Lawyer Fees Soar To $1,500 An Hour

From a recent post by Robert Wood:

Legal costs keep rising, and top lawyer hourly rates are soaring. In fact, legal fees have crossed $1,500 an hour. Not long ago $1,000 seemed high. And just recently, the City of Baltimore took flak for paying outside lawyers up to $1,200 an hour in its Justice Department probe. 

Your tax lawyer could be making over $3,000,000.00 per year!  Even lawyers contracted by the IRS to investigate Microsoft are costing over >$1000 per hour:

Despite a court order to preserve documents, the IRS wiped the hard drive of an important IRS official, Mr. Samuel Maruca. Controversially, Mr. Maruca helped the IRS hire Quinn Emanuel, an outside law firm tasked with pursuing Microsoft. Hiring outsiders at over $1,000 an hour (!) angered Senate Finance Committee Chairman Orrin Hatch, who wrote a letter to the IRS complaining about strange deal and the $2.2 million fee.

This is where this unbridled lawyer greed has led:

In an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal, financial adviser David Kuenzi told the story of an American school teacher whose Swiss husband died of cancer. She evidently didn’t realize that she was obligated to disclose her deceased husband’s Swiss pension. That’s when things spiraled out of control for the widow.

“Despite having paid all of her U.S. taxes on time,” Kuenzi wrote, “she is advised by a California law firm to enter the IRS’s Off-Shore Voluntary Disclosure Program. She paid the firm a retainer fee of $124,000 to begin the OVD process and was told to expect penalties of up to $800,000.”

This poor widowed school teacher, lucky to be making $50,000 a year, paid probably 4 years of her after tax income, just as a retainer!  All on a Swiss pension of a couple of tens of thousands of dollars a year that had already been taxed in Switzerland.  And that doesn't even consider the obscene level of penalties that will be extracted from her by the holier than thou legal experts.

Aside from the question of what these parasites really contribute to society or the economy (answer zip, zero, nada), what special skills does this caste of parasites really have that makes them worth $3,000,000 a year?

Well the IRS tax code is 70,000 pages long.  It is contradictory, vague, open to misinterpretation, and constantly changing, and all of this is criminally deliberate.  But it is written by a criminal caste of people who have been trained to think a certain way, whose minds have been sanitized by certain thought patterns.  Sure, one has to know what is in the code, but a large proportion of the reference material is actually relevant to specific branches of IRS wealth extraction, so a tax parasite lawyer never has to have a complete understanding of the entire 70,000 pages in his head to be able to make obscene amounts of money.  I would actually say that the amount of brain power or knowledge required would be no more than a typical computer programmer making $100,000 (whose jobs are deliberately being stolen and given to H1b visa holders earning probably $50,000).  That's per year, not like a tax lawyer makes in a couple of weeks.

So what really makes the members of this legal parasite caste worth 30x or more as much as a decent computer programmer?  Here are some of my thoughts:

1.  Since getting a H1b visa in order to enter the civil service and work for the IRS would be extremely difficult, they have to be a US citizen or at least already have a green card.

2.  They have to have passed the BAR exam in at least one state to enter the elite cast of parasites that wield monopoly power over interpretation of the "laws" of our society.

3.  They need to have served at least a few years in the IRS, preferably as a high level legal council, and made many valuable future contacts.  This likely would entail spending these few years somewhere near the epicenter of foul corruption, Washington DC.

4.  They have to have sufficient statist mental hygeine.  There are several aspects to this:
4a.   Can they block empathy to the IRS's tax victims through things like self righteousness.
4b.   Or are they psychopaths who suffer from complete lack of empathy. 

5.  To gain entry into the highest levels of this elite parasite caste, they need to be loyal not to the US constitution or the American people,  but to a certain tribe.  
5a.  One can be born into this tribe like the upper echelons of the US government money departments, the FED, the treasury and the IRS.  Consider who runs them to understand:  Janet Yellen, Jack Lew, John Koskinen.  Or go back one generation:  Bernanke, Geitner, Schulman.
5b.  If you weren't born into the tribe, you have to have allowed yourself to be become blackmailable.  The best method of this is pedophilia, preferable some photographs.  Send them straight to Tel Aviv.

The Revenue Rule: Is It Relevant Any More?

Jack Townsend has yet another post about the tax crimes of tax "havens".

He quotes a previous post of his:

Of course, the reason Tax Haven jurisdictions have no such treaty provisions (they wouldn’t be Tax Haven jurisdictions if they did) is to avoid such treaty information sharing provisions and tax debt collection provisions. 

Once again, Jack shows how he is pandering to whatever Democrat gets selected President, and he is showing how well he can spin his beloved parties lies, which would be a primary requirement for the party of slavery.

First of all, the US is far and away the worlds largest tax haven:

Keep up the lies and distortion Jack, Hillary is bound to notice your talents.   If not, perhaps Bernie will.  And too bad you didn't bundle enough contributions for that Nobel Peace Prize winner Barry "choom gang" Obama.  If you had you might have ended up as Secretary of Commerce like that mammoth tax cheat with IRS immunity named Penny Pritzker.  I guess you'll just have to keep peddling IRS lies until the next Democrat administration sees your talent.

Second of all, when the IRS acted like the mafioso that they are, and forced the Swiss banks to hand over detailed information on the transactions and banking recipients of all cash transfers by US tax donkeys out of Model 1, 2 and 3 Swiss banks, the IRS conveniently exempted transfers to US tax haven and tax crime banks.  In this way deep state operatives like Penny Pritzker could simply be tipped off that if they got their money out of the Swiss bank and into a US bank, they would escape under the radar of the IRS and they could simply declare any income from that capital on that years income tax form and become instantly compliant.  They also accomplished another goal, getting that capital back onshore before the Fatca capital controls shut down all international banking for US tax slaves.   Bravo IRS, but the poor US tax slaves are slowly waking up to this Lois Lerner "dog ate my emails" type of corruption.  See Here.

The private banking subsidiary of Societe Generale SA in Switzerland conceded in its comparison with the US Department of Justice that they, installations of American customers to "private and corporate accounts at other banks in Switzerland, Hong Kong, Israel, Lebanon Liechtenstein and Cyprus "have transferred. Banque Pasche SA declared in the comparison, funds were transferred to banks in Israel and Hong Kong "in an attempt to escape the discovery further."

Third of all,  the Obama administration coerced the Swiss government into signing a model 2 IGA in which they were forced to forgo all reciprocity from the IRS in order to avoid completely shredding the Swiss constitution.  Again, the US never had jurisdiction to do this and was acting in a willfully illegal fashion.  But what do the criminal IRS or Jack Townsend care about law when the law gets in their way.

This coercion is very reminiscent of the oath required of US slave person-hood renunciants who not only are extorted into paying $2350.00 to buy their freedom, and forced to take an oath stating that they were not coerced into renunciation, when in fact, it is the very same IRS that is coercing virtually every US person-hood renunciant into their renunciation.  It is like the IRS forcing the poor tax slaves to dig their own grave and then forcing them to sign a statement that they weren't coerced before executing them.

Bravo federaltaxcrimes for telling another whopping turd of a lie.

Just Submit

The Catholic Pope and the Orthodox Patriarch met in Cuba last week to discuss the Orthodox Church's refusal for 1000 years to submit to the Catholic Church's preeminence.  This meeting was performed under the scull and crossbones, and the controlled media didn't make a peep.  The only ones who noticed are those who are looking for these signs.

Scull and Crossbones?  Did all 3 reach a consensus?

On the war front, the Saudi coalition is prepared to invade Iraq and Syria to get control of the Levant, the oil, and the trade routes.  Putin has said "nyet" and threatens tactical nuclear strikes if the coalition invades.

Supreme Court Judge Scalia was assassinated, and they left the pillow on his face to tell the rest of us to STFU.

Lavoy Finicum was executed by the FBI on TV, while their impudence and cover-up were shamelessly brandished about right under our noses.

Hillary Clinton has been spewing out US national secrets for years from her treasonous private mail server, with impunity, and can still run for president.

Watch this video by a woman from Calais where she describes how her town has been destroyed due to the invasion of muslims.  This is the murder of an entire community and the police not only do nothing, they persecute the towns people who have the audacity to speak out.

My friends we have entered into a new world, and to struggle will only prolong your agony.   If you resist you will pay penalties far more severe than OVDI.

Just Submit.

Why the isaacbrocksociety is in some ways worse than Fatca and FFI's

One of the most obscene aspects of Fatca is that FFI's (Foreign Financial Institutions) are forced to become tax enforcers for the IRS, at massive cost and no benefit to themselves or to their customers.  A small proportion of these FFI's are large international banks who actually derive significant profits from their operations in the US, often through US subsidiaries that they have acquired.  Many of these large FFI's end up being corrupted and taken over by the US subsidiaries that they have taken over, UBS's purchase of Warburg Dillon Read comes to mind.  But that is a different story.

However the majority of these FFI's are small, national or even community banks and other financial institutions that have no US subsidiaries and were only forced to accept Fatca due to the US Department of Treasury and Justice's threats of withholding 30% of any transaction flowing though any US bank.   We only have to look what US economic sanctions have done to countries like Cuba, Iran or North Korea to understand that this would be the death of a FFI to understand how they were coerced into cooperating with the IRS.  It was clearly non-wilfull.

Isaacbrocksociety, on the other hand, faces no such coercion when they act to censor or block comments concerning the IRS, the US, or Canada.

In the past I have tried to point out various aspects of a far bigger, call it "holistic", approach to looking at the CBT, FATCA, FBARS, the IRS and even income taxes.  This is where censorship by those parties controlling IBS becomes an issue.  I believe that it was partially my outside of the box comments at IBS that originally led to the great schism between Isaacbrocksociety and Maplesandbox.

Of course, many readers of IBS, especially those from the left side of the political spectrum, who also happen largely to be of the female sex, took issue, or were "offended" by my comments.  Some of them became very upset at me, and shortly after they split off to form maplesandbox where they could ban my comments.  At this point Petros was still largely in control of IBS and he refused to outright ban my comments.   Later on he seemed to have bowed out of the management and then a different group, I think largely female, took over management of isaacbrocksociety.

At this point I was forced to self-censor my comments in an attempt to get them posted.  However, as time went on the antagonism between myself and particularly Patricia Moon deteriorated to the point that "Tricia" decided to outright ban all my comments.  This is one of the reasons that this blog now exists (thanks Tricia).

So now we get back to the willful myopia of Isaacbrocksociety.  By censoring certain viewpoints, especially those opposed to the welfare state, or those that point out that perhaps people who like all the goodies that the welfare state provides them but don't like it when they are forced to pay for it like so many others, these same "brockers" block "offensive" comments.  In the end they warp and distort the comments section to conform to their viewpoint.  Usxcanada refers to it as "broccultists".

Overtime these distortions have led to a situation that people who make comments outside of the overton window, or disagreeable ("offensive") to the welfare statists who dominate IBS end up without additional comments that support or reinforce their viewpoints.

Squakin' about that unjust Fatca law

Ultimately this of course has led to the group think, or that "broccultism" that predominates at IBS.  And it is willful and completely avoidable.  And that is why IBS is in some ways worse than Fatca and FFI's.

Like sheep in their overton window pen

The group thinkers over at Isaacbrocksociety have another post about the poor Swede who apparently committed suicide over Fatca.

Overton Window at IBS

I say "apparently" because information about the actual event is still scarce.

What I would like to discuss though is Canadian parochialism.  The way that liberal coven work themselves into a liberal hissy fit reminds me of how the English parliament threw a hissy fit about Trump and called him a 'buffoon, demagogue and wazzock'.  

IBS greeting Trump haters

You see, while IBS is indignant about one Swede killing himself, they cannot see Fatca in the context of wider war crimes and crimes against humanity committed by their own government for the benefit of the Anglo Zionists and in the name of all Canadians.  Of course, I am talking about Canada supporting the bombing and destruction of Syria.

ZeroHedge covers it well:

Syria before Canada came uninvited

Syria after Canada lends its helping hand

So why can't Canadians at IBS see that their country has lost all sovereignty and is merely a pawn that takes its orders from the Anglo-Zionist Empire without protest?  Could it be because they are just plain ignorant Canucks?

Here is some further evidence of collective Canadian idiocy:
-  Economic Sanctions against Russia
-  Support for the Maidan coup d'etat in Ukraine
-  Training Ukranian terrorists to fight in the Donbass
-  Canada selling virtually all their gold and making themselves financial vassals like Ukraine and Libya
-  Belonging in Nato, that "defensive" organization
-  Participation in the destruction of Afghanistan, Libya, and Iraq
-  Canadian Navy trying to provoke Russia in the Med and Black Sea

I could go on and on.  But the real point here is that IBS getting their panties in a bunch about Fatca is going to accomplish zero, zip, nada.  First they have to free themselves from the Anglo Zionist Empire.  Fatca chance of that!

*The Truth About Fatca*

The Isaacbrocksociety.ca has a new post about *The Truth About Fatca* based on an interview of Jim Jafras by IRS Medic.

As usual for IBS this post and the comments willfully fail to recognize the 800lb gorilla glaring at them from the middle of the room.

 Jim does a good job of skirting this real issue and going into depth about the symptoms without addressing the root cause.

The video is full of great lines that completely miss the target, like:

- the only thing that comes close [to Fatca as bad legislation] is prohibition
- the Fatca law was never debated on or voted on or amended in either house congress
- there were never separate hearings held in congress
- aside from its [Fatca's] supidity as a tax enforcement mechanism
- its [Fatca] very destructive to the whole concept of a law based international system
- this thing [Fatca] could be knocked over with a feather but we don't have a feather
- It was passed when the Democrats had a full majority of both houses of Congress

So why was this law passed when it clearly was bad legislation, was never debated over or voted on, never had separate hearings, was clearly going to be ineffective in terms of cost/benefit, violates any semblance the international legal norms, and should have been very easy to block?

Well lets look at some of the actors who were pushing this foul piece of legislation long before they managed to blackmail the majority of opponents who might have done something into allowing it to pass without the slightest degree of opposition:

Chuck Schumer
Carl Levin
Barney Frank
Dick Durbin
Barbara Boxer
Diane Feinstein
Ben Bernanke
Timothy Geitner
Lois Lerner
Doug Schulman
Rahm Emmanuel
David Axelrod

What do these guys have in common?  They are all members of the same tribe.  The tribe that brought us the IRS and the FED in 1913 and still run them today.   The IRS was created before the FED because the tribe already in control of the US government knew it would need much more cash from the tax donkeys to pay for the debt that the FED was going to be lending to the US Government to finance the coming wars of conquest.

So if IBS and Jim Jafras want to do anything about Fatca, they are going to have to pull their heads out of the sand and figure out what the true agenda is.

Hint:  Why did the US rubbleize Iraq, Libya and Syria?

US DOJ Swiss Bank Program Categories 3 and 4 Comments (2/4/16; 2/7/16)

Jack Townsend once again deleted my comment on his federaltaxcrimes blog.  Having had Jack censor several of my posts is the reason I created this blog.  This blog post is a reply to Jacks inane P and C comment from this post:

US DOJ Swiss Bank Program Categories 3 and 4 Comments (2/4/16; 2/7/16)

"Let me give an example of a case where the IRS might assert the penalty. Parent (P) is a U.S. Person owning an FBAR reportable account at Swiss Bank (SB). Child (C), a U.S. citizen and resident, is a signatory and sole beneficiary of the account upon P's death. P lives in Switzerland and all of P's assets are outside the U.S. collection jurisdiction and there is no treaty requiring Switzerland to collect an FBAR penalty. Through disclosures by SB as a category 2 participant, the IRS "discovers" the existence of the account and both P's and C's relationships to the account. The IRS asserts the maximum willful penalty against P, as owner. P thumbs his nose at the IRS. Will the IRS ignore C and give C a free pass, even though the evidence (including documents and information from SB) indicates that C knew about the account and chose (i) not to answer the Schedule B question truthfully and (ii) not file an FBAR, because he was trying to protect P.Now, it is true that if the IRS waits to see if P will pay or the IRS can collect from P, the civil and criminal statutes as to C may have -- likely will have -- passed. If the IRS has reason to believe or suspect that P either not cooperate in determining the correct FBAR liability or will not pay, the IRS can investigate C and impose the penalty against C protectively. If it were to do that, it will get the penalty at least once which, under its discretion, seems to be all it wants to collect.
Moreover, of course, there are alternative ways to collect the penalty. When C is given or bequeathed assets, the IRS could use some form of transferee liability (not the Code form, but state law or other remedies).
The point simply is that, simply because I am not aware of the IRS actually directly asserting FBAR penalties against a signatory, does not mean necessarily that it will not because it certainly can if it chooses to under the statute.
Jack Townsend"

I would like to add some important background information about P and C that Jack tried to spin away with his typically sadistic "tax cheat" hunter glee:

It turns out P was born in the US while his father was on assignment in the US for 5 years for a Swiss corporation.  P moved back to Switzerland at the age of 3 with his family, and then 24 years later made the grave mistake of passing his US personhood on to C who was born in Switzerland.  24 years after that, P set up this account at SB bank for C to use while attending University to get advanced degrees while studying Cancer.  P had paid all his Swiss taxes on the money put into this account and all of the income had been earned in Switzerland.  P had even signed a W-9 under the QI agreement made beween SB and the IRS, even though he had only held cash and no US securities.  

Unfortunately for P and C, SB bank and the Swiss government knuckled under to US arm twisting and violated the Swiss constitution, and sent P's private bank information to the IRS.  Since interest rates in Switzerland have been hovering at about 1% or lower for decades, it turns out that the total amount of taxes due on the account was merely $200, but the IRS decided to levy penalties of 70% of the highest amount in the account at the time.  Unfortunately for C, this bank account now had only 60% of the funds left, and C was forced to quit his studies in order to raise money to pay the IRS penalties.  P was unable to help C in this matter because he had been financially ruined and could not even pay is IRS penalties due to the phantom gains on the sale of his house and the exorbitant legal fees charge by his tax compliance vulture lawyer.  His house had appreciated very little in value in Swiss franks, but due to the near doubling of the Swiss frank over the US dollar over the 20 years, his father faced a IRS tax bill of $150,000 for capital gains on this home sale alone.  And that didn't include the other penalties P had had to pay for his other bank accounts.  All this despite the fact that in the end, P had only owed the IRS $1000 on income.  This $1000 would have actually have been a gain for P due to tax credits, but due to quirks in IRS regulations on the Statute of Limitations, the SOL for his tax credits had run out long before the SOL on his income tax returns and FBAR's.

In case any readers of federaltaxcrimes thinks this is hyperbole, they should consider the case of the Swedish PhD researcher and father of two, who hadn't lived in the US since attending Cal Poly 20 years prior, who recently committed suicide due to what and only be described as IRS vindictiveness.  You can read about it here.

This poor Swedish man was driven to suicide by IRS demands such as these:  

"The “bank accounts” that I must report to the US government include life insurance policies, telephone prepaid cards, my customer card at the supermarket and my lunch card at work. The latter three must be reported, along with their highest balance (try to calculate that on a supermarket rebate card) all because they fit the definition of a debit card. All of this under threat of a penalty of USD 10,000 per account if I make a mistake in reporting. I think the most my lunch card has ever had on it was USD 60."

Now lets talk about another well known IRS case: Turbo Tax Timothy Geitner, who was allowed to become Secretary of the Treasury (and therefore big boss of the IRS) even after it turned out that he had was a tax criminal.  He got off with $0.00 in penalties:

"At the Senate confirmation hearings, it was revealed that Timothy Geithner had not paid $35,000 in self-employment taxes for several years, even though he had acknowledged his obligation to do so, and had filed a request for, and received, a payment for half the taxes owed. The failure to pay self-employment taxes, in part due to the way his employer reported his wages which was not in accordance with tax law, was noted during a 2006 audit by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), in which Geithner was assessed additional taxes of $14,847 for the 2003 and 2004 tax years. Geithner also failed to pay the self-employment taxes for the 2001 and 2002 tax years (for which the statute of limitations had expired) until after Obama expressed his intent to nominate Geithner to be Secretary of Treasury. He also deducted the cost of his children’s sleep-away camp as a dependent care expense, when only expenses for day care are eligible for the deduction.Geithner subsequently paid the IRS the additional taxes owed, and was charged $15,000 interest, but was not fined for late payment."

And this is where Jack's statement at the beginning of the comment really galls, the IRS might...but it does not mean that it will.

If we look at other cases involving PEP's, we find virtually NO prosecutions of the 1% or members of the deep state.  These guys (Bill Gates, George Soros, etc) have bank accounts and properties around the world, and yet the only really big fish the IRS can seem to be able to find are Russian Oligarchs and Wesely Snipes.  To paraphrase Leona Helmsely:  "Only the little people have to worry about IRS compliance".