Tag: banks

Another Senator Signs Onto Marijuana Banking Bill, Saying It Will ‘Take The Target Off The Backs’ Of Dispensaries Facing Robberies

A Democratic senator has announced that she’s joined the list of bipartisan cosponsors of a marijuana banking bill, stressing the need for the reform amid a spate of robberies targeting state-licensed cannabis businesses in her state.

Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-WA) signed on as a cosponsor of the Secure and Fair Enforcement Regulation (SAFER) Banking Act on Tuesday, becoming the 35th member of the chamber to add their name to the legislation in addition to its lead sponsor.

“Last year there were more than 50 robbery attempts at marijuana dispensaries in the State of Washington,” the senator said.

A report from StoptheDrugWar.org further found that nearly 100 Washington cannabis shops were impacted over a period of less than five months in 2021.

“This bill will take the target off the backs of our state’s dispensaries by updating federal banking laws so they don’t have to do all their business in cash,” Cantwell said.

The senator has also previously pushed for marijuana industry access to federal Small Business Administration (SBA) loans and services, as well as the elimination of an Internal Revenue Service (IRS) code known as 280E that prevents cannabis businesses from taking standard federal tax deductions.

Congressional researchers also recently Congressional acknowledged in a report that the lack of banking access for state-legal marijuana businesses leads them to be “heavily reliant on cash transactions, making them a target for theft.”

The Senate Banking Committee passed the SAFER Banking Act to address the issue last September, but the measure is pending action on the floor. Earlier versions have cleared the House in some form at least seven times in recent sessions.

Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-NY) said in late December that lawmakers will “hit the ground running” in 2024, aiming to build on bipartisan progress on several key issues, including marijuana banking reform—though he noted it “won’t be easy.”

Keep reading

Lord Jacob Rothschild dead at 87 – Financier who was major figure in banking dynasty passes away

LORD Jacob Rothschild has died at the age of 87, his family have announced.

The financier was a British peer and a member of the Rothschild banking family.

His family have been at the top of the financial tree since the 18th century.

Lord Rothschild’s family have an estimated fortune of around £825million, according to last year’s Sunday Times Rich List, and give away a reported £66 million to Jewish causes, education and art.

In a statement, the family said: “Our father Jacob was a towering presence in many peoples’ lives – a superbly accomplished financier, a champion of the arts and culture, a devoted public servant, a passionate supporter of charitable causes in Israel and and Jewish culture, a keen environmentalist and much-loved friend, father and grandfather.

“He will be buried in accordance with Jewish custom in a small family ceremony and there will be a memorial at a later date to celebrate his life.”

Keep reading

And the Winner Is…Not You

Of all the government or quasi-government institutions, there is perhaps none as openly opaque in its operations and unaccountable for its failures as the Federal Reserve. For, unlike its top rivals for this most dubious of distinctions, like the CIA, NSA, or DOD, which do their law bending and money wasting largely of sight and out of mind, the nation’s money supply is so ubiquitous, so ever-present in the lives of the ordinary person that its activities must of necessity take place before the public eye. Hence, the gradual development of Fed Speak; that is, the art of speaking so technocratically that none but the most arcanely initiated have any hope of understanding what is being said or done.

Consider a few commonplace examples, which one can find in the regularly published minutes of the Federal Reserve’s meetings:

The Fed will “conduct overnight reverse repurchase agreement operations at an offering rate of 0.8 percent and with a per-counterparty limit of $160 billion per day,” and further “engage in dollar roll and coupon swap transactions as necessary to facilitate settlement of the Federal Reserve’s agency MBS transactions.”

Mm-hm. Yes. Indeed—perfectly clear.

Translated: the Fed intends to “buy and then sell back at a set date and price any qualifying security from any qualifying corporation or institution,” essentially, a futures contract meant to help operations that are either illiquid or overleveraged stay in business; and, further towards that end, the Fed intends to “continue to sell short various portions of its now nearly $3 trillion in mortgage backed security holdings,” again in an effort to help illiquid or highly levered dealers and traders of these securities stay liquid.

That Fed Speak elides more than it illuminates is, of course, intentional and operates on a number of levels: first, no ordinary person understands any of this; second, those who do understand benefit from these arrangements, i.e. the major banks, and consequently love it and have lobbied for it; and, lastly, the above combination along with their desire to pass the buck to anyone else means your congressional reps have no interest in intervening with the Fed’s activities, even when it blatantly violates the rules Congress put in place when it set the Federal Reserve up—all Fed purchases having been statutorily mandated to occur in the “open market,” that is at market prices (i.e. not executed as futures contracts).

Lev Menand’s latest book, which I reviewed last year, for all its sympathy for the Federal Reserve’s activities (having been himself an employee), could not avoid deeming the Fed completely out of control, acting since 2008 and through COVID without any bounds at all: an exploding balance sheet, unlimited credit facilities for troubled banks—this is not “Free Market Capitalism,” but rank corporatism, and a major reason young people increasingly view socialism or populist conservatism as preferable alternatives.

For, much like the national security establishment, it isn’t as though these gross violations of the principles of liberal, capitalist government have even produced any notable successes: quite to the contrary, they have produced little but abject failure.

Keep reading

American Express, Visa, Mastercard move ahead with code to track gun store purchases in California

Major credit card companies are moving to make a merchant code available for firearm and ammunition retailers in order to comply with a new California law that will allow banks to potentially track suspicious gun purchases and report them to law enforcement, CBS News has learned.

Retailers are assigned merchant codes based on the types of goods they sell, and the codes allow banks and credit card companies to detect purchase patterns. Currently gun shops are lumped in with other types of retailers, such as sporting goods stores. 

Mastercard, Visa and American Express initially agreed to implement a standalone code for firearm sellers, but later paused their work on it after receiving blowback from Second Amendment advocates concerned tracking gun purchases would infringe on the rights of legal gun owners.

Gun control activists hope the code, approved by an international organization in 2022, can be used as a tool to help identify suspect purchases and, consequently, stop gun crime, including mass shootings. Proponents say a code for firearms merchants would allow banks and credit unions to alert law enforcement of potentially suspicious purchasing patterns in the same way they already flag other types of transactions, such as those that suggest identity theft or terrorist financing. 

While a merchant code for standalone firearm and ammunition sellers would yield data that shows a transaction was made at a gun store, the credit card companies say the code would not provide details about the customer or insight into individual items that were purchased.

At least seven Republican-controlled state legislatures have banned the code while nine other legislatures are considering similar legislation. However, deep blue California passed a law requiring retailers that primarily sell firearms to adopt it by May 2025.  

Last month, executives from Mastercard, Visa and American Express each wrote to congressional Democrats assuring them the code would be available to retailers in California by that deadline, according to documents obtained by CBS News. 

“The applicable standalone merchants in California primarily engaged in the sale of firearms will be required to utilize the code,” wrote Mastercard executive Tucker Foote.

The letters from credit card executives reflect the tricky political waters the companies find themselves in. 

Keep reading

Treasury Department’s Janet Yellen Dodges Questions on Financial Surveillance of “MAGA,” “Trump”

A wave of backlash for the Biden administration has been triggered following a probe into a surveillance mission by the Treasury Department targeting Americans. Republicans have been seeking answers about the initiative, which involved surveilling bank records of Americans for “extremist” activities post-January 6.

Recent reports revealed a controversial directive from the Treasury Department regarding the monitoring of financial transactions. Under this directive, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) asked financial institutions to investigate their clients’ transaction data for terms such as “MAGA” and “Trump.” This sparked an outcry from Republicans who questioned the government’s monitoring strategies.

This comes following a revelation of the specific sectors and demographic being targeted — Trump supporters, patrons of outdoor stores like Cabela’s, Dick’s Sporting Goods and Bass Pro Shops, and individuals who bought religious texts. Secretary of the Treasury Janet Yellen encountered numerous questions about these retrieval requests during her appearances on Capitol Hill this week.

However, these intense inquiries were deflected by Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, who responded that the matter was under investigation and that she didn’t have extensive knowledge about the situation.

Keep reading

Appeals Court: FBI’s Safe-Deposit Box Seizures Violated Fourth Amendment

The FBI violated the Fourth Amendment when its agents rifled through the contents of more than 700 safe-deposit boxes in the aftermath of a March 2021 raid, a panel of federal appeals court judges ruled unanimously on Tuesday.

In doing so, the judges at the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed what innocent victims of the raid and their attorneys have been arguing for years: that the FBI overstepped the bounds of its warrant issued in the case and failed to follow proper protocol when federal agents cracked open safe-deposit boxes, ran the contents past drug-sniffing dogs, and tried to seize some of the money and other valuables found in the boxes.

The 9th Circuit’s ruling pivots on a detail of the case that Reason first highlighted more than a year ago: the existence of so-called “supplemental instructions” for the handling of the safe-deposit boxes seized at U.S. Private Vaults in Beverly Hills.

The warrant authorizing the raid expressly forbade federal agents from engaging in a “criminal search or seizure of the contents of the safety [sic] deposit boxes.” Under typical FBI procedure, the boxes should have been taken into custody until they could be returned to their rightful owners. But those “supplemental instructions” drawn up by the special agent in charge of the operation told agents to be on the lookout for cash stored inside the safe-deposit boxes and to note “anything which suggests the cash may be criminal proceeds.”

It is “particularly troubling,” wrote Judge Milan D. Smith Jr. in Tuesday’s ruling, that the government was unable to provide any “limiting principle to how far a hypothetical ‘inventory search’ conducted pursuant to customized instructions can go.”

Elsewhere in the ruling, Smith theorized that if a government agency were “given the discretion to create customized inventory policies” for “each car it impounds and each person detained, the ensuing search stops looking like an ‘inventory’ meant to simply protect property and looks more like a criminal investigation of that particular car or person, i.e, more like a ‘ruse.'”

“If there remained any doubt whether the government conducted a ‘criminal search or seizure,’ that doubt is put to rest by the fact that the government has already used some of the information from inside the boxes to obtain additional warrants to further its investigations and begin new ones,” Smith wrote.

“The Ninth Circuit today held that the FBI violated the Fourth Amendment rights of hundreds of people by breaking into their safe deposit boxes to try to forfeit everything worth taking,” Robert Frommer, an attorney with the Institute for Justice, a libertarian legal nonprofit that represented some of the plaintiffs in the case, tells Reason. He said the case should bring renewed attention to a congressional proposal to reform federal forfeiture laws in order to “stop federal cops from continuing to act like robbers.”

A spokesperson for the FBI declined to comment on the ruling and referred the matter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office, which did not respond to Reason’s request for comment.

Keep reading

Advocates Outraged That Feds Asked Banks To Search Customers’ ‘Religious Texts’ Purchases

Faith leaders and religious liberty advocates are up in arms over news that the federal government encouraged banks and other financial institutions to search customers’ private accounts using the search term “religious texts.”

The “religious texts” search term was among those federal officials asked financial institutions to use following the Jan. 6, 2021, breach of the U.S. Capitol, a congressional source with direct knowledge confirmed to The Epoch Times on Jan. 18.

Other terms that banks, credit card companies, and financial firms were asked to use in the searches included “MAGA” and “Trump,” according to the House Judiciary Committee. Federal officials at the Department of Justice and the Treasury Department sought the data from such searches as part of their investigation of the events of Jan. 6, 2021.

Religious liberty advocates interviewed by The Epoch Times were unanimous in condemning the searches, which were conducted without judicially authorized search warrants.

“This is beyond alarming,” Family Research Council President Tony Perkins told The Epoch Times. “If we did a word search in history of the type of activities the Biden administration is engaged in, it would return words like ‘KGB,’ ’totalitarian,‘ ’repressive,’ ‘anti-democratic,’ and ‘grave threat to freedom.’”

Family Research Council is a Washington-based nonprofit advocacy group that works on behalf of traditional values, including and especially defense of the family and religious freedom.

“The last place you would anticipate this kind of government intrusion into freedom of speech is America and yet it is rife with this administration and with the ‘deep state,’” Liberty Counsel founder and Chairman Mat Staver told The Epoch Times.

“It is a very serious concern and it should be a serious concern, no matter your political beliefs because if this is permitted, then it just depends on who is in power. This is what despotic governments do to suppress people that they don’t agree with,” he said.

Mr. Staver’s organization, Liberty Counsel, is an Orlando, Florida-based nonprofit religious liberty defense foundation.

Keep reading

Is a Cyber 9/11 Coming?

Talk of a “Cyber 9/11” has been circulating for years.  With the next presidential election twelve months away now, some folks are predicting that a major cyber event will happen before then, throwing a monkey wrench into the 2024 election process.

What the heck is Cyber 9/11?

What does Cyber 9/11 mean?  Is there a real risk?  What should we be preparing for?

There are two aspects to the Cyber 9/11 concept.  The first is the disaster itself; 9/11 was a catastrophe that ended the lives of over 3000 people in one day.  There are fears that if power grids were hacked or enough damage was done to logistical centers, the ensuing chaos would cause deaths.

Quite memorably, back in 2000, a disgruntled public works employee in Australia hacked into the water treatment system and caused raw sewage to pour into public areas, flooding a Hyatt hotel.  One man acting alone caused a disgusting, expensive mess. Of course security experts are concerned with what a team of angry individuals could do.

The second aspect to a potential Cyber 9/11 is the change in the regulatory landscape that occurred after 9/11 in 2001.  I remember flying as a teenager in the 90s. So many things changed later.  The airport changes were most obvious to regular citizens, but the passage of the Patriot Act in October 2001 was far more consequential.  It dramatically changed the way surveillance was conducted.

Under the Fourth Amendment, private citizens are supposed to be protected from warrantless search and seizures.  The Patriot Act really weakened that. Law enforcement is now allowed to delay the notice of search warrants.  They don’t need nearly as much oversight from judges to conduct phone and internet surveillance.

These Constitution-weakening changes occurred after 9/11 in 2001.

Keep reading

How Vexatious Government Demands Can Lead Your Bank To Refuse To Do Business with You

Dealing with big businesses whose services you need to conduct the basics of everyday economic life can be frustrating when those businesses make seemingly arbitrary decisions that cripple your ability to function in a modern economy. In general, the incentives of businesses are to, well, do business with customers.

It’s not surprising, then, that a recent New York Times story giving infuriating details of innocent Americans being cut off by their banks reveals that the real cause of the banks’ seemingly arbitrary behavior is government rules designed to make sure it knows everything it can about citizens’ banking business, to discourage big cash transactions, and to ensure businesses the government disapproves of have as difficult a time as possible without being explicitly banned.

As the Times puts it, when citizens suddenly find their banks exiling them, it’s because “a vast security apparatus has kicked into gear, starting with regulators in Washington and trickling down to bank security managers and branch staff eyeballing customers.”

The Times story highlights specific aggravating stories of Americans losing their banking and credit card services over such nonsense as regularly having cash deposits that are near, but below, the government’s legally mandated $10,000 limit that triggers filing special paperwork with the feds (despite those same businesses also frequently going over that limit and filing the necessary paperwork when they do); for getting direct deposit income from a cannabis company; for receiving frequent cash wires from your parents in Nigeria to help with your rent; for making frequent cash withdrawals in the multiple thousands to pay a contractor who wanted cash; for having a past criminal conviction for using counterfeit money; and for using a bank account to move money among a small private community loan pool for those less able to access the normal loan market.

Keep reading

It Appears That We Have A Major Problem With The Banks

In recent weeks there have been numerous high-profile bank “glitches”, accounts are being shut down without warning at a staggering rate all over the nation, and more institutions continue to get into very serious financial trouble.  For a while, I was ignoring some of these reports because I thought they were isolated issues.  But when you step back and take a bigger picture view of things, it really does appear that we have a major problem with the banks.

According to CNN, on Friday many of our largest banks “were hit by deposit delays”…

Multiple US banks were hit by deposit delays on Friday caused by an error at a payment processing network, according to the Federal Reserve.

The Clearing House, which operates the Automated Clearing House system, which allows banks to send electronic payments to each other, experienced a processing error with a batch of bank transactions. Banks send everything from direct deposit paychecks to customer bill payments for mortgages and utility bills through the ACH system.

This caused a tremendous amount of distress, because paychecks were not showing up in the accounts of a lot of people.

And considering the fact that more than 60 percent of the country is currently living paycheck to paycheck, that is a big deal.

Incredibly, some banks are still trying to fix the problem.  The following is a message that PNC Bank posted on Twitter on Sunday…

Good morning, Amy. Due to an industry-wide delay with Federal ACH transactions, some ACH credits and debits, including some Direct Deposits, haven’t been processed. We recommend that you contact your employer or ACH originator for more information. Thank you.

There have been so many bank “glitches” this year.

So why is this happening?

Could this latest incident have been caused by a cyberattack?

Keep reading