International Livings seminar, Worth it?

SawMan wrote:

...or simply conclude that these generally low balance accounts are too much of a compliance risk to justify the reward....Unfortunately, most checking accounts expats would maintain would not be very attractive to a bank when weighed against the risks and costs of compliance.

When I opened my Banco de Guayaquil account in Quito in February 2014, the account I was assigned was a savings account.  The bank showed no interest in my obtaining a checking account.

No big whoops, though, because Expat consumers in EC do not need to write checks so long as they have credit or debit account cards they are able to draw against.

If some Ecuador banks decide to 'stiff' Expats next year, that may be to the advantage of other EC banks to which more funds would thus be moved. 

In this scenario, Expats will still have a bank in Ecuador, just not the same one as before.

cccmedia in Quito

cccmedia wrote:

SawMan wrote:

...or simply conclude that these generally low balance accounts are too much of a compliance risk to justify the reward....Unfortunately, most checking accounts expats would maintain would not be very attractive to a bank when weighed against the risks and costs of compliance.

When I opened my Banco de Guayaquil account in Quito in February 2014, the account I was assigned was a savings account.  The bank showed no interest in my obtaining a checking account.

No big whoops, though, because Expat consumers in EC do not need to write checks so long as they have credit or debit account cards they are able to draw against.

If some Ecuador banks decide to 'stiff' Expats next year, that may be to the advantage of other EC banks to which more funds would thus be moved. 

In this scenario, Expats will still have a bank in Ecuador, just not the same one as before.

cccmedia in Quito

Although I wasn't trying to refer solely to checking accounts, I bow to your superior knowledge!   

Much will be learned on how banks respond to the requirements coming in 2016 as this year moves along.

I'm pretty sure the EC banks will not do anything if your balance is below what the USA says you can have. They will not have to report it.

Pajaroazul wrote:

I'm pretty sure the EC banks will not do anything if your balance is below what the USA says you can have. They will not have to report it.

You're getting confused.  EC banks have to report as required and when requested. Period.  This means sending out 1099-INT statements for interest, etc. and responding to inquiries from the IRS. (these are spelled out in the regs.) The $10,000 minimum has nothing to do with EC banks or excuse their compliance obligations.  It is only relevant as the amount in one account or in multiple accounts combined that triggers the taxpayer FinCEN 114 obligation. Ok?

The U.S. does not limit how much you can have in an account.

Here is the catch...the key was "flux". No one, not even bank execs, know which way Ecuadorian bank Boards are going to advise. They also don't know what insane new law is going to come from the USA Congress or via the now infamous "Presidential decree", based on the latest imaginary threat to the USA. So...impossible to call right now. The safe hedge...since opening a bank account for an Expat is already more difficult in 2015 than 2010...or 2013 for that matter...hard to believe it will get easier in 2016. Worst case, it may become impossible, but no proof of this yet.

Pajaroazul wrote:

I'm pretty sure the EC banks will not do anything if your balance is below what the USA says you can have. They will not have to report it.

I am sorry, but that is incorrect. Reporting is required on all accounts and, to be brutally honest, the lower your balance, the more of a headache you become to fill out paperwork and devote precious bank man-hours.

cccmedia wrote:

SawMan wrote:

...or simply conclude that these generally low balance accounts are too much of a compliance risk to justify the reward....Unfortunately, most checking accounts expats would maintain would not be very attractive to a bank when weighed against the risks and costs of compliance.

When I opened my Banco de Guayaquil account in Quito in February 2014, the account I was assigned was a savings account.  The bank showed no interest in my obtaining a checking account.

No big whoops, though, because Expat consumers in EC do not need to write checks so long as they have credit or debit account cards they are able to draw against.

If some Ecuador banks decide to 'stiff' Expats next year, that may be to the advantage of other EC banks to which more funds would thus be moved. 

In this scenario, Expats will still have a bank in Ecuador, just not the same one as before.

cccmedia in Quito

Keep,in mind, though, that most debit accounts in Ecuador have a $300-$500 daily limit on those cards, which does little for someone trying to buy a $700 refrigerator, today. They would have to go to the bank and pull out cash. Not the end of the world, but far from the "no worries" implied convenience.

Andrellita wrote:

No, you don't have to "live in a cardboard box and eat spam every day"  That;s an insult to those of us who know how to live within our means.  If you read my previous post, I live very well and take trips to boot - also I've discovered fabulous restaurants with very affordable prices.  Salinas is another story altogether.

Whoooooaaaaa! Back up the truck! While some sarcastic hyperbole was used to drive home a distinction, no insult was intended to anyone who has found a frugal way to live. Let us remember, the Ecuadorian minimum wage is basically half that amount and most get by with that. My quibble is with the whole "live like a king for $[fill in the latest hype figure here]" crowd. One man's king is another man's pauper. Define "live like a king"? I made it clear, in my earlier statement, that no one could/should define this lifestyle variable for anyone else. It is a personal lifestyle decision...but folks have to be realistic. If you still think I am wrong, by all means, breakdown your monthly $700 budget, so everyone one can evaluate for themselves if that is the kingdom they seek.

HGQ2112 wrote:

Here is the catch...the key was "flux". No one, not even bank execs, know which way Ecuadorian bank Boards are going to advise. They also don't know what insane new law is going to come from the USA Congress or via the now infamous "Presidential decree", based on the latest imaginary threat to the USA. So...impossible to call right now. The safe hedge...since opening a bank account for an Expat is already more difficult in 2015 than 2010...or 2013 for that matter...hard to believe it will get easier in 2016. Worst case, it may become impossible, but no proof of this yet.

Perhaps not impossible, but will it really be worth the hassle for either party in 2015 and beyond? Already so much paperwork, and time involved for a U.S. citizen to open an account, and already a hassle for Ecuadorian Bank Boards with some new U.S. law everyday (well not quite) but you get where I'm headed. The U.S. is making it impractical for either party. Which I believe has been the main goal from the U.S. all along. I'm far from a conspiracy theorist, but do think that the main objective from all these U.S. regulations is to keep as much money staying in U.S. bank accounts as possible.

Only other option is have plenty of gold, silver, and cash hoarded somewhere, but that's pretty impractical, and not a viable option for the vast majority. Plus it's inconvenient, and dangerous.

j600rr wrote:

HGQ2112 wrote:

Here is the catch...the key was "flux". No one, not even bank execs, know which way Ecuadorian bank Boards are going to advise. They also don't know what insane new law is going to come from the USA Congress or via the now infamous "Presidential decree", based on the latest imaginary threat to the USA. So...impossible to call right now. The safe hedge...since opening a bank account for an Expat is already more difficult in 2015 than 2010...or 2013 for that matter...hard to believe it will get easier in 2016. Worst case, it may become impossible, but no proof of this yet.

Perhaps not impossible, but will it really be worth the hassle for either party in 2015 and beyond? Already so much paperwork, and time involved for a U.S. citizen to open an account, and already a hassle for Ecuadorian Bank Boards with some new U.S. law everyday (well not quite) but you get where I'm headed. The U.S. is making it impractical for either party. Which I believe has been the main goal from the U.S. all along. I'm far from a conspiracy theorist, but do think that the main objective from all these U.S. regulations is to keep as much money staying in U.S. bank accounts as possible.

Only other option is have plenty of gold, silver, and cash hoarded somewhere, but that's pretty impractical, and not a viable option for the vast majority. Plus it's inconvenient, and dangerous.

In my professional and, also, personal opinion, you are 100% dead on right in your observations. Respectfully, let me suggest that perhaps your concluding question needs to be a somewhat different perspective. Perhaps the question shouldn't be "Is it going to become too much of a hassle?" Perhaps the question should be "How quickly can I organize my life to make the move?" Today, some freedom of money movement still exists. Today, a country like Ecuador will still consider accepting your funds and opening an account. Does anyone truly believe the current trend is for the preceding to become easier tomorrow? I mean to be in denial even 10 years ago...well...maybe I could understand. But today? Now? Can there truly be many left that do not see the writing on the wall, when the once most desired banking customer, the USA citizen, is now being almost universally rejected around the globe. I am a global real estate investment consultant, by way of full disclosure. So, yes, theoretically I could benefit from this advice. My industry certainly does. However, I say get your USA cash out, as fast as possible, into global hard assets, such as foreign real estate. You never know when the door will fully close. It would have been hard just 10 years ago for most to have imagined foreign banks saying, "No, thank you" to USA citizens wanting to put down a chunk of hard-earned cash. Who knows what the next 10 years hold?

While the US leads the way, Canada and UK have each passed their own FATCA-type legislation governing their citizens and financial dealings abroad.  So, the trend is quite discernible among more and more Western nations.

SawMan wrote:

While the US leads the way, Canada and UK have each passed their own FATCA-type legislation governing their citizens and financial dealings abroad.  So, the trend is quite discernible among more and more Western nations.

Astute observation. Impacting a UK client of mine, right now. Finding solutions, but it gets harder every day for citizens of those countries relying on "quantitative easing" - a wonderful euphemism for "printing imaginary money, to pay very real debts, while leaving the citizenry holding the financial bag via higher taxes, capital controls and asset confiscation." The old world economies (feels odd to say that, but reality is...what it is) like the USA, Western Europe and Canada are in for a world of economic hurt. Worse, the citizenry of those nations are in for a world of economic hurt.

HGQ2112 wrote:

SawMan wrote:

While the US leads the way, Canada and UK have each passed their own FATCA-type legislation governing their citizens and financial dealings abroad.  So, the trend is quite discernible among more and more Western nations.

Astute observation. Impacting a UK client of mine, right now. Finding solutions, but it gets harder every day for citizens of those countries relying on "quantitative easing" - a wonderful euphemism for "printing imaginary money, to pay very real debts, while leaving the citizenry holding the financial bag via higher taxes, capital controls and asset confiscation." The old world economies (feels odd to say that, but reality is...what it is) like the USA, Western Europe and Canada are in for a world of economic hurt. Worse, the citizenry of those nations are in for a world of economic hurt.

Greece gets all the attention, but U.S.A.'s debt-to-GDP ratio is almost double (66% vs. 122%).  That's worse, BTW.

My view (and I have no idea if it makes sense to anyone else) is that just as an investor diversifies his or her investments, a prudent individual should diversify their life, which is analogous to a three-legged stool:  Live in one country, be citizen of a second country and keep your assets in a third.  If you want to add a fourth leg, hold all your safe assets in an irrevocable trust organized (or organised) under the laws of a country have strong protection laws.  So, for me, I might (i) live in Ecuador, (ii) remain a citizen of the U.S., (iii) have my assets in a Cook Islands Trust with legal owner being a Cook Islands Trustee (many organizations established there to provide such services worldwide) and (iv) the actual custodian of assets and investment advisor being a Swiss bank.

I will not.  Why should I lay my budget bare to a snobbish remark?  For more demeaning remarks?  I know everyone can figure out his own budget without my help.  I won't even bother to answer your remarks ever again.  All I did was share what was and is possible for the benefit of others, and wooah is for horses.

SawMan wrote:

HGQ2112 wrote:

SawMan wrote:

While the US leads the way, Canada and UK have each passed their own FATCA-type legislation governing their citizens and financial dealings abroad.  So, the trend is quite discernible among more and more Western nations.

Astute observation. Impacting a UK client of mine, right now. Finding solutions, but it gets harder every day for citizens of those countries relying on "quantitative easing" - a wonderful euphemism for "printing imaginary money, to pay very real debts, while leaving the citizenry holding the financial bag via higher taxes, capital controls and asset confiscation." The old world economies (feels odd to say that, but reality is...what it is) like the USA, Western Europe and Canada are in for a world of economic hurt. Worse, the citizenry of those nations are in for a world of economic hurt.

Greece gets all the attention, but U.S.A.'s debt-to-GDP ratio is almost double (66% vs. 122%).  That's worse, BTW.

My view (and I have no idea if it makes sense to anyone else) is that just as an investor diversifies his or her investments, a prudent individual should diversify their life, which is analogous to a three-legged stool:  Live in one country, be citizen of a second country and keep your assets in a third.  If you want to add a fourth leg, hold all your safe assets in an irrevocable trust organized (or organised) under the laws of a country have strong protection laws.  So, for me, I might (i) live in Ecuador, (ii) remain a citizen of the U.S., (iii) have my assets in a Cook Islands Trust with legal owner being a Cook Islands Trustee (many organizations established there to provide such services worldwide) and (iv) the actual custodian of assets and investment advisor being a Swiss bank.

Professionally speaking, your advice is one that should be heeded by all!

Andrellita wrote:

I will not.  Why should I lay my budget bare to a snobbish remark?  For more demeaning remarks?  I know everyone can figure out his own budget without my help.  I won't even bother to answer your remarks ever again.  All I did was share what was and is possible for the benefit of others, and wooah is for horses.

I went out of my way to explain that no "snobbish" tone was intended and given the breadth of quotes from me on the Internet, anyone can discern the same. I am glad that you have made it work, very economically so...for YOU. What these hack outfits preaching (or at the very least strongly implying) a regal life for $1,200/mo. forget to mention is that not everyone perceives "the regal life" quite the same way. If it is working for you...great! Posting your personal budget might have helped others. If you prefer not, I strongly support your right to refrain.

message deleted

HGQ2112 wrote:

Respectfully, let me suggest that perhaps your concluding question needs to be a somewhat different perspective. Perhaps the question shouldn't be "Is it going to become too much of a hassle?" Perhaps the question should be "How quickly can I organize my life to make the move?" Today, some freedom of money movement still exists. Today, a country like Ecuador will still consider accepting your funds and opening an account. Does anyone truly believe the current trend is for the preceding to become easier tomorrow? I mean to be in denial even 10 years ago...well...maybe I could understand. But today? Now? Can there truly be many left that do not see the writing on the wall,

Astute observation, and recommendation. Personally, own a fair amount of land outside of the U.S., have cash, gold, and silver scattered around, and trade commodities. Am pretty well hedged, and not really concerned what happens with the U.S. to be perfectly blunt. Whatever happens will have a minimal impact on me. Have the finances, and ability to opt out of the system anytime.

Am probably not as cynical as you, and Sawman regarding the future of the U.S. Not that both your observations, and analysis is wrong. Would make the argument that if you look at the last 30 plus years the growth of big corrupt government, out of control spending, unrealistic programs that could never be paid for. Lack of investment in infrastructure during good times. Big uncontrolled, unproductive, and uncompetitive businesses that should have been allowed to go under, and replaced by more competitive businesses. An out of control banking system, and financial system still run by crooks(more or less). The decreasing middle class. Industries lost, wages decreasing, cost of living increasing. In large parts these things have all been the doing of one generation (not exactly 100% accurate or fair to put on one generation), but overall these things took place when a particular generation had the most power, and influence.

In contrast if you go back, and look at articles from the 90's, you will see that my generation has by in large always been for less intrusive government, and fiscally conservative. We have never wanted big out of control business, or government, and have always wanted to go after the corrupt leaders of all these things. We have also always wanted more options than the two party system, which is really only a one party system, and we have always believed in being fiscally responsible. The taboo issues such as social security, and medicare are not taboo for my generation. As a whole we have not been political, and could care less about becoming career politicians. As the older generation is starting to lose power we are getting more involved in politics, and we are willing to make the tough financial decisions that have been completely ignored for the last 30 plus years. If some people are going to have to take an economic hit by getting things under control, then so be it. What has to be done, is what has to be done.

j600rr wrote:

Am probably not as cynical as you, and Sawman regarding the future of the U.S. Not that both your observations, and analysis is wrong.

I'm not cynical at all, just realistic.  I hope for the best, but plan (in part) for the worst.  Sounds like that's what you're doing.

As far as this generation or the next one or the one after that "fixing" the problems of the past, it will become harder and harder to  cut entitlements as more and more people depend on the government for all or part of their support and harder and harder to raise taxes when a higher and higher percentage of the income tax burden is already on a relatively small percentage. (The top 1% pay 50% of the income tax collected in 2014 and the top 20% - household income of $134,000 - pay 85% of the income tax.  The bottom 50% pay no income tax.)  Many states, notably New Jersey, raise tax rates on wealthy and end up collecting less revenue.  Remember, the more you tax something, the less you get of it.

message deleted

SawMan wrote:

j600rr wrote:

Am probably not as cynical as you, and Sawman regarding the future of the U.S. Not that both your observations, and analysis is wrong.

I'm not cynical at all, just realistic.  I hope for the best, but plan (in part) for the worst.  Sounds like that's what you're doing.

As far as this generation or the next one or the one after that "fixing" the problems of the past, it will become harder and harder to  cut entitlements as more and more people depend on the government for all or part of their support and harder and harder to raise taxes when a higher and higher percentage of the income tax burden is already on a relatively small percentage. (The top 1% pay 50% of the income tax collected in 2014 and the top 20% - household income of $134,000 - pay 85% of the income tax.  The bottom 50% pay no income tax.)  Many states, notably New Jersey, raise tax rates on wealthy and end up collecting less revenue.  Remember, the more you tax something, the less you get of it.

Point taken, and not trying to start a generation clash, or war, but do think generational characteristics are cyclical just like most things in the U.S. There are events that have an impact on each generation during there earlier years that have an impact on their beliefs. Yes, am fully aware the more you tax something the less you get of it, and  the rich, or more well of don't pay their fair share argument is comical. It's actually quite easy to cut entitlement programs when your generation, and younger generations will never see many of those benefits.  Bear in mind the population of my generation, and the next younger generation now coming of voting age blows away the older generations population.
However the budget, and deficit does not need to be fixed overnight. In fact the U.S. debt never really needs to be paid fully off, but it does need to get under control. There are still many options available, and simple reforms for many of the entitlements that will help to get things under control, and still plenty of government waste that is accomplishing nothing that can be cut. There is actually a ton that can get cut that will have very little impact on the vast majority, and won't effect many of the programs now in place. Still don't have to reinvent the wheel yet. Rome wasn't built in a day, and the U.S. fiscal debacle won't get fixed in a day. Of course if over the next 10 years or so the government debt doubles, or triples (extremely possible) then things may be beyond repair. At which point I'll be sitting on a beach having a cold beer somewhere.

Quoted: "Am pretty well hedged, and not really concerned what happens with the U.S. to be perfectly blunt. Whatever happens will have a minimal impact on me."

Amen, to that. Same boat. However, candidly, the impending USA implosion will have some impact on us all. Of course, the race is on...does the Euro implode first or the USD/economy. This is one "down to the wire" finish with no possible winning bet.

HGQ2112 wrote:

Amen, to that. Same boat. However, candidly, the impending USA implosion will have some impact on us all. Of course, the race is on...does the Euro implode first or the USD/economy. This is one "down to the wire" finish with no possible winning bet.

Quite a few possible scenarios. Not really sure any of them will be particularly pleasant. Would say as of now both Europe and the U.S. are trying to go more the route of financial repression. Seldom heard term, but not a new concept.

j600rr wrote:

HGQ2112 wrote:

Amen, to that. Same boat. However, candidly, the impending USA implosion will have some impact on us all. Of course, the race is on...does the Euro implode first or the USD/economy. This is one "down to the wire" finish with no possible winning bet.

Quite a few possible scenarios. Not really sure any of them will be particularly pleasant. Would say as of now both Europe and the U.S. are trying to go more the route of financial repression. Seldom heard term, but not a new concept.

Exactly. Couldn't agree more.

Pajaroazul wrote:

Also as far as IL is concerned they are a scam. I volunteer for a program that helps street/ market children and heir families. The mothers make bags and jewelry out of recycled materials to sell in gift and souvenir shops here in a Quito. I saw that IL was having a seminar. I went to ask if they would allow us to set up a table to sell these items. The really nasty IL lady at the door said it would cost us $1500 for a table! I tried to argue that this is helping the poor, but no dice.

IL wants to ignore the poor, not help them.  IL accuses expats of causing economic and social unrest when they pay the cleaning lady more than $3/hour.

Hi everybody,

Please note that some off topic posts have been removed from this thread.

Thanks

Priscilla 

Priscilla wrote:

Hi everybody,

Please note that some off topic posts have been removed from this thread.

Thanks

Priscilla 

Thank you

message deleted

Right on, Nataly.  Without International Living I wouldn't have known about or purchased in Quito in 2004.  NOW i enjoy living here high on the Andes where life is good.

I mentioned earlier that chicungunya mosquitoes are a threat in lower altitudes.  President Correa is concerned and taking action because the frequent rains are providing more breeding grounds.  They say it doesn't kill you but the pain and discomfort can be almost unbearable for quite a while.  However, two people have died from it, and although less than in other countries in Central and South America, thousands more are suffering from it.  Hopefully mosquitoes don't chase after you the way they do me.

message deleted

Andrellita wrote:

I mentioned earlier that chicungunya mosquitoes are a threat in lower altitudes.  President Correa is concerned and taking action because the frequent rains are providing more breeding grounds.  They say it doesn't kill you but the pain and discomfort can be almost unbearable for quite a while.  However, two people have died from it, and although less than in other countries in Central and South America, thousands more are suffering from it.  Hopefully mosquitoes don't chase after you the way they do me.

It's called dengue, or dengue fever, and it's pretty nasty. Will knock you on your but usually for a good few weeks, and sometimes months. There is also usually several deaths associated from it every year in most Latin American countries. Have been fortunate to have never gotten it, but know several people who have gotten it over the years. Though in their cases it was never fatal, it was nasty.

message deleted

Wrong.  Dengue is another problem, but not like chikunguna.  You don;t read the headlines here nor the ongoing news, so please check your info before trying to correct mine.  Just because you know about one doesn't mean you know about the other.

message deleted

Andrellita wrote:

Wrong.  Dengue is another problem, but not like chikunguna.  You don;t read the headlines here nor the ongoing news, so please check your info before trying to correct mine.  Just because you know about one doesn't mean you know about the other.

My bad, did not notice you mentioned chikunguna. Still dengue is another ugly thing spread by mosquitoes. Mosquitoes are quite nasty aren't they? Spreading so many ugly diseases.

Hi everybody,

Can we please stick to the initial subject of this thread? 

Thanks

Priscilla

message deleted

IL is now claiming that the best place for economic refugees is Panama. $1,000 income for pensioners visa plus 20% off for medical costs, 25% off for restaurants, airfare, electric and phone plus 50% off for entertainment.  In addition the people are very polite and respectful, with retirees getting to go to the head of lines, have their own special windows in the banks etc

mugtech wrote:

IL is now claiming that the best place for economic refugees is Panama. $1,000 income for pensioners visa plus 20% off for medical costs, 25% off for restaurants, airfare, electric and phone plus 50% off for entertainment.  In addition the people are very polite and respectful, with retirees getting to go to the head of lines, have their own special windows in the banks etc

Ecuador's resident Expats 65+ also get 50 percent off on transportation, including the first leg of flights originating in EC .. half off on utilities and certain live entertainment ... plus discounted IESS healthcare.

Ecuador's highlands have a great advantage in offering mild weather.  To find that in Panama you need to go to Chiriquí province above David, Panama's altitude.  The capital, Panama City, is a sauna.

Ecuador 65+ Expats also have preferencial lines at the banks and at the Maxi supermarkets.

cccmedia in Quito

cccmedia wrote:

mugtech wrote:

IL is now claiming that the best place for economic refugees is Panama. $1,000 income for pensioners visa plus 20% off for medical costs, 25% off for restaurants, airfare, electric and phone plus 50% off for entertainment.  In addition the people are very polite and respectful, with retirees getting to go to the head of lines, have their own special windows in the banks etc

Ecuador's resident Expats 65+ also get 50 percent off on transportation, including the first leg of flights originating in EC .. half off on utilities and certain live entertainment ... plus discounted IESS healthcare.

Ecuador's highlands have a great advantage in offering mild weather.  To find that in Panama you need to go to Chiriquí province above David, Panama's altitude.  The capital, Panama City, is a sauna.

Ecuador 65+ Expats also have preferencial lines at the banks and at the Maxi supermarkets.

cccmedia in Quito

I agree that Ecuador is a better place to live, but evidently IL has more real estate in Panama.