Main Menu

Public Registration of Asset Ownership

When the Panama Papers broke and the news cycle had an opportunity to scold the wealthy from using offshore accounts to stash some of their wealth, the globalist regulators had another excuse to demand that financial privacy needs to end. Lost in this frenzy is that private property is an inherent natural right of individuals. If money was ill-gained, by theft, criminal endeavors or manipulated transactions; the penal judicial system certainly has enough tools to hold crooks accountable. Yet, the monetary controllers want to know exactly where and how much cash you have under the mattress or in a foreign bank account.

What exactly is behind the motivation to force disclosure on all financial transactions?  Ostensibly, cracking down on tax evasion is the basic argument. Never is there an attempt to debate what methods of taxation are proper for funding whatever governmental services a society deems appropriate. No, the entire rationalization is that the state has absolute authority to impose taxation at whatever level and inclusion on any asset it deems necessary.

Of course authorities must know the entire portfolio of possessions, properties and resources in order to make this assessment.

In a foreboding essay on The Daily Bell, Transparency International Plots to Strip Global Privacy With Public Registry of Ownership, sets out the risk to private property.

“This outfit, the largest entity of its kind with over 100 chapters around the world, is determined to create an international registry that will list the “beneficial ownership” of all controlling legal entities. If you want to affix your name to a document asserting ownership of assets, be prepared to have that ownership revealed.

The group was founded by a former top executive of the World Bank.”

Even under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), the right to park money outside the country is legal, if not very difficult. The assessment in How Does U.S. Law View Offshore Bank Accounts?, provides a sober analysis.

“While the law is intended to prevent tax evasion, many have already criticized it as being much too far reaching. The implication is that even if one were to retire to a foreign country and take their banking with them, so long as they retain U.S. citizenship or have a green card to the U.S., they are still subject to IRS oversight of their bank accounts and even to paying income taxes earned entirely in another country.”

Since legislation is already in place for reporting bank holdings, any additional effort to register ownership in ANY company, stock, bonds, trust, foundation or asset of worth is a virtual abolishment in PRIVATE Property.

Is your earned, inherited or acquired property you own or is there an implied chattel claim against any wealth that benefits you?

The Daily Bell article continues with an insightful summary:

“Without privacy, authoritarianism flourishes because it is impossible to build and expand private networks that would act as a deterrent to government abuses. A worldwide transparency regime virtually guarantees abuses and corruption from those in power.

This is a reason why the “cashless society” idea is such a bad one. When no one is able to use cash, financial histories will be easily available via electronic bank records.”

In order to correctly understand the underlying objectives of the Panama Paper Trail Disclosures, review the sources that contend that the exposure has specific political and regulatory targets in mind.

The same age old trick is used to enrage the public against the “so called” greedy absconders who want to hide their ripped off fortunes. Wake up to the real scam. The power elites have always played by their own rules. The burden from the call for public registration of asset ownership will fall upon the millions of ordinary citizens and business interests who simply want to protect their own personal wealth or facilitate their enterprises.

The globalists want total control over your possessions. Allowing mandatory registration not only relegates one to a junior partnership in your net worth, but also tracks and limits your options and behavior. Sorry, this does not sound like Harry Browne’s concept of How I Found Freedom in an Unfree World.

Private property is too important to surrender jurisdiction over to banksters, governments or tax collectors. However, this is the very aspect that an NGO like Transparency International advocates.

“From villages in rural India to the corridors of power in Brussels, Transparency International gives voice to the victims and witnesses of corruption. We work together with governments, businesses and citizens to stop the abuse of power, bribery and secret deals.

As a global movement with one vision, we want a world free of corruption. Through chapters in more than 100 countries and an international secretariat in Berlin, we are leading the fight against corruption to turn this vision into reality.”

This pie in the sky utopia is actually Orwellian regimentation. The code words “work with governments” should be read as enforcing money skimming schemes to keep you in poverty.

Anyone who has gone through a net wealth tax audit or filled out a personal net worth statement under oath knows that your financial assets are already known and tracked. In a digital environment, transactions are already recorded and monitored. However, this is not good enough for the true corrupt protectors of the big swindle.

Using the justification of stopping the laundering of drug traffickers illicit cash needs to start with government sanctioned dope operations. Who in the government or in the international criminal justice system will do a forensic audit on the CIA? RIGHT . . . hell will freeze over waiting for government accountability for the crimes of the state.

Governments, NGO and financial institutions are not human beings. They have no inherit rights and no legitimate claim of authority over individuals. Only our willful consent gives limited power to the state. This same principle applies to your money and assets. Demand that personal property remain private in a very “Unfree World”.

James Hall – April 13, 2016