The usual propaganda pretending that the whole world loves FATCA and wants to emulate it but fails to mention that the US hypocrisy on information sharing continues......

As always leaving out the pertinent context that the US chooses to define the bank accounts of those living ordinary lives outside the US as somehow the business of the US Treasury, based solely on birthplace or parentage.

As usual, this article in Forbes leaves out that no other country practices CBT except the US. 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/taxanalysts/2014/10/27/fatca-envy-spreads-across-hemisphere/

It also carefully leaves out that the US serves as a tax haven for other countries, including Latin Americans, and has no plans to stop the US banks in Florida, Texas, etc. from doing so. See for example: January 23, 2013 News Analysis: Will U.S. Hypocrisy on Information Sharing Continue?
by Lee A. Sheppard http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Articles/0C26B2CFD92F1FBE85257AFC004E8B38?OpenDocument

Therefore, though some other countries may be interested in the bank accounts that its RESIDENTS have outside its borders, they do not seek to do so based on a geographical birthplace, or the national origin of their parents. Anyone who is now writing about FATCA, in a source such as Forbes will know this. Leaving it out is willful blindness or deliberate evasion !

Let’s stop talking about FATCA’s “collateral damage” and start discussing real intent.  FATCA is the enforcement tool to collect IRS taxes and penalties from non US residents receiving no standard government services (schools, roads, education, or social welfare).  FATCA talking points contradict the administration’s own statements upon FATCA intentions.
 http://www.taxanalysts.com/taxcom/taxblog.nsf/Permalink/UBEN-9Q7FTD?OpenDocument
1. The Latin American rich hide their money in the US, where some banks gladly accept it without asking too many questions. Gobs of flight capital, only a small proportion of which represents drug money, comes to U.S. banks. Florida's economy is utterly dependent on outsiders, both domestic and foreign, bringing money in.
2. It is easy to incorporate anonymously in the US. The US is an easy place to start a business. Unless you're selling liquor or some other means of enjoyment, there is no license requirement. It takes 6 days on average to start a business .
3. The US until recently maintained the ancient British common law revenue rule, which says that one country will not assist another country in the enforcement of its tax laws in the first country's territory. The revenue rule originally allowed the British to function as pirates and Britain as a tax haven.
4. Tax evasion was not taken seriously before Birkenfeld . Treaties and tax information exchange agreements do little or nothing to address tax evasion and may even have enabled it. That is because treaties are primarily intended for the aid and comfort of multinational corporations.
5. Treaties and tax information exchange agreements do little or nothing to address tax evasion and may even have enabled it. That is because treaties are primarily intended for the aid and comfort of multinational corporations.
6. Latin American countries mostly don't sign treaties with the United States, and for good reason. They don't like giving up tax jurisdiction over the affiliates of American multinationals that would do business in their countries even without tax treaties.
7. Another weakness in both treaties and TIEAs is that the English versions are drafted by lawyers trained in common law systems. Common law lawyers take an Alice in Wonderland approach to wording, in which words mean whatever they want them to mean. There are often civil law countries on the other side of the contract, and their lawyers are taught to read words narrowly and hypertechnically.
8. The United States does not want to kill the goose that lays the golden egg while pursuing its own resident tax evaders. That's what diplomacy is about -- saying one thing and doing another.
9. Treasury is bragging that loads of countries have volunteered to discuss IGAs with it. To have an IGA, a country must have a tax treaty or TIEA in place with the United States so it has the legal ability to transfer information. Japan and Switzerland have offered to sign unilateral IGAs under which their banks would report directly to the IRS, but the United States would not give any information to them. It's not like the Swiss are hiding money in the United States. Treasury billed this unilateral agreement (Model II) as something those countries asked for. There is a nonreciprocal version of the Model I agreement, under which the signatory country promises to gather FATCA-compliant information and automatically transmit it to the United States. It is hard to imagine any country signing this document, but Treasury drafted the nonreciprocal version with the apparent intent of offering it to someone.