This is the thread where the fringster comes back with teeth

[taxwonk]

Originally Posted by Not Bob

Oops.

Do you remember the "Bloom County" comic strip? In it, one of the protagonists was a boy by the name of Binkley. Binkley was an anxious sort, and one ongoing schtick was to have the poor kid unable to sleep because of the monsters in his closet. In one strip, he decides (like Brer Rabbit) to try to outsmart a monster by pretending that he's terrified of Nastassja Kinski (I think he has her poster with the snake up on the wall). He pushes it just a little too far by pretending to be afraid of cheesecake, and the monster realizes his trick.

The comment about Bilmore was because of his use of the Opus avatar. Ms. Kinski makes me think about that strip, and "Bloom County" reminds me of Bilmore (and also a certain tall brunette from high school and college, but that's a different story), hence the "I miss Bilmore" comment.

I find it more than a little disturbing that this post concluded with "I miss Bilmore" rather than "I miss [that certain tall brunette from highschoo and college]."

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield

The problem is, we didn't figure out how to catch them. We weren't successful in locating and examining specific transactions on our own to determine who here was hiding money abroad and then send reasonable, narrowly-tailored requests to the Swiss citing the basis for release of finite records on individual suspected tax cheats. Instead, we took the lazy approach and said "Give us all records on all Americans with X amount of dollars in your banks, or who utilized the services of X division of UBS' private banking group." Doing it that way, we created a showdown with the Swiss, whose economy in no small part depends on the attractiveness of their protective banking secrecy laws.

I'd have no issue with discrete requests made for records, and would expect Swiss compliance. But we didn't do that. Being the arrogant, lazy nation we are, we demanded they open volumes of books for us to allow the law enforcement agents of this country who hadn't done their job to go on a fishing expedition. Judges don't allow that sort of broad net discovery in criminal or civil actions here and the Swiss had every right to tell us to fuck off there. It's their sovereign territory, their bank, and the possibility of a bad press imperiling an important source of revenue to their country. That we don't like it, or think they protect criminals, is irrelevant. We don't make their laws.

This is outright garbage. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/09...me-to-confess/

"In June 2008, UBS's Bradley Birkenfeld pleaded guilty to helping a U.S. client evade his tax liability, and the case provided information on the bank's internal practices to American officials. In February of this year, UBS admitted that it had violated U.S. securities law and had helped its American clients hide their income from tax authorities. It agreed to pay $780 million in penalties and unpaid taxes in exchange for a deferred prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice. Simultaneously, the IRS and Justice pursued a related civil case (known as the John Doe summons) concerning the names of up to 52,000 account holders with the Swiss bank.

In August, UBS reached a settlement agreement regarding that case and, as part of the deal, agreed to turn over the names of approximately 4,450 UBS account holders suspected of using their Swiss accounts to evade taxes. According to the IRS, these accounts held more than $18 billion at one point. UBS will give the names to Swiss tax officials, who will then determine whether to turn them over to U.S. tax authorities. The agreement, which contains details regarding how the Swiss government will make its determinations, remains sealed for now. The IRS has said that it will unseal the document by Nov. 17."

Not only were many rich people using UBS to avoid paying taxes by setting up secret accounts, but UBS broke our laws as well. Just because they built an industry that (for decades) relied on tax cheats doesn't mean they don't have to follow our laws.

And I don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the lazy US prosecutors not doing their job. It seems like they did a great job in this case and it seems like standard procedure for taking down a criminal enterprise. They found a guy who was breaking the law for an organization. They busted his ass and flipped him. He told them all the crooked shit they do. They used it against UBS, who admitted they violated our laws and paid fines. They then cooperated and gave up information on other motherfuckers with secret accounts. Like the article says, it ain't hard to comply with the law. If you did, the accounts would not be secret and it wouldn't matter that information regarding those accounts were uncovered in the investigation.

The only difference between this and taking down a drug cell is that sophisticated rich people are the ones getting away with the crime. "Reasonable, narrowly-tailored requests to the Swiss citing the basis for release of finite records on individual suspected tax cheats." What a joke. I'm sure this has been done countless times with the Swiss response being, "Fuck off. We're not giving you a damn thing."

I do not understand your thought process. Sometimes I can follow it. In this instance, I don't know what the hell you're thinking.

TM

[Sparklehorse]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

I find it more than a little disturbing that this post concluded with "I miss Bilmore" rather than "I miss [that certain tall brunette from highschoo and college]."

I would say disappointing rather than disturbing, but otherwise, 2!

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

The only difference between this and taking down a drug cell is that sophisticated rich people are the ones getting away with the crime.

Well, the "sophisticated rich people" aren't shooting each other when a new tax "shelter" encroaches on their turf. So that's another difference.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

The Swiss governemnt relented in large part because UBS wanted it. If the Swiss government hadn't "allowed" UBS to disclose, then UBS would (most likely) been prosecuted criminally and had its US assets seized. And, with the precedent set, all the other Swiss banks will need to decide b/t having a US presence and complying with US law. It's not so hard--why should we allow anyone to operate a business in the US and blatantly ignore US law?

Because their clients are underdogs who are availing themselves of hard to detect criminal endeavors. It's like you're not even listening.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by taxwonk

Everything in that post is fact. I specifically refrained from stating an opinion. However, if you will exercise your memory, you may recall that I was not one of the people I refer to in my post.

I noticed that you didn't go one way or the other. So very clever. I am not criticizing your ability to list ridiculous things. But that doesn't make what you put in that post any less ridiculous.

TM

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Because their clients are underdogs who are availing themselves of hard to detect criminal endeavors. It's like you're not even listening.

TM

But I want to be one of them and it isn't fair that *I* will have to follow the law when I get there.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

Well, the "sophisticated rich people" aren't shooting each other when a new tax "shelter" encroaches on their turf. So that's another difference.

That's not the focus of the analogy. The focus of the analogy is how prosecutors go about taking down the organization.

TM

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

This is outright garbage. http://www.politicsdaily.com/2009/09...me-to-confess/

"In June 2008, UBS's Bradley Birkenfeld pleaded guilty to helping a U.S. client evade his tax liability, and the case provided information on the bank's internal practices to American officials. In February of this year, UBS admitted that it had violated U.S. securities law and had helped its American clients hide their income from tax authorities. It agreed to pay $780 million in penalties and unpaid taxes in exchange for a deferred prosecution agreement with the Department of Justice. Simultaneously, the IRS and Justice pursued a related civil case (known as the John Doe summons) concerning the names of up to 52,000 account holders with the Swiss bank.

In August, UBS reached a settlement agreement regarding that case and, as part of the deal, agreed to turn over the names of approximately 4,450 UBS account holders suspected of using their Swiss accounts to evade taxes. According to the IRS, these accounts held more than $18 billion at one point. UBS will give the names to Swiss tax officials, who will then determine whether to turn them over to U.S. tax authorities. The agreement, which contains details regarding how the Swiss government will make its determinations, remains sealed for now. The IRS has said that it will unseal the document by Nov. 17."

Not only were many rich people using UBS to avoid paying taxes by setting up secret accounts, but UBS broke our laws as well. Just because they built an industry that (for decades) relied on tax cheats doesn't mean they don't have to follow our laws.

And I don't know what you're talking about when it comes to the lazy US prosecutors not doing their job. It seems like they did a great job in this case and it seems like standard procedure for taking down a criminal enterprise. They found a guy who was breaking the law for an organization. They busted his ass and flipped him. He told them all the crooked shit they do. They used it against UBS, who admitted they violated our laws and paid fines. They then cooperated and gave up information on other motherfuckers with secret accounts. Like the article says, it ain't hard to comply with the law. If you did, the accounts would not be secret and it wouldn't matter that information regarding those accounts were uncovered in the investigation.

The only difference between this and taking down a drug cell is that sophisticated rich people are the ones getting away with the crime. "Reasonable, narrowly-tailored requests to the Swiss citing the basis for release of finite records on individual suspected tax cheats." What a joke. I'm sure this has been done countless times with the Swiss response being, "Fuck off. We're not giving you a damn thing."

I do not understand your thought process. Sometimes I can follow it. In this instance, I don't know what the hell you're thinking.

TM

The Swiss can still offer bearer bonds, gold bars, and safe deposit boxes. Foreign accounts indeed.

[Greedy,Greedy,Greedy]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

But I want to be one of them and it isn't fair that *I* will have to follow the law when I get there.

You don't like the idea of a Swiss chalet with a hardened sub-basement full of gold bars?

The problem is that the rich people want to get interest on their ill-hidden gains - it's a matter of not just being crooked, but greedy as well.

[Cletus Miller]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

That's not the focus of the analogy. The focus of the analogy is how prosecutors go about taking down the organization.

TM

Then I missed the part where we are providing military aid to the Swiss in exchange for their cooperation.

I also missed where we've threatened forfeiture of US assets of Mexican/Columbian/etc businesses to gain their government's cooperation in taking down drug cartels. Or where we let a cartel kingpin off with a (fairly small) fine in exchange for giving us a list of his customers.

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

Then I missed the part where we are providing military aid to the Swiss in exchange for their cooperation.

I also missed where we've threatened forfeiture of US assets of Mexican/Columbian/etc businesses to gain their government's cooperation in taking down drug cartels. Or where we let a cartel kingpin off with a (fairly small) fine in exchange for giving us a list of his customers.

i don't mind when stuff on the PB is over my head, but, besides double-anal, I've always been able to understand FB posts.

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Cletus Miller

Then I missed the part where we are providing military aid to the Swiss in exchange for their cooperation.

I also missed where we've threatened forfeiture of US assets of Mexican/Columbian/etc businesses to gain their government's cooperation in taking down drug cartels. Or where we let a cartel kingpin off with a (fairly small) fine in exchange for giving us a list of his customers.

Really? Are you actually trying to have this argument? Because I refuse.

TM

[ThurgreedMarshall]

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski

i don't mind when stuff on the PB is over my head, but, besides double-anal, I've always been able to understand FB posts.

Twins just finished penetration #1 in today's double-anal Tigers action. Looks painful.

TM

[Hank Chinaski]

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall

Twins just finished penetration #1 in today's double-anal Tigers action. Looks painful.

TM

a rookie pitcher threw 6 innings, allowing 1 run for us. our pitchers deserve better.