Travel and vacations - Cuba Travel Ban

TravelBanter (http://www.travelbanter.com/index.php)

- Air travel (http://www.travelbanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - Cuba Travel Ban (http://www.travelbanter.com/showthread.php?t=2098)

"mrraveltay" wrote in message m...
Speedy Gonzalez wrote:

Becuase I was not legally required to report it, thats why. If you do
not use a US passport to go there, you are not required to report it.
This is another quirk in the law that allows dual nationals to get away
with evading the law. When I travelled to North Korea in early 2001,
using my passport

No, there is no such "quirk" in the law regrading North Korea or Cuba.
It doesn't matter what passport you use to get to Cuba, if you are a US
Citizen OR US Permanent Resident, you fall under the law. Perhaps you
can explain how the law has a "quirk" regarding dual nationals, but
restricts non US citzens who are US permanent residents.

There is a difference. I do not LIVE in the USA, so I am not subject to
those restrictions. Also, one Australian court ruling, in 2002 also makes
it legal. The Australian High Court ruled that Australian credit cards are
subject to Australian law. This means that when I go to Cuba, I can charge it
on my Australian-issued Visa card, and not be in violation of the law. This
had to do with one Austraian suing an American company for an article that
is not libelous under US law, but IS libelous under Australian law. There
were only 17 actualy subscribers to the Barrons site living in Australia,
but 400 subscriptions charged to Australian cards. The court said, in fact
that Australian issued credit cards come under Australian law, and no other.
Basically to High Court of Australia opened up a loophole for any USA
citizens living in Oz, dual or not, to travel to Cuba. If the trip is
charged to an Australian credit card, it is not subject to any U.S.
travel restrictions.
I use an online travel service in Germany that has pages in English.
Amadeus, being headquartered in Germany, is not subject to U.S. laws. They
can sell travel to Cuba, or anywhere else, to anyone they wish, and are
not subject to U.S. laws. A travel agency in Erding, Germany is not subject
to U.S. laws. Becuase I am paying a German travel agency, I am not violating
U.S. laws when I do so. For example, I have to go to Cuba next week for a
few days on assignment. I purchased all my travel thorugh Amadeus, and they
took care of everything. My air, hotel, and rental car were all paid for
through Amadeus. Since they are a GERMAN company, they are only subject
to GERMAN laws. It is not illegal for Amadeus to sell me trips to Cuba,
as they are not subject to U.S. laws. Because air, hotel, and car rental
are paid for before I even arrive, those are not subject to U.S. laws,
and I paid Amadeus, and not any entity in Cuba directly. I charge it to
my Australian-issued Visa card, and they Amadeus forwards that money to
the appropriate entities in Cuba. As for paying for food, when I stop in
Guatemala, and get cash from a cash machine there, before proceeding
onward to Cuba. Because I will be paying for meals and any other cash
expenses in Guatemalan quetzals, that will not be subject to the travel
restrictions either, as the United States Treasury has no jurisdiction
of the use of Guatemalan currency obtained with via an Australian credit
card. Because my air, hotel, and rental car were paid for through a GERMAN
company, it is subject to GERMAN laws, and Germany does not have any
restrictions on travel to Cuba.
What kind of airline is Taca? I had to take what was available, and
my usual LAX-MBJ-HAV route had no availability, and I have to go by way
of Guatemala City. I have never heard of Taca airlines before. Has
anybody ever flown on this airline?

In article ,
Speedy Gonzalez wrote:

It doesn't matter what passport you use to get to Cuba, if you are a US
Citizen OR US Permanent Resident, you fall under the law. Perhaps you
can explain how the law has a "quirk" regarding dual nationals, but
restricts non US citzens who are US permanent residents.

There is a difference. I do not LIVE in the USA, so I am not subject to
those restrictions.

Nonsense. These restrictions apply to all US citizens regardless
of where they live. Here is the exact quote from the relevant OFAC
regulation: ``The Regulations affect all U.S. citizens and permanent
residents wherever they are located''

Do you understand the ``wherever they are located'' part?

Also, one Australian court ruling, in 2002 also makes
it legal.

No Australian court has the power to invalidate US laws as applied to
US citizens.

This means that when I go to Cuba, I can charge it
on my Australian-issued Visa card, and not be in violation of the law.

False. If you spend money on travel to Cuba without an OFAC license,
you are violating US law regardless of the currency or credit card
you use.

If the trip is
charged to an Australian credit card, it is not subject to any U.S.
travel restrictions.

False. All trips by US citizens and permanent residents are subject
to U.S. travel restrictions.

I use an online travel service in Germany that has pages in English.
Amadeus, being headquartered in Germany, is not subject to U.S. laws. They
can sell travel to Cuba, or anywhere else, to anyone they wish, and are
not subject to U.S. laws.

They are not subject to U.S. laws, but *you* are. As long as you
keep your US citizenship, you are violatinng the law every time you
spend money on travel to Cuba, even if you use a German, Australian
or Martian travel agency.

Becuase I am paying a German travel agency, I am not violating
U.S. laws when I do so.

Once again: it does not matter which travel agent, currency or credit
card you use, where they are located, or where you live. The U.S. law
prohibits *you* as a U.S. citizen from spending money on travel to
Cuba without an OFAC license in *any* currency, via *any* travel agent,
in *any* country.

My air, hotel, and rental car were all paid for
through Amadeus. Since they are a GERMAN company, they are only subject
to GERMAN laws. It is not illegal for Amadeus to sell me trips to Cuba,
as they are not subject to U.S. laws.

It is not illegal for Amadeus to sell, but it is illegal for you
to buy. Had you not been a US citizen, you could have bought trips
to Cuba with impunity. As long as keep your US citizenship, you are
committing a crime.

Because I will be paying for meals and any other cash
expenses in Guatemalan quetzals, that will not be subject to the travel
restrictions either, as the United States Treasury has no jurisdiction
of the use of Guatemalan currency obtained with via an Australian credit
card.

Who told you this nonsense? The U.S. Treasury has jurisdiction over
financial transactions of all U.S. citizens (including yourself) even
if they are done via Guatemalan currency and Australian credit cards.

Because my air, hotel, and rental car were paid for through a GERMAN
company, it is subject to GERMAN laws, and Germany does not have any
restrictions on travel to Cuba.

Nonsense. They are subject to both German (because the seller is
located in Germany) and U.S. (because the buyer is a U.S. citizen)
laws, and the U.S. law in question prohibits you from making financial
transactions related to travel to Cuba without a license.

Speedy Gonzalez wrote:
The court said, in fact
that Australian issued credit cards come under Australian law, and no other.
Basically to High Court of Australia opened up a loophole for any USA
citizens living in Oz, dual or not, to travel to Cuba. If the trip is
charged to an Australian credit card, it is not subject to any U.S.
travel restrictions.

How can the High Court of Australia open up a loophole regarding US Law.
It is a US law and NOT subject to the legal interpretation of an
Australian court.

"mrraveltay" wrote in message m...
Speedy Gonzalez wrote:
The court said, in fact
that Australian issued credit cards come under Australian law, and no other.
Basically to High Court of Australia opened up a loophole for any USA
citizens living in Oz, dual or not, to travel to Cuba. If the trip is
charged to an Australian credit card, it is not subject to any U.S.
travel restrictions.

How can the High Court of Australia open up a loophole regarding US Law.
It is a US law and NOT subject to the legal interpretation of an
Australian court.

Because the High Court ruled that Australian-issued credit cards fall
under Australian jurisdiction and no other. This effectively legalises
travel to Cuba for U.S./Australia dual nationals who live in Australia.
Among other things, this ruling also has the effect that a U.S. court cannot
subpoena any tranaction information from the credit cards company. This means
that the U.S. government would be unable to gather any evidence to even
ATTEMPT to enforce any travel restrictions.
So by using Australian-issued credit cards, the High Court effectively
makes it legal, because they effectively shut out other jurisdictions. They
said that Australian issued cedit cards fall under Australian jurisdiction
and no other.
The Court has effectively said that no other country has jurisdiction over
transactions made on Australian-issued credit cards. Australian credit cards
are subject to Australian jurisdiction and no other. The Australian High
Court hath spoken. It is this ruling that has the effect in invalidating
U.S. law on anything charged to an Australian credit card.

On Wed, 31 Dec 2003 03:48:00 +0000, mrraveltay wrote:

Speedy Gonzalez wrote:
The court said, in fact
that Australian issued credit cards come under Australian law, and no other.
Basically to High Court of Australia opened up a loophole for any USA
citizens living in Oz, dual or not, to travel to Cuba. If the trip is
charged to an Australian credit card, it is not subject to any U.S.
travel restrictions.

How can the High Court of Australia open up a loophole regarding US Law.
It is a US law and NOT subject to the legal interpretation of an
Australian court.

How can the US Supreme Court close up a loophole regarding Australian law.
Etc.

See my point? When there is a conflict, what do you do? Suicide perhaps?

In article ,
devil wrote:

How can the High Court of Australia open up a loophole regarding US Law.
It is a US law and NOT subject to the legal interpretation of an
Australian court.

How can the US Supreme Court close up a loophole regarding Australian law.

You are missing the point, as usual. The US Supreme Court cannot and
does not close any loopholes regarding Australian law. US courts only
interpret US laws, which the original poster must obey by virtue of
his US citizenship - regardless of his other citizenships, opinions
of Australian courts, his use of Guatemalan currency, etc.

See my point? When there is a conflict, what do you do? Suicide perhaps?

You obey both Australian and US laws. If you don't wish to obey US
laws, you give up your US citizenship and stay out of the US.

How can the High Court of Australia open up a loophole regarding US Law.
It is a US law and NOT subject to the legal interpretation of an
Australian court.

Because the High Court ruled that Australian-issued credit cards fall
under Australian jurisdiction and no other. This effectively legalises
travel to Cuba for U.S./Australia dual nationals who live in Australia.
Among other things, this ruling also has the effect that a U.S. court cannot
subpoena any tranaction information from the credit cards company. This means
that the U.S. government would be unable to gather any evidence to even
ATTEMPT to enforce any travel restrictions.

Making prosecution more difficult is not the same as a "legal loophole",
now is it?

Vitaly Shmatikov wrote:

devil wrote:

See my point? When there is a conflict, what do you do? Suicide perhaps?

You obey both Australian and US laws. If you don't wish to obey US
laws, you give up your US citizenship and stay out of the US.

That isn't always possible. Canada has a law that makes it illegal for
Canadian companies to obey the US laws regarding trade with Cuba. If
you work at a Canadian subsidiary of a US corporation, you are subject
to the US law, whether you are a US citizen or not, but simultaneously
subject to the Canadian law. It is a Catch-22.