No credit card required
Browse credit cards from a variety of issuers to see if there's a better card for you.
Interesting discussion; that said, there's a non-trivial amount at least regarding one's financial picture that can be gotten simply from looking at a credit report. This is especially true if you have records over time on a single individual, and Amex certainly does if they so desire with their regular soft-pulls. For that matter, since lenders see the individual charges made on accounts, they may not get the shoe size necessarily (though they certainly know I have big feet based on the socks I've purchased) but they absolutely know what brands and styles I prefer. If you really want to get blackhat about it, using credit cards period is simply leaving a trail like a slug through society, what, when, where, and potentially with whom if correlating financial information is looked at more broadly. There are few people these days who can live off the grid so to speak, I certainly couldn't.
I will say this though having worked in a number of lenders: there are very stringent controls as to who sees what and when, and what the document retention policy is. I've also worked for a government contractor; while I'm a little skeptical personally of trusting the FBI over Amex, I can pretty much guaruntee you that the requirements McArthur has cannot be met by any lender. Top secret clearance, what a pain for not much point in their cases.
That said, I was looking at the scenario from my own perspective, where it's just me with limited assets (which incidently the value of I had to roughly disclose on the Amex application anyway) and nothing wierd or even interesting as far as taxes go as a result. If I do ever have more than that in my life and therefore on my tax transcripts, I may have to re-evaluate things; however, I'm pretty certain if I'm still running a non-trivial portion of my life through an Amex, they already know those things anyway with the exception of some particulars with regards to asset distribution and income sources.

There is also the little detail that a clearance is not issued without a specifc organizationl need that has to, itself, have authorization and need for handling classified stuff.
I don't think Amex's FR group qualifies.
I think it (top secret) was hyperbole rather than his real minimum requirement.
Just going over my tax return, leading to a question for McArthur or anyone who knows.
Being a good person (or rather being too scared not to, $10K fine for not filing, then a fine of the greater of $100K and 50% of assets for failure to identify an account), I have identified my offshore banking assets to the Treasury Department on TD F 90 22.1. Since this isn't filed with the tax return, does this show on the transcript returned from a 4506 T? If not, then a lot of assets might not be apparent in the FR, but I guess you could chose to tell them.
@Anonymous wrote:I think it (top secret) was hyperbole rather than his real minimum requirement.
Just going over my tax return, leading to a question for McArthur or anyone who knows.
Being a good person (or rather being too scared not to, $10K fine for not filing, then a fine of the greater of $100K and 50% of assets for failure to identify an account), I have identified my offshore banking assets to the Treasury Department on TD F 90 22.1. Since this isn't filed with the tax return, does this show on the transcript returned from a 4506 T? If not, then a lot of assets might not be apparent in the FR, but I guess you could chose to tell them.
Assets, overseas or otherwise, do not show up on IRS transcripts nor on the full tax returns, Like the guy that died in Vegas with 7M in gold in cardboard boxes, that isn't on his transcripts unless he sold some and declared gap gains. And then only the amount sold would be reported.
@Anonymous wrote:You're missing the point.
A FR may be voluntary, but failure to comply gets your account closed. To some people that may not seem to voluntary. Further, your logic about financial circumstances changing doesn't hold water. First of all, everybody's financial circumstances can change so why don't they just FR everybody? Maybe when you and your family return from a trip to the mall your house should be locked up so you can't enter while your mortgage holder does a FR. According to your logic, that should be ok.
No, I got your point just fine the first two times you wrote it.
Here's what you seem to be missing:
Providing ANY information to a potential or current lender is 100% VOLUNTARY, just like the credit relationship is 100% at-will. CCCs have no obligation to shape their business practices and RM procedures to suit your privacy concerns. You seem to almost be implying that Amex OWES prospective or current lenders the opportunity to borrow without having to prove (or prove again) credit worthiness. That is so irresponsible from a lending perspective that it's beyond not plausible. The same goes for financial circumstances changing. Does not a lender, particularly an unsecured lender, have the right to make sure that a borrower has the ability to repay and meets minimal credit standards? I can hardly believe that people advocate such a sloppy approach to lending, but that appears to be what you are advocating.
I said it once, I'll say it again: If you don't agree with Amex's business model, FIND ANOTHER CARD TO USE. We simple disagree on this point. I think Amex has every right to be as invasive as they want. It is the consumer's choice to engage in business with them...but when you agree to use the product, don't complain about what you agreed to.
And to answer your question, I definitely think Amex SHOULD FR EVERYONE they think might be a potential credit risk to them. It's called doing smart business in the unsecured credit world.
Thanks for the spirited debate.
Edited because half my original post disappeared when it posted
@HiLine wrote:
@jake619 wrote:
I would stop short of saying I welcome a FR; however, since I've been honest with my apps I'd be open to the inconvenience if it satisfied them (AMEX). With little to hide I just don't see why it wouldn't be in both our interest. They see my capabilities and extend credit responsibly and I get a CL that in likelihood is aligned with my income and obligations factored in. This is only a game to a point.Well, I hope they don't strike you when you're on vacation overseas....
Always....ALWAYS bring 3-4 credit cards when traveling abroad.
FR aside. There is always a chance your creditors see foreign transactions and kill the account.
@Anonymous wrote:I think it (top secret) was hyperbole rather than his real minimum requirement.
Just going over my tax return, leading to a question for McArthur or anyone who knows.
Being a good person (or rather being too scared not to, $10K fine for not filing, then a fine of the greater of $100K and 50% of assets for failure to identify an account), I have identified my offshore banking assets to the Treasury Department on TD F 90 22.1. Since this isn't filed with the tax return, does this show on the transcript returned from a 4506 T? If not, then a lot of assets might not be apparent in the FR, but I guess you could chose to tell them.
They would not see that information.
That said, there are other often fruitful ways to tell if you have overseas assets. Are your reported interest earnings greater than your 1099 totals? Overseas banks pay interest on accounts, but rarely, if ever, issue 1099s. Now, whether you reported that overseas interest income is another thing, but you should have. Have you claimed foreign income exclusion on your returns? Do you have a SSN appearing on your tax transcript that was issued since randomization took effect?
Just like FICO has developed a scoring system that makes a science out of predicting economic health, there are entities that have made a science out of reverse engineering common financial data such as that found on your tax returns. I wouldn't think AmEx has reached that level, but then again we already do know they monitor where you shop and use that data against you.
@CreditCrusader wrote:
@Anonymous wrote:You're missing the point.
A FR may be voluntary, but failure to comply gets your account closed. To some people that may not seem to voluntary. Further, your logic about financial circumstances changing doesn't hold water. First of all, everybody's financial circumstances can change so why don't they just FR everybody? Maybe when you and your family return from a trip to the mall your house should be locked up so you can't enter while your mortgage holder does a FR. According to your logic, that should be ok.
No, I got your point just fine the first two times you wrote it.
Here's what you seem to be missing:
Providing ANY information to a potential or current lender is 100% VOLUNTARY, just like the credit relationship is 100% at-will. CCCs have no obligation to shape their business practices and RM procedures to suit your privacy concerns. You seem to almost be implying that Amex OWES prospective or current lenders the opportunity to borrow without having to prove (or prove again) credit worthiness. That is so irresponsible from a lending perspective that it's beyond not plausible. The same goes for financial circumstances changing. Does not a lender, particularly an unsecured lender, have the right to make sure that a borrower has the ability to repay and meets minimal credit standards? I can hardly believe that people advocate such a sloppy approach to lending, but that appears to be what you are advocating.
I said it once, I'll say it again: If you don't agree with Amex's business model, FIND ANOTHER CARD TO USE. We simple disagree on this point. I think Amex has every right to be as invasive as they want. It is the consumer's choice to engage in business with them...but when you agree to use the product, don't complain about what you agreed to.
And to answer your question, I definitely think Amex SHOULD FR EVERYONE they think might be a potential credit risk to them. It's called doing smart business in the unsecured credit world.
Thanks for the spirited debate.
Edited because half my original post disappeared when it posted
Nobody said you can be physically forced to provide tax transcripts to AmEx. That said, they do without doubt try to strong arm you when they state that your account will be closed if you fail to comply. In the end, though, you decide if compliance is in your best interests or not. For some on this forum losing their AmEx account would hurt them -- in a variety of ways. But it's still your call.
Nobody stated AmEx or any other creditor should throw money at people without reasonable assurances they will be repaid. Any sloppiness or irresponsibility exist only in your word. Of all possible credit card issuers, only -- yes, only -- AmEx demands a 4506 T. Has Bank of America, Citibank, Chase or even Capital One ever demanded one from you? By your definition, then, they are sloppy and irresponsible. The very simple fact is that in the majority -- likely vast majority -- of cases, there are far less intrusive methods to determine one's income. Now if AmEx has decided that they need to examine your tonsils via a colonoscopy, that's their right -- for now. Again, you decide if you want to allow it.
Nowhere in the AmEx cardmember agreement does it state that as a condition of cardmembership you are required to surrender income tax information. Nowhere. Period. If at some future point they want to verify income and choose that method for verification, then they are free to do so -- for now. And I have the absolute right to refuse and fire them. And if they do decide to FR me at some point, that is exactly what will happen.
I think it's clear from what I have posted on this topic that people make their own decisions, but seemed to be lacking all the information necessary to make an informed decision. I hope you aren't going to come back and state that informed decisions are somehow sloppy or irresponsible.
@bradpitt wrote:
...Also its mentioned a few times in this thread that Amex is loaning you huge sums and they compare it to a mortgage. The average mortgage is around $250,000. I bet the average account at Amex is below $10,000. I really don't think 4% is a huge amount in my opinion. But maybe someone's home is $30,000 and they have a $20,000 Amex?
Amen, brother! Well stated.
If anybody should be conducting a colonoscopy on a regular basis after granting credit it should be a mortgage lender.
@Anonymous wrote:
I think it's clear from what I have posted on this topic that people make their own decisions, but seemed to be lacking all the information necessary to make an informed decision. I hope you aren't going to come back and state that informed decisions are somehow sloppy or irresponsible.
I really think that is the crux of the argument. Has anyone here ever disagreed with the statement "You don't have to do business with them" which pro-FR's seem to be constantly saying. Yes, we all get that!
There is a spectrum of ways of identifying risk,including:
1) Please tell us your income and we will believe you
2) We DO believe you, but can you also give us W2s and other statements showing source of income
3) Show us your tax return, and we may ask for more documents.
4) The equivalent of a full IRS research audit: (ALL documents, going back years)
5) Lie detector with waterboarding if anything questionable comes up.
4 and 5 are probably going to be more successful in identifying risk than 3. Of course, more people will choose to opt out if they were the choices, but apparently these are the bad credit risks Amex wouldn't want any way (since they all lied about their income).
What I think McArthur has done here, at least for me, is raising the question if 3 is also too intrusive in ways we didn't suspect, and that might change some people's decisions about whether the benefit of an Amex account outweighs the privacy concerns.