Y’know, I used to be so inattentive about what a USEFUL word “heretofore” is. Fraught with meaning, that one.
Well, it’s about a thing that went off the rails before it even started.
Well, and there is a fair bit of railing going on in the thread.
I guess so. I saw a Tim Horton’s there once.
I like my opinion on Comic Sans, so I’m posting it again:
It doesn’t look like the lettering of a skilled cartoonist; it looks like the lettering of a cartoon done by a kid. Watterson or Charles Schulz would only use type that ugly if it was representing the writing of Calvin or Lucy.
I dislike almost no fonts, but some are simply more useful than others; there is almost never an occasion when I want to imitate the lettering of an unskilled juvenile cartoonist. And because the type designer has said he was trying to imitate classic cartoon lettering, I think the designer is either a liar or that he failed spectacularly.
So, like any font, Comic Sans is only good in an appropriate place, but it is very rarely appropriate. And the designer failed in his stated objective, so any uses it has are accidental. It sure as hell didn’t deserve to be an important part of the world’s leading software.
That is how the Russian money gets laundered. It’s been that way for decades. Why else would a gangster pay I dunno, $100M for a property “only” worth $40M. It’s not just in Florida, either.
The old scam of “sell the name and concept, pocket the front money, go bankrupt” didn’t work anymore and U.S. banks got wise, so he turned to this racket… or the gangsters did (I don’t think he was clever enough or patient enough to think of it or
make it work on his own).
Is Tim Horton’s American, or is Burger King Canadian?
Trump sold a ton of condos in New York to Russians for massively inflated prices too.
If nothing else, from what I’ve read, Mueller has Trump cold on money laundering charges. New York and New Jersey AG’s offices were called in too, so they may come as state charges, which would mean he can’t issue himself a pardon for them.
Or Brazilian (BR’s 3G with an assist by US’s Berkshire)?
Seeing as Timmy’s started and grew in Canada, and following the buyout is still headquartered in Canada (from the USA point of view a tax inversion to take advantage of Canada’s much lower tax rate than that in the USA) and most of its stores are in Canada, I’m going with Canadian, but I’m curious as to which entities and individuals own the shares today.
As far as Burger King in Canada goes, it’s a lame duck. It will be interesting to see if it can be revived in the USA, and if that might drag its Canadian stores out of the gutter.
Tim Hortons is owned by Restaurant Brands International, which also owns Burger King and Popeye’s. http://www.rbi.com/
According to the wikipedia page;
Owners
3G Capital (~51%)
Pershing Square (16%)
Berkshire Hathaway (3.60%)
3G Capital is a Brazilian private equity partnership, so finding out who exactly owns how much of it isn’t very easy. They do seem to be buying an awful lot lately, including going after Unilever for $40 billion.
Okay, I feel (and probably am) really dense for not understanding this, but: How does paying inflated prices work for the source of the money that’s being laundered? Okay, they presumably get the asset, but how do they get back the value of the overpayment? I’m presuming Trump or whoever their partner in crime is wouldn’t get to keep more than X percentage of the overage as payment for doing the laundering. Or am I wrong about that? Is the whole and mere point to turn illegal loot into legal assets, no matter the cost?
Feel free to denounce me as a dummy for not getting it, as long as you then patiently explain. 
I think this is the way it works -
trump gets 100mil for 40mil condo. Trump buys condo back for 80mil making a quick 20mil. Gangster effectively pays 20mil to launder the money.
It’s not. I think CHIMERA means that that there is proof of laundering AND the inflated prices (which would be bribery).
But I could be wrong.
The primary purpose is to turn illegally acquired money into legal assets. The folks who want to do this often aren’t super-particular about losing some value along the way. They usually got the illegal money the old-fashioned way (they stole it) or they made it selling something that has an unusually high profit margin, like drugs. The overpayment is essentially the fee that they pay to the seller for laundering their money.
But what service does the seller actually provide in this transaction?
Like, what’s the difference between someone buying a $40 million estate from Trump for $100 million, and buying $100 million worth of non-Trump estates from completely unrelated sellers for $100 million?
Buying the property in and of itself doesn’t launder the money. If I found $100 million in a suitcase covered in blood, I could buy a $100 million estate in cash, and then sell it, thus “cleaning” my money in a literal sense, but the IRS is still going to want to know where I got the money to buy the estate in the first place. A crucial element here is that the money has to be obfuscated through shell companies the whole time, and if the shell companies are doing the heavy lifting of obfuscating the source of (and therefore laundering) the money, then what role does a complicit seller play?
Secrecy. Trump could be trusted not to ask questions. An unknown seller can’t be.
Might be the speed and timing of the transaction as well.
:dubious:
It’s not clear to me that there’s a shortage of people willing to sell expensive properties without asking a lot of questions, so I’m not sure why this is a service worth paying tens of millions of dollars for. It’s also not clear to me what questions a seller could ask that would cause an issue. “Where’s this money coming from?” “Offshore Legal Construction Company.” OK. I mean, the transaction is going to be public record so the “identity” of the buyer is going to be known to the authorities, what other bits of information could the seller spill?
eta: Furthermore, wouldn’t it just attract more attention to pay 2.5x market value to a complicit seller than to just pay what it’s worth to someone who wouldn’t really see any reason to ask questions?
ISTM the only way this makes sense is if it’s Trump’s money to begin with. Like if he sold $60 million in drugs, rather than someone giving him that money directly, they could buy a $40 million building for $100 million, thus giving Trump the dirty money with an ostensibly clean explanation. But as far as I know, nobody is accusing Trump of being involved in anything that would generate that kind of dirty money.
The seller is being paid for the risk of abetting money laundering. The American seller is even more at risk of running afoul of the laws and being imprisoned than the Russian gangster, who merely has to stay in Russia to avoid capture.