FC: Reason's Michael Lynch on plans to decrease financial privacy

From: Declan McCullagh (declanat_private)
Date: Sun Oct 07 2001 - 22:35:59 PDT

  • Next message: Declan McCullagh: "FC: UCLAer suspended for writing email criticizing Israel"

    **********
    
    Date: Thu, 04 Oct 2001 10:32:44 -0500
    Subject: Michael Lynch on financial privacy restrictions
    From: Virginia Postrel <vpostrelat_private>
    To: Dave Farber <farberat_private>, Declan McCullagh <declanat_private>
    
    http://reason.com/ml/ml100401.html
    
    Following the Money
    The September 11th attack revives an attack on offshore banking
    
    By Michael W. Lynch
    
    The September 11th attacks have been put to all sorts of uses by interest
    groups with preexisting agendas. Some of the claims are patently absurd:
    Some legislators, for instance, are trying to push the Farm Security Act,
    which protects such things as peanut butter sandwiches, as more necessary
    than ever in the wake of an attack on American soil.
    
    But itıs the claims that appear reasonable that may prove to be the most
    damaging to freedom in the long run. The inverse relationship between
    laughability and lethality is easily explained: The serious claims deal with
    government police powers, which are necessary to ensure our domestic
    security but also contain the most potential for abuse. Thatıs certainly the
    case with the anti-terrorism bill Attorney General John Ashcroft has been
    attempting to rush through Congress. Itıs just as true of money laundering
    legislation that may be bundled into the anti-terrorism bill or considered
    as a stand-alone package.
    
    At first glance, anti-money-laundering efforts appear directly related to a
    war on terrorist networks. To do their deeds terrorists must, after all,
    spend money. And one of Bushıs first acts was to freeze assets of suspected
    terrorist funders and ask other governments to do the same. To date, 19
    countries have frozen the accounts of 27 groups. This action may in time
    prove to be overbroad, but the government already had the authority to
    undertake it. The debate moving forward both in Congress and internationally
    will have precious little to do with terrorism and plenty to do with the
    boring but important issues of financial privacy and international tax
    competition.
    
    The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has been
    campaigning against countries it labels tax havens. Its high-tax members
    resent their citizens' ability to park money offshore and therefore avoid
    taxes. The OECD wants information exchange and tax harmonization, but was
    unable to secure the backing of the Bush administration earlier this year.
    Without the support of U.S. -- the worldıs largest tax haven by OECD
    standards -- the initiative stalled. Then the Twin Towers fell.
    
    The Financial Times weighed in with an article chiding the U.S. government
    for hypocrisy and accusing the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, the
    leading opponent of the OECDıs efforts, of having a change of heart, since
    it issued a memo expressing a desire to see those responsible for the World
    Trade Center massacre brought to justice. Unnamed European Union officials
    have been quoted saying they think the OECD effort is alive and kicking.
    Said one EU official, "Politically it is now going to be very difficult to
    defend the continuation of tax havens."
    
    But "tax havens" should and must be defended. The issues of money
    laundering, financial privacy, and tax harmonization are very distinct from
    one another. Many countries considered tax havens are willing to work with
    law enforcement officials to seize the assets of people who commit crimes
    that are recognized by all involved. Piloting a plane into a skyscraper full
    of people is such a crime. What some countries reject is treating all their
    citizens as criminals, and turning over their financial information to
    governments. Not a single country on OECDıs tax haven hit list stands
    accused of harboring al Qaeda money. The same canıt be said of the U.S.
    According to The Washington Post, some of the terrorists maintained nine
    checking accounts at Sun Trust Bank in Florida.
    
    This shows the limits of government snooping. U.S. financial transactions
    and bank accounts are already heavily monitored, something I know from
    personal experience. Shortly after I opened a checking account at a
    Washington, D.C. branch of First Union roughly three years ago, it was
    frozen by the corporate office because I fit a "criminal profile." Iıd
    opened an account by phone and deposited "large" sums of money in it in a
    high crime area. The large amount of money was two checks that totaled less
    than $4,000 and were drawn on First Union accounts. The high crime area was
    17th Street and Pennsylvania Avenue, which is almost yelling distance from
    the White Houseıs West Wing.
    
    The government and banks are so busy snooping on everybody that they catch
    virtually nobody. Like our intelligence officials who canıt analyze all the
    data they currently collect, U.S. financial snoops are buried under
    paperwork. Out of 77 million reports that banks filed from 1987 to 1996, the
    U.S. Treasury Department convicted a mere 580 people of currency transaction
    violations.
    
    Perhaps if the feds werenıt so busy keeping track of us petty criminals, and
    the international community wasnıt so busy trying to insulate high-tax
    countries from tax competition, theyıd be able to devote the necessary human
    intelligence to figure out exactly where bin Laden and other al Qaeda
    funders park their money. After all, theyıve reportedly been pursing this
    very issue for more than two years. According to the Post, al Qaeda doesnıt
    usually rely on traditional money-laundering techniques such as offshore
    banks and large wire transfers. Unfortunately, that wonıt stop politicians
    from going after such banks--and large numbers of law-abiding citizens.
    
    Michael W. Lynch (mwlynchat_private) is REASON's national correspondent.
    
    -- 
    Virginia Postrel (vpostrelat_private)
    Editor-at-large, Reason magazine
    Author, The Future and Its Enemies
    "Economic Scene" columnist, The New York Times
    Contributing editor, D Magazine
    http://www.dynamist.com | http://www.reason.com
    (214) 219-5725 | (214) 219-1188 (fax)
    --
    
    
    
    
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    POLITECH -- Declan McCullagh's politics and technology mailing list
    You may redistribute this message freely if you include this notice.
    Declan McCullagh's photographs are at http://www.mccullagh.org/
    To subscribe to Politech: http://www.politechbot.com/info/subscribe.html
    This message is archived at http://www.politechbot.com/
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------
    



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Sun Oct 07 2001 - 22:56:45 PDT