Mercury descrimination by nationality

[yngmind]

Another xenophobic EMI. -

Mercury | Banking for Startups

A complete financial stack to build your company. Scale with FDIC-insured bank accounts, debit and credit cards, and 3-click payment flows.

app.mercury.com

"
We're also unable to open accounts for applicants with passports from the following countries, regardless of physical location
Cuba (Republic of Cuba)
Iran (Islamic Republic of Iran)
North Korea (DPRK - Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)
Syria (Syrian Arab Republic)
Russia (Russian Federation)
Belarus (Republic of Belarus)
Ukraine Regions: (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea)"

 

[0xDEADBEEF]

They are also transphobic, they did not accept me solely because I identify as a Lamborghini Aventador SVJ.

 

[hlepic211]

The CEO will get run over by a car the next day if they open an account to someone from these countries. Welcome to reality.

 

[ilke]

Not accepting sanctioned countries & HRJs (which are not actually listed here) is not xenophobic but an intelligent take to avoid poking the bear (a.k.a. US regulators). You do not have the right to bank at a specific US FinTech. AFAIK, such a law has not yet been added to the UN's human rights list.

 

[yngmind]

Not accepting sanctioned countries & HRJs (which are not actually listed here) is not xenophobic but an intelligent take to avoid poking the bear (a.k.a. US regulators). You do not have the right to bank at a specific US FinTech. AFAIK, such a law has not yet been added to the UN's human rights list.

It is xenophobic. well at least we can call it discrimination.

We don't choose where we are born.

It says it's based on citizenship.

You can be a US resident but have Russian citizenship and still can't open an account.

Those countries don't have sanctions that prevent people who hold those citizenships from opening a bank account in the US.

funny that they didn't mention Chinese, lol

 

[Cloudbanck]

Airwallex has a more sensible take on this:

"Currently we cannot onboard businesses with UBO/directors that reside in Russia or Belarus. If you are a Russian or Belarusian citizen but have a valid residence permit in a non-prohibited/sanctioned country, then there is no restriction to onboard."

 

[yngmind]

Airwallex has a more sensible take on this:

"Currently we cannot onboard businesses with UBO/directors that reside in Russia or Belarus. If you are a Russian or Belarusian citizen but have a valid residence permit in a non-prohibited/sanctioned country, then there is no restriction to onboard."

That's how it should be.

Relayfi don't have certain nationalities in their list when you apply for the account, and the list is pretty big.

 

[12345]

True it is unfortunate being restricted based on citizenship. I knew a guy from Iran living in Germany and he couldn't open a bank account anywhere despite leaving his country years ago

 

[yngmind]

Not accepting sanctioned countries & HRJs (which are not actually listed here) is not xenophobic but an intelligent take to avoid poking the bear (a.k.a. US regulators). You do not have the right to bank at a specific US FinTech. AFAIK, such a law has not yet been added to the UN's human rights list.

Not really. There is a human right in UN that says no discrimination.

 

[jafo]

funny that they didn't mention Chinese, lol

Not publicly, but chances are they won't unless they stand to earn a LOT of money from the relationship.

Most people don't want to go with "an eye for an eye." Once one starts, they'll bend over real quick!

Imagine what would happen if, e.g., China started to deny visa requests of regulators, their family, their friends, Mercury employees, Mercury family members, friends, etc., etc (i.e., similar to La Lista Clinton)...but apply banks' policies of NOT disclosing "the why."

 

[yngmind]

There should be a website, like a wall of shame, where all of those companies are listed for discrimination.

 

[hlepic211]

It all comes down to money. They have to spend extra to do the due dilligence and all that compliance bs + always under scrutiny because they accept for example Russian nationals. That's why it has to be worth it for those companies and that's why if you are HNWI they can accept you even with those nationalities.

Human rights is also a meme btw

 

[jafo]

There should be a website, like a wall of shame, where all of those companies are listed for discrimination.

I mentioned this before on my social media throwaway accounts....
Every.Single.Time.I.Got.Banned

 

[TheCryptoAnt]

Another xenophobic EMI. -

Mercury | Banking for Startups

A complete financial stack to build your company. Scale with FDIC-insured bank accounts, debit and credit cards, and 3-click payment flows.

app.mercury.com

"
We're also unable to open accounts for applicants with passports from the following countries, regardless of physical location
Cuba (Republic of Cuba)
Iran (Islamic Republic of Iran)
North Korea (DPRK - Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)
Syria (Syrian Arab Republic)
Russia (Russian Federation)
Belarus (Republic of Belarus)
Ukraine Regions: (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea)"

lets take a moment to imagine the smell of this words

 

[JohnLocke]

Not really. There is a human right in UN that says no discrimination.

I don't know if you really believe what you're writing and the words you use, but discrimination is something else in my view. It's crystal clear that with all the laws and regulations we have today all over the world, and the wars that are being fought and the overarching project - one state one government for the entire world! - then the banks can do nothing but follow the rules, and the countries you mention are certainly not at the top of the list of those countries that have the least money laundering, terror money, and all sorts of other bad stuff going on.

Just to keep it simple

 

[wellington]

There was an article in cointelegraph yesterday about a EU based crypto exchange accepting OFAC sanctioned states citizens - namely Iranian and this being against US law.

Last time I checked EU/UK entities persons followed their respective state sanctions - not US sanctions.

The argument was these citizens were welcome to exchange Tether for local currency thus violation of OFAC sanctions.

The last time I checked - Tether was NOT as a US entity but a HK/BVI entity and abided by the respective sanctions of each state and the sanctions of the Director States.

The argument is that Tether is managed or rather the underlying assets by a US entity thus its a violation of OFAC sanctions - this I believe to be incorrect assumption.

Iran for example can’t legally transact in $ in international markets as all $ route through SDNY, thus fall under the scope of OFAC… except physical $ which isn’t policed because it can’t be.

So it begs the question on whether Tether bucks are similar to physical cash I.e outside of the jurisdiction of the US ability to police appropriately - consider whack a mole…

And just because the underlying is managed or transacted through the US banking system does this mean there’s OFAC violations by the issuer.

I can say with 100% certainty that USDC is used similarly but there’s rarely any interest in reporting that - likewise there’s a continuous feed of UsDT blacklist but not for circle as rule of law has to be followed there via court orders which are slow.

It also needs to be determined the jurisdiction of OFAC and whether non $ direct entities have to follow US law where tether is concerned.

So when it comes to the entity above are they following a law or just being proactive due to fear - much like the tether administration.

I should note in the UK we were able to invest in Venezuela even though the US sanctioned via OFAC - it’s done through GBP and restricted to UK citizens/entities and doesn’t touch US financial rails.

BingX exchange openly supports Iranian users, defying sanctions

BingX exchange allows Iranian users to bypass sanctions, offering direct swaps of Iranian rial to crypto assets. Learn how BingX defies OFAC rules and sanctions regulations

cointelegraph.com

 

[yngmind]

There was an article in cointelegraph yesterday about a EU based crypto exchange accepting OFAC sanctioned states citizens - namely Iranian and this being against US law.

Last time I checked EU/UK entities persons followed their respective state sanctions - not US sanctions.

The argument was these citizens were welcome to exchange Tether for local currency thus violation of OFAC sanctions.

The last time I checked - Tether was NOT as a US entity but a HK/BVI entity and abided by the respective sanctions of each state and the sanctions of the Director States.

The argument is that Tether is managed or rather the underlying assets by a US entity thus its a violation of OFAC sanctions - this I believe to be incorrect assumption.

Iran for example can’t legally transact in $ in international markets as all $ route through SDNY, thus fall under the scope of OFAC… except physical $ which isn’t policed because it can’t be.

So it begs the question on whether Tether bucks are similar to physical cash I.e outside of the jurisdiction of the US ability to police appropriately - consider whack a mole…

And just because the underlying is managed or transacted through the US banking system does this mean there’s OFAC violations by the issuer.

I can say with 100% certainty that USDC is used similarly but there’s rarely any interest in reporting that - likewise there’s a continuous feed of UsDT blacklist but not for circle as rule of law has to be followed there via court orders which are slow.

It also needs to be determined the jurisdiction of OFAC and whether non $ direct entities have to follow US law where tether is concerned.

So when it comes to the entity above are they following a law or just being proactive due to fear - much like the tether administration.

I should note in the UK we were able to invest in Venezuela even though the US sanctioned via OFAC - it’s done through GBP and restricted to UK citizens/entities and doesn’t touch US financial rails.

BingX exchange openly supports Iranian users, defying sanctions

BingX exchange allows Iranian users to bypass sanctions, offering direct swaps of Iranian rial to crypto assets. Learn how BingX defies OFAC rules and sanctions regulations

cointelegraph.com

Mercury just mentioned there are heavily sanctioned OFAC countries.

But damn. They don't allow citizens from this countries to open accounts there, it's not based on residency.

I don't know if you really believe what you're writing and the words you use, but discrimination is something else in my view. It's crystal clear that with all the laws and regulations we have today all over the world, and the wars that are being fought and the overarching project - one state one government for the entire world! - then the banks can do nothing but follow the rules, and the countries you mention are certainly not at the top of the list of those countries that have the least money laundering, terror money, and all sorts of other bad stuff going on.

Just to keep it simple

Please show me the law that will say that citizens of these countries who are residents somewhere in the EU can't open a bank account in the US.

What does citizenship have to do with money laundering?

It's a description of the word discrimination.

"the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability."

Just to keep it simple

 

[Cloudbanck]

Mercury just mentioned there are heavily sanctioned OFAC countries.

But damn. They don't allow citizens from this countries to open accounts there, it's not based on residency.


Please show me the law that will say that citizens of these countries who are residents somewhere in the EU can't open a bank account in the US.

What does citizenship have to do with money laundering?

It's a description of the word discrimination.

"the unjust or prejudicial treatment of different categories of people, especially on the grounds of ethnicity, age, sex, or disability."

Just to keep it simple

Nation states understanbly treat citizens and non citizens differently in terms of right to vote, right to stay, right to work etc.

This does not legally count as discrimination.

 

[Sols]

There was an article in cointelegraph yesterday about a EU based crypto exchange accepting OFAC sanctioned states citizens - namely Iranian and this being against US law.

Last time I checked EU/UK entities persons followed their respective state sanctions - not US sanctions.

Compliance with OFAC is optional outside of the US. If you don't comply with OFAC, though, you risk losing access to USD.

If you are a bank providing fiat rails to an EU crypto exchange and that EU crypto exchange isn't complying with OFAC, you could at any moment be cut off from one of the most important currencies in the world (which has a ripple effect). So what do you do? Do you risk it, or do you choose to only accept EU crypto exchanges that are OFAC compliant?

The argument was these citizens were welcome to exchange Tether for local currency thus violation of OFAC sanctions.

The last time I checked - Tether was NOT as a US entity but a HK/BVI entity and abided by the respective sanctions of each state and the sanctions of the Director States.

The argument is that Tether is managed or rather the underlying assets by a US entity thus its a violation of OFAC sanctions - this I believe to be incorrect assumption.

Iran for example can’t legally transact in $ in international markets as all $ route through SDNY, thus fall under the scope of OFAC… except physical $ which isn’t policed because it can’t be.

So it begs the question on whether Tether bucks are similar to physical cash I.e outside of the jurisdiction of the US ability to police appropriately - consider whack a mole…

And just because the underlying is managed or transacted through the US banking system does this mean there’s OFAC violations by the issuer.

Tether is inextricably linked to the US by having one of its main assets (USDT) tied to the USD and supposedly backed 1:1 with USD. At least that's how the US views it and as long as they have more aircraft carriers than the rest of the world combined and a massive economy that has profound impact on the world, that's how it'll remain.

It also needs to be determined the jurisdiction of OFAC and whether non $ direct entities have to follow US law where tether is concerned.

Worldwide. The US has made it clear. If you hold or transfer USD, those holdings or that transfer are subject to US law.

Not saying any of that is necessarily right, just, or fair. But maybe next time someone tries to launch a crypto token that's supposed to be free of fiat regulations, don't base it on a fiat...

 

[Martin Everson]

Another xenophobic EMI. -

Mercury | Banking for Startups

A complete financial stack to build your company. Scale with FDIC-insured bank accounts, debit and credit cards, and 3-click payment flows.

app.mercury.com

"
We're also unable to open accounts for applicants with passports from the following countries, regardless of physical location
Cuba (Republic of Cuba)
Iran (Islamic Republic of Iran)
North Korea (DPRK - Democratic People’s Republic of Korea)
Syria (Syrian Arab Republic)
Russia (Russian Federation)
Belarus (Republic of Belarus)
Ukraine Regions: (Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, Donetsk, Luhansk, and Crimea)"

Mercury is a US FinTech right? That's absolute discrimination call BLM or something

. For example can they deny a US Person holding a greencard and resident in the US, corporate banking services just because of their place of origin? I typical avoid all things US and I am no US aficionado but this does not seem right to me. If all Fintechs or even banks in US followed this logic the US gov would have a hard time collecting tax revenue from SME's run by immigrants....lol.

Well look on the bright side as at least they are being honest with you before you waste time applying

. Also some companies in Europe etc also deny US Persons and companies with US UBO's access to banking

.