Donald Trump

Panama Papers Previews What Donald Trump's Jacksonian Economics Would Look Like

When the biggest economy on the block gets to write the global rules, foreigners and regular Americans get screwed, elites skate, and hypocrisy rules the day.

|

You can't unsee. ||| PanamaVanHalenTribute.com
PanamaVanHalenTribute.com

For years we have been warning you about the odious 2010 Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), which has been driving Americans to renounce their citizenship in record numbers because of the law's incredibly onerous disclosure requirements on U.S. citizens who have the bad manners to maintain financial accounts abroad, and because foreign banks in most halfway decent countries no longer want the hassle of serving any of the estimated 7.6 million American expatriates, since doing so essentially gives the IRS carte blanche to investigate the bank's innards and seize assets. For the dubious prize of shaking a paltry $1 billion extra in annual tax receipts, the United States has been systematically destroying the notion of international financial privacy.

Except in the United States itself.

The massive Panama Papers reporting project, which the world is still trying to digest this morning, puts one idea in sharp relief: America is benefiting greatly from exempting itself from the rules it is imposing on the rest of the world. Here's how The Economist describes it, in a piece headlined "The biggest loophole of all":

America seems not to feel bound by the global rules being crafted as a result of its own war on tax-dodging. It is also failing to tackle the anonymous shell companies often used to hide money. The Tax Justice Network, a lobby group, calls the United States one of the world's top three "secrecy jurisdictions", behind Switzerland and Hong Kong. All this adds up to "another example of how the US has elevated exceptionalism to a constitutional principle," says Richard Hay of Stikeman Elliott, a law firm. "Europe has been outfoxed." […]

No one knows how much undeclared money is stashed offshore. Estimates range from a couple of trillion dollars to $30 trillion. What is clear is that America's share is growing. Already the largest location for managing foreign wealth, it has picked up business as regulators have increased information-exchange and scrutiny of banks and trust companies in Europe and the Caribbean. Money is said to be flowing in from the Bahamas and Bermuda, as well as from Switzerland.

Or as Bloomberg Businessweek put it in January, "The World's Favorite New Tax Haven Is the United States." It's a good deal for Miami luxury real estate developers, Delaware corporate lawyers, and for people of any nationality who can afford to shop for favorable (and favorably complex) financial jurisdiction. The rest of us schmoes have to continue bending over for the IRS.

The FATCA/Panama Papers state of international financial hypocrisy falls squarely on the shoulders of President Barack Obama (with assists from drug warriors and their enablers from both parties, stretching back to Richard Nixon). But it's fair to consider it as the model excretion of Donald Trump's international economic ideas. Why? Because this, at long last, is a deal that America has unquestionably "won." To the extent that we can decipher Trumponomics, the constant through-line is that America doesn't win anymore because we negotiate terrible deals, so dealmaker extraordinaire Trump will get in there to make sure that America wins again. He will threaten Mexico and China with steep tariffs in an attempt to halt U.S. companies from opening new production facilities in those two countries, discourage China from manipulating its currency, and (presumably) to get more favorable terms for American exporters. If in the process he has to rip up international treaties or disband multilateral institutions (or at least threaten to do both), well, that's the price of doing better business.

We normally use the term "Jacksonian" to describe belligerent, go-it-alone foreign policy, and "mercantilist" to characterize nationalistic economics, but I think the former word better captures the spirit of the latter concept in 2016. Trump's attacks on Mexico, China, Iran, Muslims, and other concentrations of foreigners are viscerally personal, as is the constant complaint (of dubious accuracy) that Americans are singularly getting screwed in every transaction with outsiders. So what would Jacksonian economics look like in practice?

A lot like FATCA, only more open about how the system is deliberately rigged in Washington's favor. Regular Americans, just like the middle-class dual citizens in Canada being screwed over by the new tax rules, would take it in the shorts, by having to pay considerably more for their consumer goods. The super-rich, as per usual, will be able to buy their way out of jurisdictional hassles. Accountants and lawyers will not be harmed in the process. There might be some temporal, zero-sum nationalistic victories, and there might also be punitive backlashes and the unpredictable unraveling of liberal international norms.

The Economist reported that:

Frustration with America has grown in Europe, which forms the core of the [Common Reporting Standard]. A group in the European Parliament argues that, if America refuses to reciprocate fully, it should be hit with a reverse FATCA: a levy on payments originating in the EU that flow through American banks. "We don't want a tax war, but nor can the US have it all its own way," says Molly Scott Cato, one of the MEPs.

For now, no one need quake in their boots at the discomforts of European parliamentarians. But even without the open-faced America-firstness championed by Trump, Washington under the allegedly genteel Obama is breeding resentment around the world with its exceptionalist policies. Which, as these things almost inevitably do, hurt Americans first of all.

NEXT: Sixth Circuit smackdown watch: Woods v. Etherton

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Here’s hoping that the Clintons were using that law firm for tax evasion.

    1. Pfft. They have an entire Foundation right here in the good old USA for that!

  2. incredibly onerous disclosure requirements on U.S. citizens who have the bad manners to maintain financial accounts abroad, and because foreign banks in most halfway decent countries no longer want the hassle of serving any of the estimated 7.6 million American expatriates, since doing so essentially gives the IRS carte blanche to investigate the bank’s innards

    How does the IRS have the right to investigate a foreign bank’s innards, you ask? I suspect these countries could sure use a little sovereignty about right now.

    1. Withhold federal highway funds, obviously. Samalia never bowed down to the IRS and look where that got them?

    2. I don’t get that, either.

      1. I assume there’s a treaty or an historic deal somewhere in the background… but I just don’t get it.

          1. It becomes the first foreign bank to plead guilty to tax evasion charges in the US.

            It’s english, from england even, but I’ll be damned if it makes any sense.

          2. My old neighbors were from Switzerland and they were appalled when those banks caved. They couldn’t believe that Swiss banks would be dumb enough to kowtow to the US.

      2. It’s very easy. The US simply refuses to let non-compliant foreign banks settle US dollar transactions through central banks. This is not generally standard govt BS either (though in this case it is being used to force govt tax compliance). Most of the time, the implicit threat is used to protect US banks.

    3. As far as i understand it, if you’re selling services to US citizens, you’re required to comply with US financial regulations.

      There’s also the 2009 FSB (‘financial stability board‘), which basically imposes a lot of requirements on any participating institutions to comply with transparency requests.

      1. As far as i understand it, if you’re selling services to US citizens, you’re required to comply with US financial regulations.

        Jurisdiction doesn’t work that way, or it didn’t use to, anyway.

        If I go to England, I’m 19, and I walk into a pub, they can serve me. Nobody says they have to comply with US drinking age laws. Why? Because they aren’t subject to US jurisdiction. Any attempt by the US to arrest or fine the English bar owner for serving a 19 year old in compliance with English law would be laughed out of any court.

        Now, if a multi-national does business in the US, their US operation is subject to US jurisdiction. In a sane world, the US wouldn’t use that as leverage over their non-US operations.

        1. In a sane world, the US wouldn’t use that as leverage over their non-US operations

          I know, my first day on this planet I had the same sort of reaction. You get used to it.

        2. In a sane world…

          Where is this “sane world” and how does one get there? Is that one of those parallel dimensions?

          1. No! If a sane world exists the last entity we want find it is a trickster god!

        3. Right. US jurisdiction should end when you take your money out of a US bank. Maybe you have to send them a form: Transferred 100K to non-US bank on 12/31/15. All US taxes certified paid on interest earned during 2015. Case closed.

          1. That is more or less how it works. The other direction requires more due-diligence as well = if you try moving funds from some offshore entity to US-institutions, you’ll have to submit statements declaring sources of funds and the delivering institution will have to submit information on transactions validating this if required.

            My awareness of this stuff is just secondhand from what you pick up in compliance training materials.

            its not so much de-facto ‘jurisdiction’ over outside entities, as regulation of US entities which places secondhand burdens on 3rd parties that do business with them.

            1. its not so much de-facto ‘jurisdiction’ over outside entities, as regulation of US entities which places secondhand burdens on 3rd parties that do business with them.

              I thought that the US was requiring Swiss banks to make disclosures about the contents and owners of Swiss bank accounts. I don’t think that’s second-hand; I think that’s pretty much universal jurisdiction.

              But I don’t recall specifically.

        4. You are right, but the US is too big for most multinationals to ignore. For similar reasons it is how we have the unfortunate situation where the California legislature is effectively writing national fuel efficiency standards.

    4. Same way the feds get states to follow federal rules in any category they want — there’s consequences to not doing so. I imagine, for instance, that transfers to non-cooperating banks have high transfer fees.

      1. basically, yes.

        You need to be able to directly punish” the institutions outside your regulatory framework – you can simply punish the ones *within* it if they transact with disfavored organizations. If an outside institution gets put on a ‘watch list’ it can be enough to dissuade any transactions with major institutions, and effectively cut people out of huge swaths of the global financial system.

      2. Nice little bank you’ve got there. Be a shame if people couldn’t afford to transfer money into it.

    5. Foreign financial institutions that do not provide such information to the United States will face a stringent penalty?withholding of 30 percent of certain U.S. source payments such as interest and dividends.

      That penalty, by the way, does not apply only to U.S. source payments that are genuinely suspected of tax evasion. FATCA allows the IRS to presume that all such payments are suspicious.

    6. If you want to move US dollars (and every bank does), you at some point directly or indirectly have to access the US financial system. Don’t comply with FATCA? Have that access pulled.

  3. Oh God… how the fuck do you make something that Donald Trump had no involvement in… about Donald Trump?

    Do you guys not want people to focus on the hypocrisy?

    Because all you’ve assured is that people will be arguing about Trump in the comments, and when the smoke clears this will be another forgettable trump thread.

    1. Say what you want about Canada’s sometimes awful laws and ways, but at least our elections come and go within weeks. This long, drawn out carnival of clowns is insufferable. Like, I can’t even anymore.

      1. No kidding.

    2. Yeh, I’m disappointed in Matt.

      This problem is waaayyy bigger than a guy who has never held power and may never will.

      It’s starting to feel like the Palin hatred. Rather than focus on women already in power and deserving of criticism a lot energy was wasted on Palin.

      1. that, of course, was because Palin was the wrong kind of woman. Come on, man.

        1. If Condi Rice were the ‘right’ kind of woman, Time magazine would talk about her class and intelligence because of her ability to play classical piano and speak Russian!

      2. Well she was running for VP and was governor of Alaska. She deserved all criticism that was sent her way. She is a dingbat.

        Not that I don’t agree with you that this leak has nothing to do with Trump and was a pretty terrible article all around.

    3. But it’s fair to consider it as the model excretion of Donald Trump’s international economic ideas. Why? Because this, at long last, is a deal that America has unquestionably “won.”

      “But it’s fair to lay this policy at his feet because I really superduper don’t like Trump and stuff.”

    4. This has nothing to do with Donald Trump. It does, however, have a lot to do with the complaints that American workers have about international trade. One of the reasons why American workers get so badly fucked by international trade is the tax system Matt mentions. Thanks to our insane “we tax any American who moves anywhere in the world at any time” tax system, American companies never bring a single dollar they make overseas back to the US. If they did, the fucking IRS would rape them in taxes.

      Everyone points to how America exports all of these manufactured goods and services. And that is true as far as it goes. What is never mentioned is that those goods are sold by overseas divisions of American companies. And the profits from selling those goods are shown on the books of the overseas divisions. This means all of the money that American manufacturing makes overseas stays there and is never returned to the US. Meanwhile, other countries with less insane tax systems, sell goods here and the profit from selling those goods goes back home or at least doesn’t all stay here.

      Our lunatic tax system is one of the biggest reasons why free trade has fucked so many American workers. Killing it and allowing money made overseas to be brought back to the US without it being taxed would go a long ways to mitigating the issues American workers have with free trade and do so without violating the sacred religous tenants of the free traders.

      1. Those American workers don’t get it John. They are at the forefront of raising/sustaining the corporate tax rate, because 1%.

      2. Our lunatic tax system is one of the biggest reasons why free trade has fucked so many American workers.

        So close, John. You’ve almost got the point that free trade hasn’t fucked American workers; the American government has.

        1. Whatever. It must be nice having an ideology that relieves you of the need to think or try and see the world as it actually is.

          1. Your whole comment was about how we don’t have free trade, but you blamed free trade for people’s problems. But I’m the delusional one.

          2. Christ Almighty, John! Take a deep breath. On the fundamentals of this topic Nikki is agreeing with you. And yes, your own comment – and it is right – recognizes that the problem is with tax policy and not trade policy.

          3. God damn you to hell, John, for making me agree with Nikki on this one. GOD DAMN YOU.

      3. the tax system did not invent itself. It took those writing it along with those making campaign contributions to the people writing it. But this is what happens when have a govt of the 1% by the 1% for the 1%.

      4. John’s comment is basically true. My company manipulated the transfer price of goods sold to our Canadian sister company – within limits allowed by the IRS and Revenue Canada of course – to put more profits in Canada where the corp. tax rate was lower. If the U.S. corporate tax rates were lower, we could have manipulated the transfer price to leave more profits in the U.S. (thus being able to possibly increase benefits and wages and dividends to U.S. employees and stockholders.)

        1. What do you have against Canucks, Maple Syrup, and Poutine?

        2. Yup. I spoke last year a corporate treasurers’ conference. It’s amazing at what lengths companies will go to to avoid having their earnings show up in the U.S. And it’s all on tax issues.

        3. Be careful, the IRS looks for transfer pricing, as so do other countries.

      5. Because too many people in power do want a sane tax system, or even a utilitarian one that increases revenue. They want a “fair” tax system, and one does not lay a claim to every cent a corporation makes is simply not “fair”, even if it damages revenue and the national economy.

        It is not even greed as a motivator but maintaining the perception of power.

    5. Because page views.

  4. Matt, for that picture, you have earned some Gary Cherone era VH.

    1. Van Halen has pretty much been a Van Halen tribute band since about Diver Down was released.

  5. “Europe has been outfoxed.”

    If Europe is the ideal America is supposed to strive for, and we’re doing it better than them, then Mission Accomplished right?

    1. The Europe that a lot of North American’s idealize is not the Europe that actually exists.

      1. ^Fucking. This.

        “I went to France when I was 18 and they had, like, trains and something something derpity derp vote Sanders!”

  6. To the extent that we can decipher Trumponomics,

    So, not sure what Trump is about, but let’s make an article that has nothing to do with him about him. Instead of giving both barrels to the actual people responsible, we’ll be bitching about having to defend Trump because the author doesn’t like him.

    1. Trump is to all Reason writers what Da Joos are to Sheldon Richman.

      Haters gonna hate. They can’t help themselves, no matter how much their absurd attacks helps those they hate.

      1. It’s a verbal tic at this point:

        Cashier: “Paper or plastic?”
        Sheldon: “Paper pl—Jooooooooooz!
        Cashier: “Ok…anyway, nice weather we are having…”
        Sheldon: “Pardon my outburst, I’m afraid that I shan’t be using plastic as long as the US provides military aid to an unabashed apartheid state.”
        Cashier: *smiles while secretely preparing to press panic button under counter, “I’m not sure that I understand the connection…”
        Sheldon: *sniffs “Neither do my readers.'”. *walks away satisfied with own brilliance.

  7. It looks like we don’t need Trump to fuck things up, they’re already fucked up.

    If Reason’s lazy assed pretend journalists would spend less time pissing moaning about Trump and more time marshaling facts about a story like this one you might be less fucking useless.

    1. more time marshaling facts about a story like this one you might be less fucking useless.

      LOL, have you read more detailed FATCA criticism elsewhere?

      1. This particular article fails to explain how the Panama Papers are related to FATCA. I couldn’t care less if this or that is evidence of hypocrisy.

      2. I’m talking about how this article, like far too many others, waste time yammering about Trump or some other irrelevant bullshit at the expense of digging up more facts. I don’t have to read criticism about FATCA, I have plenty of experience with keeping myself on the right side of it.

        1. waste time yammering about Trump or some other irrelevant bullshit at the expense of digging up more facts

          Maybe you should stop reading blogs, dude.

    2. If Reason’s lazy assed pretend journalists would spend less time pissing moaning about Trump and more time marshaling facts about a story like this one you might be less fucking useless.

      I know right?! FUCKING COZMO FAGGITS!11!!!1!!!!

  8. Unless Teh Donald is in those papers – throwing his name in appears to be useful only to generate commenter discontent.

    Oh, and damn you for that earworm, Welch. “Panama” indeed.

    1. …throwing his name in appears to be useful only to generate commenter discontent page views.

      It’s always about the page views. They’ll stop the Trump-a-geddon when we stop clicking on this shit.

  9. Trump eviltry makes me want to hang Hillary from a lamppost

    1. A true Reason reader prefers Woodchippers.

  10. “There might be some temporal, zero-sum nationalistic victories…”

    This is highly unlikely. There may be, however, be some temporal, negative-sum nationalistic victories.

    When two nations go to war, the victor’s net gain is far smaller than the vanquished nation’s loss.

  11. Can we have a follow-up on what Hillary’s would look like?
    And then one on Bernie?

    Or is this really all Trump all the time?

  12. Your Trump digression is reasoned and appropriate, Matthew.

    1. Stop shitting yourself, MG.

  13. if a multi-national does business in the US, their US operation is subject to US jurisdiction. In a sane world, the US wouldn’t use that as leverage over their non-US operations.

    “Nice little bank youse gots here….”

  14. Much of the coverage of the Panama Papers doesn’t mention the juiciest bit: one of the people exposed is the Prime Minister of Iceland. You remember, the hero of all those Facebook memes about how Iceland put bankers in prison.

    1. Actually he’s the current PM not the one who was PM then. His party was in the opposition – not govt – from 2009 until 2013. And yes unfortunately – his involvement is gonna hurt ‘free market’ ideas in Iceland because his party is one of the two that espouses classical liberal free-market ideas.

      1. ^That sucks.

  15. This piece would be better if it was a video of a haggard Matt Welch in a P.O.W. camp reading “his” blogpost in a shaky-voiced monotone while blinking his eyes in what seems to be some sort of pattern…Yes! it’s Morse code… and as we transcribe it the message he’s blinking, over and over it is….

    STFU and VOTE TRUMP

    We hear you Matt, we hear you!

  16. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.net-jobs25.com

  17. If only Trump actually did propose Jacksonian economics!
    Andrew Jackson shut down the Bank of the United States, and was the last US president to actually balance the budget.

  18. Just saw Matt on Fox Business discussing this issue.

    1. *minus the trump connection. As far as i know. I had the sound off.

  19. Jacksonian economics? So Trump wants to end the federal reserve and pay off the deficit?

    1. Force all the IllegalMexicans to move to Oklahoma.

      1. Too late: already happened.

  20. Am I the only person who thinks its kinda uncool to leak everyone’s financial information just because someone doesn’t want to pay higher taxes?

    Often these arrangements are fully legal.

    Let’s leak every journalist’s 1040 and we can comb through those and catch the cheaters.

    1. Am I the only person who thinks its kinda uncool to leak everyone’s financial information just because someone doesn’t want to pay higher taxes?

      There is a point here which all the coverage I’ve seen by the NYT/WaPo etc has missed.

      There’s little if anything interesting about the fact that a few wealthy people have been involved in offshore accounts. there’s nothing illegal about it, necessarily, and maybe some have avoided taxes which they’ll have to pay now. So what?

      Whereas the actual “hook” here which should be relevant is the fact that there are dozens of World Leaders and their families & associates implicated in this data-dump, which provides evidence of corruption and favor-selling.

      IOW, “Tax Evasion” isn’t the great underlying-crime here – its political corruption.

      Yet all the US media seem to be acting as though the story here is ‘stealing the government’s money’.

      1. Totally agree with you.

        On reddit, its seems very much focused on “rich people hiding money.”

    2. Deal!

  21. Has anyone else noticed that outside of the seeming token of Iceland there are basically no leaks about westerners in general? I figured there would be scores of sleezy american politicians on the list but silence thus far; seems odd.

    1. Reasons to use offshore accounts vary.

      One is for safety – Putin isn’t worried about the Russian version of the IRS, but he might be worried about a coup.

      Same for other dictators or Chinese bureaucrats.

      Europeans who uses these probably are investing overseas and want to grow their profits without paying domestic taxes. Totally legal.

      Some will be for bribery purposes. Paying or receiving, but I predict US people have better ways to do this than use offshore companies. IRS cracks down hard on these.

      1. The US is one of the corrupted tax havens now. Not one of the oppressive climates. Pols and rent-seekers here only need to create a half-dozen or so shell companies – and use the combo of tax preferences given to land and hedge funds and interest deductions and unrealized cap gains and gimmicks like variable prepaid forward contracts to shelter their assets from taxes.

        Unlike Switzerland – which is a tax haven but an honest tax haven

  22. just before I saw the receipt that said $7527 , I accept that my mom in-law woz like actualey making money in there spare time from there pretty old laptop. . there aunt had bean doing this for less than twentey months and at present cleared the depts on there appartment and bourt a great new Citro?n 2CV . look here…….
    Clik This Link inYour Browser.
    ???????? http://www.net-jobs25.com

  23. HA HA HA. Blaming Trump for the mess made by Obama and Clinton.

  24. The super-rich, as per usual, will be able to buy their way out of jurisdictional hassles

    You know – if libertarians weren’t so damn knee-jerk anarchoglobalist, this statement would be an ideal way to sell ACTUAL free markets to all the folks who aren’t able to buy their way out of jurisdictional hassles. With the explicit promise to fix this shit rather than shrug and hmmhaw and play organ-grinders monkey to those who are actually rich enough to buy their way out and tilt the free market so it is no longer free anymore.

    But I won’t hold my breath waiting

    1. Libertarian Party candidates have denounced such “thumbs on the scales of justice” for forty + years. And it routinely gets them 1% of the vote. While you are “holding your breath,” how about writing the LP a check for a million dollars to let them advertise their positions in some detail.

      1. Thing is most people who libertarians might have a shot at appealing to tend to think that libertarianism is for rich white guys and immature teenagers. You see it everywhere; in the media, in pop culture. Libertarians are gonna have to work hard on revamping their image, which is mostly defined by Ayn Rand (who hated libertarians) and Milton Friedman (who was libertarian-ish). I’m not saying I agree or disagree with this characterization, just pointing out how it is to people who probably already know about it…

      2. Trump showed how to make it work. Identify the target. Focus on it with no wifflewaffle and only emphasize the policy stuff that is targeted at those folks. And the target will then spend millions trying to bury you – resulting in credibility among an angry electorate that is looking for someone out there who’s got the balls to take those people on and end their manipulation of the system. BS like ‘consumption tax’ (a perfect example of corrupt ‘reform’) and parroting what those groups parrot is wifflewaffle. And the anarcho (blaming everything on bureaucrats and ignoring the puppet masters who benefit from all this) strategy is totally useless as an electoral strategy.

        1. Just as a policy-wonk aside – there are two tax ideas that would actually be the right kind of reform. One is the old Henry George land/location tax – which everyone acknowledges to be the least distorting tax and it can’t be avoided (can’t deposit land in a Caymans bank account). Smaller versions of it are working very well in place like Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, Estonia (all better free markets now than the US) – and it really hits slumlords (good location, negative value improvements), tax games by billionaire leftists like Ted Turner and Jeff Bezos, and much of the zoning and eminent domain abusers. The second is a tax structure like federal level in Switzerland (hardly a tax hellhole) – roughly 5% VAT, 10% income, and 0.5% asset/wealth. The latter in particular is exactly what would raise taxes on Warren Buffett and all the others who know they are gaming the current system.

          That said – tax reform is too wonkish to sell. But just wonkish enough to scare the shit out of those who see the game ending. And maybe enough to get them to pony up to oppose it loudly and deliver credibility to the one who proposes it.

  25. To the extent that we can decipher Trumponomics feel like making up shit about Trump,…

  26. I think that you malign the name of Andrew Jackson by viewing him out of his time. Remember that it was he, along with his protege James K. Polk, who kept the country’s banking system free and honest up until the second decade of the twentieth century.

  27. Really? You are linking Trump to one of Obama’s worst ideas? FATCA is one of the worst tax collection schemes the proggies ever conceived of and Sanders has actually come out in support of FATCA. But you are trying to blame a man who has probably had his own significant problems dealing with FATCA due to his holdings of foreign real estate and businesses. Sigh. Reason has reached the level of MSNBC.

    .

  28. RE: Panama Papers Previews What Donald Trump’s Jacksonian Economics Would Look Like

    When the biggest economy on the block gets to write the global rules, foreigners and regular Americans get screwed, elites skate, and hypocrisy rules the day.

    This is nothing more than American imperialism at its acme.
    But hey, anything for money.

  29. Before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    http://www.JobToday60.com

  30. Max . true that Gregory `s st0rry is impossible… on wednesday I bought Aston Martin DB5 since I been bringin in $9774 this last five weeks and more than ten/k this past-month . it’s by-far the best-job Ive ever had . I began this 4 months ago and practically straight away was bringin home minimum $81, per hour
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.earni8.com

  31. Max . true that Gregory `s st0rry is impossible… on wednesday I bought Aston Martin DB5 since I been bringin in $9774 this last five weeks and more than ten/k this past-month . it’s by-far the best-job Ive ever had . I began this 4 months ago and practically straight away was bringin home minimum $81, per hour
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.earni8.com

  32. Max . true that Gregory `s st0rry is impossible… on wednesday I bought Aston Martin DB5 since I been bringin in $9774 this last five weeks and more than ten/k this past-month . it’s by-far the best-job Ive ever had . I began this 4 months ago and practically straight away was bringin home minimum $81, per hour
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.earni8.com

  33. ??Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.

    +_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.path40.com

  34. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser
    ? ? ? ? http://www.ReportMax90.com

  35. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  36. Start making more money weekly. This is a valuable part time work for everyone. The best part work from comfort of your house and get paid from $100-$2k each week.Start today and have your first cash at the end of this week. For more details Check this link??

    Clik This Link inYour Browser?

    ???? http://www.selfCash10.com

  37. my step-mum just bought a new cream Toyota Highlander only from working off a pc… browse around this website

    ??????www.paypost50.com

  38. til I saw the draft which was of $6881 , I didnt believe that my mother in law had been realy taking home money part-time on their laptop. . there best friend has done this 4 only twelve months and at present took care of the mortgage on there condo and got a top of the range Subaru Impreza . Learn More ….

    Click This Link inYour Browser….

    ?????? http://www.Reportmax20.com

  39. I’ve made $76,000 so far this year working online and I’m a full time student.I’m using an online business opportunity I heard about and I’ve made such great money.It’s really user friendly and I’m just so happy that I found out about it.

    Open This LinkFor More InFormation..

    ??????? http://www.selfcash10.com

  40. Matt if you aren’t careful you will be sitting in your local IRS field office. The Gov doesn’t like people pointing out the Emperor has no clothes.

  41. before I saw the bank draft which had said $9426 , I didnt believe that…my… brother woz like actualy earning money part-time at there labtop. . there uncles cousin has done this 4 less than fifteen months and by now repaid the dept on there place and got a great new Mini Cooper . read the full info here …

    Clik This Link inYour Browser??

    ? ? ? ? http://www.SelfCash10.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.