Swift Wire Transfers Not Confidential

[phormio]

Thought this might be of interest since many wire money in/out for Visa/living expenses, etc.

Article in New York Times about SWIFT wire transfer monitoring can be found here:

New York Times Article on SWIFT wire transfer monitoring

Same article as above but different site

[ThaiPauly]

The last time I wired money from the UK to LOS, it was only 1/2 million Baht.. but I had e-mails from my bank saying that the USA Government wanted to know what it was for! Took me ages for my Personal Bank Manager to get them to leave me alone

<deleted> is that all about ? Is this happenening to everyone ??

[OldAsiaHand]

There's nothing new about inquiries concerning the purpose of wire transfers. Thai banks have been requiring people who wire funds into the country to state the purpose of the funds for years. Yes, I know many people aren't asked -- I'm asked sometimes and not other times -- but the requirment to provide an acceptable purpose before a wire transfer is accepted is still there. It's just that Thai banks are frequently lax about fulfillling it. Does that surprise you?

[Thaiquila]

US people: I wouldn't worry too much about this if you aren't actually involved in criminal activities. However, it does underline the utter lack of privacy in banking. It also points to the necessity of filing TD F 90-22.1 if your Thai bank account goes over $10,000, because now you can be sure, they know about it already! There is more discussion about Americans overseas-specific issues at www.RetireAway.com .

Edited June 23, 2006 by Thaiquila

[cclub75]

There's nothing new about inquiries concerning the purpose of wire transfers.

Don't mix. Theses are 2 differents issues.

-declaration of purpose.

Nobody cares, the banker put your nice fax under his desk while sipping his 5 o'clock tea and dreaming about his mia noi.

-and now this program, allowing US to trace, not the "purpose" of a transfert (again nobody cares if the terrorist declare "to pay my grand'mother hospital bill"), but the origin and the destination of money transferts (that reveal much more).

You have to figure a huge database (Swift), where US services can launch automatic processes, crunching numbers.

Nothing new. It's an extension of the program ECHELON, that allow US to listen to virtually any telecommunication in the world.

With the fantastic progress of computer technologies, and the digitilization of our lives, this dirty work is a piece of cake now. I mean, before during World War 2 for instance, services were spying the mail with an army of people to open the letters, check contents etc.

Now : you just put some teraflops on the table and that's done.

[Thaiquila]

I don't want to give the impression that I appove of how profoundly Americans have given up their privacy in all areas, especially since 911. Of course, this is a disturbing business. I am just saying for expats who are living in Thailand and are not the real target of these privacy intrusions, not very many of them are going to end up at Guatmo for no good reason, and short of voting differently or expressing outrage to legislators, this is pretty much the status quo now. So, why bother raising your blood pressure, it won't change anything. Fatalist perhaps, but so be it.

Edited June 23, 2006 by Thaiquila

[phormio]

I don't want to give the impression that I appove of how profoundly Americans have given up their privacy in all areas...very many of them are going to end up at Guatmo for no good reason, and short of voting differently or expressing outrage to legislators, this is pretty much the status quo now...

Surfing the blogs on this topic can lead to some interesting speculation. The top politicians of the GOP are quite a ruthless bunch whose sole ethics is based upon whatever it takes to ensure long-term electoral success. Nothing seems to be out-of-bounds. The data , now legally available through this "national security program" may very well be used as part of this goal for attaining electoral success. Along with much other data in addition to the financials, using available adaptive marketing strategies, one may be able to increase Republican turnout and decrease Democratic turnout if you know how to crunch all the data(they do - it ain't rocket science) . No doubt this is only one of many ways in which , overstepping limits previously established, the GOP political machine attempts to ensure future victory at the polls by getting their poodles to turn-out for elections at a higher rate, whilst discourage the Dems from showing up. Just a theory, but sounds about right to me. Don't think they've caught any really serious "terrorist" threat via all this privacy invasion, data crunching BS that's been going on for the last 5 years.

P.S. : More sinister possibilites are easy to imagine

Edited June 24, 2006 by phormio

[thaiknot]

I don't want to give the impression that I appove of how profoundly Americans have given up their privacy in all areas, especially since 911. Of course, this is a disturbing business. I am just saying for expats who are living in Thailand and are not the real target of these privacy intrusions, not very many of them are going to end up at Guatmo for no good reason, and short of voting differently or expressing outrage to legislators, this is pretty much the status quo now. So, why bother raising your blood pressure, it won't change anything. Fatalist perhaps, but so be it.

america is a big brother police state now and swift has lost the confidence and business of the world.avoid all us banks or foreign banks that do business in the us and forget swift wire transfers.

stick with foreign local banks with no us presence and make deposits and withdrawals in cash.one could have a bank account with uob or dbs in singapore with under $10,000 and it doesn't have to be reported but the best part is having a safety deposit box in the bank filled with cash and gold and it is all private and away from the prying big noses of the jack-booted feds.leave no paper or electronic trail for the infernal revenue service to trace and track.

[chingching]

Surfing the blogs on this topic can lead to some interesting speculation. The top politicians of the GOP are quite a ruthless bunch whose sole ethics is based upon whatever it takes to ensure long-term electoral success. Nothing seems to be out-of-bounds. The data , now legally available through this "national security program" may

I was under the impression that this info was not LEGALLY obtained but the u.s. "tapped" into the database of the bank.

[cclub75]

I was under the impression that this info was not LEGALLY obtained but the u.s. "tapped" into the database of the bank.

It's even easier : they just... asked ! It was an "agreement".

(from New York Times)

Swift executives have been uneasy at times about their secret role, the government and industry officials said. By 2003, the executives told American officials they were considering pulling out of the arrangement, which began as an emergency response to the Sept. 11 attacks, the officials said. Worried about potential legal liability, the Swift executives agreed to continue providing the data only after top officials, including Alan Greenspan, then chairman of the Federal Reserve, intervened.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/23/washington/23intel.html

[Phil Conners]

SWIFT is a clearning house, i.e a way for banks to send money to each other. They are not "an extension to Echolon", but they were asked by the US authorities to inform them of transfers of a certain size. If they declined US would probably just deny transfers so it's not like they actually have a choice.

Bark up the right tree, complain to your government, use your vote to change it.

[Thaiquila]

About avoiding US banks and SWIFT, well that is easier said than done for Americans in Thailand who need to transfer in money for visa purposes. In any event, it underlines the importance of filing form TD F 90-22.1 for accounts going over $10K USD.

http://www.irs.gov/businesses/small/articl...=148845,00.html

While there is some dissent about this spying reality, the smart money is on such programs remaining, and probably even getting even more intrusive, no matter who takes power after Bush.

Today's Washington Post:

"It would be very disturbing to me to find out that this program represents yet another unilateral action and further abuse of executive authority without proper safeguards and oversight," said Rep. Barney Frank (Mass.), the senior Democrat on the Financial Services Committee. Others described the program as an invasion of privacy and called for hearings on possible violations of domestic and international law.

Edited June 24, 2006 by Thaiquila

[IMA_FARANG]

Thought this might be of interest since many wire money in/out for Visa/living expenses, etc.

Article in New York Times about SWIFT wire transfer monitoring can be found here:

New York Times Article on SWIFT wire transfer monitoring

Same article as above but different site

I read some of the comments on this forum......and obviously some of you have no comprehension of the real world post 9/11.

I routinely xfer funds to my Bangkok Bank account in Thailand from a U.S. bank, and have been doing so for over two years.

I was informed at the time I set up my monthly wire transfer that amounts over $5000 would be subject to possible "monitoring" by the U.S. authorities and that any transaction over $10,000 would be subject to "special interest" inspection.

My normal monthly amounts are below the $5000 amount.

The purpose of this monitoring is 1) anti money laundering and 2) anti-terroist monitoring of funds being transferred out of the U.S.

I may not enjoy the monitoring of my financial transactions, but it is a fact of life, especially after September 11th.

And for you Brits, please do not think it is only for funds from the U.S. transferred to forieign banks. I assure you the U.K. government regularly cooperates with the U.S. requests for monitoring of wire transfers.

The "good news" is that the authorities monitoring these transfers are some overwhelmed by the volume of transactions that they can't cope with most of the transactions.

For U.S. voters reading these comments.....well, you gave up your pretence of a right to "privacy" (which you never had anyhow) when you voted for George Dubbya (Bush).

That is the reality you have to live with today.

[Thaiquila]

Yeah, it is the reality, but we don't exactly have to celebrate it. And lots of people didn't vote for Bush, the majority in fact in 2000. The reason I say this won't change if the Democrats take power is that if they will be timid to try to soften any security measures because that would be an opportunity for the other side to attack them as weak on defense. So, yes, learn to deal with it, I agree.

Edited June 24, 2006 by Thaiquila

[thaiknot]

Wall Street Journal

American Executive in Brussels Aided Terrorist-Tracking Program

By Glenn R. Simpson

The Treasury Department's secret terrorist-tracking program depended in part on the cooperation of Leonard "Lenny" Schrank, an American executive who heads the Belgium-based banking cooperative known as Swift.

A gregarious technology whiz who graduated from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the Brooklyn-born Mr. Schrank ended up working closely with U.S. intelligence officials on the project when Swift received subpoenas from the Treasury Department following the Sept. ...

Time Magazine

Sunday, Jan. 12, 2003; 2.09 p.m. GMT

It was a cozy, intimate dinner party for some of Brussels' leading lights, held at the home of one of the city's premier architects. Leonard Schrank, the American chief executive of the financial services firm Swift and president of the American Chamber of Commerce in Belgium, took a seat next to an elegant woman he recognized as one of Belgium's richest people. During the pre-dinner chitchat in a room full of museum-quality contemporary art, she ventured offhandedly that it was "good that the Americans got hit on Sept. 11. Maybe it taught them a lesson."

"What the hel_l are you talking about?" Schrank responded. "More than 3,000 people died!" The woman wilted under his assault, but for Schrank the moral of the story was clear. "She was just repeating what she had heard," he says. "The real point is that 90% of the people she talks to every day would agree with her."

[Phil Conners]

Yes, USA has been very unpopular throughout Europe since Bush took office.

[OldAsiaHand]

There's nothing new about inquiries concerning the purpose of wire transfers.

Don't mix. Theses are 2 differents issues.........

No, actually, they're not.

The issue is that anyone who insists that wire transfer instructions given internationally through a series of banks are private just isn't very smart. All of the other information that you refer to is already apparent on the face of the wire instructions ans durely you must realize that it has always been colated into an accessable database.

My comment was directed to the growing tendancy of banks even to ask for additional information, information that isn't apparent on the face of the wire, in connection with transfer. The proposed use of the funds is one thing they occasionaly ask for. The source of the funds (i.e. how did they get in your account in the first place and who did they come from) is another. Whether they care once you tell them probably varies considerably from case to case.

Regardless, both areas of interest in your business are a function of a growing effort by governments and banks to make all international financial transactions more transparent. To whine about it is to whine about the sun setting. It's inevitable and, in my view, it's also a good thing. Whether you agree with that or not, learn to live with it. That's the way it's going to be from now on.

[LadyinRed]

I believe this has to do with the transfer currency being USD.

There don't seem to be similar problem (assuming the transfer amount is not big enough to raise eyebrows) with other currencies.

[Chang_paarp]

My reading of this is that the US govt is looking at ALL transfers through SWIFT over $X. This is irrespective of currency, origin and destination of the transfer. It has been reported that the Belgian govt and several other European govts feel uncomfortable about the loss of soveignty over this practice.

The US govt justifies this stance as a defence against terror and amongst other cases points to the prosecution of Hambali (sp) one of the Bali bombers. They were able to trace fund transfers that ended up with him.

[thaihome]

I am not a big fan neither of current anti-terrorist policies nor of G.W. Bush but I do have to agree with him that that it is disgraceful that the newspapers choose release this storey. It seems they have been in discussions for several months with various government figures, including at least one very vocal critic of the Iraq war, but in the end decided the sensationalism value was worth the damage they would do.

All this means is that people with something to hide will now find other means to transfer money around.

TH

Edited June 27, 2006 by thaihome