In the eyes of the Swiss, the reputation of the United States of America has for various reasons been in sharp decline, and America has been presenting itself to Switzerland less and less as an old friend, and more and more as an enemy. I want to remind our friends in Switzerland, as well as every American in Switzerland, that the US is a friend of Switzerland, and I want to tell you what the Swiss as friends must do.
The US and Switzerland are two of the worlds oldest democracies, and both share the founding principles of freedom and independence. At the time of the American revolution, Switzerland was surrounded by tyrannical monarchies, and its fierce independence and stubborn refusal to submit to these despots earned it the title of ‘Sister Republic’ to the United States of America.
How things can change. In 2010, the US Congress with FATCA decreed that every bank in the world must report to the IRS, or face severe consequences. This is nothing less than an act of war on the sovereignty of every nation. Switzerland must under no circumstances submit to these threats, and we must as friends tell America that they are out of line. Brute force has replaced enlightened thinking, and the language of threats and intimidation have become the norm of US foreign policy.
Swiss politicians talk of appeasing the Americans to preserve our friendship. Real friends however don’t allow themselves to be bullied or intimidated by their friends. America needs to be brought back to its senses, so that Switzerland and America can sort out their differences as equals. Switzerland must not allow itself to be bullied and treated as a vassal state.
This is why I wish to encourage every person in Switzerland who values real friendship between the US and Switzerland to sign the referendum to repeal FATCA in Switzerland.
The Swiss government recently agreed to enforce FATCA on every Swiss bank. They must report on accounts defined as belonging to ‘US persons’. The US government is however the only one who can decide who a ‘US person’ is, and Switzerland has already agreed to accept all future modifications to FATCA.
This is pure bullying against Switzerland, and were any other country to attempt similar legislation aimed at the US, it would be considered an act of war. The criminal actions of a few Swiss bankers are leading to the subjugation of the entire Swiss banking sector (not to mention other sections of the economy), and Swiss politicians have accepted this with hardly a word of protest.
The referendum to stop FATCA has been launched, and a core group of volunteers is fighting tooth and nail to get the necessary 50,000 signatures before the deadline. It’s a difficult struggle though.
The banks and the large parties are too afraid of the US to mount any resistance, and the average Swiss voter doesn’t yet see how FATCA will affect them personally. By the time they do, it will be too late.
This referendum is a small grass roots movement that needs your help.
Here’s what you can do:
– Go to www.stop-fatca.ch, download the referendum sheet (http://www.lldc.ch/wa_files/referendum_fatca.pdf), and get as many signatures as possible. If you can’t sign yourself (you must be Swiss to sign), find a friend who is willing to sign.
Then send the sheet to:
FATCA
Le Lobby des Citoyens
Rue du Conseil-Général 20
1205 Genève
Please try to send your letters before 16 December. The holiday season means that most communes will be closed, and it will be very difficult getting the signatures validated in time for the 16 January deadline. Every signature counts though, so keep them coming until the very end.
If every American in Switzerland could just get one or two signatures, we’d easily have enough signatures, and we would be making a giant leap towards killing FATCA for good.
– We need every volunteer who is willing to help us. We are working hard and setting up stands to inform people and to collect signatures. But we need help. If you have the time, and are willing to stand outside in the ever colder weather, we’d love to have your support. Send an email to: info@lldc.ch or call 022 807 08 32 to find out more.
– Contact your local representatives and political leaders and ask what they are doing about FATCA. The large Swiss parties have sold out the country to protect the interests of the large banks. They are hoping this law will pass unnoticed. We need to make some noise and stir things up.
FATCA is a steamroller coming down on the world economy, and Americans abroad are going to be this law’s first victims. We can choose to fight and stop FATCA in its tracks, and if we work together we will succeed.
Spread the word to as many people as possible, and good luck!
Richard
@Just Me:
The link to the newspaper is (Le Temps, not Les Temps – sorry):
http://www.letemps.ch/
Then search on “douglas” to find the article.
Copy and paste the article name in Google and search on it to read it behind the paywall.
Not necessarily related to the above, the Swiss Federal Council today approved the continuance of the investigation by the prosecutor’s office into allegations of espionage by the US in Switzerland. A shot across the bow?:
http://www.nzz.ch/aktuell/schweiz/bundesanwalt-darf-in-der-spionageaffaere-ermitteln-1.18199676
One day everyone is probably going to learn that Bradley Birkenfeld was a deep cover mole from the very beginning.
@Innocente…..Thanks…
I can see the article, but can not get access in the search mode. I have tried the “copy and paste” in google news with no luck.
@Just Me:
1) I copy and paste title of article into Google and then hit search. I then open it in Google. It works from here.
2) Below is article. Please read and then remove it.
Opinions jeudi 05 décembre 2013
La majorité des banques suisses doit refuser le «US Program»
Douglas Hornung
Seules les banques qui ont démarché activement les clients sur sol américain ont intérêt à y participer. Les banquiers qui prennent le temps de se renseigner découvriront les subtilités du «US Program» que les diplomates suisses n’ont pas vues. Par l’avocat Douglas Hornung
Vos commentaires
Lire tous les commentaires (0)
Ajouter un commentaire
De plus en plus de banques s’interrogent sur l’opportunité de participer au «Program» américain et la Finma, l’Autorité fédérale de surveillance des marchés financiers, fait le forcing pour convaincre les banques de participer à ce «US Program». Les autorités suisses et l’Association suisse des banquiers soulignent qu’à défaut de participer au «US Program», les banques s’exposent à des poursuites pénales pour «conspiration», qui menaceraient leur existence même. L’exemple de la banque Wegelin est mis en avant.
En réalité, cette crainte et cet exemple sont à écarter: en l’état, les Etats-Unis ne peuvent pas menacer d’ouvrir une enquête pénale en «conspiration» contre la plupart des banques suisses. Ils ne peuvent le faire que contre celles qui ont effectivement eu pour politique d’attirer une clientèle américaine importante et qui ont en ce sens déployé des efforts particuliers pour avoir ce type de clients. Dans ces cas, mais dans ces cas seulement, les Etats-Unis peuvent mettre la banque elle-même en péril en la menaçant de poursuites pénales pour «conspiration» si elle ne coopère pas.
Pour toutes les autres banques suisses, il n’y a aucune raison de craindre de se voir accuser de «conspiration» car elles n’ont en rien «conspiré» et n’ont fait que gérer la fortune de quelques clients américains, souvent très anciens, qui ne représentent qu’une partie infime de leur clientèle habituelle. Elles n’ont pas eu d’activités proactives sur sol américain (organisation d’événements culturels, sportifs ou mondains par exemple) et se sont contentées de traiter des clients qui venaient naturellement vers elles. Elles pourraient d’ailleurs se défendre vigoureusement, et avec succès, au cas où – bien peu probable – une telle menace se concrétisait. Cette défense serait par ailleurs moins onéreuse financièrement que le paiement des amendes prévues par le «US Program».
La participation au «US Program» repose sur d’autres bases. Le critère de base n’est pas seulement la «conspiration» mais «la violation du droit américain», en particulier du Titre 18 du Code des impôts américain (United States Tax Code) qui, à lui seul, comprend 123 chapitres… Ainsi, si la banque a fait signer un mauvais formulaire (W8BEN au lieu du W9 par exemple), elle a «violé le droit américain» et doit passer à la caisse en participant au «US Program».
Ce n’est ni raisonnable ni équitable. Et c’est donc à juste titre que de plus en plus d’établissements se refusent à cette opération qui n’est manifestement pas dans leur intérêt et qui vise à faire appliquer en Suisse le droit interne américain.
A cela s’ajoute que le «US Program » est flou et ne permet même pas de tourner la page ni de savoir exactement à quoi la banque s’expose. D’une part, il n’absout en rien les dirigeants des banques qui pourront ainsi être personnellement poursuivis. Les Etats-Unis pourront donc «se servir» une deuxième fois (puis une troisième fois en poursuivant les clients américains, puis une quatrième en poursuivant quelques gestionnaires ou avocats ou fiduciaires choisis dans la masse de données qui seront communiquées).
Bien plus: l’IRS américaine aime bien changer les règles du jeu une fois que le «fautif» s’est dénoncé. Le «US Program» pour les banques est calqué sur le programme d’amnistie mis en place par les Etats-Unis pour les particuliers (OVDP).
Quelle n’a pas été la surprise des particuliers qui se sont dénoncés dans le cadre de l’OVDP de voir que l’IRS changeait ses règles et interprétations pour leur faire payer des amendes encore plus importantes que celles qui étaient annoncées dans l’OVDP. Le Taxpayer Advocate Service, soit le service à l’intérieur même de l’IRS chargé de s’assurer que les contribuables ne sont pas abusés, s’en est d’ailleurs fait l’écho, mais sans succès, en qualifiant cette méthode de bait-and-switch («appâter puis changer»).
En un premier temps, l’IRS attire les fautifs puis change les conditions et fait payer des amendes beaucoup plus fortes que celles annoncées dans le programme. Dans cet esprit, l’IRS n’aura d’ailleurs même pas besoin de se forcer: les banques qui s’annonceront en catégorie 2 (soit celles qui admettront avoir «violé le droit américain») devront, selon le texte du «US Program», commencer par payer les amendes calculées au prix fort sur tous les comptes de clients américains, y compris les comptes déclarés. Ce n’est que dans un deuxième temps que le montant global de l’amende pourra, peut-être, être réduit (may be reduced), une fois la démonstration faite que certains clients américains étaient en réalité en ordre avec leurs obligations fiscales ou que le client américain a bénéficié de l’OVDP.
Probablement que la délégation suisse – qui a «négocié» le diktat imposé par les Etats-Unis sans être assistée d’avocats américains – n’a pas vu ce genre de subtilité. Heureusement qu’il reste quelques banquiers qui prennent le temps de se renseigner et d’examiner la situation. Ils en concluent logiquement et légitimement que ce «US Program» n’est utile que pour les établissements qui ont réellement fauté à grande échelle. Raisonnablement et logiquement, le «US Program» ne peut donc être utile qu’à une quarantaine de banques suisses. Toutes celles qui n’ont jamais eu pour politique d’attirer une clientèle américaine non déclarée devraient reprendre leurs esprits, analyser la situation objectivement et, en liaison avec des avocats américains, refuser le service après-vente de la Finma. En rappelant aux dirigeants de la Finma qu’elle-même, dans son rapport publié le 2 mai 2011, soulignait encore que «en vertu du droit suisse en vigueur depuis des décennies, et mis à part quelques cas spécifiques, l’acceptation et la gestion d’avoirs non déclarés de clients étrangers sont autorisés, et donc non punissables».
@Innocente,,,
I have done all that, but the article does not show up in my list. The only one that does is this one… at the very top…
http://www.24heures.ch/economie/Conflit-fiscal-le-programme-US-reste-flou/story/14109440
Maybe I should change to the Swiss edition of Googlenews and see what happens…
Nope… for me, it still is not there. Very strange…
The print-edition of the Handelszeitung (HZ) has an interview with the Paolo Cornaro (PC), CEO of Corner Bank, a credit-card bank in Switzerland. He seems to indicate that the tax deal between the Swiss and the US governments is more about extortion than about an agreement (translated):
“HZ: The US tax dispute is further along. How do you judge the agreement?
PC: This program, which I cannot characterize as an agreement with good conscience, strikes all banks as a block. It does not make a distinction between banks which consciously went on American soil to acquire customers and those banks, to name an extreme example, that opened accounts for two Swiss who were also coincidentally in possession of US citizenship. We know today which banks are Category 1. Since we never actively pursued American customers, we should be in Category 3. With this view, however, we are exposed to the risk in the event that documentation is not water-tight that we would have to accept additional liability.
HZ: You must decide no later than December 9.
PC: It certainly could happen that there are banks which will not be so far. We will classify ourselves in Category 2 in order to avoid further discussions and risk a penalty. We have American customers who are properly declared. The program’s concept is however that all are tax evaders. Then we must prove that this is not the case.
HZ: What kind of penalty are you looking at?
PC: I cannot and do not want to mention a number. We want to close a chapter by paying a penalty and then can we look forward again.
HZ: You will pay in order to have peace and quiet.
PC: Yes. We found ourselves in a similar situation in connection with the “unidentified accounts” matter. Our bank was founded in 1952 so there was certainly no unidentified accounts coming out of the war. We decided to pay anyway. Towards the end of the matter the actions were directed at all Swiss banks. If we wanted to continue with a US dollar clearing account, we had to pay. It didn’t matter whether we were guilty or not. We booked the payment as a solidarity contribution. Also at that time we wanted to simply conclude the matter.”
@Innocente
I cant’ even begin to express how this is just so wrong! The Swiss government has allowed the US government to run roughshod over the Swiss banking system.
Will anyone stop this rampaging beast, or should we fear that as Switzerland goes, so goes the world?
@bubblebustin
No, Yes
Pingback: The Isaac Brock Society
In my view, this is a mixure of bigotry and bullying. Prior to this, Americans would accuse Switzerland of hoarding Nazi loot anytime that I voiced an opinion about Palestine, hoping that such would silence my criticism. With FATCA, the Nazi loot attack got merged with money laundering, where Switzerland was described as being a financial mob. With all of that having led to nothing, the US is now focusing on accusing the 20’000 or so Americans in Switzerland who haven’t renounced yet of being “tax cheats”. Of course, that will also lead to nothing too, but the US is excited with the idea of squeezing money out of innocent Banks.
@bubblebustin:
It seems appropriate to respond with a Prussian count’s statement: “Macht geht vor Recht”.
Might makes right?
@bubblebustin:
Yes. The usage of the German seemed appropriate in this context. 🙂
@all:
A Swiss Sunday newspaper “Schweiz am Sonntag” reports that the Big 4 auditors are not accepting assignments to attest that banks are in Category 3 as they consider such assignments as too risky. Without an attestation, a bank that believes itself to be Category 3 will be placed in Category 2, meaning that they are pleading guilty of harboring tax-evading USPs and subject to stiff penalties:
Concluding paragraph:
“All this leads to the fact that most banks are likely classified in category 2 and so will confess as guilty. “Only about 5 percent of the banks will fit in the categories 3 or 4,” says corporate lawyer Schenker. The U.S. objective is thus already achieved before they announced the first penalty: A complete industry buckles under.”
http://translate.google.com/translate?sl=auto&tl=en&js=n&prev=_t&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.schweizamsonntag.ch%2Fressort%2Fwirtschaft%2Frevisionsgesellschaften_lassen_banken_im_regen_stehen%2F
@Innocent
The only reference I could find to a Prussian count and your German phrase was apparently when Count von Bernstorff presented it as a principle of international conduct to President Wilson, while he was the German ambassador to the US:
http://speeches.empireclub.org/62042/data
“The U.S. objective is thus already achieved before they announced the first penalty: A complete industry buckles under.” German translation: “klausterfokken.”
@bubblebustin:
Found the expression in a German academic dictionary:
“Der Satz, den Maximilian Graf von Schwerin Bismarck in Bezug auf dessen Rede vom 27. 1. 1863 im preußischen Abgeordnetenhaus in den Mund legte, hat sprichwörtlichen Charakter. So heißt es im Alten Testament beim Propheten Habakuk (1, 3): »Es geht Gewalt über Recht«, in der Sprichwörtersammlung von Johann Agricola (1494-1566): »Gewalt geht für (= vor) Recht«, in Baruch de Spinozas (1632-1677) »Tractatus politicus« (Kapitel 2, § 8) in deutscher Übersetzung: »(…) weil jeder so viel Recht hat, als er Macht hat«, in Goethes Faust II (V, Palast): »Man hat Gewalt, so hat man Recht«, in Schillers Gedicht »Die Weltweisen«: »Im Leben gilt der Stärke Recht«, in Adelbert von Chamissos (1781-1838) Gedicht »Die Giftmischerin«: »Hast du die Macht, du hast das Recht auf Erden«.”
http://universal_lexikon.deacademic.com/268841/Macht_geht_vor_Recht
The kf word describes it well but might only exist in German as “Neudeutsch” if it is known at all. Consider the partially related Dutch word for pig breeder: Varkensfokker 🙂
@Innocente
LOL! Thanks.
@Innocente
I found this when Googled
klausterfokken
noun
1. A situation so confusing and chaotic that the American-English “cluster fuck,” is not adequate to describe it. The German compound word is used to create a deep and profound sense of cluster fuck.
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=klausterfokken
You read it here first:
What happens tomorrow – could lead to a bank run, if banks asess such high fines (somewhat self imposed) that they will file bankruptcy. We will of course have to wait and see…
@no ref:
A bank run due to possible bankruptcies in the banking sector as a result of impending US penalties is a possibility. Based on my analysis, it does not appear that the PostFinance, which is weakly capitalized by some measures, will be bankrupted although a bank run cannot be excluded if its depositors panic. Here are some numbers for the PostFinance which announced on Saturday that it is in Category 2:
Scenario 1:
Customer deposits: CHF 103’850’000’000 (CHF 103.85 billion)
Customers: 2’922’000 (2.922 million)
Ave. customer deposit: CHF 35’540
Current USP customers: 6’000
Former USP customers: 1’700
Total USPs: 7’700
USP deposits: CHF 273’665’000
Est. Penalty %: 40%
Penalty: CHF 109’466’000
Scenario 2:
Same as above but assume CHF 100’000 deposit per USP
Total USP deposits: CHF 770’000’000
Est. Penalty %: 40%
Penalty: CHF 308’000’000
In this example, PostFinance should be able to withstand a substantial penalty of, say, CHF 109 million to 308 million since it has capital of CHF 4.6 billion. But there may be banks that have a substantial amount of USP deposits as a percentage of their deposits that might collapse under the US penalty.
@Innocente
I doubt that PostFfinance will experience a bank run. It is most likely “THE” Swiss bank that enjoys the most confidence from the Swiss people. I could easily see Postfinance profiting from the other group 2 banks once more information about the penalties they have to pay becomes public. I think postfinace is probably the safest place to put your money if you live in Switzerland. I have to check and see if PostFinance sell stocks, oh snit wait a second I’m a “US person” and probably can’t have an account to invest in stocks 🙄
@Innocente, I know it’s a general figure you’re working on, but CHF100,000 per USP is optimistic imho. I was one and came nowhere near that amount. At most it was CHF30,000 and usually more like CHF10-15,000. I’m not one of the highly-paid, specialised people, but the OH is just an average earner. So first scenario is more likely. But yes, PF should be fine for any fines they get lumbered with.
@Uncle Tell, yes it does probably have the most confidence, but don’t forget it’s no longer backed up by the Swiss government in the way it has been in previous years. This year it became a bank proper with all that entails. If it starts to come under US scrutiny that confidence may drop rapidly.
@MedeaFleecestealer
True, PF no longer enjoys full asset insurance as do most of the Kantonalbanken, but if people lose confidence in PF then they definitely will lose confidence in the other banks and in such a situation PF will probably still float on top while they all go down the drain. As far I know the Swiss Gov. still holds 100% of the stocks from PF and I doubt that they would sell them off. I can see that in the future, where this whole FATCA b.s. has settled or hopefully resolved itself that PF might just come out as the winner. 😯
Does anybody have an idea how many of the 50k required signatures are already obtained?
@Medea: Two scenarios were presented:
1) Expected case: ave. customer deposit of CHF 35’540 also used for 7’700 USPs.
2) Worst case: For 7’700 USPs increased to CHF 100’000 ave. deposit to see impact on capital.
Companies also bank at PF which might be responsible for increasing the overall average per customer to CHF 35’540, so the ave. private customer deposit might be less than CHF 35’540.
@Uncle Tell:
The Swiss Federal government is the owner of PostFinance and I would expect the government to stand behind it by injecting more capital if necessary. By some measures, it is not well-capitalized. However, because it invests primarily in high-rated obligations, and not loans, it is also considered adequately capitalized.
The above analysis was done to show the possible impact on PostFinance by allowing USPs to bank there. I suspect that 95-99% of the USPs banking there are just wage-earning USPs who live and work in CH. The penalties are grossly disproportionate to any possible tax evasion, but the concept of the US-CH deal is that all USPs banking in CH are tax evaders unless proven beyond a doubt otherwise.
Going forward, why would any bank in CH allow a USP to bank with it? If I were running a bank, I wouldn’t.