Sunday, September 4, 2016

worldwide taxation under control of Rome


See also: FATF Blacklist
Indonesians may soon be hiding their Ferraris - they have a graft-busting new minister via @business
The OECD publishes and updates a model tax convention that serves as a template for bilateral negotiations regarding tax coordination and cooperation. This model is accompanied by a set of commentaries that reflect OECD-level interpretation of the content of the model convention provisions. In general, this model allocates the primary right to tax to the country from which capital investment originates (i.e., the home, or resident country) rather than the country in which the investment is made (the host, or source country). As a result, it is most effective as between two countries with reciprocal investment flows (such as among the OECD member countries), but can be very unbalanced when one of the signatoryc countries is economically weaker than the other (such as between OECD and non-OECD pairings).
Since 1998, the OECD has led a charge against harmful tax practices, principally targeting the activities of tax havens (while principally accepting the policies of its member countries, which would tend to encourage tax competition). These efforts have been met with mixed reaction: The primary objection is the sanctity of tax policy as a matter of sovereign entitlement.[36] The OECD maintains a "blacklist" of countries it considers uncooperative in the drive for transparency of tax affairs and the effective exchange of information, officially called "The List of Uncooperative Tax Havens".[37] In May 2009, all remaining countries were removed from the list.[38]
On 22 October 2008, at an OECD meeting in Paris, 17 countries led by France and Germany decided to draw up a new blacklist of tax havens. The OECD has been asked to investigate around 40 new tax havens in the world where undeclared revenue is hidden and that host many of the non-regulated hedge funds that have come under fire during the 2008 financial crisis. Germany, France, and other countries called on the OECD to specifically add Switzerland to a blacklist of countries that encourage tax fraud.[39]
On October 29, 2014, in Berlin, during the Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax Purposes, all OECD and G20 countries, as well as most major international financial centres, signed a “multilateral competent authority agreement” that will activate the automatic sharing of financial data for tax purposes.[40][41] Under the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), the United States will automatically exchange information with other countries beginning in 2015. In 2017, 58 jurisdictions of the "early adopters"—the UK, Spain, France, Portugal, Cyprus, Malta, Germany, Italy, Isle of Man, Jersey, Guernsey, Gibraltar, Bermuda, Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Ireland, Iceland, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, San Marino, Seychelles, Argentina, and South Africa—start to share information automatically. In 2018, another 35 jurisdictions, including Australia, Austria, Bahamas, Brazil, Brunei, Canada, China, Hong Kong, Monaco, Qatar, Russia, Singapore, United Arab Emirates, and Switzerland begin sharing information.


The OECD publishes books, reports, statistics, working papers and reference materials. All titles and databases published since 1998 can be accessed via OECD iLibrary.
The OECD Library & Archives collection dates from 1947, including records from the Committee for European Economic Co-operation (CEEC) and the Organisation for European Economic Co-operation (OEEC), predecessors of today's OECD. External researchers can consult OECD publications and archival material on the OECD premises by appointment.


The OECD releases between 300 and 500 books each year. The publications are updated accordingly to the OECD iLibrary. Most books are published in English and French. The OECD flagship[vague] titles include:
  • The OECD Economic Outlook, published twice a year. It contains forecast and analysis of the economic situation of the OECD member countries.
  • The Main Economic Indicators, published monthly. It contains a large selection of timely statistical indicators.
  • The OECD Factbook, published yearly and available online, as an iPhone app and in print. The Factbook contains more than 100 economic, environmental and social indicators, each presented with a clear definition, tables and graphs. The Factbook mainly focuses on the statistics of its member countries and sometimes other major additional countries. It is freely accessible online and delivers all the data in Excel format via StatLinks.
  • The OECD Communications Outlook and the OECD Internet Economy Outlook (formerly the Information Technology Outlook), which rotate every year. They contain forecasts and analysis of the communications and information technology industries in OECD member countries and non-member economies.
  • In 2007 the OECD published Human Capital: How what you know shapes your life, the first book in the OECD Insightsseries. This series uses OECD analysis and data to introduce important social and economic issues to non-specialist readers. Other books in the series cover sustainable development, international trade and international migration.
All OECD books are available on the OECD iLibrary, the online bookshop or OECD Library & Archives.[n 1]

Thursday, January 8, 2015

It's Crap from tax preparing companies that add to the belief that we Americans are Suppose to pay our Fair Share. 

Fair is; Americans are not required to pay a tax on labor or wages. All income taxes are  Lies. You know how I know. 

Because we of five, six, seven or more INCOME TAXES. But not one government Official will tell us what the definition of INCOME IS, According to the law and statute. The supreme court already did. It's not labor!!

The 16th Amendment did not authorize a direct unapportioned tax on wages or labor Inside any of the Several states. 1 US 240 1916, 

Brushaber v. Union Pacific R.R. Co. (1916)

Home Budget: Cost-Of-Living Reality Check Updated: 6/25/2013 | Article ID: INF16169 You’ve heard the mantra over and over: budget, budget, budget. This is money management rule number one as you graduate, start bringing home a paycheck and begin life in the real world.

 But if you’ve never had to pay for life’s essentials yourself, coming up with a realistic spending plan can feel like wandering in the dark. If your parents have been covering or subsidizing your living expenses at home or college, you probably need a reality check before stepping out on your own. For many young adults, the combination of lower-than-expected take-home pay coupled with higher-than-expected living expenses can be a recipe for financial disaster. We’re here to shed some light on your finances, and help you build a home budget that avoids surprises. Your income Let’s start with your paycheck. While you know that Uncle Sam gets first dibs on your hard-earned money, you may not be prepared for how much the government will take. For example, if you earn a salary of $35,000, you’ll likely only see about $28,356 after federal taxes, Social Security and Medicare are subtracted.

 That doesn’t include state taxes or any deductions from your paycheck for workplace benefits, such as medical and dental insurance or a retirement savings plan. When all is said and done, you’re likely looking at a take-home pay of— brace yourself—$25,350 or so per year. That’s a net income of about $2,100 per month. Your expenses Now that you know how much you can expect to bring home, you can divvy up your paycheck. Here’s a general guide to help you budget your money to make sure your expenses are covered. You may have to make some adjustments for your situation. If you spend less on housing, for example, you can put the extra money from that category toward paying down debt.

The dollar figures in parentheses are based on our above example of a $35,000 gross salary with a monthly take-home pay of $2,110 per month after taxes and other deductions. 30% ($634) Housing 10% ($211) Utilities and other housing expenditures (including renters insurance) 15% ($317) Food (at home and away) 10% ($211) Transportation (including car loan) 10% ($211) Debt repayment (student loans and credit cards) 10% ($211) Saving 5% ($106) Clothing 5% ($106) Entertainment 5% ($106) Car insurance and miscellaneous personal expenses In terms of dollar figures, this actually breaks down pretty close to the lines of what things will actually cost you. Housing, of course, will vary depending on your location and also on whether you live alone or with roommates.

Debt repayment is another wild card for which you may have to make adjustments. But for now, let’s take a closer look at the utilities and household expenses categories. Utilities We start with utilities, such as gas and electric. Your actual cost will vary by your location, season and how well-insulated your apartment is. If you live in Las Vegas, for example, you’ll spend a lot more on air conditioning this summer than someone in Minneapolis. But budgeting an average of $50 to $60 per month to power a one- or two-bedroom apartment should suffice. Many apartments come with garbage and water service included, so you may not have to worry about that. Renter's Insurance For renter's insurance, a good policy can run about $200 a year—or $17 a month. Internet, Cable, Phone You can save money on your Internet service by going back to the stone age of dial-up. You can find service for about $10 a month.

But if that’s too drastic for your lifestyle, consider getting high-speed service through your cable-TV provider. You can usually get a cut-rate deal for bundling services together. The national average cost for basic cable is about $15 a month—$30 for expanded basic, to which the vast majority of cable watchers subscribe. Add a high-speed Internet connection for $40, and you’d do well to budget $70 or so for the whole package. You might save money on your phone bill by scrapping your land line altogether and sticking to your cell phone. (A bare- bones landline service typically costs about $20 to $25 a month.) Cell phone bills can vary widely by location, provider and, of course, your own personal use.

But the average cell phone bill in the U.S. runs about $50 to $60 a month. If that’s too steep for your budget, consider using a prepaid cell phone that charges you only for the minutes you use. If that’s too conservative, you may have to look for other areas to cut back. Total Now let’s add ’em all up: $50 for utilities, $17 for renter’s insurance, $70 for cable and Internet plus $50 for your cell phone, and you’re looking at $187 a month. We had budgeted $211, so that leaves you a $24 cushion for those months in which costs may vary. And if you live with a roommate, you may be able to share the cost of your utilities, cable and Web access, giving you even more leeway in your budget. Possible adjustments Two of the biggest areas to watch out for are the transportation and debt repayment categories. Transportation If you own your car outright, $211 a month for transportation is a good estimate— perhaps even too high. But if you have a car loan, your monthly payment will probably be more than $211 to begin with, let alone the money you’ll spend on gas, parking, maintenance and repairs. So before you rush out after graduation to buy your first set of wheels, make sure you are aware of the real cost of buying a car. For maintenance and repairs, you should budget at least $500 a year, or $42 a month—maybe more if you’re buying an older car. For gas, let’s assume you drive 1,000 miles a month and your car averages 23 miles per gallon. You’d need to budget $117 per month with prices at $2.70 per gallon.

That leaves only $52 for a car payment, parking and other transportation expenses. Clearly, not enough. (And, of course, wildly fluctuating gas prices can throw a curve ball here.) Some cities are easy to live in without a car, thanks to good public transportation and bike paths. But in other cities, a car truly is a necessity. Look into carpooling with friends or coworkers.

Or cut back somewhere else in your budget—say, spend less on food and entertainment or take on a roommate to split the cost of rent to help make ends meet. Debt repayment As for debt repayment, a college senior graduates with at least $20,000, on average, in student-loan debt. If you fall into that camp, you’ll spend $230 a month on a standard ten-year repayment schedule at 6.8 percent interest. You may need to negotiate a different time schedule with your lender, say, a 15- or 20-year repayment.

Or you can ask for a graduated repayment schedule where you pay less per month now, but more toward the end of your loan period. There is also an income-contingent repayment which bases your bill on a percentage of your actual salary. The average college senior also graduates with $3,300 in credit card debt. At 18% interest and paying $80 a month (4 percent minimum payment of initial balance), it’ll take you about 2½ years to rid yourself of that debt. And that’s assuming you don’t charge another dime Pay yourself first One category we’d like to see you stick with the fixed amount (or higher) is savings.

This is an excellent habit to get into right from the get-go. Start by building up your short-term emergency savings, and then branch out into investments for the long term. If a 22 -year-old saves $211 every month and earns an average annual rate of 8 percent on her money, she’ll have about $951,000 saved up by the time she turns 65. If she increases her monthly contribution every time she gets a raise, sticking with the 10 percent savings rule, she’ll have well over $1 million – perhaps even $2 million.

 There is an exception to this rule, however. If you have high-interest debt, you’d do better to take your 10 percent savings allotment and pay off your credit cards first and then start saving. It doesn’t do any good to earn 8 percent on your savings if you’re paying 18 percent on your credit card balance.

 Sitemap Legal Notice Terms of Service Privacy Quicken License Agreement About Intuit © 2015 Intuit, Inc. All rights reserved. Intuit and Quicken are registered trademarks of Intuit, Inc. iPhone, iPod, iPad Touch are trademarks of Apple Inc., registered in the U.S. and other countries. Android is a trademark of Google Inc. Terms, conditions, features, availability, pricing, fees, service and support options subject change without notice.

Monday, December 15, 2014

A U.S. Court Practically Declared Insider Trading Legal

Wednesday, December 10, 2014, was a big day for insider trading.
A three-judge panel of the U.S. Second Circuit Court of Appeals overturned insider trading convictions of former hedge fund managers Todd Newman and Anthony Chiasson.
Not only did the appeals court reverse the much-publicized guilty verdicts against the two traders, its 28-page decision effectively rewrites the meaning of insider trading.
The immediate outcome of the decision not only affects the two hedge fund executives, other traders convicted of insider trading, and charged individuals who pled guilty, it will also change how traders use inside information to their benefit in the future.
The court decision is as surprising as it is profound…

This Changes Trading Forever

Because the surprise unanimous appeals court decision immediately vacated the May 2013 judgments of conviction against Newman and Chiasson on charges of conspiracy to commit insider trading and insider trading in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371, sections 10(b) and 32 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, SEC Rules 10b‐5 and 10b5‐2, and 18 U.S.C. § 2.
Adding insult to injury for Preet Bharara, the Manhattan U.S. Attorney who oversaw the six-week jury trial, which was heard in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District and presided over by Judge Richard J. Sullivan, the appeals court dismissed the entire suit with prejudice.
According to, "In the formal legal world a court case that is dismissed with prejudice means that it is dismissed permanently. A case dismissed with prejudice is over and done with, once and for all, and can't be brought back to court."
Now, not only won't there be any re-trial based on the appeals court decision, the only way similarly derived convictions will stand up on appeal will be if the matter makes it to the Supreme Court.
What happened – and how it happened – matters.

An Impossibly High Bar Is Set

The bottom line: As far as the appeals court's ruling, Judge Richard Sullivan gave the jurors hearing the case against both traders erroneous instructions. The appeals court said that he set the bar too low, which made it easy for jurors who deliberated for two days to reach a guilty verdict.
But the real bombshell in the Appeals Court decision is what it says is required to prove insider trading.
Insiders at Dell Inc. (formerly Nasdaq: DELL) and Nvidia Corp. (Nasdaq: NVDA) passed along information about what was going on in their companies to some contacts, which made its way through some fuzzy Wall Street "intelligence networks" (in reality, glorified gossip channels papered over with research notes) to analysts, who transmitted the information to analysts who worked for Newman and Chiasson. They traded on the information and made about $72 million.
While Judge Sullivan told jurors it was enough to show the traders knew the information they traded on resulted from a breach of fiduciary duty on the part of the tipsters at Dell and Nvidia, it didn't matter if the tipsters received benefits as a result of their tips. The appeals court wholeheartedly disagreed.
The new interpretation of what constitutes insider trading effectively says, a prosecutor must prove that the "tip-ee" knew that the "tipster" committed a breach of their fiduciary duty in disclosing inside information, and that the "tip-ee" knew that the "tipster" would gain a tangible reward of "some consequence."
Only one of the tipsters in the case received any gain. And that was merely "career advice." As such, the appeals court determined that there was no gain of any consequence, and further, that the traders didn't get the information first-hand.

Experts Despair of Ever Fixing the Problem

I spoke to New York securities attorney Bill Singer – editor of the widely site, who was formerly on the regulatory side of securities lawyering but now represents broker-dealers, brokers, traders, and their customers – for his reaction to the decision.
"This is one of those rare cases that is actually historic," Singer said. "The appeals court decision largely eviscerates any further or future prosecution of similar cases."
The bar for the burden of proof has been raised Singer told me. "Now there are two hurdles," he explained. "It has to be proved beyond a reasonable doubt that the tipper knew he was breeching his fiduciary duty and would benefit, meaning probably receive compensation, andit must be proved beyond that elusive reasonable doubt, that the tip-ee knew the tipster was breeching his duty and knew that the tipster would benefit through some tangible reward. All that, beyond a reasonable doubt."
So, if the bar to prove insider trading has been raised, I asked the securities expert, is there an easier way under it now?
"Here's my cynical response," Singer replied, "This provides a roadmap to tipsters and tip-ees on how to distance themselves from bumping into the existing statutes."
He's not alone in recognizing the fuzzy legal ramifications of many of the statutes governing Wall Street.
Judge Barrington D. Parker, writing the appeals court decision on behalf of the panel that included Judge Ralph K. Winter Jr. and Judge Peter W. Hall, said, "Although the government might like the law to be different, nothing in the law requires a symmetry of information in the nation's securities markets."
As if there wasn't enough asymmetry already dividing the haves from the have-nots, there's now a higher bar for fleet-footed, "in-the-know" traders to waltz right under.

Sunday, July 14, 2013

The 545 People Responsible For All Of U.S. Woes

BY Charley Reese

(Date of publication unknown)-- -- -  P
oliticians are the only people in the world who create problems and then campaign against them.

Have you ever wondered why, if both the Democrats and the Republicans are against deficits, we have deficits? Have you ever wondered why, if all the politicians are against inflation and high taxes, we have inflation and high taxes?

You and I don't propose a federal budget. The president does. You and I don't have the Constitutional authority to vote on appropriations. The House of Representatives does. You and I don't write the tax code. Congress does. You and I don't set fiscal policy. Congress does. You and I don't control monetary policy. The Federal Reserve Bank does.

One hundred senators, 435 congressmen, one president and nine Supreme Court justices - 545 human beings out of the 235 million - are directly, legally, morally and individually responsible for the domestic problems that plague this country.

I excluded the members of the Federal Reserve Board because that problem was created by the Congress. In 1913, Congress delegated its Constitutional duty to provide a sound currency to a federally chartered but private central bank.

I excluded all but the special interests and lobbyists for a sound reason. They have no legal authority. They have no ability to coerce a senator, a congressman or a president to do one cotton-picking thing. I don't care if they offer a politician $1 million dollars in cash. The politician has the power to accept or reject it.

No matter what the lobbyist promises, it is the legislation's responsibility to determine how he votes.


Don't you see how the con game that is played on the people by the politicians? Those 545 human beings spend much of their energy convincing you that what they did is not their fault. They cooperate in this common con regardless of party.

What separates a politician from a normal human being is an excessive amount of gall. No normal human being would have the gall of Tip O'Neill, who stood up and criticized Ronald Reagan for creating deficits.

The president can only propose a budget. He cannot force the Congress to accept it. The Constitution, which is the supreme law of the land, gives sole responsibility to the House of Representatives for originating appropriations and taxes.

O'neill is the speaker of the House. He is the leader of the majority party. He and his fellow Democrats, not the president, can approve any budget they want. If the president vetos it, they can pass it over his veto.


It seems inconceivable to me that a nation of 235 million cannot replace 545 people who stand convicted -- by present facts - of incompetence and irresponsibility.

I can't think of a single domestic problem, from an unfair tax code to defense overruns, that is not traceable directly to those 545 people.

When you fully grasp the plain truth that 545 people exercise power of the federal government, then it must follow that what exists is what they want to exist.

If the tax code is unfair, it's because they want it unfair. If the budget is in the red, it's because they want it in the red. If the Marines are in Lebanon, it's because they want them in Lebanon.

There are no insoluble government problems. Do not let these 545 people shift the blame to bureaucrats, whom they hire and whose jobs they can abolish; to lobbyists, whose gifts and advice they can reject; to regulators, to whom they give the power to regulate and from whom they can take it.

Above all, do not let them con you into the belief that there exist disembodied mystical forces like "the economy," "inflation" or "politics" that prevent them from doing what they take an oath to do.

Those 545 people and they alone are responsible. They and they alone have the power. They and they alone should be held accountable by the people who are their bosses - provided they have the gumption to manage their own employees.

This article was first published by the Orlando Sentinel Star newspaper

Click on "comments" below to read or post comments
Comment Guidelines
Be succinct, constructive and relevant to the story. We encourage engaging, diverse and meaningful commentary. Do not include personal information such as names, addresses, phone numbers and emails. Comments falling outside our guidelines – those including personal attacks and profanity – are not permitted.
See our complete Comment Policy and use this link to notify us if you have concerns about a comment. We’ll promptly review and remove any inappropriate postings.
In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. Information Clearing House has no affiliation whatsoever with the originator of this article nor is Information ClearingHouse endorsed or sponsored by the originator.)

Sunday, June 30, 2013

we need to occupy the occupiers, If one of them goes out to protest a company, two of us needs to go there and talk back. Let the socialists know we are not going to let them push us out of the way. Join meet up groups, tea party groups, start spreading the info around so others of like mind can come help too. we have to be as energized as they are even if our party is failing.

Sunday, June 16, 2013

Anyone daring to expose themselves as being among those who have seen the Truth about the IRS’s and DOJ’s lies and myths about the income tax law is in jeopardy of harsh reprisals despite the law to the contrary. Thus it is not recommended that you confront them. These tax enforcement agencies are “armed and dangerous” and they will do you harm.
It is recommended that you do the same thing that you would if you were to recognize a band of armed and dangerous fugitives. You would not attempt a citizen’s arrest in that case but you would report your sighting to the authorities, wouldn’t you? Since reporting the government’s illegal activities to the government would be tantamount to informing one of the armed and dangerous fugitives that you have recognized them, that would be imprudent at best, and more likely be a disastrous mistake. The authorities in this case must be those who have authority over the government . . . We the People of America. The owners and masters of the government must be informed of their government's misconduct. Instead of confronting the gang of outlaws, tell your family, your neighbors, your friends, your co-workers and associates. Tell it to the People and call upon them to bring the force of the law down on the government.

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Tesla $52 per share could reach $1000 per share, but can Tesla stay proud while profits from emission credits take over.

Companies like tesla motors could make huge profits before they will ever profit from their core business as they sell emission credits and help destroy cheap energy and global power markets as the united nations is also seeking entry into the US energy markets. A tax we are all paying for.

Digital currency exchanger

Digital currency exchanger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Digital currency exchangers (DCEs, independent exchange providers or e-currency exchangers) are market makers which exchange fiat currency for electronic money, such as digital gold currency (DGC), and/or convert one type of digital currency (DC) into another, such as Liberty Reserve into pecunix. Exchangers apply either a commission or bid/offer spread to transactions.
Some digital gold currency accounts, such as e-gold, do not provide an in-house service to purchase their private currency so it is necessary to use a third-party digital currency exchanger. According to e-gold's website the reason they do not provide an in-house exchange service is so there can be no debt or contingent liabilities associated with the business, making e-gold Ltd. absolutely free of any financial risk. They claim e-gold Ltd. does not possess currency of any nation or even have a bank account.




There are no specific financial regulations governing DCEs, so they operate under self-regulation. However the Global Digital Currency Association (GDCA), founded in 2002, are a non-profit association of online currency operators, exchangers, merchants and users. On their website they claim their goal is to "further the interests of the industry as a whole and help with fighting fraud and other illegal activities, arbitrate disputes and act as escrow agent when and where required." [1] GDCA is a privately owned organization and not an association of its members per se. Its views and opinions are highly subjective. It is completely irrelevant whether or not any of the exchange companies are members of GDCA.[citation needed]
It is possible for clients to purchase DGC by credit card, and therefore receive consumer protection from their credit card company. Various exchangers offer this service, although the exchange fees are typically higher than using a wire transfer[2]


Comparison of Digital Currency Exchangers (DCEs) as of 18 April 2010:
Digital Currency ExchangerYear
 (DC) accepted
Fiat currencies acceptedFee buying DCFee selling DCFee exchanging DC to DC
WMXchange.net2009Green tickGreen tickGreen tick10any5-8%5–8%0-5%
LinkflyExchange.com2010Green tickGreen tickGreen tick6any1–3%1–3%1–5%
wmBroker.eu2008Green tickGreen tickGreen tick11any0–3%0–3%3–5%
e-forexgold.com2000Green tickGreen tickGreen tick7any2–5%2–7.5%3–7.5%
PlanetWM.com2009Green tickGreen tick731–5%1–5%1–8%
Money Central Market2007Green tickRed X232.99%-4.99%4.99%-6.99%0–5%
CurrEx2007Red XGreen tick30N/AN/A0–5%
SaveChange.ru2007Green tickGreen tick503%–5%5%0–5%
Euro Gold Sales2004Green tickGreen tick232.5%–4%%1.9%N/A
ExchEngine2004Green tickGreen tick5 ? ? ? ?
GoldExchange.eu2005Green tickGreen tick321.9–2.9%1.9%N/A
ecardone.com2009Green tickGreen tick321.9–2.9%4.0%-5%+5%
GoldNow1999Green tickGreen tick495%5%5%
goldtotem2005Red XGreen tick433–5%0.75–1.5%1.5–3%
IntlExchange.com2005Green tickGreen tick9102%1%1.5%
citichanger.com2010Green tickGreen tick55US$2.00US$2.00US$2.00
NetPay2001Red XRed X ? ? ? ? ?
ROBOXchange2002Green tickGreen tick140N/AN/A1–5%
SpeedyExchange2003Green tickRed X (answerphone)738–13%1.5–9%0.3–4.4% tickRed X315–7%3%0–5%
Wm-center.com2005Green tickGreen tick1131.5–6%1–8%0–10%

[edit]Regulatory issues

In September 2004 several Australian based e-gold currency exchangers voluntarily ceased operation as they did not hold an Australian Financial Services licence (AFSL) [3]. Australian based DCEs that elected to close, due to theAustralian Securities and Investments Commission (ASIC) licencing requirements, included:
In July 2006 Gold Age was closed down by US government authorities following the arrest of the owners, Arthur Budovsky and Vladimir Kats, on account of not having a New York state "money transmitters" licence.
In April 2007, the US government ordered e-gold administration to lock/block approximately 58 e-gold accounts, owned and used by The Bullion Exchange, AnyGoldNow, IceGold, GitGold, The Denver Gold Exchange, GoldPouch Express, 1MDC (a Digital Gold Currency, based on e-gold), and others, and forced G&SR (owner of OmniPay) to liquidate the seized assets [4]. In addition, a few weeks later, e-gold themselves were indicted with 4 indictments. However, e-gold are still in business, and are growing at the rate of approximately 95,000 new accounts per month [5]. Here is the DoJ release [6] and here is the rebuttal by Douglas Jackson, CEO [7][dead link]( copy).
In July 2008, Webmoney changed its rules, that affected many exchangers. Since that time it became prohibited to exchange Webmoney to most popular e-currencies like e-Gold, Liberty Reserve and others: