Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 3 of 11 (Year 2016)

2,818 thoughts on “Media and Blog Articles Open for Comments – Part 3 of 11 (Year 2016)”

1. “Need to Hide Some Income? You Don’t Have to Go to Panama”

   http://www.nytimes.com/2016/04/08/business/need-to-hide-some-income-you-dont-have-to-go-to-panama.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

2. @iota My take on it: https://twitter.com/JCDoubleTaxed/status/718210056559288320

   Hypocrisy involved on the part of the US government to go after and vilify other countries as “tax havens” but then to say nothing about what is happening in the US. I suppose States rights are involved and that is a tricky area for federal government.

3. @JC – good tweets.

   I must admit I was a bit shocked that these states actually market their tax evasion services internationally. I suppose it’s another way of sucking capital into America, so maybe the Federal Government is happy to turn a blind eye.

4. @iota @JC

   Shamelessly, it seems…

   http://www.taxhavenusa.com/

5. *Open and accountable?* and a reason Liberal PM and MP minds and promises can so easily flip-flop (same as for any other party’s government representatives) who decide not in their best interest to serve the people but the corporations, financial institutions, law firms and lobbyists from any of the big guns.

   http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/liberal-party-fundraising-ethics-1.3525751

   The kind of tactics we are up against unfortunately.

6. http://www.caribbeannewsnow.com/headline-Commentary%3A-Leaked-'Panama-Papers'-affirm-more-than-reveal-offshore-banking-secrets-29944.html

   Carribean News Now Commentary:
   Leaked ‘Panama Papers’ affirm more than reveal offshore banking secrets

7. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2016/04/07/1000-secret-nevada-firms-and-most-trace-2-overseas-addresses/82760186/

   USA Today:
   1,000 secret Nevada firms, and most trace to 2 overseas addresses

   Patricia Amunategui, who runs Mossack Fonseca’s corporation registration operations in Las Vegas and Wyoming, said in a 2014 deposition that very little is required of foreign businesses who want to register a corporation in Nevada.

   “Under the Nevada law, they don’t ask you any more,” she said, “just the name and (whether or not) the original of the company is in good standing.”

   In its statement, Mossack Fonseca added it has always complied with international protocols including the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, or FATCA, “to assure as is reasonably possible, that the companies we incorporate are not being used for tax evasion, money laundering, terrorist finance or other illicit purposes.”

   In her 2014 deposition, Amunategui said she was advised by lawyers to stop signing her name to corporation documents as the secretary of the companies before FATCA took effect in 2015.

   “I’m a U.S. person,” she said, “and I want to follow the law.”

8. http://www.marketexpress.in/2016/04/how-the-us-became-a-top-destination-for-shady-assets.html

   Market Express:
   How the US became a top destination for shady assets

   The Panama Papers’ tax haven list features exotic locales like the British Virgin Islands, the Seychelles – and the US state of Nevada. Experts aren’t surprised and say the US has become a top destination to hide money.

   When one thinks of places to shelter legitimate or illegitimate assets from the prying eyes of government authorities, destinations like Switzerland, Luxembourg or the Cayman Islands spring to mind. However, unlike the US state of Nevada, none of them made it onto the top ten list of the most popular global tax shelters according to the Panama Papers.

9. “I`m a US person” she said ” and I want to follow the law”
   The LAWS are being made in America to benefit them and harm all others. And then they can hide behind their LAWS and rob everybody else blind without being taken to jail for it.

10. @Bubblebustin – I’m gobsmacked!

    That “TaxHavenUSA” site is quite blatant. Run by a firm called Connex International- offices in the UK and yes, Delaware.

    When setting up the US LLC there are many ways to structure the entity to maximize asset protection, legal tax reduction, and privacy.

    For the US LLC, in order to maintain the “disregarded”€ tax treatment there can be only one owner. The easiest way to do this is to name the client as the sole owner. There are many advantages to being named as the sole owner, but privacy may not be one of them. Also, as the sole owner of the US LLC you may be legally required to declare and/or pay taxes on the income of the US LLC in your home country.

    To provide greater privacy, asset protection, and better tax treatment, I suggest that the client obtain an International Privacy Trust to own the US LLC. In this case the Trust will be listed as the owner of the company, not the client, and if the Trust is properly structured the client may be able to legally avoid paying taxes on the income earned by the US LLC and the Trust in his home country.

    The “International Privacy Trust” being of course a shell company.

    As you say, no shame. No shame whatsoever.

    I guess that’s why it’s so easy for resident Americans to assume we’re all tax evaders. Tax evasion, it seems, is the American way.

11. @JC
    Well, there are ways around federalism. Ronald Reagan praised “states rights” when running for the presidency and then as president told them all to raise their drinking ages to twenty-one or they wouldn’t get highway funds.

    What I liked about the NY Times article was that it made clear that all this money wasn’t ending up finally in the Bank of East Reno, but with the big banks in New York and elsewhere. The problem is, as the Inside Job put it “It’s a Wall Street Government”. When even the FBI can’t get in, that is bad.

    @Polly
    Of course, she isn’t signing off on that stuff because FATCA makes all of it reportable to the U.S. federal government, not because she has high moral standards. Maybe the feds need to bring in a law that all corporations incorporated in the U.S. need to be signed off by a U.S. person.

12. July/August 2010 issue
    http://www.canadiangeographic.ca/magazine/ja10/stanstead-border-town.asp
    About Stanstead, Quebec – town split by Canada US border.

    Though a 2010 article, looks like there is still open opportunity to comment – and raise the FATCA/US Extraterritorial CBT problem.

    And alert readers to the ADCS lawsuit.

13. @iota @Deckard1138

    Not only shameless, but blatantly proud of being a tax haven.

    The OECD warned Panama, but said the US was cooperating. Really? I suspect they’ll ignore them as they always have.

    “Saint-Amans said that the OECD is not pressuring the U.S. because: “America is much more close to meeting the standards of the OECD than Panama.”

    What he failed to mention is that the U.S. has generally ignored agreements proposed by the OECD, which is based in Paris and whose policies are generally driven by European countries.”

    -which in ‘American’ translates to “toothless”. At least so far.

    – See more at: http://www.prensa.com/in_english/OCDE-lanza-amenaza_21_4437516206.html#sthash.B2Ovf5pj.dpuf

14. @Bubblebustin

    “Saint-Amans said that the OECD is not pressuring the U.S. because: “America is much more close to meeting the standards of the OECD than Panama.”

    Apparently the OECD still believes American promises of reciprocity and data integrity (and, presumably, the tooth fairy), even though the EU has finally started to see through all the FATCA lies and is beginning to push back. But, since the OECD is mainly comprised of failed policy hacks and other assorted B-team technocrats, it’s really not too surprising.

15. Grover Norquist outlines why the corporate tax system can’t be changed under Obama. Obama wants a it to be revenue positive for the government. He wants a trillion dollars.

    http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/06/inversion-rules-are-part-of-obama-hostage-policy-grover-norquist.html

    Remember we have had other government types saying that if you want RBT then you were urged to pay for it. My guess is you won’t get this from Obama without a major increase in revenue.
    Obama’s view then is that America is undertaxed. He would likely want the Clinton rates back not just for the rich but for everyone.
    This matches the stuff in the presidents budget. One time tax on overseas stuff + tax on overseas income going forward.

16. https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/for-us-tax-cheats-panama-papers-reveals-a-perilous-new-world/2016/04/08/a3467e9a-fd9f-11e5-886f-a037dba38301_story.html

    http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/for-u-s-tax-cheats-panama-papers-reveal-a-perilous/article_2de147c9-a2a2-5b64-8358-fa40e42c6991.html

    For U.S. tax cheats, Panama Papers reveal a perilous new world

    Just left this comment at both sites:

    Amazing how this entire article makes no mention of the fact that the United States itself is now the third-largest tax haven in the world and is racing towards the number one position with a bullet. That’s just one of the reasons why more Americans aren’t on the Panama Papers list, since many of them are now choosing to hide their money in safer home-grown tax havens like Nevada and Delaware. The hypocrisy from the U.S. government is unbelievable: they rail against offshore tax havens while ensuring that American tax havens remain black holes of secrecy. Not even the FBI can search for beneficial owners of the kinds of accounts that are being set-up with less due diligence than a college kid’s first credit card during frosh week.

17. http://wealthmanagement.com/high-net-worth/how-avoid-entanglement-unethical-offshore-companies

    How to Avoid Entanglement with Unethical Offshore Companies

    KYC, the IRS and FATCA are Your Friends

    Financial institutions in certain jurisdictions like the Cook Islands, Nevis, Lichtenstein, and Switzerland, are arguably more closely regulated than U.S. institutions. But American consumers do not need to rely solely on the regulations of those countries to be protected from illegitimate institutions. International laws and cooperative agreements have made it possible to determine if a company is ethical before doing business. If the companies you work with are not making use of the following standards, they may not be above board.

    “KYC” or “Know Your Customer” – Only do business with companies that have the same or higher KYC standards than the U.S. For example, the institutions that we recommend to our clients require original notarized copies of identification, an original IRS Form W-9, copies of filed tax returns, and run each customer through a comprehensive international background check.

    The IRS – Obtain an employer identification number for each foreign trust, and be sure to have the trust company sign the SS-4. This puts the trust company on notice that you will be reporting the trust’s existence to the IRS, and similarly notifies the IRS to expect a tax return. Disreputable offshore companies may shy away from signing a form filed with the IRS.

    FATCA – Ensure that every offshore company you work with is FATCA compliant. FATCA, or the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, requires foreign financial institutions with American customers to report assets and income to the IRS in a manner similar to domestic institutions. An American opening accounts with a FATCA compliant entity cannot possibly make use of a tax haven for tax evasion.

    By utilizing the above steps, professionals and consumers can be assured of the integrity of the offshore companies they work with, and avoid being tangled up with a company like Mossack Fonseca.

    Wow, that really IS rich.

18. http://www.advisor.ca/tax/tax-news/what-happens-when-you-dont-account-for-pfics-203833
    ‘What happens when you don’t account for PFICs’
    Jessica Bruno / April 8, 2016

    Note, this is NOT an endorsement.

    Open for comments. And the whole PFIC thing is vicious.

19. Delaware companies are harder to crack than iPhones:

    “If somebody is conducting an investigation and it comes back to a Delaware company and you want to find who or what is behind that company, you basically strike out,” he said. “It doesn’t matter if it’s the F.B.I., at the federal level, state or local. Even the Department of Justice can’t get the information. There is nothing you can do.”

    http://federaltaxcrimes.blogspot.ca/2016/04/nyt-article-on-us-as-tax-haven-4716.html?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed:+blogspot/oGeEWy+(Federal+Tax+Crimes)

20. Why America loves being the world’s No. 1 tax haven. Forget what we learned from the Panama Papers. The real secrecy problem lies with America’s banks and Congress.
    By PETER COTORCEANU

    http://www.politico.eu/article/why-america-loves-being-the-worlds-no-1-tax-haven-panama-papers-data/

21. Somehow I have the feeling that only Bernie Sanders would consider playing fair- and doing the right thing about America`s double faced behaviour as a tax haven – but I might be mistaken. He seems to value integrity, but perhaps once president he will be confronted with such immense debt that he will also lose some of his noble ideas?

22. @Deckard1138
    It is worth reading that Washington Post article for the comments section alone!

    @Polly
    As long as Senators and Representatives from the tax haven states get on the relevant committees, opening up those states is going to be difficult by anything but executive action, which is constitutionally questionable.

    There is an argument I see popping up on the internet now that the lack of U.S. names in the Panama papers may involve something sinister. This was a big operation, possibly involving a government intelligence agency, but whose? When I first saw the argument on Zero Hedge that it might be Russia, I was skeptical. But this policy expert from the Brookings Institution argues the same and that there is the danger that the U.S. names have been withheld to blackmail the respective parties.
    http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/order-from-chaos/posts/2016/04/07-panama-papers-putin-gaddy

23. @Publius
    I was just ruminating on the idea that getting somebody in office who is ethical might be better than somebody who is making promises they dont keep.

24. The Panama Papers And FATCA – Another Cover Up?
    By Jim Atkins

    http://www.iexpats.com/panama-papers-fatca-another-cover/

25. @Publius: That was a good read. Gaddy always has interesting ideas & frameworks for looking at the world. “Who is John Doe” and “the revelation brings collateral damage upon legal business and innocent individuals—was that not a worry?'” are very good questions I haven’t seen anyone else thinking about seriously.

    Too bad that he is also a single-minded Russia expert, so — even in a blog post — he will tell you only about the Russia-related consequences of his ideas to the exclusion of anything else. Reminds me a lot of his earlier op-ed I read a few years ago where he had the beginnings of a fascinating comment about the Financial Action Task Force:

    http://nationalinterest.org/commentary/russias-financial-police-state-8746

    The FATF is the paradigmatic soft-law regulatory body. Soft law regulation—called soft because it does not have binding effect—is increasingly pervasive in international law. The reasons are rather simple. Voluntary standards are far less costly to establish than binding treaty law since they do not involve the difficult policy decisions required in hard-law regulation. Soft law is viewed as less political, formulated by technocratic civil servants working with relevant domestic agencies rather than diplomats representing state interests in the negotiation of treaties.

    But soft law can have a hard side. Precisely because of their nonbinding nature, soft-law norms tend to be formulated without the formal checks and balances of the hard-law legislative process. But without these political safeguards, technocrats who might not fully comprehend the tradeoffs in formulating standards—or who willfully ignore them—often formulate overly broad norms.

    And then the rest of it went:

    That’s usually not an issue in the mature democracies. The broad norms are not meant for the United States and Europe anyway—in fact, they would violate key constitutional protections in these countries. But in countries without these domestic constitutional protections, powerful domestic interests can deploy them to entrench their power and harden their regime.

    This dark side of soft law is on display in the development of FATF’s recommendations for combating financial crime. These standards have grown more expansive over time. Beginning with the war against drugs and organized crime, FATF’s mission has, since September 11, expanded to the global war against terrorist financing. With this expansion, FATF standards have increasingly focused on financial surveillance as a key instrument in fighting financial crime. Following the lead of the CIA, which in the months after September 11 had begun to monitor the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication (SWIFT) data streams, the FATF urged its member states to enhance their domestic financial surveillance. In 2003, one specific recommendation the FATF made was that countries should ideally set up a powerful and centralized financial-intelligence unit, or FIU. The FIU should “have access to the widest possible range of financial, administrative and law enforcement information,” and it should be “operationally independent and autonomous.” Most countries balked at the idea of creating such a powerful body. One that did not—that had in fact already created one—was Russia.

    (Just to make things really fun: Gaddy’s co-author on that op-ed has since moved from Washington DC to Australia. Wonder how he feels about now being at the pointy end of the U.S. financial intelligence unit’s desire to have “the widest possible range of financial, administrative and law enforcement information” and whether he feels democratic & constitutional safeguards have operated properly to prevent the formulation of “overly broad norms”.)

Comments are closed.