JoyV

Not the 80s. The mid 70s. Iran cancelled. We did NOT cancel it. What we did was froze the account we had been being paid out of for the arms. There were a lot which had been delivered and not yet paid for. There were others which were being customized and not yet paid for. Others ordered but not yet filled (some of which we had paid contracted arms or jet manufacturers already such as Grumman).

Nor was it only planes and parts. But as for planes, Iran ordered 80 F14 Tomcats. Iran received 79. The 80th had a problem which delayed its delivery until the revolution started. So because one out eighty was not delivered, they wanted ALL the money paid into the account to be drawn from for paying for these arms orders. IRAN broke the contract! Iran having F14 tomcats is a very scary thing. Only the Raptor can compete against them.
https://nationalinterest.org/blog/the-buzz/revealed-irans-air-force-flies-american-made-f-14-tomcats-16758

You say all the details are in your posts. I do not see any contract details. I do not see anything on how much Iran owed us before we froze the account, only how much money was in the account. For instance, was the $8 billion in arms orders in 1972 which was filled; in that account? Your posts leave out details. It is cherry picked bits of history. When we froze the account, was all the money in the account was due us? Was more or less due? Often the news stories say we froze accounts. This is not accurate. Other accounts were frozen by Chase. Chase was not under the control of the US government. Yet the arbitration judgment did not differentiate what was owed by private institutions, such as Chase) and what either we owed or was owed to us. I scanned through the judgment and all these funds are scrambled together.

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1082&context=njilb

Here is a timeline which should make it easier to understand. https://iranprimer.usip.org/blog/2013/nov/17/us-iran-timeline-1979

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

good lord, how many ways can you twist facts..

https://www.haaretz.com/middle-east-news/iran/trump-s-iran-cash-story-oft-told-still-bogus-1.6032057

FACT CHECK Trump’s Favorite Iran-Obama Cash Story, Still Bogus No Matter How Often He Tells It
Here is Trump's latest iteration of this claim from Thursday, the reality behind it and how its used to delegitimize the Iran nuclear deal

U.S. President Donald Trump likes to tell a story about the U.S. paying out billions of dollars to Iran as part of the multinational deal freezing its nuclear program and easing sanctions against it. What he doesn’t say is that most of that money was Iran’s to begin with. The rest relates to an old debt the U.S. had with Iran.

The numbers and some details change in his retelling — dating back to the 2016 campaign — but his bottom line is always the same: The Obama administration was hoodwinked into giving Iran all that money, some of it in a huge and hidden bundle of cash.

A look at what Trump said Tuesday (he repeated it again Thursday in a bizarre interview with "Fox and Friends") and the reality behind it:

TRUMP: “The Iran deal is a terrible deal. We paid $150 billion. We gave $1.8 billion in cash. That’s actual cash, barrels of cash. It’s insane. It’s ridiculous. It should have never been made. But we will be talking about it.” — remarks before a meeting with French President Emmanuel Macron. At a news conference Tuesday, he spoke about “giving them, Iran, $150 billion at one point.”

THE FACTS: There was no $150 billion payout from the U.S. treasury. The money he refers to represents Iranian assets held abroad that were frozen until the deal was reached and Tehran was allowed to access its funds.

The payout of about $1.8 billion is a separate matter. That dates to the 1970s, when Iran paid the U.S. $400 million for military equipment that was never delivered because the government was overthrown and diplomatic relations ruptured.

That left people, businesses and governments in each country indebted to partners in the other, and these complex claims took decades to sort out in tribunals and arbitration. For its part, Iran paid settlements of more than $2.5 billion to U.S. citizens and businesses.

The day after the nuclear deal was implemented, the U.S. and Iran announced they had settled the claim over the 1970s military equipment order, with the U.S. agreeing to pay the $400 million principal along with about $1.3 billion in interest. The $400 million was paid in cash and flown to Tehran on a cargo plane, which gave rise to Trump’s dramatic accounts of money stuffed in barrels or boxes and delivered in the dead of night. The arrangement provided for the interest to be paid later, not crammed into containers.

JoyV

Not so simple.

There was $400 million in the trust account to pay for arms when the account was frozen. There were orders in the works. There were orders recently delivered (like the F14s). There were losses due to Iran cancelling arms which were contracted for. There was the issue of breach of contract.
https://www.gao.gov/assets/130/127394.pdf

Then there were moneys owed us separate from the trust account.

Wall Street Journal reported that the Obama administration not only paid $400 million in cash to Iran on Jan. 17, but $1.3 billion more in cash in two subsequent shipments — all in Swiss francs, euros and other currencies. The administration claims the payments were returning money Iran paid in 1979 under the Foreign Military Sales program for military equipment it ordered but did not receive, plus interest.

There are two key questions the administration has been refusing to answer: How was the payment calculated, and was it really due?

In his Jan. 17 announcement, Obama cast the payment as a favorable settlement of Iran’s claim for its 1979 payment. He said he had potentially saved “billions of dollars” Iran could have pursued at the Iran-US Claims Tribunal at The Hague. But the administration has repeatedly refused to answer questions about the merits of the claim or the amount of the payment.

Not for lack of trying on the part of Congress.

On Feb. 3, Rep. Edward J. Royce (R-Calif.), chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, requested “all legal analyses . . . evaluating the likelihood of Iran prevailing in this dispute” and a “detailed explanation of how the interest payment to Iran of $1.3 billion was calculated.”

Six weeks later, Assistant Secretary of State for Legislative Affairs Julia Frifield responded that the United States “could well have faced significant [additional] exposure in the billions of dollars,” because “Iran was of course seeking very high rates of interest,” and “we are confident that this was a good settlement for the American taxpayer.”

But she provided neither a legal analysis of the claim nor a calculation of the interest paid.

The State Department’s response also noted that the United States “has a significant counterclaim against Iran arising out of the [Foreign Military Sales] program” seeking “substantial damages.” But the administration has declined to explain the nature and amount of its counterclaim, or why it paid Iran’s claim and left its own counterclaim for future litigation.

Moreover, the administration had more than $400 million in other claims against Iran, arising under the “Victims of Trafficking and Violence Protection Act,” for court judgments it holds against Iran for terrorist attacks against Americans. That law specifically provided that “no funds shall be paid to Iran . . . from the Foreign Military Sales Fund, until [such claims] have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the United States.”
https://nypost.com/2016/09/08/no-we-didnt-owe-iran-that-1-7-billion-ransom-payment/

So I ask again. Who owes who what amounts? Even if there was more money in the account than what was owed us, including for breach of contract; the entire amount was certainly NOT what was owed!!!!

JoyV

Whatever gave you the idea I was a Reagan fan?

As for the money earning interest, then the money they owed us should also earn interest. In neither case was the money sitting in interest bearing accounts.

You really like to twist things to make the US out to be the bad guy. THEY cancelled! We did NOT ask for more money! The F14s were only part of the order. All of the orders had not actually been paid for, but were guaranteed under the trust account.

JoyV

As to your picture, I've got some news for you. Hillary Clinton was not the US President when she was subpoenaed to testify in front of congress. And here's another bit of news. She still isn't!

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

You truly work at this don`t you..


OK... It was not an account until the order was canceled due to the antagonistic men in power Iran..

So then, and only then, the 400 mil was put into an account to hold if for later talks..

Those talkes lasted decades..

When the money was presented, it was held by the bank/agency.

The account was established so the money would not disappear..

All pretty well handled other then the talks over the decades..



Now, think about how govt works, rather then creating some scenario which is not correct.. look that the facts and how well they fit with the events of the day.

they are not make believe, they are the events as recorded. From Reagan to trump.. all managed to have their nose in this issue..

Observe the record and not the make believe..

JoyV

Bureau of the Fiscal Service
US Department of treasury

2018 receipts Jan - June
1,771,293

2016 receipts Jan - June
1,703,181

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Did you miss reading the part that stated how the court/arbitrator handled claims both for the US against Iran; as well as claims for Iran against the US??

You as a right winger, would be expected to worship the ground Ronnie walked on.. every day reverence is paid to him by the right winger on OPP..

How in the world would the US be the bad guy if we canceled any part of an arms purchase by a now hostile nation?? why would we not cancel the remainder of the sale??

I saw nothing that made this a money issue.. the US did not want the new powers in Iran to have the weapons we had agreed to sell the the Shah..

If you want to call all the weapons we sold to Iran, go ahead. The 400 million was one incident, they wanted more of everything. we stopped all deliveries, including repair parts.

some articles say that iran cancelled what was left of the orders.. If they did so, it was after we told them we would not allow delv..

In no way did I clame Iran held the high ground.. by stopping shipments, we did the right thing..

We have a very nasty history with Iran, we were not the nice guy in many instances.. but canceling weapons was good..

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

I guess she had to much class for the people who voted that year..

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

Updated July 12, 2018 4:27 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON—Corporations taking advantage of new, lower tax rates reduced their payments to the federal government last month.

The Treasury Department on Thursday said government receipts fell 7% in June compared with the same month a year earlier, including a 33% drop in gross corporate taxes. Individual withheld and payroll taxes were down 5% from June 2017, while non-withheld individual taxes rose by 7%.



Tax Collections
Total U.S. government receipts during June
Source: Treasury Department

More broadly, the federal deficit is swelling as government spending outpaces revenues. The budget gap totaled $607.1 billion in the first nine months of the 2018 fiscal year, 16% larger than the same point a year earlier. So far in the current fiscal year, which will end Sept. 30, total spending rose 4% compared with the same period a year earlier and total revenues rose 1%.

Many individuals and corporations both had estimated-tax payments due in June, making the month an important indicator of the revenue effects of the new tax law. The legislation, which reduced individual and corporate tax rates, was enacted in December and mostly took effect Jan. 1.

Corporations, which received a tax rate cut to 21% from 35%, captured many of the benefits quickly.

Lower withholding from worker paychecks kicked in for many Americans in February, increasing their take-home pay and reducing what they send to the federal government.

Super Dave Loc: Realville, USA

Permalib sees class

JoyV

When you base you information solely from news sources, you can run the gamut of bias either way. I provided several documents in this thread. For example, most news articles say that we held $400 million paid for jets which were never sent. But they WERE sent. All but one of the 80 ordered were sent, along with pilots and technicians to learn how to use and maintain them, $150 million in spare parts, and missiles including; 714 AIM-54A missiles (Phoenix), AIM 7 and AIM 9 (I can't find how many).
Here are the basic bare facts.
1) Iran had arms contracts with the US from at least as far back as the Nixon administration.
2) There was a revolution in Iran resulting in new government.
a) The arms contract was cancelled/
b) US hostages were taken.
c) Chase froze non US government accounts Iranian accounts.
d) US freezes Iran arms trust account
3) Various hostage negotiations were entered into which included releasing various assets and or arms. Every time arms were sent, some hostages were released but others taken.
4) After settlement was attempted multiple times, arbitration at the Hague was agreed upon.
5) There were two main cases. (Not including private cases such as chase or oil companies) A suit by Iran against the US for the money frozen in the trust account and a countersuit by the US against Iran for breach of contract, destruction or loss of US government property in Iran, for the hostages, and more.
6) Obama "saved" the US money by leaving the Hague arbitration and agreeing directly with Iran to pay them $1.7 billion. The savings were that if arbitration had been completed it was believed the Iran suit against the US would have been for more. Nothing was said about the suit we had against Iran but since arbitration was ended, I guess that suit is null and void now.

The money Obama sent Iran was NOT an amount arbitration found we owed. Obama closed arbitration to negotiate directly with Tehran!!!!

https://www.iranwatch.org/sites/default/files/gao-irancancelledarmssales-072579.pdf

https://scholarlycommons.law.northwestern.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1082&context=njilb

Along with the F14s, we sent:


{So if all on the right should worship Reagan, I guess all on the left should worship Stalin. Do you have a Stalin shrine in your home?}

JoyV

First you say I must have only looked at April which was a good month. Now you show proof through looking only at June. Shall I go back and pick the month with the least revenue receipts during Obama's years and use it as the basis for how bad revenue was? Nor can I find the paragraphs you posted on the US treasury site. https://home.treasury.gov/ Can you give a link to the specific page?

permafrost Loc: Minnesota

John B. Bellinger, the chief State Department lawyer under Condoleezza Rice and before that legal adviser to the National Security Council for George W. Bush, reviewed the law and the congressional exchange about the clause at our request.

"The VTPTA does not say that the USG could never release the FMS funds to Iran; it says the funds could not be released to Iran 'until such subrogated claims have been dealt with to the satisfaction of the United States,'" he said. "I assume that when the Obama administration paid the FMS funds plus interest to Iran, they concluded that this VTPTA provision was satisfied."

The Treasury IG examined the payments and reported in November 2016 that it had received verbal assurance from the Justice Department "that the settlement comports with the VTVPA." In its semiannual report to Congress in March 2017, the IG said the payment was made "after receiving necessary information and authorizations from the Departments of Justice and State."

The Tablet article raised questions about the size of the interest penalty -- $1.3 billion -- and called on Treasury to release all documents related to the payment of the claim, such as the computation of the amount of interest allegedly owed. (The Treasury IG report indicated the State Department relied on a calculation involving the annual prime lending rate and simple interest method, which seems out of the ordinary.) We made a request to Treasury for the information, but a Treasury spokesperson declined to provide it because of the ongoing litigation between the United States and Iran.

Obama administration officials had claimed that without a deal with Iran, the Hague tribunal might have imposed an even higher interest penalty on the United States.

Bellinger agreed that that was a concern. "There was a significant risk, based on its judgments in recent years, the Iran-U.S. Claims Tribunal would have issued a decision awarding a larger amount to Iran," he said. "If the tribunal had done that, and the U.S. government was then unwilling or unable to pay the award, the U.S. would have violated its obligations under the Algiers Accords." He said "it was prudent to settle the claims, even if it required the U.S. to take the highly unpalatable action of making a payment to Iran."

The State Department has noted that under the Hague process, Iran has paid out more than $2.5 billion in awards to U.S. nationals and companies. With a few exceptions, the major outstanding claims concern Iran against the United States, heightening the sensitivity of U.S. officials about discussing the issue. Much as Trump dislikes Obama's dealings with Iran, releasing the documents now might raise the cost to U.S. taxpayers later.

As for why the transfer was made in cash, given that the previous claims reached through the Hague tribunal were paid via wire, U.S. officials have cited the effect of increasingly tough sanctions imposed on Iran. If time was of the essence, cash was the best way to go.

Regular readers know we have been willing to award ourselves Pinocchios if we get something incorrect. But that's not the case here. One can certainly disagree with the Obama administration's decision to send a jet with cash to Tehran on the same day that American detainees were released, but the action taken did not violate the law passed by Congress.


Iran got 79 of the 80 f-14s...


My shrine only contains real American heros and patriots, like Ike, JFK and McCane.. Among many others..

JFlorio Loc: Seminole Florida

Just admit you’re happy a bunch of terrorists ended up with our money and move on already.