Monthly Archives: April 2016

A Presumption of Guilt

Posted on by
Reply

The White House’s Office of Management and Budget earlier this week accepted for final review a rule that would force banks to identify the owners of companies behind shadowy financial transactions, such as the firms revealed in the Panama Papers scandal or the ones used to buy real estate.  It would close a loophole that critics say allows criminal money into the US financial system.

Never mind that the vast majority of the Panama Papers’ shell companies are entirely legitimate.  Never mind that, in a free country, there has to be probable cause driven by a presumption of innocence to go looking for “criminal money,” not just a government man’s idle suspicion, or a dislike for a person or an entity, or a liking for fishing expeditions.

Of course Government must be above such petty concerns.

A spokesman for FinCEN [Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the originator of this rule] said the agency couldn’t provide specifics on the contents of any final rule, nor could he predict the timing for publishing a final rule.  He declined to comment further.

Of course not.  And of course.

This also represents another instance of this Democratic administration’s post-America attitude.

The International Monetary Fund weighed in as well, criticizing the US in July 2015 for failing to move quickly enough on identifying beneficial owners, saying the rule, as proposed, was too weak.

“There were no requirements for [financial institutions] to look beyond a customer to establish the identity of the beneficial owners in all cases,” the IMF said at the time.

Nor need there be, absent a court’s order based on probable cause, but hey—it’s an extranational institution that’s objecting.  That matters.

Sure.

Anti-Competitive G-20

Posted on by
Reply

And, yes, that includes an anti-competitive Democratic Party administration representing the US in this group of twenty.

G-20 finance officials called on the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development to report by July countries and jurisdictions that haven’t signed up to new international standards on tax transparency and information sharing.

“Defensive measures will be considered by G-20 members against non-cooperative jurisdictions,” the officials said in their statement after two days of meetings in Washington.

Wrong answer, guys.  Your threats just expose your own dishonesty.

If you really want to rein in the so-called tax havens, out-compete them in a free market: lower your own tax rates to competitive levels, and simplify your tax rules to eliminate your cynically Byzantine structures which serve only to benefit (or, just as bad, to appear to benefit) cronies and other government-favored groups.

The best defense is a good offense, but that offense must be directed at the right target.

“There is one thing which has not gone very global and that is taxation, which is still very much a local affair associated with national sovereignty,” IMF Managing Director Christine Lagarde said.

Why must taxation be standardized globalized?  What part of national sovereignty is unclear to you, Madam?

And further cynicism:

Revenue lost to tax havens is a sore point for the G-20….

It isn’t lost to you, guys; it isn’t yours to begin with, so it cannot be “lost” to you.  Again, compete: lower tax rates, and reduce the incentives to hide in “tax havens.”

And just to be clear (although, surely I’m preaching to the choir here:

haven 2. A place of refuge or rest; a sanctuary.

Thus, tax haven is a place of refuge from abuse by tax.

A Timid Administration

Posted on by
Reply

Saudi Arabia has told the Obama administration and members of Congress that it will sell off hundreds of billions of dollars’ worth of American assets held by the kingdom if Congress passes a bill that would allow the Saudi government to be held responsible in American courts for any role in the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

And in response, President Barack Obama (D) once again bowed to Adel al-Jubeir, Saudi Arabia’s Minister of Foreign Affairs, who personally delivered the threat, and virtually to King Salman bin Abdulaziz.  Obama then responded to the Saudi threat, meekly.  He

has lobbied Congress to block the bill’s passage, according to administration officials and congressional aides from both parties….

This timidity is a part of what Democratic Party Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT) insist they will perpetuate, should they be elected.

Elections have consequences.

Tax the Rich for the Benefit of the Rest of Us?

Posted on by
Reply

The Left—Democratic Party Presidential candidates Hillary Clinton and Senator Bernie Sanders (I, VT), for instance—want the rich to pay their fair share in taxes.

What is their fair share, you ask?

(…), Clinton and Sanders answer.

Here’s what the rich are paying today, according to our very own IRS, via AEIdeas:IncomeTaxShares

Notice that.  The hated 1% already are paying nearly 40% of the income taxes being paid—that includes Warren “I’m Not Paying Enough, but Don’t Ask Me to Donate to Treasury” Buffet—even though they earned less than 20% of the total income.  Meanwhile, the poor, downtrodden, and abused bottom 50% aren’t even paying 3% of the total.

Hmm….

Grow Government

Posted on by
Reply

It’s what Democrats do.  Here’s another installment, this one by Democratic Party Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton:

I would create the first ever Office of Immigrant Affairs.  [The office] would create a dedicated place in the White House to coordinate integration policies across the federal government and with state and local government as well.

Never mind that the private economy already is in that niche, groups like

CASA de Maryland, Refugee Council USA, the US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, the US Catholic Conference of Bishops’ Migration and Refugee Services, and The National Network for Immigrant and Refugee Rights.

Never mind that myriad Federal agencies already involved in immigration affairs could be combined and streamlined, agencies like US Citizenship and Immigration Services; Department of Labor’s Office of Foreign Labor Certification; Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs, its visa management facility; The National Visa Center, a private company under contract to the DoS that’s in the middle of the green card issuing process.

But that would shrink government.  Can’t have that.