Post New

Since I have often posted sundry trades I've done, I thought I'd pass this along.

I'm divesting from the US. I've already sold all my T-bills and sold (so far) 96% of my US stock positions including everything in my quant portfolio. I've converted the existing US cash to other currencies, and will convert the rest after trades settle.
I still have some derivatives, most of which I will let run off in an orderly way. And a couple of stock positions that I'll ease out of.
I'm in the process of opening a brokerage account with a Europe-based firm, planning to move assets out of my current one whose parent is in the US.

Jim

Does that include Berkshire?

Can you please provide your reasoning?

Is this an act of protest, or a decision based on information you’ve obtained.

Even US Treasuries? Seems rather dramatic…you must have concluded the US and its government are done for.

I think that is a wise move Jim. I'm pretty sure I grasp your reasoning but will leave it up to you whether to relay to others or not.

That's a bold move, would you be willing to share what brokerage you decided to use?

I've been exploring hedging my defenses. I thought I was in a good defensive position by being 50% in T-bills (actually in funds SNVXX and SGUXX), but have recently been thinking about the need to hedge my defense.

To hedge my defensive position, I've been considering buying OTM calls on IGOV and BWX, which are unhedged ex-U.S. sovereign bonds funds of relatively short duration.

Why ex-U.S.? Because in the scenario I'm concerned about, T-bills wouldn't be considered a safe harbor so there'd probably be a flight to ex-U.S. sovereign funds, increasing their price.
Why unhedged? Because in the scenario I'm concerned about, the dollar would drop and unhedged ex-US funds would rise relative to the dollar.
Two possibilities for upside.

And/or might buy some disaster puts on something like BIL to offset declines in the funds I'm curently in.
I could change my present fund investments in SNVXX and SGUXX to direct T-bill investments, but am not sure I want to hold T-bill during a U.S. default.


However, I am still just musing about options. Other thoughts would be welcome.

That's pretty dramatic. With others, I'd be glad to hear your reasoning.

When I think about Jim’s financial decision to sell…a combination of financial, tax, and personal factors come to mind.
Financial Reasons:
+ Risk Assessment
+ Profit Taking
+ Currency Fluctuations
+ Investment Strategy Shift
Tax Considerations:
+ Monaco's Tax Environment
+ Estate Planning
Personal Factors:
+ Relocation or Lifestyle Changes
+ Liquidity Needs
+ Geopolitical Concerns

I think also, time yields truth.
Your Humble Shredm.com Creeper,
PaulnKC

Does that include Berkshire?

Honestly I'm not sure. I have not been net long for quite a while, so in that sense there's nothing to sell--it's more of a question of whether I'll buy any the next time it's cheap. I suppose it depends how my hunt elsewhere goes. There are other companies out there. Today I was reading up on Investor AB.

Can you please provide your reasoning?
...
Is this an act of protest, or a decision based on information you’ve obtained.

It's not an act of protest as such. Who cares if I storm off in a huff? : )
I don't want to start any flame wars, but two reasons:
(1) The US has moved too far along the spectrum of being uninvestable, like China. Not a stable regulatory/tax environment, capricious changes in the financial landscape, massive holes in the rule of law. (I suspect that the zone has been flooded sufficiently that some pretty dire developments have escaped the notice of many). That means an unacceptably high risk of unacceptably bad outcomes unrelated to the businesses themselves: wealth protection.
(2) The US is no longer an ally, but is now either adversary or enemy of Canada (where I'm from) and Europe (where I live). In the same way that I wouldn't invest in Russia, I no longer think it's honourable for me to invest in the US. I've done many dishonourable things in my life, but I'm trying to cut back. I don't think it's cool to fund one's adversary's government or economy.


Even US Treasuries? Seems rather dramatic…you must have concluded the US and its government are done for.

Not done for, that's a bit harsh. But for non-US-persons, the #1 risks are getting pretty plain. You may or may not be aware of moves to curtail inbound investment via taxation of portfolio flows, and (separately) talk of forcible conversion of US debt to non-redeemable perpetuals in some circumstances. Plus many things not already on the policy plate but all too plausible....For non Americans, is there a 1% chance of (say) a huge withholding tax on T-bill redemptions that are not rolled over, or withdrawals from US brokerage accounts, or punishing withholding tax on sales? Would a US brokerage one day be asked/forced to apply some rules that might not be lawful under US law? Note that there is already a rule that if a non-US-person sells shares of a listed LLP, the entire sale proceeds (not the profit) are subject to 10% withholding tax which is (in my case) non recoverable. Buy $100 worth of Sunoco, sell at $105, lose $5.50.

I think that is a wise move Jim.

Actually I expect to be poorer as a result with fairly high probability. But perhaps a small chance of avoiding greater disaster?

Would you be willing to share what brokerage you decided to use?

I'm looking at Saxo, HQ in Denmark. Looks pretty good. For expats, Perplexity recommended them as the best alternative to IB : )

...Financial Reasons:
+ Risk Assessment
+ Profit Taking
+ Currency Fluctuations
+ Investment Strategy Shift
Tax Considerations:
+ Monaco's Tax Environment
+ Estate Planning
Personal Factors:
+ Relocation or Lifestyle Changes
+ Liquidity Needs
+ Geopolitical Concerns

Not profit taking, currency fluctuations, investment strategy shift, Monaco tax environment, estate planning, relocation, liquidity. Leaves only risk assessment and geopolitical things. The latter is one inescapable factor in the former, in much the same way that growth is an inescapable factor in assessing value. Sometimes the key thing in assessing prospective return on capital is assessing return OF capital. And, like cigarette making, there are legal ways to make money which I choose not to avail myself of.

Jim

Thanks for sharing your move here Jim. You are certainly not messing around there.

I presume currency risk is a large factor in your decision? That is particularly interesting to me, as I also do not reside in the "home of capitalism".

May I ask a question. I notice Buffett hedges any foreign equity investments he makes. If he was in my position (a UK based investor with currently about a third of his retirement portfolio in US equities and no currency hedging), would he consider that poor risk management?

Looking forward to hearing more about your US pivot.

Currency Allocation:
GBP 59%
USD 32%
Yuan 6%
SEK 3%
Total 100%

Investment allocation:
Investment property 45%
Equities 49%
Cash 6%
Total 100%

PS - if you are looking to buy non US equities, Greggs PLC here in the UK looks attractive and low risk currently...(I also like: The Sage Group PLC and Rightmove PLC but not at current prices.)

Wow! My wife gives me the same reasoning every few days, she wants to leave. Return to Canada or go to the EU via a Portuguese visa. I'm older now and don't feel up to drastic actions.

The currency issue is one I don't know much about and hate being forced to address it. We've lived many places, and I've just tried to keep all my living expenses in local currency. Over the years it worked very well in Germany, Switzerland, France, Singapore, and Canada. It would have been a disaster in Indonesia, but that was the one place I made an exception.

As far as currency for the main nest egg, I see a catch-22. The USD is the main currency of global economics. I don't see that changing without a major upheaval. Major upheavals always result in a flight to safe haven US dollars. Fortunately the living expense rule (and expenses of my heirs) helps me on that one.

Thanks Jim for sharing your thoughts. We have plenty of thoughts, but can't come up with an action.

I respect your reasoning, and grateful you shared it. I can hardly speak for myself, let alone all Americans, but to the extent it matters, I am truly ashamed and sorry as an American. I hope sanity prevails, and soon.

I’m also an embarrassed/pissed off American, with all investments in US dollar based investments. I’ve built up quite a bit of dry powder in US Treasuries, but now it appears I have to worry about that! 😡

I presume currency risk is a large factor in your decision? That is particularly interesting to me, as I also do not reside in the "home of capitalism".

No, not at all.
Currencies are notoriously unpredictable, but if I had to guess I rather expect the US dollar to be strong (or stronger) for a while. That's one of the "normally expected" effects of tariffs. Maybe weaker later if the financial/economic situation deteriorates, but the future is an unknown place.

No, I'm out of the US dollar for the same reason I don't own any roubles or renminbi: I just prefer not to given that the US is now, to put it bluntly, one of the bad guys on the world stage. A faint secondary factor would be counterparty risk due to jurisdiction risk on T-bills or cash deposits at US brokers in that some change might mean I don't get my money back. I don't expect that would be a problem with the currency itself, but rather one's access to it. Nobody wants "cash" that's only good till you reach for it. I conclude that T-bills, for non-US-persons, no longer reliably meet that test.

Jim

Jim:

May the road rise up to meet you.

Don't be a stranger.

Jim, appreciate your thoughts. I too am struggling with this. i have some real estate in europe, and have increased my treasury holdings here. I am debating moving some stuff to IBKR,but as still resident in usa till I can sell up properties, I'm holding my fido brokerage.
Question : when you say "non us " to you mean non resident, or non citizen ? I will be non resident at some point,ll citizen , and am currently looking into non dom status in Ireland as a possibility ....

M.

> A faint secondary factor would be counterparty risk due to jurisdiction risk on T-bills or cash deposits at US brokers in that some change might mean I don't get my money back. I don't expect that would be a problem with the currency itself, but rather one's access to it. Nobody wants "cash" that's only good till you reach for it. I conclude that T-bills, for non-US-persons, no longer reliably meet that test.

I don't know if it is one of the under-the-radar developments, but the carve outs of rule of law has crossed several of my red lines. One part of that, which I alluded to earlier this year, was use of budget impoundments and apparent direct interference in the ACH system. I'm starting to make preparations that I was hoping to avoid, I don't want to be the proverbial boiled frog. I have some diminishing causes for optimism, and bringing it full circle I think BRK is still an important player still left on the board.

Current money market funds at Fidelity or Vanguard have interest rates close to T-bills, it's a good alternative.

Question : when you say "non us " to you mean non resident, or non citizen ?

Very close to the same thing. "US Person" has a specific meaning in US tax law. All US citizens all have to file US tax returns, so I believe (?) all US citizens are "US Persons", even though there are some slightly different deductions. Non-citizens resident in the US are also "US persons", including those "resident" by accident of visiting too many days in a year. (3 year average over 4 months/year, something like that).

Now, as for who might get targeted as "foreign rubes we can take money from", the category I was imagining, your guess is as good as mine who might count. US policy in recent years has not given any thought at all to the situation of American expats, so I suspect they won't be considered one way or another, which in this case might mean they are fine as they are citizens. (To be fair, taking advantage of foreigners is a tax policy which isn't entirely crazy as these things go, I just don't want to be the payer in question).

As an aside, there is an EXTREMELY little known law that states that a non-US-person owning shares in a US company at death has to pay inheritance tax in the US on those shares. Almost nobody ever pays this, as non-US brokers don't enforce the filing, and there are easy dodges such as having a holding company. The total amount collected annually is about the size of one big estate. I mention this because moving my assets out of the US removes this particular item as a concern.

Jim

Current money market funds at Fidelity or Vanguard have interest rates close to T-bills, it's a good alternative.

Hmmm, not in this context. Arguably all the same risks, and more besides. (counterparty, fraud, financial-systemic, etc)
Besides, I'm not sure non-US-persons can put money into them these days? Maybe so, but investments in US mutual funds are prohibited, for example.

Jim

Don't be a stranger.

I have to say, this feels, personally, like a disaster to me. One of many just now, admittedly.

Are there any realistic steps an American citizen and resident can take to protect themselves against the kinds of perils that (rightly) concern you?

I have learned to manage market risks to my own satisfaction, and one part of that process has been absolutely refusing to make investment decisions in response to news, punditry, and what have you. That's been my rule for 30 years. I abandoned that rule last month, and converted everything in my tax-deferred accounts (about 80% of liquid assets) to treasuries and ultra-short bonds.

In the medium to longer term, are there better choices out there for someone whose roots are too deep in American soil to be pulled up even now?

Baltassar

I don't want to start any flame wars
Yes, I very much hope we can avoid this here.
Difficult, as this is a case where unfortunately there is no way around politics and specific politicians when wanting to talk about investing.

I no longer think it's honourable for me to invest in the US
Though I understand that: Isn't that a typical case for Warren's "Only invest in companies that are so great that they survive it when managed by idiots --- because at some point in time that will happen"?

(I don't remember the exact words, but think that was roughly it's meaning.)

In other words: As a European outsider I suspect that probably not only many voters already regret their vote, but that additionally the really powerful politicians of his own party don't stand behind their leader --- with the result, that the worst disruptions will be temporary only, will be reversed by the next government, no matter which of the two parties will be then in power.

(I tried to formulate that as politically neutral as possible, hoping we can leave our political/ideological opinions out of this as much as possible.)

I don't want to be the proverbial boiled frog.

Nice precis of my feelings.

Though not a large thing by itself, I was saddened to see how Mr Buffett was cowed into silence in the recent NBC interview, feeling it unsafe to opine on the state of the economy (!): "I won't talk about it, I can't talk about it, I really can't."

Jim

Sorry to hear and read of all of this concerning discussion. I hope when we look at the forest and beyond the current trees that this too may pass and American dynamism, as WEB has discussed So many times over the years, will continue to prevail in fits and starts and with All types of political parties in office. Warren leans left but he truly believes America and capitalism will prosper decade after decade over the Long run. I am optimistic as well.

Isn't that a typical case for Warren's "Only invest in companies that are so great that they survive it when managed by idiots --- because at some point in time that will happen"?

I guess there is a corollary: should one not avoid, or put into the "too hard" pile, those organizations that might not survive a destabilizing leader?

I found much to ponder in the article "The Trump 50 Percent Doctrine" at the FT.
Probably paywalled, but this link https://www.ft.com/content/8632f1ba-7156-4bf7-8b80...

Jim

Don't be a stranger.

Historically speaking, it's pretty hard to shut me up.

Jim

Historically speaking, it's pretty hard to shut me up.

Music to most readers' ears around here.

- Manlobbi

I think Buffett's answer on the economy was appropriate, especially given the limited time in the CBS interview.

"a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma"

And he made a strong statement on tariffs.

"a riddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma"

A characterization originally applied (by Churchill) to Russia. A coincidence, I'm sure.

Not much of an enigma these days!

Baltassar

As a European outsider I suspect that probably not only many voters already regret their vote

No they don't. This is a Dem talking point, but there are more people who voted Dem that regret their vote than people who voted Rep regret their vote. The more common remark is "I am seeing twice as much happening as I expected in my wildest dreams."

A difficulty for "non-US outsiders" is that they mostly get their US news from what is called the MSM (mainstream media) which is heavily slanted toward Dem.

Yeah, it is really difficult for non-Americans to understand America. They think they do, but they don't.


Tax issues for "non-US persons" are one thing, and I don't know anything about that or the associated risks.

But the GDP of USA is the largest of all countries, and is almost TWICE the GDP of the #2 country (China). And SIX times the #3 country (Germany). 26% of the world GDP. #2 is 17%, #3 is 4%
So the US economy is going to be the dominant economy for investing.

should one not avoid, or put into the "too hard" pile, those organizations that might not survive a destabilizing leader?

Berkshire is at an all time high and continues to surge higher. It's not the price action one would expect for an organization that might not survive a destabilizing leader. Based on how market participants are collectively voting, in my humble opinion, your decision may be an overreaction and the long term risks may in fact be significantly lower than what you are currently perceiving.

>. I hope when we look at the forest and beyond the current trees that this too may pass and American dynamism, as WEB has discussed So many times over the years, will continue to prevail in fits and starts and with All types of political parties in office.

I replied to this on a different board: https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=991192255. Suffice to say I disagree emphatically.

Berkshire is at an all time high and continues to surge higher. It's not the price action one would expect for an organization that might not survive a destabilizing leader. Based on how market participants are collectively voting, in my humble opinion, your decision may be an overreaction and the long term risks may in fact be significantly lower than what you are currently perceiving.

BRK-B is now at $523. Whodathunk?
Not too long ago people were doubting that it would break $500.


The S&P are DOW are up 1% today, and a Yahoo news headline is "Stocks edge higher".
Just a few days ago they were down 1% and the headlines were "Stocks Crash!!!"

Sounds to me like a great setup for "markets climb a wall of worry."

But the GDP of USA is the largest of all countries, and is almost TWICE the GDP of the #2 country (China). And SIX times the #3 country (Germany). 26% of the world GDP.

A friend recently returned from a trip to Asia and remarked "The US is just not that important anymore". Indeed, that 26% is down from 40% in 1960. That trend is unlikely to reverse.

it is really difficult for non-Americans to understand America. They think they do, but they don't.

I finally believe you may be right. I always think and talk about "Westerners" as if they/we all have the same mentality and opinions, just with some minor differences, e.g. Southern Europeans more impulsive, talkative and openly emotional than Northern Europeans etc.

But all that comes from experiences with European mentalities (plus Americans coming to Europe for Yoga Retreats etc = Americans who might give me a distorted picture), contrasting that with my experience of far larger differences between all of the above and Asian mentalities.

That leads me to my "Westerners", generalizing that with maybe a too thick brush onto ALL Westerners.

Maybe Americans ARE different, I don't know anymore.

BRK-B is now at $523. Whodathunk?
Not too long ago people were doubting that it would break $500.

What I think is that I am kind of "forced" to reduce my Berkshire holdings. A while ago I started to not only buy more and more puts (I know, most can hear that anymore, sorry), but also to sell my "holy" Berkshire shares I bought before 1.1.2009 (those are exempt from capital gains tax in Germany). That selling lately accelerated, very especially today.

But the GDP of USA is the largest of all countries, and is almost TWICE the GDP of the #2 country (China). And SIX times the #3 country (Germany). 26% of the world GDP. #2 is 17%, #3 is 4%
So the US economy is going to be the dominant economy for investing.


The size of GDp relative to the world may not be a good leading indicator for places to invest.

Japan had 18% in the early 1990s. Now 4%. Stock returns since 1990????

https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Japan/gdp_share/

Aussi

This is alarming, though I can’t say I blame you.

What strategies would you consider if you were a US citizen and invested in the US? I’ve been diversifying into global stack and bond funds, but I’m not sure they wouldn’t be impacted by the capital control measures you’re discussing.

Way off topic for the BRK board.....


Maybe Americans ARE different, I don't know anymore.

Ponder upon the history of the USA, and where an under what circumstance and *why* the people came to the US. (Spoiler: it was mostly to get away from the Old Country.)

Not helped by the cream of the European population being killed in WW 1.

Also the core difference between a "subject" and a "citizen". The political difference is immense. From the very beginning, Americans are citizens.

I've converted the existing US cash to other currencies

Which currencies have you decided to use?

mungofitch,
thanks much on your detailed reasons.
its amazing what exposure to countries and cultures can do. priorities shift even for hard core capitalists.
personally, i went from ~50% american equites to ~30% after the election, and now have to reckon with leaving longtime value and GARP managers who have managed risk&reward well.

coincidentally today, one of my favorite curmudgeons also had an equity exit reveal along the same lines.
(martin is 'old man yells at cloud' of the finance world)
https://www.martinsosnoff.com/post/trump-the-wreck...


disturbing sidenotes to your buffet note and FT link :
- if someone of warren's wealth, reputation, and AGE fears speaking out against catastrophe, i really have to ask what's the point. will be researching predictions of how badly america is expected to drop in the economic freedom index.

- casual poll of CEOs indicated they would not consider speaking out against trump actions until ~30% mkt drop. even at that, i suspect rather a lot of timidity. consider the sheer magnitude of wealth destruction.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/top-ceos-share-univ...

at the very other end are low income MAGA voters, and they have more to lose than they think (like healthcare). but with no ability to attribute responsibility , they are identity-tied and clearly in it for the ride all the way down. this is of the most lasting consequence, as on any given day trump could cancel tariffs, or expire himself.

***As a European outsider I suspect that probably not only many voters already regret their vote

--- No they don't. This is a Dem talking point, but there are more people who voted Dem that regret their vote than people who voted Rep regret their vote.


I'm curious as to where your are hearing this. Primarily because:

1. With my exposure to left-leaning sites/media, I've never heard anything along those lines and

2. It really doesn't make sense to me. If I'm happy with the outcome of the election, why would I regret my vote either way?



--- The more common remark is "I am seeing twice as much happening as I expected in my wildest dreams."

That I can understand. I expressed a similar sentiment to a friend a couple of weeks ago.
It was not complimentary.

but also to sell my "holy" Berkshire shares I bought before 1.1.2009 (those are exempt from capital gains tax in Germany)

Now THAT'S a really nice tax benefit!

I think the essence of Jim's worry is that the rule of law is not as reliable as most people perceived before. Trump has proven that rules can be changed quickly, including claiming rights to other countries lands, which dwarfs claiming right to other people's money.

should one not avoid, or put into the "too hard" pile, those organizations that might not survive a destabilizing leader?
...
Berkshire is at an all time high and continues to surge higher. It's not the price action one would expect for an organization that might not survive a destabilizing leader.

To clarify, personally I was thinking of the US government (and by extension everything dependent on its functioning), not Berkshire. The entire US economy is now in the "too hard" pile for me. (as always, often a euphemism for too unpredictable or too risky or beyond the pale)

I don't anticipate a destabilizing leader at Berkshire, and if it did happen I share your thought that it's unlikely to be fatal. A big healthy fish can survive an embedded fish hook, but not the disappearance of the water.

Jim

The topic of Trump is a polarizing one and discussion of him gets heated.

Putting that topic aside, I still find it hair-on-fire alarming that the present chair of his Council of Economic Advisors has a published plan starting with tariffs, to radically transform not just the U.S. economy, not just the world economy, but the world geopolitical landscape. Treasury Secretary Bessent seems to buy in too.
See thread https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=638518736

If they pull it off then maybe things would be great.
Or maybe not.
But the risk of even attempting it is off the charts.

A friend recently returned from a trip to Asia and remarked "The US is just not that important anymore". Indeed, that 26% is down from 40% in 1960. That trend is unlikely to reverse

Yes it was at 40% in 1960, but it was at 26% in 1990 and 24% now; so the trendline has flattened considerably. Also of note it was at 23% in 2010, the trend has actually reversed slightly.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/u-s-share-of-glob...?

There is certainly a reasonable argument to be made that if you have won the game why keep playing, especially if it seems that the rules might change. (I haven't won the game yet, so I need to keep playing; and any changes to the rules are unlikely to impact me much).


tecmo
...

You have been a great contributor to the community. I hope you continue to post.

The trump 50 per cent doctrine not behind a paywall

https://skynews.icu/top-stories/798154-the-trump-5...

Are there any realistic steps an American citizen and resident can take to protect themselves against the kinds of perils that (rightly) concern you?

I'm not MF and have nothing like his kind of credibility here. But as a US citizen heavily invested in Berkshire, I share his concerns. The steps I am taking are (1) Emigration to an EU country on a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship, leaving in a month or so (2) Selling the majority of my US equities (which are 80%+ BRK.B) and moving a large fraction of that to Euros in EU financial institutions.

Very possibly I'll lose out on huge gains. I don't need huge gains at this point in my life. I need confidence that I won't lose everything, or have it locked up behind embargos, sanctions, or military adventures. Importantly for my calculations, the EU has the ability to defend itself from hostile actors to either East or West, and early signs seem to be that it has the will to do so, as well.

My father fought in WW II (albeit in Asia, not Europe). I've studied enough history to understand the trajectory things are on. Of course, I could be wrong. I'd be very happy to be wrong.

Rather alarmist

As if opening the gates of our country to 10-15 million migrants from some of the most violent places on the planet isn’t destabilizing?

oddhack,
congrats on the effort and decision.

i had 2 FIRE relatives depart the u.s. during 2016 trump, and another 2 planning now.
all are experienced travelers and have enjoyed living elsewhere anyway. only immediate family is causing procrastination towards a golden passport, and some inertia is slowing re-allocation away from american equity.

as berkshire bent, you may be interested (and eligible) for the edelweiss fund, taking stakes in very long lived family-run european companies. hope you enjoy the discovery, especially the 1 or 2 very long form videos with fund founder deden.

Its possible to agree that stronger border controls are critical (agreement about policy direction) and that the current administration is destabilizing. If all we were debating was which policy is better for the country, that is one thing. The heat in any discussion is because the reshaping of decision rights allocation in the government goes far beyond that. We have a three part government with a balance of power constitutionally. The current executive branch has decided that being president doesn't require paying much attention to the other two branches, and one of those branches has been happy to cede power to the executive branch. That is pretty unprecedented.

The history of US government is that even presidents who espouse limited government (e.g., Reagon, Nixon) actually spend their time in power aggregating power to the executive branch. Typically Congress is fighting to avoid that, but not this time. The executive branch is aggregating unprecedented decision rights as a result, including taking control over the branches responsible for law enforcement. In a short time, they have already demonstrated a willingness to use all of this power to squash dissent, threaten opponents, exclude free press in order to enable the establishment of something akin to state media (Fox news). If the law enforcement branches report to the executive with people who feel responsible to an individual, not the constitution, then the judicial branch can make all the judgement they want but there will be no one to enforce them.

I am not right wing, but I have a lot of agreements with some of the policy direction. But the fundamental risk of becoming China or Russia in terms of how the government runs is off the charts. That is the destabilizing thing, not whether people agree or disagree that immigration policy is wrong.

Back to regular BRK programming...

I have sold 1/4 my holdings in BRKB between $495-$520/share. For decades, it seemed like BRK was undervalued. Even during the brief catchup periods where it climbed quickly or enough to catch back up to S&P long term growth, it never quite got to the point where it felt like a beneficiary of "irrational exuberance".

For the first time in years, it feels like the market valuation for BRK may be anticipating more than I think the business is capable of returning. That view is also tempered by my view that investment prowess for BRK going forward is likely to be less reliable than it was during Buffett's tenure, and that creates genuine risk in a firm with over $300B sitting in cash. Of course its easy to be wrong about that and BRK share price may continue growing well, but my assessment is that the risk of that is higher than it used to be when the shares were trading at 1.4x book.

I consider it a gift that BRK share have done so well this year. Its just so rare in the more recent past to be able to say that BRK is trouncing the S&P 500. I don't consider the shares very over valued and so just "holding the damn stock" isn't something I would really disagree with. But if you are interested in raising cash in a generally high risk market (e.g., high index multiples), now seems like as good a time as any.

God this thread makes me sad! It also sums up all my fears about the investing environment in the US. Why would anyone want to invest in the US? Our president has literally started an unprovoked economic war with our dear brothers to the north and our long standing European allies in Europe. The knock on effect of all this damage is going to be huge because this is the second time the world is going through it except this time and there is no one there to help blunt it. And politics schmolitics! I don't want to hear the usual "take it to the politics board". This is beyond politics and very much exemplifies what people think of the US right now. It's a problem for anyone that is living off investments. Black is white and up is down. Canada is our enemy and Russia's our best friend. At some point people need to wake up!!

Jim mentioned the "flooding of the zone". The bigger flooding of the zone is that social media along with the right wing media complex has confused Americans to the point where they can no longer effectively think critically for themselves without defaulting to their home team. The constant demonizing has taken root and the American right thinks it's enemy is from within and not in the traditional places where anti democratic regimes were our traditional enemies. Until the fevered pitch is broken it is just going to continue to get worse. The only thing I know for certain right now is that it will all end badly. It always does! How much damage is done and how long it will take I have no idea but I have no doubt this ending in catastrophe.

should one not avoid, or put into the "too hard" pile, those organizations that might not survive a destabilizing leader?

To clarify, personally I was thinking of the US government (and by extension everything dependent on its functioning), not Berkshire. The entire US economy is now in the "too hard" pile for me. (as always, often a euphemism for too unpredictable or too risky or beyond the pale)

Yes, I know you were referring to the current US government and my point is only that it's hard to reconcile Berkshire sitting at an all time high with the extreme concerns that you and others have raised in this thread. Mr. Market is a collection of global market participants of all political persuasions and takes all risks into account. Mr. Market obviously knows that Berkshire doesn't exist in a vaccum and its fortunes are inextricably linked with the US economy. If it were true that US government and economy have materially taken a turn for the worse to the point where the US economy is "too risky or too unpredictable or beyond the pale", one would think Mr. Market would recognize this and assign a much lower price to Berkshire.

Same applies to the index. After gaining 26.29% in 2023 and 25.02% in 2024, YTD it's down 3.51% only! For all the sound and fury we hear about markets falling, not much has actually happened. Just a minor lowering of multiple on forward looking earnings where estimates have come down from 290 or so to 270. It's still a very rich 21 forward PE. Mr. Market certainly seems sanguine in sharp contrast to the mood in this thread.

Mr. Buffett also said in his annual letter, which was published after the current administration took office, that he will continue to invest in US businesses and that the US is still the best place to invest or something to that effect. Are we saying he just said it, but doesn't really mean it?

Time will tell who is right and who is wrong. Above is just an alternative perspective to those contemplating extreme actions! Maybe it's just minor turbulence and the plane will land. You are not going to crash and die!

Zooming out and looking at the big picture, everyone knows the US fiscal situation is on an unsustainable path. There are severe imbalances in trade between nations. Wealth inequality is serious issue in the US, but also globally. It's folly to think that business as usual can continue indefinitely in the face of these serious problems. One way or another these issues will get resolved, historically via different types of conflicts. Trade wars is actually a good way to go, if the alternative is actual wars.

it's hard to reconcile Berkshire sitting at an all time high with the extreme concerns that you and others have raised in this thread. Mr. Market is a collection of global market participants of all political persuasions and takes all risks into account. Mr. Market obviously knows that Berkshire doesn't exist in a vaccum and its fortunes are inextricably linked with the US economy. If it were true that US government and economy have materially taken a turn for the worse to the point where the US economy is "too risky or too unpredictable or beyond the pale", one would think Mr. Market would recognize this and assign a much lower price to Berkshire.

Another interpretation of what's happening, inverting your thinking: Mr. Market does recognize and because(!) of that assigns such a historically high price to what is seen as a last resort of stability - explaining why Berkshire´s price this year so often went up when the market did fall and lately went higher and higher while the market did not. It makes perfect sense, while with your line of reasoning this phenomenon is still unexplained.

I think Mungofitch is overreacting here.

As Buffett said in his latest interview:

Despite deflecting questions about the current news from Washington, or of Trump adviser Elon Musk's efforts to cut the government, Buffett did admit that he is bullish on American companies. "A majority of any money I manage will always be in the United States," he said.

And why is that? "It's the best place!" he laughed. "I was lucky to be born here."

"I think Mungofitch is overreacting here.

As Buffett said in his latest interview:

Despite deflecting questions about the current news from Washington, or of Trump adviser Elon Musk's efforts to cut the government, Buffett did admit that he is bullish on American companies. "A majority of any money I manage will always be in the United States," he said.

And why is that? "It's the best place!" he laughed. "I was lucky to be born here.""

But Mungo said he's not American and he's not overreacting if he feels that America, and I quote- " is now either adversary or enemy of Canada (where I'm from) and Europe (where I live)". I do not live in the states anymore and I can tell you that sentiment is very indicative of how a lot of people feel about the US right now outside the states. It's not good and people in the US need to wake up to the fact that it will hurt investment opportunities in the US. You quote Warren and I believe that he believes America's the best place but I also believe he's smart enough not to say what he really thinks about Trump because of fear of backlash against Berkshire. We are falling into an authoritarian dictatorship and it is not good!!

<<<<<<< I'm looking at Saxo, HQ in Denmark. Looks pretty good. For expats, Perplexity recommended them as the best alternative to IB : )>>>>>

Saxo? Really? I`am a long term customer with mixed feelings, just about to move away. They have often changing owners. Now being transferred from Chinese to (again) Swiss majority holders (Sarasin). Just check the archives of "Inside Paradeplatz". Lots of legal matters connected with CHF/Eur event many years ago.

I chose them as the alternative to IB, not my best decision. So I`m still looking for an alternative for IB, but after many years I haven`t found one in Europe.

Kind regards

Hittfeld

Hittfield,

Same feelings here WRT SAXO. They’re slow and bureaucratic. It took me a year to transfer my portfolio to SAXO. I would not recommend them, but then I have never found anything better.
Astore

The steps I am taking are (1) Emigration to an EU country on a path to permanent residency and eventual citizenship, leaving in a month or so

For others moving out from the US, just a reminder that the subject of living abroad is covered fairly actively at the Living Abroad board:

https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?bid=122

You can also get to it via All Boards / Head to the Outskirts / Living abroad

A few of us are already in Monaco, and quite a few others tend to select regions of Europe so the board has a bit of a “Bound for Europe” slant a lot of the time.

- Manlobbi

I`m still looking for an alternative for IB, but after many years I haven`t found one in Europe.

Consors?

Did start as a German discount broker, still is cheap (for European brokers), since many years now belonging to BNP Paribas (largest French bank ).

Are there any realistic steps an American citizen and resident can take to protect themselves against the kinds of perils that (rightly) concern you?
I don't need huge gains at this point in my life. I need confidence that I won't lose everything,?

Sort of OT, but still "out":
I've taken a quick look at visa programs for U.S. citizens wishing to live abroad. Most seem oriented toward people planning to work. I'm retired, have acquired some level of wealth over the years, so therefore looked at so-called Golden Visa programs. Requirements for me, and perhaps similar U.S. retirees, are (1) stable country (2) English as primary language or fairly prevalent as a second language (3) excellent health care (4) a place I'd enjoy living. Many countries, e.g. Canada, have eliminated 'Golden Visas' that simply require an investment. I initially found this surprising, but digging further shows the reason to be that these countries are experiencing a housing shortage and don't welcome foreigners soaking up existing housing stock.
Maybe buying a house isn't necessary, perhaps renting?
Maybe staying 180 days one country, 180 days another?
I've looked at the 'living abroad' board, didn't see much info for the 'relatively wealthy retiree' demographic.
By the way, living abroad is not a decision to be taken lightly. I have in the past, so am familiar with the necessity of an American being able to accommodate to another culture, and enjoy the accommodation!
Any suggestions?

" But Mungo said he's not American and he's not overreacting if he feels that America, and I quote- " is now either adversary or enemy of Canada (where I'm from) and Europe (where I live)". I do not live in the states anymore and I can tell you that sentiment is very indicative of how a lot of people feel about the US right now outside the states. It's not good and people in the US need to wake up to the fact that it will hurt investment opportunities in the US. You quote Warren and I believe that he believes America's the best place but I also believe he's smart enough not to say what he really thinks about Trump because of fear of backlash against Berkshire. We are falling into an authoritarian dictatorship and it is not good!!"


Right, during the Obama -Biden years there was never any backlash against those with opposing points of view. No one got cancelled no censorship. Ever hear of Mark Zuckerberg at Meta, the twitter gang, etc? Unbelievable denial of fact.

As if opening the gates of our country to 10-15 million migrants from some of the most violent places on the planet isn’t destabilizing?

Apologies to the board but a reality check is required...

Biden wanted Congress to address the problem with a bipartisan solution, you know the way America is supposed to work. (Not like a dictator who throws executive orders at everything.)

Unfortunately...
Fear mongering insurrectionist Donald Trump killed the bipartisan bill that would have addressed the border problem...
He said, "The Senate is better off not making a deal, even if it means the country will close up for a while."

Life long Republican Mitt Romney summed up the situation nicely...
"The border is a very important issue for Donald Trump, and the fact that he would communicate to Republican senators and congresspeople that
he doesn’t want us to solve the border problem because he wants to blame Joe Biden (Kamala Harris) for it is really appalling."

BTW The bill was fully endorsed by the National Border Patrol Council, the Chamber of Commerce, the Wall Street Journal and supported by 66% of Americans.

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/senate-deal-on-b...

h-vegas, well said. An incredible amount of nonsense and blatantly false information is being posted here. What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment. Perhaps they should stand up at the meeting and ask WEB that question.....

" h-vegas, well said. An incredible amount of nonsense and blatantly false information is being posted here. What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment. Perhaps they should stand up at the meeting and ask WEB that question....."

Good morning, you can bet this topic will bring out the usual suspects, who post on the US policy board. They are never in doubt of their political brilliance, but they rarely get anything right. IF trump can get European nations to pay more for their own defense going forward, that's bearish America? That might be bearish American defense contractors and bullish European defense contractors but that isn't bearish the American debt problems and might help to reduce our debt. Trump and Musk are making way too many unforced errors but panic selling America, be serious. Carry on msnbc fans, sell and run to Ireland!!

" What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment. Perhaps they should stand up at the meeting and ask WEB that question....."

To be fair, IF, huge IF, the current stars in the Dem party Aoc, Sanders, Warren, take control of the Dem party and they win in 28, I would get out of the dollar. I can hear AOC now, " If you have so much money you can afford to lend the USA 30 trillion plus, you should be happy to get paid back half your money and shut up. Sort of like a 2 for 1 reverse split. Stay tuned bud.

What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment.

Yes! Our credit rating is almost as good and Johnson & Johnsons and when has Donald Trump ever not paid his debts?

What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment.

Maybe I need to go back and re-read the thread, but my take-away was Mungofitch's concern regarding how t-bills would be handled vis-a-vis "non-US persons".

It's interesting: with all the hand-wringing, Berkshire stock keeps going up. A lot of people must not have got the memo.

Hold the damn stock!

Mr. Buffett also said in his annual letter, which was published after the current administration took office, that he will continue to invest in US businesses and that the US is still the best place to invest or something to that effect. Are we saying he just said it, but doesn't really mean it?

He's said it a hundred times - "Never bet against America". It's also amazing that suddenly many people are doubting his practice of buying "good companies at fair prices" rather than basing his investments on whatever particular macroeconomic effects happen to be going on at a particular time. It's almost as if some people believe that he changed his ways after 60+ years.

It's also ridiculous that people worry more about one particular politician (and a buffoon at that) than about the real simple arithmetic that shows the USA in a decline due to debt. I've shown the arithmetic many times in various places, and it's almost always ignored. I used to think that it was due to innumeracy, but it appears that it is more due to cognitive dissonance. It's trivially simple arithmetic that anyone with a 5th grade education can do. Simply make a chart, easy to do in Excel or in google sheets, make two columns, one for GDP and one for debt. Now pick an interest rate, and pick a GDP growth, and pick a number for govt spending growth, you can be as optimistic as you want, and run it for 20 or 30 years. What do you see? Yes, what you will see using any sane numbers will be what is called a "debt spiral". And if that continues unabated, and it IS continuing unabated despite minor differences between the two political parties, we spiral into oblivion. Here's a really good chart that shows the main cause of the above, we simply spend way too much to govern ourselves. It's similar to the cause that ended the Roman Empire centuries ago.
https://tinyurl.com/42t7rzxs

So if you really want to bet against America, bet against it for a real reason rather than some short-term politics that you may hate.

Regarding 'hand wringing' about T-bills -- it's not an emotional response but a rational one.

Stephen Miran, chair of the Council of Economic Advisers, has published a detailed plan, see below, to radically change the U.S. economy (involving tariffs, devaluing the dollar, etc), radically change the global economy, and radically change global geopolitics (alliances etc). Scott Bessent, Treasury Secretary buys in. The plan involves tariffs, Trump has long liked tariffs.

In this thread https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=638518736 I posted an interview with Gillian Tett discussing the plan, a link to the Miran paper, and a NotebookLM audio summary of the Miran paper (it's dense).
If they succeed in this radical transformation then perhaps things would be great. Or not.
The risk in trying this radical restructuring is immense.
For more, see also this thread https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=373148673
To think that Trump would not back a radically restructuring is belied by his allowing Musk to try to radically restructure agencies that run the U.S. government.

I had long ago decided on France, long before these kinds of concerns arose....moving large amounts to europe is difficult, but buying an expensive property works well., thge (current) tax treaty is the best with USA...

I think the essence of Jim's worry is that the rule of law is not as reliable as most people perceived before. Trump has proven that rules can be changed quickly, including claiming rights to other countries lands, which dwarfs claiming right to other people's money.

Alas, the US has proven itself to be 'agreement incapable'. Going back many decades. Each time the Federal government changes to the other party everything can, and often does, change. Obama did it when he got elected, Biden did it when he got elected. Heck, Bush (HW) did it when he got elected after Reagan -- and they were in the same party.

In the international arena an inevitable consequence of being the biggest hombre in the room. At other times in history different countries were the biggest hombre and they always did the same thing. Spain, France, England.

And now we are finding out that the CIA, et. al. has been messing with countries & regions all over the world for decades, regardless of whoever the President was, probably since the end of WW2.

I find it amusing that Europe is considering ignoring "rule of law" with respect to the $300 billion of frozen Russia assets. Lending money using Russia's assets as collateral. (Great, I'll borrow money from the bank and put your house up as collateral.) Seizing the interest earned on the $300B. (The earnings of an asset belong to the owner of that asset.)

thanks for that info..its kind of where my research ended up. stay with fido, due to US taxe, move some to IBKR for living, and keep some in a LT savings locally....invetment angle is a much more expensive home than I really need locally , bearing in mind, selling takes lot longer in europe.
a bit of a mish mash, but should work out. I have couple of other ides with real estate and family, but not sure if those will work out.

As I remember, the country (Monaco?) where Jim lives has no capital gain tax. That would make selling stocks a much easier decision. I would have sold 95% of stocks now and bought it back in case the tax policy changes, considering the possibility that US may tax those gains to make it even with the US tax rate.

The risk in trying this radical restructuring is immense.
For more, see also this thread https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=373148673
To think that Trump would not back a radically restructuring is belied by his allowing Musk to try to radically restructure agencies that run the U.S. government.

The big problem is the huge annual deficit. The US government cannot continue spending like it has been. Everybody knows that.

Kicking an addiction is always painful.

I find it amusing that Europe is considering ignoring "rule of law" with respect to the $300 billion of frozen Russia assets. Lending money using Russia's assets as collateral. (Great, I'll borrow money from the bank and put your house up as collateral.) Seizing the interest earned on the $300B. (The earnings of an asset belong to the owner of that asset.)

For those who value the rule of law, it is heartening that they have thus far resisted. (For those who value people not getting bombed, it's less of a comfort). The latest proposal is that Ukraine assign their war reparations claims to the European agencies holding the Russian assets, and then to do an international offset. i.e., reducing claims against Russia euro-for-euro against the reduction in the assets held on their behalf. This is generally legal (if one is mindful of a few technicalities) and has long precedent, and would accomplish about the same thing as outright confiscation. Quite aside from questions of moral justice and human impact, one couldn't reasonably argue that the Russian government hasn't damaged some valuable fixed assets inside Ukraine.

Jim

By the way, living abroad is not a decision to be taken lightly. I have in the past, so am familiar with the necessity of an American being able to accommodate to another culture, and enjoy the accommodation!
Any suggestions?

Rather to my surprise, New Zealand has not only retained but expanded their Investor and Entrepreneur visa programmes. The dollar commitment has been dropped, now about (US)$2.8m invested in the NZ economy. It's hard to beat for quality of life and nice people. Yes, it's far from everywhere, but many of the nicest things about NZ are because of that. And you can pretty much choose any climate you like, depending on the town you pick. Napier is a lot like Spain, its precise antipodes. Christchurch is a bit closer to the San Francisco end of the scale.

Jim

Mr. Buffett also said in his annual letter, which was published after the current administration took office, that he will continue to invest in US businesses and that the US is still the best place to invest or something to that effect. Are we saying he just said it, but doesn't really mean it?

I'm sure he means it. And he is probably right. But "probably" isn't "certainly". I think the chances have dropped, and I think the chances that he is wrong in a lose-so-much-that-your-lifestyle-changes-a-lot kind of way are now over 1%.

Consider: The stock markets in Germany went up, with squiggles, on a gigantic tear from 1847 to 1916, and for good reason. In many ways its economy crushed the rest of the world, and there was nowhere to go but up. It was a sure thing. Someone could be 90 years old just before the first war and conclude precisely what Mr Buffett has concluded, with equally good historical evidence, and just as good a history as an investor. I am emphatically not saying the same scenario will play out, I'm merely casting doubt on engineer's induction: the notion that something will keep happening purely because it has done so for a long time. In any complex system, sometimes there are regime changes.

Jim

I am a retired attorney, a lifelong US’ian, and I share all of your concerns and more about what appears to me to be a descent into a Fascist dictatorship. But I am also tethered to my country by the need to be here for my children and grandchildren. I am at a loss as to how to accomplish this task. I would love to hear what could be done short of leaving my country.

Yes, South island of NZ was my favorite international spot. Milford sound, unlimited adventure options around Queenstown, whale watching & swimming with dolphins in Kaikura, artsy fartsy town of Nelson with sea kayaking, Mount Cook, exploring glaciers- its heavenly down there! Even tandem paraglided! The people, cuisine and beverage were wonderful as well!

What really stands out are the posts from people residing in the USA saying that t-bills are not a safe investment.

They've defaulted before, for example a nice long one April through May 1979. So it's not unreasonable for anyone, American or not, to imagine they will default again.

That's not to say that your stance is unwarranted: it's against the US constitution to question it. (14th amendment, section 4).

Jim

Where is the info on the investor visa for 2.8 million USD? I found one for 15 million NZD, but that’s like 8.7 million US?

Saxo? Really? I`am a long term customer with mixed feelings, just about to move away. ...
I chose them as the alternative to IB, not my best decision.

Thanks for the comments.

As you note, there aren't many obvious good alternatives. Other than being annoying, do you have particular concerns about Saxo? Would they fall into the category of "good enough"?
Living where I do, the main alternative is wealth management banks, and the fees are eye watering. For example, if you had rolled T-bills quarterly over the last couple of years you'd be losing money because the commissions exceed the yield.

Technically I'm a client of IB UK, not IB US, but I'm not sure how much the corporate distinction would matter in the event that the US passed some rules to the detriment of non-US-persons.

Jim

With all due respect Mungo, you’re technically correct.

The U.S. Treasury did experience delays paying maturing T-bills. In 1979 Congress faced a situation where it had not raised the debt ceiling in time. This limited the Treasury's ability to borrow funds.  

Result: There were three occasions in late April and early May of 1979, where T-bills were paid late. These delays, while ultimately resolved, were considered a form of "mini-default" or temporary default.

Just a humble creeper,
PaulnKC

Where is the info on the investor visa for 2.8 million USD? I found one for 15 million NZD, but that’s like 8.7 million US?

There are different categories, and at least one of them changed just recently, effective next month. I think they are dubbed Growth and Balanced. I think (?) the main difference is that Balanced is allowed to invest in bonds, whereas Growth has to be all equities (private or public).

From a recent FT article:
"Would-be investors can apply for a visa if they are willing to invest NZ$5mn (US$2.8mn) directly into the country’s businesses. Applicants will only be required to spend 21 days in New Zealand over three years to qualify for residency, compared with 117 days over four years under the previous scheme. Visas are also available for those willing to invest at least NZ$10mn over five years and live in the country for 105 days during that period."

A government article describing the new alternatives:
https://www.immigration.govt.nz/about-us/media-cen...

Jim

These delays, while ultimately resolved, were considered a form of "mini-default" or temporary default.

Like being a little bit pregnant, I guess : )

The really *big* default was the one of 1933. The bonds said that they would be repaid in gold, but they weren't, so that's that. The country was in dire straits and had little choice, but that's rather the point I suppose: such situations do happen from time to time.
I don't know as much about the 1968 silver certificate default or the 1862 demand notes.

Jim

So if you really want to bet against America, bet against it for a real reason rather than some short-term politics that you may hate.

Though I don't have any particular fondness for Mr Trump or the current version of the Republican party, my own moves aren't driven by dislike. That would be a bit petulant. There are lots of people I like or dislike, and I agree with a few of Mr Trump's actions, notably chivvying Europeans into getting their defence funding act together and (a while back) lowering the high-but-irrelevant headline US corporate tax rates to a international norm level with fewer eastiy-gamed carve outs.

Rather, I am concerned about the potentially permanent dismantling of certain aspects of the US system that make it (a) a profitable and reliable place for investments and (2) a jurisdiction of moral standing suitable for being involved with. That comprises things like rule of law, separation of powers, intolerance of and passable action against bribes and corruption, habeas corpus, political neutrality in sundry arms of the government, respect for international treaties and borders, avoiding committing war crimes, that sort of thing. I don't care who did the changes or why, but I care that they happen.

Jim

Right, during the Obama -Biden years there was never any backlash against those with opposing points of view. No one got cancelled no censorship. Ever hear of Mark Zuckerberg at Meta, the twitter gang, etc? Unbelievable denial of fact.

They are 🤢 very sick, mentally. I love it, good riddance to all fanatical nutbags leaving USA!!!

Ah thanks. Sounds interesting!

perplexity.ai says (with references) that for New Zealand it's 5M NZ or about $2.9M USD minimum investment, into things that benefit the NZ economy
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/new-zealand-golde...
I don't think I want that much tied up in strictly NZ investments. But potentially there may be good deals, one would need to spend some time there first to get the 'lay of the land', which would be a good idea in any case.

Actually, at first look Monaco seems easier. perplexity.ai says (with references) that the requirement is to maintain 500K euro in a bank registered in Monaco
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/investment-requir...
Not sure if there's reasonable interest on those deposits, or other investment opportunities for the deposited funds.
A long stay type D French visa would be required, but they seem to let Monaco show proof of funds.
I looked into living in Monaco a bit, it does have its attractions!

I get it. So you’re identifying multiple U.S. Treasury defaults dating back to 1933.
Good info. Thanks Mungo!
Respectfully,
paul

have acquired some level of wealth .....Golden Visa programs.....(1) stable country (2) English as primary language or fairly prevalent as a second language (3) excellent health care (4) a place I'd enjoy living.
Any suggestions?

Yes, from own experience those ones (with the limitation that your point (4) of course is higly subjective):

1. Australia: My favourite country which easily meets ALL of the above. Requires investing several Million$ to get permanent residency (PR). You (and me) are 2 years too late, otherwise we as retirees could have gotten PR for free.

2. New Zealand: Also several Million$ investment required for PR. But: Meeting (3) ONLY (more or less) if you are not dependent on the public health system which is a catastrophe, so if you pay for treatment in private hospitals. Even then not as good as Australia.

3. Monaco: Cheaper if wealthy. Just buying accomodation required, starts at around $1Million. Our local experts there can tell you more.

4. Thailand: No problem with English in the areas where foreigners/expats are concentrated (Bangkok, Phuket, Ko Samui, Chiang Mai). Excellent private hospitals for them. Excellent private care for elderlies. Golden Visa: Several options, starting at $25,000 for five years.

5. Portugal: PR is something like §500,000. English normally no problem. Healthcare system I don't know about, but we have local experts here "on board".
.
.
P.S.: I'd love if I could agree with Jim´s "NZ.....you can pretty much choose any climate you like, depending on the town you pick. Napier is a lot like Spain, its precise antipodes. Christchurch is a bit closer to the San Francisco end of the scale.", but I can't. There is a reason why NZ is so green: Much more and often rain (followed by clear blue sky again!), with therefore often great humidity, especially in the North Island (that's where the majority lives) is much more humid. Plus: The Winters here can create heating problems, as older houses - because the winters in the North Island are mild - lack insulation and heating facilities - which comes as a bad surprise for Europeans/Americans used to central heating (I once thought "Nice that it's still 4-8 degrees Celsius in the middle of the winter" --- until I found it was the same in the house itself).

Said, writing this from Tauranga, NZ. Ask if you have questions regarding NZ.

" I don't know as much about the 1968 silver certificate default or the 1862 demand notes.

Jim"

Relax old friend the plan is to pay back foreigners in trump coins!

Maybe I need to go back and re-read the thread, but my take-away was Mungofitch's concern regarding how t-bills would be handled vis-a-vis "non-US persons".

Mungofitch was talking about a tariff on foreign capital, which he would want to avoid. The problem he’s raising, though, is the implications of any Mar-a-lago accords on the treasury markets. If the Trump administration pursues radical ideas like a capital tariff or a compulsory century bond swap on foreign treasury holders, the run on treasuries could be catastrophic. Prices could collapse overnight, yields could explode, and the major market for US treasuries—our trade partners—wouldn’t be there to fill the gap because of trade wars and capital tariffs.

These loons seem hell bent on doing a major redesign of the world economic order in mid flight. These kinds of radical economic regime changes usually arise from crises rather than precipitating them.

The latest proposal is that Ukraine assign their war reparations claims ...

This would be the first time I have ever heard of the loser of a war making the winner pay reparations.
But, hey, this isn't the first wild claim from Ukraine.


This is generally legal (if one is mindful of a few technicalities) and has long precedent, and would accomplish about the same thing as outright confiscation.

Which winners of a war in history had their assets forcibly taken from them and given to the loser? Usually it's the other way around.
Did Rome pay reparations to Carthage?

A lot of this thread is like a bunch of kids in the woods around a campfire, telling each other ghost stories to scare themselves.

Another Chicxulub asteroid will resolve all our issues.


In the discussion about Treasuries there's another story that comes to mind, about two hikers who see a bear following them in the woods. "I don't have to outrun the bear, I just have to outrun you."

I get it Phoolish Phillip. Thank you.
It’s really scary stuff.
Respectfully-your humble Shrewd.com Creeper,
Paul

“A lot of this thread is like a bunch of kids in the woods around a campfire, telling each other ghost stories to scare themselves.”

I might agree if habeas corpus wasn’t being trampled, and the judiciary being sidelined, just weeks into this administration. Zealots are at the wheel and they have a plan come hell or high water. They are going to push the financial world order to its breaking point.

Yep. Look at some of the people we are locking up:

https://charlieangus.substack.com/p/niemoller-and-...

Isn't this the Berkshire board, with Jim´s post having been about his (yes, politically influenced) investment(!) decisions?
Maybe I accidentally landed on the wrong board.

Thanks, Said, Jim. NZ is certainly worth considering, but that is a decent chunk of change that they ask you tie up in NZ assets of some type. But the fly fishing apparently is incredible, which outweighs many things!
Regarding Australia, here's what perplexity.ai says (with references)
https://www.perplexity.ai/search/what-investment-i...
Also seems like a big chunk of change.
Monaco still seems cheapest in terms of 'downpayment' for residency. Don't know yet about housing/living costs, but there are definite advantages to living in that part of Europe.

A lot of this thread is like a bunch of kids in the woods around a campfire, telling each other ghost stories to scare themselves.
Not at all. I listened to the Tett inverview, read Stephen Miran's paper (Chair of Trump's Council of Economic Advisors), and it set my hair on fire, no campfire needed. I posted about it here https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?pid=638518736
Jim's subsequent thread, i.e. this one, and the comments in this thread are not the cause of me no longer being hirsute.

Discussion of politics, including the war in Ukraine, are probably too much of a 'hot button' to discuss here and hope to retain the collegiality of this board. There are other boards on which one can debate deeply held beliefs, perhaps posters here could say something like "I've responded to your comment on the 'U.S. policy board' which is here https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?bid=17

I'd love if I could agree with Jim´s "NZ.....you can pretty much choose any climate you like, depending on the town you pick. Napier is a lot like Spain, its precise antipodes. Christchurch is a bit closer to the San Francisco end of the scale.", but I can't. There is a reason why NZ is so green: Much more and often rain

Bear in mind there are subtleties to my comment: the average temp in San Francisco in summer is about 57 F, if I recall : )
If you want good weather (but few other attractions), go to Quito. Spring every morning all year, summer every afternoon.

Jim

This would be the first time I have ever heard of the loser of a war making the winner pay reparations.
But, hey, this isn't the first wild claim from Ukraine.

Well, wars have many dimensions. I agree that it seems unlikely (as it has for three years) that Ukraine's old borders will ever again be the widely recognized and permanent ones.
But when it comes to the money side of things, the winner is the one holding the money. That isn't Russia, and is (IMO) unlikely ever to be so.

Jim

Discussion of politics, including the war in Ukraine, are probably too much of a 'hot button' to discuss here and hope to retain the collegiality of this board.

Maybe, but the increasing sympathy for, or neutrality with respect to, Russian aggression in certain U.S. circles is part of why I'm slowly doing what Jim has done quickly.

I'm Canadian, and the newfound U.S. stance on Russia-Ukraine/EU relations puts an important gloss on U.S. threats to treat the U.S.-Canada border as less than sacrosanct. Violating Canadian / non-U.S. citizens' rights in property or contract is hardly a massive reach when Trump can't go a day without describing Canada as the 51st state. And these aren't isolated incidents either.

What all the wise men promised has not happened. And what all the damned fools predicted has come to pass. – Lord Melbourne, Queen Victoria's first Prime Minister

"Right, during the Obama -Biden years there was never any backlash against those with opposing points of view. No one got cancelled no censorship. Ever hear of Mark Zuckerberg at Meta, the twitter gang, etc? Unbelievable denial of fact."

You seriously cannot grasp the difference between the federal government working with social media companies to help get scientifically factual information through to users during a deadly pandemic and the federal government using the DOJ to actively harass people who disagree with them? The executive branch ignoring the direction of the legislative branch? The executive branch actively flouting judicial review or judicial decisions?

Unbelievable denial of fact indeed.

You must be tired from pickleball and therefore are not thinking clearly. Go have some milk and cookies then take a nap.

...around a campfire...
When the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court feels the need to step in and say, "whoa, there boy, WHOA there", it's not kids sitting around the campfire. The woods are actually on fire.

"For more than two centuries, it has been established that impeachment is not an appropriate response to disagreement concerning a judicial decision. The normal appellate review process exists for that purpose," Roberts said in the statement....

But Trump himself raised the stakes Tuesday, when he called for the impeachment of U.S. District Judge James Boasberg after he blocked the deportation of Venezuelan migrants.

...and his new toady playthings at the DOJ sang the chorus...

FC

"I'm Canadian, and the newfound U.S. stance on Russia-Ukraine/EU relations puts an important gloss on U.S. threats to treat the U.S.-Canada border as less than sacrosanct. Violating Canadian / non-U.S. citizens' rights in property or contract is hardly a massive reach when Trump can't go a day without describing Canada as the 51st state. And these aren't isolated incidents either."

Please just know that the vast majority of Americans Love Canada, respect it's sovereignty and do not agree one iota with what is going on right now! In fact, I'm going to take it a step further..... I do not know one person (and trust me, I know a lot of Trumpers) that has verbally shown support for Trump on this issue. For the most part his base is confused on the subject. On what possible grounds could someone literally say "oh yeah Trump's on the mark on this issue". Do you remember how much this was discussed during the campaign? No you don't, that's because never once was the idea of Canada becoming the 51st state discussed! Same goes for Greenland and the Panama Canal. In fact he branded himself as the anti war candidate. The one that was going to end all our overseas excursions and yet he's unwilling to take military options off the table against our long standing allies no less!!

This is all a joke. Canada's ripping us off (on the very deal he negotiated which is basically no different than the NAFTA that was there before it). I mean I can't believe that Canadians aren't foaming at the mouth of the idea of becoming the 51st state after such a well executed courtship has been implemented by his Orangeness. My god has this world gone nuts!

"Unbelievable denial of fact" "You must be tired from pickleball and therefore are not thinking clearly. Go have some milk and cookies then take a nap."

DO NOT screw up this board. There are threads where politics are unavoidable. Insults are avoidable. If your post is not on topic and civil, please don't post it.

I've shown the arithmetic many times in various places, and it's almost always ignored. I used to think that it was due to innumeracy, but it appears that it is more due to cognitive dissonance.

And yet again ... the simple arithmetic is being ignored.

For those looking to find a country more in line with their political/economic comfort, I can offer my personal experience with Canada. We moved to British Columbia in 2005 and political and healthcare beliefs were a big part of the equation. If anyone wants details on that send me a message. We found the immigration process to be slow and laborious, but very doable. There is a points system, and it is fairly easy to qualify if you have certain qualifications. In our case, those included advanced degrees, age not much over 50, a very small business of our own, and some limited skills in French. Actually we qualified without the French test, but were considering the middle level test if we needed it. Once over 55 it becomes more difficult.

We were accepted as landed immigrants after two years. We maintained a US address and for financial issues we simply neglected to tell our US brokerage our legal residence changed.

Personal issues prompted us to return to the US before we had enough residence time for a Canadian passport. In retrospect, we wish we had put in the time to obtain it.

I know there are financial ways of obtaining residency and citizenship, but I don't know the details.

It felt good to be part of Canada and to pay taxes to a country we were proud of. I feel there is also merit in staying and advocating for things one believes in. We find it to be a tough choice.

Rather, I am concerned about the potentially permanent dismantling of certain aspects of the US system that make it (a) a profitable and reliable place for investments and (2) a jurisdiction of moral standing suitable for being involved with. That comprises things like rule of law, separation of powers, intolerance of and passable action against bribes and corruption, habeas corpus, political neutrality in sundry arms of the government, respect for international treaties and borders, avoiding committing war crimes, that sort of thing. I don't care who did the changes or why, but I care that they happen.

Below are my parting thoughts on this thread.

It's okay to be concerned, but taking extreme investment or domicile related actions at this point in the game seems too hasty to me. Sweeping statements like above need rigorous supporting evidence. Trolling (Governor Trudeau, 51st state, etc.) is not the same as intent and even farther away from action. To determine the extent to which the situation has materially changed, more evidence is needed which will only become available after more time passes.

Buffett said in his annual letter, "Charlie and I have always acknowledged, Berkshire would not have achieved its results in any locale except America". After decades and decades of being the best place to invest, in a mere two months (inauguration was Jan 20), has everything really gone to hell? Maybe it eventually will, more likely it won't, but how can you reliably conclude one way or another in 2 months?

FWIW, my input to those contemplating changes is don't be hasty. There is no need to rush because whatever you think is going to happen, will not happen overnight. Whether good or bad, things always take a lot longer than you expect to unfold.

Last but not least, many unkind and uncharitable things about the US have been said in this thread. I think that's not cool, especially for this group, which has become enormously wealthy (see Net Worth thread) thanks to Berkshire and America. I prefer Buffett's view of eternal optimism for America, while acknowledging it won't be a straight line.

From the latest annual letter:
"The American process has not always been pretty – our country has forever had many scoundrels and promoters who seek to take advantage of those who mistakenly trust them with their savings. But even with such malfeasance – which remains in full force today – and also much deployment of capital that eventually floundered because of brutal competition or disruptive innovation, the savings of Americans has delivered a quantity and quality of output beyond the dreams of any colonist. From a base of only four million people – and despite a brutal internal war early on, pitting one American against another – America changed the world in the blink of a celestial eye."

"DO NOT screw up this board. There are threads where politics are unavoidable. Insults are avoidable. If your post is not on topic and civil, please don't post it."

I will put a value on your advice in the amount I paid for it, especially considering it is evident you failed to grasp certain subtleties.

Thank you.

"Last but not least, many unkind and uncharitable things about the US have been said in this thread. I think that's not cool, especially for this group, which has become enormously wealthy (see Net Worth thread) thanks to Berkshire and America. I prefer Buffett's view of eternal optimism for America, while acknowledging it won't be a straight line."

Why do you think Buffett had/has eternal optimism in America? That is a serious question.

Do you think it is because America is made up of magical soil that makes businesses based in America magically profitable? Probably not, but there has to be some reason that Buffett had/has so much optimism for America. Why do you think he does?

My opinion was that Buffett's optimism came from the idea that America was a great place to ethically make money. Some of the reasons that America was a great place to ethically make money was because of what Mungofitch mentioned: "(a) a profitable and reliable place for investments and (2) a jurisdiction of moral standing suitable for being involved with. That comprises things like rule of law, separation of powers, intolerance of and passable action against bribes and corruption, habeas corpus, political neutrality in sundry arms of the government, respect for international treaties and borders, avoiding committing war crimes, that sort of thing."

Almost all of those mentioned points have been clearly violated in the past few weeks (I can give clear and specific examples if you like, but mentioning specific examples will make this discussion much more political....). Now, don't get me wrong, each of those things have been violated in the past as well, but they were always minor violations and regret usually followed by a vast majority of the citizenry. Furthermore the violations were few and far between. America wasn't perfect but it tried hard and was better than other places. That is what made the optimism warranted. Unfortunately, the violations are not few and far between. It has literally been a few weeks. Furthermore, a large chunk of the citizenry of this country has zero regrets and in fact greatly supports each of those violations.

So if the things that make me optimistic about America are no longer holding true, why continue to be optimistic?

So what is the basis for your optimism in America? Magical soil?

Also, I don't expect Buffett to come out and directly say anything has changed for him, even if it has. However, I really do wish Charlie was still alive. I expect he would have a whole lot to say.

"Trolling (Governor Trudeau, 51st state, etc.) is not the same as intent and even farther away from action. To determine the extent to which the situation has materially changed, more evidence is needed which will only become available after more time passes."

With all due respect it's a lot more than calling him Governor Trudeau and referring to Canada as the 51st state. An unprovoked trade war has already been started (by us) and he has openly talked about absorbing Canada while also threatening the sovereignty of Greenland and Panama. While I certainly agree about not panicking I don't need more evidence that the US is not in good moral standing on this issue. I would also argue that Trump's supporters have long ignored and excused his "trolling" while he continues to erode democratic norms. It doesn't feel like "trolling", it feels like he really means what he says!

"FWIW, my input to those contemplating changes is don't be hasty. There is no need to rush because whatever you think is going to happen, will not happen overnight. Whether good or bad, things always take a lot longer than you expect to unfold."

Again, I agree with the sentiment about panicking but when exactly would the good time be considering we have really good evidence that this administration has a fascist bent? They just openly defied the courts, Trump has mused about using military force against "the enemy from within" and has not ruled out military force against Canada, Greenland or Panama. It doesn't matter what our personal feelings are about whether he would use military force he has literally said it! So I would posit that considering this is an investment board it is the right time to start pondering the possibility of how to move assets or seek domicile in another country. As to when, I certainly don't have that answer either.

"Last but not least, many unkind and uncharitable things about the US have been said in this thread. I think that's not cool, especially for this group, which has become enormously wealthy (see Net Worth thread) thanks to Berkshire and America. I prefer Buffett's view of eternal optimism for America, while acknowledging it won't be a straight line."

This is really the only statement you made that I take issue with. These "Unkind and uncharitable" statements may not be cool to you but for a lot of us Trump's vision of America is what is unkind and uncharitable. I have no idea what your political leanings are, nor do I care, but free speech is a hallmark of being American so I don't think it's fair for you to tell us we should be quiet because we have "become enormously wealthy thanks to Berkshire and America". Two factors for sure but there's a lot more inputs than that. And I don't know what "enormously wealthy" even means. Much like beauty that is in the eye of the beholder.

" DO NOT screw up this board. There are threads where politics are unavoidable. Insults are avoidable. If your post is not on topic and civil, please don't post it."

Good morning, there are several clowns who have been stalking me for decades on several boards, ignore them, trust me. Jealousy is the highest form of flattery! Have a grand day.

“For those looking to find a country more in line with their political/economic comfort, I can offer my personal experience with Canada”

I grew up on the Canadian border. Spent many a summer at a family cottage in Canada. I still go fishing in Canada. I love Canada and Canadians, but I could never live in a country where retiring to the south for the winter puts you on the border of North Dakota.

I could never live in a country where retiring to the south for the winter puts you on the border of North Dakota.

I hear ya.
Do bear in mind that it rather depends where you are...it's a big country. Victoria has snow on an average of only 7 days a year, total accumulation about a foot. Around twice that in Chatham Ontario. Just enough to offer a few photo ops for the Christmas card : )
Of course this didn't keep me from heading somewhere warmer to dodge the winters, so pay me no heed.

Jim

Canada was my first thought. The easiest route is to have some familial connection to Canada. Some of my U.S. friends do and are considering the move. Discussions are continuing about them adopting me. The regulations otherwise seem to be at the province level if you'd be coming as a retiree and not as an entrepreneur, making it complicated to sort out, .

I've visited Vancouver a number of times, but in summer and some years ago. I recall people saying the winters are long and gray.
BC is beautiful, but BC seems to be burning up and I'm already a climate refugee having moved to Virginia from Colorado, which now has basically official 'fire season'.

So, I wonder: where in Canada might one be able to live on the outskirts of a decent city, in a semi-rural area that's a shortish drive or shortish public transport away from city amenities, such as medical care and restaurants etc and hopefully come culture?
Importantly - with tolerable climate?

Thank you!

Jim has forgotten more about investing than I have ever known, so I always pay attention to his moves. I think he is probably making the right move...for himself. If I weren't a US citizen, I would consider doing the same, but I think US citizens should stick with their investing plan, as the country adjusts every two years and we have been through much worse scenarios than the current one. Hell, the whole system almost collapsed in 2008. That said, whatever makes an investor able to sleep at night is probably the best course, just be wary of panic selling on whatever the fear of the day is.

I have lived overseas and just got back from a trip to Spain, France & Andorra. I would love to live in one of these places as the lifestyle was incredible. Alas, I have three children so I want to stay close to them. I just need to convince my kids to go :-). There are a lot of great places to live in the world, but without friends and family, it might not be a good choice (or, depending on your family, it might be a great choice).

We do have a few Canadians at my workplace, and I asked them if they would move back. Overwhelmingly, no. They love their homeland but say life is better here in the States. One went back against his wishes (the wife's family was still there and she made him).

Discussion of politics, including the war in Ukraine, are probably too much of a 'hot button' to discuss here and hope to retain the collegiality of this board.
Maybe, but the increasing sympathy for, or neutrality with respect to, Russian aggression in certain U.S. circles is part of why I'm slowly doing what Jim has done quickly.
I'm Canadian, and the newfound U.S. stance on Russia-Ukraine/EU relations puts an imp
ortant gloss on U.S. threats to treat the U.S.-Canada border as less than sacrosanct. Violating Canadian / non-U.S. citizens' rights in property or contract is hardly a massive reach when Trump can't go a day without describing Canada as the 51st state. And these aren't isolated incidents either.


@Lear
I've responded to your comment (in bold) on the 'U.S. policy board' which is here https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?bid=17

(1) The US has moved too far along the spectrum of being uninvestable, like China. Not a stable regulatory/tax environment, capricious changes in the financial landscape, massive holes in the rule of law. (I suspect that the zone has been flooded sufficiently that some pretty dire developments have escaped the notice of many). That means an unacceptably high risk of unacceptably bad outcomes unrelated to the businesses themselves: wealth protection.

Leigh McGowan rants about a specific example of this destabilization of the legal and financial environment happening in Delaware and explains why it is not just a Delaware issue.
https://youtu.be/orLlW33lQKs?si=q8BUvO6ctps8dkwE

Would it be possible to have a separate expatriation forum or board so that this one can remain focused on Berkshire Hathaway?

“Why do you think Buffett had/has eternal optimism in America? That is a serious question.”

It’s obviously the rule of law and the investment stability that law provides. It’s also the strong social and physical infrastructure that has made America great. Buffett nods to that history of social and public investment when he celebrates paying $28 billion in taxes in his most recent letter.

Some would have this conversation silenced because it is clearly political, but for centuries the study of economics was called political economy for a reason. Without the political infrastructure to support the economy, the growth and prosperity we have achieved would never have been possible.

Mungofitch made an announcement about his investment decisions based on an analysis of the current political environment in the US, and I think it is perfectly appropriate conversation for this board. His decision challenges a couple of tenants of Buffett’s investment style. First, it challenges the idea that the US is the best place in the world to be an investor, and second it challenges the idea that you should focus on the individual enterprise and ignore the macro noise when making investment decisions. The question is, has something fundamentally changed about the investment environment in the US? There are a number of reasons to believe that it has. The assault on habeas corpus challenges the most fundamental legal principles on which our political economy rests. Executive Orders that target individual law firms ability to conduct business. The flagrant dismissal of judicial review. Add to this list the potentially catastrophic impact of any Mar-A-Lago Accords on the bond markets and you have a demolition of the political and juridical scaffolding of a century of capitalism in America.

It is necessary to talk about the political context of the current investment environment, even if it makes some uncomfortable.

The US Policy board would be a good place to continue this discussion.

So, I wonder: where in Canada might one be able to live on the outskirts of a decent city, in a semi-rural area that's a shortish drive or shortish public transport away from city amenities, such as medical care and restaurants etc and hopefully come culture?
Importantly - with tolerable climate?

London Ontario?
Not traditionally an exciting place, but the big city lights of Toronto are not so far away. Mainly known for university, medical, and insurance. And trees. Pretty nice climate in general, fertile/lush landscape, snowy to the north but not much to the south, the snow belt line sometimes goes right through the middle. It's a city, but surrounded by very rural spaces for quite a distance in every direction.

Jim

It is necessary to talk about the political context of the current investment environment, even if it makes some uncomfortable.

Take it to the US Policy board.

Take it to the US Policy board.
That's something we do agree on, so at least there's that!

I responded with my opinion about some of the comments you made on this board, on the U.S. policy board, which is here https://www.shrewdm.com/MB?bid=17

Also, I don't expect Buffett to come out and directly say anything has changed for him, even if it has.

Just thinking that there is a small possibility of Buffett changing his entire view due to two months of "odd" politics is an indication of not understanding Buffett at all.

London Ontario?
Thank you for the suggestion, I will investigate.

Post New

US Policy FAQ

---

Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.