<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
	<channel>
		<title>Latest comments</title>
		<description>Latest comments for http://www.ababj.com , comment 0 to 1 out of 1 comments</description>
		<link>http://www.ababj.com</link>
		<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 May 2013 04:14:04 +0100</lastBuildDate>
		<generator>FeedCreator 1.7.2</generator>
		<item>
			<title>...</title>
			<link>http://www.ababj.com/myblog/deja-vu-we-have-all-been-here-before.html#pc_632</link>
			<description>Another great column, John!  I had the same sensation seeing the embasssy account controversy stir itself up.  Your suggestion about stakeholders addressing the issues makes a lot of sense.  Agreeing on what &quot;embassy accounts&quot; are for various types of financial institutions, how they should be opened and monitored, and how long the industry has to implement any resulting embassy-specific requirements would be a more effective way to address any risk than continuing to do so through flare-ups in examiner interest and international controversy.  And whatever is decided should be a plan both that Treasury is willing to implement and enforce here and that State is willing to live by when/if reciprocal requirements are imposed on foreign institutions by their home country regulators. - Steve Ganis</description>
			<pubDate>Wed, 01 Dec 2010 18:04:31 +0100</pubDate>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
