Daily news, documents and intelligence about Offshore Financial Centers and those who conduct business in them that you will not find anywhere else.
RSS Feed Print
OCT.15 Deadline Swiss accounts/UBS a failure
Internal Administrator
Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011
Joined: 10/12/2010
Posts: 5779

Posted: 10/13/2009 8:44:19 AM

By: knightmare3000

it was announced in Houston Chronicle newspaper that this Thursday,October 15,2009 is the deadline to report Swiss accounts. it also stated UBS is slated to turnover the names of about 4,500 clients to US Treasury. furthermore, it states that some US clients ae gambling that their names are not on the list. all I can say is that it appears that UBS failed its clients in many ways:
a. by analogy to the actions other large banks in Zurich,most of us Americans had advanced notice of "something brewing about the accounts" as early as December,2008. without mentioning any names,my personal bank in Zurich advised US clients that a separate department would be established in one of its subsidiaries in another country. you could get a new account there and transfer assets you did not like that then they would sell off your Swiss account and send it anywhere you pleased. the bank in the the new country-which also shall remain nameless-- waived its usual personal appearance rule and local person to vouch for you rule .. you just got your passport either notarized by an American notary or visited a embassy/diplomatic mission/consultate of the new country anywhere in America. they relied on your Swiss bank officer to vouch for you. all completed in about 3 weeks. WHY DID NOT UBS do this for their clients? they have branches/subsidiaries in PANAMA and URUGUAY to transfer the American accounts from Switzerland. it would have been infinitely better than turning over 4,500 names to the US Treasury.
b. if for whatever reason,UBS could not discuss the matter with its US clients because of the legal proceedings going on in US District court in Miami,FL earlier this year,then why did not the lawyers/personal advisers of the US clients recommend that the US clients leave Switzerland? they should have realized the possible outcome of the proceedings rather than gamble on Swiss bank secrecy to save them. One of my other banks in Zurich--which also shall be nameless--solved this problem by getting rid of all US clients by September,2009. that way if they were forced to surrender the names of US clients,then they have no US clients to surrender. all of this done before any deadline. most legal adviser should have known the list of countries that would take in US clients under the circumstances ( e.g Austria,Monaco,Ghana,Cayman islands,Denmark,Bahamas,Hong Kong,Singapore,Andorra,Uruguay).

so I feel sorry for the 4,500 US clietns that are being surrendered. I do not recommend gambling on whether or not your name is or is not on the list. however, I do believe that UBS failed their clientele by analogy to the actions of other Swiss banks that advised their clients to leave as early as December,2008

Ironically,some smaller Swiss cantonal banks are not surrendering anyone and are not asking anyone to leave. it seems the focuses of these inquiries are the large banks in Zurich.( CREDIT SUISSE,UBS, SBC)

Finally if anyone is still panicky and has failed to heed any of the warnings on this message board, then I am told that Privat Invest AG bank in Salzburg, Austria does require a personal appearance and just has to look at your passport for a quick glance. it does not need a notary and does not need a local person to vouch for you. so it could still be possible to fly to Vienna,take the train to Salzburg and get an account very quickly if necessary.,

good luck,this message is meant for academic purposes and not intended for anyone to do anything illegal like criminal tax evasion or money laundering. thank you for listening

Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011

Posted: 10/13/2009 7:18:09 PM

By: David S. Lesperance

Just to put another nail in the coffin of knightmare's fantasy.

Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011

Posted: 10/13/2009 6:42:10 PM

By: David S. Lesperance

Since knightmare continues to spout dangerous hogwash, I will repost an earlier post to set the record straight.

Dear Knightmare: Your advice seems to avoid asking the receiptent "THE QUESTION"

I.E. "Are you going to be tax compliant?" or "Are you going to be non-tax compliant?"

If you are going to be compliant, then chose your jurisdiction taking into consideration the legislation (e.g. asset protection laws); history of jurisprudence of those laws; level of quality of necessary service providers (e.g. financial institutions, lawyers, accountants, corporate secretarial services etc.); and the effect (pro or con) of the treaty network.

If you are going to be non-compliant than you will constantly be looking over your shoulder (and will likely get caught) because your "secret" non-compliant account will come to the attention of the authorities as a result of:

a) International pressure against the jurisdiciton (e.g. G-20 vs. Switzerland, L'stein, Singapore etc. etc. etc.)

b) Government pressure against an institution (e.g. U.S. using Q.I regime against UBS, E.U against various jurisdicitions in newly beefed up European Savings Initiative); BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY

c) Whistleblowers: The LGT lesson was that stealing information pays VERY VERY well. You will need to deal with an institution which is large enough to appear stable. It will be computerized. Many people will have authorized and unauthorized access to your account information. Many will spend $40 on a USB key and copy that information for use if i) bonus is not big enough; ii) they have a difference of opinion on a performance appraisal; iii) their spouse loses their job; or iv) they are laid off.

Your continually saying that you can go to Bank X in Jurisdiction Y if you are an American is missing the most important point.

Are you being tax compliant or non-tax compliant? If the former, then many institutions in many jurisdictions will deal with you. Some institutions have made the business decision that the administrative costs of complying with U.S. laws is more expensive than the revenue generated by servicing anything but the UHNW U.S. clients. Others have simply increased the fees to deal with these additional costs.

If you are non-tax compliant and think you can find the "Unicorn-Bank" which is reliable and which will allow you to continue with your hidden non-compliant account despite the factors above, then all I can say is "Good luck with that".

David S. Lesperance
Barrister and Solicitor

Posted: Saturday, August 13, 2011

Posted: 10/13/2009 11:13:52 AM

By: Secret Offshore Accounts Are Stupid

Why not just disclose the existence of the account in the first place?

If you do not want the account in your own name, see an attorney about setting up some structure whereby the account can be reported by the entity, and all taxes paid on the money and all tax reporting made by the entity, but you can have distance from the money until you need it.

The problem with most of the people who are getting caught up in this Swiss banking mess is that they either (1) were too cheap or thought they could "do it yourself" in setting the account up and relied primarily upon secrecy instead of smart planning, or (2) they went to some idiot planner who talking them into something idiotic.

Offshore planning, including merely owning offshore accounts, should only be accomplished by going to a very, very good offshore planning attorney (and these are few and extremely hard to find, despite the number that beat their own drum as "experts" in offshore planning).


Jump to different Forum... 

We hunt for red flags in high-value, cross-border finance by monitoring offshore and onshore courts, regulatory actions, offering documents, and other sources - and email you the results.

View Recent Digests

Cayman Court Secrecy: A Huge Red Flag for Foreign Investors & Clients
David Marchant
As any fule kno, the biggest enemy of fraud, corruption, money laundering, and other forms of financial crime is transparency, while their best friend is secrecy. That's why the unprecedented mass sealing of cases that's taking place at the Financial Services Division of the Grand Court of the Cayman Islands is repugnant to anyone with a genuine concern for financial crime.