Is Gold Stored Offshore Reportable to the IRS?

By admin | April 27, 2009

Although we are a very much an international business, we naturally have more than a few readers who are US taxpayers in one way or another, and are liable to file IRS tax returns. And by definition most of our readers are already involved in offshore or international banking. A question that frequently pops up, therefore, is “Do I have to Report Gold Stored Offshore to the IRS on the FBAR (Foreign Bank Account Reporting) form?”

This question is also relevant to non-US residents as similar reporting requirements exist in other countries – although you should be sure to check local reporting requirements very carefully in the country where you normally file tax returns, as reporting requirements do differ significantly.

The so-called IRS  FBAR requirements actually refer to the requirements of a Foreign Bank and Financial Account Reporting form. The actual form number you will be working with is TD F 90-22.1. Under current U.S. law, any person living in the U.S. must file this form if he or she has a financial interest or signature authority in a foreign financial account that has an aggregate value of over $10,000 at any time during the course of a year. This not only includes U.S. citizens but also all residents, domestic partnerships, domestic corporations or domestic estates.

The question has been raised and answered many times before, but was addressed recently by Mark Nestmann of the Sovereign Society, in an article entitled Are Precious Metals Stored Offshore Reportable Financial Accounts? As Nestmann says, tax authorities “construe the term “financial account” very broadly. The definition unquestionably includes bank, securities, and other accounts that hold financial instruments. However, it does not include individual bonds or stock certificates.”

The question, therefore, is whether physical gold bullion that you hold in an offshore vault (or anywhere else offshore for that matter) is reportable. The IRS gives no clear guidelines on the matter, and you probably wouldn’t want to call your local IRS office and ask them directly. Better to check with a suitably qualified tax attorney who is working on your side!

Nestmann’s conclusion is that “If you hold the metals in a safety deposit box or private vault, without opening a bank or other financial account, you don’t appear to have any reporting obligation.”  At many offshore banks you must open an account in order to rent a safety deposit box, but you could always keep the balance of this account under the $10,000 FBAR reporting requirement. There are also a number of non-bank safe deposit facilities available in Austria, Switzerland and the Caribbean.

More information on how to buy gold bullion offshore, as well as where to store it (including specific names and addresses of little known storage and vault facilities) may be found in The Gold Report by Peter Macfarlane. There are also some important warnings about places you should NOT store gold bullion and other precious metals, including anywhere in the United Kingdom.

If you are interested in buying and storing gold bullion offshore, The Gold Report is for you. The good news is that it’s available free for immediate download to members of Q Wealth Report  in the members’ section. If you are not a Q Wealth member and don’t want to sign up, you can now also purchase Peter Macfarlane’s Gold Report as an e-book at the Expat Wealth bookstore.

Note:  sampling the quality of Peter Macfarlane’s articles costs you nothing. Simply enter your e-mail address on the box to your right to receive a free 6-part course entitled “Secrets of the Super Rich” in your e-mail inbox. No spam guaranteed!

Sphere: Related Content

Topics: Investing in precious metals, Offshore Wealth Creation | No Comments »

Are Fake Gold Coins Really a Problem?

By admin | April 25, 2009

A Guest Post by Doug Hornig, Editor, BIG GOLD

The Chinese Fake It

You probably remember movies about the Old West, wherein a shady-looking character would offer to exchange a gold coin for a horse, and the seller would bite down on the coin to verify its authenticity. That was about all you could do if you lacked proper assaying equipment and had to make a snap judgment: depend on your teeth to tell you whether the metal in your hand was sufficiently soft to be genuine gold.

The bite test is actually a pretty good one since gold, despite being among the heaviest metals, is also very soft. If you chomp down and shatter a tooth, it ain’t gold. But before you go munching on your coin collection, you might want to ask yourself, why bother?

Well, because of the Internet. While the Net has become an indispensable resource and we’d never want to return to the days when basic research meant a long day in the library, it also has the ability to stir up a hornet’s nest of concern at the drop of a stick.

One such hornet release followed the recent publication of a three-part series by Coin World, dealing with the subject of coin counterfeiting in China, where it’s quasi-legal. Instantly, the Web was buzzing with the worries of bloggers and eBay shoppers, and the pontifications of pundits about this dire threat.

Before we got too worked up about it, first thing we did was carefully read the source material. Yes, the Coin World articles raise the issue, and they feature an in-depth interview with one Chinese counterfeiter, although that’s not what he calls himself. He’s a proud artisan who produces replicas.

Of what? As it turns out, it’s primarily copies of ancient Chinese coins, which are sold to tourists. A few fake U.S. silver dollars are put up each week on eBay, but they are required to carry a Replica stamp.

Do all Chinese counterfeiters abide by this regulation? Perhaps not. But eBay has always been a place where caveat emptor rules, so the best policy would probably be simply to avoid coin purchases from China.

Problem Areas

Next, we consulted with our favorite gold coin dealer, asking if they come across many fake bullion coins, such as Eagles or Maple Leafs. The answer was no. They’ve only seen a handful during their thirty years in business.

Not that it’s hard to do. With modern 3-D laser imaging, a die can be created that mimics the real thing in perfect detail. The good news is that it’s impractical. The difficulty is that any counterfeit bullion coin would likely have to be gold in order to pass. If it were pure, then the profit margin would be too small to make the deal worthwhile. And if the counterfeiter skimped on the gold content, the coin’s weight would be a dead giveaway.

The only alternative would be to gold-plate a coin made out of some other metal. But again, getting the weight right while preserving the correct size would be a challenge.

Which brings us to the areas where counterfeiting can be a real problem. The most significant is rare coins. These can be made with the proper gold (or silver) content, then artificially aged so that only an experienced numismatist could pick them out. Because of the premium they command, rare coins made with real gold would be highly profitable where a bullion coin would not.

This is one of the reasons (disinterested grading is the other) why many collectors will only trade coins graded and slabbed by third-party specialists like Professional Coin Grading Service (PCGS) or Numismatic Guaranty Corp. (NGC).

Ominously, though, some counterfeit coins are turning up inside phony slabs. If you collect rare coins and have any reason to suspect them, it’s pretty easy to sort the real slabs from the fakes. Coin World provides illustrations on just how to do that here. (http://www.coinworldonline.com/articles/ChineseCounterfeit/Diags.aspx)

Gold bars are a different matter. Fakes do show up in the market from time to time, and they’re hard to identify. Generally speaking, counterfeiters don’t bother with the smaller ones, which are stamped, numbered, and sealed. They concentrate, our dealers tell us, on 1-kilogram or larger sizes. These are poured, rather than stamped, and can be easily adulterated or even hollowed out and filled with lead or some other metal. Compounding the problem is a lack of standard weights, even among good delivery gold bars. The “400-ounce” bar, for example, can vary anywhere from 390 ounces to 420.

How to Protect Yourself

As noted, we don’t believe that there is a serious issue with counterfeit bullion coins at the moment. But that doesn’t mean that they don’t exist, nor does it mean that evolving technology might not make them more profitable in the future than they are now.

The best precaution is the simplest: deal with someone you trust. Establish a relationship with a coin dealer who has built a strong reputation, preferably over a matter of decades, such as the dealers we recommend in BIG GOLD. Buy from them, even if you stumble across some mail order supplier who is charging less of a premium.

For small bars, purchase only those that carry the stamp of one of the known, trustworthy refiners, such as PAMP, Credit Suisse, or Johnson Matthey. For bigger orders, ask your dealer if they do assays. Reputable outfits generally assay bars that are a kilogram or larger. If you want a 100-ounce bar, consider buying direct from the Comex, which will also vault it for you. That removes the assay requirement when you buy, but remember that if you take physical delivery of a large bar, you’ll need an assay when you sell. Do not, under any circumstances, buy a larger gold bar on the Internet or from a private seller you don’t personally know.

If you’re still worried about a coin, there are tests you can perform to check it out.

Precious metals are going to be attractive to con artists, just like anything else of real value. But there are some decent safeguards already built into the system. Supplement them with your own knowledge and common sense, and it shouldn’t be difficult to avoid becoming a victim.

Good thing you don’t really have to worry about purchasing fake bullion coins… because it’s the best time to buy gold, and maybe one of the last chances you get to buy at $800+ levels. Read our report on why ultra-low interest rates could make gold rise to $1,500 (and higher) in the near future – and how you can profit: Click here to learn more.

Sphere: Related Content

Topics: Currencies and Cash | No Comments »

One Thing That Could Sink or Save the Largest US Banks

By admin | April 20, 2009

Guest Post for Peter Macfarlane by Martin Hutchinson Contributing Editor Money Morning

Peter’’s note:  As you probably know I have a pretty hectic work and travel schedule doing at least four jobs: bringing up my kids, editing the Offshore Banking Guide at The Q Wealth Report, flying around the world meeting my private consulting clients, and now I’m working on a major new real estate project with Thomas Bolther too. And then I have a load of reports I am scheduled to write! So sometimes a good article comes along from an associate and I would like to publish it for my readers’ benefit. Such is this press release put out by my friends at Money Morning recently which is preceded by a little well deserved publicity…

$4, 201 Cash Guaranteed Next Month …Yours For The Taking! Martin Hutchinson has uncovered a special group of investments set to pay out $4,201 guaranteed cash next month. Plus, they pay out juicy cash sums all year long. And they’re not income trusts, corporate bonds, or foreign bonds. In fact, remarkably, no one else is talking about them. But you must act by April 26. Read Martin’s full report here…
One of the most accurate forecasters of the global economic crisis, Nouriel Roubini, said last week that last September’s spree of bank takeovers deepened the crisis because it made the already-too-big banks even bigger.

He may well be right; more interesting is what this tells us about the U.S. banking system going forward.

“The institutions are insolvent,” Roubini said in a Bloomberg Radio interview. “You have to take them over and you have to split them up into three or four national banks, rather than having a humongous monster that is too big to fail.”

But that may be impractical. Citigroup Inc. (C), for example, can sell and is selling peripheral parts of its empire such as Japanese broker Nikko Securities. However, so much of its business involves an international nexus of connections – including its large U.S. operations – that splitting them may be both impractical and excessively value destroying.

However, Wells Fargo & Co. (WFC) showed Thursday what could be achieved by simplicity. It gave investors a preview of its first quarter results, in which it will make record earnings of about $3 billion, or 55 cents a share, after paying preferred stock dividends of $372 million on its $25 billion of preference shares from the Troubled Assets Relief Program (TARP).

Both the old Wells Fargo and Wachovia Bank, which it acquired last year, are showing good results, with $3.3 billion in loan-loss charge-offs for the combined group – down from $6.1 billion in the fourth quarter of 2008. As a result, bank stocks were up sharply Thursday, continuing their healthy rally over the last six weeks.

Wells Fargo is one of six U.S. banks – Citigroup, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. (GS), and Morgan Stanley (MS), Bank of America Corp. (BAC) and JPMorgan Chase & Co. (JPM) – with assets of more than $1 trillion. They are so large they form a separate “top tier” of banks, since the next largest bank, PNC Financial Services (PNC), has assets of only $295 billion.

However, Wells Fargo’s first-quarter success does not mean that all the top-tier banks will do well. Both Wells Fargo and Wachovia were heavily oriented to conventional retail and commercial banking, with massive branch networks all over the United States. The combined Wells Fargo was thus much less reliant on the slumbering investment banking business than other top-tier banks. It was also far less involved in high-risk capital-markets game playing, which got so many other banks in trouble. For example, while Wachovia got $500 million of dubious payouts from American International Group Inc.’s (AIG) dodgy credit default swaps, Wells got nothing, and therefore presumably had no net exposure.

Wells Fargo, in short, is becoming a model of what a nation should require of its behemoths under the “too big to fail” doctrine. It does mostly conventional retail and corporate banking, and provides economically useful services to its nationwide network of clients. It takes few huge risks, and is emerging from 2008’s disaster in pretty good shape. Without the Wachovia acquisition, Wells Fargo could probably have avoided the need for TARP capital.

In my February report on the top 12 U.S. banks, I showed how many of the top banks were in pretty good shape and offered investors good value, which would be demonstrated by higher first quarter earnings going forward. The Financial Select Sector SPDR fund (XLF) is up about 39% since then, so that was a pretty pleasing call.

Of course, what I didn’t get right was that the dogs are up even more in percentage terms than the solid citizens. Citigroup, the biggest bow-wow of them all, has more than doubled. Going forward, I would expect quality to assert itself. While some of the weaker banks should survive, they will be able to take much less advantage of currently juicy lending opportunities than their stronger brethren.

Sorting Out the Winners and Losers

Over the long term, the road forward is clear. Roubini’s suggestion to break up the largest banks – say those with assets of more than $500 billion – may be impracticable. It is also unnecessary. They should simply be tightly restricted, allowed to undertake only “vanilla” banking businesses, without a presence in investment banking, or in high-risk trading.

The market would then sort matters out. Some banks, like Wells Fargo, would probably prefer to remain gigantic, but simple and low-risk – earning a reasonable return, paying their top executives moderately, and having their stock serve as a fine investment for risk-average investors seeking dividend income. Bank of America and JPMorgan might wish to divest their investment banking businesses and move toward this model. The cultural clash between Merrill Lynch and the old Bank of America has been huge, suggesting that their merger has huge negative synergy and that the two institutions would be worth more separated.

The top six’s two investment banks, Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley, would have no interest in commercial banking, in which they have little history, so would have to downsize dramatically. One possibility is splitting them three ways – an advisory business, a medium-sized institution with a magnificent client base, and a more or less unregulated hedge fund that could be allowed to bankrupt itself in the shadows. They would not be permitted to retain their current huge positions in “principal trading,” an activity of little economic purpose beyond exploiting the firm’s insider information.

As for Citigroup, it seems likely that its troubles are too great and its culture too aggressive for any Wells Fargo-type solution to be possible. Over time, it should almost certainly be liquidated.

Below the top tier, the U.S. regional banks should mostly be in good shape, with a few exceptions that were based in particularly troubled regions or who had been excessively aggressive. In any case, they would not be “too big to fail” and would be allowed to engage modestly in investment banking if they thought it profitable.

Since they would be allowed higher leverage than the behemoths, they would be more profitable. And over time, the banking business might fragment further, which could only be good for competition.

As the world has seen over the past year, the arguments for creating financial services behemoths were spurious. They were too large to manage, and they survived only because their host country taxpayers gave them an implicit guarantee.

Sphere: Related Content

Topics: Banks and banking offshore | No Comments »

Why You Should Buy Gold Even if it is Manipulated

By admin | April 18, 2009

Jon Herring recently asked on Investors’ Daily Edge how it is that gold – “the world’s greatest inflation hedge” – is roughly the same price today that it was in 1980, after 30 years of inflation?

There is a simple answer: manipulation of the markets by the Gold Cartel . That will be nothing new to readers of this blog or The Q Wealth Report. What’s interesting about Jon’s article is his take on conspiracy theories. Things that you might only have wanted to whisper to trusted friends a few years ago have become facts accepted by the mainstream today…

It used to be that you didn’t speak about market manipulation in polite company. Everyone knows those conspiracies don’t exist. Who could do such a thing? We now know those sentiments are woefully naïve. There is now a deep and wide body of evidence that points to willful and ongoing, official and unofficial suppression of gold prices. Much of this evidence has been compiled and documented by the good folks at the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee

Jon continues explaining not just why but how the cartel manipulates the gold price.

What our readers have long known, however, is that the quoted spot gold price is increasingly diverging from reality. There is one price for ‘virtual’ or ‘electronic’ gold – and a completely different spot price if you actually want to take delivery, touch and hold the bullion itself in the form of bars, coins or ingots (which, as a savvy investor, you should.) In fact, it has become increasingly difficult to buy gold bullion at all. Though fortunately, help is at hand… if you want to read my Q Wealth piece about How to Buy Gold Bullion Offshore.

One of my best discoveries in recent years has been a little-known way that you can purchase gold outside the cartel and completely offshore. Fortunately gold is impossible to forge or fake – its purity can be tested very easily and of course it can be weighed quite easily too. So if you have the right contacts you can buy gold direct from small, artisanal producers and be sure you are not being scammed. That way you don’t have to deal with snooty Swiss bankers with huge minimum handling fees for gold purchases. All this is explained (including contact information) in my special report named appropriately enough The Gold Report, which is available free, provided you are a member of The Q Wealth Report. If you are not yet a member, well a Q Wealth Report Subscription at $87 won’t exactly break the bank and will entitle you to a host of other benefits that you’ll find listed at that site.

Investing in Gold and Silver Coins – by which I don’t mean bullion coins but rare collectors coins – is another interesting angle – a way to diversify your portfolio and thereby spread risk. We have long referred interested readers without charge to our ‘Coyne Chap’ – who was one of North America’s most respected coin dealers, until he took early retirement and moved offshore. He’s a fascinating and knowledgeable person, and welcomes like-minded visitors at his home in South East Asia… so if youare living or traveling in that region and are a Q Wealth subscriber don’t hesitate to make contact with the offices in London to request a referral.

Anyway to get back to the original point, if I haven’t made myself clear by now, it’s that you should buy gold bullion because although it’s manipulated by the means mentioned above and by many other underhand methods covered in Jon’s article such as IMF and Central Bank gold leasing, it is much harder for the cartel to manipulate the real physical stuff you can carry around in your suitcase!

Sphere: Related Content

Topics: Currencies and Cash, Investing in precious metals | No Comments »

“It’s Possible to Train People to be Crazy”

By admin | April 10, 2009

Guest post for petermacfarlane.net by Terry Coxon, Editor, The Casey Report

We don’t yet know how many trillions will be swallowed up by the government’s rapidly breeding herd of stimulus-bailout-help!help! measures. But additional bold steps are sure to come, some already in R&D and others to be invented on the fly to answer each new wave of bad news. Expect price tags suitable for proving how serious and determined the authors are.

The doubts that meet each new plan – does it really need to be that big… hasn’t something like that been tried before… is it smart to keep wrong-headed decision makers in high places… isn’t too much debt at the heart of the problem… if you don’t know what causes inflation, are you sure you know what causes babies – are all answered with the same rhetorical question: “We can’t just do nothing, can we?”

Yes, we can. But we won’t, because the decisions about our wealth and our freedom are being made by career politicians, for whom stepping aside is the only truly unacceptable plan. Nonetheless, even though the idea of government doing nothing in the face of credit crisis, bank insolvencies, and recession has been reduced to a hypothetical, such a policy deserves a little exploring, since it can tell us something about where all the big-dollar solutions coming out of Washington are likely to lead.

Background

It’s possible to train people to be crazy. If you’re acquainted with a psychotherapist (socially, of course), ask him to explain how it’s done. Training people to be crazy wasn’t what the U.S. government set out to do when it ended the dollar’s convertibility to gold in 1973. But it turned out to be one of the results.

Untethered from the gold standard, the Federal Reserve was free to create new dollars whenever it saw fit. But the policy it drifted into wasn’t steady inflation, day in and day out, it was rescue inflation. The Fed would step up the expansion of the money supply whenever it saw a risk of widespread defaults in credit markets. The unintended effect was to train both lenders and borrowers, by repeatedly rescuing them from damaging defaults, to appraise financial risk unrealistically and to regard what is in fact a source of danger as a manageable nuisance. It made the managers of financial institutions functionally crazy, and the longer rescue inflation continued, the worse they got. (When you read about investment bankers running a business with 30-to-1 leverage and tell yourself, “Those people must be crazy,” you’ve got it about right. But they weren’t born that way. They were trained.)

That’s how the credit crisis was nurtured. And here is what the government has done about it so far.




Other vast and unprecedented programs have followed, including tens of billions for any car company willing to drive (not fly) to the teller window, hundreds of billions to get messy home mortgages house-trained, and unspecified mega-billions for Timothy Geithner’s proposal to unburden banks of bad assets through a plan of great advantage but nobody to know what it is.

And today, 21 months after the doctors started scribbling prescriptions, most markets continue down, the economy is still shrinking, and worries are still growing.

Now roll the tape back to August 2007. What would have happened if the U.S. government had simply kept its long-standing commitments (in particular, protecting FDIC-insured deposits and preventing the money supply from shrinking) and otherwise had done nothing? No good-asset-for-bad-asset swaps, no wild expansion in the monetary base, no bailouts, no arranged marriages with taxpayer-financed dowries for failing institutions.

Nothing.

If that sounds extreme, perhaps you’ll find it a little more acceptable if I put it this way: what would have happened if George Bush, Ben Bernanke, Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Barney Frank, and Barack Obama had done nothing?

It would have been spectacular, a mass die-off of the incautious. Bear Stearns, Morgan Stanley, and other practitioners of ultra leverage, including perhaps Merrill Lynch, would have folded. When you borrow to carry $30 of investments for each $1 of company capital, it only takes a 3.4% drop in the prices of your assets to put you under water. And when you’re getting that 30-to-1 leverage through overnight borrowing, even a whiff of doubt can make it impossible to roll over your financing from one day to the next. Either way, you’re out of business.

From there, the trouble would have fanned out. The firms just pronounced dead were counterparties to trillions of dollars in derivatives. The investors on the other side of all those deals (largely banks, insurance companies, and other brokers) would have been left holding the bag. Some of them would have failed, and all that survived would have been left weakened and living in fear.

Growing mortgage losses would have forced Fannie and Freddie (and also Countrywide Financial) into bankruptcy, which would have turned their trillions in outstanding bonds into junk debt, doing great injury to the banks, insurance companies, and other investors that held them. Citibank and Wachovia would have gone under. And with Fannie, Freddie, and Countrywide gone, the biggest sources of mortgage money would be unavailable, which would have turned the housing market from a corpse into a mutilated corpse. AIG, which had turned itself into a sink of follies by insuring other companies against losses on junk debt, would also have joined the departed – and the companies that had been depending on AIG credit insurance would have gotten sorted out between the failed and the merely damaged.

Bank of America, having been spared the irresistible invitations to acquire Countrywide and Merrill Lynch, might be in much better shape than it is today.

With a hundred-car pile-up in the financial sector, lending to businesses and consumers would have shriveled, and the rest of the economy would have slipped into a depression. No more General Motors. No more Chrysler. Ford maybe.

And those are just the big names. Tens of thousands of other companies would have gone out of business. Most others would have laid off workers. The unemployment rate would have moved deep into double digits. With so many companies cutting inventories to raise cash for survival, the wholesale price index would have gone off a cliff, and the consumer price index also would have slumped.

It’s an ugly picture, with pain and hardship for millions of people and grave worries for the rest. But before you start preparing thank-you notes for the good people in Washington who’ve acted so boldly, consider this:

If they had done nothing, the whole sorry business might be over by now. Without the promise of rescue and blow-softening, events would have moved quickly. The collapse of the overleveraged financial companies would have started soon after credit market jitters began in August 2007. (Leverage built on overnight borrowing invites swift justice.) The disaster in the financial sector might have been over by the end of that year or soon after. The year 2008 would have seen the wave of layoffs and bankruptcies in operating companies and the fall in wholesale and consumer prices.

A simple process would have brought the contraction to an end. With the prices of most things falling, the real value of the money in everyone’s pocket would be rising. That would continue until large segments of the population came to feel cash rich and started spending. Dollars appreciated in value, not dollars newly printed, would finance the recovery.

And it would be a thoroughly healthy recovery, because the bankruptcy proceedings that came before it would remove the billion-dollar bunglers of recent years from positions where they can make expensive mistakes. Decision making about the allocation of capital would fall to the survivors, who, by their survival, had proven their ability and readiness to decide wisely.

There is precedent for this. In the depression of 1920-1921, for example, wholesale prices fell by nearly one half, and most of that fall occurred in a period of just six months. It was a violent experience, with widespread bankruptcies, but it was over in a year and a half. It ran fast because the government did so little to try to stop it. Nancy Pelosi hadn’t been born yet.

So much for the hypothetical. Instead, with all the government efforts to make things right, we have:

Yes, it does seem cruel to do nothing when disaster is unfolding. But consider the likely consequences of the alternative.

Doing nothing might be appropriate for Washington at this point in time… but it is not what you should do as an investor. Making the trend your friend is the strategy that will get you through tough economic times like this and provide you double- and triple-digit returns.

The Casey Report focuses on emerging trends to profit from even in highly volatile markets – whether it’s shorting stocks squarely in the way of the accelerating economic avalanche or investing in commodities that stand to gain big in the coming months. Test it now risk-free with our 3-month, 100% money-back trial… click here to learn more.

Sphere: Related Content

Topics: Cautionary tales and real cases, Currencies and Cash | No Comments »

« Previous Entries Next Entries »
  • FREE INTENSIVE OFFSHORE COURSE
     Discover the Secrets of the Super Rich
         Unbiased guidance from Q Wealth Professionals

    Enter your e-mail address here to receive our five day course in your e-mail box:

    Day1:Offshore Banking Made Simple
     Day2:Offshore Asset Protection and Estate Planning
     Day3:Health, Wealth and Wisdom
     Day4:Build Real Wealth Offshore and Online
     Day5:How to Prosper from the Coming Shift in Power

    Enter your e-mail here:

    Free subscription to Q Bytes (No obligation - no spam - unsubscribe any time)

  • Sign up for QBytes


    If you are interested in receiving news and more information related to wealth creation and international living topics, sign up to our FREE newsletter Q Bytes.

    From time to time we offer exclusive benefits for regular Q Bytes readers. These may include discounts on events, pre-launch access to new information, free limited access to research reports, and more… You can read about these offers in Q Bytes.

    Enter your email address to sign up today

    		   

    After entering your email address in the box above, you should receive a confirmation email within a few minutes. You will need to click on the link in that mail in order to confirm that you have opted in to the Q Bytes subscription.