Money Laundering in BC

[nightswhisper]

From Google:
Findings suggest that the central authority should establish a centralization policy confined to only one sector because cross-sectoral centralization always results in higher corruption.

Yes, and the context was that centralized authority in one sector without influencing another sector is a good thing. But it's speaking mostly about the economy in the context of this ground-breaking paper:

https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/gov2126/files/shleifer_and_vishy.pdf

Some corruption can even be a good thing - It's the reason why many people like Elon Musk was able to make the Tesla pass regulations quickly.

 

[licks2nite]

Yes, and the context was that centralized authority in one sector without influencing another sector is a good thing. But it's speaking mostly about the economy in the context of this ground-breaking paper:

https://projects.iq.harvard.edu/gov2126/files/shleifer_and_vishy.pdf

Some corruption can even be a good thing - It's the reason why many people like Elon Musk was able to make the Tesla pass regulations quickly.

When the size of a jurisdiction gets smaller and/or less populated, the question of what centralization is becomes moot. Cross-sectoral centralization always results in higher corruption. Nowhere in Western democracies is cross-sectoral centralization more evident than in federal Europe, federal U.S. and federal Canada.

Don't know about Elon Musk. I think that a Tesla burst in flames recently and there was something else about one on autopilot in a big crash. Regulations, if nothing else keep standards up.

 

[nightswhisper]

When the size of a jurisdiction gets smaller and/or less populated, the question of what centralization is becomes moot. Cross-sectoral centralization always results in higher corruption. Nowhere in Western democracies is cross-sectoral centralization more evident than in federal Europe, federal U.S. and federal Canada.

Not really seeing what your argument is here?

Canada is relatively low in corruption, not only because of decentralization and separation of powers, but because culturally, we were opportunists at one point and then evolved to become socialists. We are allowed opportunities to grow if we were smart, but we can get by without having to struggle socially. There isn't a huge disparity between the rich and the poor due to taxation, and a stable political system results in less corruption overall.

France, on the other hand, has a long history of being totalitarian, but historically enjoyed lower corruption due to their division of estates and social classes. It paid dearly with the lack of social mobility and subsequently was emboriled in revolution. Currently, France experiences endemic corruption in its governing elites despite being decentralized, much like Canada. Culturally, they're a complex people who thrive on struggles and conflict, which breeds corruption.

It's weird to pin corruption on centralization or not because case like Japan, where power rests in the hands of the few elites, has little to no corruption while countries like Korea which has the same type of power structure as Japan, is extremely corrupt. Furthermore, Cross-Sectoral centralized countries like Singapore has seen miraculous economic growth and almost no corruption, same as countries like Jordan (almost an absolute monarchy), while countries like Italy are extremely corrupt, and high taxation and good social benefits haven't fixed the problems.

I am of the opinion that corruption is a cultural issue more so than a political one.

Don't know about Elon Musk. I think that a Tesla burst in flames recently and there was something else about one on autopilot in a big crash. Regulations, if nothing else keep standards up.

Focusing on a few incidents despite major advancements in the tech sector, the jobs he provided, and the contributions a single man has made to space and technology is sort of weird. No one has stopped traveling and driving because of flight accidents, car accidents, or bike accidents. Better safety in our vehicles today came from deaths of many. The airbag didn't really come into production until the 1970s, and it was produced because people died more often in vehicles that did not have them. This incident with Tesla, hopefully, will rectify issues so that when there's mass market adoption, fewer would perish.

Regulations may keep standards up but can also be cumbersome. Two examples.

The best remedies for frostbite of the extremities today are derived from exprimentation. These experimentations were conducted on the Jews by the Nazis. In addition, these unregulated studies also allowed us to quickly understand and demystify many misconceptions in the medical world. The Americans also indemnified many Japanese prisoners of wars in exchange for the biological research data they gathered when experimenting on South East Asians in World War 2. This allowed us to understand the progression of many diseases such as syphillis Some say the advancements in human biology advanced greatly because of these opportunities. In heavily regulated space such as Canada and the US, none of these data would have been readily collected without more people dying, ineffective treatments, or misdiagnosis. Humane? No. Effective? Very.

In the second example, Wall Street markets are heavily regulated. But take into consideration the companies that run pump and dump schemes. These companies face delisting from stock exchanges because they lack funds, so they announce news to inflate their prices to stay afloat on the stock market. Then, tons of people buy the stocks in hopes of cashing some money out in a good investment, only to have the prices collapse a few weeks later because nothing substantial has happened. Not only have regulations not worked, it has created systems and loopholes for people to screw other people over using regulations. In the grand scheme of capitalism, it's a non-issue. But in the microscopic view of using regulations as a means to keep standards up, it's pointless, because humans are very savvy about bypassing regulations.

 

[Shanghai]

Gotta love the caption on the Georgia Straight article

“A commission of inquiry will deliver a final report six months before the October 2021 provincial election”

So, the NDP will take 18 months to “study the issue, not fix it. (‘Vote them in again if you want to see part 2, “The Fix”). It seems more like the NDP was fishing around for *any* hot topic that would resonate with voters simply to use as currency to stay relevant in the eyes of the public.

The cities are beneficiaries of increased property taxes because of money laundering, so what is the political incentive for changing this situation other than pandering for more votes to study the problem? The launderers will simply move to a different Province if there were new laws enacted.

Since this is an escort forum, if one extrapolates the proceeds of crime laws that requiring proof of legitimate sources of income to buy anything (or defend oneself if stopped by cops wanting to keep your nice car as a proceeds of crime), how would most girls do this when their clients want keep their expenditures private? Tax returns? Client receipts? Cancelled cheques? Credit Card or PayPal billings?

 

[nightswhisper]

You can't just buy a house and call it money laundering simply because you don't know where the money is coming from. The money doesn't come out clean at all.

A real (but simplified) laundering scheme:

1. Person A makes dirty gray money in some other country like China or Russia.
2. Person A takes cash dirty money and gets someone else (Person B) to deposit into a tax haven, like Cayman Islands, Panama, or Bahamas so that it can't be traced.
3. Person B creates a company there for the purpose of holding assets.
4. Person B goes to a country like Canada, US, England etc and finds a small struggling company or investment opportunities and buys shares / stock / ownership using the holding company in the tax haven as source of funding.
5. Person B reports profit in transactions, either legally (business profit) or illegally (book-cooking), and then funnels the profits back to the holding company because it's a foreign holding so that it doesn't pay local taxes.
6. The holding company reports a loss in some of its local subsidiaries or simply utilizes tax haven laws and pay little to no taxes on its income.
7. Person A gets paid as a member of that holding company while living in a country like Canada or USA, and pays some income tax. The money is now considered clean because they are running a valued company owned by someone else, over which they can claim or feign ignorance of source of funds and disclaim liability.

 

[LM987]

A 3 bedroom house in Kitsilano say 60 years ago for under $40,000 is now worth north of 4 million depending on the size of the lot.

If I were in that position and just about to retire I would sell the place and move to either Costa Rica or Thailand and live like a king with the money in a trust in the Cook Islands.

With regards to the money laundering,well red flags should have been raised immediately when hockey bags full of cash showed up at casinos.

SR

This is actually reasonable. Real estate tends to double every 10 years, so this $40k would have doubled 6.5 times to become $4million.

 

[LM987]

You can't just buy a house and call it money laundering simply because you don't know where the money is coming from. The money doesn't come out clean at all.

A real (but simplified) laundering scheme:

1. Person A makes dirty gray money in some other country like China or Russia.
2. Person A takes cash dirty money and gets someone else (Person B) to deposit into a tax haven, like Cayman Islands, Panama, or Bahamas so that it can't be traced.
3. Person B creates a company there for the purpose of holding assets.
4. Person B goes to a country like Canada, US, England etc and finds a small struggling company or investment opportunities and buys shares / stock / ownership using the holding company in the tax haven as source of funding.
5. Person B reports profit in transactions, either legally (business profit) or illegally (book-cooking), and then funnels the profits back to the holding company because it's a foreign holding so that it doesn't pay local taxes.
6. The holding company reports a loss in some of its local subsidiaries or simply utilizes tax haven laws and pay little to no taxes on its income.
7. Person A gets paid as a member of that holding company while living in a country like Canada or USA, and pays some income tax. The money is now considered clean because they are running a valued company owned by someone else, over which they can claim or feign ignorance of source of funds and disclaim liability.

For those that don't think this exist in the open, next time you at a big mall, look at some of those stores and just think what the rent is ( not cheap), and how much some of these "odd" stores would need to sell in a month, just to pay the rent. This is before inventory cost, labour, insurance, etc etc. Many of these stores have been in operations for decades. They are either cleaning ( different but similar to laundering).

 

[licks2nite]

Thanks for all your thoughtful rk and consideration of my post, nightwhisper. Try to get back to you sometime. Have a great long weekend.

 

[nightswhisper]

Cheers broski.

 

[licks2nite]

Not really seeing what your argument is here?

Canada is relatively low in corruption, not only because of decentralization and separation of powers, but because culturally, we were opportunists at one point and then evolved to become socialists. We are allowed opportunities to grow if we were smart, but we can get by without having to struggle socially. There isn't a huge disparity between the rich and the poor due to taxation, and a stable political system results in less corruption overall.

France, on the other hand, has a long history of being totalitarian, but historically enjoyed lower corruption due to their division of estates and social classes. It paid dearly with the lack of social mobility and subsequently was emboriled in revolution. Currently, France experiences endemic corruption in its governing elites despite being decentralized, much like Canada. Culturally, they're a complex people who thrive on struggles and conflict, which breeds corruption.

It's weird to pin corruption on centralization or not because case like Japan, where power rests in the hands of the few elites, has little to no corruption while countries like Korea which has the same type of power structure as Japan, is extremely corrupt. Furthermore, Cross-Sectoral centralized countries like Singapore has seen miraculous economic growth and almost no corruption, same as countries like Jordan (almost an absolute monarchy), while countries like Italy are extremely corrupt, and high taxation and good social benefits haven't fixed the problems.

I am of the opinion that corruption is a cultural issue more so than a political one.



Focusing on a few incidents despite major advancements in the tech sector, the jobs he provided, and the contributions a single man has made to space and technology is sort of weird. No one has stopped traveling and driving because of flight accidents, car accidents, or bike accidents. Better safety in our vehicles today came from deaths of many. The airbag didn't really come into production until the 1970s, and it was produced because people died more often in vehicles that did not have them. This incident with Tesla, hopefully, will rectify issues so that when there's mass market adoption, fewer would perish.

Regulations may keep standards up but can also be cumbersome. Two examples.

The best remedies for frostbite of the extremities today are derived from exprimentation. These experimentations were conducted on the Jews by the Nazis. In addition, these unregulated studies also allowed us to quickly understand and demystify many misconceptions in the medical world. The Americans also indemnified many Japanese prisoners of wars in exchange for the biological research data they gathered when experimenting on South East Asians in World War 2. This allowed us to understand the progression of many diseases such as syphillis Some say the advancements in human biology advanced greatly because of these opportunities. In heavily regulated space such as Canada and the US, none of these data would have been readily collected without more people dying, ineffective treatments, or misdiagnosis. Humane? No. Effective? Very.

In the second example, Wall Street markets are heavily regulated. But take into consideration the companies that run pump and dump schemes. These companies face delisting from stock exchanges because they lack funds, so they announce news to inflate their prices to stay afloat on the stock market. Then, tons of people buy the stocks in hopes of cashing some money out in a good investment, only to have the prices collapse a few weeks later because nothing substantial has happened. Not only have regulations not worked, it has created systems and loopholes for people to screw other people over using regulations. In the grand scheme of capitalism, it's a non-issue. But in the microscopic view of using regulations as a means to keep standards up, it's pointless, because humans are very savvy about bypassing regulations.

Wholeheartedly agree that culture has much to do with whether authority in a nation is centralized or decentralized. I'd extend that to include indigenous philosophy and religion. Subservience in a culture, certainly centralization writ large and not necessary corrupt, is common in some parts of the world but turns into violence and revolution when things go sideways. Definitely don't want such to take root to here in North America.

From Google:
France is the 21st least corrupt nation out of 175 countries, according to the 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index reported by Transparency International, just one notch above the United States. Italy 53rd. Rwanda 48th. Canada 9th. Japan 18th. Albania 99th. South Korea 45th. Singapore 3rd.

Canada ranks low in corruption but skirts provisions of the Canadian Constitution through what amount to bribing and practically blackmailing provincial/territorial/municipal governments. Pierre Elliot Trudeau offered 50% cost sharing agreements for provinces, territories and municipalities. If a jurisdiction didn't participate in the program the non-participants had to watch neighbouring jurisdictions soak up all the cash that the federal government was handing out. At 50% cost sharing, it was no coincidence that the combined provincial/territorial/municipal accumulated debt was equal to the accumulated federal debt of $200 billion.

Didn't find anything about Americans experimenting on Southeast Asians in World War 2.

The principal-agent problem you mentioned, the relationship between government (the principal) and the civil servant (the agent) solved with higher wages and indoctrination, certainly an argument for smaller government.

So, what do you propose then if not regulations, just let Darwinism take its course and survival of the fittest?

 

[nightswhisper]

From Google:
France is the 21st least corrupt nation out of 175 countries, according to the 2018 Corruption Perceptions Index reported by Transparency International, just one notch above the United States. Italy 53rd. Rwanda 48th. Canada 9th. Japan 18th. Albania 99th. South Korea 45th. Singapore 3rd.

I don't like to quote WikiPedia but these are relevant in the 21st century and in the last decade alone:

The Karachi Affair:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Karachi_affair

Cahuzac Affair:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cahuzac_affair

Bettancourt Scandal:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bettencourt_affair

Fillon affair:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fillon_affair

Benalla Affair:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benalla_affair

It's pretty awful.

Didn't find anything about Americans experimenting on Southeast Asians in World War 2.

Here's the unit responsibile;

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731

Here's the Americans buying that information:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unit_731#Surrender_and_immunity

The principal-agent problem you mentioned, the relationship between government (the principal) and the civil servant (the agent) solved with higher wages and indoctrination, certainly an argument for smaller government.

We voted out a government that did that exactly. The Conservatives were not without their own problems, obviously.

So, what do you propose then if not regulations, just let Darwinism take its course and survival of the fittest?

I don't think regulations are bad, but they can be terribly cumbersome. The right amount of regulation should be just enough to deter fraud but not enough to prevent innovation. Failing that, (since most regulators don't know what they really are regulating), a small amount of corruption isn't necessarily bad.

 

[licks2nite]

BC money laundering discussion has evolved a bit to include all of Canada, just over $47 billion in 2018 alone and nearly as much in each of the preceding 5 or 6 years. Alberta seems to have been getting more money laundered than British Columbia, just over $10 billion a year versus $7.4 billion in B.C. Didn't find anything to suggest that proceeds of crime in Canada are enough to cover the amounts laundered in Canada. Have to guess that the copious amount laundered in Canada, to perhaps a great extent come from other nations. In that light, money laundering in Canada has been a source of foreign income that has helped balance Canada's trade deficits and the reason why there's been so much procrastination in tackling the issue of money laundering in Canada. Are Canadians any better than the perpetrators in benefiting from the proceeds of crime because the money is laundered? Ethically I doubt it even if the rule-of-law may say otherwise. On the other hand, other nations have benefited from gradually relieving Canada of its export manufacturing capabilities over the past decades so is there an ethical balance here? And even if there is an ethical balance between trading off legitimate export capabilities for laundered money for Canada, is that fair for all the parties (nations) that could be involved. The lack of transparency suggests corruption beyond what the money launderers have done. Ultimately, we know what is wrong that affects nearly everything else that is wrong in Canada. Canada's export manufacturing sector has to be restored and Canadians have to start working at more jobs that actually support the Canadian economy rather than jobs that consume foreign products.

 

[rlock]

Most of the laws governing money laundering, and it's sibling - tax evasion, are federal, and the federal laws & enforcement has been extremely weak. Money launderers and tax evaders tend to go where regulation is the weakest.

 

[nightswhisper]

Most of the laws governing money laundering, and it's sibling - tax evasion, are federal, and the federal laws & enforcement has been extremely weak. Money launderers and tax evaders tend to go where regulation is the weakest.

No. The laws are not weak. It's that money launderers have become a lot smarter, and most money have been laundered through Switzerland or Panama before coming into Canada.

 

[UrbanBumpkin]

You make it sound so complicated. People from China don’t need to use your difficult scheme to launder money. The first generation immigrants use their grandfather and grandmother’s will to engage in “legalized tax evasion”. Housewife or student comes to Canada does not work or study, live of “gifts” from parents or grandparents. They work as drug dealer or SP in all cash transaction business. CRA come knocking, they provide evidence that their grandparents are rich mofo in Mainland China. Truth is: law is not weak, but law enforcement is weak because federals know they need this foreign money to lubricate Canadian markets. Law is so regulated and average citizens get taxed to death that this millennial generation rised in the west have no way of getting ahead without engaging in criminal activity.

How do you explain majority of west side Vancouver owners claiming 10,000 income a year? Do they all have a canteen account in Panama or Swiss? You probably explained the European Canadian way of money laundering. We live in a globalizee world now.

 

[badbadboy]

No. The laws are not weak. It's that money launderers have become a lot smarter, and most money have been laundered through Switzerland or Panama before coming into Canada.

Switzerland? You can't be serious, they have the toughest banking laws on money laundering. Please post your source of information.

 

[nightswhisper]

You make it sound so complicated. People from China don’t need to use your difficult scheme to launder money. The first generation immigrants use their grandfather and grandmother’s will to engage in “legalized tax evasion”.

Tax evasion isn't money laundering.

Housewife or student comes to Canada does not work or study, live of “gifts” from parents or grandparents. They work as drug dealer or SP in all cash transaction business. CRA come knocking, they provide evidence that their grandparents are rich mofo in Mainland China.

Also not laundering. Not knowing where the money comes from doens't make it laundering. Laundering specifically refers to the process I described to make dirty money very clean. Gray money can be made from arbitrage operations as well as outright corruption. Blood money, on the other hand, is a whole different story.

Truth is: law is not weak, but law enforcement is weak because federals know they need this foreign money to lubricate Canadian markets. Law is so regulated and average citizens get taxed to death that this millennial generation rised in the west have no way of getting ahead without engaging in criminal activity.

There's some truth to this. But banking secrecy makes enforcement very difficult. Trying to ask a bank in Cayman Islands if a bank account belonged to someone is like pulling teeth. You have to ask for the bank account, then you have to get a subpoena. Then the bank will "lose the registration", advise the client to move the money, and then call it a dead estate account. And since Canada can't strongarm them into releasing information like the US does, there's little that can be done to find out if the money is clean or not.

How do you explain majority of west side Vancouver owners claiming 10,000 income a year? Do they all have a canteen account in Panama or Swiss? You probably explained the European Canadian way of money laundering. We live in a globalizee world now.

You're assuming Panama and Swiss bankers are good people. Bankers are the scummiest people in the world, second only to Wall Street pump-and-dump schemers. Bankers get huge remuneration based on deposits. They have every reason to keep secret accounts as secrets.

 

[nightswhisper]

Switzerland? You can't be serious, they have the toughest banking laws on money laundering. Please post your source of information.

Every moron knows Switzerland's banking secrecy laws are higher on the rung than money laundering laws:

"the Swiss will exchange information with rich countries if they have to, but will continue offering citizens of poorer countries the opportunity to evade their taxpaying responsibilities. These factors, along with ongoing aggressive pursuit of financial sector whistleblowers (resorting at times to what appear to be non-legal methods) are ongoing reminders of why Switzerland remains the most important secrecy jurisdiction in the world today.”

https://www.financialsecrecyindex.com/PDF/Switzerland.pdf

Here's how much money they laundered:

With 4,684 Suspicious Activity Reports (SARs) involving over CHF 16 billion, 2017 was another record-breaking year. In two years, the number of SARs has almost doubled. In 2017, MROS received an average of 18 reports per working day, i.e. over 60 percent more than in the previous year.

https://www.fedpol.admin.ch/dam/data/fedpol/kriminalitaet/geldwaescherei/jabe/jb-mros-2017-e.pdf

 

[UrbanBumpkin]

Nighwhisperer: do you agree David Eby and NDP are trying to portray tax evasion as money laundering? They are targeting immigrants to increase vote base.

 

[clu]

Not knowing where the money comes from doens't make it laundering.

You'd think, and yet proposed changes to laws would create a reverse onus which would allow the government to claim just that. They call it "unexplained wealth orders" wherein you have to prove it was legitimately acquired or they take it:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/brit...laundering-unexplained-wealth-order-1.5132202

And they are proposing enacting that change in the name (albeit disingenuously) of combatting money laundering, not tax evasion.