Slashdot Mirror


Nauru: Real life Kinakuta

23mcgee writes "Today's washington Post has a story about a small Island in the pacific named Nauru. After exhausting it single natural resource, geographically remote Nauru is reinventing itself as an offshore banking center that provides it's customers the means to hide their transactions -- an offshore haven similar to Kinakuta, the fictional data haven in a Slashdot favorite; Neil Stephenson's Cryptonomicon. "

162 comments

  1. offshore confusion by DuckWing · · Score: 1
    I've always been confused by hording dollars to offshore (or Swiss) accounts to avoid taxes, etc. How can it work. You're taxed on the money you make from your paycheck.


    I'm not sure about the US, but us Canadians have to declare any foreign income as well. So I'm confused.


    Can anyone enlighten me?

    --
    -- DuckWing
    1. Re:offshore confusion by rc-flyer · · Score: 1

      You can use this to hide illegal transactions, overseas transactions (for example, income from a foreign country), etc. I'm sure others can come up with more ideas.

      --
      -- Error: Cannot find file REALITY.SYS - Universe halted, please reboot!
    2. Re:offshore confusion by georgeha · · Score: 4

      I've always been confused by hording dollars to offshore (or Swiss) accounts to avoid taxes, etc. How can it work. You're taxed on the money you make from your paycheck.

      I'm not an expert on offshore banking, but I'm pretty sure that if you're drawing a paycheck, you're probably not a candidate.

      However, if you have a large income strictly in cash (10s, 20, 50s, 100s), once you find a way to get that cash overseas, without federal knowledge (aka money laundering), you can then safely deposit in your offshore bank account.

      There are other situations I can imagine. I'll give your company this contract, at this price, but you have to sweeten the pot with a deposit in this foreign account, and for your own sake you better draw it out of a unaccountable fund (hush fund), maybe lots of petty cash withdrawals, some funky depreciation schedules, oddly priced sales of new equipment, etc.

      To use the Cryptonomicon example, a Taiwanese clone maker solds thousands of PC's with unlicensed MW software. All the profits were lost apparently (a good accountant can do this, I know a little of accounting practices, and it seems like fiction writing at times), but they could have ended up in an offshore bank.

      In short, if you're a working stiff pulling down a weekly or monthly salary, there isn't much advantage to an offshore bank. If you're a drug dealer/smuggler or high placed government or corporate official, you might have need of sucha thing.

      George

    3. Re:offshore confusion by emmons · · Score: 1

      About time someone other than the first post kiddies get the first post!

      I believe using offshore anonymous bank accounts are generally used for illegal or shady purposes, therefore I don't think tax laws matter all that much. (am I wrong?) The money can't be traced and therefore can't be classified as earned income.

      -----

      --
      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
    4. Re:offshore confusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes you're taxed on your paycheck, but you're also taxed on capital gains. An offshore account can prevent that.

    5. Re:offshore confusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not everyone gets "normal" paychecks. I have been selling Marijuana for many many years now, and offshore banking is an excellent way to keep the feds off your back.

    6. Re:offshore confusion by antizeus · · Score: 1
      I've wondered about this myself, and while I'm still pretty ignorant of what actually happens, I have made some guesses. It seems to me that the best use of such bank accounts is for money that is gained through non-standard means which the government does not monitor. Suspicion would be raised if your account with a regular US bank were to get large infusions which weren't compatible with any reported income. Note that US banks are required by law to inform the government about transactions over US$10,000. If the government notices this discrepency, they may very well start investigating you, and you may be subject to such inconveniences as assessment of taxes, prosecution, etc.

      I figure I'll have at least one offshore bank account eventually, but I haven't developed a need for one yet. Or maybe I'm lying about that.

      --
      -- $SIGNATURE
    7. Re:offshore confusion by BlackSol · · Score: 2

      Even the working stiffs pay income tax on intrest earned.
      With an off shore bank account such as this you could earn your money (paying income tax) then transfer it the the offshore account.

      From the offshore account you invest it. Intrest earned goes back to the offshore account. No tax's on the intrest.

      Yes this would probably be illegal.

      --
      $sig=$1 if($brain =~ /idea\s+(.*)/i);
    8. Re:offshore confusion by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Offshore banking is for people drawing paychecks too. Especially for us europeans constantly being sucked dry by the government. At this moment Im paying roughtly 75% of my personal income in tax. Say I want to save for a rainy day - you think I would put the money in the juristiction of states that rob you blind and are proud of it? The only way to have a fairly good chance of not being robbed blind is to keep your stash offshore. And the fees? - for internet banking with my bank= zilch. If I want a VISA card tied to my offshore account - its slightly more expensive than if I get one in my country. With the expansionist attitudes of governments in Europe, we better save for our old age - no economy can survive such a tax pressure in the long run.

    9. Re:offshore confusion by Cactus_03 · · Score: 1
      Some countries have 'wealth' taxes. Obviously not much money stays in those countries.

      Hidden money also helps in case you're afraid of the IRS, who are all-powerful even when in error.

      It can also be protection from frivolous lawsuits. The rich get sued a lot.

    10. Re:offshore confusion by zot+o'connor · · Score: 1

      In the US you can't hide direct connections to any bank from the IRS. But you shift the money to an entity that you "control" vs. "own." A offshore corp that you "control" can hire you and give you company benifits (VISA, Car, House), but you do not own the assets.

      This makes you more "judgement proof." You see that term after a lawsuit. Two recenet examples: O.J. and the web-site anti-abortion people. Both had large Judgements against them, both own very little.

      You can play larger games, mostly to protect yourself from suits (in the US it has replaced kidnapping).

      Tax Evasion is illegal, Tax Avoidance is not. Merely not paying a tax that does not apply is not illegal (seem obvious to everyone but the IRS). Tax avoidance can be done onshore (401K, write-offs, proper planning, mail order) for most people, but asset protection is much tougher.

      Since most people making more than $50K are in a high probablility of lawsuits, Offshore Protection makes sense.

      So while it makes great headlines to say drug dealers are banking offshore, the reality is that most of the money there is 100% legal. Most offshore banks are much more stringent on knowing where the money is coming from than US banks. Once the money is moved offshore, and you no longer "own" it but "control" it, it is harder to get to rom predatory lawsuits.

      An example: You run a business that nets $100K a year, and has $1M in assets. You would owe corp taxes on all $1M and the $100K (assume your salary is part of that). It is all you since you own the business. By having an Offshore entity own the business rather than you, your $ liability is lessened. Then if you hit a kid on a bicycle by being parked in a legal spot (happened to a cousin) and the parents sued you, they could only sue "you" for your salary and your personal assets. The business is owned by external entities. The entities would be structured so you can claim you do not "own" them.

      Now to add some fun you have that offshore entity "loan" capital to the business. Then the business would actually have a net liability of $loan amount - $assets. You can structure things so that the business would be a loss if someone sued it. That should scare off most of the predatory lawsuits.

      This is set up legally and carefully. There are a fair amount of restrictions on what you can and can't do, but there are many advantages. Most of them deal with privacy, some with taxation.

      I've learned most of this from a client:

      http://www.offshorecorpservices.com/

      They have a book that explains things (for sale). Unfortunately the web site is slim due to issues concering legal aspects of advertising services. (the above company is a consultanting firm, not a bank).


      --

      --
      Zot O'Connor
    11. Re:offshore confusion by akey · · Score: 1

      It's a method to keep from having to pay US taxes on money made outside of the USA. The tax havens don't have to report transactions (large transactions in the US are reported by the banks to the gov't) to the US gov't, hence the US can't prove that you made any money == can't collect taxes on it. A lot of small island nations offer "citizenship" in their countries for a small fee.

      --

      ---
      "Go Metallica. Die RIAA." -- Linus Torvalds
  2. Real and virtual worlds tied together by Chris+Worth · · Score: 2

    I think this demonstrates that much as we might want the Net to be sovereign, the real world and real geography-specific legal systems are going to dictate the way the web evolves. Nauru's a start, though - an anonymizer for cash! Now that's what I need when my 52% French tax bill comes due.

    --
    - Read fiction at www.espressostories.com
    1. Re:Real and virtual worlds tied together by jsm2 · · Score: 2

      I would guess that you're best off biting the bullet and paying French tax. If Nauru keeps advertising itself like this, it will get put on the blacklist of money laundering centres. If that happens, it will be next to impossible to introduce money stored in Nauru to the banking system of any country located where you might possibly want to spend it.

      Unless you go through illegal channels of course. But money laundering is a very expensive business -- if someone had a laundering scheme which would provide an "anonymizer for cash", and you ended up keeping 48% of the money, then that would be regarded as a very efficient scheme indeed.

      In general, havens are not usually worthwhile for straightforward tax avoidance -- they're more for your Kalashnikovs and Kokayne/IMF loans crowd.

      And if you're paying 52% straight down the line, I can probably give you the name of a man who could save you some.

      jsm

  3. The Dentist by Mr_Plow · · Score: 1

    Quick, we gotta get our hands on it before the dentist does.

    SIR, ARE YOU FUCKING WITH ME, SIR?


    ------------------------------------------------ ----------

    1. Re:The Dentist by tweek · · Score: 1

      This is far from off topic. Read the book and it might make a tad bit of sense ;) If anything some kindly moderator mark it up to funny. Or hell even witty.
      "We hope you find fun and laughter in the new millenium" - Top half of fastfood gamepiece

      --
      "Fighting the underpants gnomes since 1998!" "Bruce Schneier knows the state of schroedinger's cat"
    2. Re:The Dentist by Q*bert · · Score: 1
      Don't worry, I know Enoch Root is hanging around somewhere ... I've seen him posting on Slashdot. Enoch, where are you?


      Beer recipe: free! #Source
      Cold pints: $2 #Product

  4. Or Switzerland for that matter by babbage · · Score: 1
    Of course they have other resources (chocolate & swatches mainly haha), but they already do the anonymous banking thing, right?

    Many countries are doing this already -- Dubai in the United Arab Emirates is trying to move away from dependence on oil reserves towards, as here, banking and finance, to cite an example off the top of my head. Can this kind of thing work everywhere? Bleed the land dry, then run the economy by skimming cash off other lands?



    1. Re:Or Switzerland for that matter by rnelsonee · · Score: 1

      Unfortunately, the Swiss Banks have stopped using numbered (number-only) accouts. This was done upon the request of the U.S. so they could investigate potential suspects easier. From what I can tell, the Swiss are becoming less stalwart in their privacy issues, which allows places like this to fill the void.

      Rick

    2. Re:Or Switzerland for that matter by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That is true.
      Austria is also stepping into the void.
      As is Luxembourg.

    3. Re:Or Switzerland for that matter by jsm2 · · Score: 1

      Dubai in the United Arab Emirates is trying to move away from dependence on oil reserves towards, as here, banking and finance

      Dubai, of course, is not a poor country -- the "banking and finance" they are moving towards is based on fifty years' worth of investment of their own oil profits, and they will certainly not be screwing around with money laundering (although they probably will have strong banking secrecy -- Gulf State accounts are usually highly secretive, mainly because they're so big).

      In general, when you see an annoucement like this, it's because some chancer in New York, London or (all too often) Vancouver has sweet-talked the local government into letting him run his pet scheme from there, kidding them that they will have a thriving financial sector. The money never, ever shows up in the local economy, apart from a few bribes to the Finance Minister.

      jsm

  5. Re:offshore confusion -answers by Dredd13 · · Score: 2
    There are several possibilities:

    1.) Many countries (such as the Cayman Islands) will offer you residency if you purchase property in the Islands. If you've got enough money to hide in the Caymans this isn't a problem. From that point you're a Citizen of THERE, and not of the US and no longer bound by silly IRS codes.

    2.) Offshore banking makes it hard for the IRS to prove income. Transactions greater than $10,000 to/from a US bank get reported directly to the IRS. That's not the case in the "money havens", since they are not bound by US law. You could transfer monies to and from your brokerage account (in another country, England maybe? Who knows?) where you could make capital gains on investments, but the IRS has no way of obtaining the information.

    Hope this helps clear up the confusion.

  6. hehe...bird crap by PHroD · · Score: 0

    i remember hearing about this country in 9th grade...its like the smallest country in the world (either size or population...cant remember) and their chief export was bird sh1t (for fertilizer i guess). I guess theyre out of that now and need a new income


    "There is no spoon" - Neo, The Matrix

    1. Re:hehe...bird crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Smallest country is "Seaworld" (It has a longer title, I don't recall it.) Was founded when a retired army officer took over a British sea fort and declared independence. He shot at the navy when they went to try and reclaim it and has been a country ever since. (Although Britain doesn't recognise them :-) Has a population of two, now the kids have left home... issues his own passports & everything...


      [sillywiz]

    2. Re:hehe...bird crap by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry "Sealand", not "Seaworld". http://www.io.com/~jlauten/nation/how-to.html

  7. Whoever moderated this... by Foogle · · Score: 1
    Probably never read the book.

    -----------

    "You can't shake the Devil's hand and say you're only kidding."

  8. not a new thing by mrzaph0d · · Score: 2

    offshore banking has been around for awhile. i remember that in The Firm (book not the movie) the Cayman Islands were used as the bank to launder money. but there's also firms that specialize in anonymity. They can forward mail, voicemail, email for you and set up anonymous accounts in different countries that have less restrictive laws about banking. I'd love to get an offshore account (even comes with a Visa bank card), but the $10,000 initial deposit requirement is a little steep.

    --
    this is just a placeholder till i send back my real sig from the future.
    1. Re:not a new thing by georgeha · · Score: 1

      I'd love to get an offshore account (even comes with a Visa bank card), but the $10,000 initial deposit requirement is a little steep.

      Even after you get the free toaster?

      George

    2. Re:not a new thing by j+a+w+a+d · · Score: 1
      I thought that $10,000 was to simply *establish* a bank...

      Nauru profits by charging fees: for example, $5,680 to establish an offshore bank and as much as $4,980 every year after that to keep the registration active.

      .. Or are you referring to something else?

      Anyway, $10k to establish a bank is nothing. Am I misreading this?

      --
      i dont display scores, and my threshhold is -1. post accordingly.
      Discuss /. policies
    3. Re:not a new thing by mistabobdobalina · · Score: 1

      account! bank ACCOUNT!

      --
      -- your knees hurt, don't they?
    4. Re:not a new thing by smackdaddy · · Score: 1

      I think you can get a Swiss bank account with an initial deposit of $5000 if you want an oversea's account.

    5. Re:not a new thing by jsm2 · · Score: 2

      Anyway, $10k to establish a bank is nothing.

      No, but there's more to it than the Post put up. US$10K is the administrative fee to set up the bank. If you want to use your bank for any actual banking business, then you would have to pay in capital of about US$1mn, or nobody but nobody would deal with you. If you didn't want to do that, but wanted to use the bank as a front company for tax-driven transactions, you'd still probably have to stump up, in order to fall outside the "thin company" regs.

      So $10K would basically buy you a brass plate on a wall (brass plate and rental of wall extra), and the right to call yourself a "bank" which can be useful if you're planning any Nigerian advance-fee frauds. Or if you're laundering money on the cheap, and just want to extend a paper trail (rather than being concerned to create a bank which can carry out transactions with any appearance of legitimacy).

      But for that privilege, $10K is indeed cheap. Which is why I would guess that "Incorporated in Nauru" will soon become the best way known to man to get yourself blackballed from any reputable banking system.

      jsm

    6. Re:not a new thing by FIGJAM · · Score: 1

      This is good justification for my "shameless plug" posted elsewhere here. US$1125 gets you an offshore credit card. There is nothing illegal about it. It is only illegal if you do not declare it in your income tax.

      www.exxcomm.com

      did you know 2/3rds of the entire planets transactions are made offshore?
      Offshore != illegal

      --
      Do your best, hope for the best, suspect the worst.
    7. Re:not a new thing by Q*bert · · Score: 1
      Ha ha ha, but when I deposit my ill-gotten gains from my super-elite open-source software Mafia, I'll be one of the most feared men in America!

      My plan is nearly to fruition... Bwahahahahaaaaa!


      Beer recipe: free! #Source
      Cold pints: $2 #Product

  9. Why this ain't Kinakuta by Enoch+Root · · Score: 2
    Having a place where you can put money in anonymously is nothing new. I mean, the Swiss do it, more or less. So they're not novel.

    This would be big news if Nauru decided to alleviate the bank transactions on the island of any international control, including themselves. That was the major point in Cryptonomicon; that the only way to create a true data haven is to put it somewhere outside the influence of any country, period.

    That's when it would severely screw up the world's economy, because a perfectly anonymous electronic currency would be untaxable and uncheckable. That is, even by the bank itself, which is not the case of Swiss banks.

    And I still think the best place to put a data haven is on the Moon. :)

    "Knowledge = Power = Energy = Mass"

    1. Re:Why this ain't Kinakuta by Bill+Currie · · Score: 2
      And I still think the best place to put a data haven is on the Moon. :)
      No thanks, too easy to find and nuke. A far better idea would be to have multiple automated havens orbiting the sun in random, unkown orbits (possibly shifting over time), constantly communicating with each other to keep things up to date (lots of redundancy) and to make them harder to track. Sending the data to these havens would be relatively easy: just broadcast it (with heaps of redundancy again, I don't think acks would work). The unfortunate thing is that getting data out again might be a problem.
      --

      Bill - aka taniwha
      --
      Leave others their otherness. -- Aratak

  10. Well... by Enoch+Root · · Score: 1
    Nauru profits by charging fees: for example, $5,680 to establish an offshore bank and as much as $4,980 every year after that to keep the registration active. With markups, the prices advertised by middlemen run about $20,000 to get started.

    Heh heh. I could put a penny in a Nauru anonymous bank account, and no one would be the wiser!

    Let's just say this bank is not for you and me. They cost more than I had in a bank account my whole life.

    "Knowledge = Power = Energy = Mass"

  11. A real smooth talking leader.. by Otter · · Score: 2

    My favorite part is:

    Nauru's president, Rene Harris, also declined to comment on the island's offshore services. "What's it got to do with you?" he asked angrily before hanging up.

    The disturbing thing is that after years of Bill Clinton biting his lip and trying to look remorseful, an attitude like that seems almost refreshing.

    1. Re:A real smooth talking leader.. by dillon_rinker · · Score: 2

      an attitude like that seems almost refreshing. Not just refreshing, but quite frankly, justified. The US and Russia are complicit in any fraud that comes about. We're talking about a little island whose only resource is fossilized birdie doo. If they were really a problem, they'd lose their independence in a second. Frowning and saying "How awful, someone should do something" is TOTALLy unconvincing when you could end the problem within 24 hours. Given that the world super-powers don't really care, I don't think it's anyone else's concern.

      On a similar note, I don't think it's that different from a state deciding they'll make it cheap and easy to form a corporation, or that they won't charge income tax. Suddenly, all the other states begin losing income as businesses flock to the finance-friendly states.

    2. Re:A real smooth talking leader.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The superpowers won't take out such a place because it's useful that it's around. How else can the CIA fund covert operations with money from selling cocaine in the US if there aren't laundering operations like this to process cash through?

      Also, the Multinational corporations are generally above any national law. So they need places like this to park money so they can continue to stay above the law.

      I don't see any government taking out havens like Nauru anytime soon.

  12. What happens when... by superape23 · · Score: 1

    The US decides that they don't want so many people to be hiding their money here and they have a little police action against Nauru. I mean literally just send in a couple hundred marines and helicopters and take the place over, given the current ability of us presidents to use military force without congressional or UN (haha) approval I really don't think this is so farfeched. I'm all for undermining the us tax structure but I'm worried that if all of these tax shelters are used by mobsters then the rest of us common sensible self deterministic anarchists are never going to get to use them properly. Here is my suggestion, set up the pr functions on the island, get a big international data cable strung out there, then sink a big concrete submarine down there and keep all the data and money underwater, where a bunch of marines and helicopters can't just waltz in and get it. Then this would be a lot more like Cryptonomicon. and lord knows we need the world to be a lot more like that.

    1. Re:What happens when... by hippo · · Score: 1

      There is no money there, just a president who will do anything for a quiet life. Just invading would not make the phony banks dissapear. Invading Liberia would not make all those dodgy shipping companies suddenly spend lots of money to make their ships safe.

    2. Re:What happens when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They don't even have to send the Marines. All the actual $ is in NYC. All they have to do is lean on the NYC banks and have their accounts set to $0.00. Much cheaper than a police action --although I'm sure they'd send in a *few* marines to provide the sheeple with a diverting amusment.

    3. Re:What happens when... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lord knows we need the world to be a lot more like that.

      Lord knows some of you can't cope in the real world, so you wish you could run away to one of Neil Stephenson's fabrications.

      Sorry, you're being shipping to "The Big U", though. You liked "Animal House" in college, I hope.

      heheh

    4. Re:What happens when... by superape23 · · Score: 1

      certainly invading them would stop them from keeping money for people. At the very least they have an account system and records that could be
      impounded and have their lines of communication shut off. It's no the same as a ship registry it's got to be a physical place. That's the whole point of a data haven or tax shelter, the way the work is they physically reside in a place with non-disclosure laws, other than that it's jsut a bank. A bank can't function w/o a staff and a phone and a database.

      so there

    5. Re:What happens when... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      But they don't need physical defenses. The bank doesn't exist on the island, and the island itself is part of the U.N. If the U.S. waltzes in and tries to take it over, they'll get themselves into a lot of trouble.

    6. Re:What happens when... by superape23 · · Score: 1

      I don't wanna flame war but this kind of thing really irks me, why don't you post registered if you are going to make insulting comments? how can I even care about your point of view if you are too scared to identify yourself by a handle? on the internet? you're safe kid, it's ok.

      "Lord knows we need the world to be a lot more like that. "

      all I meant by that is alot of us here on slashdot enjoy a fertile imagination, if the world was more like cryptonomicon it would be:
      A. Not so banal
      b.Funny
      c. Have data havens


      why don't you check who's afraid of reality when you can't put a name to your silly little comments.

      (sorry to the rest of you. just can't stand people who get off on ruining others good times.)

    7. Re:What happens when... by superape23 · · Score: 1

      like when the us waltzed into former yugoslavia?
      like when the us waltzed into grenada?
      or panama?
      The un can't do anything. The un is a figure head.
      the us doesn't even pay it's dues. The us can't get into big trouble becuase without nato there is no un.

      regarding the fact that the bank isn't even there, explain that to me and I'll shut up.

      there is a long history of one country blockcading or invading another for financial reasons. If you asked carl marx that is the only reason.
      but you can't ask him cause he's dead.

    8. Re:What happens when... by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 1

      The U.S. would have to dissolve the island nation or seize political control of it in order to have direct control over the laws which permit the bank to exist. If you recall, the U.S doesn't even do such things to non-member nations. There are some rules which they do take seriously... for instance the one which prevented them from taking Saddam out of Iraq... which I believe is part of thier constitution.

      Despite the instances you describe above, I think the U.S. does not think lightly of attacks on U.N. member nations... much less toppling their governments and taking control of their banks.

      As for the physically existing in any significant capacity on an island with a weak communications infrastructure and limited access by air... that's just silly. They probably operate much like cruise ships. Offices all over the world, but they pay taxes and work by the rules of foreign governments. It's even covered quite clearly in the article:

      Tracking Nauru banks is difficult, the State Department report said, because all "have the same post office box."

      The only visible presence offshore firms have on Nauru may be a wall display in a hallway of the Nauru Agency Corp., where their names are engraved in plastic.

      As a practical matter, it is only in the form of ledger entries that offshore dollars ordinarily pass through Nauru. The way the international banking system works, funds are electronically transferred to and from "correspondent accounts" that the Nauru-registered banks maintain in distant money centers such as New York.

    9. Re:What happens when... by superape23 · · Score: 1

      Got it, I see... you are right that they don't have to actually be there to operate, but they do have to communicate and they do have to have a staff. If the us (for example) found this to be a real threat they could say there is a large amount of money being held for osama bin laden (FOR EXAMPLE) in the accounts of this island, the banks will not release the money and it is being used to fund terrorist attacks again the US. Since Bin Laden is hidden in the middle east we want to cut off his supply of money, the bank won't let us stop the account so we are going to take over the bank and hold it, because they are aiding and abeting a terrorist. That is not too far fetched.. I think. (altho bin ladens money is with sympathetic governments so change his name for another bogeyman)

      as to the us not wanting to topple governments and take over their banks, the us toppled alot of governments in south america in the eighties..

      see also the cruise missle strikes against syria in retaliation of the bombing of the us embassy in africa, that was in direct violation of many many un laws, but it happened anyway and the us never got in any trouble.

      Not to stress this too much, but the us holds all the cards with the un. And they didn't take saddam out of iraq becuase it was not a goal of that war to do so. the goal was to protect oil reserves of us allies. This is proven by the fact that the anti-saddam freedom fighters were abandoned as soon as saddam sued for peace. And there is nothing in the constitution that:
      "..prevented them from taking Saddam out of Iraq..."

      there is, I believe, a us law that forbids the assasination of the rulers of foreign powers. But
      that law has been broken by proxy many a time (check with the cia for more info)

      The US does what it wants, it pays lipservice to the un and then moves on as it see's fit. That is
      how I feel, but I am very willing to look at evidence to the contrary and pronounce myself wrong.
      thanks for your comments

  13. Not quite Kinakuta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Their secrecy is based on their banking law, just like other offshore accounts. They don't base it on public-key encryption, and they don't have their own digital currency backed by gold.

    1. Re:Not quite Kinakuta by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Here's the link: http://www.offshorebanking4u.com/. On their application they say they cooperate with authorities to prevent fraud. However if you click around they do provide anonymous accounts for $5000 initial deposit. Also they accept deposits in e-gold.

  14. Slashdot focus by Non-Prophet · · Score: 1

    I have to ask: What does this have to do with the normal topics of /.?
    Just a very loose tie-in with encryption.
    Rob really needs to reel it in.
    /. is wandering farther and farther every day.

    1. Re:Slashdot focus by Zoltar · · Score: 1

      Hmmm... I disagree...I find thsi kind of thing interesting as I'm guessing many other "nerds" do. so it seems to fit quite well. I wouldn't mind seeing more of this kind of stuff, I get burned out on all of the Linux/Unix/etc stuff somtimes. Maybe Rob should start a new section ...something that deals with the frings nerd stuff.. like this..

    2. Re:Slashdot focus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My mathematics research is potentially very
      applicable to crypto. Not all geeks are
      primarily into hacking systems engineering
      problems with respect to software and hardware
      combinations for Linux: some of us are metamathematcians, information theorists, cybernetic systems theorists, etc.

      Crypto is a hot topic because it is socially relevant as well as mathematically interesting.

    3. Re:Slashdot focus by A+Big+Gnu+Thrush · · Score: 2

      /. has a focus?

      I thought we got rid of that years ago.

      focus!

      hocus focus

      Just two quick examples of Rob reeling it in from this category alone.

      /. needs focus like I need a real job.

    4. Re:Slashdot focus by orz · · Score: 1

      You didn't notice the "stuff that matters" part?

  15. Duuuude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not everyone gets "normal" paychecks. I have been selling Marijuana for many many years now, and offshore banking is an excellent way to keep the feds off your back.

    So, like, when's your harvest party? I just got some kind Dead CDRs in the mail, 6/30/74, I'll pick up some Sierra Nevada, bring some guacamole and chips, and we'll parrrrrty!

    1. Re:Duuuude by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I don't "paaarty"

  16. OS banking by jkirby · · Score: 2

    I like the idea of tax reform better than OS hording. Imagine dribbling your money back in at 10K chunks... Naaahhh.. Tax reform is the way to go. You guys do vote ; don't you? Jamey

    --
    Jamey Kirby
    1. Re:OS banking by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 2
      If I was ever to consider an offshore account, it wouldn't be from tax concerns - while I dislike the income tax for its privacy invasiveness, USAmericans pay low taxes compared to other nations. (Though there are still many changes I'd like to see - a general shift towards consumption taxes, raise the taxes on capital gains for absentee ownership and other forms of unearned income while cutting payroll taxes, and direct tax credits (rather than deductions) for charitable contributions, among others. But I ain't holding my breath.)

      If I had substantial assests, I'd be using them to make myself a royal pain in the ass to the powers that be. I'd therefore be concerned about making someone's shit list and having the hammer of civil forfeiture - whereby the state can take anything and everything you own without even charging you with a crime, much allowing you a trial by a jury - directed against me.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    2. Re:OS banking by Cid+Highwind · · Score: 1

      Do you really believe that the policies of the US government have anything at all to do with what the voters want?

      --
      0 1 - just my two bits
    3. Re:OS banking by Field+Marshall+Stack · · Score: 1

      Consumption taxes? How you gonna set it up so it's not regressive?
      --
      "HORSE."

      --
      "HORSE."
      -Flaming Carrot
  17. This is a good thing... by binarybits · · Score: 1

    It is good for people to have a means to keep their transactions private from prying eyes. Combine this with encryption, and hopefully we'll soon have a financial system in which it's impossible for the Feds to keep track of our money no matter what they do. This has great implications for the future of the tax burden: the Federal government will simply run out of money and be forced to cut back. Most of the times, "money laundering" means hiding the proceeds of drug deals. Drugs should be legal anyway, so I don't have a problem with drug dealers using this method to hide their transactions. There are some crimes that legitimately should be stopped (swuch as hiring a hit man, but there are other means of catching those criminals, and I don't think it's worth endangering our financial security for the small number of cases wheretighter controls would catch criminals.

  18. slashdot is everything geek by h1cks · · Score: 1

    Instead of providing a constant stream of 'how to pimp out your linux box' articles slashdot has a broader base. Thats why i visit. I enjoy articles with 'loose tie-ins' because they are intressting. Everything geek.

    --
    "There is a holy mistaken zeal in politics and religion, by convincing others we convince ourselves" -Junius
  19. So where do I keep my pr0n? by jblackman · · Score: 2

    A pacific island paradise for offshore banking is a pretty cool idea, but I'm wondering when we'll see data havens in the strictest sense of the word.

    Though it seems like a lot of the need for data storage in a legally-neutral locale could be alleviated by strong crypto, I still suspect that one day, we'll see something along the lines of vast server farms operating in jurisdictions largely untouchable by traditional institutions of law and order. What might some of the applications be? Aside from the obvious use indicated by the subject ;)

    Perhaps when coupled with highly secure (and secret) financial transactions, the black market might find itself with a whole new dimension...

    -jay

    1. Re:So where do I keep my pr0n? by Bald+Wookie · · Score: 1

      What might some of the applications be?

      One of the prime applications could be encrypted message archival. Lets say that you dont want the DOJ/FBI/ATF snooping in your company's old email. You could delete it, but then you lose the ability to refer to it again. You could encrypt it and keep it around, but I bet some judge can force you to cough up the key. Sticking it offshore in an unfriendly jurisdiction may help. Just keep it away from the Church of $cientology.

      The second application would be for housing content that is not legal or welcome in some jurisdictions. This could include some forms of hate speech, anti-government propaganda, techniques for manufacturing drugs, and of course pr0n. It may also be a good place to put crypto software. Damn, I hate lumping crypto into that group.

      My favorite application would be an encrypted chain of proxy servers and anonymous remailers. Paranoia, sweet paranoia. Gotta go, the black helicopters are circling again.

      -BW

  20. Tracing Nauru Banks... by Pasty+Drone · · Score: 2

    ...is not easy...

    From the article:
    Tracking Nauru banks is difficult, the State Department report said, because all "have the same post office box." The only visible presence offshore firms have on Nauru may be a wall display in a hallway of the Nauru Agency Corp., where their names are engraved in plastic.

    So the trick is to open your own BANK, not just an account with one of the banks...

    Check this out:
    In 1998, $70 billion was transferred from Russian banks to accounts of banks chartered in Nauru, primarily to evade taxes, Victor Melnikov, deputy chairman of the Russian central bank, said in an interview yesterday...The estimated volume of Nauru's Russian capital flow is so staggering as to strain credulity, some analysts said. In comparison, Russia's total exports amounted to only $74 billion last year, according to the International Monetary Fund.

    How about a Bank of Andover/Slashdot incorporated in Nauru?

    --diva

    --
    diva Pasty Drone NewsTrolls, Inc.
  21. I wonder... by Howard+Beale · · Score: 1

    how much do they charge for an ATM card??

  22. The big question is... by wsb · · Score: 1

    ...will they be using Finux for their datahaven?

    W S B - transmitting from the beyond...
    --
    WSB
  23. Some thoughts... by jd · · Score: 2
    This -might- work. The Swiss banks have been under enormous pressure to back off the anonymous account stance for ages, and the Nazi gold that was found there (a few tens of billions of $'s worth) certainly didn't help their case. The Swiss Government seems to be more sympathetic to other nations than it's merchants, too.

    With Switzerland no longer the totally safe refuge it once was for tax exiles, the "instantaneously rich", and other such folk, it wasn't going to be long before someone started up an alternative.

    It's a pity that it doesn't sound like it's 100% computerised, complete with ultra-strong encryption, but rather a low-tech system. That leaves it very vulnerable, especially to armed nations, or larger criminal organisations. Even the locals might get a tad greedy.

    With electronic currancy, there's nothing physical to steal. This reduces the incentive to level the buildings, demolish the safes, and generally make a mess of the place. Physical storage, though, doesn't have that. There's something to see, something to take, and that is worrying. For them, anyway. Doesn't bother me, as I'll never have enough money to make it worth putting there.

    I expect one of three things, in their first 2-3 years of operation: An Island-wide civil war, an invasion by a foreign power (possibly the US, though France has never shown itself as caring of national sovereignty, as the New Zealanders discovered), or a heist that dwarfs Brinks-Matt and the Great Train Robbery combined.

    --
    It's a small world and it smells funny; I'd buy another if it wasn't for the money; Take back what I paid (SoM)
  24. Re: money laundering by Mendax+Veritas · · Score: 2
    find a way to get that cash overseas, without federal knowledge (aka money laundering)
    Quibble: Money laundering is not simply getting money out of the country without anyone noticing. Money laundering involves getting it back into the country in such a way that it appears to be legitimate income. This is important if you have a large amount of money derived from illegal activities.

    One simple way of laundering money is to get yourself one of these anonymous offshore bank accounts, then create a fictitious offshore company that hires you to perform expensive consulting work. You have really hired yourself, but it's hard to tell that's what has happened, and harder still to prove it. So you then submit work records and bills to the bogus company and get paid. Your income appears to be legitimate. Of course, this means you have to pay income tax on it, but at least you get to keep the rest, and you can pass an IRS audit with flying colors.

    This is great for relatively small amounts of money (say, up to a few million). There are much more sophisticated games you can play with things like currency futures trading if you really need to launder massive sums.

    There was a really interesting book (now out of print) called Power On Earth by Nick Tosches (New York: Arbor House, c. 1986) which covered the story of the Italian banker Michele Sindona, who was reputed to have ties to the Mafia and, by his own admission, knew some pretty shady characters. At one point in the book, Sindona gives a good overview of what money laundering is (and isn't) and several ways it can be done.

  25. fossilized bird droppings, Huh??? by blizzard · · Score: 1

    I never knew there was such big market in fossilized bird droppings. Who would have thought that an entire islands ecomony was based on bird shit.

    1. Re:fossilized bird droppings, Huh??? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1
      I never knew there was such big market in fossilized bird droppings. Who would have thought that an entire islands ecomony was based on bird shit.

      One word: fertilizer.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    2. Re:fossilized bird droppings, Huh??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Oh bullshit, who would use it for something like that?!

  26. Thanks by georgeha · · Score: 2

    I wasn't totally sure about the particular's about money laundering, other than it was a way of taking money of dubious origin, and then somehow making it appear to be legitimate income.

    George

  27. Sterling had it first. by regs · · Score: 2

    Not to in any way diminish Mr. Stephenson, who is one hell of an author, he was not the first to come up with the concept of the "Data haven". As early as 1988, Bruce Sterling imagined the concept with his Jamaican "Data Pirates" in Islands in the Net.


    However, Neil does get points for predicting the right hemisphere. :)



    --
    --

    --
    "In Cyberspace, no one can hear you be sarcastic"
    1. Re:Sterling had it first. by The+Apocalyptic+Lawn · · Score: 1

      Even better, if I recall it right, Nauru was actually mentioned as one of the data heavens. Only once, I think, though.

      - da Lawn

      --
      't used to be LawnMOWER, really...
    2. Re:Sterling had it first. by beachy · · Score: 1

      Likely as not... I picked up Holy Fire since Sterling was so cool in his interview. Tonight on the subway home I ran across this passage (p 287):

      "They had found the physical source of Warshaw's palace: it was datastriped through a series of servers in the Pacific island of Nauru."

      The palace referred to is the one Mia/Maya inherited at the beginning of the book.

  28. I don't want to get off on a rant here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...but there are five grammar errors in that blurb. Write what you mean, and mean what you write.

  29. Not Helpful To Us "Wage Slaves" by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 4
    The "offshore account" isn't terribly helpful to those of us that are employed; the money that comes to us has ample causes to be disclosed to organizations like the Internal Revenue Service (US), Inland Revenue Service (UK), or Revenue Canada (guess?).

    Offshore accounts are useful in keeping transfers of funds hidden once that money is sitting offshore.

    This would be useful for:

    • Making payments for questionable activities such as sales/purchases of illegal substances
    • Making payments for "consulting services."
    Note that transferring funds to and fro between Transparent Jurisdictions like Canada or the US and Opaque Jurisdictions like Lichtenstein or Switzerland or ... is:
    • Significantly inconvenient.

      In order for the important transfers to remain secret, you'd need to have a whole pile of accounts, some to be used for the "Opaque Transactions," and others to be used for "Transfers To/From Canada."

      One account is most definitely not enough, and the action of shifting money is also not convenient.

    • You don't use one of the "Hidden Accounts" to pay off your MasterCard bill, as that would expose its existence to domestic authorities.

      Ditto for any other situations where you need to have money in Canada to spend on things.

    • Note that interest rates on deposits in these foreign places are not likely to be terribly high.

      The tax havens are "capital rich," which means that based on supply+demand, interest rates will be low to nonexistent.

      The net effect of this is that you don't actually make money off of having money in the tax haven; all you do is to avoid being taxed at home.

    The net result of all of this is that there's probably little point to opening "tax haven" accounts unless you've got at least a few million dollars kicking around, or unless someone who would find it worthwhile to move money to a tax haven owes you payment for significant services.

    The people that would thus care about this might be:

    • Athletes, models, and the likes,
    • The vieux rich,
    • Organized crime figures.
    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  30. I'm being pedantic by georgeha · · Score: 2

    But wasn't Freeside in Gibson's Neuromancer (1984 if I'm correct) a data haven, among other things?

    And then of course, Nicky Halflinger, computer prodigy, writes a massive tapeworm that protects his adopted community from being cracked as well as breaking into every secret database in the world and releasing it, in 1975's Shockwave Rider, by John Brunner.

    George

    1. Re:I'm being pedantic by regs · · Score: 1
      But wasn't Freeside in Gibson's Neuromancer (1984 if I'm correct) a data haven, among other things?

      Couldn't tell you... it's been years since I read Neuromancer. My point was not that Sterling was the first to come up with it, but that he was using it before Stephenson. Perhaps I should I have stated that better... but I was going for a little controversy in the post title. :)



      --
      --

      --
      "In Cyberspace, no one can hear you be sarcastic"
  31. perl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    #!/bin/perl -sp0777iX+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0j]dsj $/=unpack('H*',$_);$_=`echo 16dio\U$k"SK$/SM$n\EsN0p[lN*1 lK[d2%Sa2/d0$^ ----- oops. on Debian, it's /usr/bin/perl. As a non-perler, is it supposed to do anything?

    1. Re:perl by emmons · · Score: 1

      Strong encryption code that isn't supposed to get exported. thus the 'oops.'

      -----

      --
      Do you even know anything about perl? -- AC Replying to Tom Christiansen post.
  32. Nauru vs Kinakuta by G27+Radio · · Score: 1

    In Cryptomonicon the sultan of Kinakuta declared that they would not interfere with the transfer or storage of data. The idea was that that they would create a "data haven" where everything would be encrypted. They planned to use this data haven to provide information on protecting ourselves from holocausts. However they soon realized that most of their investors were pretty shady characters with a lot of money. In the process they discover a huge cache of gold and diamonds, etc. They realize that they can create their own currency (totally anonymous, digitally signed, electronic currency -- no paper trail of an sort on transactions transacted) and back up the currency with the discovered treasure.

    numb

    ?syntax error

  33. The fed govt to me is just another company... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    whose products (regulation, defense and security, diplomatic relations, supporting foreign governments) i should be able to purchase or not. state and local taxes (used for things actually important to you, like roads and sewers) should be the only ones that are mandatory.

    my premise is that money laundering should not be a crime. its my money. i should be able to hide it in a drawer or send it to timbiktu if i want.

    while one may counter that we could simply re-elect a different government if we don't want to pay for the activities of the current adminstration, this is impossible as both parties perform the same in power - i.e., neither would seriously consider withdrawing financial aid to egypt...regardless of whether it matters at all to any american citizen. the only choice is to not support the federal government at all.

    1. Re:The fed govt to me is just another company... by rlkoppenhaver · · Score: 1

      The trouble with this position, as any economist will tell you, is that most of the government's "products" (national defense, for example) cannot be provided to just those who are willing to pay for them. We can't have an army, and say to hostile countries "We'll fight to the death to protect our country... except for Joe's house. You can invade that if you want."

  34. No its not... by Hobbex · · Score: 4

    This is not a data haven in the Kinakuta way at all, its simply a the same kind of anonymous offshore banking that has been done on small island countries for many years now. Nothing actually goes on in the country, but because it can register companies, operating under its flag can be used to overcome all sorts of regulations. Its really not to different from convenience flagging of boats to get around safety regulations. Or cheap domain names (like Nuine, Cocos, and Turkmenistan).

    In a way its a sad story how this country which overspent its natural resources is now forced to prostitute itself to Russian organized crime in order to fund its budget. Not that I am against offshore banking (I am in principle against taxes), but still...

    However, if the article mentions that the country has 190 million dollars in a fund left from its wealthier days. Maybe, if the leaders are willing to play "dirty" against the big guys, doing a Cryptonomicum wouldn't be such a bad idea. How much would putting a good pipe to the island (or a permanent sattelite link) cost?

    I am doubtful of the realism of Stephensons vision however. If an offshore datahaven were to succeed with causing an upheaval in the western economies, you can bet your ass America wouldn't think twice before the island had a carrier permanently docked in its harbour. Its funny how much influence that can have over a very small country, huh?

    I mean, just look what happens when anything threatens the American oil market...

    The true datahaven can't be located in some physical place. It has to be nowhere, and it has to be everywhere. It will not gain its security by mountain vaults but by crypography, and it won't secure its existance by oceans but by being dynamic, distributed, and smart. Lately I have seen a few projects in the open source world aspiring towards solutions in this direction (Freenet, the Eternity system) and they are much better news in this front than the existance of roque island states.

    -
    /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

  35. Security by Migrant+Programmer · · Score: 1
    It states in the article several times that no money is physically transferred, to the island or to any other place.

    As a practical matter, it is only in the form of ledger entries that offshore dollars ordinarily pass through Nauru. The way the international banking system works, funds are electronically transferred to and from "correspondent accounts" that the Nauru-registered banks maintain in distant money centers such as New York.

    The system is as secure as the 'distant money centers' are. And it's all electronic.

    1. Re:Security by superape23 · · Score: 1

      No, the system is as secure as the ledgers are who cares where the accounts are if the records of the accounts are not secure.

  36. Forgot to mention: World Income by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 2
    I forgot to mention that using these "tax havens" to hide income is not, generally speaking, particularly legal if you're a resident of (say) Canada, the US, and other "less dodgy" nations.

    If you're a resident of Canada, for instance, Revenue Canada considers your income for tax purposes to include all world income, and that includes whatever you might be trying to hide by flowing it through a tax haven.

    Thus, if you don't leave Canada, probably taking on residency in one of the tax havens, the avoidance of tax represents tax evasion which is definitely against the law, and possibly a criminal act (as opposed to being "merely civil").

    Becoming an International Criminal may not be on the "top ten list" of things to do this week...

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  37. That buys a bit more than you think... by Christopher+B.+Brown · · Score: 2
    That $5680 wasn't the fee for opening a mere bank account; that was the fee for establishing your own BANK.

    Just a slight difference...

    --
    If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.
  38. Re:offshore confusion -answers by jsm2 · · Score: 2

    From that point you're a Citizen of THERE, and not of the US and no longer bound by silly IRS codes

    Sadly, not so.

    (disclaimer: don't get your tax advice from slashdot!)

    It's a widespread fallacy that countries only have the power to tax their own citizens. Most countries will tax their own citizens on their income, plus they tax all income earned within their country. If you're a US citizen drawing a salary in the UK, you quite often end up paying two lots of tax. Yopu have to hope for a favourable "double taxation treaty" to rescue you. It's never this simple.

    As noted below, offshore havens are of use to people who have substantial sources of income other than paychecks . . . .

    jsm

  39. Not Neal Stephenson! by The+Dodger · · Score: 2

    Anyone who's read Iain (M) Banks' latest novel The Business (it's excellent, by the way, and I am planning to write a review of it, as well as IMB's sci-fi novels) will be able to draw definite parallels between Nauru, as a country which has a seat at the UN, and requires external help to support itself, and a certain country in the novel, the name of which I won't mention, as it's a spoiler.

    By the way, hasn't it occured to anyone that the websites, systems and networks which these offshore banks use, are probably completely owned by various intelligence agencies' hackers?

    D.
    ..is for Dangerous!

  40. Re:offshore confusion -answers by skeptikal · · Score: 2

    > to hide in the Caymans this isn't a problem.
    > From that point you're a Citizen of THERE, and
    > not of the US and no longer bound by silly IRS
    > codes.

    Dream on. I am working here, and I am a citizen
    of another coutry, and paying taxes like anyone
    else. I suggest to read the appropriate IRS docs
    otherwise you are in trouble. Even worse, I pay
    three times higher taxes that you on certain
    income (the so called "Income not connected with
    US business") unless this money goes directly
    outside US, for example business deals in my
    country and deposited in my country's bank
    acount. But in that case IRS does not care anyway.
    Also if you lived in US for more that four
    years, you are treated as a US permanent resident
    for tax pusposes, altough you are screwed as
    a foreigner in any other way. When Uncle Sam
    wants his cut, nothing can stop him from coming
    up with any law that surves the purpose.

    > transfer monies to and from your brokerage
    ...
    > but the IRS has no way of obtaining the information.

    Worse, each brokerage transaction gets immediately reported to the IRS, not just transactions above 10 grands. Even if you keep money cash, not in stocks, the broker keeps them in a money market account. Where else this interest comes from?

    If you really beleive in what you said, and are doing this, I suggest that you get the he.. out
    of US before IRS raids your business. You can read
    the Senate hearing if you don't believe me,
    I just forgot the url with the horror stories.

    Best,

  41. Common way to build revenue by Preston+Pfarner · · Score: 1

    At least one of the ex-Soviet states attempted to set itself up in this way. Naturally, there are also the Caribbean islands with confidential banking laws and low (no?) taxes. I believe it's a reasonably common method of building revenue.

    Unfortunately, one problem when attempting this is the confidence issue. People are very confident that Switzerland will remain, with no major changes to its banking policies. It's much harder to predict the actions of a small nation that has just initiated this sort of policy. The stability and reliance on tradition hasn't been demonstrated. You really don't want the state to start revealing information (or nationalizing assets!).

    Naturally, this won't keep all money out. It's also likely (as Neal said) that a higher portion of early adopters will be doing something shady. This gives these small states an opportunity to demonstrate their commitment to their policies, especially if larger states fail to pressure the state for information or other violations of policy.

  42. Re:offshore confusion -answers by hazydave · · Score: 2
    Well, kind of. For situation (1), the Grand Caymans don't much care if you're a US Citizen or not -- it's not their job to administer US tax laws. It also doesn't much matter if you become a Cayman citizen or not, since its the US government you have to convince of your non-citizenship, or as far as they're concerned, you're still paying those taxes.

    Now, there are two ways to go about this. If you're a criminal type, of course, you don't much care what the US government thinks. And you're probably not getting too many of those drug, prostitution, and illicit gambling charges on VISA, these are in cash. Which, of course, is smuggled out of the country hidden in dolls or coffins or whatever, at least according to most of the gangster movies I've seen.

    The other thing is to actually become a citizen of a tax haven and remain a non-resident of other countries. An actual case of this is Irving Gould, onetime principle owner and Chairman of the Board at Commodore. At some point in time, he moved to the Bahamas, real house an everything, and I assume became a citizen. But he had to be careful about being percieved as a resident of any country. So he actually had people who kept track of how many days he spent in any given country. For example, it was not uncommon for the PET Jet to circle until after 12AM, when old "Uncle Irv" was coming into the US, just so that fraction-of-a-day couldn't be held against him in US tax court. In other words, maybe a bit shady, but all perfectly legal.

    I don't supposed you would do this until you're making enough money to have that kind of lifestyle, but that kind of goes without saying. Most offshore accounts offer little interest, charge high fees for transactions, require opening deposits in the $10-$25 range, etc. It's not likely to attract the typical working stiff, even if you're a contractor or some-such getting lots of payments in cash. On the other hand, a millionaire with lots of foreign income and fewer scruples could well go for such a thing, profitably.

    It'll probably only get easier, with the e-banking and e-trading. There are already US-based companies specializing in setting up foreign investors in US stocks and bonds, and it probably won't be long until US folks have the same online shot at some foreign securities. Now, when you're doing the electronic transfer to your bank in New Jersey for that killing you just made on the Newer Markt, ole Uncle Sam will be there to congradulate you. But all you'll hear from that Caymans' bank is the $50 (or whatever) deposit fee.

    Which just goes to illustrate the old point that the rich do, in fact, get richer.

    --
    -Dave Haynie
  43. Re:offshore confusion -answers by hazydave · · Score: 1

    Uh, that was supposed to be $10K-$25K. I could swing the $10-$25 opening minimum myself :-)

    --
    -Dave Haynie
  44. Re: money laundering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Um, Actually laundering is done to "clean" monies that could otherwise be traced. Since the police and banks track Serial numbers, if you were to get say $20k in marked (recorded) bills, if you were to spend that money, the second law enforcement or a bank checked those numbers, whoever flagged those bills would be notified.

    So what you want to do is somehow exchange the "dirty" bills for clean, unmarked bills. If you go through someone to do it, you will be charged anywhere from 10%-50%.

    The best way I have found to do it is to take a trip to Vegas, get $xxK in chips, gamble a little, then cash in, thereby getting new bills.

  45. Re:offshore confusion -answers by jpatokal · · Score: 1
    It's a widespread fallacy that countries only have the power to tax their own citizens. Most countries will tax their own citizens on their income, plus they tax all income earned within their country. If you're a US citizen drawing a salary in the UK, you quite often end up paying two lots of tax. Yopu have to hope for a favourable "double taxation treaty" to rescue you. It's never this simple.

    The US is actually quite unusual in taxing its citizens when they work in foreign countries, although there is a $70,000 exemption (no tax paid on earnings of less than $70,000 while employed overseas). As a Finnish citizen, for instance, I don't have to pay any Finnish taxes on income I make abroad, as long as I spend at least 180 days outside the country per year. (This made quite a difference in Japan, where I paid 6% Japanese income tax instead of ~45% Finnish income tax.)

    And again, the above paragraph is a simplification of 17,000 pages of international tax code, so don't put all your money in a Nauruan bank account based on this...

    Cheers,
    -j.

  46. Finding those sneaky banks by copito · · Score: 1

    Tracking Nauru banks is difficult, the State Department report said, because all "have the same post office box."

    Damn, well I guess they can just use the CIA maps...no wait...yup we're screwed.

    But seriously folks, banks don't launder money, people launder money. If you make offshore money havens a crime, only criminals will have offshore money havens.

    Ok, I'm done now.
    --

    --
    "L'IT c'est moi!"
  47. Re: money laundering by jsm2 · · Score: 3

    One simple way of laundering money is to get yourself one of these anonymous offshore bank accounts, then create a fictitious offshore company that hires you to perform expensive consulting work. You have really hired yourself, but it's hard to tell that's what has happened, and harder still to prove it. So you then submit work records and bills to the bogus company and get paid. Your income appears to be legitimate. Of course, this means you have to pay income tax on it, but at least you get to keep the rest, and you can pass an IRS audit with flying colors.

    Ahhhh (this used to be my life, a few years ago). I'm sure that Mendax would like to remind all slashdotters that this is an illustrative example only, and that it should not be tried at home.

    The phrase you can pass an IRS audit with flying colors is used here rhetorically -- actually, a half-competent auditor would tear you to shreds if you tried this "thin" scam on any significant tax liability. Real tax avoidance schemes are a lot more complicated and require [ahem] godlike genius consultants to design them (particularly if you want to have a chance of them being declared legal).

    Oh yeh, and people who "go to Vegas, buy a load of chips and then cash them in without gambling" get to learn a fair amount about both the IRS and the Secret Service before long. The casino companies have a troubled enough relationship with Lily Law without acting as willing accessories to avoidance or worse.

    If you're really interested, the locus classicus is "Secret Money" by Ingo Walter.

    jsm

  48. Attention Leaders of Third-World Countries!!! by Pollux · · Score: 2

    Happen to be short on cash? Has your country, once thriving with entrepreneurs coming in to take out your one and only resource, now been stripped bare of it's past glory?

    Then come join the thriving business of MONEY LAUNDERING, or, as we like to call it, Helping out the less fortunate! Come join the hundreds of other third-world countries as they too pick up on what the "economy" is REALLY about! Within months you too will be lying in mountains of money, smoking your Cuban Cigars, surrounded by beautiful women in bikinis!

    What's that? You say the rest of the country is angry that you're holding on to all the profits while they're still poor? Well, if you respond to this add within the next 30 minutes, we'll throw in, ABSOLUTELY FREE, a pair of genuine, bona-fide mafia hitmen, voilin cases and all! Now, you too can sit back and relax to endeavor in your mounds of cash while you hear sounds of bones breaking and screams of pain from the next room!

    Supplies are limited, order today!


    Is this going to be the wave of the future? Once we've sucked the Earth dry of it's resources, we'll move toward starting other business practices that aren't so "legal?"

  49. Other ways to make money by ryanr · · Score: 2

    Couldn't they just get their two letter ISO country code, open a NIC, and extort money out of corporations for domain names, like all the other little island nations?

    1. Re:Other ways to make money by DanMcS · · Score: 1

      Aw, I hope they don't do that, I was thinking it would be neat to get a .nr and run my webpages from there ;)

      --
      Communication is only possible between equals
  50. Even More Obscure Banks by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Even this is insufficient security for some people. There are banks "based" in the Turkish Republic of North Cyprus (TRNC), a state which is only diplomatically recognized by Turkey, which are entirely outside of the ordinary system of international law. However, Russians are not major customers: the TRNC government's relations with Russia have been poor since they considered a large weapons sale to the internationally (except for Turkey) recognized government on the rest of the island.

  51. Tax Evasion for Dummies by mosch · · Score: 4

    This isn't designed to avoid the taxes on your paycheck. It's to avoid taxes on "other income".

    Example #1, let's say that you run a company worth $500,000,000. Now let's say you want to give yourself a "raise". You hire a "consultant" who happens to bill you to an account fron one of these offshore banks in the amount of $10,000,000. Your company sends the money for "work rendered" and wow, that's odd your company just sent those ten million dollars to YOUR secret account and you've just evaded taxes on $10,000,000.

    Example #2: you run a profitable "business" from traditional organized crime, or large-scale drug dealing, or assassinations or even working as $5,000/day call girl. Now you have a whole lot of money and if you legitimize it within the U.S. you'll end up with a lot of taxes on it. But what if this money gets deposited to your offshore account? Well, now suddenly there are no taxes involved. Neat, eh?

    As for the laws about foreign income, the IRS even admits it's basically honour system. There's no way to trace this so basically as long as said random rich person reports enough income to be credible, they can hide the rest without fear of the authorities find out. After all, there isn't a real difference in lifestyle between somebody who makes $100,000,000/year and somebody who makes $10,000,000/year, so you hide $90,000,000 and report that you make $10,000,000/year and meanwhile become worth billions without taxation difficulties.

    1. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by ender- · · Score: 1
      , there isn't a real difference in lifestyle between somebody who makes $100,000,000/year and somebody who makes $10,000,000/year, so you hide $90,000,000 and report that you make $10,000,000/year and meanwhile become worth billions without taxation difficulties.

      Hmm...this makes me think... How much do you figure ole Billy Gates has tucked away in offshore accounts??

      Just a thought.

      Ender

    2. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by Steven+Pulito · · Score: 1
      Hmm...this makes me think... How much do you figure ole Billy Gates has tucked away in offshore accounts??

      Not much since he's one of the lowest paid CEO's in this country. Most of his money is tied up in Mircrosoft's stock.

    3. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by Uruk · · Score: 1

      I would think that it's extremely likely that "ol' Billy" keeps his nose extremely clean since he's a very high-profile rich person. Not to say that he doesn't exploit tax law to the hilt with workarounds and loopholes, but I severely doubt that he's doing anything that is out and out illegal. Also keep in mind that most of his money is on paper in Microsoft stock, and no matter what he does, he'll always get nailed with tax when he sells that stuff. The vast majority of his wealth isn't money - it's *potential* money in the form of stock.

      Besides the fact that he is so high profile, you'd figure that at a certain point, there's just no friggin' point in going to the extra trouble to save yourself a few million. Sure, you can look at it as a total sum of money, $1,000,000 is a lot of money, but as a percentage of net worth, it's really not worth going to the trouble to save, since that effort spent on the phone with your accountant figuring out how to screw the gov't out of that extra $1,000,000 is time that could have been spent making the stock (where your real value is) more valuable. Remember that every time MS stock goes up $1, Bill goes up ~= $90,000,000 :)

      --
      -- Truth goes out the door when rumor comes innuendo. -- Groucho Marx
    4. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by ender- · · Score: 1
      I would think that it's extremely likely that "ol' Billy" keeps his nose extremely clean since he's a very high-profile rich person. Not to say that he doesn't exploit tax law to the hilt with workarounds and loopholes, but I severely doubt that he's doing anything that is out and out illegal. Also keep in mind that most of his money is on paper in Microsoft stock, and no matter what he does, he'll always get nailed with tax when he sells that stuff. The vast majority of his wealth isn't money - it's *potential* money in the form of stock. Besides the fact that he is so high profile, you'd figure that at a certain point, there's just no friggin' point in going to the extra trouble to save yourself a few million. Sure, you can look at it as a total sum of money, $1,000,000 is a lot of money, but as a percentage of net worth, it's really not worth going to the trouble to save, since that effort spent on the phone with your accountant figuring out how to screw the gov't out of that extra $1,000,000 is time that could have been spent making the stock (where your real value is) more valuable. Remember that every time MS stock goes up $1, Bill goes up ~= $90,000,000 :)

      Good point, but Bill isn't completely stupid. He does have some money that is not in MS stock. He constantly sells off shares. For a long time, he didn't do much with that money. Now he gives it to his own charity [a little suspicious if you ask me, why don't you give it to someone elses charity?]. But he does have some cash and other investments in non-MS stock. He also knows that Microsoft can't and won't last forever [he even admitted as much in the BBC interview]. I'd be willing to bet he's got a damned good plan to come out with a healthy heap of money even if M$ dies. Maybe it's not in OS accounts, but it wouldn't be too far fetched to think he's got some money overseas...

      Ender

      Then again, maybe the mega-doses of Moutain Dew are making me imagine things...

    5. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Actually, most of the "money" he gives to his charity is in the form of Microsoft stocks. This has the advantage that he doesn't have to pay any capital gains tax of it, because he never sold the stocks, and the charity doesn't pay any tax when selling it. So instead of selling off a billion in stock, paying taxes on it, and giving away the rest, he can give away the whole billion.

      Also, I don't know about US tax law (not being a US resident), but can he deduct the value of the contribution on his taxes, even if it isn't in the form of money?

    6. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also, I don't know about US tax law (not being a US resident), but can he deduct the value of the contribution on his taxes, even if it isn't in the form of money?
      Probably. I've heard radio commercials from a charity soliciting donations of used cars saying that the donor would be able to write off the value of the car.

  52. Re: money laundering by mdecerbo · · Score: 1

    >The best way I have found to do it is to take a
    >trip to Vegas, get $xxK in chips, gamble a
    >little, then cash in, thereby getting new bills.

    Hmm, have you tried this?

    I can't find the post, but I distinctly remember a past comment on /.
    where the poster was pretty definite that the second or third time you tried this,
    there were FBI and/or Treasury agents around Vegas who would call you in for a nice chat
    about why you weren't gambling.

    I have no knowledge either way, but that caution sounds pretty plausible to me.

  53. Poor communications by drox · · Score: 2

    Maybe I'm missing something, but one thing this island seems to lack (besides natural resources) is a good communication system. Not only is it difficult to get to physically, it sounds like Nauru is difficult to reach by telephone. That would seem to make becoming a center of secret international banking much more difficult. Is there an effort to improve Nauru's communication system in all this? Will the people of Nauru benefit by this, or will all the benefits go to their customers and investors?

    The Nauruans got burned once, when they sold all their birdsh1t to foreigners. They got rich quick, then got poor again just as quick. Poorer than when they started, since their island seems to have been deforested in the process. I'd expect them to be cautious going into a venture like this one.

    If there is are fortunes to be gained by this, and if the Nauruans can use it to improve their lot and that of their children, more power to them.

    1. Re:Poor communications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, a satellite Net link is not exactly expensive these days, and hard to block if it uses a Russian comsat.

      Trust me, there are vast fortunes to be made by giving the rich (and increasingly the middle class) people of the world the ability to avoid paying taxes to the increasingly authoritarian Western nations. In twenty years from now these kind of once-poor offshore bank and data havens are going to be rich while Americans and Europeans wonder where the Glorious Socialist Welfare State went.

    2. Re:Poor communications by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well - I know someone who knows someone who actually went to nauru last year and connected them to the internet. They are using a 64K Sat Line and the Government/Telecom operate as an ISP for the country. Not a big time operator but they do own the domain .NR. Bob

  54. They are also building neighborhoods by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Nauru has also branched into real estate development in order to offset the loss of the phosphate income. Here in Houston, they developed a "master-planned" golf course community. The interesting thing is the semi-shady way in which the development company was run. Very similar to the first impression of this banking deal. Not illegal, but not clean cut, either.

    I don't think that the development netted them nearly the profit that they were hoping it would. As I recall, the clubhouse came in significantly late and over budget. And the cart storage flooded as well. In all, not a very well planned venture.

  55. Use The Backhoe, Luke! by jsm2 · · Score: 3

    get a big international data cable strung out there .... keep all the data and money underwater, where a bunch of marines and helicopters can't just waltz in and get it

    "We can't get at the money or data, sir! It's all hidden underwater, at the other end of this big ... long ... fragile .... fibreoptic cable .... with the other end .... in New York ...ohhhh".

    jsm

    1. Re:Use The Backhoe, Luke! by superape23 · · Score: 1

      you can move it and/or restring the fiber, my whole point on this is to have a really secure tax haven it has to be physically secure as well, there is no such thing as legally secure when big countries with big armies are involved. And a real cryptonomicon style data/money haven has to actually have money in it. Gold or other precious metals, because it would be using encrypted data as currency backed by actual gold.

  56. focus!@#$!# by werd+life · · Score: 3

    Hate to beat a dead horse, but anyway, one of the normal /. topic *is* money. And this story does have something loosely to do with money. Anyway, News for Nerds is a hell of a lot more than just the OSI-Seven Layer model. 'Sides it is nice to tie my /. addiction to something more connected to the real world than an mp3 playing router, and stories like this give me something I can bring up to people at the bar that might not be complete tech freaks. ya know.

  57. OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I have seen many people on here ask the question of "why would you want to put your money in an OS acct?"
    I figured I would give an example.

    Lets say you have a stock acct in the US with 200,000$ in it as well as a savings acct with 50,000 in it. The people
    that use the OS accts have money like this. If your average return on stocks is 30% and your average return on
    savings is 2% then you have an income of 60,000$ a year in stocks and 1000$ a year on savings. This means that
    you have a total annual income of 61,000$. The US government is going to want there cut of your hard earned
    money, (22%) 13,420.00$, come tax time. This will leave you with 47,580$ after taxes..

    Now lets say you have a OS acct. You do your stock trading from your OS acct and keep your savings in an OS acct
    as well. The US government does not see the income as a US income. There for you get to keep the 22% and not
    report it to the IRS. That is an extra 13,420$ in your pocket. That is also worth the trouble of keeping the money
    outside of the US.

    There are other sides to this such as you can trade stocks, bonds, and currency in any country in the world, as well
    as growth funds, and living funds offered by the bank.

    Hope this helped some one.. ;)

    1. Re:OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      like people with 60K of investment income ( also known as money they didn't work for ) need advice on how to cheat on their taxes...that's why they have accountants. i find it ironic that people like this who spend so much time trying to avoid their civic responsibilities tend to be so nationalistic when it comes to meaningless crap like flag burning and clinton's blowjobs.

    2. Re:OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >like people with 60K of investment income ( also known as money they didn't work for ) need advice on how to
      >cheat on their taxes...that's why they have accountants. i find it ironic that people like this who spend so much
      >time trying to avoid their civic responsibilities tend to be so nationalistic when it comes to meaningless crap
      >like flag burning and clinton's blowjobs.

      Well if investing in the future of the US and risking your hard earned money is not working then what do you
      consider working? Not all of us with 60K of investment income have an accountant. Even with an accountant you still need to use
      your money wisely. The government did not earn that money I did! They take the 22% off the top then they hit
      your with another 8-10% for what you spend as well as property tax, Tax on the car (Plates/Inspection), Gift Tax,
      etc. The government gets more then there fair share of my money. I have a right to live in this country and
      according to our founding fathers a right is granted by god not the government. A tax is just the governments way
      of selling you a god given right.

      And personally I don't care who is sucking clintons dick. As for flag burning let 'em.. They have a right to protest
      all they want.

      Ok I am stepping off the ammo box now..

    3. Re:OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and i suppose you consider the roads, police,
      public education, defense, and social welfare a god given right also?

      you did not earn your investment income.
      the people working for the company you invested in did.

      i doubt you "risk your hard earned money" for "the future of the US". you risk it because you want to realize a profit.

    4. Re:OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Now explain why exactly someone earning $1,000,000 a year should pay 100x as much as someone earning $10,000 a year for roads, police and defence? (I won't include 'social welfare' and 'public education' as they're blatantly unconstitutional).

      Most rich people would happily keep their money in America if they were only charged for the services they use. But instead the richest few percent pay the majority of the tax bill, and the investors who keep the economy going see most of their investment income swallowed in capital gains taxes.

    5. Re:OS Banking and why.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      AMEN BROTHER

  58. Missing the obvious by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    I think perhaps everyone here is skirting around the obvious: lie about "foreign investments". With banking laws such as the ones described in the article, there is little chance that Revenue Canada (or any other country's tax authorities) are going to be able to uncover the truth (unless money starts coming into domestic accounts from your offshore ones, then if you get audited, they might be suspicious). I happen to know a couple of RevCan's auditors, they're nice, but they can smell blood.

    As mentioned before, this is also fun for nefarious activities.

  59. screw kinakuta... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... where can i find the real golgotha?

  60. Shameless plug by FIGJAM · · Score: 1

    I know im gonna get moderated for this but I am involved in this type of industry and maybe people might also want to get involved, or at least like more info
    Many ppl want an offshore account but get knocked back, or dont know how to go about it. This makes things easy...
    http://www.exxcomm.com/

    --
    Do your best, hope for the best, suspect the worst.
  61. Serial # Tracking by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since the police and banks track Serial numbers, if you were to get say $20k in marked (recorded) bills, if you were to spend that money, the second law enforcement or a bank checked those numbers, whoever flagged those bills would be notified.

    And it's not just the police that would be watching you. We do that over at Wheresgeorge all the time! :-)

  62. Re: money laundering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, you don't go to the same casino everytime, wait a while between visits, and I make it a point to drop a few K every time.

    No problems so far :)

  63. From the article.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Nauru's president, Rene Harris, also declined to comment on the island's offshore services. "What's it got to do with you?" he asked angrily before hanging up."

    Now THAT'S a president I could respect.

  64. Re: money laundering by Mendax+Veritas · · Score: 1
    actually, a half-competent auditor would tear you to shreds if you tried this "thin" scam on any significant tax liability.
    Okay, you seem to know more about this than I do. Can you elaborate on this? It isn't obvious to me how a tax auditor could determine that an offshore company, paying you from a numbered offshore account, is actually just you in disguise.
    Real tax avoidance schemes
    Is this a minor glitch on your part, or are we not talking about the same thing? Money laundering per se is not a tax-avoidance scheme; in fact, for money to be laundered, you have to pay taxes on it. The point of money laundering is simply to make illegal gains look like legitimate income. (Again, if you disagree, please elaborate.)
  65. links to Freenet or Eternity System anyone? by bug1 · · Score: 1

    Does anyone have a link to info on Freenet or the Eterneity system mentioned above. I did a quick search didnt find anything that looked relavent.

    Im interested in this datahaven concept... it has to be everywhere.. like a vast distributed filesystem with quotas based on storage capacity and bandwidth?

    I havent read cryptonomicum... on the todo list now

    1. Re:links to Freenet or Eternity System anyone? by Hobbex · · Score: 1


      Freenet is at: http://freenet.on.openprojects.net/

      The design of the Eternity Service is here: http://www.cypherspace.org/eternity-design.html I'm not sure where they have a "live" webpage.

      Just to clarify, I'm not part of either of these projects, just interested.

      -
      /. is like a steer's horns, a point here, a point there and a lot of bull in between.

  66. So? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    Fine then....
    get rid of the standing army.
    No war - no army

    Problem solved.

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
    1. Re:So? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pay as you go has been done here in the US. In the past you could opt in or out of paying for the fire departments services and if you didn't pay they just let your house burn. There is no reason in this day and age they can't just say house 242 hasn't paid for police services so don't pay attention to their 911 calls.
      This does get trickier for larger services like roads and military services. If all the federal government did was handle national defense and interstate trade they wouldn't need to collect nearly as much taxes and people would be much less inclined to look for offshore havens.

  67. do they? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    Do they really?

    A very small number (Read: The vocal Minority)
    seem to be nationalistic, but somehow I doubt the
    vast majority is. They have money and basically
    free income...why should they care?

    How many people outside of congress and a few
    right wing public "Congressional Wannabee" nuts
    really care about flag burning and Clinton's
    blow jobs?

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  68. top level? by TheCarp · · Score: 1

    I would suspect you are a large top level suplier
    or importer then.

    Certainly a good buisness tho...I doubt it you
    were REALLY a a cannabis suplier who had enough
    money to need to use offshore acounts, you would
    post on /. (even anyously) and say so...
    maybe you would...but I doubt it

    Though if you are...
    your service is greatly apreciated by those
    of us who love the product
    (course any marijuana I would get tends to
    be the more quality stuff so is probably grown
    local in a small garden...so I doubt I would
    see any of your suposed stuff)

    --
    "I opened my eyes, and everything went dark again"
  69. Re:Shameless plug-Shame on you by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Another multi-level marketing scheme. Bbbbboooorrrriiinnnnnggggg.

  70. Nauru vs. Tuvalu: a study in contrast by Wooly-Mammoth · · Score: 2

    It's interesting how various tiny nations have tried to cash in on the net.

    Like Nauru, tuvalu is a tiny pacific island, the world's 4th smallest nation. Population : 10,000. When the internet boom began, tuvalu stood to make a fortune on the domain name trade - it's .TV country code was a potential goldmine (www.fox.tv ?)

    What happened next was a sad tale of how a pacific nation, remote and unaware of the existence of the internet, was swindled by domain name sharks.

    First, webTV grabbed admin. control of the .tv domain from ICANN without informing Tuvalu - further proof that webTV is evil incarnate. Tuvalu's prime minister came to know that something called the "Internet" existed after visiting Australia, and managed to get ICANN to hand them control.

    Good wired story here.

    Next, VCs and domain name companies descended on the remote island, courting the confused govt. Ultimately, Tuvalu signed a deal with a Canadian company, which failed to deliver the $50 million it had promised in a year (that's 10 times the country's entire GDP). Sad story.

    Now Tuvalu, wiser and bitter, is still looking for a company to administer .TV and raise the nation's fortunes. Being honest religious folks, they don't want to do pr0n, shady financial deals, or anything unethical.

    If only they could be like Nauru, with its offshore banking, or Niue, which hosts tons of porn on the .nu (naked in French) domain, or like Tonga, which sells $100 .to domains, no questions asked; they could improve their per capita income 10 times, but instead, they are fumbling in confusion.

    I felt particularly sorry for them because they are so naive and quaint. It's a custom on the island to apologize if you walk past someone sitting, since the level of your head is higher than theirs. And hey, you can climb on top of the local church if you ask permission from the pastor. They're so naive their web site is a Yahoo Club.

    Poor Tuvalu. Maybe the linux community can help them out by hosting their domain thingie and transforming their island. :)

    w/m.


    --
    -- I'm not a freak show, I'm a mammal. --
    1. Re:Nauru vs. Tuvalu: a study in contrast by G27+Radio · · Score: 1
      Poor Tuvalu. Maybe the linux community can help them out by hosting their domain thingie and transforming their island. :)

      Looks like the Linux community has helped already--they're running RedHat 6.0 (the ISP, not the gov't.) Check out the journal if you're interested.

      numb
      ?syntax error

  71. After the west took their shit... by barnaclebarnes · · Score: 1

    Interestingly the article never mentioned the fact that it was Australia and New Zealand (ie Me) that dug all the bird shit off the island.

    We made a lot more money off that island than the local islanders ever did so its good to see they can now make some money for themselves and not be ripped off so much.


    --
    [Please type your sig here.]
  72. Re:offshore confusion -answers by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    does anyone else think this is the *real* reason for the cryptography rules (not terrorism or drug dealing)?

  73. 17,000 pages of international tax code.. by zerone · · Score: 1

    ..unsustainable! Intelligence is likely route around it.. Vince Cate has a lot of info on this overall thread:

    "The IRS says that a US citizen who is out of the country for 330 days or more of the year does not owe any taxes on his first $70,000 earned outside the country. Clearly, you want to incorporate your business in some tax haven country and pay yourself less than $70,000 per year. By doing this, you can then travel around as a "PT" and legally avoid taxes."

    "The consumer gets the best deal in terms of products, service, and price when there is competition. If people move freely between countries, governments that do not provide good service at a reasonable price will loose people to those that do. Countries will start to compete for people, or they will loose people. This will make governments provide better services with less taxes. Governments will have to be more efficient."

  74. Re: money laundering by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Exactly...Why do you think the Mob started Vega$ anyhow?

  75. Re:Tax Evasion for Dummies [Addendum] by ender- · · Score: 1
    Oh, I guess I could clarify. I'm not necessarily suggesting he's got the money overseas illegally. There's got to be legal ways of getting money out of the country. It's just as likely that he did it all legally to keep his nose clean, but got it out of the country 'just in case'

    Ender

  76. An easy model for a Data Haven. by Raindeer · · Score: 2

    A data haven is basically nothing more then an FTP-server on which you can safely store and access your data. For this to be possible at an easy and low cost model I think you need to do the following things.

    1. Client side encryption. This way you as the provider of the service can not be responsible for the contents, since you have no way of having knowledge of the contents.

    2. Multiple locations. Governments change, with that policies change, though this is a good thing in a democracy it might adversely affect your business.

    3. The possiblity for VPN so that people can make online changes.

    4. The possibilty to store and make available huge amounts of tapes, since the bandwith of a truck loaded with tapes or disks is still unsurpassed.

    Basically, this has been done for years by back-up companies. What they need to do is link their sites through a network and make sure that the locations are identical. This way it is almost impossible for a government or even a combination of governments to take over the system. (I thought I read about INTEL entering this market, but I couldn't find the URL on Wired. Anybody got the article on that for me?)

  77. www.nic.nu by vlax · · Score: 2

    They already do.

    1. Re:www.nic.nu by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually its a american company that tries to sell .nu domains (cause its pronounced 'now'). However its mostly used in Sweden since now is actually spelled nu in swedish. There are tens of thousands .nu adresses floating around.

  78. Porn isn't uch a big deal by vlax · · Score: 2

    Tuvalu currently makes a lot of its foreign exchange selling phone numbers (they have their own international phone code) to international phone sex lines. They expect to make a bit more when the global freephone number system is in place.

  79. "money" is root access to open code by zerone · · Score: 1

    If you believe in free exchange of ideas and resist censorship of your opinions and cultural expressions, then opening the source code for "money" is well worth talking about.

    Tax evasion might be parasitic, but so might governmental policies taxing the creation rather than consumption of value. Maybe you don't like funding the "war on drugs" or corporate welfare for a booming prison industry either. Maybe you believe some forms of "intellectual property" are unethical and unfair barriers to fair trade. Maybe you think bombarding people with access to information instead of deadly bombs (iraq, kosovo) might engender far more liberty and justice for all. You might then look for alternative systems to trade your valuables.

    As Hobbex says here, most of today's "offshore" alternatives are in reality subject to forceful persuasion. But unprecedented, dynamic, distributed, smart, encrypted exchange mediums could redefine "borders" and free a great deal of trade in ideas..

  80. Don't get your hopes up... by whocares · · Score: 2

    So there's another place for people with 10x your yearly salary coming in every month to stash some of it. And? You think this is cool because...?

    All it does is make sure that even less of the top .01%'s money gets taxed, so the rest of us working stiffs can pick up the bill. God help me when my obnoxious neighbour, who spends all his time swimming in his money like ScroogeMcduck gets hold of this, and announces he won't be paying any taxes on the million dollars he made this year... I'll have to rip his eyeballs out. :)

  81. Re:Shameless plug-Shame on you by FIGJAM · · Score: 1

    ahh yes but the credit card is available without the MLM

    --
    Do your best, hope for the best, suspect the worst.
  82. mini HOWTO protect your money offshore by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    What does the name IRS mean?

    Internal Revenue Service, right?

    Doesn't it seem logical that one could be legally EXTERNAL ?

    Here's some starting information on how to protect your money offshore.

    1. Expatriate and become a Sovereign State Citizen.
    BILL OF RIGHTS, Article XIV.
    "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the State they reside."

    Why is this important?

    From the 1998 Filing requirements.
    http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-pdf/f1040.pdf
    or
    http://ftp.fedworld.gov/pub/irs-pdf/i1040gi.pdf
    "These rules also apply to nonresident aliens and dual-status aliens who where married to U.S citizens or residents at the end of 1998 and who have elected to be taxed as resident aliens."

    Income tax is voluntary for non-resident aliens, how nice!

    Things that make you go hmmm:
    You might also want to research WHY the the constitution is title "united States of America."
    WHY did the original writers use a LOWERCASE 'u' on uSA when they were knew better?
    Because the jurisdiction of the United States is different then the uSA.

    What exactly is the jurisdiction of the United States?

    The United States is defined by the Constitution: "To exercise exclusive Legistlation in all Cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding ten Miles square) ..."

    2. Revoke your Social Insurance Number. (There is no law that requires you to have one. :-)

    3. Get a company formed off shore. You will find certain countries don't tax foreign income. ;-)

    4. Work for the above mentioned company to manage its business. A company id card and VISA is a must.

    5. Since the company doesn't have a US Tax Payers Identification Number, (since it is formed in an off-shore jurisdiction), submit a W-8 to your boss, which notifies them that he/she can't with-hold wages, since they are NOT paying you, but the off-shore company.

    Work smarter, not harder.

    "No man has the right to be taxed without his consent."

    If you need more info, email me at mpohores@sfu.ca


    Here are some links to get you started:

    How the constitution is slowly being eroded.
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN%3D1559501 278/americanpatriotnA/002-6543589-3496023

    Black's Law book, 6th ed.
    http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/031476271 X/002-6543589-3496023

    United States definition essay
    http://www.civil-liberties.com/

    Copy of the Constitution and Bill of Rights
    http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/7006/rulebook .html
    http://www.ole.net/~tmb/document/CRB-JURY.TXT

    The IRS scam
    http://freedomabovefortune.com/
    http://members.tripod.com/~fedinfo/tax_page.html
    http://www.mind-trek.com/practicl/tl16d.htm
    http://www.mind-trek.com/treatise/ls-tbj/appendi x.htm

    A good starting point at sovereinty info.
    http://www.devvy.com/index.html


    IANAL

    Cheers

  83. The RIGHT to travel ! by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    You might want to look into getting an IDP (International Drivers Permit.) Remember, they are NOT valid in the place of issue, so please don't go to AAA and get one.

    You will also want to learn about the:
    Manufacturer's Statement of Origin

    You DO NOT own your car, unless you have the MSO (Manufacturer's Statement of Origin.) When the police ask for my driver's license and registration, I only give them my IDP, and don't give them the registration, since I don't have one as my car is not registered with the government. Once the police realize that you are outside their jursidiction, they let you go.

    http://www.ptialaska.net/~swampy/interest/travel _2.html

    Cheers

  84. Offshore Crypto Development? by Myself · · Score: 1

    So what if we all ssh into servers running in Nauru and develop code there, is it restricted in any way?

  85. Re: money laundering by jsm2 · · Score: 2

    ? It isn't obvious to me how a tax auditor could determine that an offshore company, paying you from a numbered offshore account, is actually just you in disguise.

    Well, the first thing he would do would be to ask you "who owns this company?". If you answer "I don't know", then you have just committed a very serious offence indeed. Depending on circumstances and jurisdiction, the guy may be able to subpoena your lawyer or accountant and force them to grass on you. He can certainly have your house searched for the particulars of ownership. And your bank will usually want to know the background of the offshore company it's dealing with before accepting transfers, which is information it will give up without even protesting.

    Your example is absolutely fine in principle. But you have to add a lot more layers of the same thing (so that you can make it much less likely that the auditor will ask you or your friends a killer question) to make it work in practice.

    Is this a minor glitch on your part

    Yes, sorry. I realised halfway through the post that I didn't want to imply that I'd ever designed laundering schemes. What I did were tax avoidance (!=evasion, although the IR didn't always agree) schemes. But although your objective in these schemes is always that they be legal, there's always a temptation to add a few layers of "security through obscurity", which is the same sort of thing money launderers do, so one gets a fair enough feel for what will and won't work.

    jsm

  86. Re:offshore confusion -- asset protection, not tax by zot+o'connor · · Score: 1

    I believe using offshore anonymous bank accounts are generally used for illegal or shady purposes This is wrong, but often broadcast by the IRS. Any assest transfer that is used for illegal purposes can be voided. The real reason for going offshore is protection of assests. It can be much harder for a lawyer to sue you if you have previously moved your money offshore. The "tax haven" countries have stricter laws for privacy and predatory lawsuits. http://www.offshorecorpservices.com is a client.

    --

    --
    Zot O'Connor
  87. Compound interest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Now calculate how much you'll make on that extra money over your lifetime assuming 10% compound interest in your investments. Paying even such a relatively small amount of tax each year will cost you millions and millions of dollars over your lifetime.