NationStates Jolt Archive

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29514602/



the argument is Swiss law versus American Law.

I want to see how it plays out. Got to figure out where to stash my future earnings if i make them here.

This also seems to highlight the need for a unified international banking charter, or at least a common set of rules. If you can play one set of rules off against another, the winner will be those with the least amount of morals.

So, IRS messed up and wants to hold the Swiss responsible.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29514602/



the argument is Swiss law versus American Law.

I want to see how it plays out. Got to figure out where to stash my future earnings if i make them here.

This also seems to highlight the need for a unified international banking charter, or at least a common set of rules. If you can play one set of rules off against another, the winner will be those with the least amount of morals.

And the most money. I'll bet you those 47,000 accounts aren't 'maintain a $250 balance and checking is free!' accounts. ;)

So, IRS messed up and wants to hold the Swiss responsible.

:confused:

IRS has let the money out of the country untaxed. Now the money is in another sovereign country. Why should said country be responsible for or even concerned about helping IRS to get its taxes? US law doesn't apply there.

I wish I was rich enough to dodge taxes :(

the US is gonna have better luck getting blood from a stone tbh

This issue is big in Switzerland right now. I've just had a few rather long discussions with my [Swiss] friends about it, actually.

So, orginally, people in Switzerland were veryyyyy excited about Obama because they heard what he was saying and it sounded good. All his campaign promises of change and all that populism. But as soon as all that 'robin hood' mentality was directed towards Swiss banks (where many rich Americans keep offshore money), Swiss people got nervous. You see, banking *IS* Switzerland, and the swiss-banking secrecy codes *ARE* Swiss banking. Without it and the banking industry that comes from it, Switzerland would be just like another....Austria.

So when Obama started claiming he would lead a crusade against Swiss banks and demand that they open up, Swiss didn't know what to do. On the one hand, the pressure from the American government (and the EU countries) is incredible. On the other, Swiss banks have everything to lose if they give in and violate their banking secrecy.....because they would then lose a (the?) major reason why people invest there.

And the legal battle is that America is claiming tax evasion and that the Swiss bankers (UBS did) actually sat down with Americans and helped them get around the taxes and out-think the IRS. The Swiss side is that international tax evasion is actually not a crime in Switzerland, thus they were doing nothing actually illegal in Switzerland, just business.

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more way in which the government is gaining control of what we do with our private lives.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/mar/01/swiss-banks-anonymity-ubs


Treasure, in fairytales, is stored underground and guarded by gnomes. The gnomes of Zurich have over the years performed heroically. They have succeeded in protecting from the world's tax authorities nearly a third of the world's $7 trillion of privately held wealth.

But against their will, Swiss bankers are being dragged from subterranean vaults into the light. The fairytale that has delivered a standard of living envied by the rest of the world is slipping away. And the country's power brokers know it.

Last Tuesday, on the day Switzerland's biggest bank, UBS, saw its share price sink to an all-time low, the country's president, Hans-Rudolf Merz, himself a former UBS banker, suggested for the first time that bank secrecy - his country's most precious commodity - is no longer non-negotiable.

And the legal battle is that America is claiming tax evasion and that the Swiss bankers (UBS did) actually sat down with Americans and helped them get around the taxes and out-think the IRS. The Swiss side is that international tax evasion is actually not a crime in Switzerland, thus they were doing nothing actually illegal in Switzerland, just business.



That might be a valid argument if they did it in Switzerland, but the fact that they went to the United States to help their clients evade US taxes kind of takes a lot of wind out of those sails.

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more way in which the government is gaining control of what we do with our private lives.

So if I had a bag full of Nazi looted artifacts, the Swiss banks would never tell on me if I kept them in their accounts? Funny. I thought the Swiss banks prided themselves on keeping their noses clean.

I hope they fry the bastards.

So if I had a bag full of Nazi looted artifacts, the Swiss banks would never tell on me if I kept them in their accounts? Funny. I thought the Swiss banks prided themselves on keeping their noses clean.

Just the outside.

So if I had a bag full of Nazi looted artifacts, the Swiss banks would never tell on me if I kept them in their accounts? Funny. I thought the Swiss banks prided themselves on keeping their noses clean.

You've gotta be kidding. Swiss banks serve two purposes: the wealth of the customer, and the wealth of the Bank. That's always been the way they've worked.

That said, fuck the IRS and the US government on this. The Swiss banks did exactly nothing wrong.

You've gotta be kidding. Swiss banks serve two purposes: the wealth of the customer, and the wealth of the Bank. That's always been the way they've worked.

That said, fuck the IRS and the US government on this. The Swiss banks did exactly nothing wrong.

They broke United States law in the United States. Explain how this is 'exactly nothing wrong.'

That might be a valid argument if they did it in Switzerland, but the fact that they went to the United States to help their clients evade US taxes kind of takes a lot of wind out of those sails.
Where does it say they went to the U.S. to do that? I'm not denying it, I just hadn't heard that.
So if I had a bag full of Nazi looted artifacts, the Swiss banks would never tell on me if I kept them in their accounts? Funny. I thought the Swiss banks prided themselves on keeping their noses clean.
Well, that's already been going on for some time now:

For several decades after the war, individual survivors petitioned and requested information about these accounts with little to no success. In 1974, the Swiss announced that they found 4.68 million Swiss francs in dormant accounts. This money was divided between two Swiss relief agencies and to the Polish and Hungarian governments.

On January 29, 1997, the city of New York considered boycotting Swiss banks. Eight days later, three Swiss banks announced that they would create a humanitarian fund of 100 million Swiss francs (U.S. $70 million).

Since most of the Jews who opened these accounts were killed, there are no accurate figures about how much money Jews really placed within the Swiss banks. Jewish organizations believe there could be billions, while the Swiss have only uncovered several million.

Most recently, in June (1997), the Swiss government announced that it would establish a $5 billion humanitarian foundation.

Where does it say they went to the U.S. to do that? I'm not denying it, I just hadn't heard that.

Searching now, but I've read in reliable news sources(I don't read blogs and crap for my news) that UBS bankers made something like 3500 trips to the US to hold seminars for rich clients to help them evade their taxes. Soon as I find it, I'll post it.

Where does it say they went to the U.S. to do that? I'm not denying it, I just hadn't heard that.

It's from the article in the OP.

UBS allegedly staged training sessions so that “client advisers” could travel frequently to the U.S. — on average 30 days a year each — to consult with secret U.S. customers without attracting the attention of tax agents or law enforcement officials. The advisers were told to rotate the hotels they stayed in and to “protect the banking secrecy” if they were questioned by any authorities, according to excerpts of UBS internal documents filed in the IRS suit and provided by the subcommittee.

It's from the article in the OP.

Yay! :D

It's from the article in the OP.
I'm sorry but that is fucking cool. :D

I'm sorry but that is fucking cool. :D

I picture bankers with cyanide capsules. :D

I wouldn't be surprised in the least if some of those 47,000 turned around and made snide "Where's the Change, Sauron?" comments about the state of the economy. Those people need to be singled out as examples first and foremost. If you're not going to contribute to the economy you of all people should not be the ones griping about it falling apart.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29514602/



the argument is Swiss law versus American Law.

I want to see how it plays out. Got to figure out where to stash my future earnings if i make them here.

This also seems to highlight the need for a unified international banking charter, or at least a common set of rules. If you can play one set of rules off against another, the winner will be those with the least amount of morals.
I wonder how many of our legislators are using their services...

ATLANTA - Georgia legislators who don't pay their taxes on time would face sanctions or ouster under a measure the state Senate could soon consider.

The proposal comes after a report by the Department of Revenue revealed 22 lawmakers from both chambers — about 10 percent of state legislators — are delinquent on their tax bills, some owing money from as far back as 2002. Sponsor Sen. Eric Johnson said the measure was meant to target the "serial abusers" who knowingly don't pay their taxes.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29530049/

I wonder how the 22 deadbeats are split by party. My guess is that there are many more Democrats than Republicans that have been delinquent, but then tax evasion isn't such a big crime anymore, is it? Failing to pay taxes is just an honest mistake. Right?

I picture bankers with cyanide capsules. :D
All moving stealthly through the shadows, whispering softly to their prospective clients through ear pieces in a very 'Priceline Negotiator'esque (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TtOMhCY9B-Y)way :D
I wouldn't be surprised in the least if some of those 47,000 turned around and made snide "Where's the Change, Sauron?" comments about the state of the economy. Those people need to be singled out as examples first and foremost. If you're not going to contribute to the economy you of all people should not be the ones griping about it falling apart.
Yeah, it's exactly because of simple reasoning like that that Obama is making this an issue. Tracking people down on moving their money oversees isn't gonna change anything in the economic situation, rather it is just a feel-good PR move that Obama is using to look like Robin Hood. It's a non-issue that he's making into an issue. . . and effectively this PR stunt is going to destroy an integral part of the Swiss economy.

They broke United States law in the United States. Explain how this is 'exactly nothing wrong.'
The Swiss banks didn't break any laws, the US tax evaders who put their money in them are the ones who broke the laws. The Swiss banks didn't break any American laws as they're not even in America. Even if they did it's not their problem as they're in Switzerland and American law doesn't matter to them.

I don't see why Switzerland should bend over on this one. I can fully understand why other countries wish to prosecute tax evaders but the Swiss government's only responsibility is for furthering its own country's interests. It's not their problem if people from other countries decide to evade taxes.

The Swiss banks didn't break any laws, the US tax evaders who put their money in them are the ones who broke the laws. The Swiss banks didn't break any American laws as they're not even in America. Even if they did it's not their problem as they're in Switzerland and American law doesn't matter to them.

I don't see why Switzerland should bend over on this one. I can fully understand why other countries wish to prosecute tax evaders but the Swiss government's only responsibility is for furthering its own country's interests. It's not their problem if people from other countries decide to evade taxes.

While in the United States, the representatives of UBS violated United States law to aid in the evasion of United States taxes. Those representatives who came to the United States to advise American clients how to evade American tax law broke the law. They broke United States law while in the United States. Unless you mean to argue that a foreigner is not subject to the laws of the land while travelling abroad, there is complete and total justification in attempting to pursue these criminals.

Those representatives who came to the United States to advise American clients how to evade American tax law broke the law.
The problem is with the representatives, however - the banks can't be forced to turn over the accounts for this.

While in the United States, the representatives of UBS violated United States law to aid in the evasion of United States taxes. Those representatives who came to the United States to advise American clients how to evade American tax law broke the law. They broke United States law while in the United States. Unless you mean to argue that a foreigner is not subject to the laws of the land while travelling abroad, there is complete and total justification in attempting to pursue these criminals.

As i read the article all they did was provide consultation. that pesky first amendment thing about free speech comes up. Unless they were filling a briefcase and smuggling money back their personally. What the swiss bankers should do is make their advisers US attorneys so that way all their advice would be covered by attorney client privilege.

As i read the article all they did was provide consultation. that pesky first amendment thing about free speech comes up. Unless they were filling a briefcase and smuggling money back their personally. What the swiss bankers should do is make their advisers US attorneys so that way all their advice would be covered by attorney client privilege.

I believe there is ample caselaw that attorney/client privilege ends where coconspiracy starts.

snip article 7 trillion dollars

assuming 25% is American and a real tax rate rate of 25%.
that would be about half a trillion dollars in extra tax revenues.
that would almost remove the nation deficit.

I believe there is ample caselaw that attorney/client privilege ends where coconspiracy stars.

is it the job of these Swiss advisers to make sure a person reports their income?
secrecy, has more reason then just avoiding taxes.

is it the job of these Swiss advisers to make sure a person reports their income?
secrecy, has more reason then just avoiding taxes.

No, but if you come to New York city, give your friend a gun, tell him how to kill someone and get rid of the body and never be caught and then go back to Switzerland, they'll extradite you to New York to stand trial as a coconspirator for murder if he gets caught.

As i read the article all they did was provide consultation. that pesky first amendment thing about free speech comes up. Unless they were filling a briefcase and smuggling money back their personally. What the swiss bankers should do is make their advisers US attorneys so that way all their advice would be covered by attorney client privilege.

Freedom of speech does not extend to cover conspiracy to commit a crime.

I hope the Swiss never capitulate to the U.S. or to anyone else.

No, but if you come to New York city, give your friend a gun, tell him how to kill someone and get rid of the body and never be caught and then go back to Switzerland, they'll extradite you to New York to stand trial as a coconspirator for murder if he gets caught.

But violent crimes and financial crimes have always been treated differently, not least because the former tends to be committed by the poor and weak whilst the later are usually committed by the rich and powerful.

But violent crimes and financial crimes have always been treated differently, not least because the former tends to be committed by the poor and weak whilst the later are usually committed by the rich and powerful.

However, that is not legally required to be the case. They are both felonies, and can both be treated in similar ways. Conspiracy to commit tax evasion is a very real crime.

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more way in which the government is gaining control of what we do with our private lives.

Welcome to the reality that is Obamamerica.

Good for the Swiss banks. I can only wish them every success in repelling central government; frankly, I can't see them losing.

The ability of the rich to evade taxes and fuck society over is refreshing no?

Welcome to the reality that is Obamamerica.

The GOP is no better in that regard. The only difference between the two parties is in which part of your life they want to have more control of, with Democrats being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on social aspects of your life, and Republicans being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on economic aspects. Of course, the few cosmetic "differences" between the two are largely fictitious, and if they had the chance, either one would gladly take away every last bit of freedom (what little we have left, anyway) that remains.

The GOP is no better in that regard. The only difference between the two parties is in which part of your life they want to have more control of, with Democrats being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on social aspects of your life, and Republicans being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on economic aspects. Of course, the few cosmetic "differences" between the two are largely fictitious, and if they had the chance, either one would gladly take away every last bit of freedom (what little we have left, anyway) that remains.

Aye, double edged sword. In the end you get killed either way. Ain't politics grand?

No, but if you come to New York city, give your friend a gun, tell him how to kill someone and get rid of the body and never be caught and then go back to Switzerland, they'll extradite you to New York to stand trial as a coconspirator for murder if he gets caught.

but if a teach someone how to kill irrespective of if it is a person or an animal I have done no wrong. I suspect that the USB personal walk a fine line but know how to walk said line. Sort of like head shops, say bong or pot and you get asked to leave, say water pipe and fresh green tobacco your fine.

The GOP is no better in that regard. The only difference between the two parties is in which part of your life they want to have more control of, with Democrats being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on social aspects of your life, and Republicans being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on economic aspects. Of course, the few cosmetic "differences" between the two are largely fictitious, and if they had the chance, either one would gladly take away every last bit of freedom (what little we have left, anyway) that remains.

I keep telling people to vote libertarian.

The GOP is no better in that regard. The only difference between the two parties is in which part of your life they want to have more control of, with Democrats being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on social aspects of your life, and Republicans being a very tiny bit more laissez faire on economic aspects. Of course, the few cosmetic "differences" between the two are largely fictitious, and if they had the chance, either one would gladly take away every last bit of freedom (what little we have left, anyway) that remains.

I almost found myself in agreement with you until the emboldened part. Grow the fuck up, turn "V for Vendetta" off, and try to escape the pubescent paradigm you're posting in in which the nasty megalomaniac government seek nothing more than to regulate every detail of your life. Do you really think you're that important? Bloody hell but you wouldn't be to me.

but if a teach someone how to kill irrespective of if it is a person or an animal I have done no wrong. I suspect that the USB personal walk a fine line but know how to walk said line. Sort of like head shops, say bong or pot and you get asked to leave, say water pipe and fresh green tobacco your fine.

Oh there's always a line - the line is whether or not you acted as a coconspirator in an illegal act. If you advised your clients to do something illegal, explained how it was done, and then provided the means - all while standing on the ground where it's illegal - that makes you a coconspirator and lands you in the slammer.

Aye, double edged sword. In the end you get killed either way. Ain't politics grand?

Yeah, true. :(

I almost found myself in agreement with you until the emboldened part. Grow the fuck up, turn "V for Vendetta" off, and try to escape the pubescent paradigm you're posting in in which the nasty megalomaniac government seek nothing more than to regulate every detail of your life. Do you really think you're that important? Bloody hell but you wouldn't be to me.

Did I say I was that important, or that it was only my life the "nasty megalomaniac government" wanted to regulate? No? Then why don't you "grow the fuck up."

However, that is not legally required to be the case. They are both felonies, and can both be treated in similar ways. Conspiracy to commit tax evasion is a very real crime.

I've no argument against it being legally required to be that way as you’re clearly right. I was just pointing out they its usually a matter of power but that with the current crisis the positions that those who are reasonably powerful are beginning to shift beneath their feet.

I don't like this one bit. It's just one more way in which the government is gaining control of what we do with our private lives.

..by making rich people pay the few taxes they have to pay?

Oh there's always a line - the line is whether or not you acted as a coconspirator in an illegal act. If you advised your clients to do something illegal, explained how it was done, and then provided the means - all while standing on the ground where it's illegal - that makes you a coconspirator and lands you in the slammer.

hiding money in its self is not illegal I hide money from my relatives all the time.

I suspect the swiss have been trained to know what they can and can not say. I also suspect they are certain to avoid knowledge intent on their clients part. Is he hiding the money just so his greedy kids wont find it ? Or is he hiding to keep the greedy government unaware of it? that should never been a bankers concern. I have yet to be asked why am I depositing a check at my bank.

I tend to consider it a game, like tag. If they want to collect taxes, make them work for it.

Seriously, every time someone gets charged with tax evasion, I just think "that's bad sportsmanship".

hiding money in its self is not illegal I hide money from my relatives all the time.

I suspect the swiss have been trained to know what they can and can not say. I also suspect they are certain to avoid knowledge intent on their clients part. Is he hiding the money just so his greedy kids wont find it ? Or is he hiding to keep the greedy government unaware of it? that should never been a bankers concern. I have yet to be asked why am I depositing a check at my bank.

Are you going to be intentionally obtuse? Tax evasion is illegal. These bank representatives are travelling to the United States to specifically advise them on how to avoid having their money taxed. What is so difficult for you to understand about this?

I'd rather have the money be deposited in a Swiss bank account than confiscated by the government and used to fund aggression against Afghanis, Iraqis, and other foreigners.

I'd rather have the money be deposited in a Swiss bank account than confiscated by the government and used to fund aggression against Afghanis, Iraqis, and other foreigners.

Yes, we all would. I'm sure every person in America would rather have their money go into a secret Swiss offshore account than towards the government. But, unfortunately, the people most likely to have that option are also the the people most likely to be the ones pushing our nation towards those conflicts.

But, unfortunately, the people most likely to have that option are also the the people most likely to be the ones pushing our nation towards those conflicts.

Politicians?

Politicians?

The people who influence politicians.

The people who influence politicians.

Ah, parasites.

Are you going to be intentionally obtuse? Tax evasion is illegal. These bank representatives are travelling to the United States to specifically advise them on how to avoid having their money taxed. What is so difficult for you to understand about this?

whats so difficult for you to understand that if they advise people with out advising people (the reference to code words in the article).
Go to a head shop ask for a Meth pipe. You will get kicked out. It is illegal to sell meth pipes or teach people how to smoke meth.

Go to the head shop ask for a Oil burner. get a meth pipe along with instructions for use.
If they are using code words the bankers have gotten around the law, of course and just like the meth user the illegality is only him, and in the case of the banks the tax evader.

whats so difficult for you to understand that if they advise people with out advising people (the reference to code words in the article).
Go to a head shop ask for a Meth pipe. You will get kicked out. It is illegal to sell meth pipes or teach people how to smoke meth.

Go to the head shop ask for a Oil burner. get a meth pipe along with instructions for use.
If they are using code words the bankers have gotten around the law, of course and just like the meth user the illegality is only him, and in the case of the banks the tax evader.

Haha. So if the police busted into the head shop and found the meth pipes, the owner wouldn't be arrested because he had been selling "Oil burners"? No. He'd be arrested for possession of drug paraphernalia.

If a drug dealer isn't selling crack cocaine, but "rock", he's not breaking the law because he used a code word? Give me a break. That's possibly the worst argument I've ever seen.

Did I say I was that important, or that it was only my life the "nasty megalomaniac government" wanted to regulate? No? Then why don't you "grow the fuck up."

It was the intimation and the implicit, not the explicit. The assumption that government has nothing better to do than control the every minutiae of it's ecitizens lives betrays an appaling paranoia and arrogance.

It was the intimation and the implicit, not the explicit. The assumption that government has nothing better to do than control the every minutiae of it's ecitizens lives betrays an appaling paranoia and arrogance.

Why? It's the nature of government, everywhere.

Haha. So if the police busted into the head shop and found the meth pipes, the owner wouldn't be arrested because he had been selling "Oil burners"? No. He'd be arrested for possession of drug paraphenelia.

I suggest you ask a head shop owner, but as case law stands, as long as they only refer to it as a oil burner they have done nothing illegal. In most cases it is not paraphernalia until it has been used to smoke the substance.
If a drug dealer isn't selling crack cocaine, but "rock", he's not breaking the law because he used a code word? Give me a break. That's possibly the worst argument I've ever seen.

first if a drug deal is saying Crack cocaine, or marijuana and so on, He is a narcotics officer don't agree to anything and wait to be busted. second a drug dealer physically has the drug on him in order to put the bankers in the same shoes they would have to personally transport the money from the US to Switzerland.
In this case they are simply advising a person how to transfer money without people seeing it. that in itself is not illegal, the tax evasion if mentioned is mentioned indirectly.

think of it like this, do you want to be arrested for something that might be constructed as conspiracy ? that becomes dangerous.

I don't remember where I read about this a month or something ago .. but what i did read basically said the bank accounts would have to be given over.. the information I mean.

Well, that's already been going on for some time now:

Makes you wonder if you could steal money from one Swiss bank and hide it in another.

Makes you wonder if you could steal money from one Swiss bank and hide it in another.

:):) who is up for trying. nothing I like more then money.

let us not forget why Swiss banks are so secretive. they did so to prevent Nazi Germany from investigating Jewish accounts. So if your against Swiss banking secrecy your a Nazi and a genocide practitioner.

/godwin

As i read the article all they did was provide consultation. that pesky first amendment thing about free speech comes up. Unless they were filling a briefcase and smuggling money back their personally. What the swiss bankers should do is make their advisers US attorneys so that way all their advice would be covered by attorney client privilege.

Hmm, so if I outline a plan on how to successfully acquire the parts to, construct, smuggle and detonate several 25 megaton hydrogen bombs inside say, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alaska, assorted red states, and then provided these plans to various groups with the motivation and resources to carry out the plan, the first amendment means I haven't conducted any crime whatsoever. Excellent.

Hmm, so if I outline a plan on how to successfully acquire the parts to, construct, smuggle and detonate several 25 megaton hydrogen bombs inside say, Texas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Alaska, assorted red states, and then provided these plans to various groups with the motivation and resources to carry out the plan, the first amendment means I haven't conducted any crime whatsoever. Excellent.

i have several such plans. 2 are posted in my blog.

The problem is with the representatives, however - the banks can't be forced to turn over the accounts for this.
If the US govt. could successfully prosecute the representatives, I'm sure they could have a go at the bank itself; aiding and abetting, conspiracy to commit, etc.

If the US govt. could successfully prosecute the representatives, I'm sure they could have a go at the bank itself; aiding and abetting, conspiracy to commit, etc.

aren't the banks under Swiss law ?
might be a tad hard.

If the US govt. could successfully prosecute the representatives, I'm sure they could have a go at the bank itself; aiding and abetting, conspiracy to commit, etc.
No, that wouldn't work. The bank is firmly on the Swiss ground.

They could only prosecute the representatives after demanding their extradition. Since about 10 years ago, US has an extradition treaty with Switzerland. I'm not sure if it applies in this case, however, such treaties often have limiting clauses.

But that is possible to do legally. Prosecuting a bank, not legally.

aren't the banks under Swiss law ?
might be a tad hard.

No, that wouldn't work. The bank is firmly on the Swiss ground.
If a foreign institution was breaking the law of the land with its representatives, I'm fairly sure they could be prosecuted, though perhaps not on a de facto basis.

let us not forget why Swiss banks are so secretive. they did so to prevent Nazi Germany from investigating Jewish accounts. So if your against Swiss banking secrecy your a Nazi and a genocide practitioner.

/godwin

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Pix/pictures/2009/01/14/maddoff460.jpg

"I'm Bernard Madoff, and I approve of this message."

If a foreign institution was breaking the law of the land with its representatives, I'm fairly sure they could be prosecuted, though perhaps not on a de facto basis.
It's not breaking any Swiss law, therefore it's not breaking any law.

If I was coordinating an operation helping people to get out of some third world country which they can't legally leave, into a civilized country of my residence (entering legally), I wouldn't be breaking any law. Said third world country wouldn't even have a legal case against me if I came there, for my actions were done outside their jurisdiction. And there's not a chance for them to have a shot at extradition.

It's not breaking any Swiss law, therefore it's not breaking any law.

If I was coordinating an operation helping people to get out of some third world country which they can't legally leave, into a civilized country of my residence (entering legally), I wouldn't be breaking any law. Said third world country wouldn't even have a legal case against me if I came there, for my actions were done outside their jurisdiction. And there's not a chance for them to have a shot at extradition.

How does that follow at all? If you were in said third world country breaking their laws by smuggling their citizens out of their country, they absolutely could punish you for violating their laws, and they absolutely would. These bankers weren't sitting in offices in Switzerland advising their clients how to break US law, they were doing it in the United States. There are literally dozens of cases from Singapore alone of foreign nationals being arrested and imprisoned for breaking the law while in Singapore.

we need a banking shield law in the US

How does that follow at all? If you were in said third world country breaking their laws by smuggling their citizens out of their country,
No, if I was in here, coordinating the operation, with field work done by my employees.

They could prosecute those employees if caught, but not demand my extradition.

Legally, even if once in a while I came into their country, but wasn't caught doing anything illegal there, they wouldn't have a case if their legal system was anything like Common or Civil law, i.e. didn't allow prosecution for actions outside its jurisdiction. Of course, they could bar entrance or make an illegal arrest, but that's another story.


These bankers weren't sitting in offices in Switzerland advising their clients how to break US law, they were doing it in the United States.
The specific advisors were doing it in the US. So US can try extradition, for the people who have been explicitly doing it in US.

But no case against the banks themselves. Even if they knowingly sent their employees to do it. No case even against the man who has ordered said employees to go to US and help the clients.

Also, the above is the worst-case scenario, applying only in the case of indiscriminate extradition.

If, as some posters have said, tax evasion is indeed not a crime under Swiss law, then US can't even legally demand extradition. That would break the doctrine of dual criminality, which says that extradition can only be granted if said action is a crime in both countries. If it isn't, the US case is nonexistent altogether. Otherwise, it's merely very weak.

Also, the above is the worst-case scenario, applying only in the case of indiscriminate extradition.

If, as some posters have said, tax evasion is indeed not a crime under Swiss law, then US can't even legally demand extradition. That would break the doctrine of dual criminality, which says that extradition can only be granted if said action is a crime in both countries. If it isn't, the US case is nonexistent altogether. Otherwise, it's merely very weak.

Swiss law distinguishes between tax fraud and tax evasion. the banks can only legally give information in cases of tax fraud( turning in false documents such as corporate earnings statements).

Swiss law distinguishes between tax fraud and tax evasion. the banks can only legally give information in cases of tax fraud( turning in false documents such as corporate earnings statements).
Then US has a very weak case for extradition of the advisors (depends on the treaty; this isn't a serious crime), and none at all for getting the information.

Without using extortion of course.

Then US has a very weak case for extradition of the advisors (depends on the treaty; this isn't a serious crime), and none at all for getting the information.

Without using extortion of course.

i guarantee the advisers new exactly what to say with out breaking the law only skirting it.

let us not forget why Swiss banks are so secretive. they did so to prevent Nazi Germany from investigating Jewish accounts. So if your against Swiss banking secrecy your a Nazi and a genocide practitioner.

/godwin


good lord it's over

good lord it's over

why do you hate the jews ??? are you Mel Gibson ?