FATCA & CRS

FATCA (the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) and the CRS (the OECD Common Reporting Standard) both require an entity to determine whether it is a Financial Institution (FI) or a Non-Financial Entity, and then which sub-category applies. The result drives the entity’s registration, due diligence and reporting obligations.

The entity. An adviser or service provider can perform the analysis and produce a classification memorandum or recommendation, but the classification is the entity’s own and so is the responsibility for it. This is why the analysis should be documented, dated and kept, rather than existing only as a box ticked on a self-certification form.

FATCA and CRS classification is not reserved to a specific regulated profession such as lawyers, auditors or expert-comptables. Specialist advisers, administrators and other competent service providers can perform it, subject to their own professional and business-authorisation requirements.

No. Legal form does not determine classification. The analysis turns on what the entity does — its activities, assets, income and how it is managed. An SCSp can be an FI, and frequently is where it is professionally managed, but that conclusion has to be reached through the tests rather than assumed from the wrapper.

No. Being a holding company or an SPV does not make an entity an Active Non-Financial Entity. The relevant FATCA and CRS definitions and the income and asset tests have to be applied, and a passive holding structure can easily fail them.

Most professionally managed investment funds fall within the Investment Entity category and are therefore Financial Institutions. That is the expected outcome rather than an automatic one: the tests still have to be applied to the specific entity, and labels such as “fund”, “RAIF” or “SCSp” are not a substitute for the analysis.

No. FATCA and CRS are related but separate frameworks and some entity categories are treated differently under each. The most consequential example in Luxembourg is that certain Luxembourg investment advisors and investment managers are treated as Non-Reporting Financial Institutions for FATCA purposes with no CRS equivalent, so the same entity can be non-reporting under FATCA and reporting under CRS. A FATCA conclusion should never be copied across to CRS.

A Financial Institution that has to carry out the due diligence and reporting obligations, because no non-reporting category or exemption applies to it.

An Active NFE meets at least one of the active-status tests under the applicable framework — for example the income and assets test, or one of the specific categories such as listed entities, governmental entities, certain holding structures, start-ups and entities in liquidation. A Passive NFE is broadly an NFE that does not qualify as Active, which triggers additional due diligence on its controlling persons by the Financial Institution holding its account.

A GIIN, or Global Intermediary Identification Number, is issued by the US Internal Revenue Service to entities registered for FATCA purposes. Luxembourg Reporting Financial Institutions generally need to obtain and maintain one.

Yes. Luxembourg requires a nil return — Zero Reporting — from Reporting Financial Institutions with no reportable accounts. Filing nothing is not the same as filing nil, and the difference is a compliance failure.

Luxembourg Reporting Financial Institutions must generally submit their annual FATCA and CRS reporting to the Administration des contributions directes (ACD) by 30 June of the year following the calendar year to which the information relates. For example, reporting relating to calendar year 2026 is due by 30 June 2027. The same deadline applies where a Reporting Financial Institution is required to submit a Zero Reporting message because it has no reportable accounts.

Three recur. Copying the FATCA conclusion into CRS. Inferring classification from the name or legal form of the vehicle rather than from its activities. And treating a holding company, SPV or securitisation vehicle as obviously outside scope without running the tests — securitisation vehicles in particular need a fact-specific analysis of their activities and how they are managed.

Amana generally applies a fixed fee per entity for FATCA and CRS classification work. The fee depends on the complexity of the structure, the nature of the entity, its activities, assets and management arrangements, and whether a straightforward classification or a more detailed documented analysis is required. Where appropriate, the engagement can include a written FATCA/CRS Classification Memorandum setting out the analysis and recommended classification.

Annual reporting support is priced separately and depends on whether the filing is a nil / Zero Reporting submission or a positive report involving reportable accounts. Separate fixed fees may also apply for historic filing remediation, review of previous classifications, GIIN matters or FATCA Responsible Officer changes.

Yes — classification reviews, reporting assessments, nil and positive reporting support, and assistance with GIIN and Responsible Officer matters. Where useful, the analysis is documented in a dedicated FATCA/CRS classification memorandum that the entity can keep on file as evidence of the position taken and when it was taken.