+1 I hate to see intelligent discussion deteriorate into a goading session. There's a maxim I learned from being on SS - I think it applies here.."Do Your Own Due Diligence".
Great news from the same mob that takes care of my SMSF. It also makes sense. If PM were taxed on unrealised gains, then what about GOLD & PMGOLD? If PMGOLD & GOLD were taxed on unrealised gains, the what about every other ASX-listed product? I think that somebody's accountant has misread the legislation, and incorrectly classified his client as a PM trader.
According to what some people are saying here... you would have to pay tax when the copper price goes up if you have copper pipes in your home ! That's the way it sounds, doesn't it ?
Fine. Overall it appears we cant verify the PM claims to back their silver programs through their audit or public announcements, we just have to trust them. Some will be okay with that, others clearly wont.
Overall it appears your unfairly having a go at Bron. He has given you the best answers that he can whilst not revealing information he isnt allowed to. YOU dont have to believe what is said. That does not mean that you should be rude to Bron about it, plainly and simply this comes down to- 'Silvery Moon doesn't believe what Bron says in relation to Perth Mint operations' so how about you just say that and be done with it, everyone else can make up their own minds without your one man/woman crusade against the Perth Mint and its employees.
But arent we in a silver shortage?! The great response from Bron goes into a lot of detail ( silver shortage ) and everything seems to be ok ( silver shortage ). The info that a corporation FREELY gives its customers is WORTHLESS Half a sentence of what Bron couldnt disclose would be MORE worth than all the information already provided by Bron and PM prospectuses and fliers.
I'll answer you tomorrow on work time, not going to spend my Sunday on this. Some questions in the meantime: 1. Do you think I will lie to cover up whatever it is you think the Mint is covering up? I have no problem making the statements made in this thread about what the Mint does official. 2. Do you think some/all of the figures in the annual report are a false view of the Mint's books, in other words you think the Mint's management is perpetrating a fraud and either the auditors are incompetent to find it or are knowingly part of the fraud? 3. If you answer Yes to both, then who would you trust to provide the "verification" you seek? Simple yes/no answers. I think everyone would also like to know exactly what you think is going on. A simple statement that says "I believe the Perth Mint says A in public but the real state of affairs is B and they are making these fraudulent statement for motive C".
In other words, "means, motive and opportunity". You can't have a good detective story without the bit at the end where the policeman gathers everybody together and explains what happened.
Hey Bron, Here's a question - if unallocated silver accounts are being discontinued, how is the mint going to fund silver needs for operational purposes? The unallocated silver accounts were so attractive because of the low storage fees as a result of the mint saving money by allowing them to use silver on "the factory floor" to back the unallocated commitments. How is this going to work in future if Pool Unallocated is a separate warehoused stockpile of bulk silver, not being used in the mint operations? Is the expectation that enough people will sit tight with their grandfathered unallocated accounts in order to provide working stock? I saw Peter Schiff was recommending that people pile into unallocated silver before the 1st May cut off in order to take advantage of the lower storage fees, so I would assume that people might hold their current unallocated balances quite tightly, continuing to provide enough silver for operational needs for the foreseeable future. Is that the case?
While we have had Depository clients selling, it has always been outweighed by buyers, so our unallocated metal balances have always been going (net) up. It wasn't a rushed decision, we could see the trend of silver buying and knew a point would be reached at which we would have to close it. We waited until we had more silver than our operations and were happy to incur the extra cost associated with that as we wanted a "buffer" so that if for some remote reason a large number of clients wanted to take profit or physical, the reduced unallocated balances would still be above our operational requirements. We do not attract traders, more buy-and-hold types so yes we see the grandfathered accounts just sitting on their metal and that will fund our operations while this bull market continues. At some point we know there will be selling (or collection if we go to hyperinflation) and are ready for that. If the unallocated balances drop below our operational needs, then we will reopen it. People could then switch from Pool Allocated to Unallocated I suppose. But I just can't see that happening, the market is just too bullish.
The rules on CGT are that an "event" has to occur for the tax payable to be triggered. There's different events from bankruptcy or deeds of contract over an asset etc etc but the most common "event" will be when you sell your asset. If you dont sell your asset you dont pay any CGT. EG. You could have bought $100,000 in AG through a SMSF in 2000 and now its worth $4 million - you wont pay ANY tax on that until you sell your silver.
I agree with that now as i am 99% sure i was incorrectly advised before. I am in the process of having that confirmed, so should be 100% sure within the next week.
It's not goldmark, it's Gold Corp. It's a typo that crept into the interwebs somewhere along the line and keeps getting repeated. Well to the best of my knowledge anyway.
That reference to goldmark is so funny, can't even get our name right, I mean how many mints are there in Perth? We are a supplier and make what they ask us to make, but as you can see from the kitco news article and the reference to "another supplier" it is clear that there are political issues with purchasing too many silver blanks from an overseas mint instead of local suppliers.
Every time I see "goldmark" mentioned I wonder why no-ones picked up on AGEs changing from 22k to 9ct plate
It's funny how it spread - here's the first reference I found to it, dated Nov 2009 in a Forbes article: http://www.forbes.com/2009/11/25/gold-coins-shortage-markets-commodities-mint.html?partner=yahootix Now funnily enough, in April 2011, Kitco wrote the following article: http://www.kitco.com/reports/KitcoNews20110401DC_ron_paul.html Quick cut & paste journalism, and it goes on. In 2013 we'll probably read again about Goldmark from Perth minting blanks
Busy day today Silvery Moon will look at this tomorrow, but thinking about it, it would be nice to get an answer from you to my three questions as if the answer is yes then I wonder if there is any point in me saying any more as you'll just say "I don't believe you". I feel like I'm wasting my time as you mind is made up.
