A Twisted Tale of Gold Stolen Almost 80 Years Ago

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.

Apparently the government can keep property stolen from you, but you can't keep property stolen from the government. A recent Bloomberg Businessweek article entitled "Gold Coins: The Mystery of the Double Eagle" details how the Secret Service has spent almost 80 years trying to track down 1933 Double Eagle $20 gold coins missing from the Philadelphia Mint.  It is well-known however who stole millions of dollars of gold from the American public in the same year - and since it was the U.S. government, lot's of luck in getting compensation.

The 1933 Double Eagle never went into circulation. All coins were ordered to be melted down because U.S. citizens were banned from owning gold in the same year. Moreover, the Roosevelt Administration confiscated all gold and paid gold holders $20.67 per ounce. Those who failed to turn their gold in were subject to a 10 year jail sentence - more time than some violent criminals got - and a $10,000 fine. Once the government had the citizenry's gold, it raised the price to $35.00 an ounce or 41% higher. The price difference represents the value of personal property stolen by the government.

Sensibly, some people sued the federal government claiming the gold seizure was unconstitutional. After all, the U.S. Constitution clearly protects property rights of Americans - if it is enforced that is. Moreover, the Roosevelt Administration claimed it was given authority to seize everyone's gold through a World War I law that gave the government sweeping powers to seize personal property to protect the Republic during wartime. There was of course, no war in 1933.

Nevertheless, the Supreme Court, in one of its most absurd rulings of all time, ruled the gold seizure perfectly legal. Even today, the mainstream press continues to soft peddle this trashing of the U.S. Constitution. The Bloomberg Businessweek article states that Roosevelt's Executive Order 6102,  "prohibited the hoarding of gold", rather than the owning of gold. While the gold was taken long ago, the same propaganda from the 1930s seems to still be with us.  

Apparently also in 1933 at least one employee at the Philadelphia Mint smuggled out some Double Gold Eagles. The government was unaware of this however. Around 1937, a Philadelphia coin dealer offered some Double Gold Eagles for sale. One of them, after being purchased by another coin dealer, was sold to King Farouk of Egypt. Unbeknownst to the Secret Service, the Secretary of the Treasury's office issued an export license for this coin on Feb. 29, 1944.

This was only one of many things that took place at Treasury that the Secret Service knew nothing about. Not stated in the Bloomberg Businessweek article was that the Under-Secretary of the Treasury at the time, Harry Dexter White, was the most highly placed Soviet agent in the U.S. government. This inconvenient, but well-documented truth has been covered up or minimized by left-wing historians and reporters for decades. White began working for the Roosevelt Administration in 1934 and concentrated on the relationship of gold and silver to currency management. The U.S. federal government confiscated American's private silver holdings in 1934.

The Secret Service arranged an elaborate sting operation in 1996 to eventually get the Farouk gold coin back. Thank goodness they didn't waste their time investigating Bernie Madoff while he was in the process of ripping off the public in his record breaking $65 billion Ponzi scheme. Eventually, after being seized from a British subject who had bought it, this coin was sold at auction and the proceeds were split between him and the U.S. government. Recently more coins have surfaced in the United States and the government has simply confiscated them -- something it is very good at doing when it comes to gold.

That the U.S. government claims rights through perpetuity and across national borders for its property, but unconstitutionally denies them to its own citizens is the major issue in the Bloomberg Businessweek article (one they seem to have missed entirely), but not the only one. Other than the dangerous precedent of property rights for the average person being trashed, the article brings up the point that the federal government is unaware that gold is stolen from its storehouses and the government wastes its time on pursuing trivial matters on its behalf while ignoring major economic crimes involving billions or even trillions of dollars. Fort Knox hasn't been audited  since 1954. How much of the gold is still there?  What other major Ponzi schemes and frauds are taking place while government agents spend their time tracking down gold coins from 1933?

Disclosure: Do not own any 1933 gold coins.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

EU and UK: Raise Taxes and Cut Stimulus

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Europeans seem bent on acting like lemmings to the sea and jumping off an economic cliff. Not only are the eurozone and UK raising taxes and cutting spending, they want the rest of the world to follow their lead and will try to get this to happen at the next G-20 meeting in late June.

Why anyone would want to follow European countries on economic matters is a real puzzle. The EU's recent handling of the Greek debt crisis will be recorded by history as one of the major episodes of government ineptness of our time (and there is really stiff competition in that category).  Instead of dealing with the problem immediately and decisively by instituting dollarization and removing Greece from the currency union, EU leadership let the matter fester until it blew up. They then tackled the problem with an approximately one trillion-dollar bailout. The EU approach to economic problems seems to be: Why institute a simple cheap solution when an expensive difficult one is available? It's enough to make one ponder if EU policy meetings resemble a multi-lingual idiot's convention.

Over the weekend German Chancellor Angela Merkel stated that she was going to push for a swift exit from fiscal stimulus programs and a focus on debt reduction at the next G-20 meeting. It was German foot dragging on the Greek debt crisis that caused the euro to lose 20% of its value in six months. With a record of success like that, of course the rest of the world should be eager to copy Germany's economic policy ideas. Earlier in June, Merkel's cabinet unveiled substantial budget cuts and tax hikes. France did the same thing recently as have other eurozone countries. Merkel is also spearheading the drive for an international financial transaction tax with the money being used for future bailouts. The possibility that there shouldn't be government bailouts of financial institutions or that the financial institutions that might be bailed out should pay the tax themselves and not their customers seems to have eluded Merkel. Of course, financial centers like London and New York would shoulder a disproportionate amount of the burden, so it is the ultimate socialist solution - get the other guy to pay. Perhaps Merkel isn't as economically challenged as seems to be the case.

Conditions don't appear to be much better in the UK, although we won't find out until Tuesday, June 21st when an emergency budget will be announced by the Conservative-Liberal coalition government. The UK is part of the EU, but not part of the eurozone so it is not obliged to follow the 3% budget deficit to GDP limit imposed there (not that the eurozone countries themselves follow this rule). Like their fellow EU members, suddenly the Brits woke up and realized they had massive deficits (they should have been reading the papers, it's been reported there on a regular basis). Large spending cuts and tax increases are on the table. Even then, the UK's budget deficit could reach 10.5% of GDP in the 2010-11 fiscal year (still less the U.S. number for 2010). It is thought the VAT (value added tax) will be raised from 17.5% to 20.0%. There have been rumors that the capital gains tax rate will be raised from 18% to 40%. If this occurs, money will flow out of British markets at a prodigious rate.

If what's going on in Europe sounds familiar to Americans, it should. These were essentially the economic policies of the failed Carter administration in the late 1970s. During that era, the U.S. economy was chronically weak and the stock market went nowhere. This economic program instituted today could have far worse consequences. The global economy was severely damaged by the Credit Crisis and is still in a very fragile state. It is likely to go into a tailspin.  The predictable follow up will be a return to spending. This scenario happened during the Great Depression after Franklin Roosevelt tried to balance the budget after the 1936 election and the U.S. economy and stock market tanked. If elected officials today are determined to repeat the mistakes of the past, investors should take note and act accordingly.  
 
Disclosure: None

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

An April 15th Look at Taxes and the Stock Market

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


Tax policy can impact not just how much money you pay in taxes, but how much money you are likely to make in the first place if you are an investor. U.S. capital gains taxes have risen and fallen over the last one hundred years and the stock market usually follows the direction of rates. A significant rate increase will be taking place on January 1, 2011.

The reason capital gains are taxed at different rates than ordinary income is that investing involves risk and capital will not flow unless risk is adequately rewarded. Lower capital gains tax rates encourage more business formation and expansion and bring more capital into the stock market. This is the source of real economic growth. Taking on risk to obtain gain of course means the possibility of loss as well. Uncle Sam is more than willing to demand his share of your profits if you make money, but is no longer your full partner when you experience losses. If you make a million dollars investing, you pay taxes on that million dollars. If you don't have trader status with the IRS and lose a million dollars, you get a $3000 deduction per year and will certainly be dead long before you use it up.

Originally, capital gains were taxed at the rate of ordinary income between 1913 and 1922. Top marginal rates were only 7% at first, but rose to as high as 77% in 1918 to pay for World War I.  An alternative capital gains rate of 12.5% for assets held at least two years was introduced in 1922. The top marginal tax rate on earned income was lowered to 25% in 1925. It was an era of low inflation and even deflation starting in the late 1920s. The stock market and economy did quite well; at least for seven years after the lower capital gains rate was introduced.

In 1932, when Herbert Hoover was still president, the top marginal tax rate on earned income was raised to 63%. In 1934, capital gains tax rates were changed and based on how long an investment was kept. For assets held 1,2, 5 and 10 years, the exclusions were 20, 40, 60, and 70 percent respectively. In 1942, top marginal tax rates were increased to 88%, but maximum capital gains rates were capped at 25% for assets held for six months or longer. Top marginal rates went as high as 94% in 1944 and 1945. They remained at 91% or 92% until 1963. The huge differential between marginal rates on earned income and capital gains rates along with low inflation created an economic and stock market boom that lasted from 1942 until the late 1960s.

The top marginal rate was lowered to 77% in 1964 and then 70% in 1965. Capital gain rates were raised in 1969. Inflation began picking up at around the same time and the combination was a negative for the economy and stock market for over a decade. The government made the problem worse by raising capital gains rates significantly in 1976 and added insult to injury by taxing gains that only existed because of inflation. Maximum capital gains rates peaked at just under 40% in 1977 and 1978.

In 1978, congress voted to reduce maximum capital gains to 28%. In 1981, capital gains were lowered to 20% and the top marginal tax rate to 50% starting in the 1982 tax year. The high rates of inflation from the 1970s were beginning to decline significantly. An almost 20-year boom period followed. There were bumps along the way however. The 1986 Tax Reform Act increased capital gains rates to 28% and lowered the top marginal rate on earned income to 38.5% starting in 1987. The marginal rate was lowered further to 28% in 1988. Ironically, equalization of earned income tax rates and capital gains, a long sought goal of certain liberal economists, took place during the Reagan administration.  The U.S. stock market zoomed for the first eight months. Unfortunately, it then fell almost 40% in a few days in October.

Marginal rates started rising in 1991 and reached 39.6% by 1993. The Taxpayer Relief Act of 1997 reduced maximum capital gains rates to 20%, once again creating a significant differential between earned income rates and capital gains. Inflation was falling and low during this time and this kept the real capital gains rate close to the official one. The stock market and economy did extremely well for the next three years until the tech bubble burst. To pick up the flagging economy and stock market, the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003 reduced maximum capitals gains rates to 15% and made this the rate for qualified dividends as well. Inflation was very low during this period. The market and economy did well for the next four years.

Now the maximum capitals gain rate is scheduled to increase from 15% to 20% after the end of the year. Additional taxes will be imposed later on because of the recently passed health care legislation. It looks like we are entering a period of rising inflation and this will make the actual capital gains rate continually go up. I will leave it to the reader to decide what impact this will have on the U.S. economy and the stock market going forward.

Disclosure: Long oil.

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.

Toothless CFTC Tries to Bite Gold and Silver

The 'Helicopter Economics Investing Guide' is meant to help educate people on how to make profitable investing choices in the current economic environment. We have coined this term to describe the current monetary and fiscal policies of the U.S. government, which involve unprecedented money printing. This is the official blog of the New York Investing meetup.


The U.S. CFTC (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) announced on January 14th that it was going to investigate trading in the gold and silver markets. This follows the commission's high profile hearings on speculation in the oil and natural gas markets held in the summer of 2009. Those led to the demise of the popular ETF, DXO and caused the natural gas ETF UNG to trade so irregularly that it no longer behaved like an ETF.  Both of these were investment vehicles for the small investor. Big-time speculators went on their merry way untouched and unscathed by the CFTC's action that was supposedly aimed at protecting the public. Anyone who was the least bit cynical might conclude that the CFTC's actual purpose was to protect the profits of the large commercial users of the commodities it regulates.

The CFTC efforts in investing oil and natural gas were in reality a thinly veiled attempt at price controls. Governments almost without exception resort to price controls when inflation becomes a threat. Price controls are of course extremely effective - not in controlling prices, but in creating shortages and driving prices much higher than they would have been if controls hadn't been implemented. Governments never learn however. In the short-term, the CFTC managed to drive natural gas prices to the low levels that were common in the 1990s. Natural gas was already trading at multi-year lows before the CFTC investigations and half of all natural gas rigs in the U.S. had already been shut down. The impact on natural gas was only collateral damage though from the CFTC's real target, which was oil.

Nothing has a greater impact on consumer prices than does oil and governments know that controlling its price is one of the keys to controlling inflation. Around the same time that the U.S. CFTC announced its hearings, the prime minister of England, Gordon Brown, and the president of France, Nicolas Sarkozy made a joint proposal that an international body of government bureaucrats should set the price of oil instead of the free markets. They suggested the price should be kept in the $70 to $80 range. For those who don't recall, Gordon Brown was the British government bureaucrat that sold half the UK's gold for under $300 in 1999 and the early 2000s. Gold has since quadrupled from the price where he sold it, so the UK didn't get that profit. The U.S. dollars that Brown bought from the gold sale then subsequently lost at least 30% of their value. This is the type of market 'genius' that government brings to the table. Would you like to let a government bureaucrat make investing decisions for your 401K?

The CFTC has more ability to impact oil and natural gas than it does gold and silver. ETFs that deal with energy commodities have to do so through some type of futures trading. Oil and natural gas cannot be easily stored as is the case with gold and silver. While there are ETFs for both gold and silver that only trade futures, there are 11 ETFs globally that buy physical gold. None of them store that gold in the United States. They are beyond the reach of the CFTC and the claws of the U.S. government, which for those who don't remember confiscated all of its citizens gold in 1933 and silver in 1934. In aggregate, the gold ETFs have become the sixth largest holder of gold worldwide since the first one was created in March 2003. They hold more gold than China, but less gold than France. In several more years, they could easily have more gold in storage than any central bank.  

Both oil and gold are completely international commodities (natural gas trades in regional markets). If regulation becomes too onerous in the United States, trading can and will shift elsewhere, just as trading in ETFs will shift from those that invest with futures to those that hold physical metal. When the CFTC made its announcement that it would be investigating gold and silver trading, the London Metal Exchange said it would offer clearing for gold over-the-counter (OTC) contracts in London by the second half of 2010. Hong Kong, Singapore, Zurich, Sydney, Tokyo, and Mumbai would probably like to have the trading business too if it leaves the U.S. commodity markets. The CFTC's action is just another government- motivated attempt to prop up the U.S. dollar by trying to hold the price of gold down. It won't work. The CFTC doesn't have the power to make it happen. Prices will eventually have to move to the point that the market dictates, just as they always do. 

Disclosure: Long gold and silver

NEXT: Lessons for Investors from the U.S. Senate Race

Daryl Montgomery
Organizer, New York Investing meetup
http://investing.meetup.com/21

This posting is editorial opinion. Like all other postings for this blog, there is no intention to endorse the purchase or sale of any security.