• Hi Guest - Sign up now for Secret Santa 2024!
    Click here to sign up!
  • 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...

The Letters - Update December 21, 2008

Shikar said:
Rod said:
What if you receive a package from over seas, and on the outside of the package it has stickers relating to non-cigar items. Customs goes through it, sees that they are actually ISOM's, packages it back up with the official custom's tape, and then sends it to you. Would you receive a letter? Would it make sense if they still sent the package? ???
Click to expand...
Same exact thing happened to my friend.....the package was opened, repacked with official customs tape. No letter yet. Guess they didnt like the Cohiba EL? *Hey, its another sucker who bought a Cohiba!!!*

Regards.
Click to expand...

The probably replaced them with the ones they confiscated in Miami :sign:
 
Bump to adivse of an important update coming in.

See the first post for the notice.

Wilkey
 
It'll be a few more days, I think. My contact is getting in deeper and might be able to put me in touch with those closer to the situation.

For right now, I think I should report the following.

"With regard to OFAC's approach to prosecuting violations of the Trading With The Enemies Act/Helms-Burton, the "insider" stated that they simply march down the list name by name and send out R or W letters as appropriate.

Furthermore, on the first pass down this list, if the recipient admits to an alleged violation and cooperates by settling as in paying a penalty, their name comes off the list and that is the end of it. However, if the recipient stonewalls, lies, or otherwise does not cooperate, their name goes on a secondary list. Once the primary list is exhausted, OFAC would then start going down the secondary list. The implication by the "insider" was that follow-up enforcement would be more aggressive with stakes raised."

This account also needs to be fleshed out some more but I thought it the responsible thing to do in presenting what I know now on this aspect. The intent is to prevent community members from taking actions that might aggravate any potential enforcement actions.

Wilkey
 
Rod said:
What if you receive a package from over seas, and on the outside of the package it has stickers relating to non-cigar items. Customs goes through it, sees that they are actually ISOM's, packages it back up with the official custom's tape, and then sends it to you. Would you receive a letter? Would it make sense if they still sent the package? ???
Click to expand...

You know rod, maybe I wrong but I don’t think customs is that well versed in cigars. I’m willing to bet they had no idea what they were looking at and as long as it wasn’t potentially dangerous didn’t care. It seems the only reason there cracking down with these letters is because someone in an office some ware figured out this vendor only sells isom’s and can track purchases with credit cards.
 
Mrepp said:
You know rod, maybe I wrong but I don’t think customs is that well versed in cigars. I’m willing to bet they had no idea what they were looking at and as long as it wasn’t potentially dangerous didn’t care.
Click to expand...
Most likely an accurate description of the events.


Mrepp said:
It seems the only reason there cracking down with these letters is because someone in an office some ware figured out this vendor only sells isom’s and can track purchases with credit cards.
Click to expand...
A gross oversimplification that distorts the rather more convoluted chain of events. We've got to be careful about distilling things down to such short soundbytes. In doing so, critical nuances could get omitted preventing an accurate description of the situation.

I'm working to bring the most complete, most accurate account of this situation to light. It'll take a bit more time but based on what was revealed to me already, it'll be worth it. Hang tight, folks.

Wilkey
 
Wilkey, your investigative skills and analytical approach are flawless. Bravo....!!

Ginseng said:
For right now, I think I should report the following.
"With regard to OFAC's approach to prosecuting violations of the Trading With The Enemies Act/Helms-Burton, the "insider" stated that they simply march down the list name by name and send out R or W letters as appropriate.
Click to expand...
The big question, it would seem, is where did they get "the list" and what event(s) trigger a persons inclusion on said list....?? I would guess the answer is not a simple one....

Thanks again, friend Wilkey - B.B.S.
 
BlindedByScience said:
Wilkey, your investigative skills and analytical approach are flawless. Bravo....!!

Ginseng said:
For right now, I think I should report the following.
"With regard to OFAC's approach to prosecuting violations of the Trading With The Enemies Act/Helms-Burton, the "insider" stated that they simply march down the list name by name and send out R or W letters as appropriate.
Click to expand...
The big question, it would seem, is where did they get "the list" and what event(s) trigger a persons inclusion on said list....?? I would guess the answer is not a simple one....

Thanks again, friend Wilkey - B.B.S.
Click to expand...
Right on, Tom. In addition to those questions, there are three others of interest.

1. How many names are on the list?
2. Aside from sorting by date, is there any other sorting or ordering filter that dictates who is next in line for a letter?
3. Will these enforcement actions cease when the present administration vacates office?

We have some insight into two of the three questions. At present, question 2 is still an unknown.

Wilkey
 
Ginseng said:
1. How many names are on the list?
2. Aside from sorting by date, is there any other sorting or ordering filter that dictates who is next in line for a letter?
3. Will these enforcement actions cease when the present administration vacates office?

We have some insight into two of the three questions. At present, question 2 is still an unknown.

Wilkey
Click to expand...

Maybe we have to give OFAC some credit and credit them with success...FUD.
 
I just want to add this as reference. This is tangent to the discussion but connected to it. It seems that the Hilton, an American owned hotel in Norway, was afraid of OFAC and the penalties they would receive from even housing Cuban tourist. Cubans at the Hilton in Norway This crackdown seems to extend beyond cigars.
 
Saxjazzman said:
I just want to add this as reference. This is tangent to the discussion but connected to it. It seems that the Hilton, an American owned hotel in Norway, was afraid of OFAC and the penalties they would receive from even housing Cuban tourist. Cubans at the Hilton in Norway This crackdown seems to extend beyond cigars.
Click to expand...
It seems a bit extreme, but i can see it happening. :cool:
 
It appears that their time frames of alleged transactions have expanded to include both older and more recent alleged transactions than before. They also appear to now be hitting the wallet with more force than previously exhibited.


DEPARTMENTOFTHETREASURY OFFICEOFFOREIGNASSETSCONTROLENFORCEMENT INFORMATION FOR MAY 4, 2007

INDIVIDUALS – 31 CFR 501.801 (d)(1)(ii)

One individual has agreed to a settlement totaling $6,088.85 for allegedly dealing in property in which Cuba or a Cuban national had an interest:
OFAC alleged that between September 2003 and August 2006, the individual purchased Cuban-origin cigars offered for sale on the Internet. The individual did not voluntarily disclose this matter to OFAC. The individual provided information to OFAC concerning additional purchases of Cuban-origin cigars.

One individual has agreed to a settlement totaling $1,261.00 for allegedly dealing in property in which Cuba or a Cuban national had an interest:
In January 2006, the individual purchased Cuban-origin cigars offered for sale on the Internet. The individual did not voluntarily disclose this matter to OFAC.
 
Ginseng said:
However, if the recipient stonewalls, lies, or otherwise does not cooperate, their name goes on a secondary list. Once the primary list is exhausted, OFAC would then start going down the secondary list. The implication by the "insider" was that follow-up enforcement would be more aggressive with stakes raised."[/i]

This account also needs to be fleshed out some more but I thought it the responsible thing to do in presenting what I know now on this aspect. The intent is to prevent community members from taking actions that might aggravate any potential enforcement actions.

Wilkey
Click to expand...

Great job you're doing Wilkey! Can you provide any additional info on what constitutes stonewalling/not cooperating? Would that be the same as you received the letter and denied receiving cuban cigars or pleaded the 5th? Thanks!
 
Sort of. There's someone I need to call but I'm afraid that things might be not quite as we've understood them so far. Sorry to be so cryptic but I've got to make doubly sure before I report further.

Wilkey
 
[/quote]

Great job you're doing Wilkey! Can you provide any additional info on what constitutes stonewalling/not cooperating? Would that be the same as you received the letter and denied receiving cuban cigars or pleaded the 5th? Thanks!
[/quote]

Any additional info? Keep up the great job! Thanks!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top