***********************************************
UPDATE: December 21, 2008
See this post for an update of the situation including a scan of a brand new letter from OFAC. Does this signal a deprioritization of enforcement actions against the purchase of Cuban cigars? Let's keep our fingers crossed.
***********************************************
UPDATE: August 5, 2008
OFAC enforcement actions continue. After an apparent hiatus, W letters are being reported again. Data continues to be sparse. Penalties are now well into the multi-thousands of dollars range as opposed to the $1k and under range of the earliest settlements.
Wilkey
***********************************************
UPDATE: September 25, 2007
I have finally received definitive evidence that the premier online payment provider with which we are familiar and which has been shown to be aggressively anti-tobacco in any incarnation is turning customer transaction information over directly to OFAC. This came in the form of an R-letter from OFAC citing this provider specifically and by name as the intermediary between the buyer and the vendor (also cited by name). The exact amount of the purchase was also detailed down to the penny.
Confiscations of the original type are still occurring and R-letters are still being received. Public awareness and attention, however, seems to have waned. I would not take the recent decrease in publicly reported actions by OFAC to be an indicator that their rate of actions has decreased.
Wilkey
***********************************************
FINAL UPDATE Postscript: July 18, 2007
The hammer has dropped.
Recent reports are coming to light regarding multiple seizures of packages from the Asia-Pacific region vendor who has been the prime target of the OFAC actions.
This vendor should be regarded as a permanent "no buy" option.
Wilkey
***********************************************
FINAL UPDATE Late June 13, 2007
Guys,
Here is an article that appeared today on the CigarCyclopedia website. I am looking for the original article in a Los Angeles paper and will post that reference when I find it.
It is out in the open now and although there really wasn't anything reported that was not known before, I believe this public reporting puts an end to the usefulness of this thread. In a sense, we are now well and truly on our own. The only defense against receiving a letter was not to have purchased Cuban cigars in the time frame from the present extending back to at least 2002. None of us can change the past, but we can make decisions moving ahead.
Thank you to all who shared their ideas and experiences. I created this thread out of a sense of responsibility to my fellow cigar smokers and you have all reinforced for me again and again that that dedication is well deserved.
Carry on, play it safe, and never stop lighting up...your favorite Nicaraguan, Dominican, Honduran, etc...
Very best,
Wilkey
The original opening post of this thread is preserved below.
***********************************************
Guys,
This is the thread that I promised to start in a post in this thread.
In that same thread, Rod has given us the go ahead to have a discussion on this topic as long as it is focused. Here is Rod's post quoted in its entirety. This is not the place to debate whether or not this topic should be discussed. I'd respectfully ask that comments on that issue be raised in the original thread linked above in order to keep this thread on topic as much as possible.
1. No discussion of sources by name.
Mentioning world regions (i.e. Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America) is allowed.
2. No discussion on the politics of the U.S. Embargo or Helms-Burton.
Historical dates and elements of statute may be cited as matters of fact but no further commentary with political or ideological intent is allowed.
3. Nothing posted here should be considered legal advice.
Legal guidance reported by others may be paraphrased here but should not be considered pertinent to anyone other than the person to whom the guidance was given.
4. Do not ask how to circumvent U.S. statute. Do not ask how to avoid civilian or criminal penalties.
Situations may be discussed in the hypothetical regarding responses made and actions that have been taken. However, in no cases will a clear intent to break the law be tolerated.
I ask that anyone who wishes to participate in this thread abide by the above guidelines. We have been given an opportunity and a very short leash on which to exercise that opportunity. If any individuals choose to abuse the trust that Rod has placed in the members of this community, then I reserve the right to ask that this thread be locked. Please DO NOT take away this chance for the members of CigarPass to discuss what others in the greater online cigar community already are exploring.
Wilkey
***********************************************
UPDATE Early June 13, 2007
Things have taken a turn for the worse.
1. Settlement amounts are going up.
2. Timeframe of alleged purchases now stretches from October 2002 through August 2006
3. Prepenalty Notices are itemizing the exact identity of the merchandise purchased.
See post #166 in this thread for more details.
***********************************************
UPDATE April 23, 2007
I will be back shortly with some important information regarding the driving force and the parameters behind this recent OFAC push on Cuban cigars enforcement. The information is coming from the inside and as soon as I am able to confirm the accuracy of my reporting of this information, I'll release it. I believe you guys will find it illuminating.
***********************************************
UPDATE February 26, 2007
My source made a mistake and in so doing, gave me erroneous information. Here are portions of our communications.
to which I responded:
and received this in return:
I subsequently received communications from the vendor in question. He raised some relevant points regarding the new payment gateway and the timing of the letter and in fact at least one member contacted me with questions about this as well. I passed on to my source what was given to me by the vendor and finally received this:
So, the bottom line is as follows:
1. The period of interest as far as the OFAC investigation has not changed and remains early 2004 to late 2005.
2. I am aware of no reports of letters being received for purchases made in 2006 or 2007.
3. I am aware of no reports of letters being received in response to purchases made through any of the recently established payment processing gateways.
4. Nobody has any plausible explanation of OFAC's motivation for this specific investigation. We simply do not know what the triggers for this sweep are although the rules and laws are documented and clear. In other words, no one knows why now and why only this time frame of interest.
I deeply regret that I presented inaccurate information to the community. In my haste to inform others of what I perceived as a new and imminent threat, I checked but did not double check my information. And for that I apologize to the community members as well as the vendor. I will continue to maintain that my primary responsibility is to obtain, analyze, and disclose relevant information to my fellow cigar smokers but from this point onward, I will maintain open communications with the vendor as well.
As to whether this or any vendor should be placed on "no-buy" lists, I leave that to your individual discretion and risk tolerance level.
Wilkey
***********************************************
UPDATE February 25, 2007 - RESCINDED and RETRACTED
Late Breaking News - I just received a first hand report of a W-Letter being received for a purchase under $500 made within the last month to one of the targeted Hong Kong-based vendors. There are two truly troubling aspects to this notification.
1. The purchase was recent, thus negating the prior assumption that the only period of interest was early 2004 to late 2005. Clearly, the attention this vendor is receiving is ongoing and intensive.
2. This purchase was made using the second, newly established payment gateway. This means that all known payment options are at risk. Further, the evidence now strongly suggests that the two major credit card providers (of cards in traditional or pre-paid format) are implicated in the turning over of purchase and account information to OFAC.
Based on this most recent disclosure, I'm motivated to publically voice my position on this vendor. This is the position I've been offering in response to private inquiries. This vendor should be placed on the "No-Buy" list until further notice. Furthermore, I would place all vendors from the Hong Kong region on the "No-Buy" list.
Another prominent forum has recently expressed the intent to throttle down the "look what Cuban cigars I just bought" threads in response to this climate of scrutiny. Prior to these events, this forum was well known for this type of public disclosure and some would say flouting of the law. Now it appears that the situation has become sufficiently worrisome for them to change something fundamental to their culture.
Folks, these are dangerous times. Be safe.
Wilkey
UPDATE: December 21, 2008
See this post for an update of the situation including a scan of a brand new letter from OFAC. Does this signal a deprioritization of enforcement actions against the purchase of Cuban cigars? Let's keep our fingers crossed.
***********************************************
UPDATE: August 5, 2008
OFAC enforcement actions continue. After an apparent hiatus, W letters are being reported again. Data continues to be sparse. Penalties are now well into the multi-thousands of dollars range as opposed to the $1k and under range of the earliest settlements.
Wilkey
***********************************************
UPDATE: September 25, 2007
I have finally received definitive evidence that the premier online payment provider with which we are familiar and which has been shown to be aggressively anti-tobacco in any incarnation is turning customer transaction information over directly to OFAC. This came in the form of an R-letter from OFAC citing this provider specifically and by name as the intermediary between the buyer and the vendor (also cited by name). The exact amount of the purchase was also detailed down to the penny.
Confiscations of the original type are still occurring and R-letters are still being received. Public awareness and attention, however, seems to have waned. I would not take the recent decrease in publicly reported actions by OFAC to be an indicator that their rate of actions has decreased.
Wilkey
***********************************************
FINAL UPDATE Postscript: July 18, 2007
The hammer has dropped.
Recent reports are coming to light regarding multiple seizures of packages from the Asia-Pacific region vendor who has been the prime target of the OFAC actions.
This vendor should be regarded as a permanent "no buy" option.
Wilkey
***********************************************
FINAL UPDATE Late June 13, 2007
Guys,
Here is an article that appeared today on the CigarCyclopedia website. I am looking for the original article in a Los Angeles paper and will post that reference when I find it.
It is out in the open now and although there really wasn't anything reported that was not known before, I believe this public reporting puts an end to the usefulness of this thread. In a sense, we are now well and truly on our own. The only defense against receiving a letter was not to have purchased Cuban cigars in the time frame from the present extending back to at least 2002. None of us can change the past, but we can make decisions moving ahead.
Thank you to all who shared their ideas and experiences. I created this thread out of a sense of responsibility to my fellow cigar smokers and you have all reinforced for me again and again that that dedication is well deserved.
Carry on, play it safe, and never stop lighting up...your favorite Nicaraguan, Dominican, Honduran, etc...
Very best,
Wilkey
The original opening post of this thread is preserved below.
***********************************************
Guys,
This is the thread that I promised to start in a post in this thread.
In that same thread, Rod has given us the go ahead to have a discussion on this topic as long as it is focused. Here is Rod's post quoted in its entirety. This is not the place to debate whether or not this topic should be discussed. I'd respectfully ask that comments on that issue be raised in the original thread linked above in order to keep this thread on topic as much as possible.
Pursuant to Rod's stated position, I've drafted the following guidelines for discussion in this thread. These are intended to allow free discussion within the boundaries but prevent the bringing up of political, ideological, or personal issues that do not address the specific issues of interest.
1. No discussion of sources by name.
Mentioning world regions (i.e. Europe, Asia-Pacific, South America) is allowed.
2. No discussion on the politics of the U.S. Embargo or Helms-Burton.
Historical dates and elements of statute may be cited as matters of fact but no further commentary with political or ideological intent is allowed.
3. Nothing posted here should be considered legal advice.
Legal guidance reported by others may be paraphrased here but should not be considered pertinent to anyone other than the person to whom the guidance was given.
4. Do not ask how to circumvent U.S. statute. Do not ask how to avoid civilian or criminal penalties.
Situations may be discussed in the hypothetical regarding responses made and actions that have been taken. However, in no cases will a clear intent to break the law be tolerated.
I ask that anyone who wishes to participate in this thread abide by the above guidelines. We have been given an opportunity and a very short leash on which to exercise that opportunity. If any individuals choose to abuse the trust that Rod has placed in the members of this community, then I reserve the right to ask that this thread be locked. Please DO NOT take away this chance for the members of CigarPass to discuss what others in the greater online cigar community already are exploring.
Wilkey
***********************************************
UPDATE Early June 13, 2007
Things have taken a turn for the worse.
1. Settlement amounts are going up.
2. Timeframe of alleged purchases now stretches from October 2002 through August 2006
3. Prepenalty Notices are itemizing the exact identity of the merchandise purchased.
See post #166 in this thread for more details.
***********************************************
UPDATE April 23, 2007
I will be back shortly with some important information regarding the driving force and the parameters behind this recent OFAC push on Cuban cigars enforcement. The information is coming from the inside and as soon as I am able to confirm the accuracy of my reporting of this information, I'll release it. I believe you guys will find it illuminating.
***********************************************
UPDATE February 26, 2007
My source made a mistake and in so doing, gave me erroneous information. Here are portions of our communications.
source said:
to which I responded:
Ginseng said:
and received this in return:
source said:
I subsequently received communications from the vendor in question. He raised some relevant points regarding the new payment gateway and the timing of the letter and in fact at least one member contacted me with questions about this as well. I passed on to my source what was given to me by the vendor and finally received this:
source said:
So, the bottom line is as follows:
1. The period of interest as far as the OFAC investigation has not changed and remains early 2004 to late 2005.
2. I am aware of no reports of letters being received for purchases made in 2006 or 2007.
3. I am aware of no reports of letters being received in response to purchases made through any of the recently established payment processing gateways.
4. Nobody has any plausible explanation of OFAC's motivation for this specific investigation. We simply do not know what the triggers for this sweep are although the rules and laws are documented and clear. In other words, no one knows why now and why only this time frame of interest.
I deeply regret that I presented inaccurate information to the community. In my haste to inform others of what I perceived as a new and imminent threat, I checked but did not double check my information. And for that I apologize to the community members as well as the vendor. I will continue to maintain that my primary responsibility is to obtain, analyze, and disclose relevant information to my fellow cigar smokers but from this point onward, I will maintain open communications with the vendor as well.
As to whether this or any vendor should be placed on "no-buy" lists, I leave that to your individual discretion and risk tolerance level.
Wilkey
***********************************************
1. The purchase was recent, thus negating the prior assumption that the only period of interest was early 2004 to late 2005. Clearly, the attention this vendor is receiving is ongoing and intensive.
2. This purchase was made using the second, newly established payment gateway. This means that all known payment options are at risk. Further, the evidence now strongly suggests that the two major credit card providers (of cards in traditional or pre-paid format) are implicated in the turning over of purchase and account information to OFAC.
Based on this most recent disclosure, I'm motivated to publically voice my position on this vendor. This is the position I've been offering in response to private inquiries. This vendor should be placed on the "No-Buy" list until further notice. Furthermore, I would place all vendors from the Hong Kong region on the "No-Buy" list.
Another prominent forum has recently expressed the intent to throttle down the "look what Cuban cigars I just bought" threads in response to this climate of scrutiny. Prior to these events, this forum was well known for this type of public disclosure and some would say flouting of the law. Now it appears that the situation has become sufficiently worrisome for them to change something fundamental to their culture.
Folks, these are dangerous times. Be safe.
Wilkey
