classyndry
on injured reserve
Do you think enforcement of the trading with the enemy act will decrease after Bush leaves office?
-
Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
Click here to visit! here...
Hypothetical, about enforcement
- Thread starter classyndry
- Start date
badhangover
New Member
Hypothetically, yes. There are two ways to effectively "kill" or otherwise curtail an enforcement program. Rescind it by statute or by case law, and to simply cut off/diminish its funding. I may be wrong, but I do not see the next administration (any of the viable candidates) viewing TWEA as a strong necessity.
Most likely, due to the strong political power of the Cuban expatriates in Florida, TWEA will never end while Castro is in power. But that doesn't mean it can't be chopped at its budgetary knees. :thumbs:
Most likely, due to the strong political power of the Cuban expatriates in Florida, TWEA will never end while Castro is in power. But that doesn't mean it can't be chopped at its budgetary knees. :thumbs:
classyndry
on injured reserve
Agreed. I expect funding will shift, but not much else will change.
billytpage
Active Member
I was wondering about this myself. To tell the truth, there are some dynamite non ISOM's out there. Everyone talks about the hit or miss quality control issues with the ISOM's so I'm not sweating it too much. When I lived overseas, I still smoked the "domestic" lines as often if not more often than I did the ISOM's.
Billy
Billy
So long as Communist run Cuba, it will never be legal to import ISOMs. However, I think the common misconception is that it is illegal to smoke ISOMs; not true. It's not even illegal to buy them. It is just illegal to bring them across the boarder. Once they are in, you can no longer get into trouble.
badhangover
New Member
You may interpret the law as you wish. Again, it's all about interpretation. I don't interpret the law as you do.
The premise of the law is to prohibit any transaction that financially benefits Cuba. If you bought a Habano in your local B&M, I could interpret that to be that you are supporting the importation of Cuban products into the United States for resale - a practice that ultimately "benefits" Cuba. If you are caught in possession of a Habano, the presumption is automatic that you purchased and imported the cigar into the United States. Who would you snitch on to get outta that burden?
Let's put it this way. How many people would openly smoke Habanos in front of Customs agents - say, at the airport or cruise ports?
One need not directly "Trade with the enemy" to participate in transactions which monetarily benefit "the enemy".
The premise of the law is to prohibit any transaction that financially benefits Cuba. If you bought a Habano in your local B&M, I could interpret that to be that you are supporting the importation of Cuban products into the United States for resale - a practice that ultimately "benefits" Cuba. If you are caught in possession of a Habano, the presumption is automatic that you purchased and imported the cigar into the United States. Who would you snitch on to get outta that burden?
Let's put it this way. How many people would openly smoke Habanos in front of Customs agents - say, at the airport or cruise ports?
One need not directly "Trade with the enemy" to participate in transactions which monetarily benefit "the enemy".
You might want to read this thread as I think that interpretation of the law has been quashed:
It didn't work out for this guy!
CoventryCat86
Corresponding authority
No. It has nothing to do with Bush. The "Act" has been in place for almost 45 years and will remain in place for many years to come.
There are many other countries on "banned" lists with the State Department and the Treasury Department so Cuba isn't the only one that we don't trade with in one form or another.
However, if you read the Supreme Court Case Regan v. Wald, 468 U.S. 222 (1984), the Supreme Court ruled that: 1) No US Enterprise may hold a license to hold transactions with Cuba 2) One may only be found guilty in violation of T.W.E.A. if they have directly sent money into Cuba (through trade or travel)
and on a different note: 3) Congress has the right to freeze the Cuban Embargo at any point so long as the US and Cuba are not at War.
This is why most of the websites you see selling Cuba, come through Europe. That way, when you buy from them, you are not putting money directly into the Cuban Economy. Therefore, you cannot be charged under T.W.E.A. unless they are coming across the boarder.
Deriffe
New Member
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2003
- Messages
- 25
President Bush signed an executive order during his first term that significantly tightened the restrictions. Where previously, it was only illegal to import cuban cigars. After the executive order, it became illegal to even possess cuban cigars. Hell, it's even illegal to possess an empty cigar box made in cuba.
The pisser of it is, it's now even illegal for a US citizen to possess a cuban cigar any where in the world.
It's also illegal to drive 60 mph in a 55 mph zone.
The pisser of it is, it's now even illegal for a US citizen to possess a cuban cigar any where in the world.
It's also illegal to drive 60 mph in a 55 mph zone.
President Bush signed an executive order during his first term that significantly tightened the restrictions. Where previously, it was only illegal to import cuban cigars. After the executive order, it became illegal to even possess cuban cigars. Hell, it's even illegal to possess an empty cigar box made in cuba.
The pisser of it is, it's now even illegal for a US citizen to possess a cuban cigar any where in the world.
It's also illegal to drive 60 mph in a 55 mph zone.
Hm, that's interesting, didn't know that. Well, good thing it was an Executive Order. It will expire when he leaves office.
bimmer635csi
Too noob to mention!
I don't exactly understand why you might say this. As far as I can tell, China is still run by communists (even though they might say otherwise for trade with capitalistic nations). We seem to buy an awful lot of items from them.
But along the lines of this thread, after the sticks are in the country, how can customs officers tell when the stick was made? Couldn't you pass them off as "pre-embargo" smokes if the are not in the box with the date code?
But see 31 C.F.R. 515.204:
(a) Except as specifically authorized by the Secretary of the Treasury (or any person, agency, or instrumentality designated by him) by means of regulations, rulings, instructions, licenses, or otherwise, no person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States may purchase, transport, import, or otherwise deal in or engage in any transaction with respect to any merchandise outside the United States if such merchandise:
(1) Is of Cuban origin; or
(2) Is or has been located in or transported from or through Cuba; or
(3) Is made or derived in whole or in part of any article which is the growth, produce or manufacture of Cuba.
See U.S. v. Plummer, 221 F.3d 1298 (11th Cir. 2000). 1st paragraph on page #2
I think it is safe to say that no matter where you are, if you are caught with a Cuban cigar on your person or in your home/office, you can be convicted under the TWEA. Obviously, OFAC would most likely fine you for a small amount if its a couple of cigars for personal consumption. In these cases, the fines and sentences are for people smuggling large amounts of cigars in the country.
badhangover
New Member
Are you serious? What do you base your information on, aside from that one case you cited (which I admit, I did not read - I'll try to get to it later)? Have you never heard of the OFAC letters/fines? They are actions directly as a result of purchases made just like you said in the above quote from you.
I skimmed the case rather haphazardly, but I didn't see anything to support the above statements. I'm too lazy to go back and find the quote, but I did see somewhere that it mentions a prohibition of any transaction in which any Cuban national or firm has any interest, direct or indirect.
badhangover
New Member
There isn't anyone alive today who was around when China became communist and nationalized all industries and real property. Not unless they were newborn babies at that time and are 1 1/2 foot into the grave now. Florida is chock full of politically powerful Cuban expatriates still simmering over the nationalization of their former interests.
And how would you prove the cigars were pre-embargo? Many of the popular brands have had new bands and vitola introductions since the embargo. That's if the marca themselves were even around pre-embargo.
Alright, I went back and found the full text of that case I was referring too (I previously cited an abridged version); and I found the errors of my reading. When the person abridged the judgment, they left out a key component:
You are allowed to bring Cuban Cigars into the country if:
You had a licensed trip to Cuba as a result of being:
* Politicians
* Cuban Americans
* Journalists
* Legitimate researchers
* Athletes
* Religious groups
So long as you meet the criteria of:
* The domestic value of the cigars cannot exceed $100
* The cigars must be for personal use and not for resale
Sorry guys, I was wrong with what I posted earlier. My fault.
tandblov
Member
Your wrong with this post as well.
None of this information is remotely accurate. You cannot bring Cuban cigars into the US whatsoever.
I know you are trying to help and add additional information, but like tandblov said, none of this is correct. Refer to 31 C.F.R. 515.204 above. NO ONE, no matter who you are or what group you are with, can be in possession of anything of Cuban origin UNLESS specifically licensed by the Treasury Sec.
Also, 31 C.F.R. § 515.410 (Dealing abroad in Cuban Commodities):
"Section 515.204 prohibits, unless licensed, the importation of commodities of Cuban origin. It also prohibits, unless licensed, persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States from purchasing, transporting or otherwise dealing in commodities of Cuban origin which are outside the United States."
Edited to add: What you posted was originally true some time ago (don't know for sure when the above was discarded, possibly by Pres. Bush's Executive order), but no longer the case.