Why Do Philippine Bank Accounts Have to be So Secret?

Because too many criminals, robbers, thieves, crooks, unemployed, gangs, organize mafia and etc. will track down your wealth and kill you. So, Bank secrecy be a MUST> or else all organize crime could steal your money or use is as ransom. If Switzerland kept all the wealthy people's money around the world there, why not Philippines. Filipinos money in the banks should invest it within the Philippines. Money are supposed to be spent anyways NOT hoarding it. A\nd also, if Filipinos are depositing their money outside the Philippines let's say in Singapore then the Singapore Bank are the one investing your money and the ones who use our money to their economic bank system. Pinoys should invest their money into Agriculture. mining, Energy. OFW should the buy PHILIPPINES AIRLINEs, San Miguel Beer, eats.

eats-etc.

Bank secrecy (or bank privacy) is a legal principle in some jurisdictions under which banks are not allowed to provide to authorities personal and account information about their customers unless certain conditions apply (for example, a criminal complaint has been filed[1]). In some cases, additional privacy is provided to beneficial owners through the use of numbered bank accounts or otherwise. Bank secrecy is prevalent in certain countries such as Switzerland, Singapore, Lebanon and Luxembourg, as well as offshore banks and other tax havens under voluntary or statutory privacy provisions.

Created by the Swiss Banking Act of 1934, which led to the famous Swiss bank, the principle of bank secrecy is always considered one of the main aspects of private banking. It has also been accused by NGOs and governments of being one of the main instruments of underground economy and organized crime, in particular following the class action suit against the Vatican Bank in the 1990s, the Clearstream scandal and the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Former bank employees from banks in Switzerland (UBS, Julius Baer) and Liechtenstein (LGT Group) have testified that their former institutions helped clients evade billions of dollars in taxes by routing money through offshore havens in the Caribbean and Switzerland. One of these, Rudolf M. Elmer, wrote, "It is a global problem...Offshore tax evasion is the biggest theft among societies and neighbor states in this world."[2] The Swiss Parliament ratified on June 17, 2010 an agreement between the Swiss and the United States governments allowing UBS to transmit to the US authorities information concerning 4,450 American clients of UBS suspected of tax evasion.[3][4]

Advances in financial cryptography (e.g. public-key cryptography) could make it possible to use anonymous electronic money and anonymous digital bearer certificates for financial privacy and anonymous Internet banking, given enabling institutions (e.g. issuers of such certificates and digital cash) and secure computer systems.

Under the Swiss principle of bank secrecy, privacy is statutorily enforced, with Swiss law strictly limiting any information shared with third parties, including tax authorities, foreign governments or even Swiss authorities, except when requested by a Swiss judge's subpoena[citation needed]. However banking is not strictly anonymous since under its banking law all Swiss bank accounts, including numbered bank accounts, are linked to an identified individual. This law only permits a bank to share information with others in cases of severe criminal acts, such as identifying a terrorist's bank account or tax fraud, but not simple non-reporting of taxable income (called tax evasion in Switzerland). Under pressure from the G20 and the OECD, the Swiss government announced in March 2009 that it will abolish the distinction between tax fraud and tax evasion in dealings with foreign clients.[6] The distinction remains valid for domestic clients. Any bank employee violating a client's privacy could be punished quite severely by law. After signing 12 new double taxation treaties in accordance with the international standard set by the OECD, Switzerland was removed from the grey list of non-compliant tax jurisdictions.[7]

UBS was caught red-handed by the United States government offering tax evasion strategies, sending undercover bankers with encrypted computers to the United States. After it was caught, UBS paid a $780 million penalty and handed over hundreds of client files to American authorities.[8][9] In 2010, the Swiss and the United States governments negotiated an agreement allowing Swiss bank UBS to transmit to the US authorities information concerning 4,450 American clients of UBS suspected of tax evasion.[3][10]

In the aftermath of the UBS and Julius Baer banking cases, some wealthy clients who continue to use offshore accounts are turning to private banks in Singapore and Hong Kong. In addition to the local Singapore or Hong Kong banks, offices have been opened in those localities by a number of Swiss private banks.[11] The move to Singapore and Hong Kong is an alternative to the banking secrecy that Swiss banks have come under attack for. Singapore has bank secrecy provisions comparable to those in Switerland. Although Hong Kong does not have the same bank privacy laws, it offers flexibility in the creation of opaque companies that can serve as tax conduits.[12]

Many offshore banks, located in tax havens such as in the Cayman Islands and Panama, also have strict privacy laws.

U.S. Bank Secrecy Act of 1970
Main article: Bank Secrecy Act

The United States' Bank Secrecy Act (or BSA) requires financial institutions to assist government agencies to detect and prevent money laundering. Specifically, the act requires financial institutions to keep records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments, file reports of cash transactions exceeding $10,000 (daily aggregate amount), and to report suspicious activity that might signify money laundering, tax evasion, or other criminal activities.

Republic Act 1405 or the Bank Secrecy Act states that all deposits with Philippine banks are "absolutely confidential" and may not be examined by any person or government official.

Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposits Act, prohibits all kinds of inquiry into bank accounts involving foreign currencies "except upon the written permission of the depositor."

bwahahahahahah crystal is loosing it like kenneth lawry

crystal when will your boyfriend be appearing in this forum deffending you

has that moot been brokken in yet or are you saving it for the right guy ?

we already have the kenny grace act appearing live every day so crystal is their going to be a crystal and her new partner appearing in this forum ?

LAW IS LAW!

Corona's dollars are savings before he joined SC:


Jimeno
by Jay Ruiz, ABS-CBN News
Posted at 02/10/2012 4:28 PM | Updated as of 02/10/2012 4:33 PM

MANILA, Philippines - A spokeswoman of Chief Justice Renato Corona's defense team on Friday said Malacañang should not meddle with Corona's dollar accounts because it is not a crime to own one.

Atty. Karen Jimeno said President Aquino cannot dictate on Corona whether or not he can have a dollar account. This, after the President challenged Corona on Friday to present information on his dollar accounts if he has nothing to hide.

Jimeno said the money in Corona's dollar accounts were part of his savings before he became Chief Justice. Then-President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo appointed Corona as an associate justice of the Supreme Court in April 2002. She named him chief justice in May 2010.

Jimeno said the defense, when they present their witnesses, will have a chance to explain the accounts of Corona.

On Thursday, the SC voted 8-5 to issue a temporary restraining order (TRO) stopping Philippine Savings Bank (PSBank) from releasing records of Corona's alleged foreign currency deposits.

Under the Foreign Currency Deposit Act, a disclosure of foreign currency bank accounts can only be made upon written permission from the depositor.

The senator-judges have scheduled a caucus on February 13, Monday at 11 a.m. to discuss the SC order.

Presidential Spokesman Edwin Lacierda, meanwhile, warned the Senate against deferring to the SC order stopping the opening of Corona's dollar deposits.

"It won't stop. Ngayon foreign currency deposits. Nagpaparinig na ang defense, sabi nila even in the peso accounts, they are going to say 'It's a fishing expedition.' What will stop them now from going to the SC and say 'Your honors, the peso accounts, while it has been revealed, was a product of the fruit of the poisonous tree.' That's another question of law. The SC will say,'Teka, we have jurisdiction. We are going to rule on that.'

"They will emasculate every order of the Senate. That is why it is untenable for the Senate to consider to even defer to the Supreme Court even in interlocutory orders because the basis is grave abuse of discretion. E kung sa final judgment sabihin nila may grave abuse of discretion, di paano na?"

They make it so secret so that all the CROOKS CAN HIDE THEIR STOLEN MONEY IN THAT BANK. This is one of the reason why ALL THE CROOKS GETTING AWAY WITH ANYTHING EVEN MURDER.

Gloria kawatan wrote:

They make it so secret so that all the CROOKS CAN HIDE THEIR STOLEN MONEY IN THAT BANK. This is one of the reason why ALL THE CROOKS GETTING AWAY WITH ANYTHING EVEN MURDER.

There's no point in trying to convince an idiot like Crystal about this. She's is one of the dumbest Indios I have come across.

Get ready to get insulted by her, Gloria Kawatan.

Sa ilalim ng Section 8 ng RA 6426, ang lahat ng foreign currency deposit ay dinedeklara na “absolutely confidential” maliban na lamang kung may written permission ng depositor para mapabuksan ito.

Hindi ito maaaring masiyasat o makita ng sinumang tao, government official, bureau o office maging ito man ay judicial o administrative o private.
..........
Because of the defected law; ALL THE CROOKS CAN DEPOSIT ALL THEIR STOLEN MONEY IN FOREIGN CURRENCY, To protect all their STOLEN MONEY! And who's to blame? These idiots who create this stupid law. It means ALL THE CROOKS in the philippines laughing all the way to the bank.

FAKE Chief Justice,Corona. I dare say that he used the inviolability of the record of deposits as a convenient shield to keep unexplained wealth from being examined.

In fact, he violated Supreme Court jurisprudence by making the deposit. THATS IS THE FACTS!

Not to be forgotten by everyone is how the Arroyo court "violated" the Constitution by allowing then EX-FAKE President Gloria Arroyo to appoint Renato Corona to head the court to ensure her protection from what, as early as then, she knew would be charges of plunder that she would definitely face under the Aquino administration.

In this sense, it is Gloria Arroyo who is under trial. If Chief Justice Corona is not convicted, Mrs. Arroyo’s majority of eight jurists will save her from the gallows. AND THATS THE TRUTH.

Anytime a court has legal need to look into my finances, I would be very happily sign the authorization get all my bank records. I have nothing to hide. All taxes due are paid, no dollar salting or smuggling, no devaluing of properties, no money laundering or any of these exciting illegal activities. My financial state is an open book. Hopefully, when a court should want to look into my finances, prosecution and defense can work to balance my check books, something I am hard-pressed to get around to doing by myself.

IF CORONA, DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE WHY CAN HE DO THE SAME. Truth of the matter is HIS GUILTY TO THE CORE!

crystal wrote:

Republic Act 6426 or the Foreign Currency Deposits Act, prohibits all kinds of inquiry into bank accounts involving foreign currencies "except upon the written permission of the depositor."

If you have stolen money stash in this foreign currency bank account. Are you going to give permission to open it? OF COURSE NOT. JUST LIKE WHAT CORONA IS DOING. He didn't give permission to open it, In fact he want to stop it because if this dollar bank account be open his finish. IF HE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO HIDE HE SHOULD GIVE PERMISSION TO OPEN IT. BUT, TRUTH OF THE MATTER HE STASH HIS GREASE/STOLEN MONEY IN THAT FOREIGN ACCOUNT.

Game-changer ang desisyon na ‘yun at ang impormasyon namin ay mahigpit daw ang botohan.
Dahil sa desisyon na ‘yun, nakapagtestigo noong Miyerkules si PSBank President Pascual Garcia na nagsabi na ang total na ba­lance sa limang peso deposits ni Corona sa kanila sa pagtatapos ng taong 2010 ay P19,728,555.39.

Noong Huwebes, sinabi naman ni Leonora Dizon, manager ng Bank of the Philippine Islands, Ayala branch na sa pagtatapos ng taong 2010, ang balanse sa checking account ni Corona sa kanila ay P12,024,067.70.

Kapag sinuma ang kanyang balanse noong Dec. 31, 2010 sa da­lawang bangko, ang total ay aabot sa P32 million.

Nakakuha si Corona ng temporary restraining order mula sa Supreme Court na hindi isapubliko ang laman ng kanyang dollar deposits.

Kahit hindi kasama ang dollar deposits, bistado si Corona na nagsinungaling siya dahil ang sinabi lang niya sa kanyang SALN ay P3.5 million ang kanyang cash at investments kasama na roon ang mga deposito sa bangko.

Ang laki naman ng diperensya ng P3.5 milyon at P32 milyon.

Dios mio! dito lang digot na siya! Lets see if he still get away with it.

PSBank President Pascual Garcia revealed that the five peso accounts of Corona as of Dec. 31, 2010 contained P19,728,555.39.

Yesterday, the manager of the Bank of the Philippine Islands, Ayala branch testified that as of Dec. 31, 2010, the balance of Corona’s checking account with them was P12,024,000.67

What has been revealed in the impeachment court was that as of Dec. 31, 2010, Corona had about P32 million in the bank.

Corona stated in his statement of assets, liabilities and net worth (SALN) for 2010 that he had only P3.5 million in cash and investments.

The huge discrepancy is glaring proof of dishonesty.

There is a side issue on the legality of the sourcing of the bank records of Corona which was the basis of the impeachment court’s subpoena. However this particular issue isresolved in line with the "fruit of the poisoned tree" theory, the prosecution has scored a victory by showing what seems to be the dishonesty of Corona.

True! with all these evidence can they convict him? Unlike Gloria Arroyo, There is solid evidence but she's staying at presidential suit. Not in munting-lupa!