The Letters - Update December 21, 2008

[Black Plague]

Here's a developing story....

Apparently some people are getting the "RFI" Letter FOR DOMESTIC PURCHASES!!! :0 :laugh:

I'm not gonna divulge too much for the sake of the guy's privacy, but a guy just got what sounded like an RFI Letter (came certified mail, requested info on certain purchases made during a certain time period) from his state's division that handles tobacco and alcohol regarding three purchases made to an out-of-state vendor.

I'll assume his state wants to collect the unpaid tobacco taxes. He maintains the purchases where for non-tobacco goods, so he's going to fight it. Wonder how his situation will turn out.

EDIT: BTW, my local tobacconist has also heard tales told of the state gov. coming back looking to collect the taxes from Internet purchases.

And apparently the two states involved are cooperating in an attempt to catch tobacco and alcohol tax cheats.

 

[Black Plague]

Here's a little more info on the 5th Amendment from a guy on another board who gave me his permission to post it. He is not a lawyer but has done some of the research. So here's his take on it.....

The fifth does not usually apply to civil proceedings, except in cases where your self-incrimination would open you up to criminal prosecution:
This is from the supreme court decision McCarthy vs Arndstein:

The government insists broadly that the Constitutional privilege against self incrimination does not apply in any civil proceeding. The contrary must be accepted as settled. The privilege is not ordinarily dependent upon the notice of the proceeding in which the testimony is sought or is to be used. It applies alike to civil and criminal proceedings, whenever the answer might tend to subject to criminal responsibility he who gives it. The privilege protects a mere witness as fully as it does one who is also a party defendant.
It protects, likewise, the owner of goods which may be forfeited in a penalproceeding. McCarthy vs Arndsten (CF Counselman vs. Hitchock, 142 U.S. 547,563, 564, 352 ED 110, 114 e inters, COM., REP, 816, 12 SUP. CT. REP 195)

This was from a bankruptcy case where someone was required to open up their personal financial records. He declined on the basis that doing so could open him to future criminal prosecution, and the supreme court agreed. Since purchasing Cuban Cigars is also a criminal violation, and admitting to it could open you to criminal charges, you cannot be forced to admit to doing so in a civil proceeding.

...I doubt that they would actually prosecute criminally someone who complied with their RFI letters. It's just the fact that they *could* that makes this US Supreme Court decision apply. Whether they intend to or not is irrelevant, if your answers equate to you admitting criminal behavior, you can't be forced to give them whether the proceeding is criminal or civil.

 

[BlindedByScience]

Here's a developing story....

Apparently some people are getting the "RFI" Letter FOR DOMESTIC PURCHASES!!! :0 :laugh:

I'm not gonna divulge too much for the sake of the guy's privacy, but a guy just got what sounded like an RFI Letter (came certified mail, requested info on certain purchases made during a certain time period) from his state's division that handles tobacco and alcohol regarding three purchases made to an out-of-state vendor.

I'll assume his state wants to collect the unpaid tobacco taxes. He maintains the purchases where for non-tobacco goods, so he's going to fight it. Wonder how his situation will turn out.

EDIT: BTW, my local tobacconist has also heard tales told of the state gov. coming back looking to collect the taxes from Internet purchases.

And apparently the two states involved are cooperating in an attempt to catch tobacco and alcohol tax cheats.

A very good friend of mine, who also lives in Washington, had this happen to his mother. In their case, it was over cigarette purchases made from "one of the biggest" internet cigarette vendors. The difference here is that he was told that it was in fact the vendor that was served a subpoena and required to turn over customer data, and not found by going through financial transactions. In their case, there was no "RFI" and no debating; they were given a "cease and desist" order, a list of specific transactions and dates from the vendor, and the amount of the fine. They were given 30 days to pay the fine or were warned that they would be prosecuted "to the full extent of the law".....whatever that may have been.

They paid up....no word since.

Regards - B.B.S.

 

[LilBastage]

Here's a developing story....

Apparently some people are getting the "RFI" Letter FOR DOMESTIC PURCHASES!!! :0 :laugh:

I'm not gonna divulge too much for the sake of the guy's privacy, but a guy just got what sounded like an RFI Letter (came certified mail, requested info on certain purchases made during a certain time period) from his state's division that handles tobacco and alcohol regarding three purchases made to an out-of-state vendor.

I'll assume his state wants to collect the unpaid tobacco taxes. He maintains the purchases where for non-tobacco goods, so he's going to fight it. Wonder how his situation will turn out.

EDIT: BTW, my local tobacconist has also heard tales told of the state gov. coming back looking to collect the taxes from Internet purchases.

And apparently the two states involved are cooperating in an attempt to catch tobacco and alcohol tax cheats.

While this is interesting, I'm not sure it fits into this thread. I think Wilkey and Rod wanted to keep this as pointed a discussion as possible in order to touch only on the pertinent info.

Not bashing you or anything, just seems like it doesn't fit into a discussion regarding what this thread is about.

Just my opinion...

 

[Black Plague]

Here's a developing story....

Apparently some people are getting the "RFI" Letter FOR DOMESTIC PURCHASES!!! :0 :laugh:

I'm not gonna divulge too much for the sake of the guy's privacy, but a guy just got what sounded like an RFI Letter (came certified mail, requested info on certain purchases made during a certain time period) from his state's division that handles tobacco and alcohol regarding three purchases made to an out-of-state vendor.

I'll assume his state wants to collect the unpaid tobacco taxes. He maintains the purchases where for non-tobacco goods, so he's going to fight it. Wonder how his situation will turn out.

EDIT: BTW, my local tobacconist has also heard tales told of the state gov. coming back looking to collect the taxes from Internet purchases.

And apparently the two states involved are cooperating in an attempt to catch tobacco and alcohol tax cheats.

While this is interesting, I'm not sure it fits into this thread. I think Wilkey and Rod wanted to keep this as pointed a discussion as possible in order to touch only on the pertinent info.

Not bashing you or anything, just seems like it doesn't fit into a discussion regarding what this thread is about.

Just my opinion...

Understood, sorry about that. I'll consult with Wilkey first and let him post this stuff himself if I find anything more regarding legal aspects in other media.

 

[vortex]

I was told a story by my Uncle that I found quite entertaining about Shaken being “raided” by Federal agents several years ago. Federal agents apparently caught Marvin at work in his New York office and served him with a search warrant. He read the warrant as he sat behind his desk puffing away on a nice Cuban cigar. The agents proceeded to his walk in humidor and began to inventory his stockpile of Cuban cigars. Marvin asks one of the agents if he can make a phone call and the agent tells him that he can. At this point Marvin picks up his phone and pages his secretary. When she answers he tells her to take out a one page add in The New York Times and The Washington Post. The agents stop what they’re doing and stare at Marvin and listen to his phone conversation. He tells his secretary to make sure the page taken out in the paper is filled with the names of every major U.S. politician that he has sold Cuban cigars to over his life.

Marvin sets the phone down and the head agent walks over to his desk and asks if he might use Marvin’s phone to call his boss. The head agent phones his boss for a moment and is told to leave the building and replace any confiscated material as they found it.

Is this story true? I don’t know, but it sure as hell cracked me up.

True or not, the story illustrates why there is latitude in the enforcement of these laws compared to other controlled substances. Reminds me of another story:
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=70...&pr=goog-sl

INRE the request for invoices, they're fishing and threatening but PROBABLY have no evidence. This is a police tactic as old as the hills.

 

[PTownshend]

Over at CW this link to a PDF of the Federal Register (dating back to January 29, 2003) might shed some light on issuance of penalties and triggers for each variance of the OFAC letters (W and R).

Go here: www.treasury.gov/offices/enforcement/ofac/civpen/enfguide.pdf

Most interesting is how US Customs assesses monetary values to boxes of Cuban cigars (found in part 515 - Cuban Assets Control Regulations --- Note to A.7. (page 4429). The rest is a pretty intensive read, but if you can trudge through it you might find some sort of method to the madness. Wilkey and I are STILL trying to figure out all the legalese.

Have at it!
Darren

 

[Devil Doc]

As my Granddady used to say ( a notorious bootleger), "Don't rat yourself out".

Doc.

 

[ulster]

One note that I wanted to add to the discussion -

All I have seen on this post is that US Citizens cannot purchase anything from Cuba, but the laws actually extend beyond that. The law does not just apply to citizens, but also to legal non-citizen residents of the US.

I am a citizen of another country than the US, but I am a legal resident of the US. Under the embargo laws I cannot go to my home country and purchase a Cuban cigar legally under US law. Crazy stuff.

 

[vortex]

We will see ever more intensive efforts to collect moneys from non-tax (fines, fees, duties, etc.) instruments as the national and local economies tank. When a nation goes broke, at some point taxes prove inadequate and other means of fleecing the public are sought.

States are hurt even worse by the loss of federal funding. This has already happened to a large degree but will continue to worsen, IMO. This may have the broader impact on cigar smokers in general(and cigarette smokers) as states try to collect those billions in tax revenues the web has cost them.

I think we are finally at "that" point everyone wondered about for years. Push has come to shove. The credit gravy train has dried up and it has finally come to hassling cigar smokers - and worse. We can only hope that unforeseen, positive influences will ameliorate the consequences of our poor fiscal restraint and the wholesale theft of the treasuries.

Stock up and dig out that foil hat!

 

[mmburtch]

So far, the one main observation I have come to from reading this thread and it's attachments, was between the lines. Earlier, Wilkey linked to the Fed's fines levied and collected listings. From the mere fact that there are one or less fines per month, either they aren't able to collect, or most of the cases are tied up some way or another. If they really have years worth of information from a couple of vendors, they should have hundreds of potential violators to serve. As intimidating as the letter is, I would expect to see more "Here's my money, now can I go home" payments. Then again, purchasing Cuban cigars is probably best compared to white collar crime, with its perpetrators well aware of their rights and not so likely to talk without consulting an attorney. Either way, at present, the campaign doesn't appear to be extremely successful.

 

[vortex]

So far, the one main observation I have come to from reading this thread and it's attachments, was between the lines. Earlier, Wilkey linked to the Fed's fines levied and collected listings. From the mere fact that there are one or less fines per month, either they aren't able to collect, or most of the cases are tied up some way or another. If they really have years worth of information from a couple of vendors, they should have hundreds of potential violators to serve. As intimidating as the letter is, I would expect to see more "Here's my money, now can I go home" payments. Then again, purchasing Cuban cigars is probably best compared to white collar crime, with its perpetrators well aware of their rights and not so likely to talk without consulting an attorney. Either way, at present, the campaign doesn't appear to be extremely successful.

I agree but hope these new letters are not the signal of changes to come. As I said, the "normal" revenue sources are drying up so new revenue sources are being sought.

 

[Gonz]

One thing I've been wondering about these letters is if they are exclusive to individuals who have had prior confiscations. Has everyone who rec'd a letter had other shipments confiscated at some other point, which may have flagged their name and indicated a prior disposition for ordering cigars from these vendors? Because I still don't see how OFAC can flag a monetary transaction between an individual and a vendor of Cuban cigars and say with certainty that you were purchasing illicit goods. How do they know that I wasn't perhaps purchasing a lighter and a humidor, or an ashtray?

 

[Ginseng]

Gonz,
Individuals who have never had confiscations have gotten the letter.

Thus far, OFAC have not presented evidence that indicated they are certain that an individual has purchased Cuban cigars. It only reads that way as is, I believe, the intent.

Vortex,
That's speculation and not really to the point of this thread. Fines revenues of $900-$2,000 per month to the U.S. Department of the Treasury does not strike me as something that could be considered worthwhile revenue. But even that is speculation.

mmburtch,
Word on the "street" (meaning people I've met and talked to and who have direct contact with other affected individuals) is that there are more people who have gotten either the W or R-Letter and have chosen not to post about it. In this case, silence coupled with FUD seems to be the far more potent intended effect as opposed to what might amount to a few months of cigar budget.

Wilkey

 

[mmburtch]

FUD? I just had a baby, I don't have enough brain power left to figure this out on my own.

 

[Ginseng]

Sorry about that. "Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt"

Wiki-link

Wilkey

 

[Gonz]

I wonder if the folks at the OFAC office, or wherever all this business is coming from, are sitting back laughing at us having this discussion trying to figure out what's going on.

 

[grateful1]

I wonder if the folks at the OFAC office, or wherever all this business is coming from, are sitting back laughing at us having this discussion trying to figure out what's going on.

 

[rectifythis]

I'm processing some OFAC documents that have recently been cited on another board. I believe there might be some information as to the triggering of the W and R-Letters.

I have a strange feeling that all the wonderful info Wilkey gives us comes from the fact that he is really a super computer attached to a draw machine.

Yeah, I get the impression that Wilkey must be a physicist or a lawyer or something. I enjoy listening to him.

 

[Strayvector]

I'm processing some OFAC documents that have recently been cited on another board. I believe there might be some information as to the triggering of the W and R-Letters.

I have a strange feeling that all the wonderful info Wilkey gives us comes from the fact that he is really a super computer attached to a draw machine.

Yeah, I get the impression that Wilkey must be a physicist or a lawyer or something. I enjoy listening to him.

The man is on his way to becoming a professor. I'll be proud to one day have my kids tell me that they're taking classes from a Professor Wilkey "Moontrance".