Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(BBC)   Some people want to be rich enough to buy a sports car, or a lavish house, or an Island. I want to be rich enough to be investigated by the National Crimes Agency   ( bbc.co.uk) divider line
    More: Cool, Mrs Hajiyeva, Crime, Trial, Unexplained Wealth Order, Credit card, United Kingdom, Property, National Crime Agency  
•       •       •

4823 clicks; posted to Main » on 10 Oct 2018 at 5:20 PM (8 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



81 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2018-10-10 12:46:27 PM  
Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.
 
2018-10-10 04:57:30 PM  
Pull back to a 50,000 foot view...lots of Russian oligarchs, oil-wealthy individuals from around the world, and other international mega-rich types own homes in London and do business with various banks that operate in London. Offshore "wealth management" is a tremendous industry, operated by relatively few players, and most maintain a presence in London (and elsewhere).

There are plenty of (more or less) legitimate clients that circulate around the globe, following social seasons and various events. The UK is a regular stop.

Mixed into that crowd, though, are scads of skeevy individuals. Plenty of Putin's friends have gotten cozy in London, as have many other sleazy types.

One way to pare back encroaching influence of these elements is to put their comfort into jeopardy. Laws like this will start to shake out the "lowest hanging fruit" first, like the example in TFA. Someone who, by all available accounts and records, was a public servant with modest earning potential, is living the life of a billionaire. It makes no sense, whatsoever. This provides for an inquiry.

Uncovering deeply corrupt individuals, around the globe, should be a priority. There should be due process and adequate defense available (they can certainly afford it), but there is no righteous public policy position that should help enable corrupt individuals to live care-free lives.

If this law were bing applied capriciously, to harass political adversaries or seize property without any justifiable cause, that would be problematic.

I expect someone here will engage in hyperbolic trashing of my little op-ed here. Just remember, you are defending people who can spend enormous sums on polished professionals who work night and day to obfuscate ugly (often criminal) truths about their clients. See my earlier point about the Offshore Wealth Management industry.

If your local school superintendent, coming from modest means, resigned and bought a $4million condo in Manhattan, a private jet, and began showing up around the world at horseracing events, throwing massive parties...it doesn't fit. Doesn't mean that it's strictly illegitimate, but it is likely something doesn't add up. Financial institutions in the US are required to determine source of funds. If something suspicious pops up, they are required to file a report. Willfully turning a blind eye to corruption is a criminal act, in and of itself.

It shouldn't be a surprise the UK is taking new steps to attack the willful blindness of their offshore wealth industry. The turds they protect should never feel comfortable.
 
2018-10-10 05:13:43 PM  
Jeez, rich people have it the worst...glad I don't have *those* problems.

*shakes head while taking another bite of off-brand Spaghetti Q's*
 
2018-10-10 05:25:26 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


Yea, much smaller scale, like the SCOTUS?
 
2018-10-10 05:28:37 PM  
Why the fark the UK's anti-money laundering laws aren't catching this shiat is beyond me.  This is crime prevention 101 stuff
 
2018-10-10 05:30:47 PM  
What is an Unexplained Wealth Order?

Coming to a Socialist Police State near you.
 
2018-10-10 05:32:19 PM  
I've always heard that I shouldn't worry if i have nothing to hide.  Since every freaking dollar I earn must be accounted for, or the IRS comes after me, I like the idea of really, really, really rich folks having to squirm.  That makes me a bad person, so be it.  What do they have to fear, if they haven't done anything illegal?
 
2018-10-10 05:33:56 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-10 05:34:44 PM  
Jahangir Hajiyev is the former chairman of the International Bank of Azerbaijan.
vignette.wikia.nocookie.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-10 05:35:10 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


Because, and I know you're going to love this, government steps in when the private sector doesn't pull its weight.

Maybe if the rich behaved scrupulously, laws like this wouldn't need to be passed.
 
2018-10-10 05:36:31 PM  
I hope she can get rid of those pixels.
 
2018-10-10 05:37:52 PM  
With that kind of money, they could just retire to a country without extradition.
 
2018-10-10 05:40:34 PM  
I'd just like to be rich enough to fully fund a bunch of animal rescues, and once a year pick a Wal-Mart and pay off all the layaways. Are layaways even still a thing?
 
2018-10-10 05:46:50 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-10 05:50:30 PM  

MBooda: What is an Unexplained Wealth Order?

Coming to a Socialist Police State near you.


Unexplained wealth is simply living beyond your means to an obscene level, and leaving a traceable paper trail while doing so. Joe Bloogs and his wife spending an extra £50 a week from hubby's part-time and off-the books takeaway delivery job probably won't raise many eyelids, but when some silly bint starts throwing thousands on several credit cards over a very shoprt period, the powers that be start pricking up their ears. It's nothing to do with a 'socialist police state', it's making sure money entering our financial system isn't tainted with illegal oil, drugs or blood
 
2018-10-10 05:52:23 PM  

brizzle365: Yea, much smaller scale, like the SCOTUS?


Job interviews are not criminal trials.

But thanks for helping me update my tags. Is it "teen sex assault advocate" or "MRA"?
 
2018-10-10 05:52:37 PM  
That sound? It's London property values crashing as oligarchs and kleptocrats dump their escape pads.
 
2018-10-10 05:55:45 PM  
I just want a boat so i can fish when I retire.
 
2018-10-10 05:55:45 PM  

jaytkay: brizzle365: Yea, much smaller scale, like the SCOTUS?

Job interviews are not criminal trials.

But thanks for helping me update my tags. Is it "teen sex assault advocate" or "MRA"?


You mean....he was SERIOUS?
 
2018-10-10 05:57:12 PM  
I know attorneys who work on forfeiture cases.  When family members of drug dealers are buying houses and boats with cash, while paying taxes based on a $20K/year seamstress job, it's not difficult to see what's going on.

Though obviuosly not all the cases are nearly so cut and dried.
 
2018-10-10 05:59:06 PM  
pm dawn: Jeez, rich people have it the worst...glad I don't have *those* problems.
 
2018-10-10 06:01:32 PM  

Dangerous_sociopath: With that kind of money, they could just retire to a country without extradition.


"I'm rich enough to retire to a third-world country with no real law enforcement to bother me."

versus

"I'm rich enough to retire to a mature liberal democracy with a non-corrupt justice system, and they'll STILL be powerless to touch me!"
 
2018-10-10 06:17:16 PM  

Dangerous_sociopath: With that kind of money, they could just retire to a country without extradition.


Don't you know London is the centre of the universe?
 
2018-10-10 06:21:18 PM  

Stantz: MBooda: What is an Unexplained Wealth Order?

Coming to a Socialist Police State near you.

Unexplained wealth is simply living beyond your means to an obscene level,


Where "an obscene level" is "apparently a lot richer than me".
 
2018-10-10 06:21:34 PM  
The Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) has something like this called a lifestyle audit.  You don't need to have millions in wealth to be subject to one, just a more lavish lifestyle than your declared income can buy.
 
2018-10-10 06:23:17 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


Because anyone should be able to explain where their money came from - including "I worked for 30 years and put a quarter of my take-home in a pickle jar. That's where that cash came from."

Because when you come from Azerbaijan, a place with GDP of $40 billion, and you've spent 100 million pounds on houses, planes, and shopping -personally spent 0.4% of your nation's GDP!- maybe things warrant a looksee into your finances.

The real question is why you think it's perfectly okay for these financial criminals to fleece their countries for all they're worth. You want to make sure the old Soviet bloc slips back into the old patterns, keep turning a blind eye to the thieves robbing the place blind.
 
2018-10-10 06:27:17 PM  
lizyrd:

The real question is why you think it's perfectly okay for these financial criminals to fleece their countries for all they're worth.

There oughta be a National Agency to prevent people from thinking that.
 
2018-10-10 06:29:43 PM  

TheOtherCami: The Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) has something like this called a lifestyle audit.  You don't need to have millions in wealth to be subject to one, just a more lavish lifestyle than your declared income can buy.


That certainly would have kept Brett Kavanaugh off of the Supreme Court.
 
2018-10-10 06:33:45 PM  

wildcardjack: That sound? It's London property values crashing as oligarchs and kleptocrats dump their escape pads.


I think you are thinking of Cyprus.
 
2018-10-10 06:36:28 PM  

MBooda: There oughta be a National Agency to prevent people from thinking that.


img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-10 06:40:49 PM  
Eh, if you're an elected or otherwise employed official, of a shiat hole country, and you're actively farking over the desperately poor people you're supposed to be working for, my sympathy for any violation of your financial privacy rights is exactly equal to . . . the per capita income of your non-functioning country.

a/k/a  next to nothing.
 
2018-10-10 06:58:50 PM  
 
2018-10-10 07:16:20 PM  
I can think of one family in the UK with a lot of "unexplained wealth", but I'm guessing that this "National Crimes Agency" isn't going to be questioning them anytime soon.

I wonder if laws like these could be used to, for instance, take away the multi-generational fortunes of families that became rich from the slave trade, or from colluding with the Nazis before and during WW2. Somehow, I think there are going to be provisions to keep that from happening, considering how many rich families would be on the wrong side of that set of laws. I'm sure "I inherited it" will be considered a sufficient explanation.
 
2018-10-10 07:24:24 PM  
<AverageAmericanFarker>Accountability? In finances? UNACCEPTABLE!!! To the corporate gulag with you!!</AverageAmericanFarker>
 
2018-10-10 07:35:07 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


Where were you when the authorities were cracking down on حِوالة in the name of fighting terrorism?
 
2018-10-10 08:03:46 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


Are you confused about what country this is?  It didn't happen in the USA.  There is no expectation of freedom.  On the other hand, even if this happened in the USA, they would be guilty of dodging taxes.  If the IRS cannot reconcile the amount of money you spend with your tax returns, then you're going to be headed to prison.
 
2018-10-10 08:07:33 PM  

DanInKansas: TheOtherCami: The Canadian Revenue Agency (CRA) has something like this called a lifestyle audit.  You don't need to have millions in wealth to be subject to one, just a more lavish lifestyle than your declared income can buy.

That certainly would have kept Brett Kavanaugh off of the Supreme Court.


Yeah.  Good thing our justice system is based on "innocent until proven guilty."  That's why I'm proud to be an American.
 
2018-10-10 08:15:59 PM  

TOSViolation: Are you confused about what country this is?  It didn't happen in the USA.  There is no expectation of freedom.


Are you an American? Because all the time, anglophones on the Internet are saying the US sucks and the US is not exceptional and so on, so saying "there is no expectation of freedom" outside the US would be a pretty weird thing for a non-American to say. Also a little weird for an American liberal. Even a little weird for an American conservative, given their affinity for the English contributions to American laws and culture.
 
2018-10-10 08:18:36 PM  
img.fark.netView Full Size
 
2018-10-10 08:19:30 PM  
damn crop failures
 
2018-10-10 08:21:57 PM  
TOSViolation:

Are you confused about what country this is?  It didn't happen in the USA.  There is no expectation of freedom.  On the other hand, even if this happened in the USA, they would be guilty of dodging taxes.

This isn't Russia.
 
2018-10-10 08:24:29 PM  
What is worse, living in a nanny state where you can go to jail for offending someone, or living in Trump's 'Murica?
 
2018-10-10 08:26:49 PM  

itcamefromschenectady: TOSViolation: Are you confused about what country this is?  It didn't happen in the USA.  There is no expectation of freedom.

Are you an American? Because all the time, anglophones on the Internet are saying the US sucks and the US is not exceptional and so on, so saying "there is no expectation of freedom" outside the US would be a pretty weird thing for a non-American to say. Also a little weird for an American liberal. Even a little weird for an American conservative, given their affinity for the English contributions to American laws and culture.


Yes.
 
2018-10-10 08:46:16 PM  

jaytkay: brizzle365: Yea, much smaller scale, like the SCOTUS?

Job interviews are not criminal trials.

But thanks for helping me update my tags. Is it "teen sex assault advocate" or "MRA"?


It's "all of my enemies are guilty regardless of evidence", comrade. GFY
 
2018-10-10 08:50:39 PM  

dittybopper: Why is this even remotely considered OK?

If a suspected corrupt foreign official, or their family, cannot show a legitimate source for their riches, then the National Crime Agency can apply to the High Court to seize the property.

"You have to prove this money is legit, or we're taking it from you".

That turns the entire idea of "innocent until proven guilty" on its head, so now it's "guilty until proven innocent".  And it's not like you have to commit an actual crime to fall under suspicion.  You just have to be rich.

And no, it's not any better when we do it here over on this side of the pond either, albeit on a smaller scale usually.


I'm so happy to have been in America, I miss her.
 
2018-10-10 08:51:44 PM  
Really hate when other countries try to copy U.S..
 
2018-10-10 08:57:12 PM  

lizyrd: dittybopper: You want to make sure the old Soviet bloc slips back into the old patterns, keep turning a blind eye to the thieves robbing the place blind.


That ship sailed long ago, during Putin's first term.
 
2018-10-10 09:36:23 PM  

TOSViolation: Yeah.  Good thing our justice system is based on "innocent until proven guilty."  That's why I'm proud to be an American.


A presumption of guilt for someone with an "ethnic" sounding name sounds American enough to me.
 
2018-10-10 09:37:48 PM  

jaytkay: brizzle365: Yea, much smaller scale, like the SCOTUS?

Job interviews are not criminal trials.

But thanks for helping me update my tags. Is it "teen sex assault advocate" or "MRA"?


You're right.  A job interview for a high ranking official  (public or private) should be able to pass a much higher standard than "have you ever committed or attempted to commit multiple felonies
?"
 
2018-10-10 09:39:48 PM  

Fabric_Man: Dangerous_sociopath: With that kind of money, they could just retire to a country without extradition.

"I'm rich enough to retire to a third-world country with no real law enforcement to bother me."

versus

"I'm rich enough to retire to a mature liberal democracy with a non-corrupt justice system, and they'll STILL be powerless to touch me!"


I guess that's the difference between "fark you" rich and "fark everybody" rich.
 
Displayed 50 of 81 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



Top Commented
Javascript is required to view headlines in widget.
  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report