General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDeutschebank claims it no longer has Trump's tax records
Suuuuure, Jan ...
The German bank which for nearly two decades was the only mainstream financial institution consistently willing to lend money to Mr. Trump has told a federal appeals court that it does not have the presidents personal tax returns, the court said on Thursday.
Democratic-controlled congressional committees issued subpoenas to Deutsche Bank this year for financial records related to the president, his companies and his family. Mr. Trump sued the bank, which became his main lender after a string of bankruptcies cost other banks hundreds of millions of dollars, to block it from complying.
That litigation is working its way through the federal courts. Last month, The New York Times and other media outlets asked the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit in New York to unseal a letter from Deutsche Bank that identified two members of the Trump family whose tax returns the bank possesses. On Thursday, the court rejected the request. Part of the reason, it said, was that Deutsche Bank had informed the court that the only tax returns it has for individuals and entities named in the subpoenas are not those of the president.
Current and former bank officials previously told The Times that Deutsche Bank had portions of Mr. Trumps personal and corporate tax returns. The bank collected at least some of those tax records in 2011, when Deutsche Banks private-banking arm which caters to the ultra-wealthy took on Mr. Trump as a client. The returns and other financial documents were reviewed by a number of bank executives, according to the current and former officials.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/10/10/business/deutsche-bank-trump-tax-returns.html
woodsprite
(11,905 posts)bluestarone
(16,864 posts)??
Moral Compass
(1,513 posts)BlueIdaho
(13,582 posts)Unless Deutsche Bank is a full on full tilt black ops money laundering operation, they need those docs as part of his loan(s) portfolio. Thats a standard banking requirement in the US. No tax docs, no loan.
Takket
(21,529 posts)it means they loaned him hundreds of millions of dollars without reviewing his finances?????????????????????
and if that is true, then what the hell have the two sides been arguing about in the courts for the last 5 months????????????????
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)Because that's what banks always do with their loan documentation, right?
Takket
(21,529 posts)Because so much critical bandwidth got freed up with that delete.
DFW
(54,302 posts)I believe that like I believe they financing ten desalinization plants on the Wyoming coastline.
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)DFW
(54,302 posts)I somehow doubt the salt content will have disappeared--either that or the Bonneville Salt Flats will be about 3 feet higher than they are now from all the deposits left.
NCLefty
(3,678 posts)jberryhill
(62,444 posts)...then the bank has the obligation to purge the supporting documents which are no longer needed.
The current privacy practices in Europe are very unlike those in the US, where information is retained pretty much forever whether it is needed or not. If the loans are no longer current - and I don't know one way or the other - then it would be expected that the bank would have purged the personal financial data.
StarfishSaver
(18,486 posts)But if that's the case, and they no longer had the relevant documents, why didn't the bank simply ask the court to declare the case moot at its inception?
And if they destroyed the records after the litigation began, isn't that a problem?
OnDoutside
(19,948 posts)original documents legally ?
jberryhill
(62,444 posts)dajoki
(10,678 posts)should find someone in the House to talk to.