*UPDATE* COURT FILING AGAINST DINAR CORP

LINK TO THE COURT DOCUMENTS:

http://www.cftc.gov/ucm/groups/public/@lrenforcementactions/documents/legalpleading/enfdinarcomplaint072715.pdf


ANYONE OWNING DINAR NEEDS TO READ THIS, NO MATTER WHO YOU PURCHASED CURRENCY FROM.

ESPECIALLY THE PART ABOUT "ELIGIBLE CONTRACT PARTICIPANTS".

RV OR NOT....DINAR HOLDERS JUST MAY BE ON THE WRONG SIDE OF THAT LAW.

Will the government allow people to keep the Dinar that was purchased illegally? 

Will the Dinar be confiscated when people try to cash out?

Has anyone who has purchased Dinar thru DinarCorp been contacted?

Case 1:15-cv-00538-WKW-TFM Document 1 Filed 07/27/15 Page 2 of 21

2. Tayeh created and operates DCI and Monex NV, business entities
that he uses to facilitate the Defendants' fraudulent activities that
act as the counterparty(s) in the subject agreements, contracts or
transactions in forex. Defendants operate their fraudulent  scheme
via the Internet through the use of the website www.dinatcorp.com ("website"),
by offering, and entering into, transactions in forex with non-ECP retail
customers that are leveraged, margined or financed by the Defendants, and
that result in actual delivery of forex
-if at all -within periods of not less than fifteen (15) days and as much
as one hundred twenty (120) days following the date of the transaction(s).


*******************************************************

Eligible Contract Participant (ECP)

An entity that is classified by the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) based on its regulated status or amount of assets. The definition of "Eligible Contract Participant" (ECP) is found in Section 1a(18) of the CEA. ECP classification permits these persons to engage in transactions (such as trading on a derivatives transaction execution facility) not generally available to non-eligible contract participants such as retail customers. ECPs include:

• Corporations, partnerships, proprietorships, organizations, trusts, or other entities with more than $10 million in assets, or any entity guaranteed by such entity.
  
• Individuals with aggregate amounts of more than $10 million invested on a discretionary basis (or $5 million if hedging).
  
• Entities with a net worth of at least $1 million that are hedging commercial risk.
  
• Financial institutions.
  
• Insurance companies.
  
• Investment companies subject to regulation under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (and similar foreign entities subject to similar foreign regulation).
  
• Commodity pools with more than $5 million in assets under management (AUM).
  
• Employee benefit plans subject to ERISA with total assets exceeding $5 million or whose investment decisions are made by a registered commodity pool advisor (CPO) or commodity trading advisor (CTA) subject to regulation under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, or by a financial institution or insurance company.
  
• Governmental entities (including the US, a state or a foreign government).
  
• Brokers and dealers subject to regulation under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (Exchange Act) and similarly regulated foreign entities. If the broker or dealer is an individual it must have discretionary investments of greater than $10 million.
  
• Futures commission merchants (FCMs) and similarly regulated foreign entities, except that if the FCM is an individual it must have discretionary investments of greater than $10 million.
  
• Any entity that:
  
  
  
  • is owned entirely by ECPs;
    
  • where the entity and its owners have an aggregate of at least $1 million in net worth;
    
  • is entering into an interest rate, FX or commodity derivative to hedge a commercial risk.
    
  
  
  

The Dodd-Frank Act makes it unlawful for a person who is not an ECP to enter into a swap other than on or subject to the rules of a designated contract market (DCM). Final Title VII definitional rules (see Legal Update, Final Rules Defining "Swap Dealer" and "Major Swap Participant" under Dodd-Frank Issued by Regulators) therefore designate:

• swap dealers (SDs) and MSPs as ECPs under the CEA, whether or not they would otherwise qualify, making them eligible to enter into swaps off-exchange.
  
• SBSDs and MSBSPs as ECPs under the Exchange Act, whether or not they would otherwise qualify.
  

In addition:

• Section 763(e) of the Dodd-Frank Act (15 U.S.C. § 78f) makes it unlawful for a person to effect a transaction in a SBS with or for a person that is not an ECP unless the transaction is effected on a national securities exchange registered with the SEC.
  
• Section 768(b) of Dodd-Frank (15 U.S.C. § 77e) makes it unlawful for a person to sell, offer to sell, or offer to buy or purchase a SBS to or from a person that is not an ECP unless a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 is in effect with respect to that SBS.
  

Dodd-Frank also amended the ECP definition by:

• Providing that, for purposes of CEA Sections 2(c)(2)(B)(vi) and 2(c)(2)(C)(vii) (7 U.S.C. § 2), the term ECP does not include a commodity pool in which any participant is not itself an ECP.
  
• Raising the monetary threshold that governmental entities may use to qualify as ECPs, in certain situations, from $25 million in investments owned and invested on a discretionary basis to $50 million in investments owned and invested on a discretionary basis.
  
• Replacing the ‘‘total asset’’ standard for individuals to qualify as ECPs with an ‘‘amounts invested on a discretionary basis’’ standard.
  

The CFTC has also issued interpretive guidance stating that swap guarantors must generally be ECPs. This rule became effective on March 31, 2013. For more information, see Legal Update, No-action Guidance on SD, MSP and CPO Rules under Dodd-Frank Issued by CFTC: Eligible contract participants and Practice Note, The Dodd-Frank Act’s Swap Guarantor Rule: Implications for Secured Bank Financings.

http://us.practicallaw.com/7-521-8340

Wow, I'm no lawyer (my parents were married so I didn't qualify) but it looks as if legally folks who bought from Dinar Corp under those conditions could not only lose the Dinar but it appears as if they could even be prosecuted!

However I think that while it technically MIGHT be a criminal offense I would be terribly surprised if any individuals are either prosecuted or have their currency confiscated. In the first place the Dinar is next to worthless and in spite of what some still want to believe it is not going to increase in value so why would the feds want to confiscate it? They will not need it as evidence since the currency itself is not illegal and they don't need it to prove any transaction since they have plenty of evidence already for that, some of the other charges appear to even be related to not even delivering the Dinar that was promised.

 Personally I don't see anyone losing any Dinar they have and even if the feds did want it how could they prove a person even still has it?

ALL currency purchases of the dinar are considered off market forex trades, including straight purchases, unless you had a specific reason to purchase it (ie: travel, business in the country).  It was illegally sold, and it was illegally purchased.  I have a call into the agency to clarify if gains will be allowed.  Especially after Dec. 31, 2012, when the new laws went into effect.

DingDongDinar wrote:ALL currency purchases of the dinar are considered off market forex trades, including straight purchases, unless you had a specific reason to purchase it (ie: travel, business in the country).  It was illegally sold, and it was illegally purchased.  I have a call into the agency to clarify if gains will be allowed.  Especially after Dec. 31, 2012, when the new laws went into effect.

I have mentioned this before and of course it's strictly just an opinion but how can any of the rules, regulations and trading laws apply to Iraqi Dinar as it has been sold in this country? Think about it, every single regulatory agency overseeing legitimate currency trading was completely bypassed. Then it must be considered that people who bought Dinar either bought it from a private individual with no kind of records or from a Dinar dealer that in order to protect themselves from prosecution SPECIFICALLY DENIED that it was sold for investment purposes, it was mostly sold as "collector" currency. None of these dealers are licensed investment brokers and every single transaction they made was done outside the scope of legitimate trading and all the rules, regulations and laws governing true currency investment were ignored. Where does that leave the Dinar holder with his/her box full of physical currency?

Just something to think about

I just spoke to the CFTC, and got the following information:

they are trying to set a precedence with the dinar corp lawsuit for the dinar being an off-market forex trade.
it has never been before a court as of yet
he did say that if it does rv, that we should be able to exchange it IF we can find a bank to do so.
he also said that EVERY group is a scam of some kind.
and to stay as far away from them as possible

IF they do get this thru the court as an off market forex trade, then restrictions will go into place as to who can buy it from that point on.

Also, ANYONE exchanging currency for someone else has to be licensed!  (groups)