Straight Up RV possibilities

[GT5Junkie]

Imo I don't think anything under 2 or 3 dollars would help anyone I remember maliki's quote saying they will have the most powerful currency of the world .10 noway also hilary stating that they(iraq) would be the richest country surpassing china how could they with a low currency they need to be at least 1-1 with us or what business would want to work for nothing they would not accept it I know if I was a contractor or any other business investing there would not do so if it was not at least par with the us but to be the most powerful I believe it will be close to kuwait Maliki does not want to be below them and if I were you I would stay away from rumours DV and a certain cll sqaud have factual articles make sure you do not believe anything with out a link that you can go to and read and see where it is coming from and even then iraq now I dont want to insult anyone but can be wishy washy maybe is the word but sometimes even articles coming from iraq will contradict another keeps us guessing and our heads spinning I hope and pray for myself and my family and everyone else it happens sooner than later GO RV

Maliki can say whatever he wants, but the notion of having the most powerful currency in the world when your country's GDP is around the 50th or 60th highest in the world (in 2010 they were 62nd) isn't very realistic. Maybe 20 or 30 years from now they'll be able to break into the top 20 or so, if they pump a whole lotta oil and develop some other industries that contribute meaningfully to their GDP.

Pretty sure Hillarious never said that, also. I've heard the speech that I'm pretty sure is the one people talk about and what was said is that Iraq would surpass China in GROWTH in two years. Which isn't really a surprise, Iraqs GDP is/was in the toilet and just getting oil back to reasonable production levels will/has result(ed) in huge growth. So no surprise that they'd experience extremely rapid growth compared to a country like China which has a GDP of around 6 trillion. They're not going to be the richest country on the planet. To even beat 2nd place China, since Iraqs economy is almost entirely oil based, they'd have to pump about 60 billion barrels a year even at 100 USD a barrel. At that rate (which is impossible anyway, given current reserves and technology) they'd blow through their current oil reserves in less than 3 years.

Here's the speech:

http://articlesofinterest-kelley.blogspot.com/2011/06/video-Hillarious-clinton-promoting.html

I think the reasons you're citing are popular pumper propaganda with little or no basis in actual fact.

[MoneyMoney7]

How? RD is the only way they would get anywhere near 2 or 3 dollars. It isnt possible for them to RV overnight to those numbers.

Iraq has the resources that turkey did not have, and there is nothing stoping them from setting a value of 3 or 4 dollars, as long as the IMF agrees to it. That is the answer to their problem, not a lop or a re-value to 10 cents.

[dinarck]

Iraq has the resources that turkey did not have, and there is nothing stoping them from setting a value of 3 or 4 dollars, as long as the IMF agrees to it. That is the answer to their problem, not a lop or a re-value to 10 cents.

There is something stopping them. 60 trillion dinar.

[jmw]

There is something stopping them. 60 trillion dinar.

yes...pretty much economics 101...supply and demand

[Darin]

There is something stopping them. 60 trillion dinar.

A good majrotiy of that 60T is likely old notes removed from circulation but not written off the books.

So the theory of 000s being pulled from circ. is partly true. They're pulling notes all together, and issuing new notes. The money supply grows because they never discount money pulled from circulation.

And that, is how we got from 6.38T to 60T....... in a matter of 7 years.

[HopefulTxn]

A good majrotiy of that 60T is likely old notes removed from circulation but not written off the books.

So the theory of 000s being pulled from circ. is partly true. They're pulling notes all together, and issuing new notes. The money supply grows because they never discount money pulled from circulation.

And that, is how we got from 6.38T to 60T....... in a matter of 7 years.

But the whole theory that they were ever removing notes came from an article about removing 70% excess liquidity. The problem is that people only focused on one line of that article. They completely bypassed that part that said it was immediately injected back into the system to promote growth through loans and the like.

How they got to 60T in 7 years is because Shabibi has stated his focus was on maintaining a stable rate, and he appears to be doing that through increasing/controlling the volume levels. When their reserves increase they only have two options to reflect those increases. They can either increase the rate or they can increase volume. When you are dealing with trillions of dinar in circulation increase the rate is really not going to reflect that big of a change - considering that for every $1 billion added to the reserves would only add $0.00001666667 per dinar given current monetary levels.

[Darin]

But the whole theory that they were ever removing notes came from an article about removing 70% excess liquidity. The problem is that people only focused on one line of that article. They completely bypassed that part that said it was immediately injected back into the system to promote growth through loans and the like.

How they got to 60T in 7 years is because Shabibi has stated his focus was on maintaining a stable rate, and he appears to be doing that through increasing/controlling the volume levels. When their reserves increase they only have two options to reflect those increases. They can either increase the rate or they can increase volume. When you are dealing with trillions of dinar in circulation increase the rate is really not going to reflect that big of a change - considering that for every $1 billion added to the reserves would only add $0.00001666667 per dinar given current monetary levels.

We all have our theories... And Shabs has his tools to maintain the rate...

We have to read into the CBI laws in-depth to fully understand how things are processed.

For me, I'm waiting for the move from Art. 14 to 8... Than we'll see some substantial changes.

[rv_hunting]

it's not happening. this is a site for all dreamers. i just dream about it. but fact is the smoke and mirrors we see is in our mind. i wished i never took the pill and saw the matrix. the matrix of dinar.

[Darin]

it's not happening. this is a site for all dreamers. i just dream about it. but fact is the smoke and mirrors we see is in our mind. i wished i never took the pill and saw the matrix. the matrix of dinar.

Your absolutely right... It isn't happening. It'll maintain the 1170 forever..

[blunter]

Your absolutely right... It isn't happening. It'll maintain the 1170 forever..

I dont believe IQD will remain the same...........time will tell whether it will rv / rd first.................but i always hope for the best....RV

[dinarck]

A good majrotiy of that 60T is likely old notes removed from circulation but not written off the books.

So the theory of 000s being pulled from circ. is partly true. They're pulling notes all together, and issuing new notes. The money supply grows because they never discount money pulled from circulation.

And that, is how we got from 6.38T to 60T....... in a matter of 7 years.

Maybe but if they were printing 3 trillion a year and destroying 3 trillion old worn notes a year then why would they add destroyed notes to their total M2 on their documentation? That makes absolutely no sense. The dinar either exsists or it doesnt. I guess the argument could be made that they are trying to hide a RV but wouldnt that be falsifiying documents? Not sure of the ramifications of that or if there would be any but something doesnt seem right with that theory unless they didnt destroy those notes and can then say that they told the truth but really they would still be lying because they state 24 trillion outside of banks unless they are holding those old worn notes somewhere outside of banks. Haha..speculation at its finest. They could then destroy all those old worn notes the day before a RV and wipe them off the M2. Maybe but highly unlikely.

Edited August 24, 2011 by dinarck

[rv_hunting]

I dont believe IQD will remain the same...........time will tell whether it will rv / rd first.................but i always hope for the best....RV

sorry blunter. belief of a change in iqd is just that a belief. the fact remains that iqd has been the same. iraq is using this to eat up dollars while the guru pumps and the greedy buys. we got sucked in on the quick easy get rich scheme. there no easy money. we have to work for it. the rich and super rich didn't just make rich from not doing anything. mass lottery win just doesn't make sense. it just perpetual the debt crisis from creating empty wealth.

[Caye98]

I'm a newbie and this is my second post. I bought my IQD back in 2006 and early this year i purchase some more after doing some research and of course there are some sort of hype that telling me The IQD will straight up RV. But after reading a lot of threads in this forum these couple of months it made me so confuse cause some of us do agree that straight up RV is impossible for IQD. I know that nobody know for sure about this process but i always hoping that it will RV first. I just want to hear you guys opinions about this rv/rd thing based on your experienced, knowledge, research ,intel or whatever

Blunter...Now see what you've started!

In just reading the responses to your post you have learned a fair bit.

I LIKE a $3.86 rate [RI], and I have the rationale to support it, but admittedly I can see the argument of an RV that STARTS at only $0.10, believing that CBI will get huge amounts of D's out of circulation (at relatively minimal cost) prior to gradual/eventual increases in value.

I do not believe in the LOP theory, and I am optimistic that an RI/RV will occur prior to Sept 15, IF GOI is seated, HCL is passed, and Chapter 7 is lifted. IMO no RI/RV until all 3 occur.

I am a BIG believer in VIP here on DV, but do as you feel is right.

Welcome to DV!

[Darin]

I dont believe IQD will remain the same...........time will tell whether it will rv / rd first.................but i always hope for the best....RV

Ya, I forgot the "/end sarcasm"

Back to being on-topic...

They started with "X" amount of currency in 2004.

That #s appears to be 6.38T (With 2T of that 6.38T allocated to reserves)

Since than, the monetary base figures show that it has expanded on average of 3T per year.

Supposedly to maintain the stable rate.

Okay, lets say in theory they only needed the 6.38T to effectively run their country.

That means, an abundance of what was printed was shipped out of country to foreign speculators.

So let's say they have not gone from 6.38T to 10T within their country on what is used... Leaving the rest of the monetary base figures to be accounted for by foreign speculator and what they hold.

50 trillion

What is that in U.S. value?

43 Billion in USD (value)...

43/7 = 6.1428

Are we really going to think, that speculators have been accounting for over $6 billion per year in buying up IQD?

Let's cut that # in 1/2 so we appear more conservative...

Are we really going to think, that speculators have been accounting for over $3 billion per year in buying up IQD?

I would argue that the U.S. accounts for a majority of foreign holdings.

And a lot of what we buy has a good chance to have at one point, been in the hands of another U.S. speculator. (In other words, re-circulated, so to speak)

So, I am basically on the fence....

If the 60T M1,2 figures were indeed true - it would only seem logical that many foreign governments account for the reasoning of the high #s.

But, for those that argue most foreign govts do not provide proof of holdings, I would likely agree as well

Because I think the #s we see & perceive are not how we perceive them.

In other words, the #s aren't lying, but how we perceive them to be calculated is different (most likely)

So if those that believe in the lop throwing the M2 #s around, are right.. I would argue several foreign Govt's likely hold & account for the larger #s

If, you were to believe in the lop and say no proof of foreign govt.s' holding, I would say, you could easily be correct.. As what is in circulation is likely lower than what we perceive.

In otherwords, I would flip-flop, but only because I don't know, as well as you don't know, or anyone knows.

But, to think they hold a M2 of 60T that was much lower 7 years ago and no foreign govts hold is a little insane to think that speculation alone has pushed it that high.

Maybe but if they were printing 3 trillion a year and destroying 3 trillion old worn notes a year then why would they add destroyed notes to their total M2 on their documentation? That makes absolutely no sense. The dinar either exsists or it doesnt. I guess the argument could be made that they are trying to hide a RV but wouldnt that be falsifiying documents? Not sure of the ramifications of that or if there would be any but something doesnt seem right with that theory unless they didnt destroy those notes and can then say that they told the truth but really they would still be lying because they state 24 trillion outside of banks unless they are holding those old worn notes somewhere outside of banks. Haha..speculation at its finest. They could then destroy all those old worn notes the day before a RV and wipe them off the M2. Maybe but highly unlikely.

Who says it is being destroyed? Even Drox argues they don't destroy notes.. As it would be considered destroying wealth.

They likely just set them aside and never let them re-enter circulation (because they are worn out, damaged, ripped, bloody, etc).

Still accounted for... And maybe even account as reserves. (not sure)

[dinarck]

Ya, I forgot the "/end sarcasm"

Back to being on-topic...

They started with "X" amount of currency in 2004.

That #s appears to be 6.38T (With 2T of that 6.38T allocated to reserves)

Since than, the monetary base figures show that it has expanded on average of 3T per year.

Supposedly to maintain the stable rate.

Okay, lets say in theory they only needed the 6.38T to effectively run their country.

That means, an abundance of what was printed was shipped out of country to foreign speculators.

So let's say they have not gone from 6.38T to 10T within their country on what is used... Leaving the rest of the monetary base figures to be accounted for by foreign speculator and what they hold.

50 trillion

What is that in U.S. value?

43 Billion in USD (value)...

43/7 = 6.1428

Are we really going to think, that speculators have been accounting for over $6 billion per year in buying up IQD?

Let's cut that # in 1/2 so we appear more conservative...

Are we really going to think, that speculators have been accounting for over $3 billion per year in buying up IQD?

I would argue that the U.S. accounts for a majority of foreign holdings.

And a lot of what we buy has a good chance to have at one point, been in the hands of another U.S. speculator. (In other words, re-circulated, so to speak)

So, I am basically on the fence....

If the 60T M1,2 figures were indeed true - it would only seem logical that many foreign governments account for the reasoning of the high #s.

But, for those that argue most foreign govts do not provide proof of holdings, I would likely agree as well

Because I think the #s we see & perceive are not how we perceive them.

In other words, the #s aren't lying, but how we perceive them to be calculated is different (most likely)

So if those that believe in the lop throwing the M2 #s around, are right.. I would argue several foreign Govt's likely hold & account for the larger #s

If, you were to believe in the lop and say no proof of foreign govt.s' holding, I would say, you could easily be correct.. As what is in circulation is likely lower than what we perceive.

In otherwords, I would flip-flop, but only because I don't know, as well as you don't know, or anyone knows.

But, to think they hold a M2 of 60T that was much lower 7 years ago and no foreign govts hold is a little insane to think that speculation alone has pushed it that high.

Who says it is being destroyed? Even Drox argues they don't destroy notes.. As it would be considered destroying wealth.

They likely just set them aside and never let them re-enter circulation (because they are worn out, damaged, ripped, bloody, etc).

Still accounted for... And maybe even account as reserves. (not sure)

Well old worn notes that are being replaced are typically destroyed but they are being replaced. Here in the US dollars that are worn are brought in and destroyed. If the IQD that is worn isnt being destroyed and replaced with new then you can bet there will be a RD because that 60 trillion will not become worth 60 trillion USD. Also if governments around the world in fact hold the majority of that 60 trillion then you can also bet there will an RD unless they are being forced to RV that currency but what would be the point? I think Iraqis would rather burn the oil fields again as opposed to give away their entire future oil reserves to governments around the world.

[Darin]

Well old worn notes that are being replaced are typically destroyed but they are being replaced. Here in the US dollars that are worn are brought in and destroyed. If the IQD that is worn isnt being destroyed and replaced with new then you can bet there will be a RD because that 60 trillion will not become worth 60 trillion USD. Also if governments around the world in fact hold the majority of that 60 trillion then you can also bet there will an RD unless they are being forced to RV that currency but what would be the point? I think Iraqis would rather burn the oil fields again as opposed to give away their entire future oil reserves to governments around the world.

Ya, some things sure don't make sense...

Time will tell.....

Here is a uniqe thing to think about:

If Shabs wanted to maintain a steady read and continue issuing IQD. He must of knew this would eventually lead up to a LOP. Now, we can say we recall reading articles that the CBI was looking on potential options on what to do regarding their currency... So, they must of checked out all feasible solutions.

With all that said, Shabs being the smart man that he is, must of been on a plan.

And inflation has remained low since 2007.... And the exchange rate has been stable...

For about 4-5 years now.

[CaptainRon]

There are two ways to get to 1.00. RV or RD. I personally dont believe a RV to one is possible for the fact there is 60 trillion dinar in exsistence. To me it doesnt matter if it is in circulation or if the CBI is on the hook for it or how much their reserves can back or if it's a liability or its effect on the value or any of that. What I cannot figure out is how that 60 trillion dinar can be worth 60 trillion USD overnight no matter where it is in the world whether it be electronic, physical, inside or outside Iraq, in a vault, or whatever. It still exsist and with a RV to 1.00 would be worth more than all the currency in circulation today. I just dont see that as possible. They would literally have to destroy 50 trillion dinar to RV to 1.00 in my opinion. I dont see that as possible either. I have brought this up 100's of time and have yet to get an answer to that. We have had discussions about it and really never figured out a way around it. Maybe there is I dont know but I have yet to hear it. If I heard and explination that made sense I would be yelling GO RV with the rest.

The other way is RD obviously and unfortunately seems to be the plan. Hopefully not. Your original question was a 1 to 1 RV and it usefulness as a transaction simplifier but since I dont see that happening then once again we will talk about how a RD would accomplish that. Now the exchange rate is .00086 now so for them to get to par with the dollar they would have to bring that old currency exchange rate to .001. We have read articles where they hinted to this. Also recent articles have stated raising the exchange rate to curb inflation temporarily and of course everyone yelled GO RV but to curb inflation they would use slight raises in the rate not huge jumps to 1.00. So in my opinion Shabs will wait for approval and if it is given he will raise the rate from .00086 to .001. Then when the new currency is introduced with a rate of 1.00 it will jive with the value of the old as well as the USD. Talk about simple transactions. All three currencies worth the same. At that point Iraqs future economy and stability would determine the future bumps upwards of the exchange rate which I think would make the dollar irrelevant inside Iraq.

These are my opinions based on what I have read coming from the CBI and articles out of Iraq. Doesnt mean it wont be voted down and a slow rise in the exchange rate would then inevitable but something would still need to be done about the 60 trillion number.

I Look at it a couple of ways.

What happened to the original value? I am sure it decreased over time so why can it not regain value over a much shorter period of time?

I also conider an IPO within our stock markets. These values change wildly and have little basis on the actual value of the company that is being offered in the first plalce.

Si I am hoping anything can happen.

[dinarck]

Ya, some things sure don't make sense...

Time will tell.....

Here is a uniqe thing to think about:

If Shabs wanted to maintain a steady read and continue issuing IQD. He must of knew this would eventually lead up to a LOP. Now, we can say we recall reading articles that the CBI was looking on potential options on what to do regarding their currency... So, they must of checked out all feasible solutions.

With all that said, Shabs being the smart man that he is, must of been on a plan.

And inflation has remained low since 2007.... And the exchange rate has been stable...

For about 4-5 years now.

I will have to admitt Darin that something in the back of my head is telling me that they do in fact want to RV. I just need to see how. I think the senerio you pointed out months ago about a multi tiered RV still makes the most sense to me and has given me the most hope of all the theories that I have heard but even that one doesnt explain how the 60 trillion number could be erased from exsistence. It would bring in large amounts of IQD and I could see the CBI making money off the spread but for them to eventially get to 1.00 then tens of trillions need to be desroyed and that is the bottom line. Unless there somehow really isnt 60 trillion in exsistence then I still cant see any way for them to get to 1.00 other than RD.

I Look at it a couple of ways.

What happened to the original value? I am sure it decreased over time so why can it not regain value over a much shorter period of time?

I also conider an IPO within our stock markets. These values change wildly and have little basis on the actual value of the company that is being offered in the first plalce.

Si I am hoping anything can happen.

Because of what I have been saying about the mass amount of IQD in circulation. I believe anything could happen too but it would be nice to see how.

[Darin]

I will have to admitt Darin that something in the back of my head is telling me that they do in fact want to RV. I just need to see how. I think the senerio you pointed out months ago about a multi tiered RV still makes the most sense to me and has given me the most hope of all the theories that I have heard but even that one doesnt explain how the 60 trillion number could be erased from exsistence. It would bring in large amounts of IQD and I could see the CBI making money off the spread but for them to eventially get to 1.00 then tens of trillions need to be desroyed and that is the bottom line. Unless there somehow really isnt 60 trillion in exsistence then I still cant see any way for them to get to 1.00 other than RD.

Because of what I have been saying about the mass amount of IQD in circulation. I believe anything could happen too but it would be nice to see how.

There are numerous issues when trying to learn about the IQD.

Translation issues.... We've seen that time & time again, yet, some people nearly cling to the word for word translations.

Banking (CBI) laws... Another thing that could easily be perceived incorrectly...

Opinions versus Facts articles.... A lot of articles we read are opinions, not so much fact-based

The chance something can happen at the drop of the hat... Things can change courses in a real hurry..

We sit back & speculate. Some of us may be on the right track, some of us may be off entirely. Our opinions may be right or wrong, but we all derive our opinions from our doing our own research.

I always say, people should take a middle of the road view & try to think outside the box on this.... Don't let a pumper or a dumper influence your decision

[jmw]

We all have our theories... And Shabs has his tools to maintain the rate...

We have to read into the CBI laws in-depth to fully understand how things are processed.

For me, I'm waiting for the move from Art. 14 to 8... Than we'll see some substantial changes.

the CBI uses the auctions to maintain the rate...it is well documented...I have read Art 8 many times...can you point to one part of it that even deals with currency or non-liquid assests as you have stated many times before?

Hopefltx is correct...there has only been one article about reducing excess liquidity by 80% and everyone jumped on it as if they were reducing their money supply...excess liquidity is definied as the amount held by a commercial bank over and above their reserve requirements...they don't want to have excess liquidity as they won't be making any money off of that excess amount...they reduce it by making more loans and releasing it back into the market place....their M0, M1 and M2 numbers are well documented...what is held outside of the country is pure speculation....regardless they have to account for all of it.

Edited August 24, 2011 by jmw

[Darin]

the CBI uses the auctions to maintain the rate...it is well documented...I have read Art 8 many times...can you point to one part of it that even deals with currency or non-liquid assests as you have stated many times before?

Hopefltx is correct...there has only been one article about reducing excess liquidity by 80% and everyone jumped on it as if they were reducing their money supply...excess liquidity is definied as the amount held by a commercial bank over and above their reserve requirements...they don't want to have excess liquidity as they won't be making any money off of that excess amount...they reduce it by making more loans and releasing it back into the market place....their M0, M1 and M2 numbers are well documented...what is held outside of the country is pure speculation....regardless they have to account for all of it.

This sort of goes along with the point I have been making. I state IMF Article VIII - and many likely went, opened the document, clicked "CTRL+F" and entered "monetize, non-liquid assets, or something of that nature" and found no results.

To understand the document, it takes reading the document....

I'll give you a better brief synopsis... The move from Article XIV to VIII will than allow exclusions that were noted from XIV.

Heck, even some gold was excluded when under Article XIV, which would likely be allowed under VIII.

When I am on a better & faster connection, I'll post a more in-depth explanation...

Don't worry JMW, I'll spoon-feed you... No reason to go check for yourself I guess.

[jmw]

This sort of goes along with the point I have been making. I state IMF Article VIII - and many likely went, opened the document, clicked "CTRL+F" and entered "monetize, non-liquid assets, or something of that nature" and found no results.

To understand the document, it takes reading the document....

I'll give you a better brief synopsis... The move from Article XIV to VIII will than allow exclusions that were noted from XIV.

Heck, even some gold was excluded when under Article XIV, which would likely be allowed under VIII.

When I am on a better & faster connection, I'll post a more in-depth explanation...

Don't worry JMW, I'll spoon-feed you... No reason to go check for yourself I guess.

Here I'll make it easier for you since you don't seem to understand it very well....

here is Article VIII in its entirety:

Here is the link

http://www.imf.org/e.../ft/aa/aa08.htm

• Articles of Agreement of IMF

Search the Articles of Agreement

Search Tips

• Disclaimer

See also:

• Selected Decisions and Selected Documents of the IMF
• By-Laws Rules and Regulations of the IMF
• Members Quotas Shares, Governors, and Voting Power
• Executive Directors and Voting Power
• Senior Officials
• Organization
• IMF at a Glance - a factsheet

Articles of Agreement of the International Monetary Fund

Article VIII - General Obligations of Members

Section 1. Introduction

In addition to the obligations assumed under other articles of this Agreement, each member undertakes the obligations set out in this Article.

Section 2. Avoidance of restrictions on current payments

(a) Subject to the provisions of Article VII, Section 3(b) and Article XIV, Section 2, no member shall, without the approval of the Fund, impose restrictions on the making of payments and transfers for current international transactions.

(b) Exchange contracts which involve the currency of any member and which are contrary to the exchange control regulations of that member maintained or imposed consistently with this Agreement shall be unenforceable in the territories of any member. In addition, members may, by mutual accord, cooperate in measures for the purpose of making the exchange control regulations of either member more effective, provided that such measures and regulations are consistent with this Agreement.

Section 3. Avoidance of discriminatory currency practices

No member shall engage in, or permit any of its fiscal agencies referred to in Article V, Section 1 to engage in, any discriminatory currency arrangements or multiple currency practices, whether within or outside margins under Article IV or prescribed by or under Schedule C, except as authorized under this Agreement or approved by the Fund. If such arrangements and practices are engaged in at the date when this Agreement enters into force, the member concerned shall consult with the Fund as to their progressive removal unless they are maintained or imposed under Article XIV, Section 2, in which case the provisions of Section 3 of that Article shall apply.

Section 4. Convertibility of foreign-held balances

(a) Each member shall buy balances of its currency held by another member if the latter, in requesting the purchase, represents:

(i)

that the balances to be bought have been recently acquired as a result of current transactions; or

(ii)

that their conversion is needed for making payments for current transactions.

The buying member shall have the option to pay either in special drawing rights, subject to Article XIX, Section 4, or in the currency of the member making the request.

(b) The obligation in (a) above shall not apply when:

(i)

the convertibility of the balances has been restricted consistently with Section 2 of this Article or Article VI, Section 3;

(ii)

the balances have accumulated as a result of transactions effected before the removal by a member of restrictions maintained or imposed under Article XIV, Section 2;

(iii)

the balances have been acquired contrary to the exchange regulations of the member which is asked to buy them;

(iv)

the currency of the member requesting the purchase has been declared scarce under Article VII, Section 3(a); or

(v)

the member requested to make the purchase is for any reason not entitled to buy currencies of other members from the Fund for its own currency.

Section 5. Furnishing of information

(a) The Fund may require members to furnish it with such information as it deems necessary for its activities, including, as the minimum necessary for the effective discharge of the Fund's duties, national data on the following matters:

(i)

official holdings at home and abroad of (1) gold, (2) foreign exchange;

(ii)

holdings at home and abroad by banking and financial agencies, other than official agencies, of (1) gold, (2) foreign exchange;

(iii)

production of gold;

(iv)

gold exports and imports according to countries of destination and origin;

(v)

total exports and imports of merchandise, in terms of local currency values, according to countries of destination and origin;

(vi)

international balance of payments, including (1) trade in goods and services, (2) gold transactions, (3) known capital transactions, and (4) other items;

(vii)

international investment position, i.e., investments within the territories of the member owned abroad and investments abroad owned by persons in its territories so far as it is possible to furnish this information;

(viii)

national income;

(ix)

price indices, i.e., indices of commodity prices in wholesale and retail markets and of export and import prices;

(x)

buying and selling rates for foreign currencies;

(xi)

exchange controls, i.e., a comprehensive statement of exchange controls in effect at the time of assuming membership in the Fund and details of subsequent changes as they occur; and

(xii)

where official clearing arrangements exist, details of amounts awaiting clearance in respect of commercial and financial transactions, and of the length of time during which such arrears have been outstanding.

(b) In requesting information the Fund shall take into consideration the varying ability of members to furnish the data requested. Members shall be under no obligation to furnish information in such detail that the affairs of individuals or corporations are disclosed. Members undertake, however, to furnish the desired information in as detailed and accurate a manner as is practicable and, so far as possible, to avoid mere estimates.

(c) The Fund may arrange to obtain further information by agreement with members. It shall act as a centre for the collection and exchange of information on monetary and financial problems, thus facilitating the preparation of studies designed to assist members in developing policies which further the purposes of the Fund.

Section 6. Consultation between members regarding existing international agreements

Where under this Agreement a member is authorized in the special or temporary circumstances specified in the Agreement to maintain or establish restrictions on exchange transactions, and there are other engagements between members entered into prior to this Agreement which conflict with the application of such restrictions, the parties to such engagements shall consult with one another with a view to making such mutually acceptable adjustments as may be necessary. The provisions of this Article shall be without prejudice to the operation of Article VII, Section 5.

Section 7. Obligation to collaborate regarding policies on reserve assets

Each member undertakes to collaborate with the Fund and with other members in order to ensure that the policies of the member with respect to reserve assets shall be consistent with the objectives of promoting better international surveillance of international liquidity and making the special drawing right the principal reserve asset in the international monetary system.

• Articles of Agreement of IMF

Search the Articles of Agreement

Search Tips

• Disclaimer

See also:

• Selected Decisions and Selected Documents of the IMF
• By-Laws Rules and Regulations of the IMF
• Members Quotas Shares, Governors, and Voting Power
• Executive Directors and Voting Power
• Senior Officials
• Organization
• IMF at a Glance - a factsheet

Edited August 24, 2011 by jmw

[dream farmer]

In my opinion, a straight up RV is impossible and will not happen. The dinar is very likely going to redenominate and the value of your dinar will not change. If you bought more dinar recently, you were duped. But don't feel bad, most of us here were duped also. It's hard to do real research on the dinar because these sites are very biased towards the dinar. Fortunately, I know several people that trade currencies for a living. None of them consider the dinar a bona fide or legitimate investment. None of them own dinar. All of them have suggested an investment in dinar is the perfect storm of ignorance, anonymity, and financial desperation. Unfortunately, I didn't talk to any of them until AFTER I bought dinar. After all, the RV was imminet and there was no time to waste. Maybe they're wrong but I tend to give much more credibility to their opinion than to some keyboard junkie hiding anonymously behind an IP address.

If you are so negative about the whole thing then why are you here? Sell your dinar and quit wasting your time watching what happens when you know nothing will. Otherwise you should keep quiet and quit hatin on the rest of us that believe it will work... you are just looking for attention

[Darin]

Your right JMW, I don't understand it well.. Not reading it from start-to-finish from my own eyes..

But, when I switch to my other PC, I'll provide you comments, descriptions, and further detail by people who are better at interpreting it than I am.

....

Like I said, it is there, it is not clearly stated, but it is there. It involved understanding something from 1 section, referring to another section, and following up to another section.

What was once excluded, can now be included.

[jmw]

Your right JMW, I don't understand it well.. Not reading it from start-to-finish from my own eyes..

But, when I switch to my other PC, I'll provide you comments, descriptions, and further detail by people who are better at interpreting it than I am.

....

Like I said, it is there, it is not clearly stated, but it is there. It involved understanding something from 1 section, referring to another section, and following up to another section.

What was once excluded, can now be included.

Thanks for "spoon feeding" me...