By now, most Americans realize what they have earned, built and own, no longer belongs to them. It will be taken unlawfully in the blink of any eye. Much like Washington, global parasites now want more of your income and wealth. The international elitists are coming for your stuff and many in our government---Democrat and Republican---are entertaining closed-door schemes designed to, once again, relieve Americans of their property.
On October 9, 2013, from its perch in Washington D.C., the International Monetary Fund (IMF) released a report outlining its recommendations for immediate global wealth confiscation---specifically American wealth---and new capital controls and exit regulations.
The report titled "Taxing Times," calls for the confiscation of household assets by a "capital levy" on citizens with a "positive net wealth" to reduce advanced economies debt to GDP ratios and stabilize global bond markets.
In other words, Global redistributionist's, at the IMF, recommend increasing taxes and instituting new capital controls and exit regulations for seizing Americans investment equity, IRA's and 401K's to pay down outstanding debt to pre-crisis 2007 levels. According to the IMF, this move will restore global debt sustainability, which is to say, our government will be free to run up more debt again and debt-ceiling fights in Washington will not cause future bed-wetting at the International Monetary Fund.
o be brief, the IMF, founded in 1944, was established to rebuild post WWII International monetary systems, increase international/cross border trade and establish rules for a system of payments to and from countries utilizing different currencies. Today, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) works to foster global monetary cooperation, secure financial stability, facilitate international trade, promote high employment and sustainable economic growth, and reduce global poverty; in other words, a new world order.
World Economic and Financial Surveys
Persistently high debt ratios in advanced economies and emerging fragilities in the developing world cast clouds on the global fiscal landscape. In advanced economies, with narrowing budget deficits, the average public debt ratio is expected to stabilize in 2013–14—but it will be at a historic peak. At the same time, fiscal vulnerabilities are on the rise in emerging market economies and low-income countries—on the back, in emerging market economies, of heightened financial volatility and downward revisions to potential growth, and in low-income countries, of possible shortfalls in commodity prices and aid. Strengthening fiscal balances and buttressing confidence thus remain at the top of the policy agenda... this issue explores whether and how tax reform can help strengthen public finances. Taxation is always a sensitive topic and is now more than ever at the center of policy debates around the world... Results reported in this issue show that the scope to raise more revenue is limited in many advanced economies and, where tax ratios are already high...
... The International Monetary Fund (IMF) quietly dropped a bomb in its October Fiscal Monitor Report....
recommends a series of escalating income and consumption tax increases culminating in the direct confiscation of assets.
Yes, you read that right. But don’t take it from me. The report itself says:
The sharp deterioration of the public finances in many countries has revived interest in a “capital levy”— a one-off tax on private wealth—as an exceptional measure to restore debt sustainability. The appeal is that such a tax, if it is implemented before avoidance is possible and there is a belief that it will never be repeated, does not distort behavior (and may be seen by some as fair). … The conditions for success are strong, but also need to be weighed against the risks of the alternatives, which include repudiating public debt or inflating it away. … The tax rates needed to bring down public debt to precrisis levels, moreover, are sizable: reducing debt ratios to end-2007 levels would require (for a sample of 15 euro area countries) a tax rate of about 10 percent on households with positive net wealth. (page 49)”
Note three takeaways. First, IMF economists know there are not enough rich people to fund today’s governments even if 100 percent of the assets of the 1 percent were expropriated. That means that all households with positive net wealth—everyone with retirement savings or home equity—would have their assets plundered under the IMF’s formulation.
Second, such a repudiation of private property will not pay off Western governments’ debts or fund budgets going forward. It will merely “restore debt sustainability,”
...The report’s most chilling aspect is the clinical manner in which it discusses how to restrict the mobility of the rich, along with the inconvenience of factoring in their “well being.” Again, to quote the report:
““Financial wealth is mobile, and so, ultimately, are people. … There may be a case for taxing different forms of wealth differently according to their mobility … Substantial progress likely requires enhanced international cooperation to make it harder for the very well-off to evade taxation by placing funds elsewhere.
“A revenue-maximizing approach to taxing the rich effectively puts a weight of zero on their well-being—contentious, to say the least. … If one attaches less weight to those with the highest incomes, the vote would be to increase the top marginal rate.”
...capital controls and exit restrictions so the proverbial four wolves and a lamb can vote on what’s for dinner. That’s the only way to keep citizens worried about ending up on the menu from voting with their feet. Again, straight from the report:
““There is a surprisingly large amount of experience to draw on, as such levies were widely adopted in Europe after World War I.”
And we all know how well that worked out.
Confiscation of Private Retirement Accounts: US Departments of Labor and Treasury Schedule Hearing
On August 26, the US Department of Labor issued a news release:
It lists the agenda for the joint hearings being held with the Department of Treasury September 14-15, 2010 on what is euphemistically called “lifetime income options for retirement plans.” The hearings are being conducted by the Labor Department’s Employee Benefits Security Administration. I don’t like speaking in tabloid-style terms, but the unstated agenda of these hearings, as I understand it, is to push for the US government to eventually nationalize (confiscate) all assets in private Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and 401K plans!
The US government is desperate to get its hands on private assets ... this is simply the largest and easiest piggy bank that could be seized. The Investment Company Institute estimates that at the end of 2008 that there were $3.613 trillion of assets in IRAs and $2.350 trillion of assets in 401K plans.
For more than the past ten years, I have warned readers that the US government was eventually going to go after private retirement accounts. ... the mainstream media pretty much ignored the subject even after a House Committee held hearings on the issue in October 2008. .. the confiscation will never be described as such by government officials. Expect to see terms such as “retirement income protection” thrown around. It is highly likely that such a program would be implemented in steps to help overcome public opposition.
The US government plan is to.. take ownership of all assets in IRAs and 401K accounts and replace them with US government “Treasury Retirement Bonds.” In the October 2008 hearings, it was proposed that these bonds pay a 3% interest rate. Another major change is that, upon retirement, the individual’s retirement account would be converted into an annuity. Once the individual is deceased, th.. heirs would not inherit anything (similar to what happens now with Social Security “accounts”).
I find the title very misleading; Americans have already had their wealth stolen from them decades ago with a swipe of a pen from corporations in tailored suits and big glass buildings, and I can assure you that they are far from worried about what the IMF can do to take it from them.