Oldest Swiss Bank Tells Clients to Sell U.S. Assets or Leave

Wegelin & Co.

Private Bankers since 1741

Farewell America

1. A moral issue?
The agreement between the USA and Switzerland
under which Switzerland is to provide administrative
assistance with regard to 4,450 UBS
clients suspected of tax fraud is, in our view, remarkable
in three ways. Firstly, we note the way
both parties are dressing it up in the aftermath of
the battle. Everyone is talking of a “success”. The
IRS, the American tax authority, surely rightly,
for it has got what it wanted, namely access to a
large number of specific client names, combined
with persisting uncertainty on the part of all the
others as to whether they are among those names.
The UBS is happy not to have to pay another
fine, and to be rid of the heavy burden of legal
proceedings. And the Swiss government regards it
as a success inasmuch as from their perspective
the agreement preserves the rule of law and offers
the clients affected the possibility of legal recourse
to the federal administrative court.
But there are also losers, of course. These are the
people affected, who must now expect legal proceedings
against them as suspected tax cheats,
and who had, until relatively recently, been promised
that precisely this would not happen. Promised
by whom? By the bank concerned (among
others), which had generously interpreted and
intensively exploited an explicit gap in the 2001
“Qualified Intermediary” (QI) agreement; by the
supervisory authorities, which were fully cognizant
of all this activity, but never questioned it; by
the Swiss government, which only a few months
ago had spoken of the “brick wall” that foreign
authorities would encounter, were they to attack
Swiss banking secrecy – for example through
fishing expeditions, such as an application for
administrative assistance against several thousand
clients. Promises, connivance, a pretence of resolute
behaviour – and now collapse. The appearance
of success conceals the reality of a breach of
trust.
Trust: is this the right word at all for something so
disgraceful as tax evasion, or even tax fraud?
Serves them right, these bloated capitalists, if they
land in the dock! This is the position of themoralizers,
as frequently stated in the Swiss media,
among others. It is astounding, and this is the
second interesting observation, how completely
naturally those who claim the moral high-ground
rush to join forces with the authorities and their
financial requirements. At the risk of once again
winding up certain specialists in business ethics,
let us briefly recall the sort of tax authorities we
are dealing with, and the sort of state they serve: a
country that, over the last 60 years, has unquestionably
been one of the most aggressive nations
in the world. The USA has fought by far the largest
number of wars, sometimes with, but mostly
without a UN mandate. It has broken the international
laws of war, maintained secret prisons, and
fought an absurd war against drugs, with serious
consequences both abroad (Columbia, Afghanistan)
and at home (according to reliable sources,
the tentacles of the narcotics mafia now reach
well into political circles). With breathtaking
moral duplicity, the USA maintains enormous
offshore havens in Florida, Delaware and others
of its states. The moralizers have joined sides with
a nation that still makes extensive use of the
death penalty, and that has a legal system under
which lawyers can get rich on the misfortunes of
their clients. Liability cases often end in verdicts
with exorbitant damages, which makes business
activity extremely risky, for medium-sized enterprises
in particular. The moralizers provide intellectual
support for a country that allows its infrastructure
to collapse, and then stuffs convicts into
hopelessly overfilled jails, after what are not infrequently
dubious proceedings. They fund a
nation that tolerates – or rather, causes – regular
crises in the global financial system that it manages.
A country whose underclass enjoys neither
the benefits of an adequate education, nor a halfway
functional healthcare system; a country
whose economic system is increasingly inclined to
overconsumption, and in which saving and investing
have increasingly become alien concepts, a
situation that has undoubtedly been one of the
driving forces behind the current recession, with
all its catastrophic consequences for the whole
world.

http://www.zerohedge.com/sites/default/files/Wegelin Document on American Taxes and Assets.pdf
 
Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

...what UBS does outside of the united states is none of the usa govts concern...

It sure does it if helps people with tax obligations in the US evade those obligations.
 
This is the best post in this thread so far!.. You are right on! Not Only the US broke the swiss laws, But this kind of crap endangers our liberty and costs us money here in the US.

"new rules may mean that people who spend limited periods of time in the U.S. acquire tax obligations."

"

Quote from Mom0/pH0x:

this is the problem with most americans, they don't understand that the swiss DON'T HAVE to follow US laws... they are in SWITZERLAND, they have to follow SWISS laws, the US, has in fact broken swiss laws... the USA is the only criminal here
 
Quote from jjj1000:

Yes, I extensively studied the subject and that is exactly what it is. Let's say that you live in South Africa, and your heirs all live in South Africa (and never set foot in the USA and don't conduct business here) - even on this scenario, all stocks and bonds that you have in the USA will be subject to the Estate tax in case you die. EVEN WORSE, foreigns don't have the right to deduct the first 3 million or so of assets like citizens do, they BASICALLY PAY approx. 40% OVER ALL ASSETS - it is crazy, and not too many people know about it.

If the case above can applies to you (you are a foreigner with assets in the USA) I advise you to urgently study the subject (opening a company abroad that holds all assets MAY shield you from estate tax). this is a very complex subject, full of gray areas - look for a especiallist.

here's a link: (which I have no association with whatsoever): http://gswlaw.com/madoff/US_Estate_Tax_NRA.pdf


It seems you are right. I also found this link-
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=156329,00.html

So, why do foreigners invest so much in the US markets with that danger in the background?
 
Quote from Highterm:

It seems you are right. I also found this link-
http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/international/article/0,,id=156329,00.html

So, why do foreigners invest so much in the US markets with that danger in the background?

This can't possibly be ! Imagine the consequences, no foreigner would want to hold US assets, such a law would not make sense anyway, besides my guess is it would be very difficult to implement.
The original link talks about "non resident alien" I believe this describes foreigners spending time in the US as a non-resident, thus this law may not apply to people living abroad , not setting foot on US soil for other reasons than for ex. vacations.
 
I think it's as I said "non resident alien" is a person spending time in the US as a non resident , obviously such person must pay taxes for their US based income and that extends to the stock of company they may own. But that does not apply to everyone living outside the US.

EDIT : I found more here on the definition of NRA, after all it looks I am wrong , everyone outside the US is a non resident alien http://investopedia.com/terms/n/nonresidentalien.asp
 
Quote from Kicking:

This can't possibly be ! Imagine the consequences, no foreigner would want to hold US assets, such a law would not make sense anyway, besides my guess is it would be very difficult to implement.
The original link talks about "non resident alien" I believe this describes foreigners spending time in the US as a non-resident, thus this law may not apply to people living abroad , not setting foot on US soil for other reasons than for ex. vacations.

Wrong, it certainly applies to people who don't live and/or who never set foot in the USA, but who had assets at the time of death that were considered to have "US situs" (like US stocks, bonds, brokerage accounts, treasuries, real estate, etc) . I know it is hard to believe.

More: If you live abroad (foreigner, non citizen or green card holder) and have a, say, vacation home in the USA and you die, that house certainly will be taxed with a huge estate tax bill.

Even worse, non-resident aliens (who are non citizens, non green card holders who do not meet the minimum staying in the USA to pay taxes here) have only a $60 k credit towards any assets that they have here (the rest is taxed with the huge Estate taxes rates, up to 45%). citizens and green card holders have a 2 million or so credit (in 2008), only what passes this amount is taxed. The only exception is when the USA has some treaty with your foreign country.
 
OK , but is this new ? Is that part of the agreement on qualified intermediaries ? How come I never heard of this ?

I still think it's very difficult to implement and as a trader, itshould not affect you, you trade futures, only margin would be subject to the tax and even with other instruments you can make arrangements for the positions to be liquidated if you die, before you die.
 
Back
Top