taxed in the same manner as residents. However a difference should be pointed out between those two countries. Indeed, and while Eritrea taxes its nonresident citizens on their foreign income at a reduced rate of 2%, the United States taxes its nonresident citizens on their worldwide income using the same marginal tax rates for both foreign and US-source income with the possibility of providing foreign tax credit to mitigate double taxation. Enforcement tactics used by both countries to facilitate tax compliance include the denial of passport to nonresident citizens deemed to be delinquent taxpayers and the potential seizure of any accounts or assets held in the country. Eritrea uses also the harassment of relatives living within the country until the tax and eventually the penalties are paid.

• Dual Residence.

In some cases, such as for workers posted abroad for a limited time or jobseekers abroad, they may be considered tax–resident, and therefore taxable, in their home country even if they stay abroad for more than 6 months. It is linked to the assumption that (i) they keep their permanent home in their home country and/or (ii) that their personal and economic ties with that country are stronger. However, in such a case, the host country may also tax the worker. His local employer may, for instance, deduct taxes from his salary at the time of payment. Hence and in such situation, both countries could consider an individual as a tax-resident at the same time, and both could require him to pay taxes on his total worldwide income. Fortunately, many countries have double tax agreements, which usually provide rules to determine which of the two countries can treat the said individual as a resident.

• Tax Treaties to eliminate or reduce double taxation or tax evasion.
• Double Tax Treaties (DTTs).

In order to prevent double taxation as defined here before (taxes levied twice on the same income, profit, capital gain, inheritance or other item), Tax Treaties are negotiated and signed between countries on a bilateral basis in accordance with the model conventions on income and wealth drawn up by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). In some countries they are also known under the title of double taxation agreements or tax information exchange agreements (TIEA). Pursuant to the foregoing, each case under consideration should be “confronted” with the provisions of the bilateral treaties for the avoidance of double taxation as they prevail over the internal laws. They also tend to have “tie breaker” clauses for resolving conflicts between residency rules.

Thus, according to the OECD model tax treaties, a resident of a Contracting State means “any person who under the law of that State is liable to tax therein by reason of his domicile, residence, head office or place of management (business), or any other criterion of a similar nature”. Therefore, when a taxpayer may be deemed to be a resident of both Contracting States under the laws of each State, the treaty enumerates the alternative criteria to be implemented in the following order of priority: (i) the permanent home; (ii) the center of vital interests, taking into consideration the personal and economic links of the taxpayer (i.e. State with which his personal and economic relations are closer); (iii) the habitual abode; (iv) the nationality.

In this regard it should be noted that the word “home” means the place where the person or his family (spouse and children) usually live. Consequently, a person is deemed to have a fiscal home in the country where his family lives even if he undertakes his activities abroad. A permanent place of abode usually includes a residence the spouse owns or leases. A person is deemed to have as well a permanent abode in a country (State) where he spends more than 183 days within one year, whatever are the conditions and regardless of his family’s abode. The center of the person’s vital economic interests are located in the country where he has implemented his major investments or where is located the head office for the purpose of managing his assets. It can be as well the place where is located the center of his professional activities or where he earns the major part of his incomes.

In the light of the foregoing, natural persons who are fiscally domiciled in a State, even if they own economic interests abroad, have in principle an unlimited tax obligation and are taxed on their worldwide income; without prejudice however to some incomes that are liable to tax in other countries in compliance with the provisions of tax treaties as for instance the revenues of real estate properties.

However in specific cases some treaties may diverge from the general rule insofar the tax systems substantially defer. For instance, US citizen and resident alien decedents are subject to estate tax in the US on all their assets wherever situated regardless of any provisions to the contrary. In the meantime and in accordance with the provisions of the OECD’ model, the nonresident aliens are subject to estate tax only on the part of the gross estate which at the time of death is situated in the US.

• Multilateral Tax Treaties.

The Multilateral Competent Authority Agreement (MCAA) adopted in a mass signing ceremony on October 29, 2014 (Global Forum) is a typical example of multilateral tax treaties aiming to adopt common rules and practice. It provides for a common OECD’s automatic standard called CRS which is a multilateral, fully reciprocal, automatic exchange of information mechanism that was essentially copied from FATCA.

There are two ways for jurisdictions to comply with the OECD’s automatic standard. Jurisdictions may enter into DTTs or TIEAs that incorporate the due diligence and reporting rules of the Common Reporting Standard. In the alternative, jurisdictions may also become parties to the MCAA, which is a framework agreement designed to implement the automatic standard on a multilateral basis. Exchange of information under the MCAA will be activated when both counterparties file Notifications with the OECD Secretariat. CRS has developed a mechanism, which requires Financial Institutions (FIs) of each Member country to report to their local Competent Authorities all accounts and related details pertaining to residents of jurisdictions with which there are agreements for automatic exchange. It implies that the criterion of residence turned out to be an essential issue at stake. The information to be exchanged includes account balances and gross amounts of interest, dividends, capital gains and other income.

• Lebanese Taxation System.

From a tax standpoint, the residency was not defined so far in the Lebanese laws, although it is the cornerstone of the fiscal systems around the world, except for some countries that adopt the citizenship criterion. The Income Tax Law and some regulations indirectly and briefly tackled the residency as well as a basic Circular of the Central Bank (No 6170 dated 17/05/1996). The decree No. 29/77 for instance stipulates that residents are the persons usually residing in Lebanon without adding further details; whereas according to the decree No. 70/1 dated 14/12/1959, Lebanese residents are the persons having in Lebanon a residence or a head office or owning a business or a factory therein. The whole notwithstanding the fact that the Lebanese tax system is based, in consideration of income taxes on professional, industrial and commercial revenues (including corporate tax), on the territoriality principle which taxes only income derived in Lebanon whether by residents or non-residents. Hence and without prejudice to double taxation treaties (DTT), profits realized on services, works and transactions conducted abroad are normally not subject to the Lebanese business income tax. Nevertheless, Lebanese Tax system adopts however the residential system for some of its schedule taxes such as Tax on movable capital gains or on income from movable assets. Thus, article 69 of the Lebanese Income Tax Law (Legislative-decree No 144 dated 12/6/1959 and its amendments) considers as liable to the local Tax, income from movable assets (interest, dividends, arrears, bonds, etc.) whether derived in Lebanon or reverting to a resident (local and foreign proceeds). The same applies as well for inheritance and gift taxes. A bill of law aiming to amend some provisions of the Law of Fiscal Procedures in order to comply with the requirements of the Global Forum has been modified recently as to include for the first time in the Lebanese laws a legal definition of the residency from a tax standpoint. The said amendment pertains to article 1 of the Law of Fiscal Procedures. It makes a distinction between the moral entities and natural persons. It considers therefore that moral entities are deemed to be Lebanese residents if they fulfill one of the two criteria: (i) they are set up or registered in compliance with the Lebanese laws (the distinction between the set-up and the registration aims to include the partnership and the de facto corporation); or (ii) they have a head office in Lebanon.

On the other hand, are deemed to be Lebanese residents, natural persons who:

• Have an office in Lebanon to undertake their activities; or
• Have a permanent home constituting an habitual abode for them or their family; or
• Spend in Lebanon more than 183 days (six months) within a twelve month period. The foregoing does not include the transit through Lebanon or the residency for medical purposes.

The principle stating, for the professional revenues, that is only taxable in Lebanon the income generated in Lebanon remains applicable. Conversely, the resident who earns incomes derived from foreign movable capital (foreign shares and debentures) will be bound to pay the tax in Lebanon whether the incomes are paid by Lebanese or foreign banks. Anyway, this was recalled by the Ministry of finance lately by virtue of two notifications dated December 1^st, 2015 and September 19^th, 2016 published in the Official Journal.

Similarly, in case of death, since the inheritance tax is paid in the State where the residence of the deceased is located, the heirs of the Lebanese resident are liable to tax in Lebanon on the assets located in Lebanon and abroad, regardless of the deceased’s nationality and without prejudice to the provisions of the bilateral treaties. This drawback is however mitigated by the ongoing protection of the bank secrecy (Law of September 3, 1956) that will still benefit to Lebanese residents insofar the MCAA as an international treaty prevailing on the local laws will only apply to nonresidents.

It is to note finally, that the Council of Ministers issued recently the Decree N° 3692 dated 22/6/2016 which determines the mode of application of tax on nonresidents. The provisions of the said Decree apply to natural persons and legal entities that do not maintain a place of business in Lebanon as well as to physical persons resident in Lebanon providing occasional and not permanent taxable activities in Lebanon (i.e. non-registered at the Ministry of Finance). The decree has notably clarified the meaning of “permanent and repetitive activity” which means in this Decree any person undertaking a taxable activity in Lebanon for more than one time within a period of 12 months.

Based on the preceding developments, we notice that the globalization and the expansion of tax treaties as well as the international fighting against money laundering, terrorism and tax evasion have eroded the sovereignty of States to a certain degree notably the developing countries for the benefit of developed countries. Nonetheless, States still enjoy a high level of fiscal sovereignty in the field of direct taxation notably those generated in their territories or reverting to their residents. Lebanon is one of those countries that despite its obligation to comply with international standards aiming to avoid any possibility of fraud, will remain largely free to design its tax system in a way that meets its internal policy objectives and requirements. This is particularly accurate as regards to the criterion of residence since it may be defined widely under its laws and serve to attract individuals, companies and capital in circulation.

Sorry, this entry is only available in French. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

Cher concitoyen contribuable: Sais-tu que la  Déclaration des Droits de l’Homme et du Citoyen, établie en France il y a plus de deux siècles avec l’avènement  de la République,  avait  garanti entre autres droits à « son peuple » celui de constater, par lui–même ou par ses représentants, la nécessité de la contribution publique par le biais des impôts (d’où d’ailleurs l’origine étymologique du nom dont tu es affublé) pour les consentir librement en tant « qu’honorable obligation » de participer aux charges  d’intérêt général de la nation, d’en suivre l’emploi et de demander des comptes aux gouvernants ? Tandis que nous libanais du troisième millénaire, adeptes du changement, friands de futurisme et partisans de la critique non constructive, nous prétendons tout savoir et passons à côté de l’essentiel…

Sais-tu aussi cher concitoyen contribuable que ta Constitution, pour l’amendement de laquelle le Liban a perdu plus de cent-cinquante mille de ses fils, impose une autorisation parlementaire annuelle préalable   pour la perception de toute recette et la réalisation de toute dépense ? Quant bien même nous nous permettons libanais de toutes souches et de toutes tendances, de laisser passer les années et se succéder les gouvernements et les législatures, sans broncher aux violations graves de ces règles ni demander des comptes à ceux qui gèrent notre quotidien et présagent de l’avenir de nos enfants et petits-enfants…

Sais-tu d’ailleurs au même titre, que la dette publique cumulée est la tienne solidaire et que la part indivis qui te revient à ce jour avoisine les quinze mille dollars américains (à laquelle il faut rajouter le cas échéant celle du conjoint et des enfants) ? Dette pour le service de laquelle tu payes d’ailleurs des intérêts annuels à des bailleurs de fonds pour la plupart locaux et très souvent très très haut placés et ce, au détriment des dotations d’investissement qui sont seules créatrices d’emploi et stimulatrices de croissance….

Sais-tu d’autre part que l’asphaltage du petit bout de chemin menant à ta résidence ou le raccordement d’eau qui t’ont été offerts par ton député local, en contre partie de ta voix et de ta conscience, ont été payés pendant des années grâce aux dotations budgétaires votées par ce mêmes député et financées par tes impôts ou des emprunts sur les emprunts ayant menés a cette dette publique abyssale ? Et comment peut-il en être autrement, puisque le Liban demeure encore un des seuls pays au monde où le législateur est élu non pour légiférer mais pour servir et se servir…

Sais-tu de même que le seul fait d’acquérir un foyer pour y vivre en harmonie, te rend redevable de deux impôts au moins: l’un foncier direct payable à l’Etat et l’autre indirect municipal perçu au profit de ta collectivité territoriale ? Or, même si tu le sais, tu ne sais sans doute pas que l’impôt foncier annuel calculé par l’Etat ne t’est notifiée que cinq ans plus tard du fait des carences administratives … avec de surcroit des amendes et pénalités de retard à ta charge du fait desdites carences dont tu n’es ni responsable ni redevable ? Ou bien que certaines municipalités te font payer d’autre part une taxe additionnelle au titre de trottoirs et égouts inexistants et même pas projetés ou en devenir ?

Sais-tu en outre, que depuis 2008 et la nouvelle loi sur les procédures fiscales, tu es doté d’une arme anti-chantage et anti-arbitraire administratifs implacable, qui te permet notamment de demander à tout agent du fisc de te notifier au préalable de sa visite ou de te produire son ordre de mission dument signé par sa plus haute autorité hiérarchique ?

Sais-tu subsidiairement et d’un point de vue purement analytique, que pour favoriser un développement économique durable il convient en tout premier lieu de réduire les inégalités sociales criantes ? Car si l’équité absolue est bien un idéal utopique, l’inéquité grave est pour sa part source d’inefficacité économique et de malaise social.

Sais-tu enfin que la question majeure que les décideurs devraient se poser aujourd’hui est celle de savoir comment améliorer le quotidien et le niveau de vie de leurs administrés et par quel moyen afin de renforcer la confiance et faire participer ceux-ci à l’effort de production et de consommation… et non  comment trouver des moyens financiers pour renflouer les caisses de l’Etat, combler les déficits et faire face aux charges publiques toujours croissantes ? Car il s’agit là de toute évidence de deux visions discordantes: l’une optimiste, productive, citoyenne et qui s’inscrit dans la durée; l’autre défaitiste, terne et sans ambitions.

Si tu ne le savais pas encore cher concitoyen contribuable eh bien maintenant tu en sais assez pour demander d’en savoir un peu plus !

Karim Daher

Sorry, this entry is only available in French. For the sake of viewer convenience, the content is shown below in the alternative language. You may click the link to switch the active language.

Je vais parler d’un sujet qui me tient à cœur, étant moi-même citoyen d’un pays qui a tous les atouts pour décoller, mais qui malheureusement n’y arrive pas. Le sujet est d’autant plus brûlant que la région d’où je viens a tourné la page à des décennies d’autarcie et qui est en train de se chercher sans arriver à se trouver vraiment.

Les différences que je vais évoquer ne sont pas celles que vous imaginez, comme la localisation géographique, les ressources naturelles, les lois ou les institutions. Je vais parler d’autre chose. De tout ce qui fait la vraie différence pour un pays entre le fait de voler de ses propres ailes ou de creuser un trou pour s’y enfoncer sans espoir.

Je vais utiliser parfois le terme « les pays en essor » pour les pays qui décollent et les « pays en déclin » pour les pays qui régressent.

1re différence : la règle de droit

Les pays en essor ont un système régi par la règle de droit. Les prémices de l’existence d’un État se trouvent dans le respect et l’implémentation juste et égalitaire de la règle de droit. Dans tous les pays, il existe des individus, des clans et des tribus qui veulent se soustraire aux exigences d’une entité qui les transcende. Mais la conscience du respect de la règle de droit et par suite l’appartenance à un État doivent être le leitmotiv commun. Celui-ci ne se décrète pas, il se construit et évolue avec le temps.

Les pays en déclin ont un système basé sur la corruption organisée. Les individus, les clans et les tribus qui se trouvent en position de pouvoir s’organisent en des réseaux de corruption pour tirer des avantages non mérités pour leurs membres au détriment de la majorité des citoyens. Dans les pays en déclin, l’État va servir d’alibi pour voler les biens communs en toute impunité. Le pays recule à mesure que ces privilégiés augmentent leur fortune et leur pouvoir. Le pays est mis en coupe réglée par son élite. Le changement est difficile parce que les victimes de ce système n’ont pas la conscience d’être des citoyens, mais des membres de tribus et de clans rivaux.

Je pense ici tout naturellement à mon cher pays, le Liban. Mais rassurez-vous : comparé aux autres pays de la région, du Golfe à l’Afrique du Nord, il figure parmi les premiers de la classe.

2e différence : une vision à long terme

Les pays qui décollent pensent à long terme, ceux qui régressent pensent à court terme. Penser à long terme, c’est avoir une vision de ce qu’on veut être, c’est savoir qui on est, où on se trouve et pourquoi on existe. C’est élaborer une stratégie pour réaliser notre vision et des objectifs pour avancer. C’est être visionnaire. Essayer d’analyser où va le monde et se positionner là où on peut le mieux tirer profit de nos atouts. Dans les années 60, le Liban était un centre commercial et financier de la région. C’était facile parce qu’il était le seul centre de la région. Avons-nous pensé à long terme ? Non, sinon on n’aurait pas eu la guerre. Dans les années 90, une autre opportunité s’est offerte à nous. Avons-nous pensé à long terme ? Non. Nous avons préféré être des marchands immobiliers au lieu d’être des innovateurs. Et aujourd’hui même, une autre opportunité se présente à nous (avouez que nous sommes chanceux). Sommes-nous en train de penser à long terme ? Non (avouez que nous sommes idiots). Nous avons adopté l’inaction comme principe d’action.

Penser à court terme, c’est, entre autres, penser en termes de commissions, de combines, d’arrangements entre amis. C’est consommer sans produire. C’est pratiquer la cavalerie financière en faisant semblant de travailler.

3e différence : parler d’idées

Dans les pays en essor, la classe politique parle d’idées. Dans les pays en déclin, elle ne fait que du potin. Elle n’a pas appris à raisonner, à penser par elle-même. Elle camoufle alors son ignorance dans de la morale, du dédain, des injures, des clichés et des potins. Elle sert à annihiler tout esprit critique, toute germination d’idées. Tout le monde se souvient du nombre impressionnant de potins avancés par les politiciens libanais et révélés par Wikileaks.

4e différence : le changement, une opportunité ou une menace ?

Les pays qui décollent embrassent le changement ; les pays qui régressent se sentent menacés par le changement. Un grand changement historique se produit sous nos yeux. Toute la région se trouve en ébullition. Un tel changement ne peut être réduit à un seul facteur, trop réducteur.

Un tel changement ne peut être que le fruit de beaucoup de facteurs : un ras-le-bol interne, combiné à un appui externe, à un contexte propice, etc. Mais là n’est pas la question. La question est de savoir comment un pays comme le Liban ressent ce changement. Eh bien, comme une menace. Mieux vaut ne pas s’en mêler pour préserver notre stabilité, notre économie, nos acquis, bref notre système. Mais, bon sang, quel système ?

Un antisystème, oui, qui a toutes les malformations génitales des systèmes que les autres veulent changer. Les pays qui décollent osent changer de modèle ; ceux qui régressent ne changent jamais.

5e différence : éducation continue ou limitée

Dans les pays qui décollent, l’éducation est continue. Dans les pays qui régressent, l’apprentissage, quand il existe, se termine à l’école. L’éducation est le fondement de toute politique pour un pays qui veut progresser. L’éducation pour tous, mais aussi l’éducation continue. Il faut investir dans la recherche et dans l’innovation, la financer, la protéger, former les talents et les garder. L’éducation aujourd’hui, c’est quelque chose de subtil, c’est avant tout apprendre à raisonner, à analyser les différentes sources d’information.

Ce n’est plus mémoriser. Ce n’est plus soumettre les élèves à un dressage. Il faut former les formateurs, éduquer les éducateurs, les rétribuer à la mesure du service qu’ils rendent à la collectivité.

6e différence : la générosité comme stratégie

Dans les pays qui décollent, le gouvernement est généreux. Il croit au partage équitable des revenus parce qu’il sait que c’est la clé de la stabilité. Dans les pays qui régressent, les membres du gouvernement, à force d’accaparer tout avec une facilité déconcertante, croient qu’ils n’ont pas les moyens de donner ni de partager. De tous les vices, l’avarice est le plus odieux. Couplé à la cupidité et à l’égoïsme de la classe dirigeante, cela devient mortel pour un pays.
7e différence : la diversification des sources de revenus

Les pays qui décollent ont plusieurs sources de revenus. Ceux qui régressent en ont une seule. Les pays qui décollent font fructifier leurs ressources. Par exemple, transformer une ressource rare et par suite périssable, comme le pétrole ou le gaz, en une ressource permanente. On parle de création de richesses par opposition à la destruction et à la dilapidation des richesses dans les pays en déclin.

8e différence : le rôle des médias

Dans les pays qui décollent, les médias posent les questions qui leur donnent le pouvoir. Dans les pays qui régressent, c’est le contraire qui se produit. On ne cherche pas la vérité, on recherche des sources de financement. Ce qui fausse le jeu et fait des médias les porte-parole dociles des classes et sous-classes politiques.

9e différence : la protection des talents

Les gens talentueux sont rares. Les pays qui décollent savent les garder et profiter de leurs talents. Les pays qui régressent les voient comme une menace et les poussent à fuir. Ils pratiquent une politique basée sur l’émigration, la personne humaine ne valant que par l’argent qu’elle peut transférer au pays. Dans cet univers, seuls les médiocres restent. Ils font du surplace dans tous les métiers qu’ils exercent et le pays s’en trouve ramené en arrière. Dans les pays qui décollent, l’ascenseur social fonctionne. Dans ceux qui régressent, l’ascenseur reste bloqué.

10e différence : le sens des priorités

Dans les pays qui décollent, on établit un agenda national sur les priorités. Le budget en constitue une pièce maîtresse. On va vers l’essentiel, la justice, les institutions, les méthodes de financement, les infrastructures, la fiscalité, l’égalité sociale, la lutte contre la pauvreté, etc. Dans les pays qui régressent, c’est la loi de la jungle, où chaque composante du gouvernement possède son agenda propre et personne n’est responsable.

(18 avril 2012)

عزيزي المكلّف. تحيّة وطنية ونداءٌ مواطني وبعد. هل تعلم يا عزيزي بدايةً أن تسميتك هذه تختزن كل المعاني وتختزل كل الأوصاف كما وتجمع جميع فئات المواطنين والمقيمين دون إستثناء أو تميز أو تفضيل أو امتياز؛ بحيث تشمل الموظفين والأجراء وأصحاب العمل، والميسورين والمحتاجين، والحكام (مبدئياً) والمحكومين، والرجال والنساء والصغار والكبار، على حدِ سواء وغيرهم وغيرهم ممن يشملهم هذا “الشرف” العابر للإصتفافات. أي بمعنى آخر، كل شخص يتحمل وزر التكليف المباشر أو غير المباشر بالضرائب والرسوم لتمويل الإنفاق العام بصدد تأمين إدارة المرافق العامة وتوفير الخدمات والرفاهية للمواطنين والمقيمين (من حيث المبدأ والأصول طبعاً). من دونك وبغياب ضرائبك ومساهماتك لا تمويل للدولة ولا إستدانة ولا تغطية ولا بزغ وتبزير ولا إنفاق غير مجدي بل شحٌ وإفلاسٌ حتمي يستتبع قلب الطاولة على اللاعبين وطردهم من الصرح المُغتصب كتجار الهيكل ذات يومٍ مجيد.

ليست الساعة للتظلمٍ والتندمٍ أو الأنينٍ والبكاء بعد هدر جميع الفرص وإستنفاد كل السبل ونفاذ الصبر…بل للنهوض والوعي والتيقّن والمبادرة. لا نفعٌ بعد اليوم لتراشق التهم والتنصل من المسؤوليات بحجج واهية لم تعد تمت للحقيقة والواقع بصلة. فقد إفتضح أمرنا وإنكشفت حيلنا ووصلنا إلى عتبة الإفلاس الإجتماعي والإقتصاتدي وأصبحنا ماركين وفاشلين بأعين بلدان العالم أجمعين. وكيفا لا؟ حين ندعي العفة ونرفض التجاوزات ونلوم الغير عما نفعله نحن دون دراية أو تيقن. نطالب بتطبيق القوانين ونكون أوائل المخالفين مع الإدعاء بأن المبرر لذلك هو عدم قيام الغير بواجباته وعجز الدولة على إلزامه بالإنضباط وبالتالي، لا طائلة ولا فائدة بالمبادرة. نتزمرّ من الفساد المستشري ونشتكي مما آلت إليه الأمور في القطاع العام من تفشي لظواهر الرشوة والزبائنية وعجزٍ في الخدمة ونحن لا نتوانى بالمقابل في تمرير إكرامية من هنا أو تزلّف من هناك لتغطية تجاوزات أو تسوية مخالفات إرتبكناها نحن عن سابق تصور وتصميم أو ورثناها أباً عن جد وسكتنا عليها وقبلناها بكل دراية وإقتناع. فمن ترانا نلوم الغير أو نفسنا؟

ألم يكن من الأجدى الإلتزام بالقوانين والقيام بما علينا من موجبات تفرضها مواطنيتنا والعقد الإجتماعي الذي يجمعنا ليتسنى لنا فيما بعد، دون خوف أو خجل، مساءلة الدولة ومحاسبة المسؤول على عدم توفيرهما المقابل الحياتي والخدماتي الذي نحن أولى وأحق من سوانا للمطالبة به طالما أننا مصدر تمويله؟ وإلا فما عسانا ننتظر من مفهوم الدولة إذا كانت المزارع هي مأوانا وملازنا الأخير؟

كاد الحراك المدني أن ينجح أخيراً في زحزحة ثقة أهل السلطة المتجزرين المترهلين القابضين على الثروة الوطنية ومكتسباتها لولا إفتقاده لبرنامج عمل واضح المعالم ومتماسك ومشروع إصلاحي قوامه المؤسسات والقانون وترشيد التغيير من خلال الوسائل الديمقراطية المتاحة والمشروعة. أما من أهم ما ينقصه وينقصنا نجد التواضع والمعرفة. بالفعل، ندعي العلم والثقافة المالية ونحلل إقتصاديات العالم وننتقدها بينما تُظهر نتائج المسح الوطني الذي نظمه البنك الدولي أخيراً بالتعاون مع المعهد المالي، أن معظم اللبنانيين لديهم قصور في المعرفة المالية والوجدان الضريبي و يشتكون من العيوب والنواقص التي تعتري نظامهم دون أن يكونوا في المقابل على دراية أو إلمام بأصوله وتفاصيله. وهذا إن دلّ على الشيء، فإنه يدلّ على الحاجة الماسة إلى تعزيز المعرفة المالية من خلال المناهج التربوية التعليمية الملائمة كما وعن طريق تبسيط المفاهيم والأنظمة والإجراءات الضريبية لكي تُصبح بمتناول الجميع. ولا ريب في أن تقوية المعرفة والوعي الضريبيين من شانهما أن يدفعا في إتجاه الإهتمام والمساهمة من قبل المواطنين في مراقبة وتقييم المالية العامة وسيما عملية إدارة وتنظيم المال العام. وهذه هي باكورة التغيير والإصلاح الفعلي.

وإنطلاقاً من كل ما تقدم، وبهدف التأثير الإيجابي على الوعي والوجدان الضريبيين والوصول إلى المبتغى المرجو، أُطلقت أخيراً مبادرة مدنية تهدف إلى نشر المعرفة المالية بصدد تحسين وتفعيل صورة وأهداف الضريبة لدى المكلفين وإقتراح حلول عملية وقانونية للمشاكل القائمة من خلال التشاور البناء مع المراجع المختصة وتحديث النصوص؛ مما قد يؤدي على المدى المنظور إلى إدارة رشيدة للإقتصاد الوطني وإعادة توزيع عادلة للثروة بشتى الأشكال. فكل ما هو مطلوب منك يا عزيزي المكلف هو تلقف هذه الفرصة والتفاعل الإيجابي معها لإحداث خرقٍ فعلي في الجدار الإنحداري الذي طالما إعتقدناه صلب وغير قابل للإلتواء والتجاوز أو التحطيم. صحيح أنك قد تستسهل الإنتقاد واللامبالاة معتبراً أن عدم الإلتزام الضريبي يشكل وسيلة سلمية وناجعة لتحدّي الدولة والإعتراض على (عدم) شرعيتها؛ إلا أنك قد تغفل بالمقابل أن من شأن ذلك أن يؤدي إلى توليد حلقة مفرغة تضعف معها عطاءات الدولة بتضاؤل إيراداتها ويقوى الإرتهان للزعماء الذين يعززون سطوهم ونفوزهم من خلال الفساد والزبائنية. فأي دولة تريد حقاً؟ لك حرية الخيار…

 كريم ضاهر*

(www.aldic.net)

 * محام وأستاذ جامعي

In the last couple of years, transparency and information sharing among the world’s financial systems have become a prime focus. The role of compliance in financial institutions has thus jumped to the front
seat. Lebanon, like almost all countries in the world, had to comply with these regulations, despite its location and close commercial ties with several countries under the watch, such as Syria, Iraq, and
others.“The role of financial compliance has actually been gaining momentum ever since the September 11 events,” Mr. Chahdan Jebeily, Group Chief Legal & Compliance Officer at Audi Group says, “those events
acted as an eye opener on crime and terrorism financing. The financial crisis of 2008 then reinforced the currents, calling for tighter controls and transparency, and highlighting the global need to fight
tax evasion.”

The heightened sense of urgency accompanying the successive regulations has led the Lebanese banks to move quickly. How serious is failing to comply? Simple. If American correspondent banks resort to de-
risking Lebanon for failure to comply, then Lebanese banks will lose their access to the U.S. dollar and the U.S. markets.

De-risking is when correspondent banks halt dealing with a bank they deem risky because of its loose compliance procedures or doubtful cases, which will in turn raise their own risk and cost them fines and
long lawsuits with their own governments.

The loss of access to the largest financial market in the world is a death penalty for Lebanon’s financial system, as the country has a highly dollarized economy (64.8% of private deposits and 74.8% of loans
are in USD) and a domestic currency that is pegged to the U.S. dollar. Lebanon cannot afford to be cut off from the U.S. markets, and turning to European banks will not help, as they are likely to follow the
lead of American correspondent banks in cutting exposure to Lebanese banks. Even one major correspondent bank de-risking a Lebanese bank will represent a substantial threat, as it can start a chain of
reactions across the remainders of banks. Hence, the negative implications of not abiding by laws greatly outweigh any presumed gains from ignoring them.

Luckily, this is a black swan scenario. Lebanese banks have developed sound relationships with their correspondent banks. Open communication, strict abidance by regulations and laws and quick responses are
only few of their committed efforts. Malek Costa, Group Head of compliance at BLOM Bank, explains that “BLOM was well equipped even before the start of the compliance era. Foreign correspondent banks were
pleased to see how updated and efficient our monitoring systems were, and Lebanese banks worked hard to convince foreign correspondent banks of their readiness to take on regulatory challenges.”

Lebanese banks can only capitalize on their competence in dealing with international regulators and banks. Indeed, to foreign correspondent banks, Lebanese banks only make for a small volume of business and
income. “Our bargaining power with correspondent banks is narrow. As a banking sector, we only have our professionalism, our sound risk management, and our safe dealership to use in convincing the foreign
banks to maintain relationships with us.” Mr. Jebeily says.

For Lebanese banks, the matter of compliance is a question of survival and cultural evolution. The compliance role was non-negotiable for the banks’ leaders, one that needed to be protected and implemented
sharply. This is why over the past 5 years, compliance departments tripled in sizes as more circulars from the Central Bank of Lebanon came in to lay the grounds for procedures. The Lebanese banks stepped up
their controls, systems, human resources and budgets, trying hard to quicken implementation. However, that wasn’t a stress-free transition.

Big Lebanese banks each count 4000+ employees, dozens of branches and several subsidiaries. Large institutions are typically slow to respond to fast-paced changes, but Lebanese banks did not have the luxury
of time.

Clashes between profitability concerns and compliance needs arose, but the banks’ senior managers were firm in their priorities. First came compliance. Managers concerned with meeting sales targets or
bringing new business found compliance to be standing in the way of their performance. People in front-office positions also complained because their own clients were annoyed. However, with patience,
education, awareness, and management support, as both Messrs. Costa and Jebeily agree, the middle ground between conforming to laws, facilitating clients’ needs, and maintaining business profitability was
preserved. That took a lot of training, workshops, meetings and discussions, and considerable budgets.

It takes delicate understanding and full knowledge of regulations to execute banking operations in Lebanon without accidentally breaching laws. Mr. Costa mentioned several cases where banks succeeded in
carving windows into rigid rules to allow the real economy to breathe. For example, “instead of enforcing systematic blocks that were aimed at countering financing of terrorism by banning a whole segment,
such as prohibiting all imports of car sales, efforts were made to distinguish the car sales destined to the local market, from the ones used to launder money from/to Africa. To be able to win that window,
Lebanese banks gave proofs of full knowledge of their clients and their operations, and had clear rules and procedures for monitoring breaches.”

Another difficult element in the equation of proper compliance is the client himself. Understandably, when rules and controls were first enforced, clients were baffled by the requests, papers to sign, and
the required disclosures. So they resisted. In the earliest stages, some even called it bad service; others changed banks or attempted to counter the procedures. It was not out of ill intentions, but out of
lack of understanding of the new culture. The proof is that, eventually, no flight of deposits was recorded as a result of compliance procedures.

Mr. Karim Daher, a managing partner at HBD-T Law firm which specializes in private and public laws, and the General coordinator of the NGO ALDIC (The Lebanese Association for Taxpayers’ Rights), defends
wholeheartedly the Lebanese clients who suffered the consequences of the confusion accompanying the implementation of every new regulation. The lawyer’s top concerns are threefold: the protection of clients
from being misled or unknowingly signing new clauses waiving secrecy; the ways some banks are communicating the clients’ rights and duties to them; and the extent of explanation and follow up offered for
clients. Indeed, the Central Bank had recently issued a circular stipulating the necessity of having an independent compliance officer in each branch to cater for the clients’ requests and needs.

Among the major compliance topics, FATCA was probably the hardest to achieve. For the readers who may have not heard of FATCA (the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act), FATCA is a U.S. law enforcing the
reporting of foreign financial assets by all U.S. taxpayers, at the cost of withholding and fining the breaching party. It required all non-U.S. financial institutions to search their records to identify
clients who are U.S. persons and to report their assets and identities to the U.S. Department of the Treasury.

FATCA application was an untested territory and needed delicate care. In this regard, Mr. Daher explains that banks were required to monitor not only holders of U.S. passports (i.e. U.S. Citizens) or holders
of Green Card, but also people to whom applies the criterion of U.S. Person. This can be a person holding a proxy and acting for the account of a U.S. resident, or someone having a U.S. postcode or address
or who bought an American SIM card, or people sending money on regular basis for their kids who are studying in the US, to name a few. This means a good percentage of the Lebanese population.

However, being a U.S. person does not not necessarily entail tax declarations or liabilities as other conditions apply in order to be considered a U.S. taxpayer, especially if you are a foreigner who does
not have revenues from a U.S. source (whether trading activities or real estate).

Laws aimed at countering and criminalizing tax evasions are multiplying. The Europeans have also embraced the new era of financial transparency. Since 2013, more than 80 countries agreed to conform to the
common reporting standards of the OECD countries, in which they agree to exchange tax information on their citizens. Lebanon will be applying this treaty as of September 2018. With all the global tax-
cooperation gaining thrust, bank secrecy is looking more and more like a product of the past.

Mr. Jebeily notes: “Banking secrecy is not eliminated in Lebanon, but the exceptions multiplied. The classical definition of banking secrecy has now changed. It is no longer a mean of protection for outlaws
or individuals breaking the law.” Mr. Daher converges to the same point, preferring to focus on “professional secrecy rather than banking secrecy, which is the clients’ right of having their information and
account details safeguarded, unless called for by a solid and legal authority.”

The world is heading toward more cooperation on the informational level, and this is not without benefits. Although the costs of implementing FATCA were deemed extraordinary, tax proceeds for the U.S. have
added $13.5 billion since 2010, equivalent to $843 million per year. Those figures come from an estimate of 6 million Americans living abroad, according to the U.S. State Department. There is a lot to gain
in Lebanon too. More transparency in reporting and business disclosures will probably bring back a lot of money that is now going under the radar.

The role of legal compliance will only continue to increase from here. The levels reached on strict application of laws cannot deescalate. Investments in this segment will rise, human needs will multiply.
The role of the regulator is enormous. The Association of Banks in Lebanon has worked hard to spread and develop the guidelines for the regulations. The sector is always anticipating alterations, striving to
stay flexible and dynamic enough to move through the changes towards the end of keeping the reputation and the interests of all stakeholders as sound and as best as possible.

This monthly editorial is brought to you by the Research Department of BLOMINVEST BANK.