Philipsburg, St. Maarten – Several local business owners have found their bank accounts suddenly frozen in recent days as banks enforce the United States’ Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA). Companies with no U.S. ties have been swept up in the compliance dragnet, leaving many scrambling to restore access to funds. Bank officials claim customers were warned to submit mandatory tax residency forms, but frustrated entrepreneurs say no such notice ever reached them, slamming the situation as heavy-handed and “bureaucratic overreach.”
FATCA: International Tax Law Reaches St. Maarten
FATCA is a U.S. law enacted in 2010 aimed at combating offshore tax evasion by American taxpayers. It requires financial institutions worldwide to identify and report accounts held by U.S. citizens or entities to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS). To avoid a punitive 30% withholding tax on U.S.-sourced payments, banks around the globe have little choice but to comply. Many countries eased the process by signing Intergovernmental Agreements (IGAs) with the U.S., which deputize local tax authorities to collect and share the information. Under such IGAs, banks report to their own government, which in turn reports to the IRS, simplifying compliance in those jurisdictions.
However, St. Maarten did not sign an IGA. Lacking the necessary legal framework for an intergovernmental deal, the country opted for “Direct FATCA” compliance, meaning local banks must report directly to the IRS without government intermediaries. (As of 2017, at least 21 financial institutions in St. Maarten had registered with the IRS under this direct approach.) This model places the onus squarely on the banks to collect required customer data and send it to U.S. authorities. It’s a path shared by a few other jurisdictions – for example, neighboring Suriname also operates with no FATCA IGA in place – but most Caribbean countries, including the Eastern Caribbean Currency Union members, signed FATCA agreements in 2016–2017 to streamline the process.
Local observers have long raised concerns about FATCA’s impact. Back in 2016, the Democratic Party faction in St. Maarten’s Parliament urged a discussion on the law’s “consequences for local businesses and banks,” noting that an IGA could potentially simplify reporting burdens for institutions. Yet nearly a decade after FATCA took effect, compliance remains a complex reality on the island – one now coming to a head for unsuspecting business owners.
Caribbean Compliance and St. Maarten’s Approach
Throughout the Caribbean, FATCA implementation has been a mixed patchwork. Some nations – like Barbados, the Bahamas, and St. Kitts & Nevis – entered Model 1 IGAs, leveraging government-to-government data exchange. Others, including Aruba, Suriname and St. Maarten, never signed IGAs, leaving each bank to individually register with the IRS and abide by FATCA’s requirements. Under U.S. law, foreign financial institutions (FFIs) in non-IGA jurisdictions must either sign an agreement with the IRS to report U.S.-linked accounts or face sanctions, namely that 30% withholding on any U.S. transactions. The stakes are high: non-compliance could effectively cut a bank off from crucial U.S. dollar correspondent banking relationships.
For St. Maarten’s banks, the choice was clear – enforce FATCA or risk severe penalties. In practice, this meant overhauling onboarding procedures and customer due diligence to identify “U.S. persons” (citizens, green-card holders, or certain U.S. taxpayers abroad) and gather their taxpayer identification details. It also meant periodically confirming the tax residency status of all account holders, not just Americans. This is where local businesses have been caught off guard.
Banks Demand Tax Residency Forms
Over the past year, major banks on the island have intensified their FATCA and related Common Reporting Standard (CRS) compliance efforts. Customers – particularly business account holders– have been asked to fill out “Tax Residency Self-Certification” forms, declaring which countries they are tax residents of (and providing tax identification numbers). The exercise is meant to satisfy both FATCA (for U.S. reporting) and CRS (a global standard for exchanging financial account info).
According to official policy, banks are not shy about the consequences of non-compliance. Royal Bank of Canada (RBC), one of St. Maarten’s largest banks, explicitly warns that failure to submit a valid self-certification can result in a frozen account. In RBC’s published guidelines, the bank notes it is required by law to obtain customers’ tax residency info and that “failure to provide a valid self-certification under FATCA or CRS will result in the temporary restraint of your account until such time as it is provided to us and verified”. In other words, access to the account is blocked until the paperwork is in order.
Other banks echo this stance. Republic Bank (St. Maarten) N.V., for example, states that it may even close accounts of customers who “fail to provide sufficient information to determine whether or not they are a U.S. person”, after ample notice. Since FATCA’s rollout in 2014, Republic Bank and others have implemented new account opening procedures and periodic reviews to ensure compliance. Bank officials defend these measures as non-negotiable obligations under international law. “We understand it’s extra paperwork for clients,” one compliance officer at a local bank commented off-record, “but if we don’t do it, the IRS can come down on us hard. Ultimately, it’s about keeping our banks connected to the global financial system.”
Business Owners Caught Off Guard
Despite those official policies, many St. Maarten business owners say they never heard a word about any “self-certification” form until it was too late. One morning in early June, “I tried to initiate a wire transfer to pay a supplier, and it just wouldn’t go through,” recalls a Phillipsburg retail entrepreneur who asked not to be named. “I called the bank and they casually tell me my account is ‘temporarily restrained’ – basically frozen – because of some U.S. tax form I was supposed to fill out. It was the first I’d ever heard of it.” Similar stories have surfaced across the business community in recent days, with owners describing sudden account blocks that disrupted their ability to pay employees, suppliers, and daily expenses.
Local banks insist they attempted to alert clients. RBC’s country management has stated that emails and other notices were sent out well in advance of any account freeze. “According to RBC, they contacted me in April – but I’ve scoured my inbox, including spam, and there’s nothing,” said a restaurant owner in Simpson Bay who found her business account locked last week. “They had my phone number too. Not a call, not a WhatsApp. Instead, I got blindsided.”
These firsthand accounts call into question the effectiveness of customer communication. Several affected entrepreneurs maintain that if any mass emails were sent, they were easy to miss or possibly never delivered. “I’m meticulous with my email. If I had gotten anything from the bank saying my account would be frozen, of course I would have acted immediately,” said the retail entrepreneur, whose frustration was palpable. “No warning – just frozen. You can imagine the panic it caused.”
For businesses, even a temporary inability to transact can be devastating. One construction company manager described having payroll bounce and needing to personally front cash to workers while untangling the issue. Another small business owner had a shipment of goods stuck at the docks because he couldn’t access funds to pay the freight release. “It’s not just an inconvenience; it interrupts real business operations,” the owner said. “We lose trust with vendors and employees when payments don’t go through.”
Non-U.S. Customers Ask: “Why Us?”
Perhaps the biggest source of indignation is that many of these owners have zero affiliation with the United States, yet they are being penalized under a U.S. tax law. FATCA’s intent is to catch U.S. tax cheats hiding assets abroad – a mission local entrepreneurs say has nothing to do with them. “It’s outrageous,” said a clinic owner whose account was frozen despite all owners and signatories being Dutch or Caribbean nationals. “None of us are U.S. citizens or residents. Our business isn’t in the U.S. We don’t even deal with U.S. clients. Why are we caught up in an American tax enforcement net?”
Under FATCA rules, banks must still collect self-certifications from all customers, because they need documentation on file to prove a given account holder is not a “U.S. Person” or otherwise reportable. In practice that means everyone gets papered, not just the few who turn out to have U.S. indicia. Local non-U.S. customers describe it as an example of “the long arm of U.S. law” reaching into their everyday lives. “This feels like bureaucratic overreach,” the clinic owner said. “I understand the U.S. wants to catch tax evaders, but I shouldn’t have my business frozen because I didn’t fill out a form for a country I have no connection to.”
The situation has also fueled resentment about the compliance burden on small enterprises. Larger companies often have compliance officers or accountants who handle such paperwork. Small and family-run businesses, by contrast, can easily miss an email or misunderstand a form – especially when it’s framed as a requirement tied to foreign law. Some proprietors admitted they ignored or didn’t fully comprehend the self-certification request: “I saw an email months ago with a PDF attachment about ‘tax residency’ and honestly thought it didn’t apply to me, since I have nothing to do with the US,” one owner confessed. “That’s on me. But the bank could have at least followed up with a phone call before unilaterally blocking the account.”
Balancing Compliance and Customer Fairness
The FATCA fallout in St. Maarten highlights a delicate balancing act between enforcing international tax compliance and providing fair customer service. Banks here operate under immense pressure to satisfy global regulatory demands – not just FATCA, but anti-money laundering standards, Common Reporting Standard obligations, and more. Failing to comply could jeopardize the entire institution (for instance, risking heavy fines or losing access to international banking networks). In that light, local banks see strict measures like account freezes as “last-resort” tools to fulfill their legal duties. An RBC spokesperson (declining to be identified by name) noted that multiple reminders were issued and that only “a small percentage of clients” ultimately faced freezes. From the banks’ perspective, they did all they could to cajole compliance short of taking action.
Yet from the customer perspective, the episode has exposed serious communication failures and a lack of consideration for business continuity. “Banks here should recognize that not everyone is glued to their email or versed in IRS jargon,” said a board member of a local foundation. “If something this critical is going on, you need aggressive public outreach – announcements, phone calls, maybe even involving the Chamber of Commerce to get the word out.” Thus far, there is little evidence of a coordinated awareness campaign. Some affected owners only learned the term “FATCA” after their accounts were locked, a scenario they describe as unacceptable.
The controversy also raises broader questions about sovereignty and fairness. Should a local business be jeopardized over a U.S. tax law it has no stake in? St. Maarten’s government, for its part, has generally left FATCA matters to the banks (given the direct-compliance model chosen). However, there are calls for authorities to take a more active role – either by revisiting the possibility of an IGA to give FATCA a formal local framework, or at least by mediating between banks and businesses to prevent sudden disruptions. As one Parliament member noted years ago, “If a jurisdiction enters into an IGA to implement FATCA, the compliance burdens on financial institutions may be simplified.” In hindsight, that observation seems prescient: without a government buffer, banks and customers are left to sort it out among themselves, not always smoothly.
For now, many business owners have grudgingly submitted their tax residency forms to get their accounts reinstated. But the episode has left a bad taste. “I get it – the bank has rules to follow,” said the Simpson Bay restaurateur, “but the way they went about it was all wrong.” She and others hope this will be a wake-up call for better communication and more proportionate solutions. Freezing accounts “should be the absolute last resort, not the first we hear of a problem,” she says.
St. Maarten’s experience is a microcosm of a global trend: as banks act as enforcers of international financial regulations, ordinary customers can find themselves collateral damage. The challenge ahead lies in striking a balance – ensuring compliance without alienating law-abiding locals, and keeping the wheels of commerce turning even as the tax-man cometh from abroad. In the words of one weary business owner, “We’ll fill out your forms and follow the rules – just treat us fairly and like valued customers, not potential criminals.”
###
ADVERTISEMENT
