 |
|
| Send an Email Via Reply Form |
 |
Write an Email Message Direct |
 |
Weekly
Update Bulletin On-Line.........
.. In The News and Readers Write In (with our answers to Questions).......... |
| INVESTMENT
NEWS & NOTES:
. Many clients and readers have sent in letters lately asking about banking issues and investments. There are two things which are of concern lately for most clients. One item is of course the declining US stock market and its How Low Can it Go track. In other words, investors are looking for seemingly safe places to put money whereby capital preservation is one key element, of course coupled with some decent rate of interest or return (in comparison to the anemic interest rates in the US and Europe for bank CD's and other fixed income investments). . The other item or issue is the fact that some banks and or investment firms have made the simple idea of opening an account, somewhat of a dubious if not impossible task. Of course many banks blame the heightened concern over combating terrorism and so on, as being the reason and additional scrutiny for new accounts. Ironically, it has been reported by major US news wire services that Bin Laden and company had previously converted all of their assets to gold, diamonds, cash and whatever other kind of non-traceable and non-attachable assets. So, it would seem that the terrorists are not even investing in the stock markets or banking anymore, and it is the honest small investor stuck with a problem (of trying to open an account while being suspected of being a terrorist or general bad guy). However, we do have two possible solutions that we would like to share with you. One of these solutions comes from Ireland and the other from (in part) the Dominican Republic. I will call these Troubled Times Investment Option I (for Ireland) and Option D (for the Dominican Republic): . OPTION I: . We have spoken before about a well-capitalized investment company offering a number of unique products and services from its base in the International Financial Center, located in Dublin-Ireland (Ireland set up a sort of Free Zone for financial services companies some years back in Dublin, which has been a tremendous success). In any event, one of the firm's senior management recently contacted me about a new product they are offering that I think will be very attractive for clients. The product is a new closed end fund, called the Capital Protected Fund and it works as follows: . This new closed-end fund (only a limited number of investors) will offer clients 100% guarantee of capital over the next five years (the life of the investment) plus offer the ability to earn a return from the funds investments into the foreign exchange markets. Foreign exchange is considered to be a hedge towards traditional stock market investments, as foreign exchange is not correlated to equity markets directly. . The fund estimates the annual returns to be about 8% per year (tax-free) PLUS the investor's principal is guaranteed (and is not invested in stocks, and therefore may be ideal for investors fearful about possible negative economic downside for the US and other stock markets). In order to get the guarantee, investors must hold on until the roll-up or liquidation date, which is NOVEMBER 1, 2007. But, at the worse case, investors at least have the opportunity to earn stock market like gains from the currency markets without the capital risk, and investors can liquidate at any time (to take profits if that is the case). Since the capital is guaranteed, it does make for an interesting alternative option in today's troubled markets. . Investors that are interested should act fairly soon, as the offering period will last until NOVEMBER 1 of this year (2002). After that, while valuations of the fund will vary, investors may liquidate at any time prior to the five years redemption date (if you have any gains) or hold on to your investment to obtain a guaranteed return of your initial investment. Fund valuation or share prices will be available via the Financial Times, Standard & Poors, Bloomberg or on-line by visiting the web site. The minimum invest is either US$5,000 or the equivalent in Euros, giving investors an interesting investment option for a Euro based account as well. . . OPTION D: . We mentioned some time ago that we were involved with a project to offer one of the first money market funds of its kind in US Dollars in the Dominican Republic, and we are fairly close to having this wrapped up. In fact, it is expected that the fund would be ready to accept new investors sometime in late OCTOBER. What's so special about this money market fund from all others? Good question and here is the answer: . We believe this will be the first offshore tax-free US dollar money market fund offering the higher returns found in the Dominican Republic and elsewhere (through bank CD's and commercial paper), plus offer investors the first money market fund with NUMBERED ACCOUNTS and debit card access for privacy. In addition, one of the largest banks in the country will act as the fund's custodian. Also, a respected public accounting firm will audit the fund annually. In either case, privacy of investors is assured as auditors will of course audit the accounts, but since they are numbered, will not have access to client information. It is estimated that this money market fund will be able to offer an initial return of 8% to 9% based on current rates in the Dominican Republic for US Dollar investments. However, to limit risk or exposure to any one market, the fund will be capped off at US$20 Million per country, but the fund would start off in the DR of course. In addition, investors of course benefit from a diversified fund of both commercial paper and bank CDs (as opposed to investing in only one single issue on their own). Minimum initial investment is US$10,000. . Investors interested in more information for either of these products should send an email with their name, full mailing address, telephone, fax and email information to: js@ascotadvisory.com . . IN THE NEWS: . . U.S. CHECKS ON OFFSHORE ACCOUNTS By James Rowley, Bloomberg News - Posted August 16 2002 . Washington · The U.S. government is seeking MasterCard International Inc. records to identify tax cheaters whose offshore bank accounts cost the Treasury tens of billions of dollars in annual tax revenue. The Justice Department said it asked a Miami federal judge to let the Internal Revenue Service examine MasterCard's files of credit cards issued by banks in more than 30 countries that are either tax havens or permit secret bank accounts. Included are Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Belize, Bermuda and St. Kitts and Nevis. Offshore accounts have enabled people to evade billions of dollars of income taxes each year in the United States, Eileen O'Connor, head of the Justice Department's tax division, said in a statement. The information obtained with the summons will help the IRS identify more tax evaders. The Treasury loses between $20 billion and $40 billion in tax revenue each year because of offshore accounts used by 1 million to 2 million people, according to the General Accounting Office, the congressional auditing agency. Only 117,000 Americans disclosed they had offshore accounts in 1999, the IRS said. . A summons similar to the one sought Thursday was issued by a federal judge in Florida in October 2000. It covered 1998 and 1999 bank records in the Bahamas, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and Barbados. The files were used to conduct civil audits and criminal investigations of credit-card purchases of jewelry, hotel stays, car rentals and airline tickets, the Justice Department said. "The information obtained through these summonses will provide the IRS with the ability to pursue tax cheats," Pamela Olson, acting assistant treasury secretary for tax policy said in a statement. . The IRS previously obtained $1.7 million by inspecting MasterCard records on 230,000 accounts to identify U.S. taxpayers who make purchases with the credit cards. Courts have also allowed the IRS to obtain records from Visa International Inc. and American Express Co. of credit cards issued by foreign banks, IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti said. . . http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/local/sfl-ztaxhaven16aug16.story?coll=sfla%2Dbusiness%2Dheadlines . Also from Bloomberg (sent in by a reader, but I do not have the on-line link for you): . . IRS SEEKS CUSTOMER RECORDS FROM AOL, EBay in Offshore Tax Probe - Washington, Aug. 29 (Bloomberg) - By: Ryan J. Donmoyer . The Internal Revenue Service went to court to force dozens of companies, including AOL Time Warner Inc., EBay Inc. and AMR Corp.'s American Airlines to surrender information on customers the tax collector suspects are hiding income in offshore bank accounts. The tax agency is seeking records from airlines, hotels, rental car companies, retailers, Internet companies, and shipping companies, including Delta Airlines Inc., Ramada Inc., Cendant Corp.'s Avis Rent a Car Inc., Amazon.com Inc., the Gap, Inc., DHL Worldwide Express, and AT&T Corp. The companies are not the target of the investigation, the IRS said. The summonses filed in federal courts in seven cities mark the first attempt by the IRS to review documents from companies whose wares or services were purchased with credit cards linked to offshore accounts. The action comes after the tax collector forced credit card issuers Visa International Inc., MasterCard Inc., and American Express Co. to turn over information on cardholders in Antigua and Barbuda, the Bahamas and the Cayman Islands. . In U.S. District Courts across the country, the IRS is moving forward with its effort to combat offshore tax evasion,'' IRS Commissioner Charles Rossotti said. ``In the weeks and months ahead, the IRS will work aggressively to pursue offshore credit card holders who are not paying their fair share of taxes.'' The summonses were filed in Atlanta, Chicago, Dallas, San Francisco, Seattle, Newark, New Jersey, and Alexandria, Virginia. Other companies affected include UAL Corp.'s United Airlines; Southwest Airlines Co.; Ford Motor Co.'s Hertz Corp.; Mary Kay Corp.; and Sabre Holdings Corporation. . The summonses were prompted by transaction information the tax agency got from MasterCard and American Express in the last year. In some cases the IRS doesn't know the name or address of the cardholder; that is what the agency is seeking from the merchants, said Dale Hart, deputy commissioner in the agency's small business and self-employed division. For example, the IRS may ask a rental car company for the name and address of the individual who used a credit card linked to an offshore account to rent a car, Hart said. It may seek the home address entered with Amazon.com or EBay. The merchants themselves have done nothing wrong, she said. We have no reason to expect that these companies would be anything less than cooperative,'' said Hart, who added the IRS was seeking only limited information. Two weeks ago the Justice Department asked a Miami federal judge to let the IRS examine MasterCard's files of credit cards issued by banks in more than 30 countries that are either tax havens or permit secret bank accounts. Included are Switzerland, Liechtenstein, Belize, Bermuda and St. Kitts and Nevis. . The Treasury loses between $20 billion and $40 billion in tax revenue each year because of offshore accounts used by 1 million to 2 million people, according to the General Accounting Office, the congressional auditing agency. Only 117,000 Americans disclosed they had offshore accounts in 1999, the last year for which statistics are available, the IRS said. . . EDITORS NOTE: As we stated earlier, the IRS does not know what the heck they are doing. First they went after Visa and MasterCard. Now, they realize (which we pointed out earlier) there is not enough information in the network to identify any cardholder as being an American (trying to evade taxes). As a result, the new deal is to try and collect information from merchants and tie that in to the database of the millions of people who have a credit card from a non-US bank. Good luck guys. Looking for US addresses? Who says a cardholder using the card inside the US could not or would not pose as a tourist and provide a driving license (from another country with a non-US address) or provide a postal mail drop outside of the US for things like on-line / catalog purchases. What about using cards in places that perhaps do not ask for ID or address information, such as restaurants or duty-free stores in airports. Personally, I agree with President Bush, but I would take it one step further. Aside from sending 2,000 IRS laptop computers to Afghanistan, I would send the same IRS agents that use them there as well. Let them chase the poor goat herders in the mountains for taxes. Of course, I might suggest some sort of government issued protective hear gear for the IRS agents to prevent the mountain herdsmen from lopping off their heads. . . READERS WRITE IN: . . John, . You made an interesting statement in the latest newsletter that generated a question I wonder about. If I did expatriate and renounced US citizenship, would I be able to collect Social Security? How about the money in my IRA, and what about money I have in a state retirement plan from one of the US states? I'm still 10 years from being able to collect SS, (unless they up the age again) so I will probably not be in the US to collect it, but it will be over $2000/mo. My IRA is self-directed, so who knows. It could be a good amount as well. The state retirement plan - only about $400+/month. Point is, the combination would be more than enough to live well offshore, so what will my options be if I renounce US citizenship OR if I just establish offshore residency? . . EDITORS REPLY: A very interesting question and one that I do not have a direct legal answer to, other than to say, considering many non-US citizens currently pay into Social Security and are entitled to benefits, I do not see the connection between US citizenship and US Social Security. However, on the other hand, based on an experience of someone who wrote to me and attempted on no less than five occasions recently to renounce their US citizenship via a US consulate abroad, it would seem they will not let you renounce even if you tried to do so correctly (by attempting to fill out all the proper forms and so on). . I would say that based upon what many clients tell me, it probably would be best to simply establish residency (and or citizenship) outside of the US and seek whatever tax advantages might apply. For example, there is currently a tax-free exemption on earned income up to US$78,000 if you live and work outside of the US, although it would be interesting to find out if that applies (or not) to Social Security. Technically we of course are talking about earned or salaried income vs. pension income, so they are two different forms of income to be sure. But, you can of course have your social security direct deposited either to a US bank (and access the account via a debit card from abroad) or have your funds direct deposited to your US Dollar account with your non-US bank as well. In addition, many countries will not locally tax foreign source pension income either (for foreigners retiring there) so there are a number of interesting angles to pursue. . . Another Reader Asks: . . Hello Mr. Schroder. Your updates are very informative and I thank you for your up to date information. However, I have a question about Dominican bank accounts. I heard rumors that the Dominican government is planning to tax such accounts. Is this information accurate? Are there any laws been passed that will affect this type of investments in the near future? Please advice. . EDITORS REPLY: I have not heard of any such legislation, although that does not mean that someone did not try to introduce it. As I have said earlier, some crazy congressman can introduce legislation that requires chickens to wear hats, but that in and of itself does not mean it will become law. Keep in mind that a large percentage of banking deposits and US deposits especially are accounts owned by foreigners (some say the figure is about 40%, others claim it to be about 60%). So, imagine the impact of say 40% of the US Dollar deposits getting sucked out of the local banking system overnight because the government now wants to tax bank account interest. It does not make any sense, but then again most politicians never do. Personally, I do not see the Dominican Government as being that stupid. The only reason why foreigners put their money in the DR in the first place is because: A. Bank Account interest is 100% locally tax-free and B. Interest rates for US Dollar deposits are higher than they are elsewhere. If any of these two things change, the money will fly out of here like a bat out of hell. Interest rates are a function of the free market and if it ever comes to pass that the banks have more money than they know what to do with (such as is the case in Panama), well - it's a problem the banks here would like to have. . Taxes or lack thereof are a function of the government and politicians, and as such are a non-natural element or intervention into the economy. Free market forces act on their own and are hard to control, but governments do have control over taxes and tax incentives they might put into place or not (and are directly responsible for the effects, be they positive or negative). In short, I cannot see even the local politicians to be so shortsighted, but I guess we will have to wait and see. . On the subject of taxes - Another Reader sent in the Following: . Subject: Taxes Explained - If you don't understand the Democrats' version of tax cuts (and you are Not alone), this will explain it for you: . 50,000 people go to a baseball game, but the game was rained out. A refund was then due. The team was about to mail refunds when the Congressional Democrats stopped them and suggested that they send out refund amounts based on the Democrat National Committee's interpretation of fairness. After all, if the refunds were made based on the price each person paid for the tickets, most of the money would go to the wealthiest ticket holders. That would be unconscionable. The DNC plan says: . People in the $10 seats will get back $15, because they have less money to spend. Call it an "Earned" Income Ticket Credit". Persons "earn" it by demonstrating little ambition, few skills and poor work habits, thus keeping them at entry-level wages. People in the $25 seats will get back $25, because that's only fair. People in the $50 seats will get back $1, because they already make a lot of money and don't need a refund. If they can afford a $50 ticket, then they must not be paying enough taxes. People in the $75 luxury seats will have to pay another $50, because they have way too much to spend. The people driving by the stadium who couldn't afford to watch the game will get $10 each, even though they didn't pay anything in, because they need the most help. Now do you understand? If not, contact Representative Richard Gephart or Senator Tom Daschle for assistance. . Virtually anyone can be a Democrat. Just simply quit thinking and vote that way. But if you want to be a GOOD Democrat, there are some prerequisites you must have first. Compare the below and see how you rate. . 1. You have to believe the AIDS virus is spread by a lack of federal funding. 2. You have to believe that the same teacher who can't teach 4th graders how to read is somehow qualified to teach those same kids about sex. 3. You have to believe that guns, in the hands of law-abiding Americans, are more of a threat than U.S. nuclear weapons technology in the hands of Chinese communists. 4. You have to believe that there was no art before Federal funding. 5. You have to believe that global temperatures are less affected by cyclical, documented changes in the earth's climate, and more affected by yuppies driving SUVs. 6. You have to believe that gender roles are artificial but being homosexual is natural. 7. You have to be against capital punishment but support abortion on demand. 8. You have to believe that businesses create oppression and governments create prosperity. 9. You have to believe that hunters don't care about nature, but loony activists from Seattle do. 10. You have to believe that self-esteem is more important than actually doing something to earn it. 11. You have to believe the military, not corrupt politicians start wars. 12. You have to believe the NRA is bad, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution, while the ACLU is good, because it supports certain parts of the Constitution. 13. You have to believe that taxes are too low, but ATM fees are too high. 14. You have to believe that Margaret Sanger and Gloria Steinem are more important to American history than Thomas Jefferson, General Robert E. Lee or Thomas Edison. 15. You have to believe that standardized tests are racist, but racial quotas and set-asides aren't. 16. You have to believe Hillary Clinton is really a lady. 17. You have to believe that the only reason socialism hasn't worked anywhere it's been tried, is because the right people haven't been in charge. 18. You have to believe conservatives telling the truth belong in jail, but a liar and sex offender belongs in the White House (from '93 through 2000!) 19. You have to believe that homosexual parades displaying drag, transvestites and bestiality should be constitutionally protected and manger scenes at Christmas should be illegal. 20. You have to believe that illegal Democratic Party funding by the Chinese is somehow in the best interest of the United States. . Vote Democratic... It's easier than getting a job. . . EDITORS REPLY: Thank you for your letter and your comments. . Another Reader Writes: . . I agree with the gentleman that has lived 4 years in Brazil. I know what is good and bad about the United States, what I want to find out, what is GOOD and BAD about the DR. We can all criticize but can we supply constructive criticism and suggestions for improving that which we believe to be in need of repair or abolishment. Give us info on the DR!!! Still waiting to see you print the info I sent to you written by Jack Wheeler in the July Strategic Investment newsletter concerning the IRS not having been codified into law. . EDITORS REPLY: Well, I think the point in general is that the Dominican Republic is a country in transition, and they know it. It is not perfect and no country is perfect, but they do not throw rocks either (knowing they live in a glass house). This is true for many other smaller nations by the way. Which is to say that the US is one of the few countries that berates, chastises, criticizes and generally attempts to dictate policy (on numerous levels) to others with the attitude that the US somehow is perfect and should be emulated. I have news for you, they are not, but for some reason they don't know it. The Dominican Republic is not perfect, and they do know it. . What is it that you want to hear about the DR that is negative? How about Europe, Panama, China or anyplace else? Just log onto the US State Department fact sheet on each country and take a read. The US government has more reasons NOT to visit another country than they do anything else. In addition, most Americans are somehow convinced the rest of the world is in disrepair and needs the US to step in and show them the proper path to take. Ironically, they are the only ones that think this. You want some constructive advice? Write your elected representative and tell him or her to stop giving money away to foreign nations. Your money, that is. Tell him or her to start changing the tax laws and other incentives so American businesses are not forced to leave, and American citizens for that matter as well. . You do not really want to hear about the negative things concerning the Dominican Republic, Thailand, Panama, Ecuador or anyplace else. You already know. What you want is for me to stop making note of the things I do concerning the US. Things like the corruption, high taxes, inept civil service, failed government run social programs and so on. Such are situations or problems that for sure do exist in other nations elsewhere. You just do not like hearing about it when it comes to the US, although the US is one of the few nations on earth that thinks it should somehow be emulated or put on a pedestal as an example of what is perfect. Sorry, but I disagree with such a philosophy. . On the subject of Jack Wheeler and this strategic investment newsletter, the name rings a bell, but perhaps there is some reason I did not print it. However, if it another one of these crack pot arguments that the IRS is illegal and so on, then for sure I would not have bothered to reprint it. You can cite the US Constitution, a court case from 1842, the book of Job, the ingredients for Captain Crunch cereal or anything else - The IRS, legal or not, is here to stay and is here to take your money. That's a fact and no amount of fighting in court is going to change that (plus they have the guns and the computers - the ones they didn't loose). So, my argument is, if the US is just as corrupt, just as inefficient and just as inept as anyplace else - then why not live anyplace else - where at least the taxes are lower (or non existent), the weather is good and the cost of living is lower (not to mention the cost of a college education for your children)? Here end-eth the lesson. . . An Alternate Point of View From this Reader: . . Dear John: I won't spend a lot of time beating a dead horse. Your reply to the guy living in Brazil that loves the US so much was certainly well written and "right on". Which brings me to the part you wrote about the state of affairs here in the US not being the fault of Bin Laden, Saddam, and various other things. The US and its people are blaming our US problems on everything but ourselves. I am one American that is not buying it. Our drug problems should be dealt with right here in the good ole US of A. Not in the jungles of Columbia. Our looming monetary problems are the result of an over zealous, active, and huge US federal and State Governments non-sensical spending habits, and it should be down-sized by at least half. (I'm being very generous here) We need to re-think all foreign policies (even though it may be too late in the Middle East game). Well, I kept that short for once. . . EDITORS REPLY: Thank you for your letter and your comments. I'll keep it brief too, as I think I have already said enough earlier. . . Another Reader Writes: . John: . I feel compelled to share a recent debate I witnessed on Chris Matthew's Hardball cable program. It relates to an issue you have touched upon on several occasions. The host (who was substituting for Chris Matthews and whose name I don't know) was interviewing two guests who took opposing positions on the issue of American corporations reincorporating overseas as a means of limiting their tax liability. One of the guests was Vermont Congressman Bernard Sanders, the only admitted and self professed Socialist in the U.S. House of Representatives (I'll let you guess which side of the issue he represented). The other guest was not someone I recognized but offered some sensible points in defending his position. . This guest pointed out that corporations can not be blamed for taking legal steps to limit their taxes as taxes have become a very high cost of doing business. He pointed out that we (the USA) used to be a low tax nation but that we are no longer a low tax nation. Therefore, corporations have to look at ways to protect their bottom line. The Congressman countered that each of us have responsibilities as citizens and that we are either going to all be Americans and pay our "fair share" of taxes or we are shirking our responsibilities to the system. In other words, this Congressman, an avowed socialist, was trumpeting the patriotic card. John, what I find so humorously ironic about this is that Socialists, as part of their vitriolic attack on the market system, have always asserted that large corporations have no loyalty to anything but the bottom line. Also, Socialist have always looked with disdain on the concept of patriotism, espousing the brotherhood of man and one worldist concept instead. Now, suddenly here is a known socialist singing the praises of patriotism as a way of attacking corporations and assailing their lack of responsibility to the nation. The host took the Congressman's side of the issue. . The interesting thing is that it has long been settled in American jurisprudence that no one is obligated to pay one penny more in taxes than the law mandates. Thus, no one is ever chastised for going to a good accountant who saves that person as much money as possible in avoidable taxes. But now, suddenly, corporations are not supposed to take the very legal step of reincorporating in jurisdictions that give them a better deal. Isn't that what the market system is about? I think what is happening here relates to something you have touched upon in the past. The industrialized, developed countries have saddled themselves with humongous welfare states that are getting increasingly difficult to support, yet politically are very difficult to curtail, much less dismantle. At the same time, the only thing that other less developed countries that are not saddled with such burdens need to do is to attract businesses that will provide jobs for their people and promote economic development to the country as a whole. One example of this is the DR. The DR may be called a poor nation but I'll say this: the people there take care of themselves and their families without any reliance on Government whatsoever (something for which they are to be admired). . What are those countries doing, well they are telling the corporations come here to our shores. We will give you a low cost, low tax business environment. Thus the world's poorer countries have finally found a card they can deal to their advantage in their relations with the larger, wealthier countries. It will be interesting indeed to see how all this will play out in the coming years. The Congress is now proposing to pass legislation that would bar any company that avoids taxes in this manner from receiving government contracts. Well, this may pass, but I don't think it would pass constitutional muster. Such would constitute an unequal protection of the law, a violation of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution (not that such a thing would ever stop the powers that be, as we have seen all too many times in our history). That is, it would exclude American companies from government contracts for merely exercising a legal right (to incorporate elsewhere) while it would not penalize foreign companies who do not incorporate in the U.S. (such companies still be eligible for government contracts). Anyway John, please keep up the good work. I always enjoy and look forward to reading your newsletter. . EDITORS REPLY: Thank you for your letter. To prove a point, I got four telephone calls this month from American companies that want to relocate to the Free Zones in the DR (or wanted to investigate the idea). Can you guess what the main reason was? The competition is killing them because the competition either has factories in China or is subcontracting work out to Chinese companies and can sell for half the price. Despite all this talk about Patriotism, Americans still want to shop at Walmart and buy a can opener for 99 cents (made in china) instead of paying US$9 for one made in the USA (maybe the consumers have no choice, maybe they cannot afford the made in the USA can opener anymore). Also, China still gets most favored nation trading status after it was proven the Chinese were selling weapons to terrorist groups in the Middle East. So, American consumers still want low prices, which means: Made in China, Ecuador or where ever else. The State Department and the politicians in general are smoking something, as they want to help the Chinese build up their own economy even after they know the Chinese are or were selling rocket launchers to Bin Ladin. . Yet, if American companies leave (which they have to do in order to survive) then they are ingrates. But wait, we cannot lower corporate or individual taxes because the government is already broke as it is. We cannot have Americans working for 80 cents an hour (like workers do elsewhere) - that would be un-American. We cannot cut government spending (we have to feed the world to put on a show we are still number one, and prop up internal social programs if any money is left over), and we cannot have all those unpatriotic Americans and American companies expatriating. What can we do? We (the government and many individual consumers as well) can instead continue to borrow money we do not have, to live a lifestyle we really cannot afford any longer, ruin the economy even further and burden our children with even more taxes and or debt later on to pay for it all. While we are at it, let us falsify the books and play other kinds of accounting and word games to convince ourselves nothing is wrong. . In short, it is the insanity of a drunk that claims he is not an alcoholic, and continues to drink even more. . . Another Reader Asks: . John - Some time ago you made mention that there was a company who was doing title insurance for overseas properties. Do you have that info? . EDITORS REPLY: The only American Title Insurance Company that I am aware of that has started expanding into Latin America and of course offering title insurance in those markets is STEWART Title, which I believe has their main headquarters in Texas. I know they are in Costa Rica, Panama and the Dominican Republic. You may want to contact the head office and ask if they have opened offices elsewhere in Central or South America. . . This information has been compiled and presented by John Schroder of Ascot Advisory Services, for the benefit of clients and readers. Ascot Advisory Services provides assistance with such matters as offshore company formation, Panama Foundations, offshore banking, and special services in the Dominican Republic regarding residency, free zone applications, etc. For more information: |