---

※ 引述《maplefff (降息の恐怖嘎鱷)》之銘言：
: ※ 引述《seemoon2000 (no cash)》之銘言：
: 原文在
: https://waysandmeans.house.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/05/SMITMO_017_xml.pdf
: 第327頁, SEC 111205, 以下原文以Open AI o3翻譯
: ######START
: SEC. 112105. 匯款轉移消費稅
: ------
: （a）一般規定
: 將第 36 章於子章 B 之後增列下列新子章：
: 「子章 C—匯款轉移 『第 4475 節　課稅』
: ------
: 「第 4475 節　課稅」
: （a）一般規定—— 對任何匯款轉移徵收相當於該筆轉移金額 5 ％之稅。
: （b）稅款繳納——
:     1.一般規定。 依本節對任何匯款轉移課徵之稅款，由匯款人負責繳納。
:     2.代收。匯款轉移服務提供者應自匯款人處代收依（a）項課徵之稅款，
:       並依部長規定之時間及方式按季繳交。
:     3.次要責任。若轉移時未繳納稅款，匯款轉移服務提供者應負責繳納任何
:       未收取之稅款。
: （c）美國公民及國民透過特定服務提供者進行之轉移之例外——
:     1.一般規定。若匯款轉移係透過「合格匯款轉移服務提供者」進行，
:       且匯款人為「經核實之美國匯款人」，則（a）項不適用。
:     2.合格匯款轉移服務提供者。 指與部長簽訂書面協議，依部長規定之方式驗證
:       匯款人為美國公民或國民之服務提供者。
:     3.經核實之美國匯款人。指依前款由合格服務提供者核實為美國公民或國民之
:       匯款人。
: （d）定義—— 「匯款轉移」、「匯款轉移服務提供者」、「指定收款人」及「匯款人」
:      之意義均以《電子資金轉帳法》第 920(g) 條（15 U.S.C.1693o-1）所定者為準。
: （e）反通道規定之適用—— 就涉及匯款人之多方安排，依第 7701(l) 條規定，匯款轉
:      移視同融資交易。
: ######END
: 關注(d)項之定義, 詢問境外非美國稅務身分
: 從券商帳戶匯款回本國是否屬於「匯款轉移」
: #####START
: 只要該筆匯出符合下列 4 個條件，就屬於《電子資金轉帳法》（EFTA）§  920(g)
: 所稱的 “remittance transfer”，即使匯款人是居住海外、沒有美國稅務身份的
: 外國自然人：
: 1.匯款人是消費者，且匯款目的為個人／家庭／生活用途；
: 2.匯款人透過的帳戶 設立於美國境內（“State”）；
: 3.服務方屬於 remittance transfer provider （每年>500筆國際匯款）
: 4.該筆轉帳 不是 (i) 小額交易（<15 USD）
:              或 (ii) 以買賣證券／商品為主要目的之資金移轉。
: #####END
: 根據《電子資金轉帳法》remittance transfer其實跟身份沒有關係,
: 跟匯款當時的條件才有關係
: 條件確認：
: 1.只要你不是法人皆是
: 2.判定條件實際上是sender在美國某一個"state(州)", 但根據CPFB 2014年的解釋
:   sender所在地是依照sender帳戶所在地, 而不是sender自然人所在地
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

你可以用此追問AI。我問了Chatgpt和Google gemini，兩者回答都類似:
外國投資人從美國券商匯款至外國，不符合remittance transfer的定義

因為12 CFR §  1005.30(g)的sender定義前提是"consumer in a State"

你可以試著問:
Assume I am a foreigner outside the US and I have an account in the
interactive brokers LLC.

I want to transfer 100 USD from this account and to my bank account outside
the US.

Is this transfer considered a "remittance transfer"?

再問:
How is the "Sender Location" determined in the US law?

再問:
My account is with a U.S.-based institution (Interactive Brokers LLC). And by
the definition of the Account-Based Transfers, the sender's location is
determined by where the account is located, not necessarily the consumer's
physical location at the time of the transfer.

Why is my sender location not considered inside the US?

兩個AI都會跟你解釋為什麼

Gemini的回答更充實一點，它會告訴你Regulation E of EFTA的立法目的是
保障本國消費者

You've highlighted a crucial point from the definition of "sender" in the
context of account-based transfers. Let's clarify why, despite your account
being with a U.S. institution, your sender location is still considered
outside the US for the purposes of the remittance transfer rules:

The key lies in the definition of a "consumer in a State". While having an
account at a U.S. institution is a factor, the regulations primarily target
situations where a consumer residing in a U.S. state is sending money
internationally.

Here's why your situation is likely different:

You are not a "consumer in a State": The definition of a "sender" explicitly
states "a consumer in a State." "State" here refers to any state, territory,
or possession of the United States. Since you are a foreigner residing
outside the US (specifically in Taiwan, as per our last interaction), you do
not meet this fundamental criterion for being classified as a "sender" under
the remittance transfer regulations.

Purpose of the Regulation: The remittance transfer rules under Regulation E
of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act were enacted to protect consumers within
the United States when they send money to recipients in other countries. The
disclosures, error resolution procedures, and cancellation rights are
designed for this specific scenario. Your transfer, while involving a
US-based institution, originates from outside the US and involves your own
funds being moved to your own account abroad. The consumer protection goals
of the regulation are less directly applicable in this context.

Initiation of the Transfer: Even though your funds are held at Interactive
Brokers LLC in the US, you are initiating the transfer from your location in
Taiwan. The regulatory focus is often on the point of initiation by a
consumer located within the US.

In essence, the "sender location" for remittance transfer rules isn't solely
tied to where the account is held. It's more about the residency and location
of the consumer initiating the transfer.

Therefore, while your account is in the US, because you are located outside
the US when initiating the transfer, it's not considered a "remittance
transfer" as defined under US law. Instead, it's treated as an international
wire transfer subject to Interactive Brokers' and your bank's international
transfer policies and fees.

:   (《Reg E》§  1005.30(g)-1 )
:   因此只要你的券商託管現金帳戶在美國皆是, 一般情況皆是


: 3.券商會使用的JPM, BOA, CITI不用看了, 皆是
: 4.(i)不是小額交易,
:   (ii)除非這是非美券商或銀行的交割款扣繳, 否則就不是
: 確實目前看起來,
: 只要是自然人從美國銀行匯款往國外皆需要扣稅, 實在是荒謬至極。

--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc), 來自: 220.133.52.251 (臺灣)
※ 作者: vatog 2025-05-18 22:37:10
※ 文章代碼(AID): #1eAV2Ojr (Stock)
※ 文章網址: https://www.ptt.cc/bbs/Stock/M.1747579032.A.B75.html

作者 vatog 的最新發文:

• +8 Re: [新聞] 駕車狠撞奪3命！78歲翁肇事前打回家報平安 妻曝他健康狀況 - Gossiping 板

  作者: vatog 220.229.65.146 (台灣) 2025-05-20 18:13:53

  21F 8推
• +14 Re: [新聞] 美國計畫對非公民海外匯款課徵5％消費稅 - Stock 板

  作者: vatog 220.133.52.251 (台灣) 2025-05-18 22:37:10

  71F 16推 2噓
• +10 Re: [新聞] 美國計畫對非公民海外匯款課徵5％消費稅 - Stock 板

  作者: vatog 220.133.52.251 (台灣) 2025-05-18 21:24:23

  26F 10推
• +40 Re: [標的] 2317 鴻海 - Stock 板

  作者: vatog 220.133.52.251 (台灣) 2025-04-13 19:42:56

  備份: 根據這裡的投影片(假設為真)，智能手機/手錶，大部分的雲端網路產品、 電腦終端產品得到豁免，不用吃125%關稅。 但有一些例外: 藍芽音箱 無線耳機 智慧音樂揚聲器 電視機 遊戲機 手機主板 …

  76F 40推
• +11 Re: [MHWs] 配裝分享 廢柴獵人的煌雷套裝 - MH 板

  作者: vatog 59.124.110.2 (台灣) 2025-03-14 14:54:20

  36F 11推

點此顯示更多發文記錄