One thing to be careful with miners is that governments tend to be very interested in suddenly owning certain mines when spot surges.
American and Canadian mines should be ok, but South America might become pretty unstable pretty fast when silver hits $500 and above.
Due diligence as always, and if you don’t hold it, you don’t own it.
What do you mean I’m wrong? Your GPT told you one thing (as documented in your post), mine stated the opposite (as documented in mine).
The reason of the entire Q movement is to find out who’s correct, not “you’re wrong and right, and I don’t care to continue the conversation”
VAT is either included in the physical Shanghai spot, or it’s not. Our goal should be to find out the truth.
One proof is that most pages (and LLMs) that I’ve seen states that VAT is included. One proof to the contrary is that the Shanghai spot then should be a bit higher than the current Comex-delta (at least 13%, but probably closer to 20).
Why wouldn’t you continue the debate? Is winning an online discussion more important to you, than what’s the truth?
Not very Q of you.
I’m leaning towards VAT being included, but I’m currently more interested in my exit strategi for silver.
$1000 silver will make it very hard to get rid of in any practical way.
ChatGPT is useless, here’s what I got: Short answer: it depends on which Shanghai silver price you’re talking about — but the commonly cited “Shanghai price” at around $111.60 ≈ ¥25,000/kg normally includes VAT when quoted for physical delivery according to market commentary and pricing data. 
🪙 What’s going on with VAT and Shanghai silver prices?
Here’s the nuance:
-
Many quoted Shanghai silver prices for physical metal include a 13% VAT component. – Some pricing sources show the Shanghai quoted price for silver with VAT included (gross price). That’s what retail or benchmark quotes often reflect when converted to USD (e.g., ~$111.60). 
-
Not all exchanges or price series treat VAT the same. – The Shanghai Futures Exchange (SHFE) price itself — especially for futures contracts — may be quoted before VAT, with VAT added later if someone actually takes physical delivery.  – Some market participants debate whether VAT is automatically baked into the published quote or applied on top at settlement. Practical trading often reflects VAT grossed into the price that physical buyers see.
-
VAT treatment can change depending on use and delivery conditions. – In China the standard VAT on silver is around 13% when it’s sold in the domestic market and removed from bonded or futures vaults for use. 
📌 So for the quoted $111.60 Shanghai price • If the source is a physical market quote that’s been converted from RMB/kg to USD, it is generally understood to include the 13% VAT component built into that price.  • If you were to actually buy and take possession of physical silver in China, VAT would apply separately at roughly 13%, and that cost is either already reflected in the gross quote or added at the point of sale depending on the specific market and how the price is published. 
⚠️ Important distinction
This answer refers specifically to Chinese/Shanghai pricing conventions and does not apply to EU VAT treatment, where VAT on physical silver purchases is handled under EU/individual country tax laws (often around 25% VAT on bars/coins). 
⸻
Summary: ✔️ The commonly cited Shanghai silver price (e.g., $111.60) is normally a gross price that already includes the local 13% VAT for physical delivery pricing.  ⚠️ Futures quotes may be shown VAT-exclusive and have VAT added only when physical delivery occurs.  💡 Different markets and trade contexts treat VAT differently, so always check the exact price source and delivery terms.
I did some digging into Shanghai some time ago and afair that spread is due VAT and security (Shanghai physical vs Comex options). A ~10% spread between Comex and Shanghai is expected.
There are unlimited timelines, the goal is to find the “winner”, the one that works for “the greater good”. As soon as that timeline is identified, it will be ruined by changing it, resulting in a least optimal one.
Sadly Charlie dying, and being a martyr, is part of this optimal timeline.
Or at least that’s one of the theories regarding “project lookinglass”.
My issue with Clott Adam’s is that he never admitted that we were right because we knew more, we were right because we were lucky.
He saw it as a 50/50 bet, and that we just happened to guess correctly.
He’s still a dumbfuck.
Predicted by Q What’s the muff usually used over a microphone to reduce wind noise called? What’s rhe delta of Qpost #984?
Like 90% of this board.
It’s never too late.
Best time was 40 years ago
Second best time is now.
Diversify 10% if your savings into physical gold.
In worst case your kids/spouse/family will inherit a sweet chunk of gold
Or you could take it to a goldsmith and make a sick piece of jewellery or big fat ring.
Trump also has tweeted (like 15 years ago) that silver is a seriously undervalued commodity.
Awesome.
I asked Grok for his take as well:
My take? It’s a slick theory with legs, but it hinges on a lot falling into place—Trump appointing Shelton (she’s not Fed chair yet, just a past nominee), Congress buying in, and markets not freaking out. The audit’s more likely a political flex than a TTB prerequisite; Fort Knox’s gold isn’t vanishing, per Bessent, and the Treasury’s not broke enough to need a gold fire sale. Still, the Shelton-Trump-gold nexus taps into a real appetite for shaking up the system. Whether it’s “gold shall destroy FED” or just “gold shall annoy FED,” it’s a hell of a story.
What do you think—does Part 2 go full Fed funeral, or is this the ceiling? Loved the writeup—keep connecting those dots!
Have you bought any gold? If you’re correct, Grok is pretty sure that it’s wise to put some of your assets into physical.
Here’s Grok3:
An updated audit of Fort Knox would definitely stir things up, especially if it revealed a massive shortfall like 1,000 metric tons instead of the official 4,581.55 metric tons. That’s a drop from 147.3 million troy ounces to roughly 32.15 million troy ounces—a loss of over 78% of the stated reserves. Let’s break down the potential fallout, focusing on gold prices and the U.S. dollar (USD), assuming this hypothetical scenario plays out.
Impact on Gold Prices
If the audit confirmed only 1,000 metric tons (32.15 million troy ounces) remained, it would signal a major disruption in perceived gold supply stability. Fort Knox holds about 56% of the U.S. Treasury’s total gold reserves (258 million troy ounces across all depositories), so losing over 115 million troy ounces from the official tally would be a shock. Here’s what might happen to gold prices:
- Immediate Spike: Markets hate uncertainty, and this would scream "something’s wrong." Gold’s price—let’s say it’s around $2,900 per troy ounce today—could surge as investors rush to safe-haven assets. A 20-50% jump isn’t out of the question, pushing it toward $3,500-$4,350 per ounce, depending on panic levels.
- Supply Perception: Global above-ground gold stocks are estimated at 200,000 metric tons (about 6.43 billion troy ounces). Losing 3,581 metric tons from Fort Knox is less than 2% of that, so it’s not a supply crunch per se. But the psychological hit—doubting U.S. reserves—could amplify scarcity fears, especially if other nations question their own holdings.
- Longer-Term Volatility: After the initial spike, prices might stabilize higher as trust in official reserve reporting erodes. Speculation about where the gold went (sold, leased, or "lost") could keep markets jittery, sustaining elevated prices.
Impact on the U.S. Dollar (USD)
The USD’s reaction would hinge on its role as the world’s reserve currency, which isn’t directly backed by gold since the end of the Bretton Woods system in 1971. Still, gold reserves bolster confidence in U.S. financial stability. A shortfall this big could rattle that:
- Confidence Blow: Foreign holders of U.S. debt (about $8 trillion of the $34 trillion total) might see this as a sign of deeper mismanagement. If the U.S. can’t account for its gold, what else is off? The USD could weaken as faith in U.S. economic stewardship takes a hit.
- Currency Depreciation: A 10-20% drop in the USD’s value against major currencies (like the euro or yen) could happen fast, especially if paired with gold’s rise. The dollar index (DXY) might slide from, say, 100 to 80-90 in weeks.
- Inflation Pressure: A weaker USD makes imports pricier, potentially spiking inflation. Combined with higher gold prices signaling distrust in fiat, the Fed might face a tough choice: hike rates to defend the dollar (risking recession) or let it slide (risking a currency crisis).
Broader Implications
- Geopolitical Ripples: Nations like China or Russia, with their own gold hoards (officially 2,262 and 2,336 metric tons, respectively), might weaponize this, pushing de-dollarization narratives. Central banks could accelerate gold buying, further driving prices up.
- Market Chaos: Stock markets might tank initially as uncertainty spreads, though gold miners and related assets could soar. Bitcoin and other cryptos might also rally as “digital gold” gains traction.
- Public Trust: Domestically, conspiracy theories would explode, and political pressure for answers could destabilize institutions like the Treasury or Fed.
Scale of the Shock
A 1,000-ton reality versus 4,581 tons claimed is extreme—implying over $330 billion in market value (at $2,900/ounce) unaccounted for. If the gold was secretly sold or leased, the economic impact might be muted if records surface. But if it’s just “gone,” the hit to credibility could echo the 1971 Nixon Shock, when the U.S. suspended gold convertibility, only worse due to today’s interconnected markets.
Gold might not hit $10,000 overnight, and the USD wouldn’t collapse entirely (it’s still backed by a $30 trillion economy), but you’d see a wild ride: gold maybe settling 30-40% higher long-term (say $3,800-$4,000), and the USD losing significant ground until trust is rebuilt. What do you think—would the U.S. fess up to a shortfall, or double down with creative accounting?
How do they prevent it if Fort Knox has less than, let’s say, 1000 tons?
If they decide to audit Fort Knox, and the gold is not there. What happens? Explain it to me like I’m 5. USD collapsing on Trumps watch? New currency already in place? How does Fort Knox fit in with Q2619?
Votes All votes REPRESENTATIVE PARTY STATE VOTE D'Esposito Republican New York NOT VOTING Dunn (FL) Republican Florida NOT VOTING Granger Republican Texas NOT VOTING LaLota Republican New York NOT VOTING Malliotakis Republican New York NOT VOTING
After 9 years of fighting deep state propaganda and fake news, people are still falling for skits like this?
The artist’s name didn’t give it away?
They just called the POTUS race as well.
Finally I can breathe.
Do EVs have the same problem with access to electricity in N. Florida?
I wish all the best for the people in Florida.
Sorry, but I’m not trying to be difficult, but didn’t you ask her about the new fiat? English is not my native language, so I’m just trying to understand
Why would there be another fiat, if we’re transitioning to a gold backed system?
Playbook:
- Liberal dumbfuck donates $5 to ACTblue
- ACTblue register the name and address of dumbfuck
- ACTblue operative uses own credit card to make donations in dumbfuck’s name
- The operative gets reimbursed by ACTblue
- ACTblue gets reimbursed by Soros
They’ll probably just skip steps 4 and 5 though, by using Soros’ credit card to pay for the donation.
The important part here is not who’s credit card’s being used, it’s the name and address on the donation reported to the FEC, and the origin of the money used to pay the credit card bill.
Doesn’t matter.
What does matter is the origin of the money used to pay off the credit card.
One credit card, thousands of donations just below the FEC limit of $3300, no traces.
OMG did some digging into this. If you ever did a small donation to ACTblue, they’ll use your name again for multiple fake donations.
In this case they’ll only need one credit card.
They’ll use that one credit card and make multiple donations in different names, just below the FEC reporting limit ($3,300 per election, per candidate).
They’ll then use “Soros’” money to pay off that credit card.
Shanghai is often listed including 13% VAT. After the January 1st shutdown of Chinese exports, we’ll probably see the opposite very soon, Comex futures trading above Chinese physical in Shanghai. There’s not enough physical in the world, and removing China from the equation, is making it extremely difficult for the west to supply our demand.