Group of Rich Americans Sues UBS to Keep Names Secret in Tax Case

[Joanne98]

Source: NYT


UBS was sued on Tuesday in a Swiss federal court by wealthy American clients seeking to prevent the disclosure of their identities as part of a tax-evasion investigation by the United States Justice Department.

The lawsuit accuses UBS and Switzerland’s financial regulator, the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority, or Finma, of violating Swiss bank secrecy laws and of conducting what Swiss law considers illegal activities with foreign authorities. It also named Peter Kurer, the chairman of UBS, and Eugen Haltiner, the chairman of Finma, as defendants.

The suit, filed by a lawyer in Zurich, Andreas Rued, on behalf of nearly a dozen American clients, underscores the growing clash between Swiss banking secrecy laws and those of the United States. Tax evasion is not considered a crime in Switzerland. Disclosing client names under Swiss law is a criminal offense and can expose bank executives and officers to fines, prison terms and other penalties.

UBS is the world’s largest private bank and Switzerland is the world’s largest offshore tax haven, with trillions of dollars in assets.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/25/business/worldbusiness/25ubs.html?ref=world

[trotsky]

1. Traitors. Every last one of them.

They're perfectly willing to use the American system to make lots of money, but then refuse to pay the taxes to support it. Fucking traitors.

[Honest1]

81. The Congress which gave The FED the power over our currency are traitors!!

Are you a WAGE SLAVE to your government (your employees)? Do they tell you what to do, or do you tell them what to do? !! When did you surrender your Natural Born Right to regulate your finances without outside control and intervention? HELLO!

[Confusious]

114. Do you know why the fed was created?

No ron paul conspiracy theories please.

[JackRiddler]

145. To find ways to serve the banksters that were more stable than prior versions.

So now you have the inevitable crash-and-plunder inherent in capitalism every 50-80 years, instead of every 5-20 as you did in the period immediately before the Fed was founded.

[wolfgangmo]

123. Natural Born Right?

What does that mean exactly?

White?

[JackRiddler]

82. Presumption of guilt, I see? Hang'em high?

The IRS is trying to get access to the Swiss files in the course of investigative discovery. No accusations have been made against anyone. You have no way of knowing who among these 52,000 people evaded US taxes, if any. For all you know, many of them put the money there after paying taxes on it, just because they valued the security and secrecy of a Swiss account.

The outgoing US government declared absolute and unconditional power for the presidency. Even as they kept all of their own dirt secret, they expected access to all records held by any agency including foreign governments. They waged aggressive wars, renounced habeas corpus and killed, kidnapped and tortured anyone they felt like, anywhere in the world. Meanwhile, the big banks plundered the nation's wealth to the tune of trillions.

Given the scale of these crimes, I'd be very careful about calling 52,000 unknown names traitors. You don't know anything about them. It's a trivialization and cheapens the term, to the point where the grand criminals will escape while you cheer on the IRS as it persecutes some granny who forgot to file.

I'm sure there are many people evading US taxes on that list, by the way, but this still doesn't justify the rhetoric of treason.

[trotsky]

86. I am surprised it took this long to get a knotted underwear response.

Cool.

[JackRiddler]

95. Are you saying you like cheap-shock rhetoric because it might be answered?

Sad.

[trotsky]

102. LOL, no.

Just always amused that even at DU someone jumps in to make sure the poor underprivileged billionaires of the country aren't badmouthed.

[JackRiddler]

106. Do you think that's a role I ever play?

Search on site for guillotine and my nick, and see how many hits you get.

The point is, we're both clueless about who may be on this list and why. As you probably know, there are not 52,000 poor underprivileged billionaires, perhaps not even 500 of them.

I could be at least as amused that at DU, someone makes sure the poor enlightened government law enforcement agencies are being taken at their word.

"Traitors" is Bushista rhetoric. Plain and simple. Since our country has a bunch of real-live proven traitors in the outgoing regime and in the banking complex, it's wise not to diminish the term.

This is a questionable fishing expedition by the IRS to justify its existence. Wouldn't you prefer to see the government marching in and expropriating the banks and billionaires whose names are known and who wittingly generated the crisis and continue to enrich themselves even after ruining everyone else? What's happening instead? They're getting another couple of trillion pumped in - borrowed money to be paid off by taxpayers. That would be the regular ones, paying for the bankers.

.

[trotsky]

107. At least the billionaires have someone to stick up for them this time.

Sorry but I'm not going to lose any sleep worrying about the struggles of the ultra-rich and the money they hide, no matter what the reason.

[Name removed]

108. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[wolfgangmo]

124. Traitors is not Bush rhetoric. It is a word.

A traitor is someone who commits treason, which is a crime that undermines the government.

Not paying your taxes undermines the government. QED tax evaders are traitors.

The fact that Bush misused that word, among many, does not mean that others may not use it appropriately. Those billionaires who have illegally avoided paying their legally required taxes should have their funds seized, there possessions confiscated and their freedoms taken away. Their families should also be stripped of everything.

Traitors should be given the benefit of the constitution but they must pay for their crimes against the people.

[JackRiddler]

140. Insane. This is the nightmare view of Democrats.

You write:

A traitor is someone who commits treason, which is a crime that undermines the government.

Not paying your taxes undermines the government. QED tax evaders are traitors.

!!!

Simply undermining the government is treason? It's very much the philosophy of the Bushistas. It's near to totalitarianism. It makes of every lawbreaker a traitor. In fact, half of "Democratic Underground" just spent eight years trying to undermine the Bush government.

This country was founded on tax revolt and has a long tradition of it. Thoreau went to prison for it.

Not that I'm for tax revolt in every context.

For example, the 52,000 unknown names in the Swiss suit are probably not righteous tax revolters. All I'm saying in their case is that you know nothing about who they are, or why they've deposited money in Switzerland, or even how much money there is in these accounts. You and trostsky seem incapable of acknowledging this simple point, but it is true. You know nothing about them.

Thus there should be no presumption of guilt, let alone proto-exterminationist rhetoric of the kind you are advancing. I say proto-exterminationist because treason is a hanging offense, remember? In trotsky's offworld statement, (s)he magically turns them all into "billionaires," which would mean about 50,000 new billionaires who don't actually exist in the world.

Your idea that tax evaders = traitors is on a level with

"antiwar=traitors"

or:

"imprison all drug users!"

You want traitors? They are in your government, which is the government of the war machine and the mega-corporations. They pulverize 2/3 of your federal income taxes for WAR and interest payments (when they could have just issued the money instead of the T-bills). They hope to appropriate social insurance payments like FICA for similarly destructive purposes. The government and the corporations that run it are not the country. The country's state isn't bad because "billionaires" evade taxes, but because billionaires run the government.

Government policy is near indistinguishable from that advanced by the worst elements of the rich, so to pretend that you're for the government but against the "billionaires" is laughable. The welcome new administration is going to qualify as criminal in no time.

I love a country, not a government.

The federal government is "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world today," said Martin Luther King, who (to show that things are a lot more complex than the "traitor" rhetoric allows) is commemorated in a federal holiday. At the time, a Democrat was president. It's still true today.

.

[closeupready]

142. No offense, but your post here is totally not topical, and an interesting side discussion, perhaps,

but not what this thread is about. This thread is about investigating and prosecuting those who use Swiss bank accounts to evade paying taxes to the US government. Not the problem with our current government or the history of tax protesting in America or any of the rest of it.

[JackRiddler]

144. No offense taken, as I feel securely on topic.

And declarations that

52,000 account holders = 52,000 tax evaders = 52,000 billionaires = TRAITORS

are outrageous.

So your beef has nothing to do with me.

[closeupready]

148. Do you deny the likelihood that SOME of the 52,000 are US tax evaders?

??

[JackRiddler]

149. No. Do you deny the likelihood that SOME

of the eight or ten million American political activists incorporated into the "Deep Core" data base as potential terrorists, or that SOME of the 100-million eavesdropped by the NSA spying program also are?

The question is about means and legitimate authority. Wide-net fishing expeditions, as opposed to probable cause. If the government has a specific case against someone, Swiss authorities have been known to be persuadable.

Meanwhile: We just had the most criminal government on record. Ever. Where are those prosecutions?

[closeupready]

150. And the answer is that the Swiss gave the US the means/legitimate authority in

Article 26 of the Swiss-U.S. Income Tax Convention. Period. The probable cause is found here:

http://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/news_digest/UBS_feels_the_wrath_of_investors_and_the_US.html?siteSect=104&sid=10368776&cKey=1235481732000&ty=nd

>>The lawsuit seeking details of the 52,000 accounts containing an estimated $14.8 billion in assets was issued last week.

It came a day after Switzerland's largest financial institution came to a settlement with the Justice Department on revealing the names of up to 300 US customers and payment by the bank of $780 million.

Under the terms of the settlement, UBS admitted helping US taxpayers hide accounts from the US Internal Revenue Service, the agency responsible for tax collection and tax law enforcement.<<

As to prosecutions of the prior 'most criminal government on record', that is off-topic, feel free to start a thread discussing that topic, but I refuse to get involved in such a bizarre discussion here.

[JackRiddler]

151. Have a look again where the discussion grew bizarre, above...

If we call every ALLEGED crook a "traitor" we're going to have several million of them to collect for the Gulag.

Not that there's any danger of quite that, so I'll depart now having made my point about inapplicable rhetoric.

[sui generis]

141. how dare you be rational!

it is simply not DONE here.

:eyes:

And Oh Yeah that's the actual sound of torches and pitchforks coming up the castle path . . . . :P

[JackRiddler]

143. If the pitchforks were coming for the recent purveyors of torture and aggressive war...

I'd join them. But apparently now there are more important things. In their minds, with the new administration we have a new enemy, which is described by the following formula:

52,000 Swiss bank account holders = "tax evaders"! = billionaires!? = TRAITORS, TREASON, HANG!!!!

No doubt there are tax evaders among them. And given how things work with the IRS, guess who's going to get nailed? It won't be a Trump, it will be some granny whose heard Swiss portfolio management made for a secure retirement.

Or perhaps the new enemy is "Mexican drug cartels"?

At any rate, now I should be glad the Obama admin isn't very radical? The time calls for radical solutions, but not the kind "trotsky" has in mind.

[safeinOhio]

2. Seems you'd have to put your name on a lawsuit?

[dipsydoodle]

4. I was thinking that too.

.

[melm00se]

18. Swiss laws are different

than they are here so they may not have to list the specific plaintiffs

[rucky]

110. Even their cheese has holes in it. n/t

[jberryhill]

27. No

Ever hear of, oh, Roe v. Wade?

The plaintiff's name was not "Jane Roe".

[happyslug]

69. But the Judges who tried the case all knew her real name

"Jane Roe" was just to keep her name from being known to the general public NOT the other side or anyone else who wanted to know.

[jberryhill]

135. That doesn't make it discoverable by anyone else

If you like Swiss banking laws, try getting a judge to tell you something the judge isn't going to tell you.

[ColbertWatcher]

112. They'll probably use the courtroom equivalent of a 527. n/t

[rpannier]

122. I know

Sounds like that list would be a good place to start

[Soylent Brice]

3. you fucking snakes.

i'm concerned. money is the only language people seem to understand anymore. i hope they don't buy their way out of this shit.


but DAMN. talk about hanging a guilty sign around your neck. fucking morons.

[Wizard777]

5. Swiss banking law is so strict.It is even illegal for a Swiss bank to tell YOU you have an account -

with them.

[Baby Snooks]

29. Numbered accounts

Accounts are listed only by assigned number although the bank keeps a record of who the accounts are registered to and who the registered agent is to prevent someone from just stealing someone else's money.

The US government wants those records and the argument being made is that disclosure would violate Swiss law. The question is how they US government has determined which accounts belong to US citizens. It may not have. It may just be seeking the records of UBS.

It is a very complex system. But who the account is registered to and who the registered agent is doesn't always reflect who the account actually belongs to. It usually is a corporation.

I doubt the Swiss will allow disclosure except for those whom the US government has identified as having evaded taxes. Apparently they have identified 250 individuals who were customers of UBS.

The law regarding use of Swiss accounts to evade foreign taxation is very complex as well. If foreign taxes were paid on the deposits the position is that taxes are not owed on the interest income beyond that point of deposit. The problem is proving that taxes were not paid.

It becomes even more problematic when the individual is a "foreign resident" as many Americans are or when they have become Swiss citizens.

UBS apparently was diverting income from "offshore" corporations and not paying any taxes to anyone.

[Wizard777]

58. Yes, but if you ever lose that number. Your money is lost.

Like I said. It is illegal for them to even tell you that you have an account with them. Yes they have a means of providing you with a lost account number. But for them to do that would require them to inform someone of your account with them. That is illegal for them to do. Because you are a someone. What I don't like about this is we are trying enforce our laws by requiring Swiss banks to violate Swiss banking law. Would we like it if Switzerland started issuing orders to American banks requiring them to violate American banking laws?

[Hello_Kitty]

66. I don't see why their bank laws trump our tax laws

If Switzerland wants to protect the privacy of those tax cheats, then they can go ahead and reimburse the U.S. for the lost revenue. They're basically aiding and abetting theft.

[Name removed]

84. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Hello_Kitty]

90. SO WHAT?!?

That doesn't give them the right to aid and abet in crimes.

[Name removed]

94. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wizard777]

133. But we're requiring them to commit a crime under Swiss law.

What gives us a right to do that?

[jberryhill]

136. Treaties /nt

[Wizard777]

138. Okay which provision of which treaty?

[closeupready]

147. Article 26 of the Swiss-U.S. Income Tax Convention of October 2, 1996

For starters.

[Hello_Kitty]

160. The fact that we can pull USB's license to do business in the U.S.

That's what the Justice Dep't is threatening them with and that's why bank officials are cooperating. What gives USB an ironclad right to access to the U.S. market, even if they participate in crimes against our country?

[Left Coast2020]

113. I agree with above poster. If you earn your money here, but hide

it over there, you're a tax cheat, and on the borderline of being unamerican. If you live here, but don't want to contribute--leave. This is the repug view. They want the benefits, but are so damn selfish they could give a rats ass about anyone else.

[Baby Snooks]

80. "My registered agent is..."

Sometimes it's someone in the bank itself. It's sort of like a "password" that allows you access. But denies access to someone who may have the account number and wants to steal your money.

[Wizard777]

85. No they can't tell anyone, no one, nobody. Not even God in a prayer.

There is no out going communications. You must go to them. What protects your money from being stolen by people that obtain the number is the list of registered agents. Swiss bank account are more for people that require a more informational security than financial security.

[Greyhound]

118. If Switzerland starts requiring cooperation of American banks regarding Swiss citizens

it is a very different matter, than the scenario you compose. This type of thing is done every day between "friendly" nations, it is one of the prime reasons that any nations are "friendly".

[UpInArms]

6. someone should force the Court to expose their names as it

doesn't have to abide by banking secrecy

:grr:

[Mari333]

7. 52,000 of them

dont f with the IRS....these people are just trying to delay the inevitable..they will be exposed in time, and it will be sweet to watch.

[1776Forever]

9. Wow 52,000? And I bet there are some very interesting names in that bunch of traitors!

It is no wonder a lot of people ask why they must sacrifice so much while the rich sacrifice nothing!

[ProgressiveProfessor]

14. One of the problems is that not all of the accounts are illegal

[1776Forever]

16. Well then let the Justic Dept. weed the "bad" ones out and forgive the rest!

I just bet there will be a good amount that are just trying to NOT pay taxes and that is something us "poor" people sure don't have the luxury of doing!

[jberryhill]

183. Correct

Same thing with telephone, credit and other surveillance of everyone else.

[JJ]

35. Why would anyone go to the trouble of having an overseas account...

if not for the purpose of evading taxes, or even more nefarious purposes.

[closeupready]

39. If you lived there?

Even if for a short time, six months or whatever. And if you went to the trouble of setting up a 'Swiss bank account,' why would you close it? I certainly wouldn't. In fact, I have a bank account in Europe from when I lived there. But not in Switzerland, but still, I wouldn't close it unless forced to.

[wolfgangmo]

127. Me too.

I don't keep much money in it and none that was not earned in that country, so I understand the account thing, but at the same time if the IRS wants to look at my account I have no problem with this because I am not a tax cheat and because it is not against the law to be audited.

The fact that they are suing is pretty indicative of something fishy even if it is just the fact that some billionaire traitor is also paying Jeff Gannon for "journalism" lessons.

[mainer]

154. We have about $5,000 dollars in a Dutch bank.

I guess that makes us traitors, too.

[closeupready]

159. If you surrender, we will go easy on you.

:rofl:

[Dover]

60. Why else would they have the annual meeting in Davos?

I'll bet lots of banking transactions have gone on during those meetings. And I'll bet lots of
transfers and withdrawals at this last meeting since the UBS scare.

[wickerwoman]

116. Probably a lot of people hiding money from spouses and/or other relatives.

I suspect Swiss banks do a brisk business in helping rich people hide assets in case of divorce. It doesn't necessarily mean that they didn't pay taxes on it... but it could land them in the shit in other ways.

But I'm betting there's a shitload of untaxed wealth stashed away in those accounts and the Swiss have been getting away with this crap for waaaay too long (hiding assets of Nazis and Italian fascists). If they want to be part of the EU and the UN they need to start reforming some of their practices. Their entire economy is driven on the stolen wealth of other nations.

[JackRiddler]

153. Cos they don't want to put their money into Citibank?

Guess what, there's more than one country in the world and until we have a different system you're free to stick your own money wherever someone is willing to hold it for you.

Now I don't know if you ever got out of Bumfuck, but here's another amazing revelation: People are free to travel. Even to move to other countries. And have accounts there. Gasp!

Nominated for Know-Nothing post of the day. (Note: "Know-Nothing" is an American tradition. Look it up. It doesn't mean you know nothing, it means you're proud of it.)

[mainer]

176. plus, there are non-US citizens who have accounts here in the US

so you're right, it works both ways. Foreign students who come to the US to study probably have accounts in Bank of America. I guess that makes them "traitors" in their home countries.

It's amazing to me that some people here on DU can't imagine any legitimate reason why an American might need an account in a foreign bank.

[Baby Snooks]

37. Some are perfectly legal

Many turned to the stability of the Swiss system when the US dumped the gold standard. They report the interest income and pay taxes on it. They just like the security of knowing their deposits are safe. A security we don't have in this country. If you put $1 million in a CD here, only $250,000 is insured. The other $750,000 is your problem.

Most Americans don't have $1 million in cash. So most Americans have little understanding of the risk in putting it in a US bank. And lots of wealthy Americans like to have millions in cash lying around. For the rainy days. Or the typhoons on Wall Street.

And most Americans resent someone having $1 million in cash in a Swiss bank and assume they stole it and then didn't pay taxes on it.

Quite a few who put their cash in Enron or World Com/MCI stock or in investments with Bernie Madoff or in CDs with Allen Stanford probably wish they had put the cash in a Swiss bank. It would still be there.

[wolfgangmo]

128. Get your facts straight.

No one puts 1 million in a CD and if they did they would split it between banks and accounts. Each bank account is insured by the FDIC, not every person. It doesn't get more secure than that.

Try again.

[mainer]

152. FDIC doesn't cover above $250,000 per account shareholder.

And that coverage is about to expire, falling back to $100,000. The higher coverage amount is only temporary.

So no, you wouldn't be secure in a US bank if you had more cash than that. For those with the excess cash, the prudent thing to do is spread it around, in different banks, and perhaps in different currencies.

Perhaps some of these people didn't want all their money in dollars? With the fluctuation in the dollar, it makes sense to hold assets in different currencies.

[Divine Discontent]

76. 52,000!!!!!!!!!!!!! WTF!

the richest most powerful families, surely, wonder if there's any big-box retailers, computer CEOs, bankers and big time celebs & politicians in that lot! Think of the tax dollars they've kept from the US that could have went to helping our problems in this country while they live in their gated communities in Seattle, Miami Beach, Beverly Hills, Windermere FL, and so on...

They must owe billions. They're going to fight with their millions and billions to keep themselves from being brought down - this is going to be big... or swept under the rug with a plea of silence so no one knows their names or something if they eventually have to pay fines.

[closeupready]

79. And sadly, I think it crosses party lines.

Consider the recent debacles Obama had with several of his nominees. And also, I would have thought this topic would have generated more outrage, but instead, we have people here actually defending the Swiss and those who have accounts there. :wtf:

[Divine Discontent]

88. exactly - don't be defending people ripping us off... sheesh. eom

[Hello_Kitty]

97. It's unbelievable.

And some of the arguments they're using are so transparently lame. The reason that the Swiss banks released those names is that the U.S. Justice Dep't threatened to yank UBS's license to do business in the U.S.

[closeupready]

98. Almost makes you wonder about people here.

I mean, Marc Rich, Rostenkowski (though I loved him) and all that.

[Greyhound]

120. In any good con, the mark has to believe he has a real chance to win.

Look at Madoff's game, look at the names of the marks he took. "Bond funds are paying 8%, but this guy's getting us 20% or more, you're a fool if you don't get in".

You can't cheat an honest man, fortunately there are so few of them that it doesn't really matter.

[Greyhound]

119. Anyone want to make a bet that the names Norton, Ellison, Gates, Knight,

Filo, Yang, Page, Brin, Schmidt, Siebel, Noyce, Moore, Grove, etc. are among them?

[Somawas]

8. I hope they win.

The Swiss absolutely should enforce their own laws. As should the United States.

Maybe we ought to prosecute Bushe and Cheney for war crimes.

[atreides1]

12. Another Apples and Oranges Argument

It's two different things, or do you equate not paying your taxes with war crimes?

[nolabels]

15. Me betting the gangsters also lose this round against the IRS

Why was tax evasion the only thing pinned on Al Capone?
http://history.howstuffworks.com/american-history/capone-tax-evasion.htm/printable

[Somawas]

19. Not quite.

You want the Swiss to violate their own laws to aid the US in collecting its taxes.

I want the Swiss to enforce thir own laws and I want the US to enforce its own laws.

[redqueen]

21. Don't you think having the names of those who are breaking the law

might help them to enforce it?

What other means could they use to find out who's doing this?

[ozu]

32. They have branches in the US

I'd be with you if UBS was strictly located in Switzerland, but they chose to open up shop here, and in doing so, they need to follow our laws and regulations.

[closeupready]

40. Their laws violate international treaties if they protect tax evaders/criminals.

For one.

[Hansel]

68. I'm not sure the Swiss Courts have any jurisdiction

I think the Swiss courts are going to take a pass on this one.

UBS exec admits bank’s sham tax shelters broke U.S. law
http://www.financialweek.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080717/REG/749563333

UBS admitted it broke U.S. law in setting up sham offshore tax shelters for wealthy Americans and agreed to work with U.S. authorities in reviewing 19,000 accounts to identify clients who may have committed tax fraud.

"Our compliance system had failures, and misconduct appears to have occurred,” Mark Branson, chief financial officer of UBS’s global wealth management unit, told a Senate panel today. “It is apparent now that our controls and supervision were inadequate.”

Mr. Branson also said UBS will discontinue offering offshore banking and securities services to American clients through branches that aren’t licensed in the U.S. The firm allowed its Swiss bankers to market securities and banking services on U.S. soil without a proper license from 2000 to 2007, according to a report released today by the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations.

snip

“The U.S. government, particularly in this economy, is not going to blow up an international financial institution with a criminal indictment,’’ Jacob Frenkel, a former federal criminal and SEC prosecutor, said in an interview. “That, however, provides no protection or insulation for civil and criminal actions against individuals whose conduct is squarely within the focus of this alleged fraud.”


So basically it looks like they are not going after UBS criminally, but are going after some of its employees for civil and criminal activity, and the tax evaders. UBS has paid a fine and has agreed to release the names. I'm not sure they have a choice. What jurdiction would Swiss courts have over illegitimate and illegal activity conducted by "rouge" employees of one of its corporations operating in the U.S.? This is how they might get around the Swiss laws: These employees were operating without proper U.S. licenses outside of UBS policies on U.S. soil with clients who were fully aware they were breaking the law (conspiracy) so these were not legitimate banking transactions and have no protection under the Swiss privacy laws.

[Hello_Kitty]

96. Um, how can the U.S. enforce its own laws when the Swiss are abetting our criminals?

[Somawas]

109. That's our problem, not theirs.

Our problem with collecting taxes is preventing our citizens from evading our tax laws. Not compelling another nation to change its laws to suit us.

Rather like a country that has no extradition treaties with us need not deliver over our murderer to us.

[wolfgangmo]

130. Quick, the clue train is leaving the station.

That is not what this suit is about.

But you are a persistent little dude.

[Hello_Kitty]

156. All the U.S. is doing is threatening to pull UBS's license to do business in the U.S.

We're not threatening to invade them or haul them into international court. We're simply telling them that if they want their largest bank to be able to operate in the U.S. they need to play ball. And they are.

[corpseratemedia]

100. part of the US enforcing it's laws would be to enforce it's tax laws

they certainly do with the little people who then get flagged for years after

if the wealthy US citizens hide taxable income that's breaking US law, they can move to Switzerland perhaps






Swiss corps. *loved* anti-union states btw. Until Mexico and China got cheaper.

[wickerwoman]

117. Swiss banking law is extremely morally suspect.

Most of the worst people in the world hide their money with the help of the Swiss who profit nicely on the plundered wealth of other nations.

Vladimir Montesinos, the former head of the Peruvian intelligence agency, stashed $48 million dollars (that's almost a quarter of the GDP of *the entire frickin' country*) in Swiss bank accounts.

If you ever wonder why so many third world countries are stuck in cycles of unending poverty and misery, political corruption + handy secretive Swiss accounts is a big part of your answer.

[rpannier]

126. I'll back the Swiss

but only if they cease banking ops in the US

They do banking business here - they follow our laws

[wolfgangmo]

129. the US is enforcing it's own laws.

It is perfectly within it's rights to deny UBS access to it's markets.

If they choose to comply that is their business, as is Switzerland if it complies in order to keep making tons of money. The fact that we are asking them to play by the rules is new after the past 8 years, but so what?

Do you have any more red herrings to add to the discussion?

[AngryAmish]

172. Similar to the Cuban embargo, yes?

[ooglymoogly]

44. astronomical sums of money have been looted from the

taxpayer in the fog of war and tarp and just about any avenue you can imagine....do you not think B*shco is the main culprit in that theft...where do you suppose that money is hiding?

[NeoConsSuck]

99. I wouldn't be surprised

if Bush and cronies are on the top of that list.

[Name removed]

87. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[LiberalFighter]

10. If Switzerland does not consider tax evasion to be a crime then...

they need to change their laws.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

13. Just because the US is forcing them too? There used to be a word for those kind of activities.....

[closeupready]

42. Um, no, because tax evasion is a crime in every country but Switzerland.

n/t

[LanternWaste]

64. even in Switzerland, some fraudulent tax conduct is criminal...

"However, even in Switzerland, some fraudulent tax conduct is criminal, for example, deliberate falsification of records. Moreover, civil tax transgressions may give rise to penalties. So the difference between Switzerland and other countries, while significant, is limited. It is often considered that extent of evasion depends on the severity of punishment for evasion. Normally, the higher the evaded amount, the higher the degree of punishment."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tax_avoidance_and_tax_evasion

[closeupready]

72. Thank you for that cite.

:hi: So we know from this that this is not a clear-cut case of just 'Swiss law vs. US law'. It actually is much more serious.

[closeupready]

41. Yup.

n/t

[nc4bo]

11. Man, the hell with that ish. The names should be made public

Where's Sen. Mccain with his "Give me their names" line??!! Come on Johnny, let's hear those fists pounding!

Screw that, we all have a right to know who it is that doesn't think they should have to pay taxes, you know, like the rest of us.

[Kittycat]

17. I wonder if Dick Cheney is on that list?

All that Iraq money had to go somewhere.

[glitch]

20. Nah he converted all his loot into spare blood and organs. And body parts.

He's got them stored in freezer vaults deep within his spidey hole bunker.
Next to his huge closet devoted solely to his collection of black fedoras.

[liberal N proud]

22. Wouldn't the court documents in the law suite be public record?

Therefore exposing them?

[jberryhill]

28. In Switzerland, as in the US, you can sue under a placeholder name

Trivia question for you:

Who is Norma McCorvey?

[liberal N proud]

33. Not sure

I don't have time to look it up right now. Have to go to work.

[jberryhill]

43. She was "Jane Roe" in Roe v. Wade /nt

[Wapsie B]

46. She is Jane Roe.

[liberalitch]

59. Who.....

.... "saw the light" and is now wanting to deny other women a right she was afforded. She was probably mentally unstable to begin with.

[Wapsie B]

63. Yeah, I had read that she had a conversion of sorts.

Sounds like someone easily led and tailor-made for a rwing cult.

[noiretextatique]

104. jane roe eom

[Fovea]

23. Again, where is the moral hazard

and where is the WTO?

Off doing another Ayn Rand circle jerk, no doubt.

[Towlie]

24. And what would we think if they were Venezuelans trying to keep their money from Hugo Chávez?

Discuss.

[Hello_Kitty]

73. Are they rich greedy assholes who are hiding money while their country starves?

Then I'd think they were dicks and their tax authorities should go after them.

(Yes, I realize the U.S. isn't starving yet - at least not most of us - but it makes for a good analogy)

[wolfgangmo]

131. Oh Puhlease - I used to live in Venezuela

It used to be a national joke and annual event when some rich asshole would flee with country with the assets of a bank or company and move to Switzerland.

If giving the money to Chavez means that the poor get another medical clinic then I am all for it.

Go find another straw man to burn.

[underpants]

25. Names??? Are we going to get to see the names of those in the suit?

:shrug:

[boomerbust]

26. One name comes to mind

Phil Gramm. He's been awful quiet lately.

[sansf]

65. Bingo

and he is married, so ther are 2 names right there

[BridgeTheGap]

30. Interesting cases of challenges to Swiss Banks - i.e. The Holocaust and surviving family members

as well as Nazi loot stowed in Swiss Banks.

http://history1900s.about.com/library/holocaust/aa072397.htm

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Jewish_Congress_lawsuit_against_Swiss_Banks

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/869789.stm

http://www2.lib.uchicago.edu/~llou/nazigold.html

[Baby Snooks]

48. One of the ongoing realities of the Holocaust...

The survivors had no way to claim the accounts because there were no records. Most of the Holocaust victims as I recall opened accounts through "registered agents" and many of those records were never found. The "registered agents" merely kept the accounts for themselves and maintained them and so they never appeared on "dormant" lists.

The problem of provenance was not and is not restricted to Swiss bank accounts but to bank accounts in other countries as well as real estate, art and equities. More and more cases involving provenance are being heard by courts. Elizabeth Taylor for instance was blocked from selling a Van Gogh because of a problem with the painting's provenance.

No one ever said the Swiss were innocent in the matter but then no one ever said the United State was innocent in the matter either.

[BridgeTheGap]

139. Judging from the Swiss generosity ($5 Billion?) to humanitarian causes, I'd say

you are correct about their guilt. Right, too, that Americans were not entirely innocent...particularly the Bush family & their skull & bones cronies.

[sui generis]

31. Misinformation abounds

American names must be disclosed to U.S. tax authorities.

Should we be confusing tax privacy with general privacy? I would sue to keep my income and information secret from anyone but the IRS, why shouldn't they?

This is Yet Another red herring, oh the evil rich peoples shouldn't gotta have no rights. Yawn.

[redqueen]

36. Are you saying that the IRS already knows who these people are,

and they just aren't bothering to do anything about it?

[sui generis]

53. for American citizens

Swiss banks are required to report balances and holdings to the U.S. Treasury, Internal Revenue Service. They are not required to report the source of funds, just the balances.

That's the sticky nuance. Once you open that can the Swiss banks are just an unpaid extension of the IRS. So now we want Swiss banks to report SAR (suspicious activity reports, amounts > 9.9K transactions and funds transfers - source and destination parties, and their associated private information, to the IRS). We want them to report all the "host" information for anyone depositing or cashing a check from those accounts, not just to the IRS but to the courts and media. Are you comfortable with that? At some point we need to stick to equal treatment under the law, or else risk our own information subject to the same precedents here in the U.S. I'm not comfortable with that, and certainly not as a blanket rule. If there is evidence of a crime, then make a criminal case, but the evidence has to come before the accusation.

I'm sorry Red, not into setting the monsters on fire and pitchforking them just because the rabble thinks it's a good idea.

[redqueen]

55. I'm in favor of them being required to provide the necessary information for us to enforce our laws.

Inflammatory language aside.

[Hello_Kitty]

67. "Rabble"?

Thanks for making your mindset so obvious.

[Name removed]

70. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sui generis]

137. yes it's obvious I don't "hate the rich"

nor do I think everyone with a bank account overseas is a criminal; certainly that would make me an arch-criminal.

As an American, I aspire to be rich - it's what keeps me interested in work, it's what keeps me wanting to see what tomorrow will bring, it's what satisfies me. I won't break the law to do it, and certainly don't do it in any way that is irresponsible or at the expense of someone's job or pension or future, and I'm not the only person who thinks this way.

Reading the responses here I am saddened by the emotional tenor that says witch hunts are okay, and if you can't find a witch overseas, pitchfork your fellow DU'er instead. What I hear smacks almost exclusively of self pity, and very little of rationality or fairness.

Whatever - I hear your story. Life hasn't given you the same opportunities so nobody else should have any opportunities, and anyone who does innovate is suspect and an effete proletariat hating snob. What. Ever. If I responded to that about people who feel sorry for themselves, who want to tear everyone down to their "perceived" level out of bitterness and anger, you would especially find a reason to revile in me what is obvious in yourself.

Yes Mz. Kitty, there are people who will do almost anything to get ahead - including throwing you under the bus and selling your organs out of your twitching body. There are people who take advantage of every system. There are sharks in the ocean. Realistically, if you're willing to take money under the table for babysitting, you're EXACTLY the same kind of person who will justify avoiding declaring ALL of your income to a taxing authority by hiding SOME of your income in a foreign account. There may be degrees of criminality, but there are not degrees of morality.

The law says that your accounts are private, yes even yours, all your bluster aside. We look for "lagging indicators" (i.e. suspicious activity) before any further investigation is called for because to do otherwise means that the government would be tasked with investigating EVERY account and transaction, which it cannot do, and certainly cannot do and still be uniquely American.

What you're asking for is that we go house to house in every "nice" neighborhood in America and start looking for roach clips because some drug dealers live in nice houses. That's wrong - and I'm certain of that.

[Hello_Kitty]

164. Jesus Christ so many strawmen in that it should be declared a fire hazard

But here's the thing, sui generis: If you had actually been following this story you would have learned that the reason that Swiss bank officials are cooperating is because the U.S. Justice Dep't threatened to pull USB's license to do business in the U.S. America is USB's biggest market and, this may come as a huge shock to you, but USB has no inherent right to access it. There's no "witch hunt" going on here. If you want to be indignant at someone, focus your ire on USB and the Swiss banks for painting themselves in this corner.

[sui generis]

165. your tag says everything that needs to be said

Don't keep up with the Joneses...Drag 'em down to YOUR level!

Is there anything you do or say that is constructive?

"straw men" "if you had actually been following" funny coming from the same keyboard.

There is a witch hunt. Read this thread. Nothing else need be said - you as much as openly stated that you "hate the rich". Also, the funny thing about characterizing a group of statements as "straw men" arguments means you absolve yourself of responding.

You are a straw kitty I guess, and there is no point in setting afire what's already burning.

[Hello_Kitty]

166. You have nothing left but personal attacks at this point

Your dripping condescension for those you deem "beneath" you is blindingly obvious. You stand on no principle other than on Calvinist dogma that holds that the rich are rich because they are more deserving.

[sui generis]

167. you put words in everyone's mouth

clearly your cavalry has abandoned you, oh lone ranger. Ride on - sunset's that way.

buh bye.

[Hello_Kitty]

168. That's rich. You accusing someone of putting words in another's mouth.

Buy bye yourself, Mr. Gramm.

[sui generis]

169. see that ignore button?

use it - let me be the first to put these words in my own mouth:

You are too fucking stupid to speak to me. Hope that's clear.

[Hello_Kitty]

170. Well, if I am stupid I can always improve on my knowledge

But you are hateful, sneering, condescending, and the personification of an elitist. I doubt there's any hope you will change.

plutocrat
A noun
1 plutocrat

someone who exercises power by virtue of wealth

[sui generis]

171. really?

let's take it offline from here.

You. Know. Nothing about me, nor have you asked.

You've made a lot of assumptions though, and as the subject of your assumptions I can tell with 100% confidence that you are mistaken, or you think you're talking to someone else, which is also bad communication.

You have it from me. You're wrong - and not even warm.

[Hello_Kitty]

173. I'm basing it off of what you posted and I am not taking it offline

I have no interest in personal correspondence with you and IMO your views should be given a full public airing on this forum.

[sui generis]

174. what is the "it" you are basing "it" on?

god you're lost.

I'm right here in front of you - if you have a question ask it.

Personally my telepathy went out when I was eight and I have been unable to restart it. You should use your powers for the good of mankind instead of ranting at your elders here.

Of COURSE you have a last word, let me just cut to the chase:

are too!

are not!

are too!

are not!

durrrrr.

[Hello_Kitty]

175. Okay. Let's start with one of your more offensive strawman arguments in reply #67

Whatever - I hear your story. Life hasn't given you the same opportunities so nobody else should have any opportunities, and anyone who does innovate is suspect and an effete proletariat hating snob. What. Ever. If I responded to that about people who feel sorry for themselves, who want to tear everyone down to their "perceived" level out of bitterness and anger, you would especially find a reason to revile in me what is obvious in yourself.

Let's see: Assumption about me and my situation, check. Accusation that I want to punish people for "innovation", check. Claim that I feel sorry for myself, want to tear others down, and revile and wish to project my failures onto you, check.

How do you feel you differ from the typical RW pundit in that statement? Indeed, those words could easily have come, verbatim, out of the mouth of Rick Santelli. And why are you projecting all these things onto me? Because I feel that Americans shouldn't be allowed to use Swiss bank accounts to avoid taxes and that a company like USB (who has a charter to do business in the U.S.) shouldn't be helping them to do it. This, to you, makes me "stupid" and "lost". Well, I guess I've got good company there. Apparently, the IRS and the Justice Dep't are as "stupid" and "lost" as I am. You and the tax cheats are on the "smart" side, I guess.

Like closeupready said downthread: "Sure whatever works, because money IS power in many ways. And many of those who have it want to retain as much of it as they possibly can, however they can.

And if the American wealthy can convince the American little person that it's okay to hide money from American tax authorities if another country says it's okay to do so (because of the 'right to privacy'), then they can still claim to be opposed to tax evasion and never fear being exposed as hypocrites. (I actually :rofl: after typing this, the absurdity of the argument being so clear to me.)"

plutocrat
A noun
1 plutocrat

someone who exercises power by virtue of wealth

[sui generis]

177. I am evil

yawn. I hate the little man. I totally agree with you I'm a complete tool of the right wing if not the actual right wing itself.

I'm a plutocrat (I guess you forgot I already admitted that in principle and was not ashamed for it) even though I'm a progressive bleeding heart liberal. I don't act on the plutocrat urges though, preferring to deal with real humans in real reality and follow my value system, which is FAIRNESS.

Let's see - I'm unreasonable, irrational and I favor criminals who hide money in the name of privacy.

Oh and I'm a hypocrite and a misogynist and oh wait wait wait, I've been here for over 11000 posts, and no little kittens are going to change that EVER.

Still here. No tombstone and I've been a lot meaner to people for a lot less. I suppose I can't quote the parts you got alerted and deleted (or whoever), but I recall you saying it was alright to get paid under the table if you were "poor" but not if you are "rich". I recall you have a pretty black and white double standard, based on your assumptions about people's fitness to be "good" or "bad" based on them being you, or not-you; based on being an evil plutocratic hypocrite like me or a totally for realreal person like you.

I actually hurt my eyes they rolled so hard just now.

I stand by EVERY LAST WORD I'VE SAID, including the evil part. I just have not been convinced otherwise by your argument or tone with me - it has been inflammatory and crude every step of the way, including your picture of a depiction of a decapitation.

You had me at hell no.

[Hello_Kitty]

178. You pile strawman on top of strawman but still refuse to address the actual points

1. Is it okay for the wealthy to hide money in Swiss bank accounts to avoid paying taxes?

2. Is it okay for USB to help them do it?

3. Does the Justice Department have the right to pull USB's license to do business in the U.S. if Swiss bank officials don't cooperate with their investigation?

4. Does USB have an inherent right to do business in the U.S., even if they help people violate U.S. tax laws?

So far, nothing but barbs, insults, and red herrings from you but no answer to the questions.

[sui generis]

179. no

it is not okay to beat your wife often.

you don't even KNOW what a straw man is.

is it okay for the poor to hide money from the IRS?

why is this between "thuh poor" and "the rich"?

is it okay to steal more than (your amount goes here)

Leading questions and you never fail to finish without a barb or a jab

I'm not defending spouse beatery, or theft or criminal collaboration. Got it?

I'm CLEARLY defending the legal process; due diligence, evidence before accusation, and case by case analysis over blanket rules to satisfy our slavering media and our sense that life is unfair and being unfair to others is therefore justified.

I am all for innocent until proven guilty. I am against (put on your simile hat here) unreasonable search and seizure, such as going house to house looking for drugs because some drug dealers can afford nice houses, whether or not anyone else is doing drugs. that's the equivalent of this witch hunt. We're justifying bad behavior as a means to an end because we know someone else is a tax evader. We're focusing on so called "rich" people, because it's so much more satisfying and sexy than going after babysitters and waiters and people who overdeclare the value of their charitable contributions and deductions here, EVEN THOUGH there are much bigger dollars at stake here.

So, I reiterate, to you I must be evil, and I'm fine with that.

[Hello_Kitty]

180. So, if the poor person opens an account with USB

And USB helps funnel the under the table babysitting money into a secret Swiss bank account, does that person's "privacy" now outweigh the U.S. government's right to enforce tax laws?

I mean, you are blathering on with this (increasingly incoherent rant) about class warfare but you still fail to address the actual issue of the OP. What is the "bad behavior" that is supposedly being "justified" here? Who is being denied the principle of innocent until proven guilty? Where is the "unreasonable search and seizure"? UBS is cooperating with our Justice Dep't. They are the ones providing the names, and the Swiss government has approved it. Here: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7901832.stm



Do you happen to have a link to your assertion that tax cheating by working class amounts to more money than that of the wealthy? Because that's not my understanding. http://www.amazon.com/Perfectly-Legal-Campaign-Benefit-Everybody/dp/1591840198

[sui generis]

191. speaking of blathering, little miss kitty

I'll bet you live alone, and deservedly so. That's not misogyny, that's active dislike. If the performances are stupid and vexatious often enough, the performer is too by association.

Bad behavior is making a blanket accusation of criminal behavior. Bad behavior is releasing private banking information to people like you because you're on a witch hunt.

Grow some reading comprehension. I don't like you or your style. In a good plot line in a book, what makes it seem plausible is that the antagonist has a compelling reason to adhere to the protagonist throughout the exposition.

You don't have a good reason, whichever one you think you are. You are not plausible. I'm bored now, go away biting fly.

[Hello_Kitty]

192. I can honestly say

That I could not care less that you don't like me. I welcome it. I would never, ever want to be a friend of or have the misfortune of being associated with a pompous, pretentious, and meanspirited person like you. I don't know why you are here on DU because you sound like every selfish greedy Republican jerkwad I've ever met in my life. But then again, I personally know "Democrats" or, more accurately, DINOs like you IRL. I avoid them too.

I am going to enjoy very much when those wealthy tax cheats get their comeuppance, and I will also enjoy seeing Swiss banks (finally) be put out of the business of stashing criminals' money. Human beings, sui generis, have rights. Money does not. Money is not people. Learn the difference.

Toodles, :hi:

Ms. Kitty

[sui generis]

194. the sound of people agreeing with you is DEAFENING

ciao brutta

[Baby Snooks]

83. Only if they're aware of them..

It depends on how the accounts are set up and if the individual or corporation is identified as "American" at that point. Otherwise, they would have no basis to report the information. Anyone intending not to pay taxes of course would make sure they were not identified as American.

As I recall the British fought this war and lost. The Americans will lose it as well. In the end, the laws also protect the Swiss themselves.

[Jefferson23]

34. I would give a lot to learn the names on that list. There would be no

doubt a very interesting conversation around the country about how Bush's tax cuts evidently were not generous enough? I wonder how much they kept for themselves in addition to the legal thievery Bush allowed these creeps and how many of them are or were elected officials.

[closeupready]

38. "Group"? Is that like, a mob?

:D

[DemoTex]

146. More like a "cabal."

Main Entry: ca·bal
Pronunciation: \kə-ˈbäl, -ˈbal\
Function: noun
Etymology: French cabale cabala, intrigue, cabal, from Medieval Latin cabbala cabala, from Late Hebrew qabbālāh, literally, received (lore)
Date: 1614

1: the artifices and intrigues of a group of persons secretly united in a plot (as to overturn a government) ; also : a group engaged in such artifices and intrigues

2: club , group <a cabal of artists>

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/cabal

[Buns_of_Fire]

45. I can understand why they don't want their names disclosed.

Times have changed rapidly, thanks to slime like Madoff and companies like AIG. Unlike the St. Reagan era of "hate the poor," the populace has started sharpening the tines on those pitchforks anew, but this time they're giving the hairy eyeball to the obscenely rich (justified or not).

[natrat]

47. it's not just a tax issue, it's illegal to have foreign bank accounts

[closeupready]

50. No it's not. It's illegal to use it to evade taxes, yes.

n/t

[Name removed]

77. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[closeupready]

78. So pack up your shit and move to Switzerland if you don't want to pay taxes.

n/t

[Hello_Kitty]

91. Oh good lord, you have employees?

God help them, for they work for a raving lunatic.

[Posteritatis]

101. Bull (nt)

[florida08]

49. no the IRS doesn't have the names

These people open accounts under dummy corporate names. Pretty easy to do..the Swiss just move things around.

UBS reached a $780 million deferred-prosecution agreement to settle accusations that it used undisclosed offshore private banking services to help wealthy Americans evade taxes.

Personally I don't give a tinkers damn what the wealthy make or how they spend it. Just for the record there are good and decent
Americans who care and give back like the Miami banker Obama mentioned last night that gave 60 million of his own pay to his employees. It was to be his bonus. That man should have a statue made in Washington DC. What I do care about are those who would step on the rest of us..lie cheat and steal from the rest of us to make their fortune. Evading taxes to the country you took your profits from is simply a bottom feeder. You name should be revealed and reviled as the scavenger you are.

[natrat]

51. isn't there a new law where it costs you like 50% to move your money out of the US?

answered my own question
"The FBAR requires taxpayers to report their name, address and taxpayer identification number and disclose the type, location and account number of the foreign bank accounts and the amount held in the accounts. The penalty for failing to file a FBAR is a $10,000 for each year of non-filing and, in the case of a willful failure to file, the penalty is increased to the greater of $100,000 or 50% of the value of the account for each non-filed year. A willful failure to file a FBAR can also be prosecuted as a criminal felony"

the new law concerns people who change citizenship, i think then they penalize you to move money out

[daggahead]

52. Funny. The rich suing the rich. n/t

[Posteritatis]

103. It's *almost* as though "the rich" wasn't a monolith or something! (nt)

[NorCalDem]

54. Wait a minute..

I have to remember this defense. If I ever murder someone, i'll just sue the witnesses! Yeah, that's the ticket!

This is hilarious, they'll sue UBS, but they should still go to jail in the USA!

[Hansel]

56. Self delete. nt

[JohnWxy]

57. Trostki's right - TRAILTORS. we could pay for stimulus package if we started collecting all the

taxes not being paid.

recommended!!!

[Dover]

61. I'll bet a lot of interesting banking goes on during Davos meetings.

I can just imagine what those arriving in their private jets have brought to place in those accounts.

[closeupready]

74. You know, I never thought about that! But you're absolutely right.

These meetings in Davos and elsewhere are certainly considered opportunities by some to take a 'business' trip overseas, deduct it from taxes in order to access income which, in turn, has been protected from income taxes. What a racket.

[acmavm]

62. What a shady system. Their economy is based on helping tax

evaders. That makes them crooks as well.

[alfredo]

71. I wonder if any from the bush junta is on the list of tax cheats? What about

the billions missing from Iraq? Did any of it end up in Swiss banks? How much has cheney and bush skimmed off the top?

[Name removed]

75. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. 
[link:www.democraticunderground.com/forums/rules.html|Click
here] to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

89. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

92. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[closeupready]

93. I don't recall seeing this FT article, 'Harbours of Resentment', from last December. Strong language

about tax havens from Obama and others.

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/bd051b0c-bf13-11dd-ae63-0000779fd18c.html
>>This icy blast is a sign of the growing hostility to the tiny states and islands around the world that harbour an estimated $6,000bn (£3,895bn, €4,725bn) of offshore assets. After months of financial crisis and banking scandals that rocked Liechtenstein and Switzerland, the world’s most powerful countries have lost patience.

In Washington last month, finance ministers from the Group of 20 leading industrial and developing nations concluded that tax secrecy “should be vigorously addressed”. This weekend, it was the turn of the developing countries. At a United Nations meeting on development in Doha, tax havens came under fire for fuelling capital flight.<<

>>The arrival of Barack Obama in the White House provokes even more anxiety for the havens. As well as launching last year’s Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, the president-elect helped this year to launch the Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act. This aims to make it easier for investigators to “see through” opaque corporate ownership structures and stop the flow of offshore funds to the US from hedge funds and private equity that are “of unknown origin” but do not have to pass money-laundering checks.

On the campaign trail, Mr Obama also laid bare his hostility to the corporate use of offshore jurisdictions for international tax planning, which analysts estimate accounts for between one third and a half of the revenues that Washington loses through offshore evasion and avoidance. “There’s a building in the Cayman Islands that houses supposedly 12,000 US-based corporations,” he said. “That’s either the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax scam in the world, and we know which one it is.”<<

[yurbud]

105. doesn't be party to the suit reveal that they have hidden assets there?

[Lethe]

111. remember that the USA requires expatriates to keep paying taxes

which is stupid and unethical. The average, non-rich, expatriate should have to pay no taxes to the USA at all. Some of these people have Swiss banking accounts, and are not rich.

[wolfgangmo]

132. Get your facts straight.

They require them to pay taxes IF they are paid in US funds by US companies. In other words if they take an overseas position that is based in the US.

Plenty of ex-pats work overseas for local companies. You are required to file taxes but with no taxable income it is just a matter of filing a 1040 EZ and then mailing it to the embassy.

So the average, non-rich ex-pat doesn't pay any taxes. Calm down.

[jberryhill]

134. ....up to $80,000 of local foreign wages and salary is excluded

And you are correct, in order to claim exclusion of that 80K, you still have to file and claim the exclusion.

Above 80K is taxable, and you may qualify for a foreign tax credit on the local foreign taxes paid.

The overall point being that one still has to file, or every dollar of foreign income from a foreign employer will be taxable by the US.

[Hello_Kitty]

158. Oh boo hoo. And what the hell does that have to do with wealthy tax cheats?

I seriously doubt many of the accounts they are scrutinizing are of nice, honest ex-pats who have $20k in a Swiss account. This investigation is happening because USB helped thousands of its wealthy clients evade billions of dollars in taxes via secret Swiss bank accounts. And now the Justice Dep't is threatening to pull USB's license to do business in the U.S. so those bankers are cooperating because America is their biggest market.

[closeupready]

161. It's remarkable, isn't it, that even after establishing here that UBS conceded

(in the settlement agreement with the US) to helping US clients hide accounts from the IRS, that some DU members here are still subtly or openly hostile to prosecuting tax cheats. !!! Seriously. :wtf: , people. What about tax evasion being a FELONY do these people NOT GET?! :puke: Just makes me sick, discovering that I'm associating her with people who defend such criminality. Disgusting.

[Hello_Kitty]

162. They think they're upholding lofty principles

In a deleted subthread above I was accused of being Karlotta Rove and wanting to deprive everyone of privacy. Privacy. :eyes: As if money (and mind you, only the money of the wealthy) was entitled to the same privacy as human beings.

[closeupready]

163. Sure whatever works, because money IS power in many ways.

And many of those who have it want to retain as much of it as they possibly can, however they can.

And if the American wealthy can convince the American little person that it's okay to hide money from American tax authorities if another country says it's okay to do so (because of the 'right to privacy'), then they can still claim to be opposed to tax evasion and never fear being exposed as hypocrites. (I actually :rofl: after typing this, the absurdity of the argument being so clear to me.)

[jberryhill]

181. I hate to break up the stupid party here, but

I was stating that US citizens abroad are required to file tax returns stating their foreign income, in response to a post which suggested that they didn't have a US tax obligation on foreign income earned abroad.

Let me try that again:

I stated that US citizens abroad are required to file US income tax returns on foreign earned income.

Please explain to me why you think I am defending "tax cheats".

Thank you.

[Hello_Kitty]

184. Please explain why this is relevant to the OP?

Which is about USB helping U.S. citizens hide taxable income via secretive Swiss bank accounts. You raised a red herring about ex-pats and their taxes and tax returns. On edit: Actually, I see that you weren't the first one who raised it but you continued the attempted threadjacking.

Here's a brief article about the situation: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7901832.stm

Please learn what's going on before calling people stupid. KTHXBAI :hi:

[jberryhill]

186. It is relevant to the post to which I was responding

It is called a conversation.

You might look at the threaded view of the conversation. You see, there is a remarkable ability to comment not only on the OP, but also to reply to other people's comments. That is what I did.

In passing, someone said expats abroad are not liable for taxes on income from foreign sources.

I pointed out that person was incorrect, and that expats must report their income from foreign sources.

You then said I was apologizing for tax cheats.

I am well aware of the UBS situation, and also aware that you are unable to follow a response to a post.

[closeupready]

190. Wow, where did I say that applied to you? Since you are correct, I guess

I either didn't say that it did apply to you or else I was wrong. Either way, I guess we can move beyond that point. Shrug.

[jberryhill]

182. Are these words not visible to you in my post?

Allow me to repeat them:

The overall point being that one still has to file, or every dollar of foreign income from a foreign employer will be taxable by the US.

I was pointing out that expats earning income abroad ARE REQUIRED TO REPORT IT TO THE IRS.

And I was pointing it out in response to someone who said that foreign earned income by expats is not taxable.

So, then, after I point out that expats HAVE TO FILE A RETURN WITH THE IRS you claim I am "defending tax cheats".

Did your parents have any children that lived?

[Hello_Kitty]

185. Nice.

"Did your parents have any children who lived?"

I know you meant that to be funny but my parents did actually lose 2 children in infancy.

[jberryhill]

187. And I know...

That your condemnation of me was not intended to be funny, and was as mean spirited as it was mistaken.

Intent is everything, ain't it.

[Hello_Kitty]

188. I didn't call you stupid.

And I didn't further suggest you were stupid with a crack about your parents. Your intent was clear.

[McCamy Taylor]

115. Are they keeping the plaintiff's names secret?

:rofl:

[vssmith]

121. Does UBS have a charter to operate in the US?

If they do, couldn't it be revoked?

[Hello_Kitty]

157. That's exactly what the Justice Dep't threatened them with.

Yanking their license. That's why Swiss bank officials are cooperating.

[TWiley]

125. Lets coin the phrase ........"illegal americans"

as opposed to lou dobb's "illegal immigrants"

[JackRiddler]

155. This thread illustrates the triumph of talk radio rhetoric on the left.

[JackRiddler]

189. Okay, let's make peace, we can all agree: TAX BONO NOW!

http://counterpunch.org/mccann02262009.html

QUOTE:

The best response to one of those breathless Bono appeals for uplift came at a Glasgow gig when he hushed the audience to reverent silence before starting slowly to clap. "Every time I clap my hands,” he whispered into the microphone, “a child in Africa dies...”

A voice responded in broad Glasgow accent: "Well, fucking stop doin' it then.”

All of which is mere intro to lyrics (by Bono impersonator Paul O’Toole) sung outside the Dail (parliament) in Dublin on Wednesday, at a follow-up- demo organized by the Debt and Development Coalition Ireland.

I want to run, my money to hide
I want build paper walls and keep it inside
I want to seek shelter from income tax pain
Where the accounts have no names
See my tax bill disappear without a trace
Where the accounts have no names

Where the accounts have no names
Where the accounts have no names
Where the accounts have no names
Keeping our fortune is something we love
Something we love
And when we go there, we go without you
Revenue we don’t do

Ireland is bankrupt and though it’s going bust
Our well paid accountants made sure it don’t affect us
They showed us a place to avoid all the pain

Where the accounts have no names
Where the accounts have no names
Where the accounts have no names
Avoiding tax is something we love
Something we love

And when we go there, we forget about you
Revenue we don’t do

Tax demands turn to rust
We’ve used the law and left on the wind
Left on the wind

On the subject of tax our love turns to rust
See our dosh is in trusts
Dosh is in trusts
And when we go there, we forget about you
Revenue we don’t do

Or:

I have paid highest fees
I have moved overseas
Only to pay less tax
Only to pay less tax

I have run
I have crawled
I’ve done so much you’d be appalled
You’d be appalled
Only to pay less tax

But I still haven't learned about democracy
No I still haven't learned about democracy

I know avoiding tax ain’t fair
It’s just because I’m a millionaire
I don’t need to pay like you
No I won’t pay like you

Cause I still haven’t learned about democracy
But I still haven’t learned about democracy

You paid your tax and you
Laid the blame
Carried the burden
Of my shame
Of my shame
You know I’m still running

Cause I still haven’t learned about democracy
No I still haven’t learned about democracy
But I still haven’t learned about democracy
But I still haven’t learned about.

[960]

193. The US should seize all of their assets.

Time for the super rich to quit the greed and treason.

That should help with the deficit, and strengthen the national economy. Which will allow a new crop of HONEST folks to make money and support the country.