More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

More results...

Generic selectors
Exact matches only
Search in title
Search in content
Post Type Selectors

What’s The Exchange Rate For Jerusalem Shekels To Tel Aviv Shekels?

Later today my employees will drive to Jerusalem to sell goods to some Arabs (they’re not going to Salahadin St today because the situation is a little more tense than usual but they’ll exchange goods for cash somewhere else).

When they get there they will receive payment in “New Israeli Shekels” – ? NIS. The same currency is used across the whole of Israel including by the Arabs under administrative control of Israel and the Palestinian Authorities. My customers today work in both Jerusalem and Ramallah.

But according to a table from the US Treasury that is displayed on the IRS web site from December 31st 2011, perhaps I should be asking my Arab friends to pay a different rate? Apparently their Shekels aren’t worth the same as my Shekels in Tel Aviv! Deeper digging seems to indicate that the IRS doesn’t see this distinction, but when they take their table from the Treasury it is there.

From the following web page: Treasury Reporting Rates of Exchange as of December 31, 2011 which is used by US citizens who need to report income earned overseas in US Dollars:

We scroll down to find the rate for Israel and we get a bit of a surprise. Because, apparently, there is another place in the world that uses the New Israeli Shekel. A whole ‘nother country called “Jeresalem” which might be “Jerusalem”. And this must be another country because it has a different rate from the one that covers the country called “Israel”.

So, just to be sure of when this Shekel using country popped into existence I had a quick scan back. I look all the way back to 1982 but only found one country, with one exchange rate, using the Israeli Shekel. That country was Israel.

But even as recently as December 31st 2010 there was only one country using the Shekel:

So sometime last year either the IRS, or the IRS following the wishes of the State Department created a whole new country called “Jerusalem”, assigned it a whole new currency called the Shekel and decided to make up their own exchange rate.

I better tell my Arab friends in Jerusalem.

Special h/t to a long time Israellycool reader Mzk1. And I do hope he doesn’t get in trouble with the IRS for pointing this out!

40 thoughts on “What’s The Exchange Rate For Jerusalem Shekels To Tel Aviv Shekels?”

    1. The lady at Treasury said it should be the same. Actually, the IRS lets you use any consistent reliable set of rates. I didn’t make the point, just asked politely. She is on vacation, so I hope she doesn’t get into trouble; they probably just copied from State.

      As far as State is concerned, I hope they fire the whole unAmerican lot of them.

      1. From your previous posts I take it that your disapproval of our State Dept. has less to do with Hillary Clinton and more to do with your perception of its historic hostility toward Israel. Personally, I don’t see it, but as Shy Guy is fond of saying, we all have our own hobby horses, I suppose.

        1. Yes. In fact, I actually more-or-less exonerated Obama per se when I gave Brian the particulars.

          It goes back to the old WASP days, the early Eisenhower Arabist days, and in particular during the holocaust, when they moved heaven and earth to keep Jews out. They made a slight mistake by trying to further obstruct something by requiring consent of Treasury (thus my soft spot for them) giving Blementhal the opening to write a report entitled “the aquiescense to this government in the murder of the European Jews” (title inexact).

          This led to the formation of the War Refugee Board, which funded Wallenberg among other things.

          I think State wishes it were the British Foreign Office, and the latter wishes it had the Palestinian Mandate back.

          1. giving Blementhal the opening to write a report entitled “the aquiescense to this government in the murder of the European Jews” (title inexact).”
            No that was Josiah DuBois from the Treasury Department who wrote that. I think you are referring to Henry Morgenthau, Jr. who was Treasury Secretary and was responsible for getting FDR to st up the War Refugee Board in 1944.

              1. Henry Morgenthau, Jr., John Pehle, Josiah DuBois (all of the Treasury Department) and California Congressmen Will Rogers, Jr. were heroes.

          2. We are a different country from the days of “Gentlemen’s Agreement.” Unfortunately, anti-Semitism still exists in America, but it is no longer socially acceptable. Surely, even from the perspective of living your life as a Jew in Israel, you must recognize this change in our country. Who in today’s State Dept. is openly anti-Semitic? It just wouldn’t be tolerated by the American people in 2012.

              1. Oh, dear. I made an extra effort to try to be grammatically correct in responding to z303, too. Is this reference authoritative, Hans, and if so, why do you suppose the hyphen is used so widely in mainstream media? Oh, I get it, the mainstream media has an ax to grind with Jewish people as well. This problem is bigger than I thought. This is very much like when Dennis Moore, the highwayman from “Monty Python’s Flying Circus” tries his hand at the redistribution of wealth on a personal level by robbing some and giving to others only to make the rich poor and the poor rich.

                1. Sorry Jim,

                  Please do not try to make a mouse into a mountain… The reference is an opinion… One that I share… I linked to it in order not to just C&P it or to write my own version due to the limited time I have and the wish not to crowd this area with what’s essentially a side issue…

                  As for the media, what they use or don’t isn’t really of my concern… The fact is that in the US they like to use hyphenated words… However, IMHO and others like me the use of the hyphen in the case of anti-Semitism misleads and stirs up the mud…

                  Case in point, the people who claim that Arabs can’t be “anti-Semites” seeing as they are Semites themselves…

                  As for the hyphen, feel free to disagree but if you do I’d appreciate to know your reasoning… Alternately, link to a source that you agree with… As for there being a problem, I’m not sure what you’re referring to…

                  1. I spent my career in the American civil service. Among some of my duties over the years was to write policy papers, decision memoranda and other official internal government papers. We were required to comply with the official “Style Manual” in the work we did. And so this is how I was trained–to comply with authoritative reference manuals and not political opinions in the spelling, syntax, grammar and punctuation to be used. The Style Manual of the N.Y. Times is good enough for me, because, as we all know, it is the newspaper of record and only includes all the news that’s fit to print. Or so I’m told. Though from the looks of things, AussieDave (or is that Admiral General AussieDave?) does not run a very tight ship in the Comments Section of his fine blog when it comes to such matters.

            1. Sorry Jim, the US has plenty of Jew haters and especially today they call themselves anti-Zionists. I make no distinction. Anyone who denies US citizens the right to a country ruled by your own constitution is a US citizen hater. Same for anti-Zionists. Simple.

              1. I was under the impression that real Jew haters called themselves “traditionalists” like Pat Buchanan or Father Coughlin. I’m not even sure what Zionism means anymore. If it means that Israel has a right to exist and that it should be recognized as the eternal homeland of the Jewish people, then I’m a Zionist, too. Unfortunately, some from Arutz Sheva and other places have redefined terms in order to attack those politically they see as Israel’s enemies, which is just about anyone with a different point of view than themselves.

                1. Jim, somotimes you seem reasonable and rational, and sometimes you go entirely off the deep end. It is undeniable that most “respectable” anti-semtism today in America is on the Left. Al Sharpton, a racist, murderous anti-semite with blood on hia hands, is accepted in the Democratic party and given a show on an influential cable channel. That is extremely disturbing, and would be so if it was the Republicans and Fox.

                  1. You make a fair point about Rev. Sharpton. MSNBC had to overlook quite a lot of his troubling history to give him his own show. There is hope, though. They just gave that vile anti-Semite Pat Buchanan the heave ho for his political views on race, so maybe Rev. Al will be next.

                    1. You would have to know as much as I do about Bachanan’s history to conclude that he is an anti-semite. I don’t think you have enough evidence to say that without being affected by poitics. Sharpton is much clearer. MSNBC was desperate to do something about the all-white lineup we laughed at them for.

                  2. “Jim, somotimes you seem reasonable and rational, and sometimes you go entirely off the deep end.”


            2. Yes, we are. Good you understand that the country had changed; that is why I have no problem being a Republican today. Most of the anti-semitism (sorry, guys) is on the left today. Reasonable people on the left cencede this. The sort of Republicans who used to be anti-semites are more the country-clubbers that people like you keep on trying to get us Republicans to listen to.

            3. Jim, I have suffered a great deal from anti-semitism in the US, even had a classmate murdered. Occasionally Jews are killed for their religion in the US; it only gets moderate play. However, in most cases (Al Sharpton being an exception) institutional anti-semitism is not acceptable in the US. Unfortunaely, the latter is not the case in Israel.

            4. To clarify, I don’t think it is anti-semitic per se; it just follows the old Arabist tradition. And the ambassadors to Saudi Arabia (See the Washington mothly on the middle East) are basically publically paid off.

            5. “Unfortunately, anti-Semitism still exists in America, but it is no longer socially acceptable.”

              Not in the classical form you find on Stormfront, I agree… but it is perfectly socially acceptable in the new form of delegating the Stormfrontesque manifestations to the Muslims and then explaining how “Israel’s actions” have “made it possible.”

              Anti-Zionism delenda est.

  1. The exchange rate of New Israeli Sheckles ant other currencies raises some interesting possibilities. Here is my modest proposal.

    The European banks are panic stricken over the loans they made to Greece, Italy and Spain. They are afraid that the loans that they made to those countries will be defaulted on in the near future and when that happens, their banks will be insolvent and the executives at those banks will lose their jobs.

    They are highly motivated. They would love to unload those loans and they will probably accept very favorable terms to unload them. They might very well accept notes denominated in New Israeli Sheckles at unreasonably high exchange rates to get some of these Greek, Spanish and Italian loans off their books. Aside from the financial bargain this offers, it also results in a bunch of powerful bankers with a strong financial interest in the continued survival and financial health of Israel lobbying their respective governments.

    What to do with the Greek, Italian and Spanish loans? All those countries used NATO standard military equipment that is common with Israeli equipment and ammunition. A few hundred (or a few thousand) additional artillery tubes facing the Lebanon and Gaza border might be very handy if things with Iran go the way that many of us fear they will.

  2. And this surprises anyone? What makes you think that the IRS isn’t part of the Obama administration. Look how they denied tax-exempt status to ZStreet because they didn’t agree with the administration’s stand on Israel.

    This is no different than the White House white washing Israel off their website when discussing Jerusalem.Too had the idiot Jews of the USA have no real ability to see past their own selfish agendas.

    1. I doubt if the Republicans are smart enough to make an issue of this in the coming election. Instead, they are preoccupied with self-immolation.

      It’s no surprise that American administrations behave this way. To the best of my knowledge, every living ex-president is currently a passenger on the Saudi gravy train and Obama knows it. As for the IRS, its big boss at Treasury is an admitted tax cheat.

    2. As the guy who started this, and as someone who thinks Obama is destroying the US and a malign influence on thw world as a whole – I would not in fact blame Obama per se. I suspect Treasury they took the list from State. Unfortunately, this long-standing and insulting policy has been around for decades in the US State department, in marked contrast to a bill passed by Congress in the 80s basically recognizing ISraeli sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.

      As a matter of fact, the religious Jews of my old neighborhood (or right next to it) did see past their own agendas and elected a Catholic Republican over the Democrat, one of our own. As far as the general Jewish population is concerned they are putting what they mistakenly see as the good of the US over the selfish agenda of preventing another holocaust. After all, it worked under Roosevelt, right?

  3. Jim

    Father Caughlin a traditionalist? Well, I suppose that if you think hating capitalism is a traditional value and criticizing FDR for not eliminating it, but that is not the most commonly understood use of the word “traditionalist”.

    There is a line of thought that socialism is a reaction against the changes brought on by what Shumpeter called the creative destruction of capitalism. Some people long for the stability and stagnation of Feudalism. Is it your contention that Father Caughlin was one of those people? That might be a traditionalist point of view in Europe but not in the United States.

    1. I know Buchanan calls himself a traditionalist, but I admit I’m not sure the term was in use in Father Coughlin’s day. He certainly was a nativist, an America Firster, and openly anti-Semitic. In America, this group of people has had an intense mistrust of people they view as outsiders, and invariably, this meant to a significant degree, the Jews. My beef with some on the Right in Israel is that they equate any criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism.

  4. Mark in Texas

    Buchanan may call himself a traditionalist. Last time I paid any attention to him he had a gig on MSNBC which is not a particularly friendly place for political conservatives. I seem to recall some dust up a few years ago when the late William F.Buckley said that he had had it with Buchanan’s antisemitism. Before that Buckley said that Buchanan danced close to the line and Buckley had advised him to quit it. I don’t remember the incident that was the last straw.

    Father Caughlin might have been a nativist but he was a native of Canada. I am not sure if he ever sought US citizenship. He was certainly antisemetic but he was a man of the left. If you would like to get some idea of how the political left was thinking in the early 1930s, you might like to watch the 1933 movie “Gabriel Over The White House”. I think you can get it from Netflix or buy it from Amazon and every so often they show it on Turner Classic Movies.

    1. Buckley’s main issue was with the editor of his own magazine, National Review, whom he felt was skirting the line. He published an entire issue called “in search of antisemitism”. Remember it was Buckley who had earlier worked to take antisemitism out of the movement, and in particular had fought the Birchers.

      It is unfortunately that the lack of appreciation of the Jewish community for the support given to them by modern conservatives has left the door open for paelos like Buchannan to skirt the line. With the unpopulariy of the anti-terrorists wars (something started, again, by the Left), accusations of dual loyalty are now becoming more acceptable.

      People who know Bachannan do not think him antisemitic. It is only the fact that he attacked the Soviet Jewry movement in the 70’s and the name of his organization (America First, recalling the old America First Committee) that get me to give credence to those accusations.

      1. Jim from Iowa

        Did you ever hear Buchanan’s criticism of Elena Kagan’s appointment to the US Supreme Court? His main expressed opposition was that she would be the third Jew serving on the court at the same time. He didn’t seem to be so exercised that the other six members were those of his own faith, Roman Catholic. I couldn’t believe what I was hearing on MSNBC coming out of this bigot’s mouth.

        1. Mark in Texas

          No, I didn’t hear Buchannan’s criticism of Elena Kagan. I haven’t payed any attention to Pat Buchannan in a long time. It seems to me that sometime during his presidential race a decade or so back he lost whatever tenuous hold he once had on reality.

          If you were surprised by bigotry on MSNBC, you have not been paying attention. That is why I watch it only when channel surfing through that part of the cable universe.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top