The Morality of Asset Protection
Right or Wrong to Protect what Is/Was Yours.
After a long 12 day trip to Amsterdam and New York, I am finally back in Estonia. The purpose of the trip was to attend an annual entrepreneurship conference in New York that I have been a part of for 6 years now. And what an amazing trip. Each year we gather in a different US city to listen to speakers about various topics and interact with each other. And for 6 years, I can honestly say my value takeaway always comes from the peer interaction.
This is a group of some of the most intelligent and successful entrepreneurs from around the world and I look forward to this event each year more than any other ‘field trip’ I take. These guys run businesses ranging from magazine publisher, hot tub manufacturer, trucking company, staffing agency, healthcare products, virtual office, software, and many others. And the philosophical conversations are always quite interesting amongst this group.
As one of my friend’s from this group likes to say “let’s keep it to the basics; politics, sex and religion”. While there were many conversations on these topics, one that seemed to keep coming up was the morality of asset protection. If you are looking for a specific bit of info this week, you may want to sign off now as this is where I wax and wane philosophically for a few paragraphs.
Repeatedly I am asked if asset protection is not only legal, but moral. And to that, my emphatic answer is always, “yes!”. Actually, my belief is that it is immoral not to protect your wealth from the parasites that abound in society. Unfortunately we must take action steps to protect our wealth.
There are many, many predators out there more than willing to strip you of your wealth and thus, you must take the necessary steps to keep your money out of the hands of these parasites. True wealth is created by production, and production comes from productive people. Just so we have no miscommunication here, government workers are not productive people, they are the highest form of parasite. And since taxes and government policies like the printing of money are huge destroyers of wealth, this is a parasite to keep in mind when structuring your asset protection plan.
Of course the other parasites to consider are what Ayn Rand would call ‘looters’. These are the lazy people in society who believe they are owed something. And considering the huge growth of government entitlement programs, there are a lot of these looters around. It is sad state of affairs for a country when most people believe their path to riches comes from the lottery or litigation. And guess who is at risk from litigation?
That’s right, the producers. The entrepreneurs and investors. You!
My belief is that in order for the world to continue to prosper and grow, wealth needs to stay in the hands of the producers, not the looters and government parasites. Entrepreneurs create businesses that hire workers and create ‘stuff’ that we like to buy and/or do. Investors risk their capital in exchange for a return when they invest in the businesses entrepreneurs create. And this creation of wealth is like the rising tide; it lifts all ships. It increases the welfare of the entire society by increasing the size of the ‘pie’.
But what do governments do? They want to take a piece of your pie. They consume resources. They don’t create. Don’t get me wrong, I am not a complete anarchist. I haven’t figured out a way for most hard infrastructure to exist without government, but there is an enormous amount of inefficiency in the world due to political power grabs.
Government agencies don’t have the profit motive that entrepreneurs and investors have so therefore they never really know when their agency is successful. All they know is they are using their budget for the year. Entrepreneurs want to operate in the most efficient manner in order to maximize profits for both himself and his investors. In essence, the entrepreneur wants to make a bigger pie.
What do the looters do? They expect something for nothing. They expect free education and free healthcare. They want welfare payments, unemployment benefits, food stamps, and anything else they can get at the expense of the producers. They believe that as entrepreneurs and investors, it is your responsibility to educate and take care of them. And heaven forbid if you are in a car accident, it may even be your responsibility to make them wealthy.
For me, this means you have a moral obligation to protect your wealth from these parasites. As a producer in this world, it is your job to not only create, but to protect your wealth in order to make sure it stays in the hands of those best capable of utilizing productive resources. It is my job to help you best structure a plan that works within your budget that minimizes your risk and maximizes your wealth.
We use many tools like LLC’s, LP’s, offshore IBC’s and LLC’s, PPLI (private placement life insurance), offshore trusts, family office, offshore banking and several other planning tools. By using the proper tools and strategic planning, we can help you protect your wealth from the predators that exist in this world. To schedule your free 30 minute consultation, contact us
Bobby Casey
Managing Director
+1-347-410-5041
To learn more about Global Wealth Protection: CLICK HERE
At a time when the world economy seems so unstable, it is important for wealthy individuals to look into some form of asset protection. Governments are searching for additional ways to fill their coffers. This generally means that they will raise taxes on individuals and companies to cover their expenses. These same people need to protect their assets or find that eventually there will be none left to protect.
Offshore banking is one strategy to utilize for asset protection. Banking regulations in specific countries will protect your assets while, at the same time, complying with all international laws.
Carlo Scevola and Partners is a worldwide fiduciary company that helps their clients protect what they have worked hard for all their lives. With locations on six of the seven continents, CS&P is easily accessible to its clientele. Professional advisors will ensure that protecting your assets is their number one priority, all within the scope of the law.
Wow. Can’t believe I almost completely disagree with you on the basic philosophy that drives your points when I believe in asset protection; perhaps a better idea is “conservation”. I think that it’s right and proper to preserve and conserve assets so that they can be directed toward their best use. But I take significant umbrage with your simplistic, “Rand-ian” philosophy. As a government employee (police officer), I believe I can state (with the hard data to back it up) that I make a significant, productive contribution to the world. Although I do draw a salary from government-mandated taxes, I’m accountable to the taxpayers for the level of my “production” through the poltical process (I report to a politically appointed boss, who reports to elected officials). My job performance has a direct effect on the quality of life, and therefore the productive capacity, of numerous individuals and businesses.
-
As for lawyers and litigants, in the American system, where regulation is less intensive and all-encompassing than the European model, it is the civil litigation system that holds large industries and corporations accountable for the safe and proper exercise of their economic power. Civil litigation is a tool which gives otherwise un-powerful people the significant leverage necessary to contend with the massive political and economic power wielded by the well-financed.
-
For the down-trodden, no, I don’t personally expect a “handout.” But I’d rather live in a society where there is a social safety net; where we can, as a society, plan for illness, old-age, and economic downturns. Harnessing collective economic power for the common good, through the public sector, provides for a baseline of public health, an educated workforce, and lower levels of violent criminality.
-
Using offshore tax shelters, manipulating your “economic citizenship” and hiding personal assets behind corporate structures is financially akin to the speeder using a radar detector to “protect” his driving record. What about safe, responsible, driving instead?
Your response is just an argument for lower standards. You must understand that the abuse of time is the greatest sin.
The legal and enforcement system are the greatest abusers of time and are fostered in confusion and complexity. This guarantees a catch 22 for all those good people drawn into it.
Changing human behavior is not done by laws but by moral and courageous people, not power hungry politicians.
>Your response is just an argument for lower standards. You must understand that the abuse of time is >the greatest sin.
Actually, my response is an argument for higher standards. I have high standards for civic participation. It could be argued that a person with high civic standards is ‘naive’, but I think that’s a cop-out (no pun intended). I chose my profession because it’s something I thought would be enjoyable and sufficiently financially rewarding, but also because I want to help people. I also follow news & politics, vote at every opportunity, go to jury duty, check on my neighbors, pay my taxes, pitch in to charitable causes, buy local products whenever possible, and donate blood on a regular basis. I’m not the world’s best citizen, but I think there’s more to being part of a community than just living someplace. And, as they say, ‘no man is an island.’
>I would expect such a response from someone in your position, although I don’t understand why >you would even be frequenting a website about personal freedom when you are part of a system that >restricts it on a daily basis.
What I do on a daily basis sir, is chase after armed criminals, in the dark, and frequently alone. Yes, I suppose someone in a more privileged position might not understand the interplay between personal freedoms, personal responsibilities, and public safety. In my understanding, there are few if any absolutes. I understand that it is the propensity of government bureaucrats to have a knee-jerk reaction to justify their salaries to a public which has little or no choice in the matter. On the other hand, I believe there are public ‘goods’ for which raising capital, which in the public sector ultimately means taxation, is a worthwhile, democratically validated undertaking. Among the goods I would include: public firefighting and law enforcement, education, provision of roads and other transportation infrastructure, utility services, public health. I think that communities can make decisions as to the details of which services and improvements they choose to provide for collectively.
So given the above, why would an avowed Communist (tongue planted firmly in cheek) such as myself visit a site dedicate to ‘personal liberty’? Well, I think there’s more to the world than just my back yard, and I’m interested in learning more about it and visiting more of it.
>For a police officer, you sure seem naive when it comes to the profound level of absolute corruption >in the financial world.
Jim, I harbor no such illusions about the level of corruption in the financial world. ;-)
>Social safety nets are needful – but, they must be those which the providers thereof are in accord >with.
Tim, I respectfully disagree with you on the second point, to a point (so to speak). I believe the providers – in general terms – should be in accord with such a system. That is, I believe, the project of a democratic society; that is, the alignment of the spending of pooled public monies (taxes) with the priorities and communal standards of the society. I believe that this is what we are trying to accomplish through the assorted political & governance systems throughout the world, with varying success.
Certainly, I would not begrudge the right of a person who is out of accord with the will of their community to absent themselves – physically, politically, financially, and however otherwise – from that locale. Surely this is one of the reasons which motivates readers of this site. However, I think it is, at a minimum, duplicitous to exploit loopholes in order to live in a community without making a contribution to it. That is, to reside in America in order to gain the significant advantages of American citizenship while claiming foreign citizenship/residency/incorporation for purposes of evading American taxation.
I would expect such a response from someone in your position, although I don’t understand why you would even be frequenting a website about personal freedom when you are part of a system that restricts it on a daily basis.
Nice , but somewhat simplistic piece. Some definitions are needed for such terms/concepts as : wealth; production;asset; protection;government;productive; etc. What sort(s) of wealth are we talking about? Currency? Investments that produce a currency – flow? Hard assets,i.e., metals, real estate, stocks? Productive…again, of what? Intellectual capital being one of the biggest forms of production these days. It would seem to me production , as a concept, needs of bit of explication.
Parasites? Hmmm, so many forms of them – I agree. However, the designation of “government” as the greatest source, along with “looters” …needs some expansion to avoid the knee-jerk response,eh? After all , we are going to protect our wealth,etc., under some form of government. Might be that of another (than USA) nation – but under some governments regulations.
Looters are a major problem and one that won’t “go away” so long as law can be perverted to the uses of those who would forcibly (even by the threat of force) redistribute the goods and services of all the producers of a society.
For a delightful , detailed and informative as well as succinct (75 pages) explication of this perversion I commend to your attention: “The Law”, by Frederic Bastiat, translated by Dean Russell for the Foundation For Economic Education. It ,unlike so many other texts on this topic , doesn’t have an axe to grind but merely deliniates the situation and its “whys and wherefores” pointing the way and the end this sort of activity brings. Should,imo, be mandatory reading.
Social saftey nets , et alia. are needful. However, they should,imo, reflect the desires and moral standpoint(s) of the people who contribute to them. Notice I said “contribute” , not are forced to contribute. A major distinction and one constituting a major difference.The desire to help, improve , educate, etc. one’s social fellwos is both natural and laudatory…if it is self generated. If, on the other hand, it is mandated and enforced by others – it is tyrannical. The difference, I would submit, between the self-interested act of a free man and the commanded performance of a slave.
As to likening asset protection to “radar detecters” – Hmmm. Not quite. When do the police decide to write a ticket for maintaining your auto in prime opperating condition ? Well this is exactly what it amounts to when governments decide “you” have made too much money/profit . You have the time, effort, energy and inventiveness which you utilized to acquire this “un-deserved wealth” taken from you as well as the wealth itself. Your life, yes, your very life has ,to that degree, been taken.
Social safety nets are needful – but, they must be those which the providers thereof are in accord with. Else it is theft – armed robbery , actually…imo. Here again we come back to the form/type of government and governance which “the people” want and will engage in/with. But, assets and their protection require some form of government and some ,meaningful consideration of government…imo. Perhaps another time,eh?
Zack,
For a police officer, you sure seem naive when it comes to the profound level of absolute corruption in the financial world. What is within the confines of the law is reasonable and ethical. Exploring the boundaries of the law is also ethical.
However, outright breaking the law and violating the Constitution of the United States of America, is not within the law and is unethical and corrupt. You should perhaps be more selective when discussing the issue of “responsibility.” The laws apply to all citizens, including those who make the laws or who purchase the making of laws.
You should use your badge to arrest an international central banker, sometime. That’s the equivalent of arresting Satan, as compared to Joe Sixpack.