Euro Pacific bank is a scam
- Thread starter sonato
- Start date
- Status
The DMCC Dubai licensed expired over two weeks ago.
If everybody who opted-in wanted to withdraw their money from Qenta I cannot see how they will allow it so easily. Makes no business sense after partially paying ($500K) for the assets.
If everybody who opted-in wanted to withdraw their money from Qenta I cannot see how they will allow it so easily. Makes no business sense after partially paying ($500K) for the assets.
You are︄ wrong. EPB was never declared insolvent. After it's 2021 audit, OCIF found that the bank︅ was under-capitalized. That's because unlike St. Vincent, Puerto Rico required reserve against cash deposits in︆ banks. So the money we had deposited in Novo Bank needed a reserve, as if︇ those deposits represented a loan. But the bank was never insolvent in any financial sense.︈ It also had millions more in cash to cover all deposits and other trade invoices.︉ EPB never had any debt on its balance sheet.
It's true that the bank started︊ losing money, particularly in 2020 with rising compliance costs, COVID and the bad press about︋ the J5 Investigation. But I personally covered those losses. That's why I wanted to sell︌ the bank. When the OCIF Commissioner said the bank was insolvent during the J5 press︍ conference, that was a lie. But she needed some justification for putting the bank into︎ receivership. However, had she approved the sale to Qenta, another $8 million in cash would️ have been added to the bank's balance sheet. That was millions more than was needed to meet the capital deficiency. Plus, under Qenta's ownership, the losses associated with the EPB name and my ownership would have gone away.
Plus, I only started to look for a buyer after the OCIF Commissioner gave me permission to sell the bank. I had multiple offers and choose Qenta. The bank would have been worth a lot more but for the exposure of the J5 investigation, which ultimately found that the bank did nothing wrong, yet destroyed its reputation and crippled it financially. But for my willingness to personally︀ cover the bank's operating losses to safeguard customers, the bank would have become insolvent over︁ time.
It's true that the bank started︊ losing money, particularly in 2020 with rising compliance costs, COVID and the bad press about︋ the J5 Investigation. But I personally covered those losses. That's why I wanted to sell︌ the bank. When the OCIF Commissioner said the bank was insolvent during the J5 press︍ conference, that was a lie. But she needed some justification for putting the bank into︎ receivership. However, had she approved the sale to Qenta, another $8 million in cash would️ have been added to the bank's balance sheet. That was millions more than was needed to meet the capital deficiency. Plus, under Qenta's ownership, the losses associated with the EPB name and my ownership would have gone away.
Plus, I only started to look for a buyer after the OCIF Commissioner gave me permission to sell the bank. I had multiple offers and choose Qenta. The bank would have been worth a lot more but for the exposure of the J5 investigation, which ultimately found that the bank did nothing wrong, yet destroyed its reputation and crippled it financially. But for my willingness to personally︀ cover the bank's operating losses to safeguard customers, the bank would have become insolvent over︁ time.
Yes an audit that was never made public to customers at the time to see whether they wanted to continue to use an under-capitalized bank.
The law is the law whether you like it or not. You must follow OCIF's requirements even if you don't agree with it or it does not fit with your︀ internal full reserve business model. You don't make the rules as a bank you follow︁ them or hand back your banking license.
P.S For an audit to determine your bank︂ was under capitalized shows gross incompetence in the management of the bank by the staff︃ there.
The law is the law whether you like it or not. You must follow OCIF's requirements even if you don't agree with it or it does not fit with your︀ internal full reserve business model. You don't make the rules as a bank you follow︁ them or hand back your banking license.
P.S For an audit to determine your bank︂ was under capitalized shows gross incompetence in the management of the bank by the staff︃ there.
That was our first government audit after moving the bank to Puerto Rico.︀ We had been asking for our annual audit for two years, so that we could︁ find out if we were doing anything wrong. But OCIF was behind in its audits.︂ But every year we still had an independent financial audit done. The bank did not︃ realize that cash deposits at other banks were treated the same as loans. We only︄ found that out after the OCIF audit. St. Vincent did not have that requirement. OCIF︅ did not require an immediate capital injection. Instead, OCIF gave the bank time to develop︆ a plan to increase the capital. The plan I presented was a sale to Qenta,︇ which provided for $8 million in additional capital, which was millions more than was needed.︈ But we were always a 100% reserve bank. The bank always held more cash than︉ was owed to customers. Contrast that with most banks, that don't even keep 10% of︊ their deposits in cash. Every deposit was safe. The only problem was that OCFI rejected︋ the sale, refused to allow me to add any more capital myself, and insisted on︌ putting the bank into receivership. That was compounded by the deliberate J5 PR campaign to︍ pretend the bank was facilitating tax evasion and money laundering, which lead to the Portugese︎ government freezing the bank's account at Novo Bank. During that time the receiver did not️ keep up to date with changing SWIFT requirements that left the bank unable to process wire requests with Novo Bank.
always the same and same story PS. You literally spam the thread with this allegations. I personally doubt you will win in court tbh.
You moved your bank to PR because you knew it was a shitty regulator, why didn't you move it to Florida? Oh wait they would never grant you a banking licence there and need 20 (!) times more regulatory capital
You moved your bank to PR because you knew it was a shitty regulator, why didn't you move it to Florida? Oh wait they would never grant you a banking licence there and need 20 (!) times more regulatory capital
Peter Schiff conveniently ignores key comments/questions from Martin and Wotduaino´s excellent comments and mostly just repeats himself.
UNANSWERED BY PETER:
Q1: Was there any due diligence on Qenta’s Wirecard connections before Qenta was selected as a buyer?
Q2: Was EPB’s international clientele informed of any potential Wirecard links?
Q3: If Qenta had trouble securing regulatory approval, was its Wirecard past a factor?
Q4: If EPB was not legally insolvent, why did OCIF classify it as such?
Q5: What exact financial figures did OCIF base its insolvency classification on?
UNANSWERED BY PETER:
Q1: Was there any due diligence on Qenta’s Wirecard connections before Qenta was selected as a buyer?
Q2: Was EPB’s international clientele informed of any potential Wirecard links?
Q3: If Qenta had trouble securing regulatory approval, was its Wirecard past a factor?
Q4: If EPB was not legally insolvent, why did OCIF classify it as such?
Q5: What exact financial figures did OCIF base its insolvency classification on?
No, the regulations in Puerto Rico where far more strict they were in St. Vincent, which is where the bank moved from . I didn't want to go to FLa. as I did not want to︀ be FDIC insured. EPB didn't need that as it was 100% reserve. Plus, my tax︁ rate on the income I hoped to earn running the bank in PR was only︂ 4%. If I ran it in Fla. it would have been 45%. (21% corporate tax,︃ then 24% federal income and Obamacare tax).
I am talking about Florida compared to PR and not St Vincent lol! So you moved it to PR because of your personal agenda and not that of your depositors, interesting. You just didn't want to pay the FDIC premium every year and would not qualify for FDIC because anyway - thats the reason
This is what I mean when I say incompetence in the management of the bank. Ignorance by management is no excuse here.
P.S They were running a bank and not a sweet shop.
P.S They were running a bank and not a sweet shop.
Why would we need to pay FDIC premiums, and incur other costs, all of which would beed to be passed on to customers, if we didn't make any loans? If the bank was in Florida we would have been forced to make loans to earn enough income to cover the added costs. That's not what the bank's customers wanted. If they︀ wanted FDIC insured accounts in Florida, there were plenty of banks in Florida to choose︁ from.
Are we playing the blame game again? If we are then I don't︀ believe it was appropriate for OCIF to block the re-capitalization or the sale or the︁ liquidation by PS of the bank.
The only ones OCIF managed to punish was the︂ customers who should not be blamed for a bank being under capitalized.
If every bank︃ that has been under capitalized at any time would be liquidated then we would not︄ have banks. So I don't agree with the idea that liquidation was the only or︅ the correct course of action.
The only ones OCIF managed to punish was the︂ customers who should not be blamed for a bank being under capitalized.
If every bank︃ that has been under capitalized at any time would be liquidated then we would not︄ have banks. So I don't agree with the idea that liquidation was the only or︅ the correct course of action.
Well things were not done right which is why competent management is important.
If people want to use banks that︂ are under capitalized that is on them. There are two sides to any story and︃ we have heard only PS side on here. Keep that in mind.
If people want to use banks that︂ are under capitalized that is on them. There are two sides to any story and︃ we have heard only PS side on here. Keep that in mind.
Most of the stuff was done right. My guess is that my bank got a lot more right than most other offshore banks in Puerto Rico that were not shut down. Had OCIF audited us two years earlier as we requested, we would have raised the extra capital much sooner, prior to︀ the bad publicity coming out.
Also, the bank complied with everything OCIF︀ asked us to do. The OCIF Commissioner had already decided to approve the sale to︁ Qenta and told me that no additional capital was necessary prior to the completion of︂ the sale. Yet I added $2 million anyway. But for the interference of the IRS︃ the sale would have gone through, and not a single customer would have been inconvenienced.︄ Don't you get that yet. The bank was not shut down because it did something︅ wrong. It was shut down purely as a PR stunt for the J5. The Commissioner︆ had to make up an excuse to justify helping the IRS. But even the bank︇ needed to be shut down, there was no reason to do it using a receiver.︈ There are many examples of insolvent banks being allowed to self-liquidate. My bank was not︉ even insolvent. There were no loans to work out. All the deposits were just sitting︊ in cash. Had the Commissioner just rejected the sale in private on June 30th, and︋ allowed me to liquidate the bank myself, everyone would have received all their money in︌ July of 2022.
This press conference is the reason the bank is in receivership. it was all part of a publicity stunt to frame the bank for tax evasion and money laundering to validate the J5 investigation and allow the J5 to take credit for getting the bank shut down.
- Status