Archive
Australia’s Constitution - The reason why I haven’t paid any income tax for 15 years.
By Marissa Calligeros | Brisbane Times, Brisbane, Australia
-
It’s the Constitution — No Bullion
A Queensland driver has tried in vain to argue it is “impossible” for him to pay a speeding fine because the Australian constitution states the government can accept only coins made of gold or silver as payment for debts.
Indeed, section 115 of the Commonwealth of Australia Constitution Act states: “The state shall not coin money nor make anything but gold and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts.”
Leonard William Clampett tested the weight of constitutional law in Brisbane Magistrates Court in September last year, after he was snapped by a speed camera driving at 73km/h in a 60km/h zone on Wardell Street, Enoggera.
“It’s logical when you look at the paramount legislation in this country, that no matter what money they [the police] request or you award them, I can’t pay,” he told Magistrate Sheryl Cornack.
“I haven’t been able to pay a lot of things over the years. Fifteen years, I haven’t paid any income tax because it’s not possible to pay it.
“I haven’t paid for instance a couple of companies. I haven’t paid Crown Law Queensland $12,500 they claimed from me, because of section 115 of the Commonwealth Constitution.
“It is paramount law in this country, but somehow or other, certain people don’t seem to catch onto that …
“A state, as opposed to the Commonwealth, cannot compel you to pay in other than gold and silver coin. Fairly simple.”
Police prosecutors called on an expert from Melbourne, who was required to travel to Brisbane and review the evidence, to confirm the roadside camera was working accurately when it photographed Mr Clampett speeding.
Despite his argument, Ms Cornack found Mr Clampett guilty and ordered he pay the $200 fine, as well as $76.90 in court costs.
She also ordered Mr Clampett pay police prosecution’s out of pocket expenses, totalling $3500, in obtaining the expert witness.
But, three weeks later, Mr Clampett fought to have Ms Cornack’s ruling overturned by the Supreme Court.
He applied for a judicial review on the grounds no court had previously defined the terms of the constitution.
“My claims, and the action sought based thereon, are as well for the Queen as for myself,” Mr Clampett wrote in his application.
However, Supreme Court Justice Martin Daubney said the basis of Mr Clampett’s argument “has long been discredited”.
“None of the reasons advanced by the applicant amount to any good reason for having instituted the present application,” he stated in a written judgment, published this week.
He did not comment further on Mr Clampett’s argument regarding constitutional law.
Justice Daubney dismissed Mr Clampett’s application.
150 Years Of U.S. Fiat Currency
-
5 days ago saw the 150th year anniversary of an event so historic that a very select few even noticed: the birth of US fiat. Bloomberg was one of the few who commemorated the birth of modern US currency: “On April 2, 1862, the first greenback left the U.S. Treasury, marking the start of a new era in the American monetary system…. The greenbacks were originally intended to be a temporary emergency-financing measure. Almost bankrupt, the Treasury needed money to pay suppliers and troops. The plan was to print a limited supply of United States notes to meet the crisis and then have people convert the currency into Treasury bonds. But United States notes grew in popularity and continued to circulate.” The rest, as they say is history.
In the intervening 150 years, the greenback saw major transformations: from being issued by the Treasury and backed by gold, it is now printed, mostly in electronic form, by an entity that in its own words, is “set up similarly to private corporations, but operated in the public interest.” Of course, when said public interest is not the primary driver of operation, the entity, also known as the Federal Reserve is accountable to precisely nobody. Oh, and the fiat money, which is now just a balance sheet liability of a private corporation, and thus just a plug to the Fed’s deficit monetization efforts, is no longer backed by anything besides the “full faith and credit” of a country that is forced to fund more than half of its spending through debt issuance than tax revenues.
More on the history of American fiat from Bloomberg:
At the start of the Civil War, the U.S. didn’t have a national paper currency. Instead, the money supply consisted of U.S. coins and a collection of paper notes issued by private banks. Technically, the federal government began issuing its own paper currency in 1861. That year, the Lincoln administration issued $60 million in demand notes, a variant of a Treasury note that was redeemable “on demand” for gold coins at the Treasury or any sub-Treasury.These notes were overshadowed in 1862 by the issue of $150 million in a new fiat currency officially known as United States notes and popularly known as greenbacks or legal tenders. By the end of the war, close to $450 million worth of greenbacks were in circulation.
The name greenbacks referred to the reverse of the notes, which were printed in green. The name legal-tender notes referred to the text that originally appeared on the back, which began, “This note is legal tender for all debts, public and private.” This provision made the currency a valid form of payment on par with gold and silver, which was a very controversial action at the time. It made the United States note a fiat currency — meaning its value was established by law alone and wasn’t based on some other unit of value, such as gold, silver or land.
Many Americans during and after the Civil War believed the creation of a fiat currency was unconstitutional. The Constitution explicitly stated that only gold and silver could be considered legal tender. In 1871, in the case of Knox v. Lee, the Supreme Court settled the matter by declaring that making United States notes legal tender was indeed constitutional.
By this time, the greenback was at the center of a countrywide debate on monetary policy. When the post-Civil War economic boom ended in the panic and depression of 1873, many people, especially farmers, blamed the Treasury’s policy of contracting the currency — that is, removing United States notes from circulation in an attempt to go back to the gold standard, which would require that a $1 note could be redeemed for $1 in gold.
As a consequence, there was a call for the expansion of United States note circulation or an inflation of the currency. This belief became joined with a political ideology that opposed big business and banking interests, resulting in the birth of the Greenback Party in 1874.
Opposing the Greenbackers were more conservative interests, sometimes known as “gold bugs,” who found support in the Republican Party and in elements of the Democratic Party. Gold interests proved the stronger contestant in the debate and in 1878, the total circulation of United States notes was fixed at a little over $346 million and the notes eventually became redeemable in gold (at least until 1933, when this provision was removed).
During the 20th century, United States notes became ever less important in the nation’s money supply, though Congress supported their continued circulation. They were increasingly replaced by currency issued by the Federal Reserve System, which came to look almost identical to the United States note. The Federal Reserve note thus became the new greenback.
In 1966, Congress allowed the Treasury to start removing United States notes from circulation. The last delivery of the notes by the Bureau of Engraving and Printing to the Treasury was made in 1971. In 1994, the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act eliminated the issuance of the notes altogether.
So instead of real money, America has an impostor “which came to look almost identical to the United States note” with the full complicity of everyone in charge, just so that when needed, any and all untenable debt burdens can be inflated away. And while the latter is a topic of a whole different discussion, we present another chart which, unlike the 150th anniversary of fiat, should be something discussed far more broadly… Because in a fiat world superpower status is always relative.
-
Source: ZeroHedge
Related Articles:
Court overturns Dutch regulator’s order to slash gold allocation
-
In the news article featured here in September 2011, the Dutch glassworkers pension fund (SPVG) was ordered by De Nederlandsche Bank (DNB, or the equivalent of the Dutch central bank) to sell the bulk of its gold assets. News is out that the “Order” has been overturned by the court, and the pension fund is now claiming damages amounting to €10m - the difference between the current gold price and the price when the gold was sold a year ago.
Court overturns Dutch regulator’s order to slash gold allocation
Source: Investment & Pensions Europe
NETHERLANDS – A Rotterdam court has overturned the Dutch pensions regulator’s recent demand that SPVG – the pension fund for glass manufacturers – divest more than three-quarters of its 13% gold allocation.
The regulator is now facing a claim for damages, estimated at €10m-11m – the difference between the current gold price and the price when the gold was sold a year ago, according to Rob Daamen, the scheme’s deputy secretary.
It also concluded that interpretation of the so-called ‘prudent person’ rule should be the sole prerogative of the pension fund, and that the regulator’s task was simply to ascertain whether this standard had been applied correctly.
“[The regulator] has not made clear in any way why a gold allocation of 13% is not in conformity with the prudent person rule, and that an allocation of 3% is,” the court said.
It also dismissed the watchdog’s reference to the drop in the gold price in 1980, or its standard deviation estimate of 33.7%.
Instead, it pointed to the scheme’s statement that the gold price had increased steadily over the last 10 years, and that the standard deviation between 2000 and 2010 had been no more than 13.1%.
In its verdict, the court said it would re-open the investigation before it delivered a verdict on the damages.
Spokesman Cees Verhagen said the regulator would look over the verdict closely before deciding whether to appeal the ruling.
Greg Smith: Why I am leaving Goldman Sachs
[Updated] Greg Smith is resigning today as a Goldman Sachs executive director and head of the firm’s United States equity derivatives business in Europe, the Middle East and Africa. Here are the main points of his resignation letter.
- ‘It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off’
- Firm ‘more interested in making money than the clients’ interests’
- Claims colleagues called clients ‘muppets’ and talked of ‘ripping eyeballs out’
-
Greg Smith | The New York Times
Today is my last day at Goldman Sachs. After almost 12 years at the firm — first as a summer intern while at Stanford, then in New York for 10 years, and now in London — I believe I have worked here long enough to understand the trajectory of its culture, its people, and its identity. And I can honestly say that the environment now is as toxic and destructive as I have ever seen it.
To put the problem in the simplest terms, the interests of the client continue to be sidelined in the way the firm operates and thinks about making money. Goldman Sachs is one of the world’s largest and most important investment banks and it is too integral to global finance to continue to act this way. The firm has veered so far from the place I joined right out of college that I can no longer in good conscience say that I identify with what it stands for.
It might sound surprising to a skeptical public, but culture was always a vital part of Goldman Sachs’s success. It revolved around teamwork, integrity, a spirit of humility, and always doing right by our clients. The culture was the secret sauce that made this place great and allowed us to earn our clients’ trust for 143 years. It wasn’t just about making money; this alone will not sustain a firm for so long. It had something to do with pride and belief in the organization. I am sad to say that I look around today and see virtually no trace of the culture that made me love working for this firm for many years. I no longer have the pride, or the belief.
But this was not always the case. For more than a decade I recruited and mentored candidates through our grueling interview process. I was selected as one of 10 people (out of a firm of more than 30,000) to appear on our recruiting video, which is played on every college campus we visit around the world. In 2006 I managed the summer intern program in sales and trading in New York for the 80 college students who made the cut, out of the thousands who applied.
I knew it was time to leave when I realized that I could no longer look students in the eye and tell them what a great place this was to work.
When the history books are written about Goldman Sachs, they may reflect that the current chief executive officer, Lloyd C. Blankfein, and the president, Gary D. Cohn, lost hold of the firm’s culture on their watch. I truly believe that this decline in the firm’s moral fiber represents the single most serious threat to its long-run survival.
Over the course of my career I have had the privilege of advising two of the largest hedge funds on the planet, five of the largest asset managers in the United States, and three of the most prominent sovereign wealth funds in the Middle East and Asia. My clients have a total asset base of more than a trillion dollars. I have always taken a lot of pride in advising my clients to do what I believe is right for them, even if it means less money for the firm. This view is becoming increasingly unpopular at Goldman Sachs. Another sign that it was time to leave.
How did we get here?
The firm changed the way it thought about leadership. Leadership used to be about ideas, setting an example, and doing the right thing. Today if you make enough money for the firm (and are not currently an ax murderer) you will be promoted into a position of influence.
What are three quick ways to become a leader? A) Execute on the firm’s “axes,” which is Goldman-speak for persuading your clients to invest in the stocks or other products that we are trying to get rid of because they are not seen as having a lot of potential profit. B) “Hunt elephants.” In English: Get your clients — some of whom are sophisticated, and some of whom aren’t — to trade whatever will bring the biggest profit to Goldman. Call me old-fashioned, but I don’t like selling my clients a product that is wrong for them. C) Find yourself sitting in a seat where your job is to trade any illiquid, opaque product with a three-letter acronym.
Today many of these leaders display a Goldman Sachs culture quotient of exactly 0 percent. I attend derivatives sales meetings where not one single minute is spent asking questions about how we can help clients. It’s purely about how we can make the most possible money off of them. If you were an alien from Mars and sat in on one of these meetings, you would believe that a client’s success or progress was not part of the thought process at all.
It makes me ill how callously people talk about ripping their clients off. Over the last 12 months I have seen five different managing directors refer to their own clients as “muppets,” sometimes over internal e-mail. Even after the SEC, Fabulous Fab, Abacus, God’s work, Carl Levin, Vampire Squids? No humility? I mean, come on. Integrity? It is eroding. I don’t know of any illegal behavior, but will people push the envelope and pitch lucrative and complicated products to clients even if they are not the simplest investments or the ones most directly aligned with the client’s goals? Absolutely. Every day, in fact.
It astounds me how little senior management gets a basic truth: If clients don’t trust you, they will eventually stop doing business with you. It doesn’t matter how smart you are.
These days the most common question I get from junior analysts about derivatives is: “How much money did we make off the client?” It bothers me every time I hear it, because it is a clear reflection of what they are observing from their leaders about the way they should behave. Now project 10 years into the future: You don’t have to be a rocket scientist to figure out that the junior analyst sitting quietly in the corner of the room hearing about “muppets,” “ripping eyeballs out,” and “getting paid” doesn’t exactly turn into a model citizen.
When I was a first-year analyst I didn’t know where the bathroom was, or how to tie my shoelaces. I was taught to be concerned with learning the ropes, finding out what a derivative was, understanding finance, getting to know our clients and what motivated them, and learning how they defined success and what we could do to help them get there.
My proudest moments in life — getting a full scholarship to go from South Africa to Stanford University, being selected as a Rhodes Scholar national finalist, winning a bronze medal for table tennis at the Maccabiah Games in Israel, known as the Jewish Olympics — have all come through hard work, with no shortcuts. Goldman Sachs today has become too much about shortcuts and not enough about achievement. It just doesn’t feel right to me anymore.
I hope this can be a wake-up call to the board of directors. Make the client the focal point of your business again. Without clients you will not make money. In fact, you will not exist. Weed out the morally bankrupt people, no matter how much money they make for the firm. And get the culture right again, so people want to work here for the right reasons. People who care only about making money will not sustain this firm — or the trust of its clients — for very much longer.
-
Developing stories:
- Goldman’s shareholders loses $2.2 Billion after Greg Smith’s resignation & criticism
- Henry Goldman III, the great-grandson of Goldman Sachs founder Marcus Goldman, says he agreed with Greg Smith’s New York Times op-ed criticizing the firm’s predatory culture.
- Former Goldman intern: “I hold him in very high regard”
- A Wall Street Insider’s Response To Greg Smith
- Will Goldman Sachs Exec fallout change Wall Street? RT Interviews Peter Schiff
- 358 Resignations from world banks, investment houses & money funds
- Bankers are jumping ship
-
Featured Reviews
16Oct: Jeff Clark (Casey Research)
$2,300 gold by January 2014
05Sep: Bill Murphy (GATA)
$50 silver by year end
13Aug: James Turk (GoldMoney)
We won’t see $1580 gold & $27 silver again
12Aug: Bill Murphy's source
We could see a 100% increase in 90 days.
03Aug: HSBC Analysts
Gold to rally above $1,900 by end 2012
05June: David Bond (SilverMiners)
Gold & Silver may bottom at $1,200 & $18
02June: Don Coxe (Coxe Advisors)
Europe to issue Gold-backed Euro Bonds within the next 3 months
21May: Gene Arensberg (GotGoldReport)
Gold and Silver are very close to a bottom, if one has not already been put in last week
>> More forecasts & forecast accuracy
Daily GOLD US$/oz
Daily SILVER US$/oz
More Gold Charts: 1 Month to 660 Years
More Silver Charts: 1 Month to 660 Years
Gold/Silver Ratio: 1 Month to 660 Years
Gold & Silver Priced in BitCoins
Click to enlarge.
BitCoin donation welcomed.
1NQ4LqE8yL6rfAqikDU8wLhHSm5fntsWxk
Gold & Silver Interviews (KWN)
- Here Is What Will Fuel The Move Higher In Hard Assets October 27, 2012
- Greyerz - Two Absolutely Incredible & Key Gold Charts October 26, 2012
- Celente - It’s Not Just Germany’s Gold That’s Missing October 26, 2012
- What To Expect With Gold Assaulting $1,700 & Silver At $32 October 26, 2012
- James Turk - The Entire German Gold Hoard Is Gone October 25, 2012
- KWN Update - Here Is A Huge Key To The Markets October 25, 2012
- Currency Wars Continue To Rage & This Is Positive For Gold October 25, 2012
- Central Planners Greatest Fear, Possible Surprises & Gold October 24, 2012
Finance & Economics
- Guest Post: GDP - The Warning Signs From Exports October 28, 2012 Tyler Durden
- On Europe And The Future Of International Relations October 28, 2012 Tyler Durden
- Meanwhile In Japan... October 27, 2012 Tyler Durden
- Bundesbank's Official Statment On Where It's Gold Is (And Isn't) October 27, 2012 Tyler Durden
- A CRuSTY CRiTTER AND aN INTeRPLaNeTaRY BuLL SHiTTeR... October 27, 2012 williambanzai7
- As Thousands Of Italians March Against Austerity On "No Monti Day", Berlusconi Threatens To Scuttle Monti Government October 27, 2012 Tyler Durden
- "Go South, Young Man": The Africa Scramble October 27, 2012 Tyler Durden
- Too Much Rain Will Kill Ya October 27, 2012 Bruce Krasting
Government admission of price suppression: Report by South Carolina State Treasurer’s Office
-
[Active updates: Developing stories] The South Carolina Treasurer’s Office, acting upon a directive from the state legislature, has recently published a report on the advisability of investing in gold and silver. Basically, the state legislature wanted to know if it’s wise to invest public funds under it’s custody in gold & silver.
Here’s what the Treasurer’s Office has to say about itself:
This is a tall order, hence we can assume that the report must be well researched and credible. It concluded that it is not advisable to invest public funds in gold & silver because:-
While the timestamp of the document was 27 Feb 2012, it can be assumed that the report was prepared soon after the end of September 23, 2011 due to this inclusion. From the perspective of a short term investment, that was a pretty good call, considering the fact that gold and silver have been taken down to $1624 and $31.40 respectively as I write.
However, this piece is not about how good the Treasurer’s Office was at making an investment call based on price. Neither is it about whether gold & silver is in a bubble. These conclusions (2) & (3) are opinions of the Treasurer’s Office, which are subjective. Of greater interest are the facts revealed in the body of the report.
Regular readers of this blog would have noticed that there are several key issues that are repeatedly discussed or highlighted here (through news feeds or third party contributions). They include:-
Items (1) to (4) are often disputed by the mainstream media and investors, sometimes referring to them as conspiracy theories. Hence, it is most interesting to see what this government published report has to say about these 6 issues.
Price Suppression is Real
In one short paragraph, this report confirms in no uncertain terms the truth behind the so called “conspiracy theories”. Not only does it confirm the existence of price suppression, it discloses the WHOs and the HOWs!
Risks of holding gold through ETFs, Certificates, Bank Accounts & other Derivatives
It has been repeatedly emphasized here that the only secure means of owning gold & silver is by holding physical coins and bars in your own possession or stored in a private vault outside the banking system. Anything else is a derivative - a paper or electronic representation of the real thing.
This report explains the nature of these derivatives and lists the risks associated with each, together with reasons why the Treasury’s Office advised against investing in them.
The full report in pdf is available for download at the South Carolina Treasurer’s website. Text from relevant sections is reproduced below with comments related to the 6 items above highlighted. Most of the remarks are self explanatory. There are, however, two groups of comments that warrant some discussion.
1. Allocated & Unallocated Accounts
The above describes two products offered by banks to clients who want to invest in gold (or silver) without having to deal with the physical metals. For example, when a bank accepts $2,000 from a customer and issues a gold certificate or credits the customer’s gold account under the unallocated system, the bank is not obliged to buy and store 1.2 oz (at current price) of gold on behalf of the customer. It holds only a tiny portion of that amount in gold. Hence when many of its the customers decide to redeem their certificates at the same time, the bank will not have sufficient gold to deliver. This is what’s referred to as a “run on the bank’s gold on deposit”. The same applies when depositing cash in your bank. The practice of keeping only a tiny fraction of what’s rightfully belonging to the customers (gold or cash) is referred to as fractional reserve banking.
When selling allocated gold products, the bank is legally required to hold 100% of the customers deposit in physical metal. For example, if a customer deposits sufficient cash to own a 400 oz gold bar and is assigned a bar bearing serial No: AGR Matthey 156571, how can one be sure that the same bar or a portion thereof is not assigned to another customer at the same time? That’s the issue raised by the report - and the risk is real.
This brings us back to “the only secure means of owning gold & silver is by holding physical coins and bars in your own possession or stored in a private vault outside the banking system”. If you have to use a third party to store your metals, use specialized private vaults instead, because banks operate on a fractional reserve banking system.
There are many companies outside the banking system that offer secure vaulting services. Generally, they have very high transparency, including publishing audited client holdings on the web for public scrutiny (without any login required). Of course clients’ ID are anonymous, and known only to the operator and the client.
Try these links:
GoldMoney bar list and BullionVault client holdings. Their reviews can be found here.
Learn more about private vaulting services, including issues like ownership, custody, bailment, counter-party risks, and performance risks.
2. Reason for not investing in physical gold & silver
The report listed 5 ways to invest in gold & silver - ETPs, Certificates, Accounts, Derivatives and physical coins & bars. Notice how it highlights & explains all the risks associated with ETPs, Certificates, Accounts and Derivatives and the reasons why it is not advisable for the Treasury to invest in these.
Notice also that there are NO risk associated with physical metals. The only reason given for not investing in coins and bars is “South Carolina does not have the capacity to store or funding to secure gold and silver bullion”.
What a lame excuse! Do they not know that in April last year, “The University of Texas Investment Management Co., the second-largest U.S. academic endowment, took delivery of almost $1 billion in gold bullion“?
-
Proviso 89.145 GP:
Gold & Silver Investments
Office of State Treasurer
-
GOLD AND SILVER AS AN INVESTMENT:
Historically, investors have purchased gold as a hedge against an economic, a political, or a currency crisis. A decline in investment markets, a growing national debt, a weak currency, increasing inflation, military conflicts and social unrest are the most common reasons for investment in gold. Currently, gold and silver are at historic highs leading many expert investors to conclude that a bubble has been created in the precious metals market. Since the US recession began, the value of gold and silver has increased as investment markets perform poorly, troublesome economic news is announced, and when uncertainty in international markets intensifies.
Similar to other commodities, the value of gold and silver is determined by supply and demand, as well as speculation. The Federal Reserve, The London Bullion Market Association, JP Morgan Chase, and HSBC Holdings have practiced fractional-reserve banking and engaged in naked short selling causing artiñcial price suppression.
There are several ways to invest in gold and silver: bars, coins, ETP’s, certificates, accounts, and derivatives. If a state were to choose to invest in gold (and silver), it would likely choose to invest by:
1. ETP’s-Exchange Traded Products. This allows the stakeholder to invest in bullion without having to store bars and coins. The ñrst gold ETF (Exchange Traded Fund) was created in 2003 and has been viewed largely as a success, but has also been compared to investing in mortgagebacked securities. The annual expenses of the fund (storage, insurance, and management fees) are charged by selling a small amount of gold represented by each certificate, so the amount of gold in each certificate will gradually decline over time. ETF’s are investment companies that are legally classified as open-end companies or Unit Investment Trusts (UIT), but differ from traditional open-end companies and U]T’s. The main differences are that ETF’s do not sell directly to investors and they issue their shares in what are called Creation Units. Also, the Creation Units may not be purchased with cash but a basket of securities that mirrors the ETF‘s portfolio. The Usually, the Creation Units are split up and re-sold on a secondary market.
2. Certificates- allow investors to avoid the risks and costs associated with the transfer and storage of bullion by taking on a set of risks and costs associated with the certificate itself. Banks may issue gold certificates for gold which is allocated (non-fungible) or unallocated (fungible). Unallocated gold certiñcates are a form of fractional reserve banking and do not guarantee an equal exchange for metal in the event of a run on the bank’s gold on deposit. Allocated gold certificates should be correlated with speciñc numbered bars, however it is difficult to prove whether a bank is improperly allocating a single bar to more than one investor. The US ñrst authorized the use of gold certificates in 1863. By the early l930’s the US placed restrictions on private gold ownership and therefore, the gold certificates stopped circulating as money, but certificates are still issued by gold pool programs for investment purposes.
3. Accounts- Many banks offer gold accounts where gold can be instantly bought or sold just like any foreign currency on a fractional reserve (non-allocated, fungible) basis. Pool accounts, facilitate highly liquid, but unallocated claims on gold owned by the company. Digital gold currency systems operate like pool accounts and additionally allow the direct transfer of fungible gold between members of the service. Different accounts impose varying types of intermediation between the client and their gold. One of the most important differences between accounts is whether the gold is held on an allocated or unallocated basis. Another major difference is the strength of the account holder’s claim on the gold, in the event that the account administrator faces gold-denominated liabilities, asset forfeiture, or bankruptcy.
4. Derivatives- The product symbol for gold futures is GC, and it is traded in a standard contract
size of 100 troy ounces. In the US, gold futures are primarily traded on the New York Commodities Exchange (COMEX). As of 2009 holders of COMEX gold futures have experienced problems taking delivery of their metal. Along with chronic delivery delays, some investors have received delivery of bars not matching their contract in serial number and weight. Because of these problems, there are concerns that COMEX may not have the gold inventory to back its existing warehouse receipts.
ADVISABILITY:
There is no statute preventing the State from investing in gold and silver. The various methods of investment in gold and silver each carry different and often significant risks, the foremost being speculation. As the US has experienced the recent bursts in the housing and tech bubbles, it is important to take caution when contemplating an unconventional investment. Taxpayer money (state funds and state pension) across the US has not typically been used to invest in gold or silver bullion.
Recently, with the uncertainty in global markets, the devaluation of the dollar, rising inflation, and a flat US economy, there has been a renewed interest in either moving back to a gold standard, investing in gold or both. The value of gold and silver has significantly increased in the last decade, meaning it would cost a great deal to invest at this time.
Risks:
1. Bars and coins- South Carolina does not have the capacity to store or funding to secure gold and silver bullion. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Office does not advise investing in gold and silver bars and coins.
2. ETP’s- The armual expenses and costs associated with this type of investment are high. In recent years there have been issues surrounding gold ETP’s. The purchase price provides the investor with a fluctuating amount (in weight) of the metal. Over time, as value increases and more investors participate in the fund, the amount of metal owner by the investor decreases. ETP’s can also be split and sold on the secondary market. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Ofñce does not advise investing in ETP’s for gold and silver.
3. Certificates- Certificates for allocated gold present an accountability problem. Allocated gold certificates are supposed to be correlated with speciñc numbered bars; however, it is difficult to verify whether a bank is improperly allocating a single bar to more than one investor. Also, unallocated gold certificates are a form of fractional reserve banking and do not guarantee an equal exchange for metal in the event of a run on the bank’s gold on deposit. This is in conflict with S.C. Code of Laws 1976 SECTION 11-9-660. For these reasons, the State Treasurer’s Office cannot advise investing in gold and silver certificates.
4. Accounts- Similar to the risks associated with gold and silver certificates, allocated and unallocated metals held in accounts produce similar accountability problems. The strength of the account holder’s claim on metals is subject to the account administrators liabilities, assets, and/or solvency. Per S.C. Code of Laws 1976 SECTION 11-9-660, the State Treasurer’s Office cannot advise investing in gold and silver accounts.
5. Derivatives- Over the last three years, gold futures traded on the New York Commodities Exchange (COMEX) have encountered significant accountability problems. Holders of COMEX gold ñltures have frequently experienced delivery delays of their metals. Once delivered, there have been many reports of inaccurate weights and serial numbers on bars that do not match the holder’s contract. For these reasons the State Treasurer’s Office does not advise investing in gold and silver derivatives.
-
Gold: April 2012
-
Having read the above, it may now be easier to make sense of the sharp price decline for both gold & silver over the past 2 days. Lets now ask some questions. Was the price action due to:
The mainstream media attributed this week’s sharp price decline to improving economy, low inflation and no imminent QE announcements following the release of the latest FOMC meeting minutes. Given that the above statement was published just 5 weeks before the FOMC minutes, who is lying?
-
Developing Stories
12 Apr:
Jason Hommel explains what Blythe Masters actually meant by “the underlying client position that we’re hedging”.
11 Apr:
Ted Butler, the pioneer of silver manipulation investigation finally broke his silence over the Blythe Masters denial video clip. By far, this is THE best, most level-headed, objective rebuttal to Masters’ famous words that they are “not running a large directional position”. Read “JPM’s TV appearance” posted at Silverseek.com.
10 Apr:
-
7 Apr:
Mike Maloney on RT discussing gold & silver manipulation, Blythe Masters denial of JPM’s role in price manipulation, “First government admission of price suppression” & High Frequency Sheering. Must Watch!
-
6 Apr:
Further Reading:
-
Share this:
Like this: