The CORPORATION SOLE

*******************************
URGENT WARNING!!!
30th August, 2002
Some people have received letters recently inviting them to travel to a country with offshore-banks, so that they can deposit their money there. THEY DO NOT RETURN!! It is much easier to dispose of 'foreigners' and take possession of their assets in such countries. Twenty incidents reported so far ....."
******************************


NEWS ITEM - August, 2002

I.R.S. Sues for Disclosure of Offshore Accounts
(New York Times)

The Internal Revenue Service went to court today in an effort to force more than 40 companies, including AOL, Time Warner, eBay and American Airlines, to surrender information on customers the agency suspects are hiding income in offshore accounts. Summonses filed in federal courts in seven cities were the first attempt by the I.R.S. to review documents from companies whose goods or services were purchased with credit cards linked to offshore accounts.

The action comes after the agency forced Visa International, MasterCard and American Express to turn over information on cardholders in Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands. The I.R.S. is seeking records from airlines, hotels, car renters, Internet companies, retailers and shipping companies, including Delta Air Lines, Ramada, Avis, Amazon.com, Gap Inc., DHL Worldwide Express and AT&T. The companies are not the targets of investigations, it said.

"In the weeks and months ahead," Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti said, "the I.R.S. will work aggressively to pursue offshore credit card holders who are not paying their fair share of taxes." The summonses were filed in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, Newark, San Francisco, Seattle and Alexandria, Va. Other companies affected include United Airlines, Southwest Airlines, Hertz, Mary Kay and Sabre Holdings. The summonses were prompted by transaction information the I.R.S. received in the last year from MasterCard and American Express. In some cases, said Dale Hart, a deputy commissioner, the name or address of the cardholder is not known; that is the information the agency is seeking from the merchants.

Two weeks ago, the Justice Department asked a federal judge in Miami to let the I.R.S. examine MasterCard's files of credit cards issued by banks in more than 30 countries that are considered tax havens or offer financial privacy. The countries include Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Belize, Bermuda and St. Kitts and Nevis. The Treasury loses $20 billion to $40 billion a year in tax revenue as a result of offshore accounts, according to the General Accounting Office, the Congressional auditing agency.

[presumably these companies are either working hand-in-hand with the I.R.S. or they are unaware of the Supreme Court's ruling on the status of the I.R.S.]

******************************

NEWS ITEM - June 2000

IMF AND OECD CONTINUE TO TURN THE SCREWS ON OFFSHORE FINANCIAL CENTERS

Extracted and shared from:
The Personal Freedom Foundation
Newsletter
Issue #3, June 2000

"The threat hanging over the heads of OFCs is the loss of IMF funding if they refuse to comply with OECD demands. When you consider that most central banks of most countries are controlled by the IMF, this is no wimpish threat. The integrity of OFCs is dropping of like flies. Over the weeks and months ahead you will see various jurisdictions cave in to U.S. demands and recognize "income tax evasion," just as Bermuda did. This from a country that doesn't levy income tax. Figure that out. The OECD is also threatening to publish a list of uncooperative OFCs.

Reminds me of the days of labour union unrest when management initiated a practice of "taking names" of uncooperative union workers. The last issue of the newsletter you will recall in the article, "Squeaky Wheel Gets Greased." I advised that the OECD had agreed to with hold publishing their list until July, 2001? Well everything the Power Elite/ International Banksters do involves a Hegelian Dialectic approach that involves more than just; "problem, reaction, solution." It also involves a "pincer movement." In other words, they come at you from more than one direction. They may have agreed to hold off publication of their list but that doesn't preclude the U.S. Bureau for International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs (INL) from publishing their list.

Go to the State Department's website at: www.state.gov. and search for the "Money Laundering Status of Selected Offshore Centers." The list was recently published in the May/June edition of "Offshore Finance U.S.A.

The INL have created three levels of OFCs; "Primary," "Concern," and "Other." When reviewing the list keep in mind the motivation for the list. For example, in last months article, "The Squeaky Wheel Gets Greased," I told how a delegation from the Cayman Islands, a dependent territory of Great Britain went to London, England to plead their case. Upon returning home the same delegation decided to head out for Washington. Why Washington? I can understand their going to London because it is Britain's membership in the EU that requires compliance concerning increased bank reporting and the transparency of directorships of all companies and it was the "Edwards Report," that indicated the direction of things to come so, why go to Washington, D.C. Could it be that "Slick Willie Clinton," is the beneficial owner of in excess of $500 Million in banks in the Caymans? Just a passing thought. Could it be that OECD can agree to hold off publication of their list only to keep the flame turned up by having other governments and organizations (NGO's) publish their list of suspect OFCs. The INL's selected list of Offshore Centers identifies the Cayman as "Primary," but has this to say, "remains vulnerable, but Cayman has taken new steps to strengthen its defenses against money laundering."

Another pincer in the Hegelian Dialectic strategy comes from the "Financial Stability Forum," a group of financial regulators established by the G7 to study methods of reducing, "global financial volatility." The FSF have rated 25 of the world's leading offshore centers according to their own criteria. Go to this site for further details. Read the OECD's position in the Manchester Guardian or in the Times of London . ................NOTE:- some of these sites are SLOW-loading!

Keep in mind, the aforementioned sources are major propaganda vehicles.

The nature of OFCs is going to change dramatically over the next few months. What do the OFCs have to turn to, to generate revenue? Most OFCs rely strictly on Tourism and Offshore Banking. Many don't even have an agricultural base. Their food supply and need for petroleum products could be cut off at anytime if a boycott or sanctions were implemented against "Primary OFCs." These are the threats. The carrot is the opportunity to shift gears and go after the "e-commerce marketplace." When I was in the Middle East recently, the ruling family in Dubai made the decision to move toward e-commerce and bureaucrats were told in no uncertain terms that everything had to be in place within 18 months and heads would roll for those who fell behind in meeting benchmarks toward the ultimate goal. Could it be that OECD is prepared to provide assistance to those countries who wish to accept the "new direction?" One never knows what lurks in the minds of International Banksters. Mind you there could be tremendous benefits, it simply means politicians selling out their country's sovereignty for compliance to IMF, OECD and UN requirements. It happens every day. After all, its all part of the greater good!

One of the distinctions currently being made by the OECD is bank secrecy versus confidentiality. The OECD don't like jurisdictions that have bank secrecy laws like the Bahamas. Where this is the case, they will smear the jurisdiction. For example; the INL Selected List identifies Bahamas as, "Primary: bank secrecy and liberal IBC legislation make it vulnerable (to whom, the OECD, IMF, UN and U.S.). Bahamian officials suspect the insurance sector may be used to launder funds." I would have thought that more the case of Bermuda since they specialized in insurance, re-insurance and captive insurance companies. You see insurance companies have never had to disclose the beneficiaries of insurance policies in the past. Perhaps that is all about to change and perhaps Bermuda's caving in to recognizing "income tax evasion," is all part and parcel of various insurance companies and captive insurance companies seeking new domiciles where there is greater privacy. After all it is privacy that is the real issue! Onshore 95% of the population are honest law abiding citizens and approximately 5% are criminals. You might be surprised to learn that offshore 95% of the population are honest law-abiding citizens and 5% are criminals. Same stuff different corner.

Bahamas is moving toward a new offshore financial vehicle as a means of complying with the pressure of OECD. Bahamas plans to amend the International Business Companies Act and proposes to amend the name of International Business Corporation to "Global Business Company." Bearer share certificates will be eliminated. Frankly, bearer share certificates provide a major problem for Canadians and Americans seeking offshore privacy because these two socialist/communist high tax regimes make "Ownership Entrapment." How can I have the audacity to call these regimes communist? Simple; its true, they have implemented each and every tenet of the "Communist Manifesto," commissioned by American and British international Banksters and penned by Marx and Engels. The second tenet of the manifesto is a graduated income tax. Sound familiar. Its an interesting world and these are interesting times. Global Business Companies will have to register their shareholders, directors and any mortgages with the Companies Register. It is anticipated that GBC's will also have to keep company records in the Bahamas. However, GBC's may be allowed to operate as domestic companies.

(Source May/June 2000 issue Offshore Finance Canada)

These kinds of adjustments and changes will become the norm among concerned OFCs in the weeks and months to follow........

[I have warned for years about developments such as these coming: get your CORPORATION SOLE now !]

In any event, despite what either the Canadian or American governments might tell you, your money is not insured in onshore banks whereas the Central Bank of the Bahamas insures the first $500,000 and individual private banks often re-insure any overage so that every penny is insured! Future questions will concern themselves with survival questions rather than just asset protection interests. Do you prefer to pay a 20% with holding tax on bank interest or outrageous and predatory income taxes. Our website advises that Canadians pay 53.6% personal income tax at $60,000 Canadian whereas Americans pay 39.6% personal income tax at $250,000 U.S. Now convert the Canadian dollars to U.S. dollars and Canadians pay 53.6% personal income tax at $40,I'D U.S. If a Canadian happens to earn the equivalent of $250,I'D U.S.per annum they will pay 20 times more tax than an American. Now add on Provincial Sales Taxes and the Goods and Services Tax and the 168 other hidden taxes and licence fees and consider who is better off? a resident Bahamian or Canadian. Despite the fact that Bahamians pay severe duties on whatever is brought to the island and despite the fact that most OFCs may be faced with some kind of income tax in the future? there is no contest! If you are an honest law abiding citizen within the offshore arena you will experience a much higher degree of privacy and confidentiality than you ever would onshore. Besides which, there are much greater opportunities for returns on personal investment offshore in a regulated economy than onshore. It's very simple where there is greater competition, there is greater opportunity to excel!

If you have been considering going offshore perhaps you should do so before the window of opportunity closes. Whatever happens there will have to be a transition period and possibly a grand-fathering of offshore entities................"

WIRE TRANSFERS
"This was forwarded to me via some one who works for one of the top 10 banks in the U.S.
On April 9, 2000 a change took place in our wire transfer system. Here is a quote from the "Change Ticket."
"This change adds a feature to the Wire Transfer System to screen incoming and outgoing wires for activity by countries or entities designated by the "Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) as being enemies of the United States. Suspect wires are sent to a special queue for review and action by wire operations. This a regulatory requirement; failure to comply will result in civil penalties and criminal prosecution.

Notice the words "entities" and "enemies."

The sender provides further comment.: Read this several times until you understand the full implications. If you haven't done so already, then it's time to go offshore and open accounts in alternative currencies? Euro, British Pound or Japanese Yen. It might cause you and your contacts some inconvenience, but its still better than discovering one day that your USD accounts are frozen because you have become (or happen to be dealing with) a designated "enemy" of the "United States." In addition to this, always remember and never forget; all USD transfers go through the U.S., no matter where actual accounts are located. (You might be moving monies down the street to a different bank in the same jurisdiction and USD will be wired to a correspondent bank in the U.S. unless you physically walk the monies or hire an armoured service to transport the monies to the new bank down the street.)

THE BANK OF CANADA
A must read for all Canadians! Go to the Bank of Canada website and read very carefully the questions and answers provided there.

AN INFORMATIVE CANADIAN SITE
the bourque site

A WORD FROM AUSTRALIA
After reading the first issue of the Personal Freedom Foundation Newsletter where I advised of the current powers of Canada Customs Revenue Agency an Aussie provided this comment. "The checking of passports relevant to taxation has been in here for some time and includes parking tickets, traffic fines, outstanding debts registered with CCRA or court registered legal disputes, family law etc..

.............. However, one of the things that really concerns me is the lack of investor savvy of most Canadians and Americans. Most offshore conferences consist of people rushing like lemmings to the investment flavor of the moment with out ever conducting any due diligence whatsoever and with total disregard for what it took to grow the investment dollars they have to invest in the first place. When they find an investment whose flavor they enjoy they decide to binge or "pig out," throw all caution to the wind and drain every personal account or pension program for a brief fling with gluttony and greed. Whatever happened to caution, due diligence or diversification? These acts of desperation boggle the mind and you become easy prey for unscrupulous investment salesman........." end of quotation.

*************************************************************************

Having investigated Offshore Banking as long ago as the early '80s, I soon became convinced that there were too many future problems. In the '90s these problems became more obvious - electronic transactions could be interfered with .... . so for North Americans in particular I recommended ONLY Nevada, which was not offshore, but had all the advantages of an offshore operation. These advantages still hold ..... even if you have to travel to Nevada to get your money out.

But now there is a much better option on your doorstep -

Go to the application page for a CORPORATION SOLE
Get yours today!

Return to the COMMON LAW CORPORATION SOLEINDEX Page

Still have questions? Write: The Corporation Sole.

© Dr Milson Macleod Jan 2000

Your use of this site is subject to
Terms and Conditions of Use
See also our
Privacy Policy