jacksonm2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:28 pmI have no idea where she will get that money but a 100 percent ad valorem tax on gold wherever she can get her hands on it it will probably be way more easy to get from the Texas depository than the Perth Mint.
Libertarian666 gave a good reply to this, but I'd also like to point out that while the Feds may have trouble seizing gold from the Perth Mint, they would have much, much less trouble seizing shares of AAAU that are held in a nationwide brokerage based in New York.
Not so sure about that. AAAU is backed by Perth Mint's gold, so the Australian government might possibly have something to say about a seizure of their sovereign assets.
I'd guess that bullion held in a private or state-run repository within US borders would be a whole lot more of a vulnerable target. Any state sensibilities would be pretty simply overcome by invoking the "it's only going to affect the rich and who cares about them" line. That's why there wasn't much of an uproar when it was last done in the 1930s.
jacksonm2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:28 pmI have no idea where she will get that money but a 100 percent ad valorem tax on gold wherever she can get her hands on it it will probably be way more easy to get from the Texas depository than the Perth Mint.
Libertarian666 gave a good reply to this, but I'd also like to point out that while the Feds may have trouble seizing gold from the Perth Mint, they would have much, much less trouble seizing shares of AAAU that are held in a nationwide brokerage based in New York.
Not so sure about that. AAAU is backed by Perth Mint's gold, so the Australian government might possibly have something to say about a seizure of their sovereign assets.
It wouldn't be a seizure of their assets. It would be a seizure of others' claims on those assets.
sophie wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 12:04 pm
I'd guess that bullion held in a private or state-run repository within US borders would be a whole lot more of a vulnerable target. Any state sensibilities would be pretty simply overcome by invoking the "it's only going to affect the rich and who cares about them" line. That's why there wasn't much of an uproar when it was last done in the 1930s.
Private, yes.
But when was gold in a state-run depository confiscated?
Never, because there weren't any until now.
Or do you think the Texas legislature was just posturing when they said that the depository would ignore attempts by other (non-Texan) governmental agencies to confiscate deposits?
Because I think they know exactly what their rights and powers are.
MangoMan wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:05 pm
I think you are all deluding yourselves if you think that if the US government wants to seize or tax your gold that holding it in TX or AU or anywhere else is going to matter. See FACTA. That has worked so well that the Swiss banking cartel basically quit offering US accounts.
I'm intimately familiar with that situation, thanks. But the State of Texas has a greater incentive, and more legal ability, to fight, than the Swiss did.
MangoMan wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:05 pm
You also underestimate the fervor of the far left to redistribute wealth.
jacksonm2 wrote: ↑Tue Oct 22, 2019 4:28 pmI have no idea where she will get that money but a 100 percent ad valorem tax on gold wherever she can get her hands on it it will probably be way more easy to get from the Texas depository than the Perth Mint.
Libertarian666 gave a good reply to this, but I'd also like to point out that while the Feds may have trouble seizing gold from the Perth Mint, they would have much, much less trouble seizing shares of AAAU that are held in a nationwide brokerage based in New York.
Not so sure about that. AAAU is backed by Perth Mint's gold, so the Australian government might possibly have something to say about a seizure of their sovereign assets.
I'd guess that bullion held in a private or state-run repository within US borders would be a whole lot more of a vulnerable target. Any state sensibilities would be pretty simply overcome by invoking the "it's only going to affect the rich and who cares about them" line. That's why there wasn't much of an uproar when it was last done in the 1930s.
States have constitutionally protected rights to create a gold backed currency. This is exactly what Texas is doing. As such it’s extremely unlikely the Feds can seize the gold at the depository, force sale of gold at the depository to the Feds, and if challenged by Texas, it is likely they can’t enforce capital gains tax or enact any windfall profits tax on gold in the Texas Bullion Depository. These are constitutional protections you can’t get with any overseas gold holding or gold stored in a domestic bank safe deposit box.
MangoMan wrote: ↑Wed Oct 23, 2019 3:05 pm
I think you are all deluding yourselves if you think that if the US government wants to seize or tax your gold that holding it in TX or AU or anywhere else is going to matter. See FACTA. That has worked so well that the Swiss banking cartel basically quit offering US accounts.
You also underestimate the fervor of the far left to redistribute wealth.
Article 10 of the Constitution gives states to right to issue gold backed currency. Once the Texas Depository issues its debit card this next spring, it will have accomplished this. At that point the feds can't touch or even tax the gold.
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
So States can't make coins.. but they can make "things" which are gold and silver coins which can be tendered to pay debts... sounds contradictory.
ochotona wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:31 pm
Confusing language:
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
So States can't make coins.. but they can make "things" which are gold and silver coins which can be tendered to pay debts... sounds contradictory.
No, they can't make anything other than gold and silver coins into a currency.
ochotona wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:31 pm
Confusing language:
"No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility."
So States can't make coins.. but they can make "things" which are gold and silver coins which can be tendered to pay debts... sounds contradictory.
This means States can't issue fiat currency so they can't take a round piece of iron, copper, etc. and stamp a currency value on it, in other words they can't make quarters, nickels, dimes etc.. However, they are allowed to use gold or silver bullion as money.
FarmerD wrote: ↑Tue Oct 29, 2019 12:49 pm
, and if challenged by Texas, it is likely they can’t enforce capital gains tax ...
We need a test case for this one!
I visited the depository a couple weeks ago. One of the managers said Texas has sent letters to the IRS over the past year or two but have not gotten any responses. He would not tell exactly what those letters asked the IRS but I think its obvious what Texas was inquiring about.
I'm surprised an anti-tax vote was that close in Texas, but then again I can imagine the average voter looks at a proposition about taxing gold and thinks "only rich people and cartoon ducks own gold, so why not?"
BTW, Libertarian666, I love your new avatar. The Saint Gaudens $20 double eagle is my favorite coin design of all time.
“Groucho Marx wrote:
A stock trader asked him, "Groucho, where do you put all your money?" Groucho was said to have replied, "In Treasury bonds", and the trader said, "You can't make much money on those." Groucho said, "You can if you have enough of them!"
I think I read somewhere that Teddy Roosevelt wanted the high relief coin for general circulation but the Treasury told him that it was impractical because it would not stack properly.
Have you tried stacking your 2008 restrike?
“Groucho Marx wrote:
A stock trader asked him, "Groucho, where do you put all your money?" Groucho was said to have replied, "In Treasury bonds", and the trader said, "You can't make much money on those." Groucho said, "You can if you have enough of them!"
jhogue wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2019 5:50 pm
I think I read somewhere that Teddy Roosevelt wanted the high relief coin for general circulation but the Treasury told him that it was impractical because it would not stack properly.
Have you tried stacking your 2008 restrike?
No, for two reasons:
1. I have only one of them.
2. I don't want to mess it up. It has a fair amount of numismatic value, maybe $400 over the gold price.
BTW, it's a 2009, not a 2008. It's my Acura TL-S that's a 2008 collectible.
Do you know of any plans for Texas to strike their own gold coins?
“Groucho Marx wrote:
A stock trader asked him, "Groucho, where do you put all your money?" Groucho was said to have replied, "In Treasury bonds", and the trader said, "You can't make much money on those." Groucho said, "You can if you have enough of them!"
jhogue wrote: ↑Wed Nov 06, 2019 6:49 pm
Do you know of any plans for Texas to strike their own gold coins?
That would not be Constitutional: https://www.heritage.org/constitution/# ... te-coinage
But recognizing privately minted coins as legal tender would be perfectly Constitutional.
I'm pretty sure they are going to do that.
I have also heard that they have plans to issue debit and/or credit cards settled by transferring ownership of gold held in collective storage.
I know many of you gush about Texas, but I just looked at my property taxes, and they exceed 2% of the value of my property, which is pretty bad in my view. It's not a low tax State... it could be depending on your holdings and your sources of income. It's a mixed bag.
ochotona wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 am
I know many of you gush about Texas, but I just looked at my property taxes, and they exceed 2% of the value of my property, which is pretty bad in my view. It's not a low tax State... it could be depending on your holdings and your sources of income. It's a mixed bag.
Yes, it's a mixed bag:
No income tax or capital gains tax.
Relatively high sales taxes.
Fairly high property taxes, but that depends A LOT on where you live and whether you get over-65 and homestead exemptions.
The tax rate on my current rural property, with both of those exemptions, is a little less than 1%.
If and when we move to a higher cost area near Austin, our taxes will go WAY up, probably tripling in all due to the higher rate and more expensive housing.
I wouldn't mind moving to College Station, the Houston-Dallas high Speed Rail will have a Brazos Valley stop, and i'd be able to get to Houston in a few minutes, and Dallas in an hour. The town is Roan's Prairie, 30 min drive east of Texas A&M. Supposed to be up and running by 2026.
ochotona wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:17 am
I know many of you gush about Texas, but I just looked at my property taxes, and they exceed 2% of the value of my property, which is pretty bad in my view. It's not a low tax State... it could be depending on your holdings and your sources of income. It's a mixed bag.
Yes, it's a mixed bag:
No income tax or capital gains tax.
Relatively high sales taxes.
Fairly high property taxes, but that depends A LOT on where you live and whether you get over-65 and homestead exemptions.
The tax rate on my current rural property, with both of those exemptions, is a little less than 1%.
If and when we move to a higher cost area near Austin, our taxes will go WAY up, probably tripling in all due to the higher rate and more expensive housing.
Quit whining. Here in IL we have property taxes that exceed 3% on homes and 15% on my office building. The highest sales tax in the nation in Chicago proper and an income tax that they are raising continually. Don't even get me started on all the other BS fees and taxes they layer on at every level of life.
Who's whining? I'm agreeing that it's a mixed bag. Overall, it's a lot better than New York, where I lived before this.
Libertarian666 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 07, 2019 8:34 am
If and when we move to a higher cost area near Austin, our taxes will go WAY up, probably tripling in all due to the higher rate and more expensive housing.
Why on earth would someone with your views want to move to highly liberal Austin? I assume it's pretty conservative where you are now?
