http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/08/20/jims-mailbox-1335/
Jim Sinclair’s Commentary
USA FACTA Legislation. GOTS is to "get out of the system," not hide from it because there is no safe place to hide.
Hi Jim,
Glad you are feeling better. Loved your conferences. Sat through two in LA several months ago.
Could you please give me a list of Singapore Banks that take Americans? Please list in order of your preference (best first).
Also do you know of a storage facility at the Singapore airport that you can recommend? It is my understanding Egon only does business in Switzerland.
You should think about coming to Austin sometime.
Thank you,
CIGA Sharron
Dear Sharron,
International banking is a complex undertaking which should only be utilized for the express purpose of safeguarding your funds from the effects of a bank failure or the Bail In.. As a matter of course you should seek advice from a tax attorney in your jurisdiction.
If you wish to open a bank account in Singapore the following banks may allow you to do so,subject to your individual circumstances. Your personal attendance would be required.
DBS Bank Ltd
Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd (OCBC)
United Overseas Bank Ltd (UOB)
The FACTA legislation has made it increasingly difficult for US citizens to open bank accounts outside of the US. FACTA imposes onerous reporting conditions on overseas banks when they allow a US citizen to open an account consequently banks are now demanding very large deposits as a prerequisite. That deposit can be as high as $3 Million in some cases. Before travelling to Singapore you should contact each of the banks listed above to ascertain their requirements.
The Singapore Precious Metals Exchange (SGPMX) offers allocated storage at the Singapore Airport. All customer’s bullion under storage is in the custody of the custodian, Singapore Certis Cisco. The SGPMX does not have access to the bullion under storage. Currently the SGPMX is offering 12 months free storage for bullion purchased through them. You can open an account with the SGPMX without travelling to Singapore.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Thank you for your work: your teaching, coaching, web site and the Q&A sessions. I attended the LA session.
In addition to PMs and stocks, I have an annuity that I’m debating about. I don’t recall the ins and outs of it. I am dealing with what seems to be a sound insurance company. However, it seems that any financial services company will be directly hit in a bail-in, etc. and that the "guaranteed annuity" will suffer – either the insurance company will go bankrupt or they will have to give haircuts so they survive.
Does this thinking seem reasonable?
I would not be collecting the annuity until over 10 years from now. If the "great leveling" occurs at any time in the next 10 years, it would be wiped out or compromised. Given that it is a small portion of my overall investments, I’m debating about keeping it or liquidating it. You can’t help on that level, but you can help me understand how insurance companies will fare in the future shake-up.
Thank you,
CIGA Evan
Dear Evan,
Your thought process is indeed correct. The likelihood of insurance companies being immune from the effects of the Bail In is very low. You should ask yourself what sort of investments the funds are deployed in. If they are in stocks they are going to be likely held in a street name which exposes them to broker counterparty risk as well as the Bail In. The reality is that in order to insulate yourself from the crisis you must GOTS now. That would include exiting the annuity and accepting any early exit penalty, if it does apply in your case. Some short term pain now will translate into long term gain and peace of mind. Exiting now and redeploying into investments you have total custody of will be far more profitable than remaining in the system and facing the consequences this crisis will bring. Jim’s advice is that you must eliminate all third parties between you and your investments. It is the guiding principle that we should adhere to.
Just as a reminder I will repeat Jim’s GOTS check list which lays out what we should be doing now before it is too late.
1. Your equities are held in certificate form.
2. You have no Federal retirement funds.
3. You have no CDs and investments in bonds.
4. You have modest money deposited among selected BRICs countries.
5. You store your own precious metals.
6. You have no mortgage obligations.
7. You keep cash on hand for 6 months expenses.
8. You have no consumer debt at all.
9. You have a small hobby farm for protein and veggies outside of where you are living with no mortgage debt, set up green.
10. You have a gas, diesel or electric car with high fuel mileage for the farm.
11. You have a generator with large fuel capacity for the farm.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
======================================================
Jim Sinclair’s Commentary
USA FACTA Legislation. GOTS is to "get out of the system," not hide from it because there is no safe place to hide.
Hi Jim,
Glad you are feeling better. Loved your conferences. Sat through two in LA several months ago.
Could you please give me a list of Singapore Banks that take Americans? Please list in order of your preference (best first).
Also do you know of a storage facility at the Singapore airport that you can recommend? It is my understanding Egon only does business in Switzerland.
You should think about coming to Austin sometime.
Thank you,
CIGA Sharron
Dear Sharron,
International banking is a complex undertaking which should only be utilized for the express purpose of safeguarding your funds from the effects of a bank failure or the Bail In.. As a matter of course you should seek advice from a tax attorney in your jurisdiction.
If you wish to open a bank account in Singapore the following banks may allow you to do so,subject to your individual circumstances. Your personal attendance would be required.
DBS Bank Ltd
Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd (OCBC)
United Overseas Bank Ltd (UOB)
The FACTA legislation has made it increasingly difficult for US citizens to open bank accounts outside of the US. FACTA imposes onerous reporting conditions on overseas banks when they allow a US citizen to open an account consequently banks are now demanding very large deposits as a prerequisite. That deposit can be as high as $3 Million in some cases. Before travelling to Singapore you should contact each of the banks listed above to ascertain their requirements.
The Singapore Precious Metals Exchange (SGPMX) offers allocated storage at the Singapore Airport. All customer’s bullion under storage is in the custody of the custodian, Singapore Certis Cisco. The SGPMX does not have access to the bullion under storage. Currently the SGPMX is offering 12 months free storage for bullion purchased through them. You can open an account with the SGPMX without travelling to Singapore.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Thank you for your work: your teaching, coaching, web site and the Q&A sessions. I attended the LA session.
In addition to PMs and stocks, I have an annuity that I’m debating about. I don’t recall the ins and outs of it. I am dealing with what seems to be a sound insurance company. However, it seems that any financial services company will be directly hit in a bail-in, etc. and that the "guaranteed annuity" will suffer – either the insurance company will go bankrupt or they will have to give haircuts so they survive.
Does this thinking seem reasonable?
I would not be collecting the annuity until over 10 years from now. If the "great leveling" occurs at any time in the next 10 years, it would be wiped out or compromised. Given that it is a small portion of my overall investments, I’m debating about keeping it or liquidating it. You can’t help on that level, but you can help me understand how insurance companies will fare in the future shake-up.
Thank you,
CIGA Evan
Dear Evan,
Your thought process is indeed correct. The likelihood of insurance companies being immune from the effects of the Bail In is very low. You should ask yourself what sort of investments the funds are deployed in. If they are in stocks they are going to be likely held in a street name which exposes them to broker counterparty risk as well as the Bail In. The reality is that in order to insulate yourself from the crisis you must GOTS now. That would include exiting the annuity and accepting any early exit penalty, if it does apply in your case. Some short term pain now will translate into long term gain and peace of mind. Exiting now and redeploying into investments you have total custody of will be far more profitable than remaining in the system and facing the consequences this crisis will bring. Jim’s advice is that you must eliminate all third parties between you and your investments. It is the guiding principle that we should adhere to.
Just as a reminder I will repeat Jim’s GOTS check list which lays out what we should be doing now before it is too late.
1. Your equities are held in certificate form.
2. You have no Federal retirement funds.
3. You have no CDs and investments in bonds.
4. You have modest money deposited among selected BRICs countries.
5. You store your own precious metals.
6. You have no mortgage obligations.
7. You keep cash on hand for 6 months expenses.
8. You have no consumer debt at all.
9. You have a small hobby farm for protein and veggies outside of where you are living with no mortgage debt, set up green.
10. You have a gas, diesel or electric car with high fuel mileage for the farm.
11. You have a generator with large fuel capacity for the farm.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
======================================================
Jim’s MailboxPosted August 26th, 2013 at 1:49 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Mr. Sinclair,
I suspect that there are a great number of people in a similar boat as I am regarding their 401 K options. I was basically told that to get access to my 401 K funds I had three options. I need to be at least 59 1/2 or could take out a loan against part of my contribution or quit my job. I’m not 59 1/2 and I can’t quit my job and I don’t want to pay interest to borrow my own money.
On your website a colleague of yours named Peter Mickelberg gave advice to a CIGA named Harley to at the very least stop any voluntary contributions to his plan. I do have limited options to invest the funds in something of my own choosing but I am in no way qualified to be a broker and it seems that most of the brokers only try to steer you to equities. I know for sure that I wouldn’t be allowed to transfer my 401 K management outside the USA but if there were a broker in the USA who thought "outside the box" so to speak who didn’t follow the herd mentality that would be very helpful. By this broker being in the USA I might be able to direct my 401 K funds under his management. I would really like to put it in some type of metals fund but currently within my plan don’t have that option.
One other thing that really concerns me is what happens during and after the crisis that is approaching. With the "Bail In" fears we all face, banks don’t seem to be a safe option if your assets are over the FDIC limit. I don’t really feel totally safe investing in foreign countries because what’s to stop them from just confiscating foreign assets. I don’t say this jokingly but what we need is something like a "Sinclair Bank and Trust" where a person would know there hard earned assets would be safe. The Too Big To Fail banks seem to always come out smelling like a rose, is there any way for average citizens to place their assets there? Other than burying it in the backyard I don’t see many good options. As I said I think a lot of people are facing this same dilemma and are really worried and would really appreciate some guidance.
Thank you,
CIGA Doug
Hi Doug,
In regards to a broker that thinks outside of the box I suggest you contact Mishka vom Dorp of Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. Mishka has been assisting CIGAs to have there shares transferred into DRS. His firm can also provide assistance regarding your 401K. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Jim advises that you should not place any faith in the FDIC guarantee, rather to offer the best protection outside of international banking you should consider banking with small, local banks that took no TARP funds and those who were not involved in the "Bail Out’.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Hi Mr. Sinclair,
I suspect that there are a great number of people in a similar boat as I am regarding their 401 K options. I was basically told that to get access to my 401 K funds I had three options. I need to be at least 59 1/2 or could take out a loan against part of my contribution or quit my job. I’m not 59 1/2 and I can’t quit my job and I don’t want to pay interest to borrow my own money.
On your website a colleague of yours named Peter Mickelberg gave advice to a CIGA named Harley to at the very least stop any voluntary contributions to his plan. I do have limited options to invest the funds in something of my own choosing but I am in no way qualified to be a broker and it seems that most of the brokers only try to steer you to equities. I know for sure that I wouldn’t be allowed to transfer my 401 K management outside the USA but if there were a broker in the USA who thought "outside the box" so to speak who didn’t follow the herd mentality that would be very helpful. By this broker being in the USA I might be able to direct my 401 K funds under his management. I would really like to put it in some type of metals fund but currently within my plan don’t have that option.
One other thing that really concerns me is what happens during and after the crisis that is approaching. With the "Bail In" fears we all face, banks don’t seem to be a safe option if your assets are over the FDIC limit. I don’t really feel totally safe investing in foreign countries because what’s to stop them from just confiscating foreign assets. I don’t say this jokingly but what we need is something like a "Sinclair Bank and Trust" where a person would know there hard earned assets would be safe. The Too Big To Fail banks seem to always come out smelling like a rose, is there any way for average citizens to place their assets there? Other than burying it in the backyard I don’t see many good options. As I said I think a lot of people are facing this same dilemma and are really worried and would really appreciate some guidance.
Thank you,
CIGA Doug
Hi Doug,
In regards to a broker that thinks outside of the box I suggest you contact Mishka vom Dorp of Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. Mishka has been assisting CIGAs to have there shares transferred into DRS. His firm can also provide assistance regarding your 401K. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Jim advises that you should not place any faith in the FDIC guarantee, rather to offer the best protection outside of international banking you should consider banking with small, local banks that took no TARP funds and those who were not involved in the "Bail Out’.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
We’ve all been fooled by the Kissinger article. The original is from a spoof magazine. Here’s the link:
http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/index.php?news=3089
Your pal,
CIGA Lorne
Dear Lorne,
Regarding the Kissinger article, twice it identified itself clearly as "Informed Satire."
Informed satire is all MOPE via MSM is. The article served its purpose. Read it more carefully.
Question everything even that written by gold people presented as fact when in truth it too is informed satire or maybe just a wild guess.
You cannot corner a metals futures market long or short that can produce endless contracts out of thin air as does the COMEX.
The volume of gold traded in the cash gold market anywhere is unknowable, and that certainly includes London.
The sale of Morgan’s vault is not an economic decision based on the profitability of proper management of a storage facility.
If you believe that silver is in critical short supply visit a private vault storage facility where it is used to block walls from battering ram intrusion by armored vehicles. If you believe that gold is plentiful try finding some in a private vault storage facility. Know the weakness of every storage facility is from within, not from outside.
If you are comfortable with your IRA self managed retirement account in gold and silver, storage arranged, know what you have is a high school locker as hard to open as was the lockers in Happy Days, the old sitcom.
Everything today is "Informed Satire," especially your daily financial life. Be your own central bank. Keep for own confidence. Question everything.
Jim
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/02/jims-mailbox-1341/
We’ve all been fooled by the Kissinger article. The original is from a spoof magazine. Here’s the link:
http://www.dailysquib.co.uk/index.php?news=3089
Your pal,
CIGA Lorne
Dear Lorne,
Regarding the Kissinger article, twice it identified itself clearly as "Informed Satire."
Informed satire is all MOPE via MSM is. The article served its purpose. Read it more carefully.
Question everything even that written by gold people presented as fact when in truth it too is informed satire or maybe just a wild guess.
You cannot corner a metals futures market long or short that can produce endless contracts out of thin air as does the COMEX.
The volume of gold traded in the cash gold market anywhere is unknowable, and that certainly includes London.
The sale of Morgan’s vault is not an economic decision based on the profitability of proper management of a storage facility.
If you believe that silver is in critical short supply visit a private vault storage facility where it is used to block walls from battering ram intrusion by armored vehicles. If you believe that gold is plentiful try finding some in a private vault storage facility. Know the weakness of every storage facility is from within, not from outside.
If you are comfortable with your IRA self managed retirement account in gold and silver, storage arranged, know what you have is a high school locker as hard to open as was the lockers in Happy Days, the old sitcom.
Everything today is "Informed Satire," especially your daily financial life. Be your own central bank. Keep for own confidence. Question everything.
Jim
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/02/jims-mailbox-1341/
Posted September 7th, 2013 at 1:27 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Dear Jim,
In the past keeping your money in a bank had 3 purposes: safety from robbery, bill paying convenience, and some protection from inflation through interest income. Now only bill paying exists – i.e., you get no interest income, and the chance of being robbed by ordinary criminals is minuscule compared to the demonstrated ability and willingness to rob you through the laws (savings and loans, Glass-Steagall repeal, 2008 bailout).
It’s worse than you think. You are lending with no security to a gambler You are not really even lending, you are giving away effective ownership because that money is not yours (you are an unsecured creditor) and laws are on the books defining you as the absolute last in line to be paid in a bankruptcy.
How likely are more bankruptcies? Gambling in the derivatives market has grown, not shrunk after 2008-to 10 times the GDP of the world, and they gamble with your money. You are the ‘clearing house’ to guarantee against counter-party risk.
They gambled with your money and when they lost it you had to replace that with more of your money. If they lose again it is you who will have to replace it with even more of what you have saved.
Dodd-Frank serves to protect the politicians from having to give them your money again in a direct way, a political impossibility post 2008 [lynching]–so legislation has been created for a bail-in, like Cyprus; so your congressman won’t be seen giving them your money, like last time. The law now just lets the failed take it directly from your account.
The above relates mostly to the major banks, but they are counter-parties to the smaller banks. The above is obvious with 5 minutes of clear thinking, but I also see the door having been opened for more ways to shift your money ‘from one perception to another,’ i.e. steal it legally.
If I were a banker, I would make some deliberately horrendous derivative bets with my brother in law’s firm in Hong Kong and when I lose on those bets, I would declare bankruptcy and pay off my brother in law with the money you deposited in my bank I would then ‘compensate’ you with stock in my now failed bank and light a cigar.
Don’t forget the predilection and pervasiveness of this when the laws in savings and loans permitted it, and note that organized crime is in banking in a big way (reference Richard Condon’s Prizzi novels).
If you think the FDIC will cover you when it hits the fan again… I would like to talk to you about a bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale.
CIGA Shelly W
Dear Ron,
Jim has advised many times that it is best to simply tune out from the news that emanates from MSN. The reality is that we are in gold because it is the only way to survive the monetary mayhem that the world’s central banks have engineered. The short term aberrations of the gold price brought about by the paper gold players are meaningless when viewed through a long term prism. If you are not a trader simply sit tight and add more physical gold or good quality gold stocks when those manipulations give you an opportunity to do so. Imitate the BRICs central banks and buy gold and gold related items on any and all weakness and ignore the spin. It is time to sit tight and keep things simple.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Dear Ron,
Jim advises that he agrees that your strategy is worthwhile.
Concerning your stocks, Jim strongly advises that whilst DRS affords a strong level of protection, holding them in certificate form provides the ultimate protection. Having a direct relationship with the company you are invested in is best for many reasons and accords with Jim’s core philosophy that we should eliminate all third parties between us and our investments.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Douglas
Your assessment is correct regarding DRS and your ROTH IRA.
The only point I would raise is Jim’s advice that all retirement accounts face the very real prospect of nationalization, just as is happening in Poland right now. Jim has reposted an article from Reuters that should make any retirement account holder understand that their account is at risk. The fact is that all governments won’t be able to resist the funds that are held in retirement accounts. They want your money to fund their excesses which is why Jim is pleading with us to GOTS now. You have done the correct thing in regard to DRS as that protects them from the effects of the ‘bail in’ and from broker counter-party risk but that will not protect them from nationalization. You should seriously consider Jim’s advice to exit now accepting the penalty and taxes otherwise you face having 100% of nothing when your hard earned assets are replaced by worthless sovereign paper. What is happening in Poland will happen elsewhere, it is only a matter of time and there may not be a lot of that left?
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Hi David,
Jim is strongly advising that we prepare for the ‘bail in’ now, so you must take action in that regard without delay. The same procedure applies in Canada. Look for smaller, local institutions and do your homework thoroughly. The days have gone when we assumed all banks were inherently safe. Jim is doing the Q&As because he is concerned that too few of us are taking action to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/07/jims-mailbox-1344/
Dear Jim,
In the past keeping your money in a bank had 3 purposes: safety from robbery, bill paying convenience, and some protection from inflation through interest income. Now only bill paying exists – i.e., you get no interest income, and the chance of being robbed by ordinary criminals is minuscule compared to the demonstrated ability and willingness to rob you through the laws (savings and loans, Glass-Steagall repeal, 2008 bailout).
It’s worse than you think. You are lending with no security to a gambler You are not really even lending, you are giving away effective ownership because that money is not yours (you are an unsecured creditor) and laws are on the books defining you as the absolute last in line to be paid in a bankruptcy.
How likely are more bankruptcies? Gambling in the derivatives market has grown, not shrunk after 2008-to 10 times the GDP of the world, and they gamble with your money. You are the ‘clearing house’ to guarantee against counter-party risk.
They gambled with your money and when they lost it you had to replace that with more of your money. If they lose again it is you who will have to replace it with even more of what you have saved.
Dodd-Frank serves to protect the politicians from having to give them your money again in a direct way, a political impossibility post 2008 [lynching]–so legislation has been created for a bail-in, like Cyprus; so your congressman won’t be seen giving them your money, like last time. The law now just lets the failed take it directly from your account.
The above relates mostly to the major banks, but they are counter-parties to the smaller banks. The above is obvious with 5 minutes of clear thinking, but I also see the door having been opened for more ways to shift your money ‘from one perception to another,’ i.e. steal it legally.
If I were a banker, I would make some deliberately horrendous derivative bets with my brother in law’s firm in Hong Kong and when I lose on those bets, I would declare bankruptcy and pay off my brother in law with the money you deposited in my bank I would then ‘compensate’ you with stock in my now failed bank and light a cigar.
Don’t forget the predilection and pervasiveness of this when the laws in savings and loans permitted it, and note that organized crime is in banking in a big way (reference Richard Condon’s Prizzi novels).
If you think the FDIC will cover you when it hits the fan again… I would like to talk to you about a bridge in Brooklyn that I have for sale.
CIGA Shelly W
Dear Ron,
Jim has advised many times that it is best to simply tune out from the news that emanates from MSN. The reality is that we are in gold because it is the only way to survive the monetary mayhem that the world’s central banks have engineered. The short term aberrations of the gold price brought about by the paper gold players are meaningless when viewed through a long term prism. If you are not a trader simply sit tight and add more physical gold or good quality gold stocks when those manipulations give you an opportunity to do so. Imitate the BRICs central banks and buy gold and gold related items on any and all weakness and ignore the spin. It is time to sit tight and keep things simple.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Dear Ron,
Jim advises that he agrees that your strategy is worthwhile.
Concerning your stocks, Jim strongly advises that whilst DRS affords a strong level of protection, holding them in certificate form provides the ultimate protection. Having a direct relationship with the company you are invested in is best for many reasons and accords with Jim’s core philosophy that we should eliminate all third parties between us and our investments.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Douglas
Your assessment is correct regarding DRS and your ROTH IRA.
The only point I would raise is Jim’s advice that all retirement accounts face the very real prospect of nationalization, just as is happening in Poland right now. Jim has reposted an article from Reuters that should make any retirement account holder understand that their account is at risk. The fact is that all governments won’t be able to resist the funds that are held in retirement accounts. They want your money to fund their excesses which is why Jim is pleading with us to GOTS now. You have done the correct thing in regard to DRS as that protects them from the effects of the ‘bail in’ and from broker counter-party risk but that will not protect them from nationalization. You should seriously consider Jim’s advice to exit now accepting the penalty and taxes otherwise you face having 100% of nothing when your hard earned assets are replaced by worthless sovereign paper. What is happening in Poland will happen elsewhere, it is only a matter of time and there may not be a lot of that left?
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Hi David,
Jim is strongly advising that we prepare for the ‘bail in’ now, so you must take action in that regard without delay. The same procedure applies in Canada. Look for smaller, local institutions and do your homework thoroughly. The days have gone when we assumed all banks were inherently safe. Jim is doing the Q&As because he is concerned that too few of us are taking action to protect ourselves and our loved ones.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/07/jims-mailbox-1344/
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 6th, 2013 at 8:26 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
I want to thank you for yesterday, particularly in light of how you have/are feeling.
I would appreciate clarification on IRA take over risk. I appreciate what you said yesterday regarding why wait as who knows what the rates will be if you do so. Unfortunately, we are in I believe a different situation. I am 57 and we have about $375k in retirement accounts in CEF, GTU, SVRZF, and TRX. My business has crashed to the point we are currently drawing a substantial part of our living expenses from our retirement. I hope to change this but based on what you said yesterday it may be close to (3)years before things are at a point where I can realistically expect to grow the business. As a result of our situation I can take quite a bit out of retirement at the lower tax rates(15 and then 25 % federally). We are looking to move to Washington where we will save another 6.5% versus NY. The net effect is that if we spread the withdrawals over multiple years we could save $50-$100k in taxes. If we take everything now the tax and penalty bite will bring our total net worth down to around $350K, and with us needing some of this each year to meet our living expenses, this does not give me the warm fuzzies.
Anyhow, yesterday it was very clear you felt holding money in banks was a bad idea that should be addressed immediately. Your position on IRAs was not as clear to me. For anyone with significant assets it seemed you saw no benefit to being in an IRA and it was simply a pay me now or later question, so the risk of staying in almost became a moot point as there was little reason to do so. In our situation there is a significant advantage to staying in and/or spreading risk over multiple years, the question is what is the risk? and is it worth it? And would there be ways to mitigate the risk(ie would there be a event that would act as the "canary in the coal mine" and say when this event happens the risk of IRAs being taken over has risen to a level you need to now exit).
Thank you again and I hope you continue to feel better.
CIGA Bob
Hi Bob,
The ‘canary in the mine’ you referred to may well be the news yesterday that in Poland exactly what Jim has been telling us is going to happen in the US is going to take place. The assets in retirement accounts will be used to bail out the government and the retiree will be left holding the bag, as always. As I have said before, there simply is no time to finesse your exit. Jim has made it very clear in his GOTS advice that all retirement accounts will be targeted and you should be exiting as soon as you can. To try to time your exit to maximise what you have may leave you with nothing. The risk reward ratio is just not there and as difficult as it is to pull the trigger and exit , it is the only prudent tactic. If Jim thought we had time to wait he would not be travelling the country telling anyone who wishes to listen to GOTS now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Just a life observation… Spending time in the grocery store drives me mad. I often ask myself if other people see these things. A store baked chicken has remained the same price, $7.99 for some time, same size container, my wife purchased one last evening, the chicken was literally 1/3 the size of past days, it was more like a pigeon.
Bread… the better so called organic stuff. The price has been reduced to only $2.99, but it’s a "mini" loaf 1/3 the size of the original.
We have all witnessed firsthand what happened in Egypt when families couldn’t afford to eat, we as a people are too pre-occupied with the next NFL season and latest iPhone.
Wishing you endless energy,
CIGA Vic P.
Jim,
I attended the meeting yesterday to gain additional insight after attending your first meeting in NYC. You looked really uncomfortable and I commend you for pushing through the pain. Would you ever consider holding smaller meetings with more savvy investors to discuss the nuances of the strategies you recommend?
I do have 7 specific questions for you that require one word answers? In your opinion:
1. Do you believe at some point in the gold price discovery that US citizens will be subject to some form of excess profits tax?
2. If you are a US citizen would you hold the majority of your physical PM inventory in a private storage facility outside of the US or is holding it in the US feasible?
3. If overseas, do this directly with the storage facility of choice or thru a facilitator such as Matterhorn?
4. Bail-in is deflationary and will bring all asset prices including PM’s down in USD terms temporarily during the leveling phase. Am I correct?
5. Do you believe that liquid asset allocations of 50% PM’s; 50% cash (outside of the banking system) is a prudent interim strategy during the great leveling period, thereby utilizing the cash to purchase assets (i.e. real estate) as prices temporarily fall?
6. As indicated in the meeting can you provide me with a couple of private storage facilities in the NYC/NJ area?
7. Can you provide me with the list of candidate banks for custodial purposes?
Thank you in advance,
CIGA John S.
Hi John,
1. Jim has previously advised that it is indeed possible that some sort of windfall tax on gold could be imposed.
2. and 3. Jim advises that you should be seeking to keep your bullion in allocated form outside the Western system. In Switzerland Jim recommends GoldSwitzerland which is headed by Egon von Greyerz and in Singapore the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange headed by Victor Foo. Their websites are goldswitzerland.com and sgpmx.com.
4. The advent of the ‘Bail In’ will likely see people looking for a secure place for their money and what better place than in physical gold. Secondly, deflation will simply not be tolerated by any of the world’s central bankers and in particular, the US Federal Reserve. It will signal the begging of a whole new level of asset purchases either way gold will benefit strongly.
5. Jim normally advocates 1/3 of your liquid net worth in gold and having liquidity available to purchase undervalued assets such as real estate would be a worthwhile strategy.
6. If it is bullion storage you are referring to, Jim has said that you should be looking to store outside of the US as per points 2 and 3 above.
7. You should be looking for banks that accepted no TARP funds and that were not involved in the ‘Bail Out’. That can be researched online at sites such as http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list. True custodian ship is when you ask for and pay for a letter from the bank that states your assets are being held segregated from the balance sheet of the bank.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Thank you for all your help teaching the masses how to deal with what is coming. I understand pretty much all that is expected to happen but I struggle to understand one part. If bail ins were to occur, how would that not be a massively deflationary event? If it is a deflationary event then how would holding precious metals during this time be beneficial?
I know you are very busy with all the emails you get but please take a few minutes to respond to this. Anytime I do not understand something I do research so I can learn but in this area I have not been able to find answers myself as all I have found implies deflation not inflation when bail ins occur.
Best regards,
CIGA Adam
Dear Adam,
The advent of the ‘Bail In’ will likely see people looking for a secure place for their money and what better place than in physical gold. Secondly, deflation will simply not be tolerated by any of the world’s central bankers and in particular, the US Federal Reserve. It will signal the beginning of a whole new round of asset purchases that will dwarf what we have already seen, either way gold will benefit strongly.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Would putting one’s money in a community credit union be any better than putting it in a big bank? I realize no bank is an island in the current environment, but are credit unions any safer? Do the new banking rules affect credit unions too?
Thanks very much,
CIGA David
Hi David,
Jim advises that if you cannot utilize international banking then the best option is to select an institution that is small and local that did not accept TARP funds and was not involved in the "bail in". There are many sources available online that disclose which institutions were bailed out such as http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Chuck,
If your broker won’t carry out your instructions you should go elsewhere. The process is simple but many brokers are unwilling to do so for many reasons, none of which are advantageous to you. If you wish to engage a new broker we suggest you contact Mishka com Dorp of Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. He has been assisting CIGAs to have their shares transferred into DRS and is happy to do so even with shares transferred from another broker. His contact details are :
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Below is a brief summary of the DRS and certification process:
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/06/jims-mailbox-1343/
========================================================
Posted September 6th, 2013 at 8:26 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
I want to thank you for yesterday, particularly in light of how you have/are feeling.
I would appreciate clarification on IRA take over risk. I appreciate what you said yesterday regarding why wait as who knows what the rates will be if you do so. Unfortunately, we are in I believe a different situation. I am 57 and we have about $375k in retirement accounts in CEF, GTU, SVRZF, and TRX. My business has crashed to the point we are currently drawing a substantial part of our living expenses from our retirement. I hope to change this but based on what you said yesterday it may be close to (3)years before things are at a point where I can realistically expect to grow the business. As a result of our situation I can take quite a bit out of retirement at the lower tax rates(15 and then 25 % federally). We are looking to move to Washington where we will save another 6.5% versus NY. The net effect is that if we spread the withdrawals over multiple years we could save $50-$100k in taxes. If we take everything now the tax and penalty bite will bring our total net worth down to around $350K, and with us needing some of this each year to meet our living expenses, this does not give me the warm fuzzies.
Anyhow, yesterday it was very clear you felt holding money in banks was a bad idea that should be addressed immediately. Your position on IRAs was not as clear to me. For anyone with significant assets it seemed you saw no benefit to being in an IRA and it was simply a pay me now or later question, so the risk of staying in almost became a moot point as there was little reason to do so. In our situation there is a significant advantage to staying in and/or spreading risk over multiple years, the question is what is the risk? and is it worth it? And would there be ways to mitigate the risk(ie would there be a event that would act as the "canary in the coal mine" and say when this event happens the risk of IRAs being taken over has risen to a level you need to now exit).
Thank you again and I hope you continue to feel better.
CIGA Bob
Hi Bob,
The ‘canary in the mine’ you referred to may well be the news yesterday that in Poland exactly what Jim has been telling us is going to happen in the US is going to take place. The assets in retirement accounts will be used to bail out the government and the retiree will be left holding the bag, as always. As I have said before, there simply is no time to finesse your exit. Jim has made it very clear in his GOTS advice that all retirement accounts will be targeted and you should be exiting as soon as you can. To try to time your exit to maximise what you have may leave you with nothing. The risk reward ratio is just not there and as difficult as it is to pull the trigger and exit , it is the only prudent tactic. If Jim thought we had time to wait he would not be travelling the country telling anyone who wishes to listen to GOTS now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Just a life observation… Spending time in the grocery store drives me mad. I often ask myself if other people see these things. A store baked chicken has remained the same price, $7.99 for some time, same size container, my wife purchased one last evening, the chicken was literally 1/3 the size of past days, it was more like a pigeon.
Bread… the better so called organic stuff. The price has been reduced to only $2.99, but it’s a "mini" loaf 1/3 the size of the original.
We have all witnessed firsthand what happened in Egypt when families couldn’t afford to eat, we as a people are too pre-occupied with the next NFL season and latest iPhone.
Wishing you endless energy,
CIGA Vic P.
Jim,
I attended the meeting yesterday to gain additional insight after attending your first meeting in NYC. You looked really uncomfortable and I commend you for pushing through the pain. Would you ever consider holding smaller meetings with more savvy investors to discuss the nuances of the strategies you recommend?
I do have 7 specific questions for you that require one word answers? In your opinion:
1. Do you believe at some point in the gold price discovery that US citizens will be subject to some form of excess profits tax?
2. If you are a US citizen would you hold the majority of your physical PM inventory in a private storage facility outside of the US or is holding it in the US feasible?
3. If overseas, do this directly with the storage facility of choice or thru a facilitator such as Matterhorn?
4. Bail-in is deflationary and will bring all asset prices including PM’s down in USD terms temporarily during the leveling phase. Am I correct?
5. Do you believe that liquid asset allocations of 50% PM’s; 50% cash (outside of the banking system) is a prudent interim strategy during the great leveling period, thereby utilizing the cash to purchase assets (i.e. real estate) as prices temporarily fall?
6. As indicated in the meeting can you provide me with a couple of private storage facilities in the NYC/NJ area?
7. Can you provide me with the list of candidate banks for custodial purposes?
Thank you in advance,
CIGA John S.
Hi John,
1. Jim has previously advised that it is indeed possible that some sort of windfall tax on gold could be imposed.
2. and 3. Jim advises that you should be seeking to keep your bullion in allocated form outside the Western system. In Switzerland Jim recommends GoldSwitzerland which is headed by Egon von Greyerz and in Singapore the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange headed by Victor Foo. Their websites are goldswitzerland.com and sgpmx.com.
4. The advent of the ‘Bail In’ will likely see people looking for a secure place for their money and what better place than in physical gold. Secondly, deflation will simply not be tolerated by any of the world’s central bankers and in particular, the US Federal Reserve. It will signal the begging of a whole new level of asset purchases either way gold will benefit strongly.
5. Jim normally advocates 1/3 of your liquid net worth in gold and having liquidity available to purchase undervalued assets such as real estate would be a worthwhile strategy.
6. If it is bullion storage you are referring to, Jim has said that you should be looking to store outside of the US as per points 2 and 3 above.
7. You should be looking for banks that accepted no TARP funds and that were not involved in the ‘Bail Out’. That can be researched online at sites such as http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list. True custodian ship is when you ask for and pay for a letter from the bank that states your assets are being held segregated from the balance sheet of the bank.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Thank you for all your help teaching the masses how to deal with what is coming. I understand pretty much all that is expected to happen but I struggle to understand one part. If bail ins were to occur, how would that not be a massively deflationary event? If it is a deflationary event then how would holding precious metals during this time be beneficial?
I know you are very busy with all the emails you get but please take a few minutes to respond to this. Anytime I do not understand something I do research so I can learn but in this area I have not been able to find answers myself as all I have found implies deflation not inflation when bail ins occur.
Best regards,
CIGA Adam
Dear Adam,
The advent of the ‘Bail In’ will likely see people looking for a secure place for their money and what better place than in physical gold. Secondly, deflation will simply not be tolerated by any of the world’s central bankers and in particular, the US Federal Reserve. It will signal the beginning of a whole new round of asset purchases that will dwarf what we have already seen, either way gold will benefit strongly.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
Would putting one’s money in a community credit union be any better than putting it in a big bank? I realize no bank is an island in the current environment, but are credit unions any safer? Do the new banking rules affect credit unions too?
Thanks very much,
CIGA David
Hi David,
Jim advises that if you cannot utilize international banking then the best option is to select an institution that is small and local that did not accept TARP funds and was not involved in the "bail in". There are many sources available online that disclose which institutions were bailed out such as http://projects.propublica.org/bailout/list.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Chuck,
If your broker won’t carry out your instructions you should go elsewhere. The process is simple but many brokers are unwilling to do so for many reasons, none of which are advantageous to you. If you wish to engage a new broker we suggest you contact Mishka com Dorp of Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. He has been assisting CIGAs to have their shares transferred into DRS and is happy to do so even with shares transferred from another broker. His contact details are :
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Below is a brief summary of the DRS and certification process:
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Jim thanks you for your support and input. If you have any further inquiries feel free to contact me.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/06/jims-mailbox-1343/
========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 9th, 2013 at 10:30 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Mr. Sinclair,
Here’s one for you. I have 2 accounts with Ed Jones. The EJ financial advisor that I have been doing business with for about 11 years told me they do not issue certificates or put the stock into DRS. Then he said this and I was rather floored: if the government wants your stock they can take it even if it is in certificate form. He went on to explain, but I was glazed over from his assertion and didn’t really catch what he said. He has always seemed on the up and up with me, but I found this to be a little hard to believe. May I ask if there’s any way he is correct? By the way, one of those accounts is an IRA that I have been slowly depleting over the last 5 years since I first heard of the possibility that private pension funds would be taken. The depletion has accelerated in the last 6 months.
Thanks!
Dear CIGA,
If you hold your shares in certificate form your relationship is directly with the company you are invested with. Your broker’s response is rubbish. There are many reasons why brokers want you to keep your shares in a street name in your account and none of those reasons assists you. Jim advises that you simply must have your shares held in direct registration at a minimum and to achieve absolute protection you should hold them in certificates. They are your shares not the broker’s and if you want them in certificate form then that is your right. Give your broker a written instruction with a time frame within which to carry out that instruction. If he does not want to carry out your instruction find a broker who will. Mishka vom Dorp from Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd has been assisting many CIGAs to have their shares directly registered and he would be happy to assist you. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Direct registration is the first part of the process, from there you then have certificates issued by the relevant transfer agent employed by the company your are invested in. Below you will see a short summary of the direct registration and certificate process.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
In regards to retirement accounts there is no doubt that governments worldwide are targeting those funds. The news out of Poland in the last few days (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/poland-pensions-idUSL6N0H02UV20130904?feed&) confirms that and Jim’s advice is that you should complete your exit as soon as you can otherwise your assets will be substituted for worthless sovereign paper. There is quite simply no time to waste in regards to this matter.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Ursula,
International banking is a complex undertaking which should only be utilized for the express purpose of safeguarding your funds from the effects of a bank failure or a bail in. As a matter of course you should seek advice from a tax attorney in your jurisdiction. If you wish to open a bank account in Singapore the following banks may allow you to do so, subject to your individual circumstances. Your personal attendance would be required.
DBS Bank Ltd
Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd(OCBC)
United Overseas Bank Ltd(UOB)
In regards to keeping 6 months of fiat currency Jim is referring to the Canadian $ , the US$ and the Euro. This is recommended so that you can service your day to day expenses in the event of a systemic crisis that sees you unable to access your bank. In terms of banking in the US Jim advises that you should look at smaller, local banks that accepted no TARP funds and were not involved in the bail out.
In the event that the general market experienced a substantial drop all stocks will likely suffer however such an event would see even more QE and gold will of course appreciate greatly and the good quality gold stocks will rise in conjunction with gold. The key in this regard is to own stocks totally free of any margin.
Jim generally recommends allocating one third of your net liquid worth to gold. If you understand the nature of the market and appreciate the fact that gold will always be subjected to manipulation during the duration of the bull market which will result in great volatility then you could perhaps increase your commitment. Jim has stated often that gold is for savings whereas fiat currency is for transactions meaning that you could use your physical gold holdings as your ‘savings account. Storing your gold in allocated form in private storage outside of the Western system affords the ultimate protection especially in this time of financial crisis.
Finally, it seems you are in a good position to relocate to another country. To that end, the most advisable course is to research which countries are attractive to you and then contact the relevant immigration authorities to establish the requirements for permanent residency or a long term visa.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Hi Nick,
If anyone thinks Canadian banks are free from the risk of a ‘bail in’ they need only read pages 144 and 145 of the "Economic Action Plan 2013" which the Harper government submitted to the House of Commons. The new budget actually proposes "to implement a ‘bail-in’ regime for systemically important banks" in Canada. "Economic Action Plan 2013" was submitted on March 21 2013, which means that this "bail-in regime" was being planned long before the crisis in Cyprus. The writing is clearly on the wall that from now on, when banks fail they are going to bail them out by using the money that is in your bank account. The advent of the ‘bail in’ will shatter the public’s faith in the banking system and will actually ensure that we will see major bank failures all over the western world. Remember Jim’s maxim, ‘As a depositor you are an unsecured creditor by legal definition and precedent.’ and act accordingly to his GOTS advice before you don’t have that option.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/09/jims-mailbox-1346/
==========================================================
Posted September 9th, 2013 at 10:30 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Mr. Sinclair,
Here’s one for you. I have 2 accounts with Ed Jones. The EJ financial advisor that I have been doing business with for about 11 years told me they do not issue certificates or put the stock into DRS. Then he said this and I was rather floored: if the government wants your stock they can take it even if it is in certificate form. He went on to explain, but I was glazed over from his assertion and didn’t really catch what he said. He has always seemed on the up and up with me, but I found this to be a little hard to believe. May I ask if there’s any way he is correct? By the way, one of those accounts is an IRA that I have been slowly depleting over the last 5 years since I first heard of the possibility that private pension funds would be taken. The depletion has accelerated in the last 6 months.
Thanks!
Dear CIGA,
If you hold your shares in certificate form your relationship is directly with the company you are invested with. Your broker’s response is rubbish. There are many reasons why brokers want you to keep your shares in a street name in your account and none of those reasons assists you. Jim advises that you simply must have your shares held in direct registration at a minimum and to achieve absolute protection you should hold them in certificates. They are your shares not the broker’s and if you want them in certificate form then that is your right. Give your broker a written instruction with a time frame within which to carry out that instruction. If he does not want to carry out your instruction find a broker who will. Mishka vom Dorp from Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd has been assisting many CIGAs to have their shares directly registered and he would be happy to assist you. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Direct registration is the first part of the process, from there you then have certificates issued by the relevant transfer agent employed by the company your are invested in. Below you will see a short summary of the direct registration and certificate process.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
In regards to retirement accounts there is no doubt that governments worldwide are targeting those funds. The news out of Poland in the last few days (http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/09/04/poland-pensions-idUSL6N0H02UV20130904?feed&) confirms that and Jim’s advice is that you should complete your exit as soon as you can otherwise your assets will be substituted for worthless sovereign paper. There is quite simply no time to waste in regards to this matter.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Ursula,
International banking is a complex undertaking which should only be utilized for the express purpose of safeguarding your funds from the effects of a bank failure or a bail in. As a matter of course you should seek advice from a tax attorney in your jurisdiction. If you wish to open a bank account in Singapore the following banks may allow you to do so, subject to your individual circumstances. Your personal attendance would be required.
DBS Bank Ltd
Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation Ltd(OCBC)
United Overseas Bank Ltd(UOB)
In regards to keeping 6 months of fiat currency Jim is referring to the Canadian $ , the US$ and the Euro. This is recommended so that you can service your day to day expenses in the event of a systemic crisis that sees you unable to access your bank. In terms of banking in the US Jim advises that you should look at smaller, local banks that accepted no TARP funds and were not involved in the bail out.
In the event that the general market experienced a substantial drop all stocks will likely suffer however such an event would see even more QE and gold will of course appreciate greatly and the good quality gold stocks will rise in conjunction with gold. The key in this regard is to own stocks totally free of any margin.
Jim generally recommends allocating one third of your net liquid worth to gold. If you understand the nature of the market and appreciate the fact that gold will always be subjected to manipulation during the duration of the bull market which will result in great volatility then you could perhaps increase your commitment. Jim has stated often that gold is for savings whereas fiat currency is for transactions meaning that you could use your physical gold holdings as your ‘savings account. Storing your gold in allocated form in private storage outside of the Western system affords the ultimate protection especially in this time of financial crisis.
Finally, it seems you are in a good position to relocate to another country. To that end, the most advisable course is to research which countries are attractive to you and then contact the relevant immigration authorities to establish the requirements for permanent residency or a long term visa.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Hi Nick,
If anyone thinks Canadian banks are free from the risk of a ‘bail in’ they need only read pages 144 and 145 of the "Economic Action Plan 2013" which the Harper government submitted to the House of Commons. The new budget actually proposes "to implement a ‘bail-in’ regime for systemically important banks" in Canada. "Economic Action Plan 2013" was submitted on March 21 2013, which means that this "bail-in regime" was being planned long before the crisis in Cyprus. The writing is clearly on the wall that from now on, when banks fail they are going to bail them out by using the money that is in your bank account. The advent of the ‘bail in’ will shatter the public’s faith in the banking system and will actually ensure that we will see major bank failures all over the western world. Remember Jim’s maxim, ‘As a depositor you are an unsecured creditor by legal definition and precedent.’ and act accordingly to his GOTS advice before you don’t have that option.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/09/jims-mailbox-1346/
==========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 15th, 2013 at 11:35 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim/Peter,
My broker tells me that ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds) cannot be placed in a DRS or Certificate format. Is this true? If so, I should sell the ETF and purchase corresponding company shares right?
Thanks,
CIGA Charles
Dear Charles,
Your broker is correct. You can’t own ETFs or mutual funds via DRS or in certificate form. This means of course, that they will remain in a street name which Jim advises is not in line with his GOTS instructions. I understand your strategy in regards to getting exposure to the sector across a range of companies but the risk you run leaving them in a street name is real. It is certainly advisable to own the corresponding stocks rather than the ETF then you will be able to hold them via DRS or certificates and eliminate the counterparty risk that you presently have. Jim is strongly advising that the crisis is worsening as each day passes which means we must take action now to protect ourselves and our assets.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
In counseling conversion of street name shares to certificates, I’m curious as to whether the type of brokerage involved is a consideration. I would certainly concur that any brokerage associated in any way with a potential SIFI, e.g. chartered/investment bank, poses the type of bail-in confiscation risks of which you warn. However, what of independent brokerages which do not appear to be so associated, ie. Scottrade, QTrade (in Canada)? Would these still be subject to the same risks?
Thanks,
CIGA Joel
Dear Joel,
There is simply no difference at all in terms of potential risk. When your shares are with a brokerage the following potential risks apply:
1. The shares can potentially be used as collateral for a brokerage’s speculative investments. Please review the Sentinel case (http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/06/21/commentary-on-the-sentinel-decision/ ) and the MF Global situation.
2. Your shares are exposed to counterparty risk in regards to the clearing house and potentially the parent company of the brokerage.
3. If you have a margin account that allows the broker to loan your shares to other entities who are short selling your stock.
4. In the event of a systemic crisis you will likely have no access to you brokerage account.
There is no alternative than to have your shares directly registered in your name with the relevant transfer agent. That is step number one. Then, to ensure absolute protection, direct the transfer agent to issue certificates to you in your name. Possession of the certificates will give you total protection by getting your investments out of the system and afford you peace of mind.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
I read your comments below and don’t understand the following. Does a "non-margin account" in association with the custodian (such as Pershing LLC) provide the same protection as "direct registration"?
The statements below were alarming to me as I thought a "non-margin account" accomplished the same thing as "direct registration."
CIGA Theodore
Goodday Jim,
As an investor and fund manager(small for private clients) from Europe I have read your site for many years and would like to say it has given me a lot of insight and guidance through the financial markets. Also I started a financial blog some 4 months ago to inform interested people in the workings of financial/political markets and how to protect oneself. I have recommended and applied stocks in different currencies, at least 2O % gold/silver related (including your Tanzanian Royalty Gold, and safe dividend paying stocks). The net returns for investors are above 25% because of sincere stock picking. Many thanks to you and your excellent work!!
Now to the issue of direct registration. I use a smallish Dutch broker for my stock transactions. On my request they informed me that my US and Canadian shares are held by Pershing Corp, a sub of BNY Mellon. The shares are held with Pershing in the name of my Dutch broker Binckbank NV. Binck informed me that individual registration is not possible because I am not a client of Pershing, but Binck is. Concluded with "best regards" and "hope this is helpful to you". Not very much so. What to do?
Best (sincere) regards,
CIGA Joseph
Dear Joseph,
Pershing is the clearing agent for your bank. Assuming the companies you have invested in participate in DRS, it is the owner of the shares that can obtain direct registration in their name at the transfer agent for the company.
The answer you have gotten is standard operating practice to get rid of you and your request. It can be done but neither your bank nor the clearing agent have any motivation to help you. You can go to the transfer agent of the company and request their assistance in getting DRS done.
In DRS the transfer agent is your friend while your bank and the clearing agent is your challenge. In direct registration neither your bank nor your clearing agent has any financial relationship with the individual owner or entity owner.
Regards,
Jim
Dear Theodore,
A non margin account accomplishes nothing in terms of Jim’s GOTS advice. You are well and truly in the system when your shares are with a broker whether the account is a margin account or not. The process is simple and cheap to have your shares held via direct registration. I have included for your reference a brief summary of the process. Do not be convinced by the broker that street name in a non margin account is safe because it categorically is not. There are a range of risks associated with that situation and unlike Jim the broker has a vested interest in you keeping your shares with them and held in a street name. They know that if they are in direct registration or in certificates there is a lesser likelihood that you will actively trade them thus they miss out on commissions. The best advice on the subject is what Jim is offering. Direct your broker to have them transferred to the relevant transfer agent and then once that is completed direct the transfer agent to issue certificates in your name. Then you will have achieved the ultimate protection for your shares. Anything less than that leaves your assets at risk.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Copyright © 2013 :: Jim Sinclair's Mineset - All Rights Reserved. http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/15/jims-mailbox-1350/
Posted September 15th, 2013 at 11:35 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim/Peter,
My broker tells me that ETFs (Exchange Traded Funds) cannot be placed in a DRS or Certificate format. Is this true? If so, I should sell the ETF and purchase corresponding company shares right?
Thanks,
CIGA Charles
Dear Charles,
Your broker is correct. You can’t own ETFs or mutual funds via DRS or in certificate form. This means of course, that they will remain in a street name which Jim advises is not in line with his GOTS instructions. I understand your strategy in regards to getting exposure to the sector across a range of companies but the risk you run leaving them in a street name is real. It is certainly advisable to own the corresponding stocks rather than the ETF then you will be able to hold them via DRS or certificates and eliminate the counterparty risk that you presently have. Jim is strongly advising that the crisis is worsening as each day passes which means we must take action now to protect ourselves and our assets.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
In counseling conversion of street name shares to certificates, I’m curious as to whether the type of brokerage involved is a consideration. I would certainly concur that any brokerage associated in any way with a potential SIFI, e.g. chartered/investment bank, poses the type of bail-in confiscation risks of which you warn. However, what of independent brokerages which do not appear to be so associated, ie. Scottrade, QTrade (in Canada)? Would these still be subject to the same risks?
Thanks,
CIGA Joel
Dear Joel,
There is simply no difference at all in terms of potential risk. When your shares are with a brokerage the following potential risks apply:
1. The shares can potentially be used as collateral for a brokerage’s speculative investments. Please review the Sentinel case (http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/06/21/commentary-on-the-sentinel-decision/ ) and the MF Global situation.
2. Your shares are exposed to counterparty risk in regards to the clearing house and potentially the parent company of the brokerage.
3. If you have a margin account that allows the broker to loan your shares to other entities who are short selling your stock.
4. In the event of a systemic crisis you will likely have no access to you brokerage account.
There is no alternative than to have your shares directly registered in your name with the relevant transfer agent. That is step number one. Then, to ensure absolute protection, direct the transfer agent to issue certificates to you in your name. Possession of the certificates will give you total protection by getting your investments out of the system and afford you peace of mind.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Jim,
I read your comments below and don’t understand the following. Does a "non-margin account" in association with the custodian (such as Pershing LLC) provide the same protection as "direct registration"?
The statements below were alarming to me as I thought a "non-margin account" accomplished the same thing as "direct registration."
CIGA Theodore
Goodday Jim,
As an investor and fund manager(small for private clients) from Europe I have read your site for many years and would like to say it has given me a lot of insight and guidance through the financial markets. Also I started a financial blog some 4 months ago to inform interested people in the workings of financial/political markets and how to protect oneself. I have recommended and applied stocks in different currencies, at least 2O % gold/silver related (including your Tanzanian Royalty Gold, and safe dividend paying stocks). The net returns for investors are above 25% because of sincere stock picking. Many thanks to you and your excellent work!!
Now to the issue of direct registration. I use a smallish Dutch broker for my stock transactions. On my request they informed me that my US and Canadian shares are held by Pershing Corp, a sub of BNY Mellon. The shares are held with Pershing in the name of my Dutch broker Binckbank NV. Binck informed me that individual registration is not possible because I am not a client of Pershing, but Binck is. Concluded with "best regards" and "hope this is helpful to you". Not very much so. What to do?
Best (sincere) regards,
CIGA Joseph
Dear Joseph,
Pershing is the clearing agent for your bank. Assuming the companies you have invested in participate in DRS, it is the owner of the shares that can obtain direct registration in their name at the transfer agent for the company.
The answer you have gotten is standard operating practice to get rid of you and your request. It can be done but neither your bank nor the clearing agent have any motivation to help you. You can go to the transfer agent of the company and request their assistance in getting DRS done.
In DRS the transfer agent is your friend while your bank and the clearing agent is your challenge. In direct registration neither your bank nor your clearing agent has any financial relationship with the individual owner or entity owner.
Regards,
Jim
Dear Theodore,
A non margin account accomplishes nothing in terms of Jim’s GOTS advice. You are well and truly in the system when your shares are with a broker whether the account is a margin account or not. The process is simple and cheap to have your shares held via direct registration. I have included for your reference a brief summary of the process. Do not be convinced by the broker that street name in a non margin account is safe because it categorically is not. There are a range of risks associated with that situation and unlike Jim the broker has a vested interest in you keeping your shares with them and held in a street name. They know that if they are in direct registration or in certificates there is a lesser likelihood that you will actively trade them thus they miss out on commissions. The best advice on the subject is what Jim is offering. Direct your broker to have them transferred to the relevant transfer agent and then once that is completed direct the transfer agent to issue certificates in your name. Then you will have achieved the ultimate protection for your shares. Anything less than that leaves your assets at risk.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
If your shares are currently held in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Copyright © 2013 :: Jim Sinclair's Mineset - All Rights Reserved. http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/15/jims-mailbox-1350/
==========================================================
Jim Sinclair’s Commentary
If you do not act to protect yourself, you will have nothing left to protect! I am delighted that every asset I have now is in Tanzania, East Africa, protected primarily by the Chinese and secondarily by Russia. I, a man out of the late 1940s, shock myself every time I think about this. For all intents and purposes, I am in Tanzania, East Africa.
Polish Bail-In Changes Everything. Get GOTS or be a SERF.
September 10th, 2013
Jeff Nielson: Ingesting the daily pablum from the Corporate Media is inevitably a two-stage process. First one reads the lines. Then one reads between the lines. When dealing with serial liars; it is always when one reads between-the-linesthat “the news” gets interesting.
Case in point is the bail-in maneuver recently announced by the government of Poland, leading to the immediate question: when is a bail-in not a “bail-in”? The Polish government refused to characterize its taking control of financial assets as a bail-in when it defended this move. The Corporate Media (agents of the One Bank) refused to call it a bail-in in harshly criticizing the government’s actions.
We have the government of Poland refusing to call this act of financial piracy a “bail-in” (despite knowing precisely what it is doing) because it is expedient for it to do so. Conversely, we have the One Bank (via the Corporate Media) also refusing to call this maneuver a “bail-in” (despite understanding exactly what is taking place) because it is also expedient for it to do so. And so we see this pair engaged in this public display of “tap-dancing.”
The critical clue in sifting through the deceptive language of Reuters as it describes this scenario comes in the following excerpt:
…Polish officials have tried to reassure investors, saying that the overhaul avoids the more radical options of taking both bond and equity assets away from the private funds outright. [emphasis mine]
Too funny!
In making this statement, we see an unequivocal illustration that the government of Poland fully understands the Golden Rule in the Crime Syndicate financial system of the 21st century which has been imposed on us by the One Bank:
Control is superior to ownership with respect to any asset.
Indeed, this is a point which I made in subtle, implicit terms in a previous commentary, The OneBank – but where I lacked the space to delve into this critical distinction explicitly. When I wrote about this “single, banking monopoly”; it was scrupulously noted that this shadowy entity (or “super-entity” in the words of the Swiss researchers) controlled rather than “owned” 40% of the global economy.
What is the legal (and factual) distinction between “ownership” and “control”? Why is control now superior to (mere) ownership? The answer to the first question has always been simple and apparent. The answer to the second question has become apparent – thanks to the recent crimes of the One Bank, and its Minions.
Ownership (by itself) neither explicitly or implicitly confers anything other than “legal title” of the asset in question. Control, on the other hand, directly implies legal and/or physical possession of the asset(s) in question. Why is control now actually superior to ownership?
In societies which respect and uphold the Rule of Law, ownership (i.e. legal title) reigns supreme. However, several years ago the One Bank assassinated the Rule of Law in most Western regimes – while our Puppet Governments sat back and watched.
It has now demonstrated the reality of that assassination with several blatant financial crimes, which its Stooges in the Corporate Media (and our own governments) have the audacity to call “precedents”. The pattern is as clear and obvious as it is repugnant.
The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on. Presto! The financial entity (i.e. Bank) which used to only “control” particular financial assets now “owns” those assets. The (former) Owner – who lacked control – ends up with nothing. The perfect crime.
MF Global? The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on? Presto! MF Global now “owns” the assets of its account-holders…which it then hands to its “creditor” – The One Bank. PFG Best? The same thing. The Cyprus Steal? The same thing.
The lights go out. Banksters (i.e. the One Bank) end up “owning” assets; while the (former, legal) Owners end up with nothing. Not only do the Corporate Media and our Puppet Governments lack the integrity to identify and stop this stealing; they continue to call the thefts “precedents”.
Repeat again (and again and again), until the One Bank goes from a paltry “40% control” of the global economy to 100% ownership. The perfect crime…until the government of Poland came along and upset its apple-cart.
The Polish government has taken control of a large chunk of the nation’s pensions assets (wresting it from the vice-like grip of the One Bank); and in doing so the One Bank’s familiar “two-step” now has a very different ending.
The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on. Et voila! With the Polish government controlling these assets before the lights went out; it is the Polish government which will own these assets (on behalf of the Polish people) when the lights come back on – not the One Bank.
Naturally the One Bank is livid, and so its drones in the mainstream media launch their predictable (and laughably hypocritical) attacks on this move:
…the changes may be unconstitutional because the government is taking private assets away from them without offering any compensation.
Bravo! We have the Corporate Media (and thus the One Bank itself) explaining the principal nature of its own crimes with MF Global, PFG Best, the Cyprus Steal, and its endless list of intended future Victims. “Taking” private assets “without compensation”; or as those who prefer plain talk might say: stealing.
But note the very, very important legal distinction here; one not available to the One Bank as a defense to its own crimes. The Polish government is not “taking private assets…without compensation” in the legal sense; because as it is careful to note itself, it ‘merely’ has control of these assets – not ownership (i.e. legal title).
Conversely, with each-and-every one of the One Bank’s “precedents”; bankers ended up owning assets. The assets were unequivocally “taken without compensation” – stolen. And thus we now have a delightful no-win scenario (for the One Bank) as the move by the government of Poland creates a new precedent.
Suddenly the world of bail-ins becomes a two-way street; not merely Banksters stealing, and everyone else being Victims. Suddenly we see a scenario where the Banksters are on the “giving” rather than “receiving” side of the equation – the most-horrific nightmare of the One Bank.
Only two things can happen here. First of all; the government of Poland can be slapped-down by some (corrupt) judge, ruling that even taking mere control of financial assets (without compensation) is “unconstitutional” or otherwise illegal. The new precedent? Bail-ins (all bail-ins) are illegal.
The other possibility is that this move is upheld as being nice-and-legal. In that scenario, the dynamics are equally obvious. What has the government of Poland really done here? As the entity in control of all of these financial assets; in the next (inevitable, staged) “financial crisis” it has made itself rather than private banks Too Big To Fail.
When the next “crisis” occurs; as the controlling entity it is the government of Poland which will require a “bail-out” (and now a “bail-in”), which simply means that when the lights come on and the stealing stops that as the Too Big To Fail entity it will now “own” any/all surviving assets – on behalf of the people of Poland.
How long before other sovereign (non-corrupt) governments engage in a similar preemptive move, because they decide that they – and not the One Bank’s subsidiaries – should be Too Big To Fail? The Polish bail-in changes everything.
This article is brought to you courtesy of Jeff Nielson From Bullion Bulls Canada.
http://etfdailynews.com/2013/09/10/polish-bail-in-changes-everything/
==========================================================
Jim Sinclair’s Commentary
If you do not act to protect yourself, you will have nothing left to protect! I am delighted that every asset I have now is in Tanzania, East Africa, protected primarily by the Chinese and secondarily by Russia. I, a man out of the late 1940s, shock myself every time I think about this. For all intents and purposes, I am in Tanzania, East Africa.
Polish Bail-In Changes Everything. Get GOTS or be a SERF.
September 10th, 2013
Jeff Nielson: Ingesting the daily pablum from the Corporate Media is inevitably a two-stage process. First one reads the lines. Then one reads between the lines. When dealing with serial liars; it is always when one reads between-the-linesthat “the news” gets interesting.
Case in point is the bail-in maneuver recently announced by the government of Poland, leading to the immediate question: when is a bail-in not a “bail-in”? The Polish government refused to characterize its taking control of financial assets as a bail-in when it defended this move. The Corporate Media (agents of the One Bank) refused to call it a bail-in in harshly criticizing the government’s actions.
We have the government of Poland refusing to call this act of financial piracy a “bail-in” (despite knowing precisely what it is doing) because it is expedient for it to do so. Conversely, we have the One Bank (via the Corporate Media) also refusing to call this maneuver a “bail-in” (despite understanding exactly what is taking place) because it is also expedient for it to do so. And so we see this pair engaged in this public display of “tap-dancing.”
The critical clue in sifting through the deceptive language of Reuters as it describes this scenario comes in the following excerpt:
…Polish officials have tried to reassure investors, saying that the overhaul avoids the more radical options of taking both bond and equity assets away from the private funds outright. [emphasis mine]
Too funny!
In making this statement, we see an unequivocal illustration that the government of Poland fully understands the Golden Rule in the Crime Syndicate financial system of the 21st century which has been imposed on us by the One Bank:
Control is superior to ownership with respect to any asset.
Indeed, this is a point which I made in subtle, implicit terms in a previous commentary, The OneBank – but where I lacked the space to delve into this critical distinction explicitly. When I wrote about this “single, banking monopoly”; it was scrupulously noted that this shadowy entity (or “super-entity” in the words of the Swiss researchers) controlled rather than “owned” 40% of the global economy.
What is the legal (and factual) distinction between “ownership” and “control”? Why is control now superior to (mere) ownership? The answer to the first question has always been simple and apparent. The answer to the second question has become apparent – thanks to the recent crimes of the One Bank, and its Minions.
Ownership (by itself) neither explicitly or implicitly confers anything other than “legal title” of the asset in question. Control, on the other hand, directly implies legal and/or physical possession of the asset(s) in question. Why is control now actually superior to ownership?
In societies which respect and uphold the Rule of Law, ownership (i.e. legal title) reigns supreme. However, several years ago the One Bank assassinated the Rule of Law in most Western regimes – while our Puppet Governments sat back and watched.
It has now demonstrated the reality of that assassination with several blatant financial crimes, which its Stooges in the Corporate Media (and our own governments) have the audacity to call “precedents”. The pattern is as clear and obvious as it is repugnant.
The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on. Presto! The financial entity (i.e. Bank) which used to only “control” particular financial assets now “owns” those assets. The (former) Owner – who lacked control – ends up with nothing. The perfect crime.
MF Global? The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on? Presto! MF Global now “owns” the assets of its account-holders…which it then hands to its “creditor” – The One Bank. PFG Best? The same thing. The Cyprus Steal? The same thing.
The lights go out. Banksters (i.e. the One Bank) end up “owning” assets; while the (former, legal) Owners end up with nothing. Not only do the Corporate Media and our Puppet Governments lack the integrity to identify and stop this stealing; they continue to call the thefts “precedents”.
Repeat again (and again and again), until the One Bank goes from a paltry “40% control” of the global economy to 100% ownership. The perfect crime…until the government of Poland came along and upset its apple-cart.
The Polish government has taken control of a large chunk of the nation’s pensions assets (wresting it from the vice-like grip of the One Bank); and in doing so the One Bank’s familiar “two-step” now has a very different ending.
The lights go out. The stealing starts. The lights come back on. Et voila! With the Polish government controlling these assets before the lights went out; it is the Polish government which will own these assets (on behalf of the Polish people) when the lights come back on – not the One Bank.
Naturally the One Bank is livid, and so its drones in the mainstream media launch their predictable (and laughably hypocritical) attacks on this move:
…the changes may be unconstitutional because the government is taking private assets away from them without offering any compensation.
Bravo! We have the Corporate Media (and thus the One Bank itself) explaining the principal nature of its own crimes with MF Global, PFG Best, the Cyprus Steal, and its endless list of intended future Victims. “Taking” private assets “without compensation”; or as those who prefer plain talk might say: stealing.
But note the very, very important legal distinction here; one not available to the One Bank as a defense to its own crimes. The Polish government is not “taking private assets…without compensation” in the legal sense; because as it is careful to note itself, it ‘merely’ has control of these assets – not ownership (i.e. legal title).
Conversely, with each-and-every one of the One Bank’s “precedents”; bankers ended up owning assets. The assets were unequivocally “taken without compensation” – stolen. And thus we now have a delightful no-win scenario (for the One Bank) as the move by the government of Poland creates a new precedent.
Suddenly the world of bail-ins becomes a two-way street; not merely Banksters stealing, and everyone else being Victims. Suddenly we see a scenario where the Banksters are on the “giving” rather than “receiving” side of the equation – the most-horrific nightmare of the One Bank.
Only two things can happen here. First of all; the government of Poland can be slapped-down by some (corrupt) judge, ruling that even taking mere control of financial assets (without compensation) is “unconstitutional” or otherwise illegal. The new precedent? Bail-ins (all bail-ins) are illegal.
The other possibility is that this move is upheld as being nice-and-legal. In that scenario, the dynamics are equally obvious. What has the government of Poland really done here? As the entity in control of all of these financial assets; in the next (inevitable, staged) “financial crisis” it has made itself rather than private banks Too Big To Fail.
When the next “crisis” occurs; as the controlling entity it is the government of Poland which will require a “bail-out” (and now a “bail-in”), which simply means that when the lights come on and the stealing stops that as the Too Big To Fail entity it will now “own” any/all surviving assets – on behalf of the people of Poland.
How long before other sovereign (non-corrupt) governments engage in a similar preemptive move, because they decide that they – and not the One Bank’s subsidiaries – should be Too Big To Fail? The Polish bail-in changes everything.
This article is brought to you courtesy of Jeff Nielson From Bullion Bulls Canada.
http://etfdailynews.com/2013/09/10/polish-bail-in-changes-everything/
==========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 14th, 2013 at 10:06 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
I’m a Canadian with shares in Sprott Physical Bullion Trusts and a couple of gold miners held in a few Canadian brokerage accounts. The accounts are "cash" accounts (with zero debt). My shares are in street name. According to the "terms and conditions" the impression I get is that only margin/indebted accounts are subject to having their shares loaned out or hypothecated. Is my impression correct or am I fooling myself or being fooled? Which is to say, do I need to buy the share certificates (I think direct registration is not as prevalent or available in Canada as it is in the USA) to protect myself in case of you know what hitting the fan.
My reluctance to make the move to certificates is threefold: 1) their cost 2) their safekeeping 3) receipt of dividends.
Any and all advice you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
CIGA Art
Dear Art,
The Federal Appeals Court decision in the Sentinel case should alert any client with funds being held at a brokerage. (http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/06/21/commentary-on-the-sentinel-decision/ ) MF Global was another example where so called segregated funds were accessed without client knowledge. The primary reason to own gold or gold shares is to insure your remaining assets and your own liquidity against financial problems beyond your control. Therefore, it is illogical to leave your ‘insurance’ with a financial organisation that is intertwined with what you are insuring against.
Ownership via certificates means:
1. Zero counterparty risk.
2. You have physical possession at all times meaning the shares can’t be seized or confiscated digitally.
3. The certificates and therefore, the shares can be moved to any location in the world.
4. The shares cannot be lent out by a broker and shorted which can still happen even when you do not own the shares in a margin account due to control glitches.
For these reasons Jim strongly advises that you have your shares held in certificate form. To do so you simply instruct your broker to have certificates issued for your stock. The broker transfers the shares to the transfer agent relevant to the company you have invested with. The transfer agent then arranges the printing of the certificates and their delivery to you.The fee for this should not exceed $200 per company. If that is not the case we suggest you contact another broker to quote for that service. Mishka vom Dorp from Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd has been assisting other CIGAs in that regard. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
In terms of safekeeping of certificates that is something that most people are quite capable of doing. Just like you look after items such as your passport you need only do the same for your certificates. The certificates are of no real value to any thief as they can not be simply exchanged for cash. If you were to lose your certificates there would be a fee ranging between 1.5% – 3% of the total value of the shares in question to have them reissued. It is also an option to take out an insurance policy covering your shares from loss or theft.
When you hold certificates your relationship is directly with the company in question and that means they would pay any dividends directly to you and not to a third party as is the case when they are held at a brokerage in a street name.
Holding shares in certificate form conforms to one of Jim’s core principles that you should eliminate all third parties between you and your investments. This is even more critical in the current climate of financial mayhem.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Jim,
Below you will find a brief summary of the process to follow in order to have your shares removed from street name. Jim advises that you first have your shares transferred into direct registration and once that is achieved you then have certificates issued in your name for your shares. Direct registration removes them from the street name and affords you protection from the counterparty risks associated with brokerage houses but certificates give you absolute protection from the upcoming crisis that Jim describes as the ‘Great Levelling’. It is highly recommend that you move into certification as quickly as possible.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
Once your shares are in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Lastly, some brokers will either be reluctant to assist you in the process whilst others will refuse to do so. Do not be talked out of doing this simple and extremely important task. Jim views this process as being a fundamental part of his GOTS strategy so you must insist that your instructions be carried out otherwise you should engage another broker.
If you do have such an issue we have been referring other CIGAs to Mishka vom Dorp at Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. The firm has been assisting many CIGAs to get their shares out of street name. His details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/14/jims-mailbox-1349/
===========================================================
Posted September 14th, 2013 at 10:06 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
I’m a Canadian with shares in Sprott Physical Bullion Trusts and a couple of gold miners held in a few Canadian brokerage accounts. The accounts are "cash" accounts (with zero debt). My shares are in street name. According to the "terms and conditions" the impression I get is that only margin/indebted accounts are subject to having their shares loaned out or hypothecated. Is my impression correct or am I fooling myself or being fooled? Which is to say, do I need to buy the share certificates (I think direct registration is not as prevalent or available in Canada as it is in the USA) to protect myself in case of you know what hitting the fan.
My reluctance to make the move to certificates is threefold: 1) their cost 2) their safekeeping 3) receipt of dividends.
Any and all advice you could give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
CIGA Art
Dear Art,
The Federal Appeals Court decision in the Sentinel case should alert any client with funds being held at a brokerage. (http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/06/21/commentary-on-the-sentinel-decision/ ) MF Global was another example where so called segregated funds were accessed without client knowledge. The primary reason to own gold or gold shares is to insure your remaining assets and your own liquidity against financial problems beyond your control. Therefore, it is illogical to leave your ‘insurance’ with a financial organisation that is intertwined with what you are insuring against.
Ownership via certificates means:
1. Zero counterparty risk.
2. You have physical possession at all times meaning the shares can’t be seized or confiscated digitally.
3. The certificates and therefore, the shares can be moved to any location in the world.
4. The shares cannot be lent out by a broker and shorted which can still happen even when you do not own the shares in a margin account due to control glitches.
For these reasons Jim strongly advises that you have your shares held in certificate form. To do so you simply instruct your broker to have certificates issued for your stock. The broker transfers the shares to the transfer agent relevant to the company you have invested with. The transfer agent then arranges the printing of the certificates and their delivery to you.The fee for this should not exceed $200 per company. If that is not the case we suggest you contact another broker to quote for that service. Mishka vom Dorp from Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd has been assisting other CIGAs in that regard. His contact details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
In terms of safekeeping of certificates that is something that most people are quite capable of doing. Just like you look after items such as your passport you need only do the same for your certificates. The certificates are of no real value to any thief as they can not be simply exchanged for cash. If you were to lose your certificates there would be a fee ranging between 1.5% – 3% of the total value of the shares in question to have them reissued. It is also an option to take out an insurance policy covering your shares from loss or theft.
When you hold certificates your relationship is directly with the company in question and that means they would pay any dividends directly to you and not to a third party as is the case when they are held at a brokerage in a street name.
Holding shares in certificate form conforms to one of Jim’s core principles that you should eliminate all third parties between you and your investments. This is even more critical in the current climate of financial mayhem.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dear Jim,
Below you will find a brief summary of the process to follow in order to have your shares removed from street name. Jim advises that you first have your shares transferred into direct registration and once that is achieved you then have certificates issued in your name for your shares. Direct registration removes them from the street name and affords you protection from the counterparty risks associated with brokerage houses but certificates give you absolute protection from the upcoming crisis that Jim describes as the ‘Great Levelling’. It is highly recommend that you move into certification as quickly as possible.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If your company does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you. The fee for this service should be no more than $20 in total per company.
Once your shares are in DRS you can have paper certificates issued by contacting your transfer agent directly, again the fee for this service should be no more than $20 per company.
To sell your shares that are in DRS you instruct the transfer agent to transfer the shares back to your broker. Within 24 hours your shares should be available for liquidation.
To sell your paper certificates you simply deliver the certificates back to the transfer agent with an instruction to transfer the shares to your broker. Generally, your shares should be available for sale within 24 hours of being received by the broker.
There should be no fee for the selling side of the process, from either DRS or paper certificates, but you should confirm this with your transfer agent and broker.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client. While that arrangement is technically possible for Canadian retirement accounts, it is not done as a matter of broker/trustee back office policy.
Lastly, some brokers will either be reluctant to assist you in the process whilst others will refuse to do so. Do not be talked out of doing this simple and extremely important task. Jim views this process as being a fundamental part of his GOTS strategy so you must insist that your instructions be carried out otherwise you should engage another broker.
If you do have such an issue we have been referring other CIGAs to Mishka vom Dorp at Sprott Global Resource Investments Ltd. The firm has been assisting many CIGAs to get their shares out of street name. His details are:
http://sprottglobal.com/contact-us/
Mishka vom Dorp
Sprott Global Resource Investments, Ltd.
1910 Palomar Point Way Suite 200
Carlsbad, CA 92008
+1 760-444-5254, fax:+1 760-683-6704
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/14/jims-mailbox-1349/
===========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 17th, 2013 at 9:49 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Jim,
If I wait until next March I will be able to avoid the 10% penalty on removing my funds
from a retirement plan (59 1/2). How emphatic do you think Jim is in having people
exit their retirement accounts now? March is only 6 months away.
Let me know what you and/or Jim thinks I should do.
CIGA Vertuall
Dear Vertuall,
Jim is very emphatic about the need to exit retirement accounts now that is one of the reasons he is travelling across the country so often telling people to GOTS now. I understand your position and like all of these things the final decision must be yours and must be something you are comfortable with. if the 10% penalty is too much for you to handle then you must wait the 6 months but you should take heed of what has recently occurred in Poland. I am sure you have read of it as it was mentioned a number of times on Mineset but interestingly not on MSN. The Polish retirement accounts were emptied without any substitution so it is a clear example of what can occur in a Western country right now. Losing 10% now would seem a small price to pay if the nationalisation occurs and you end up with 100% of worthless paper.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Good day Peter,
Allow me to understand this. The Bank of Canada compared to RBC and CIBC banks is public but the latter banks are not. Hence is the Bank of Canada the only public bank in Canada?
What about credit unions or Alberta Treasury Branch. I am asking on behalf of 20+ people, so it is important I get clarification. To me the Bank of Canada appears like a separate federal entity that does not cater to the public.
Will the CIDC in this country guarantee our deposits of 100,000 and less or are we in the same boat as FIDC in the USA?
Look forward to your responses.
CIGA Joe
Dear Joe,
Credit unions would not be public banks in the relevant definition of public whereas the Alberta Treasury Brach is because it is owned by the Province of Alberta. The other banks you mentioned are not public banks as they are not banks or financial institutions, in which a state or public actors are the owners. A public bank in terms of what you have asked is a company under state control.
According to the CDIC’s 2012 Annual Report, the CDIC protects $622 billion CAD in total eligible deposits, but only has $2.44 billion CAD in assets to meet insurance claims. That amount represents 0.39% of total eligible deposits. The CDIC is also authorized to borrow up to $19 billion if necessary from the federal government or the financial markets, and may request further funds from Parliament. In the event of systemic collapse the CDIC hasn’t got the funds to cover much at all.
The following from the relevant act of Parliament leaves the government plenty of room to not do much at all in regards to the $100,000 insurance if it suits them.
7. The objects of the Corporation are
(a) to provide insurance against the loss of part or all of deposits;
(b) to promote and otherwise contribute to the stability of the financial system in Canada; and
(c) to pursue the objects set out in paragraphs (a) and (b) for the benefit of persons having deposits with member institutions and in such manner as will minimize the exposure of the Corporation to loss.
R.S., 1985, c. C-3, s. 7;
R.S., 1985, c. 18 (3rd Supp.), s. 49;
1996, c. 6, s. 22;
2005, c. 30, s. 98.
Previous Version
Marginal note:Power of Governor in Council
7.1 (1) The Governor in Council may, by order, exempt the Corporation from the requirement that it pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss when it takes any action to address a situation that is specified in the order.
Marginal note:Condition precedent
(2) The Governor in Council may make the order only if the Minister is of the opinion, after consultation with the Board, the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Superintendent, that the requirement that the Corporation pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss, in respect of a situation that will be specified in the order, might have an adverse effect on the stability of the financial system in Canada or public confidence in that stability.
Marginal note:Repeal
(3) The Governor in Council may repeal the order only if the Minister is of the opinion that the requirement that the Corporation pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss, in respect of the situation specified in the order, will no longer have an adverse effect on the stability of the financial system in Canada or public confidence in that stability.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/17/jims-mailbox-1351/
=========================================================
Posted September 17th, 2013 at 9:49 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Jim,
If I wait until next March I will be able to avoid the 10% penalty on removing my funds
from a retirement plan (59 1/2). How emphatic do you think Jim is in having people
exit their retirement accounts now? March is only 6 months away.
Let me know what you and/or Jim thinks I should do.
CIGA Vertuall
Dear Vertuall,
Jim is very emphatic about the need to exit retirement accounts now that is one of the reasons he is travelling across the country so often telling people to GOTS now. I understand your position and like all of these things the final decision must be yours and must be something you are comfortable with. if the 10% penalty is too much for you to handle then you must wait the 6 months but you should take heed of what has recently occurred in Poland. I am sure you have read of it as it was mentioned a number of times on Mineset but interestingly not on MSN. The Polish retirement accounts were emptied without any substitution so it is a clear example of what can occur in a Western country right now. Losing 10% now would seem a small price to pay if the nationalisation occurs and you end up with 100% of worthless paper.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Good day Peter,
Allow me to understand this. The Bank of Canada compared to RBC and CIBC banks is public but the latter banks are not. Hence is the Bank of Canada the only public bank in Canada?
What about credit unions or Alberta Treasury Branch. I am asking on behalf of 20+ people, so it is important I get clarification. To me the Bank of Canada appears like a separate federal entity that does not cater to the public.
Will the CIDC in this country guarantee our deposits of 100,000 and less or are we in the same boat as FIDC in the USA?
Look forward to your responses.
CIGA Joe
Dear Joe,
Credit unions would not be public banks in the relevant definition of public whereas the Alberta Treasury Brach is because it is owned by the Province of Alberta. The other banks you mentioned are not public banks as they are not banks or financial institutions, in which a state or public actors are the owners. A public bank in terms of what you have asked is a company under state control.
According to the CDIC’s 2012 Annual Report, the CDIC protects $622 billion CAD in total eligible deposits, but only has $2.44 billion CAD in assets to meet insurance claims. That amount represents 0.39% of total eligible deposits. The CDIC is also authorized to borrow up to $19 billion if necessary from the federal government or the financial markets, and may request further funds from Parliament. In the event of systemic collapse the CDIC hasn’t got the funds to cover much at all.
The following from the relevant act of Parliament leaves the government plenty of room to not do much at all in regards to the $100,000 insurance if it suits them.
7. The objects of the Corporation are
(a) to provide insurance against the loss of part or all of deposits;
(b) to promote and otherwise contribute to the stability of the financial system in Canada; and
(c) to pursue the objects set out in paragraphs (a) and (b) for the benefit of persons having deposits with member institutions and in such manner as will minimize the exposure of the Corporation to loss.
R.S., 1985, c. C-3, s. 7;
R.S., 1985, c. 18 (3rd Supp.), s. 49;
1996, c. 6, s. 22;
2005, c. 30, s. 98.
Previous Version
Marginal note:Power of Governor in Council
7.1 (1) The Governor in Council may, by order, exempt the Corporation from the requirement that it pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss when it takes any action to address a situation that is specified in the order.
Marginal note:Condition precedent
(2) The Governor in Council may make the order only if the Minister is of the opinion, after consultation with the Board, the Governor of the Bank of Canada and the Superintendent, that the requirement that the Corporation pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss, in respect of a situation that will be specified in the order, might have an adverse effect on the stability of the financial system in Canada or public confidence in that stability.
Marginal note:Repeal
(3) The Governor in Council may repeal the order only if the Minister is of the opinion that the requirement that the Corporation pursue its objects in a manner that will minimize its exposure to loss, in respect of the situation specified in the order, will no longer have an adverse effect on the stability of the financial system in Canada or public confidence in that stability.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/17/jims-mailbox-1351/
=========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 19th, 2013 at 6:47 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Dear Jim,
When you say that all IRA’s will eventually be confiscated do you also mean physical PM IRAs as well? I know an IRA is an IRA, but the logistics of confiscating physical PM in an IRA sends a huge red flag to the world, key markets and American citizens in general (who are as dumb as dirt anyway) that basically there is no personal property rights that exist any longer in the country formerly known as the United States.
The reason I ask is because there are some very reputable PM gurus and well known investment newsletters or so called gold bug entities that are promoting these vehicles very hard.
If the physical IRA vehicle is not safe from being confiscated right along with the general equities IRA, what’s the point in promoting this type of IRA if your reputation will be completely destroyed in the process with tens of thousands of your followers being bankrupted as a result?
Respectfully,
CIGA Tim
Tim,
Jim’s advice is that all retirement accounts, irrespective of the assets held within them, are at risk of nationalization. This is why he is strongly advising that we exit those accounts whilst there is still an opportunity to do so. In some countries such as in the UK and Australia that opportunity does not exist. Exiting now and paying the relevant penalties is the only way to protect yourself from what is coming. Before Cyprus and now Poland none of us would have believed such things were possible but it is a reality that we simply must face. Jim is a lone voice in advising of this danger and unlike so many others he has no self interest in the matter. Many advisers will eventually jump on the bandwagon but it will be too late by then. I think it is significant that Jim was unequivocal in stating that the FED would not taper whereas so many other commentators were hedging their bets. We should all heed Jim’s words and GOTS now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
My Dear Friend Jim,
Just so you know, now when I go to withdraw cash from my Italian bank, they want to know why I need the money. They want a detailed description too. In the US I get strange looks when using 100 dollar bills and some stores can’t find the change. Something to consider.
With much gratitude,
CIGA Margaret
Dear Margaret,
Jim thanks you for the interesting feedback. Crazy times indeed when a bank challenges you and asks why you want access to your own money. Perhaps you should ask them for a detailed answer as to why they want to know. Soon everyone will hopefully realise that bank depositors are simply unsecured lenders. In the not too distant future Jim’s GOTS advice will be looked upon as being prescient indeed..
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultan
www.jsmineset.com
Greetings Mr. Sinclair,
Is a safety deposit box in Alberta Treasury Branch (ATB) safer than in a Big-5 Canadian bank?
Your consultant Peter Mickelberg recently responded to a question from an Alberta resident regarding the ownership structure of Canadian banks and credit unions. I’m wondering if ATB, and specifically a safety deposit box held there, would be treated any differently in a bail-in scenario. ATB is, as Mr. Mickelberg rightly identified, is a Crown Corporation owned by the Province of Alberta. Unlike the other provinces, Alberta has (almost) no public debt. ATB is not regulated federally, so it seems to me that in a bail-in scenario, it would be up to the Alberta government to make decisions.
Thanks in advance for your generosity in sharing your knowledge and insights.
CIGA Erich
Erich,
In the event of a systemic crisis Alberta will not be unaffected. Jim has advised that the use of safety deposit boxes in banks of any description, as a storage alternative, is not a desired option. The GOTS advice inherently implies exiting the system and retaining assets in any bank, even by way of a safety deposit box, means you are still within the system and thus at risk. The bail in will be far reaching and to ensure that your assets are protected Jim is strongly advising that you do what you can to not be involved in the system at all if that is possible.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/19/jims-mailbox-1353/
===========================================================
Posted September 19th, 2013 at 6:47 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Dear Jim,
When you say that all IRA’s will eventually be confiscated do you also mean physical PM IRAs as well? I know an IRA is an IRA, but the logistics of confiscating physical PM in an IRA sends a huge red flag to the world, key markets and American citizens in general (who are as dumb as dirt anyway) that basically there is no personal property rights that exist any longer in the country formerly known as the United States.
The reason I ask is because there are some very reputable PM gurus and well known investment newsletters or so called gold bug entities that are promoting these vehicles very hard.
If the physical IRA vehicle is not safe from being confiscated right along with the general equities IRA, what’s the point in promoting this type of IRA if your reputation will be completely destroyed in the process with tens of thousands of your followers being bankrupted as a result?
Respectfully,
CIGA Tim
Tim,
Jim’s advice is that all retirement accounts, irrespective of the assets held within them, are at risk of nationalization. This is why he is strongly advising that we exit those accounts whilst there is still an opportunity to do so. In some countries such as in the UK and Australia that opportunity does not exist. Exiting now and paying the relevant penalties is the only way to protect yourself from what is coming. Before Cyprus and now Poland none of us would have believed such things were possible but it is a reality that we simply must face. Jim is a lone voice in advising of this danger and unlike so many others he has no self interest in the matter. Many advisers will eventually jump on the bandwagon but it will be too late by then. I think it is significant that Jim was unequivocal in stating that the FED would not taper whereas so many other commentators were hedging their bets. We should all heed Jim’s words and GOTS now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
My Dear Friend Jim,
Just so you know, now when I go to withdraw cash from my Italian bank, they want to know why I need the money. They want a detailed description too. In the US I get strange looks when using 100 dollar bills and some stores can’t find the change. Something to consider.
With much gratitude,
CIGA Margaret
Dear Margaret,
Jim thanks you for the interesting feedback. Crazy times indeed when a bank challenges you and asks why you want access to your own money. Perhaps you should ask them for a detailed answer as to why they want to know. Soon everyone will hopefully realise that bank depositors are simply unsecured lenders. In the not too distant future Jim’s GOTS advice will be looked upon as being prescient indeed..
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultan
www.jsmineset.com
Greetings Mr. Sinclair,
Is a safety deposit box in Alberta Treasury Branch (ATB) safer than in a Big-5 Canadian bank?
Your consultant Peter Mickelberg recently responded to a question from an Alberta resident regarding the ownership structure of Canadian banks and credit unions. I’m wondering if ATB, and specifically a safety deposit box held there, would be treated any differently in a bail-in scenario. ATB is, as Mr. Mickelberg rightly identified, is a Crown Corporation owned by the Province of Alberta. Unlike the other provinces, Alberta has (almost) no public debt. ATB is not regulated federally, so it seems to me that in a bail-in scenario, it would be up to the Alberta government to make decisions.
Thanks in advance for your generosity in sharing your knowledge and insights.
CIGA Erich
Erich,
In the event of a systemic crisis Alberta will not be unaffected. Jim has advised that the use of safety deposit boxes in banks of any description, as a storage alternative, is not a desired option. The GOTS advice inherently implies exiting the system and retaining assets in any bank, even by way of a safety deposit box, means you are still within the system and thus at risk. The bail in will be far reaching and to ensure that your assets are protected Jim is strongly advising that you do what you can to not be involved in the system at all if that is possible.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/19/jims-mailbox-1353/
===========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 20th, 2013 at 12:54 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for all you do. Here is an FT article reprinted in the open on CNBS. In it Lord Turner is making an open call for the Great Leveling.
"Lord Turner offers a few ideas. He wants a radical overhaul of the intellectual models that economists use (including, presumably, those in central banks.) He also wants policy makers to deliberately reduce credit.
Thus the Basel III framework for banks should have tough counter-cyclical capital requirements, he argues, and regulators should reintroduce "into the policy toolkit quantitative reserve requirements, which more directly constrain banking multipliers and thus credit growth than do increases in capital requirements"."
Click here to read the full article…
The only way the banks will meet those capital requirements is to grab all the deposits in sight.
CIGA Tom
Ted,
If the US effectively appropriates all retirement funds by way of a nationalization all confidence will be lost in the $US and as gold shares an inverse relationship with the $ we would see gold challenging levels far higher than anyone, except perhaps for Jim, has theorized. The same goes for the ‘bail in’. Once banks begin to use the depositor’s funds to finance the bankster’s financial misfeasance, gold will resume its place as the one and only true safe haven. The theory of fiat currency is predicated on confidence and as the $US is the ‘common share’ of the US, either one of the events you have listed will see all confidence disappear overnight and the $US will drop like a stone. A vastly lower $US means higher gold prices and a rally for good quality gold stocks that will surprise us all. We must remember that in times of political, economic and currency related crisis gold has historically been the only asset class that maintains value.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Chris,
Jim is of the view that the Comex will become a cash market in contrast to its present nature where you can margin the 100 ounce contract. The futures and options on futures contracts would therefore not be null and void. Once that does occur the physical gold market will then become predominant as it was prior to 1973 and the good quality gold stocks will certainly benefit as investors look for a leveraged play on gold. The integrity of the Comex is a function of its warehouse inventory. As that inventory falls lower and lower, as it is every week, the Comex has no option than to inevitably change into a cash settled market as they simply don’t have the gold to deliver. The delivery system will change and then paper gold will trade at a price thats irrelevant to the paper gold market rather it will be determined by the over the counter market for physical gold. That change will herald the birth of the real bull market for gold.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
MC,
Jim advises that all retirement accounts are at risk which includes ROTH IRAs. If you can exit now it is certainly advisable as the recent events in Poland told us that it is only a question of time before nationalisation happens elsewhere. Time is short but so many people think they can finesse their exit or that it simply won’t happen but that is exactly what the little people in Cyprus and Poland thought. We are lucky in that we do have Jim informing us beforehand which gives us a fighting chance.
In regards to banking, credit unions are probably the best alternative to banks but you must ensure that you carry out proper due diligence. Nothing replaces doing your own homework and it is something Jim encourages.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Debbie,
I expect there is not a single institution that does not have some degree of derivative exposure. Short of banking internationally, I think it is a question of doing your own detailed research and finding the least dangerous institution to deal with.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Laszlo,
Thanks for the update. You are certainly correct. There is no place to hide if you leave your assets exposed in the Western system as the various agencies in this countries work hand in glove with each other. The same occurs in Australia where I live. Anyone who thinks using any Western institution is a safe means is being very naive.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Jim,
Jim advises that in the absence of international banking you should look for small, local institutions. To that end, you must do extensive research and a useful organization that provides independent US bank and credit union ratings can be found at http://www.veribanc.com.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Helen,
Congratulations on getting your stocks safely protected. Remember that Jim views DRS as stage one in the process and that certificates afford the best level of protection. In regard to the credit union you should do your own research and ask questions of the institution, including what their exposure to derivatives might be. Storing valuables in a safety deposit box is no guarantee of their safety and privacy. Eliminating third parties between us and our investments is the core principle of Jim’s GOTS strategy.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Benjamin,
In the US, the Patriot Act allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. In the event that we have a systemic banking crisis we could easily see such laws invoked and your assets will be at risk. Jim strongly advocates that you remove all third parties between you and your investments. If you cannot store them personally I would certainly seek storage outside of the system. There are potential options available for international storage that are not expensive. Please let me know if that is of interest to you.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Ted,
Many brokers won’t recommend you take delivery of certificates or even use direct registration for the simple reason that they want you to trade your stocks often and more critically, they want full control and custody of your investment. Certificates provide the ultimate protection for your shares and if a broker won’t accept them all you need do is send the certificate to the relevant transfer agent with an instruction to have the shares transferred to the broker of your choice for liquidation. What you have been told is a scare tactic designed to discourage you from exiting the system.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/20/jims-mailbox-1354/
===========================================================
Posted September 20th, 2013 at 12:54 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Hi Jim,
Thanks for all you do. Here is an FT article reprinted in the open on CNBS. In it Lord Turner is making an open call for the Great Leveling.
"Lord Turner offers a few ideas. He wants a radical overhaul of the intellectual models that economists use (including, presumably, those in central banks.) He also wants policy makers to deliberately reduce credit.
Thus the Basel III framework for banks should have tough counter-cyclical capital requirements, he argues, and regulators should reintroduce "into the policy toolkit quantitative reserve requirements, which more directly constrain banking multipliers and thus credit growth than do increases in capital requirements"."
Click here to read the full article…
The only way the banks will meet those capital requirements is to grab all the deposits in sight.
CIGA Tom
Ted,
If the US effectively appropriates all retirement funds by way of a nationalization all confidence will be lost in the $US and as gold shares an inverse relationship with the $ we would see gold challenging levels far higher than anyone, except perhaps for Jim, has theorized. The same goes for the ‘bail in’. Once banks begin to use the depositor’s funds to finance the bankster’s financial misfeasance, gold will resume its place as the one and only true safe haven. The theory of fiat currency is predicated on confidence and as the $US is the ‘common share’ of the US, either one of the events you have listed will see all confidence disappear overnight and the $US will drop like a stone. A vastly lower $US means higher gold prices and a rally for good quality gold stocks that will surprise us all. We must remember that in times of political, economic and currency related crisis gold has historically been the only asset class that maintains value.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Chris,
Jim is of the view that the Comex will become a cash market in contrast to its present nature where you can margin the 100 ounce contract. The futures and options on futures contracts would therefore not be null and void. Once that does occur the physical gold market will then become predominant as it was prior to 1973 and the good quality gold stocks will certainly benefit as investors look for a leveraged play on gold. The integrity of the Comex is a function of its warehouse inventory. As that inventory falls lower and lower, as it is every week, the Comex has no option than to inevitably change into a cash settled market as they simply don’t have the gold to deliver. The delivery system will change and then paper gold will trade at a price thats irrelevant to the paper gold market rather it will be determined by the over the counter market for physical gold. That change will herald the birth of the real bull market for gold.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
MC,
Jim advises that all retirement accounts are at risk which includes ROTH IRAs. If you can exit now it is certainly advisable as the recent events in Poland told us that it is only a question of time before nationalisation happens elsewhere. Time is short but so many people think they can finesse their exit or that it simply won’t happen but that is exactly what the little people in Cyprus and Poland thought. We are lucky in that we do have Jim informing us beforehand which gives us a fighting chance.
In regards to banking, credit unions are probably the best alternative to banks but you must ensure that you carry out proper due diligence. Nothing replaces doing your own homework and it is something Jim encourages.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Debbie,
I expect there is not a single institution that does not have some degree of derivative exposure. Short of banking internationally, I think it is a question of doing your own detailed research and finding the least dangerous institution to deal with.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Laszlo,
Thanks for the update. You are certainly correct. There is no place to hide if you leave your assets exposed in the Western system as the various agencies in this countries work hand in glove with each other. The same occurs in Australia where I live. Anyone who thinks using any Western institution is a safe means is being very naive.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Jim,
Jim advises that in the absence of international banking you should look for small, local institutions. To that end, you must do extensive research and a useful organization that provides independent US bank and credit union ratings can be found at http://www.veribanc.com.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Helen,
Congratulations on getting your stocks safely protected. Remember that Jim views DRS as stage one in the process and that certificates afford the best level of protection. In regard to the credit union you should do your own research and ask questions of the institution, including what their exposure to derivatives might be. Storing valuables in a safety deposit box is no guarantee of their safety and privacy. Eliminating third parties between us and our investments is the core principle of Jim’s GOTS strategy.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Benjamin,
In the US, the Patriot Act allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. In the event that we have a systemic banking crisis we could easily see such laws invoked and your assets will be at risk. Jim strongly advocates that you remove all third parties between you and your investments. If you cannot store them personally I would certainly seek storage outside of the system. There are potential options available for international storage that are not expensive. Please let me know if that is of interest to you.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
Ted,
Many brokers won’t recommend you take delivery of certificates or even use direct registration for the simple reason that they want you to trade your stocks often and more critically, they want full control and custody of your investment. Certificates provide the ultimate protection for your shares and if a broker won’t accept them all you need do is send the certificate to the relevant transfer agent with an instruction to have the shares transferred to the broker of your choice for liquidation. What you have been told is a scare tactic designed to discourage you from exiting the system.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.JSMineset.com
http://www.jsmineset.com/2013/09/20/jims-mailbox-1354/
===========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 23rd, 2013 at 4:02 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Shelley,
The Chinese are buying far more than just gold with their US$. Since 2002 China has invested more than US$ 680 billion worldwide, predominantly in energy. They are buying assets across the world with their US$ and will continue to do so as part of their long term plan to become the economic power of the world. I am certain they enjoy buying weakness in gold but it must be remembered that they are not buying gold as a speculation. China understands the power of gold and they are purchasing gold to ensure they have a seat at the table when the ‘Great Reset’ occurs. The Chinese know that gold will be a part of the new virtual reserve currency and they want the Renimbi to be part of the Great Reset too.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Lois,
You will not be able to have certificates issued for your money market accounts. The reference we make to certificates generally applies to shares in companies trading on various stock markets. You should be aware of Jim’s view regarding bali ins and the risks involved in dealing with many banks, particularly in the US.
Jim recommends that you seek allocated bullion storage outside of the Western system. To that end he has suggested that Singapore is an appropriate destination. If you are interested in allocated bullion storage in Singapore you can obtain information about the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange from its website at sgpmx.com. You can store your own bullion or coins personally but you should consider the inherent risks involved in that and if you accept those risks and are comfortable with them then it is an option.
In regards to government imposing a windfall tax on gold, that is, of course a possibility. However, it should not deter you from owning the only asset class that provides insurance from the financial mayhem we are about to experience when what Jim describes as the ‘ Great Levelling’ occurs. Only gold will maintain value in the face of the ongoing devaluation of currencies across the world. Gold is insurance against political, economic and currency related crisis and when you look at the world that is all you can see each and every day.
Jim has advised that a hobby farm is a very worthwhile option and clearly it is best that it is closer rather than further away from your home. The important thing is that you have a place to go to that is self sufficient and relatively safe.
Don’t let yourself become overwhelmed by the situation. It is important to think clearly and simply about the circumstances we find ourselves in so that our response is the right one. Jim is providing the warning ahead of time so that we can get our affairs in order and protect ourselves and our families so if you haven’t taken action to GOTS you should do so now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ajay,
Jim advises that you should contact CNT Depository to discuss your situation.
CNT Depository, Inc.
Ed Lubicich, Director of Vault Services
e-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 508-807-4801
722 Bedford Street, Bridgewater, MA 02324
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Kurt,
No asset class will be safe from the nationalisation of retirement accounts. The government will not discriminate when it comes to using your assets to pay off Wall Street’s debts. If you haven’t exited your retirement accounts then you must do so before you don’t have the option and you lose all that you have saved. Exiting and using that to purchase a hobby farm along the lines of what Jim has advised is totally in line with the GOTS strategy but doing through and IRA is definitely not.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Uwe,
I am sure you have read Jim’s comments concerning the gold share activity on Friday last. Friday was also equity option expiry and on top of that we had a FED mouthpiece suggesting the taper was on, which helped drive gold lower, despite that not being the case as of last Wednesday. In a financial world where algorithms rule, price chasing both on the upside and the down is the standard practice. The average person is doomed trying to join them so we must do as Jim says and that is to own margin free positions in good quality gold stocks and ignore MSN. If the Indians really do want to sell 200 tons of gold I am sure the Chinese will be willing buyers.
In terms of TA, Jim has provided everything he recommends in his compendiums which if you haven’t already got are available on Mineset.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Frank,
Congratulations on your GOTS efforts. Jim speaks to many people but so few have the courage and the foresight to actually take action. Your advice regarding retirement accounts is exactly correct but greed stops people from pulling the trigger. Only those with ‘skin in the game’ like Jim and McEwen are worth listening to, the others are just talkers and anyone fool can do that.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
==========================================================
Posted September 23rd, 2013 at 4:02 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Shelley,
The Chinese are buying far more than just gold with their US$. Since 2002 China has invested more than US$ 680 billion worldwide, predominantly in energy. They are buying assets across the world with their US$ and will continue to do so as part of their long term plan to become the economic power of the world. I am certain they enjoy buying weakness in gold but it must be remembered that they are not buying gold as a speculation. China understands the power of gold and they are purchasing gold to ensure they have a seat at the table when the ‘Great Reset’ occurs. The Chinese know that gold will be a part of the new virtual reserve currency and they want the Renimbi to be part of the Great Reset too.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Lois,
You will not be able to have certificates issued for your money market accounts. The reference we make to certificates generally applies to shares in companies trading on various stock markets. You should be aware of Jim’s view regarding bali ins and the risks involved in dealing with many banks, particularly in the US.
Jim recommends that you seek allocated bullion storage outside of the Western system. To that end he has suggested that Singapore is an appropriate destination. If you are interested in allocated bullion storage in Singapore you can obtain information about the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange from its website at sgpmx.com. You can store your own bullion or coins personally but you should consider the inherent risks involved in that and if you accept those risks and are comfortable with them then it is an option.
In regards to government imposing a windfall tax on gold, that is, of course a possibility. However, it should not deter you from owning the only asset class that provides insurance from the financial mayhem we are about to experience when what Jim describes as the ‘ Great Levelling’ occurs. Only gold will maintain value in the face of the ongoing devaluation of currencies across the world. Gold is insurance against political, economic and currency related crisis and when you look at the world that is all you can see each and every day.
Jim has advised that a hobby farm is a very worthwhile option and clearly it is best that it is closer rather than further away from your home. The important thing is that you have a place to go to that is self sufficient and relatively safe.
Don’t let yourself become overwhelmed by the situation. It is important to think clearly and simply about the circumstances we find ourselves in so that our response is the right one. Jim is providing the warning ahead of time so that we can get our affairs in order and protect ourselves and our families so if you haven’t taken action to GOTS you should do so now.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ajay,
Jim advises that you should contact CNT Depository to discuss your situation.
CNT Depository, Inc.
Ed Lubicich, Director of Vault Services
e-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 508-807-4801
722 Bedford Street, Bridgewater, MA 02324
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Kurt,
No asset class will be safe from the nationalisation of retirement accounts. The government will not discriminate when it comes to using your assets to pay off Wall Street’s debts. If you haven’t exited your retirement accounts then you must do so before you don’t have the option and you lose all that you have saved. Exiting and using that to purchase a hobby farm along the lines of what Jim has advised is totally in line with the GOTS strategy but doing through and IRA is definitely not.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Uwe,
I am sure you have read Jim’s comments concerning the gold share activity on Friday last. Friday was also equity option expiry and on top of that we had a FED mouthpiece suggesting the taper was on, which helped drive gold lower, despite that not being the case as of last Wednesday. In a financial world where algorithms rule, price chasing both on the upside and the down is the standard practice. The average person is doomed trying to join them so we must do as Jim says and that is to own margin free positions in good quality gold stocks and ignore MSN. If the Indians really do want to sell 200 tons of gold I am sure the Chinese will be willing buyers.
In terms of TA, Jim has provided everything he recommends in his compendiums which if you haven’t already got are available on Mineset.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Frank,
Congratulations on your GOTS efforts. Jim speaks to many people but so few have the courage and the foresight to actually take action. Your advice regarding retirement accounts is exactly correct but greed stops people from pulling the trigger. Only those with ‘skin in the game’ like Jim and McEwen are worth listening to, the others are just talkers and anyone fool can do that.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
==========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 24th, 2013 at 3:34 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Bob,
When you hold the stocks from your IRA in certificate form they are held in the name of the trustee on behalf of you, the client. When you hold them outside of an IRA the certificate is in your name only. It may appear to be a subtle difference but in the event of a nationalisation of retirement accounts the former arrangement offers you no protection. Nationalisation will not include an option for you to exit the retirement account rather than have your retirement assets replaced with some worthless sovereign paper. That option is presently open to you but it may not always be the case. If you exit now and have your shares in certificate form you have the ultimate form of insurance and you will have removed all third parties between you and the shares. You should also bear in mind that whilst the penalty and taxes that you would incur on exiting early may seem onerous, we have no idea of what taxation regime a government might impose in the midst of the Great Levelling. You might be looking at far higher taxes in that scenario and that is why Jim is strongly advising that you exit now and protect what you have.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Rob,
Jim has advised that allocated bullion storage should be outside of the Western system, but for some people that is not practical and it is for that reason that he has sought a domestic option. It is a a relatively easy task to store internationally, but it is not for everybody hence we have published details of an alternate option in the US. They key point is to totally avoid bank safety deposit boxes.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Darin,
There is no minimum account size concerning direct registration. Brokers do not actively promote direct registration as it is in the firm’s best interests that you leave your shares in a street name. You should note that whilst direct registration offers protection personal possession of certificates provides the best level of insurance.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If the company you are invested in does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Tim,
Your story is an excellent example of someone actually taking responsibility and protecting himself from the effects of the Great Levelling. Congratulations are certainly in order. Your tax assumption is valid but none of us know just how government will react in the midst of the crisis regarding taxation. It is not inconceivable that a desperate government will impose higher and higher taxes to prop itself up and you can bet that retirees will be a target to tempting to pass by.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Nate,
I understand what you are feeling. Take heart from the fact that you have taken steps to protect yourself and your family as best you can. I think it is sometime best to tune out from MSN as it is a madhouse. Take care.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Robert,
The Great Reset that Jim refers to concerns the formation of a new reserve currency that will be a virtual currency made up of the US$, Euro, Yen, Renimbi and gold. Countries will still have their own currencies to carry out their day to day transactions just as they do today. This reset occurs some time between 2016 and 2020 and at a time when gold is at vastly higher levels then it is today. The US$ will be much lower than todays level but we are not talking about the US$ disappearing. The Great Reset sees all currencies being revalued vis a vis gold. The reset will validate gold as the real foundation of the international monetary system, hence China’s insatiable appetite for physical gold. This is why Jim is going to great lengths to prepare and inform us so that we can survive the Great Levelling and the Great Reset and preserve our assets. The only strategy that can allows us to do so is to own physical gold and good quality gold stocks.
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
===========================================================
Posted September 24th, 2013 at 3:34 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Bob,
When you hold the stocks from your IRA in certificate form they are held in the name of the trustee on behalf of you, the client. When you hold them outside of an IRA the certificate is in your name only. It may appear to be a subtle difference but in the event of a nationalisation of retirement accounts the former arrangement offers you no protection. Nationalisation will not include an option for you to exit the retirement account rather than have your retirement assets replaced with some worthless sovereign paper. That option is presently open to you but it may not always be the case. If you exit now and have your shares in certificate form you have the ultimate form of insurance and you will have removed all third parties between you and the shares. You should also bear in mind that whilst the penalty and taxes that you would incur on exiting early may seem onerous, we have no idea of what taxation regime a government might impose in the midst of the Great Levelling. You might be looking at far higher taxes in that scenario and that is why Jim is strongly advising that you exit now and protect what you have.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Rob,
Jim has advised that allocated bullion storage should be outside of the Western system, but for some people that is not practical and it is for that reason that he has sought a domestic option. It is a a relatively easy task to store internationally, but it is not for everybody hence we have published details of an alternate option in the US. They key point is to totally avoid bank safety deposit boxes.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Darin,
There is no minimum account size concerning direct registration. Brokers do not actively promote direct registration as it is in the firm’s best interests that you leave your shares in a street name. You should note that whilst direct registration offers protection personal possession of certificates provides the best level of insurance.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If the company you are invested in does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Tim,
Your story is an excellent example of someone actually taking responsibility and protecting himself from the effects of the Great Levelling. Congratulations are certainly in order. Your tax assumption is valid but none of us know just how government will react in the midst of the crisis regarding taxation. It is not inconceivable that a desperate government will impose higher and higher taxes to prop itself up and you can bet that retirees will be a target to tempting to pass by.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Nate,
I understand what you are feeling. Take heart from the fact that you have taken steps to protect yourself and your family as best you can. I think it is sometime best to tune out from MSN as it is a madhouse. Take care.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Robert,
The Great Reset that Jim refers to concerns the formation of a new reserve currency that will be a virtual currency made up of the US$, Euro, Yen, Renimbi and gold. Countries will still have their own currencies to carry out their day to day transactions just as they do today. This reset occurs some time between 2016 and 2020 and at a time when gold is at vastly higher levels then it is today. The US$ will be much lower than todays level but we are not talking about the US$ disappearing. The Great Reset sees all currencies being revalued vis a vis gold. The reset will validate gold as the real foundation of the international monetary system, hence China’s insatiable appetite for physical gold. This is why Jim is going to great lengths to prepare and inform us so that we can survive the Great Levelling and the Great Reset and preserve our assets. The only strategy that can allows us to do so is to own physical gold and good quality gold stocks.
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
===========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 25th, 2013 at 12:48 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Ashish,
Jim has stated time and time again that the FED has no choice than to extend QE through to infinity. It may be given another name so that MSN can make out that our financial masters really do have a strategy other money printing but its effect will be the same, the creation of more and more liquidity. Simply put, it is money creation on a scale never witnessed before and that will see general equities rise along with gold and result in a lower US$. We should have no doubts that the Great Levelling and the Great Reset are all part of a plan and it is Jim’s desire to equip us with the tools to survive and hopefully prosper. The only way to do that is to own physical gold and good quality gold stocks. To own an asset that is presently not in fashion is not easy for many, but we need only look at history to know it is the correct decision.
The new virtual reserve currency you refer to is not going to be based on one currency, rather it will be a basket including the US$, Euro, Yen and Renimbi and of course the ultimate currency, gold. Jim has given us a ‘heads up’ on the Great Reset, it’s our job to act accordingly and hold gold.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ted,
In regards to safety deposit boxes Jim’s concerns stem from the Patriot Act which allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. That and the fact that most safety deposit boxes are with banks makes leaving your valuables in them problematic to say the least in the climate of the ‘bail in’. Jim has recommended that we seek allocated storage for our bullion outside of the Western system and in so doing has suggested Singapore as an appropriate jurisdiction but in the absence of that option a US based option is CNT Depository.
CNT Depository, Inc.
Ed Lubicich, Director of Vault Services
e-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 508-807-4801
722 Bedford Street, Bridgewater, MA 02324
There are options available whereby you can store precious metals in Singapore without having to ship them. If you are interested in those I suggest you contact the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange at sgpmx.com.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Bob,
When you hold the stocks from your IRA in certificate form they are held in the name of the trustee on behalf of you, the client. When you hold them outside of an IRA the certificate is in your name only. It may appear to be a subtle difference but in the event of a nationalisation of retirement accounts the former arrangement offers you no protection. Nationalisation will not include an option for you to exit the retirement account rather than have your retirement assets replaced with some worthless sovereign paper. That option is presently open to you but it may not always be the case. If you exit now and have your shares in certificate form you have the ultimate form of insurance and you will have removed all third parties between you and the shares. You should also bear in mind that whilst the penalty and taxes that you would incur on exiting early may seem onerous, we have no idea of what taxation regime a government might impose in the midst of the Great Levelling. You might be looking at far higher taxes in that scenario and that is why Jim is strongly advising that you exit now and protect what you have.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Darin,
There is no minimum account size concerning direct registration. Brokers do not actively promote direct registration as it is in the firm’s best interests that you leave your shares in a street name. You should note that whilst direct registration offers protection personal possession of certificates provides the best level of insurance.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If the company you are invested in does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
==========================================================
Posted September 25th, 2013 at 12:48 PM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Ashish,
Jim has stated time and time again that the FED has no choice than to extend QE through to infinity. It may be given another name so that MSN can make out that our financial masters really do have a strategy other money printing but its effect will be the same, the creation of more and more liquidity. Simply put, it is money creation on a scale never witnessed before and that will see general equities rise along with gold and result in a lower US$. We should have no doubts that the Great Levelling and the Great Reset are all part of a plan and it is Jim’s desire to equip us with the tools to survive and hopefully prosper. The only way to do that is to own physical gold and good quality gold stocks. To own an asset that is presently not in fashion is not easy for many, but we need only look at history to know it is the correct decision.
The new virtual reserve currency you refer to is not going to be based on one currency, rather it will be a basket including the US$, Euro, Yen and Renimbi and of course the ultimate currency, gold. Jim has given us a ‘heads up’ on the Great Reset, it’s our job to act accordingly and hold gold.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ted,
In regards to safety deposit boxes Jim’s concerns stem from the Patriot Act which allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. That and the fact that most safety deposit boxes are with banks makes leaving your valuables in them problematic to say the least in the climate of the ‘bail in’. Jim has recommended that we seek allocated storage for our bullion outside of the Western system and in so doing has suggested Singapore as an appropriate jurisdiction but in the absence of that option a US based option is CNT Depository.
CNT Depository, Inc.
Ed Lubicich, Director of Vault Services
e-mail: [email protected]
Tel: 508-807-4801
722 Bedford Street, Bridgewater, MA 02324
There are options available whereby you can store precious metals in Singapore without having to ship them. If you are interested in those I suggest you contact the Singapore Precious Metals Exchange at sgpmx.com.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Bob,
When you hold the stocks from your IRA in certificate form they are held in the name of the trustee on behalf of you, the client. When you hold them outside of an IRA the certificate is in your name only. It may appear to be a subtle difference but in the event of a nationalisation of retirement accounts the former arrangement offers you no protection. Nationalisation will not include an option for you to exit the retirement account rather than have your retirement assets replaced with some worthless sovereign paper. That option is presently open to you but it may not always be the case. If you exit now and have your shares in certificate form you have the ultimate form of insurance and you will have removed all third parties between you and the shares. You should also bear in mind that whilst the penalty and taxes that you would incur on exiting early may seem onerous, we have no idea of what taxation regime a government might impose in the midst of the Great Levelling. You might be looking at far higher taxes in that scenario and that is why Jim is strongly advising that you exit now and protect what you have.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Darin,
There is no minimum account size concerning direct registration. Brokers do not actively promote direct registration as it is in the firm’s best interests that you leave your shares in a street name. You should note that whilst direct registration offers protection personal possession of certificates provides the best level of insurance.
Directly registering shares in your name is a relatively simple task. Firstly, direct your broker to transfer the shares to your company’s transfer agent. The cost of this should not exceed $50 per company. Once that process is complete your shares are digitally registered with the transfer agent. You will then have a web account with the transfer agent where you can view your holdings.
If your broker won’t carry out these instructions find another that will.
Most US stocks offer access to direct registration (DRS) but a number of Canadian stocks do not. If the company you are invested in does not offer DRS you can opt for paper certificates to be issued to you in your name.
To obtain the paper certificates instruct your broker to inform the transfer agent of your request. The certificates will then be printed by the transfer agent and posted to you.
Shares held in US retirement accounts can be held in certificated or direct registration form in the name of the trustee on behalf of the client.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
==========================================================
Jim’s Mailbox
Posted September 28th, 2013 at 10:19 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Bob,
I am not a lawyer but if you hold shares in certificate form your relationship is directly with the company in question and if you have carefully selected that company there should be no problem. There are no guarantees in life but if the company in question is ethically managed by quality people owning it via certificates will afford you the best protection available.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ryan,
You cannot own mutual funds via direct registration or in certificate form as mutual funds do not have transfer agents. Mutual funds own individual securities but they are inherently in a street name with a brokerage. This means that those shares are exposed to a range of broker/dealer counter party risk.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dave,
It certainly isn’t paranoid behavior to be considering that government is capable of such conduct but I think it is more likely that Jim’s Great Leveling scenario followed by the Great Reset will be the ways things turn out. The banksters are the architects and they prefer to do things with stealth and in conduction with a compliant media they have and will continue to achieve their goals. We are lucky to have Jim here to inform and then guide us through these troubled times. Preparation along the lines of Jim’s GOTS advice is paramount and then it is a matter of being safe and strong in the knowledge that you and your family are protected.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ernie,
Jim’s advice regarding real estate is to seek to purchase a hobby farm or other property possessing a unique location but without any debt.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Randall,
Jim advises that you should not store any valuables in bank safety deposit boxes as they are ‘safe’ in name only. You should also note that in the US, the Patriot Act allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. Storage of certificates should be no more problematic than storing your passport.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
============================================================
Posted September 28th, 2013 at 10:19 AM (CST) by Jim Sinclair & filed under Jim's Mailbox.
Bob,
I am not a lawyer but if you hold shares in certificate form your relationship is directly with the company in question and if you have carefully selected that company there should be no problem. There are no guarantees in life but if the company in question is ethically managed by quality people owning it via certificates will afford you the best protection available.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ryan,
You cannot own mutual funds via direct registration or in certificate form as mutual funds do not have transfer agents. Mutual funds own individual securities but they are inherently in a street name with a brokerage. This means that those shares are exposed to a range of broker/dealer counter party risk.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Dave,
It certainly isn’t paranoid behavior to be considering that government is capable of such conduct but I think it is more likely that Jim’s Great Leveling scenario followed by the Great Reset will be the ways things turn out. The banksters are the architects and they prefer to do things with stealth and in conduction with a compliant media they have and will continue to achieve their goals. We are lucky to have Jim here to inform and then guide us through these troubled times. Preparation along the lines of Jim’s GOTS advice is paramount and then it is a matter of being safe and strong in the knowledge that you and your family are protected.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Ernie,
Jim’s advice regarding real estate is to seek to purchase a hobby farm or other property possessing a unique location but without any debt.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
Randall,
Jim advises that you should not store any valuables in bank safety deposit boxes as they are ‘safe’ in name only. You should also note that in the US, the Patriot Act allows for the contents of safety deposit boxes to be seized without a search warrant when its deemed to be a matter of ‘national security’. Storage of certificates should be no more problematic than storing your passport.
Regards,
Peter Mickelberg
Communications Consultant
www.jsmineset.com
============================================================