Monthly Archives: October 2014

In a four year, $200 billion global development program unknowingly initiated by Congress, the US police force FINCEN has implemented a global tracking system of US citizens, their assets, their bank account numbers, phone numbers, addresses, and their social security numbers. The system allows the US information to be leaked to Al Quada, ISIS, kidnappers, and other affiliates—alternatively to be taken over as rebel groups overtake the areas where these organizations operate.

Greenwald has hopped over it. Snowden missed it–because it isn’t covert.

Crossposting from Story found at this location (please inform all you know of this overt action via all means):

http://bancdelasteroideb612.wordpress.com/2014/10/23/usa-treasury-launches-global-citizen-tracking-system-code-names-fatca-iga/

http://bit.ly/1tjlOGt

The system was quietly passed in a US domestic Jobs Bill, called the Jobs for Mainstreet Act, 2010 HR 2847. The enactment was nearly invisible to the media, and few of the Congresspersons even realized what it was that they had passed.

With passage of the act, a massive administration misinformation campaign was initiated, saying that the administration and treasury were out looking for 1%’ers and FATCAts.  This was to enable a muzzle against resistance and to be able to portray any opposing political parties as supporters of Tax Evasion, initiators of money laundering,  harborers of terrorists, and possibly “cat killers”.   The misinformation campaign has been largely successful (domestically and internationally), as only a few small media outlets have mentioned it.  Only a tiny handful of legislators have dared to speak against it. Members of Congress are terrified to speak against it or of it for well-justified fear of reprisal from captive media.

The administration and Treasury have been traveling extensively to these regions–to train Islamic banks in the techniques of finding “indicia” of US citizens. Upper-level Treasury appointed administers such as Jesse Eggert have traveled extensively through the region for training sessions with Islamic banks. Those IRS officials have been praised by the Sheik of Finance in Qatar for aiding those banks.

This action has been heralded in Russia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, Iraq, Yemen, and Nigeria, where the demand for identification of US citizens has skyrocketed. With this tool, low level employees, administrators, and corrupt bank officials now have access to the most sensitive personal information of US citizens and have no restrictions placed upon them for passing the information onwards to interested individuals and organizations.

The organizations in Afghanistan which are holding this data are: Afghanistan International Bank, United Bank Afghanistan, BAKHTAR BANK, New Kabul Bank Afghanistan, Afghan United Bank Afghanistan, Afghanistan Commercial Bank, Branch, AZIZI BANK, MAIWAND BANK, GHAZANFAR BANK, The First MicroFinanceBank. These organizations, their highlevel employees, and low level adminstrators are known to have ties with tribal heads in their regions. Many of these organizations are tasked also with storing the assets of tribal lords.

In Yemen: Cairnwood Global Technology Fund Ltd, Branch Yemen, Shamil Bank of Yemen and Bahrain, Tadhamon International Islamic Bank, NATIONAL BANK OF YEMEN, SABA ISLAMIC BANK, YEMEN KUWAIT BANK FOR TRADE AND INVESTMENT, Cooperative & Agricultural Credit Bank, Yemen Bank for Rec and Dev,  International Bank of Yemen, Islamic Bank of Yemen, lkuraimi Islamic Microfinance Bank, Yemen Commercial Bank, ISLAMIC BANK OF YEMEN FOR FIN AND INV.

In Iraq, United Arab Emirates, Communist China, Algeria, Colombia, Kosovo, and others, a unique agreement between Treasury and foreign governments, code-named “IGA” has been implemented. Here, the Kosovo government has been deputized to store US citizen data. FINCEN has placed a great trust in these governments, because FINCEN does not trust US citizens.

What is an IGA?

An IGA is an Intergovernmental Agreement. In this case it is an agreement with the Executive Branch of the United States Treasury with the mentioned foreign governments. These agreements are not authorized by Congress in the way a treaty would be. Don’t forget, that the Constitution requires any foreign agreement to be ratified or initiated by Congress. And this isn’t.  This is solely an agreement between the Obama administration and these selected countries.

This system has begun implementation in more “friendly” countries prior to the mid-term elections. US citizens have already been identified in less sensitive neutral countries such as Sweden, Austria, and Thailand.  After elections, the information gathering will be ramped up significantly.

These governments and institutions will be collecting and storing this “FATCA” data outside of US territory for the coming period of 6-9 months. At the end of the period, the information will be shared with the United States police agency “FINCEN”.

A citizen warning has been placed out at the website location below.  It is also explained that it is of no help to discuss this with the ambassador in the named countries, because the ambassadors have been tasked to arrange for signatures upon the agreements and to aid in identification of US citizens.

US citizen alert:

https://bancdelasteroideb612.wordpress.com/wp-admin/post.php?post=498&action=edit

List of foreign organizations implementing “FATCA” program

http://apps.irs.gov/app/fatcaFfiList/flu.jsf

List of countries implementing “IGA” program

http://www.treasury.gov/resource-center/tax-policy/treaties/Pages/FATCA-Archive.aspx

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED

ALL RESPECT DESERVED

[We now have a NEW POST taking us up to February 1, 2015. This post will be retired from service.]

THE AUTUMN 2014 UPDATE

Dear Donors,

Together, we reached our goal of $100,000 to pay the November 1 legal bill 11 days ahead of schedule!

Thank you Canadian donors from coast to coast and our friends from around the world for your generosity, support and determination — and especially for not being afraid.

The name of our non-profit corporation is the “Alliance for the Defence of Canadian Sovereignty.”

We were very deliberate in including in our name the word “sovereignty”, which forms a cornerstone of our Claims against the Government of Canada.

Canada and dozens of other countries throughout the world gave into a bully because their “leaders” were afraid of harm caused by a trading “partner” — and they gave their sovereignties away.

Help us convince by example the Leaders and Governments of all countries worldwide that they should return their sovereignties back to their Peoples.

Please continue to support our lawsuit.

“Alone we can do so little. Together we can do so much.” (Helen Keller)

— Plaintiffs Ginny and Gwen, and the ADCS-ADSC team

Chers donateurs,

Ensemble, nous avons atteint notre but d’amasser 100 000 $ pour payer notre facture légale du 1er novembre 11 jours d’avance !

Un gros merci à vous, donateurs canadiens, et à nos amis de tous les coins du monde pour votre grande générosité, soutien et détermination. Et surtout pour votre courage.

Le nom de notre organisme sans but lucratif est « l’Alliance pour la défense de la souveraineté canadienne ».

Nous avons choisi délibérément le mot « souveraineté » puisqu’il constitue la base fondamentale de nos revendications envers le gouvernement du Canada.

Le Canada et des dizaines d’autres pays se sont pliés devant l’intimidation des États-Unis parce que leurs « leaders » ont eu peur des menaces de notre « partenaire » commercial. Ils ont donc vendu leur souveraineté à rabais.

Aidez-nous à convaincre les dirigeants et les gouvernements de tous ces pays qu’ils se doivent de remettre leur souveraineté à leurs peuples.

S’il vous plaît, continuez à soutenir notre cause.

« Seuls, nous pouvons faire si peu. Ensemble, nous pouvons faire beaucoup. » (Helen Keller)

— Ginny, Gwen et toute l’équipe de l’ADCS-ADSC

DONATE to www.adcs-adsc.ca (ADSC en français).

Continue reading →

The time is coming near to when I must surrender.  In my country of Sweden, the real Swedish people are being mapped, while the US persons remain out there unidentified.  It’s time to do what is right for my Sweden and for you to do what is right your country too. I must turn myself in., and so should you.

My country is spending more than $25 per person in order to find me.  This must stop.

I know that I am worth 30 000 SEK to Sweden—they are paying more than $200 million dollars to find all of the US persons here, and there are about 50,000 US persons located here.  I can do my part and give myself to Sweden. I am worth 30,000 SEK to them.  If all of the others can follow and do the right thing, the country will be saved and the FATCA money can go back to being spent upon real Swedish people.

Soon, I shall dress myself up, and take myself first to my bank.  I will take my number in the bank line, and when I reach the front of the line, I shall declare: “I admit, I am a US person”  “Please save Sweden from me”.

From there, I shall walk to the local tax authority skatteverket, and I shall again take a number for the que.  When I reach the front of the que, I shall humbly state “I am a US person” “Please save Sweden from me”

I shall pick the appropriate time, Perhaps it shall be Tuesday, the 11th of November, at 9:30 pm, depending upon what is convenient, and if anyone should decide to accompany me.

Perhaps someone shall also be willing to do the right thing. The world must be saved from these US persons and Sweden must be saved from me..   I shall turn myself in. So should you.

I shall do my part to save Sweden from me, for I AM A US PERSON.

Cross post from

http://samuelclemmons.wordpress.com/2014/10/22/the-time-has-come-to-surrender-myself-i-am-a-us-person/

(Read the other articles, too)

It’s a sunny day in the UK. I call my father.

‘Hello Dad. I got this funny letter from my financial institution. It’s about tax, or something. Uh, am I still an American?

I was born in the U.S. Thirteen months later, we moved to the UK, where I have lived ever since.

As a baby, I had an American passport. As a child and throughout adulthood, I’ve only held a British passport. I’ve been back to the US once, for a short holiday over 20 years ago.

‘You’re American-born. I suppose that means you’re still an American?.

As it turns out, it does indeed. I am an American. I am an American who cannot remember living in America. I am an American who cannot name more than a dozen American states. I am an American who has never voted in an American election.

I am an ‘accidental American’. And for that I will pay. Literally.

*****

This is one more example of the United States imposing citizenship on people because they were born in the U.S. Is citizenship something that one chooses or is citizenship something that is forced upon you? Does any country have the right to impose citizenship on residents and citizens of other countries? Is citizenship a “property interest” that a government has in people? Does the U.S. government believe that it has ownership over anybody born in the United States?

The Obama administration has made U.S. citizenship such a burden and devalued it to the point where people are happily paying money to be rid of it.

But, the U.S. government is making it very difficult to relinquish U.S. citizenship through the available statutory channels. This is clear from the:

– outright refusals to recognize past relinquishments

– outrageous wait times and inability to get appointments

– the outrageous and unjustifiable fee increase to renounce U.S. citizenship

– the imposition of Nazi and Soviet style exit taxes

It’s certainly “change we can never believe in”.

This is going to get very very nasty.

On the one hand we have a U.S. Government that says:

“You are our property until we say you are not”.

On the other hand we have those who don’t believe they are property and will say:

“I am a free person. How can I then be a citizen of the United States?”

and worse than Shulman: http://www.taxanalysts.com/www/features.nsf/Features/C21A42AD927007A285257D780057410A?OpenDocument

MR. HOFFMAN: What did you think of Steven Miller’s comments last week that he’s not sure that FATCA’s benefits will outweigh its costs, which were followed, I believe, followed shortly thereafter, by Nina Olson’s comments somewhat along a similar vein, concerned about the cost versus benefits of FATCA? COMMISSIONER KOSKINEN: Well, I think it’s always an important question if you’re going to make statutory changes and increase, by definition almost, some burden to some extent. You know, what do you gain from that? You know, we’ve already collected 6 or 7 — now over $7 billion in additional revenues that would otherwise not have been collected just through the offshore voluntary disclosure program. And, you know, that’s — there the burden was simply people had to come forward. It was a fairly straightforward process, so there was a fairly significant amount of money in return. I’ve always thought that the problem you have is you can’t measure the benefit just by the taxes you collect. What you have to do is measure the benefit by the overall impact on the system generally. And what I’ve always been, even before I got here, concerned about was if the average taxpayer felt I’m paying a greater burden of supporting the government because rich people with fancy lawyers and accountants don’t have to pay taxes, they can hide money in Switzerland. You know, hiding money in Switzerland has been a visible issue for 50 years. It’s corrosive to compliance and corrosive to the system. So when you’re going to talk about measuring the benefit, you can’t look just at the burden and the additional resources we get out of the filings there. But having said that, there are indications, not surprisingly, there was a preliminary review that said between 2011 and 2012 — in fact, you guys reported it — we got 500,000 more returns about foreign accounts with $100 billion of income. And we’re seeing the same thing in 1099-Ks.   But even as we do that, as I say, and we’re tracking, the voluntary compliance rate is going up as we go. In some cases, when people match, the revenue goes up, then suddenly their expenses magically go up. But those are signals that we can follow. So I think in FATCA, when you look at it, you won’t be measuring just by the amount of money we collect from the people we catch. You won’t be measuring it just by the increased reporting and money we collect from people who now are with the program. Ultimately, the benefit is, again, protecting the overall compliance rate in the sense of the average taxpayer that it’s a fair system.

Sweden begins to implement FATCA by sending out FATCA questionaires in a spray to Swedish citizens.

Since FATCA only has minimum reporting requirements, each bank and each customer in any country is deputized to do anything it wants to US citizens. This fulfills the opposite of the function of a government—which is supposed to PROTECT its citizens from harm no matter where they are in the world. Not to deputize foreign banks and foreign countries to violate the rights of their citizens.

Please note the VERY intrustive questions. Have we returned to the McCarthy era?

Sweden has a weak government—it will do whatever is demanded-and then some.

“Are you a politically exposed person, have you or have you ever had a high political post, high government office or close family member of such a person?”

“What is the origin of the capital that is currently on your Nordea account?”

“What is the purpose of your current banking relationship with Nordea?”

from this article

ROUGH TRANSLATION: “Any Swedish bank customers must shortly certify that they are not taxable in the United States. The reason is a new cooperation agreement between the United States and Sweden. An agreement under which both critics endangers both the privacy and may violate EU laws.

“Are you a politically exposed person, have you or have you ever had a high political post, high government office or close family member of such a person?”

“What is the origin of the capital that is currently on your Nordea account?”

“What is the purpose of your current banking relationship with Nordea?”

When a letter from the bank with these issues tumbled down the home of Janne Bengtsson in Alingsås, he became suspicious.

– I thought it was the imposter and was thinking of going to the police, but on the way there, I took the turn for Nordea to ask them. They said it was about an agreement with the USA and Sweden signed and that I would answer the questions, he says. Did not bother to answer

But he still thought it was creepy and thought it could not happen anything serious if he did not care to answer the questions, because he is a customer of the bank since long. It turned out to be wrong.

The reason that Janne Bengtsson got the letter on the other side of the Atlantic.

After the American financial crisis, the United States imposed a new law that would help them find tax evaders in the world, even in Sweden. As recently as August, the then Swedish government an agreement with the United States, known as FATCA Agreement.

The agreement is the basis for a bill that the Finance Ministry is working on right now and that parliament is expected to approve this spring. The legislation will come into force on 1 April by 2015. collects information

Nordea says to SVT that all who become customers after July 1, 2014, and further, some people get the questions from the bank. Although the legislation has not yet entered into force, one has in gathering information for the United States. The next step is that banks violate bank secrecy and hand over customer information to the Tax Office, but it requires a change in the law.

According to sources in the Ministry of Finance, the banks in the future be required to terminate accounts if customers do not provide the information requested.

Swedes in the US shall be reported

The debate surrounding FATCA has been rather lukewarm, although criticized by heavy bodies Swedjsh Bar Association and the Swedish banking association.

According to the Ministry of Finance is an agreement between the countries better than the American law applies over the head of the Swedish authorities. Now Sweden has an exchange, since the United States in the contract (IGA) agrees to the return report Swedish taxpayers in the United States.

In the end, Janne Bengtsson in Alingsås responded to the questions, but only after Nordea informed him that he would not be able to use their bank account in full if he did not respond.

– I’m dependent upon being able to transfer money, I send money to friends in Tanzania to help with medical care and food, so I had to fill out. But I think it feels like Sweden sold to the United States, says he said.”

Interesting Article:

http://www.amazon.com/National-Security-Government-Michael-Glennon/dp/0190206446/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1413856139&sr=8-1&keywords=double+security+and+national+security

http://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2014/10/18/vote-all-you-want-the-secret-government-won-change/jVSkXrENQlu8vNcBfMn9sL/story.html

IDEAS: Why would policy makers hand over the national-security keys to unelected officials?

GLENNON: It hasn’t been a conscious decision….Members of Congress are generalists and need to defer to experts within the national security realm, as elsewhere. They are particularly concerned about being caught out on a limb having made a wrong judgment about national security and tend, therefore, to defer to experts, who tend to exaggerate threats. The courts similarly tend to defer to the expertise of the network that defines national security policy.

The presidency itself is not a top-down institution, as many people in the public believe, headed by a president who gives orders and causes the bureaucracy to click its heels and salute. National security policy actually bubbles up from within the bureaucracy. Many of the more controversial policies, from the mining of Nicaragua’s harbors to the NSA surveillance program, originated within the bureaucracy. John Kerry was not exaggerating when he said that some of those programs are “on autopilot.”

#FATCA: A Taxing Law Made by a Whole Bunch of Zeroes.

A new US tax law raises only $9,000,000,000 for the USA.  However the world pays $200,000,000,000 to implement that tax law. That means that 9 zeroes were made by 11 zeroes.

The 2010 Congress’ HR 2847 Jobs for Mainstream Act, a domestic jobs bill, was funded by the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA).  FATCA’s mechanism is to force all of the world’s banks to identify their resident customers who might be suspected of being dual US citizens or US green card holders.  The law takes advantage of US’ globally-unique taxation system, which is allowed to tax any dual citizens or US visa holders even when such persons do not reside in US.   The only two countries of the world practicing this type of taxation is US and Eritrea.  To better understand this method, envision being born in Iowa and paying lifelong taxes to Iowa even while living in Georgia or Ohio.

Of course, there is limited relief to this taxation.  A dual citizen living in Sweden, via the use of a complicated set of forms, might be able to offset most of the US taxes with exclusions and credits for having paid Swedish taxes. Unfortunately, his Swedish pensions and Swedish unemployment benefits could still be taxed by USA. He could also be subject to self-employment taxes and (if qualified) could also not escape the Obamacare tax upon the rich.  FATCA will make its revenue gains by ensuring that dual US/Swedish citizens in Sweden are identified so as to pay taxes upon their income not taxed by Sweden.  And so forth.  Country-by-country and instance-by-instance, FATCA would enable further IRS revenue by identifying previously-unidentified US dual citizens throughout the world.

Australia’s study determined that FATCA would cost its banks $1.065 billion USD, or $42.12 USD per capita. Hence, its recommendation was for the Australian government to absorb some of FATCA’s implementation costs, by signing an Intergovernmental Agreement (IGA) with the US Treasury Department.  With the IGA,  it was determined that its banks costs would be reduced by more than half—from $42.12 USD to $20.46 per capita. Canada and UK have also absorbed some of the banks implementation costs, so that their banks are only burdened with $26.02 and $25.28 USD per capita.  These three countries verify each other’s calculations, in being able to transfer more than half of their bank’s implementation costs into each country’s own administration.

Up to half of the world’s governments have signed IGA’s.  Even China, Russia, Kosovo, and UAE have agreed to collect and store FATCA’s identification of US persons within their countries.  As a result, we can see that about half of the world has reduced it’s banks’ implementation costs from $42.12 to as low as approximately $22 US. Even though these IGA’s are not all the same, this could succeed to bring FATCA’s global bank burden down to as low as $221 billion USD.

FATCA is a law created by specialist US accountants with specialist FATCA competency.  As such, FATCA’s implementation is primarily by very-high priced compliance firms.  There are few discounts available in lower income countries.  There are few lower-cost specialists outside of the developed world.  It would be difficult to say that FATCA-implementation cost reductions might be possible in low income regions or in non-IGA countries.

It might also be said that low income countries have fewer banks for their populations and fewer banks trading in US investment products.  If these banks could succeed to stay out of US investments, indeed, the global FATCA implementation costs might be reduced somewhat.  Another possible reduction might be that, although the 2010 Congress intended for the entire world to implement FATCA, many developing countries can not or will not implement FATCA.

There is no other analyses available showing other than an $8.5-8.9 billion USD FATCA revenue benefit over a 10 year period. Round that up to $9,000,000,000—9 zeroes.  However, with the analysis in this article, it shows that the FATCA implementation costs have been reduced from $291 billion to $221 billion.  FATCA has then been shown to globally lose $212 billion dollars net.   Rounding down, we see that FATCA is made by $200,000,000,000—11 zeroes.

FATCA was created by a whole bunch of zeroes.

All rights reserved

This is a guest post—submitted by a fan. For reprints-contact the blog.

http://samuelclemmons.wordpress.com/2014/10/16/fatca-a-taxing-law-made-by-a-bunch-of-zeroes/

Calculations and sources found at the blog, in the comment section.

Barrie McKenna has been following an ongoing battle between Canada and the US.

A WTO appeal panel ruled that a U.S. law that requires grocery stores to list the country of origin on meat products discriminates against Canadian and Mexican livestock.

The Conservative government warned that it will strike back with punitive duties unless the U.S. ends the “blatantly protectionist” regulations, which its says are costing the North American cattle and hog industry more than $1-billion a year.

“Canada will be watching this situation closely to ensure U.S. compliance in accordance with the WTO’s clear ruling,” Trade Minister Ed Fast and Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz said in a joint statement. “We will continue to fully assert our rights to achieve a fair resolution to our concern, including seeking authorization to implement retaliatory measures on U.S. agricultural and non-agricultural products if and as necessary.”

Ottawa has already identified 38 target products for retaliation. The list includes U.S. cattle and hogs, as well as a number symbolic products, including California wine, Vermont maple syrup, Florida orange juice, ketchup and breakfast cereal.

So the issue is the country of origin on the labelling of meat. Discrimination against Canada. The Conservative government is hopping mad and willing to protect the meat industry but will do nothing to protect its own citizens and permanent residents (who pay taxes and according to Hon. Sinclair Stevens, are fulling entitled to the protection of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms). It will however, engage in a trade war for cattle and pigs.

Ottawa is willing to slap on some sanctions in this disagreement but it never seemed to occur to them to respond in a similar fashion when Washington decided to put a crippling sanction on the financial industry. FATCA has been estimated to also cost $1 billion per year. Same issues, same cost.

I find it incredibly ironic that Canada will choose “symbolic products” to target. “Punitive,” “country of origin,” “discrimination” and “asserting our rights.” Sound familiar?