logo
The Hendler Case: FBAR Penalties Survive Beyond Death

The Hendler Case: FBAR Penalties Survive Beyond Death

Forbes13-04-2025

Death doesn't erase FBAR penalties. Noncompliant taxpayers leave a problem to their estate which ... More may simply inherit the liability. This leaves beneficiaries in a state of peril as well.
A recent decision reminds taxpayers and the tax compliance community of the importance of filing the Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts. The U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York in United States v. Hendler, 23 Civ. 3280 (Sept. 17, 2024) has clarified the enduring nature of penalties tied to FBAR. The court held that FBAR penalties 'accrue' on the date the form is due (but fails to be filed) and not when the IRS assesses the penalties which might be years later and after the taxpayer has died.
The court also determined that an individual's death does not extinguish these obligations or render them excessive under the Eighth Amendment. Adding another layer to the ruling, the court found that the government was not time-barred from assessing these penalties, thanks to the taxpayer's agreement, while still alive, to extend the statute of limitations.
The Hendler case revolves around David Benishai, a U.S. citizen who held financial interests in multiple bank accounts in Israel from 2004 to 2010. Benishai failed to timely file FBARs as required by the Bank Secrecy Act. Mr. Benishai later filed delinquent FBARs and agreed to extend the statute of limitations for the IRS to assess penalties. He passed away a few months before the IRS finalized its assessment.
Benishai's estate, administered by his wife Hanna Hendler, challenged the assessment of 'nonwillful' penalties which IRS had assessed at $10,000 per form per calendar year in line with the U.S. Supreme Court landmark decision. The estate argued that the FBAR penalties could not be enforced after his death, that the statute of limitations had expired, and that they violated constitutional protections. The district court rejected these claims, delivering a ruling with significant implications for taxpayers and their estates.
A key element of the Hendler ruling was the court's determination that FBAR penalties 'accrue' on the date the FBAR form is due. What does this mean in practice? Unlike penalties that might depend on an agency's action such as an assessment, FBAR penalties are tied to the moment of noncompliance. For each year an individual fails to file an FBAR by its due date (now April 15 of the following calendar year, with an automatic six-month extension to October 15), a liability is created. This liability doesn't require the IRS to act immediately; it exists as a latent obligation from that due date onward.
In Benishai's case, his FBARs were due annually between 2005 and 2011 for the calendar years 2004 through 2010. Because he was alive on those due dates and failed to file, the penalties accrued then and not at the later time after his death when the IRS assessed them. The court likened this to tax deficiencies, which arise by operation of law when a return is due but not filed, requiring no formal assessment.
Even though Benishai died in 2021 and the IRS assessed the penalties posthumously, his FBAR liability had already crystallized years earlier while he was alive and failed to file the forms when due. This interpretation means the IRS can pursue these penalties against an estate long after the taxpayer's death, provided it acts within the statutory timeframe. While the IRS may face greater hurdles in FBAR penalty collection, it has various means to ensure payment.
The estate argued that assessing the nonwillful FBAR penalties after Benishai's death extinguished the claim or violated due process and the Eighth Amendment's Excessive Fines Clause. The court disagreed. It found that FBAR penalties are primarily 'remedial', designed to compensate the government for the costs of investigating noncompliance and to enforce tax collection. FBAR penalties are not purely punitive and designed to punish the taxpayer. When a penalty is remedial in nature, the penalty can survive the taxpayer's death. Various precedent was cited by the Hendler court that supported this view, affirming that estates remain on the hook for accrued FBAR violations. As an aside, even 'willful' FBAR penalties have been found to be 'remedial' and survive death, despite the huge penalty amounts involved.
The Eighth Amendment challenge that the penalties were excessive was also unsuccessful. The estate claimed any fine against a deceased person is inherently excessive, but the court found no legal basis for this blanket assertion. The court declined to rule definitively on whether the Excessive Fines Clause applies to FBAR penalties, but it made clear that death alone doesn't render a penalty unconstitutional.
The estate's final defense was that the FBAR six-year statute of limitations barred the IRS' 2021 assessment. This argument was undermined by Benishai's own actions. The Bank Secrecy Act provides the government six years from the due date to assess FBAR penalties, but taxpayers can extend this period by agreement with the IRS. While Benishai was alive, he signed extensions pushing the deadline beyond his death to December 31, 2021. Since the IRS assessed the penalties in April 2021 this assessment was well within the extended window. The estate's argument that such extensions are invalid lacked supporting authority, and prior cases have consistently recognized their legitimacy.
The Hendler decision reminds us that FBAR obligations don't vanish with the taxpayer's death. For individuals with unreported foreign accounts, the accrual of penalties on the due date means liability begins ticking the moment they miss a filing, whether the IRS catches it during their lifetime or not. Estates can inherit these debts, facing enforcement actions years later. If beneficiaries receive assets tied to unreported foreign accounts, they could inadvertently become entangled in ongoing compliance issues or audits, exposing them to further legal and financial risks.
For tax pro's, wealth advisers and estate planners, the Hendler decision is a reminder to investigate potential FBAR liabilities when managing a decedent's affairs. Consider a taxpayer who failed to file an FBAR for a $50,000 Swiss account by April 15, 2018 (for the 2017 tax year), with the automatic extension expiring October 15, 2018. If they died in 2020 without extending the statute of limitations, the IRS could still assess a $10,000 penalty against their estate as late as October 15, 2024, six years from the due date.
FBAR rules can be, and are, enforced beyond the grave. By tying penalty accrual to the FBAR due date and upholding penalty survival post-death, the Hendler court has closed loopholes that might have let estates escape a decedent's FBAR penalties that are not assessed during his lifetime.
Taxpayers who are not compliant leave a problem to their estate which may simply inherit the liability. As foreign account scrutiny intensifies, this decision serves as both a warning and a call to action. There are many avenues to rectify FBAR noncompliance and often, without any penalty being imposed.
Stay on top of tax matters around the globe.
Reach me at vljeker@us-taxes.org
Visit my US tax blog www.us-tax.org It is an invaluable guide in all areas of U.S. international tax. Stay on top of legislative developments and tax reform (including FBAR developments) and keep ahead of U.S. tax changes impacting your life, family or business.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Yellow Springs' state audit lists $19K penalty; Matt Dillon blames IRS, village
Yellow Springs' state audit lists $19K penalty; Matt Dillon blames IRS, village

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Yellow Springs' state audit lists $19K penalty; Matt Dillon blames IRS, village

Jun. 10—The Ohio Auditor of State issued a finding for recovery of nearly $20,000 Tuesday against several former Yellow Springs officials who failed to pay federal tax withholdings on time, as well as late fees and penalties. The Ohio Auditor's Office issued a finding of recovery for $19,512.40 for fiscal year 2023, the vast majority of which is attributed to former village finance director Matt Dillon. Dillon left the position in 2022. Auditors found that Dillon "failed to timely remit payroll withholdings and filings to the federal government, leading to late fees, penalties, and interest," the majority of which would have been avoided had filings been on time, auditors said. Former village manager Josue Salmeron and former finance director Amy Kemper were also implicated in the report, but on a much smaller finding: Salmeron was deemed responsible for $156.95, and Kemper for $136.13, both of which have been repaid, according to the state. Dillon and his bonding company are responsible for the remaining $19,219.32, auditors said. Reached for comment Tuesday, Dillon said he has been forthcoming with the state's independent auditors, but feels that the nearly $20,000 amount is a punitive amount to be placed on one person for a "clerical error." "I'm a public servant," he said. "I try to be a financial steward, and I take that very, very seriously." The auditor's report shows that the breakdown of the findings for recovery include: — $4,657.30 for late filing of one Federal 941 Form; — $5,002.19 for seven instances of failure to submit withholdings; — $9,520.00 for incorrect filing of one Form 1099; — $332.91 for seven instances of interest for failure to pay IRS penalties. Dillon served as Yellow Springs' finance director for only two years. He added that during that time he repeatedly sought guidance from the IRS as to how to properly complete filings, but received no response, in part due to the effects of COVID on the IRS at the time. "With some of these, like payroll withholdings, we're submitting things without feedback to a black hole," he said. Dillon further alleged that many of the tasks assigned to him in the role had more to do with Village Council's pet projects, rather than maintaining solid fundamentals of bookkeeping. "Yellow Springs is the type of town that comes up with lots of extracurricular municipal activities that are beyond the basics. Like, 'Hey, let me just do what I need to do,' which is to make sure our taxes are good." Dillon said he is looking into his options to appeal the monetary charge. Leadership for the village of Yellow Springs did not return a request for comment Tuesday.

Matthews to require annual audit of one organization after setting nonprofit funding threshold
Matthews to require annual audit of one organization after setting nonprofit funding threshold

Yahoo

time5 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Matthews to require annual audit of one organization after setting nonprofit funding threshold

MATTHEWS, N.C. (QUEEN CITY NEWS) — Matthews is going to require all organizations that receive at least $50,000 from the town to submit an annual audit – but only one group qualifies at this time. The Board of Commissioners initially was to consider requiring the audit for either all nonprofits who use town funds or annually receive direct or in-kind support excess of $75,000. A compromise of sorts was made, coming up with the $50,000 figure since it aligned with IRS tax-exempt guidelines. This threshold only covers the Matthews Alive festival. 'Is no one else concerned that Matthews Alive is the only organization from which we're requiring an audit,' asked Mayor John Higdon. Commissioner Gina Hoover agreed. Matthews approves agreement with CMS board to construct Discovery Place on elementary campus The multi-day festival is a staple of Labor Day weekend, held annually at Stumptown Park with a parade, live music, vendors and more. 'This board was so challenged by Matthews Alive for so many years, and now we're no longer concerned?' asked a frustrated Commissioner Ken McCool. 'I just don't understand how we continuously do this.' Town Attorney Daniel Peterson noted that from a legal standpoint, 'this is a lawful exercise of treating people differently.' Outgoing Town Manager Becky Hawke said she's explained to festival leaders the reasoning for singling them out for this potential policy. 'They receive significantly more funding, significantly more in-kind support than any other organization in town,' she said. 'There is wide margin, and when you add in in-kind support provided to Matthews Alive, that pushes them beyond six figures. That was where I felt comfortable creating the differential in the threshold.' Hawke added that there's another nonprofit that has requested more funding, and given commissioners' support later this year, would pass the $50,000 mark. 'For these other organizations, we essentially cut them a check and don't have direct involvement in anything else that they do,' she said. 'It's much different with Matthews Alive. We are intently involved in that event. That was the difference.' North Carolina statute states that if a city or county grants or appropriates $1,000 or more in any fiscal year to a nonprofit organization, the municipality may require that the group have an audit performed. If the nonprofit has an annual budget of less than $300,000, the town will provide an additional $5,000 in annual support to complete the audit. The policy was approved unanimously. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Louisiana Legislature targets out-of-state doctors who provide abortion pills
Louisiana Legislature targets out-of-state doctors who provide abortion pills

Yahoo

time7 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Louisiana Legislature targets out-of-state doctors who provide abortion pills

Packages of Mifepristone tablets are displayed at a family planning clinic on April 13, 2023 in Rockville, Maryland. (Photo illustration by) The Louisiana Legislature has approved a bill targeting out-of-state abortion-inducing drug providers, giving more time to individuals who want to sue someone who performed, attempted to perform or substantially facilitated an abortion. The legislation is part of an effort from anti-abortion advocates to crack down on doctors who ship abortion-inducing medication to states where the procedure is illegal. In nearly all instances, abortion has been illegal in Louisiana since the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade in June 2022. House Bill 575 by Rep. Lauren Ventrella, R-Greenwell Springs, easily passed both chambers. She dubbed her proposal the 'Justice for Victims of Abortion Drug Dealers Act,' though it would apply to all forms of the procedure. It extends the window for abortion lawsuits from three years to five years and allows out-of-state doctors and activists to be sued. The bill will become law unless vetoed by Gov. Jeff Landry, which is unlikely. Ventrella's bill has the support of Attorney General Liz Murrill, who is currently prosecuting a case against a New York doctor accused of providing abortion-inducing medication to the mother of a pregnant minor in West Baton Rouge Parish. Gov. Kathy Hoschul has refused to extradite the doctor to Louisiana to face charges, citing New York's shield laws. The doctor and the minor's mother were both indicted. Murrill has alleged the minor was coerced to take the medication, though her mother was not charged with this crime. Ventrella's legislation was substantially whittled down throughout the legislative process. In its original state, it would have allowed the 'mother of the unborn child,' her parents, the man who impregnated her and his parents as potential plaintiffs. The man would have been unable to sue if the pregnancy was the result of rape, sexual assault or incest. The measure also would have allowed the plaintiffs to sue anybody who facilitated the abortion, with this term originally being undefined. It also would have allowed drug manufacturers to be sued. The legislation received bipartisan pushback, with multiple lawmakers raising privacy concerns. Last year, Louisiana lawmakers classified mifepristone and misoprostol as controlled dangerous substances. Both are used in medication abortions but also have other uses, including to stop life-threatening postpartum hemorrhages. Medical professionals opposed the move, warning the designation could make the drugs more difficult to access in time-sensitive medical crises. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store