Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.

British Virgin Islands - Leaked files.....

edited April 2013 in General Charlton
http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/03/offshore-secrets-offshore-tax-haven

£21 trillion :o Sickening really, over a third of the worlds GDP, and made worse because its not even all the money that's being stashed away.

On a lighter note I wonder if any of the 120,000 leaked entities could be linked to our ownership or cash.......
«1

Comments

  • £21 TRILLION .. who makes these figure up?. Nowadays billionaires are passé .. the real goldfingers are yer average trillionaires. Whatever happened to 'undreds fahsends and mere millions
  • edited April 2013
    Interesting, but as you'd expect from the guardian not necessarily entirely plausible.
    Here's why: as long as you pay a little more, US$1k per year (aka chicken feed) and let the shares live with a custodian, you can run a BVI company that issues bearer shares.
    That is, anyone that holds the shares, owns the company. BVI is one of the few (only?) countries that allows companies to issue totally anonymous bearer shares. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to know who the actual beneficial owners are. So unless people were being exceedingly stupid, there would be no way to access ownership information.
  • cafcfan said:

    Interesting, but as you'd expect from the guardian not necessarily entirely plausible.
    Here's why: as long as you pay a little more, US$1k per year (aka chicken feed) and let the shares live with a custodian, you can run a BVI company that issues bearer shares.
    That is, anyone that holds the shares, owns the company. BVI is one of the few (only?) countries that allows companies to issue totally anonymous bearer shares. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to know who the actual beneficial owners are. So unless people were being exceedingly stupid, there would be no way to access ownership information.

    Not so it seems.....
    ICIJ rebuilt some of the databases in an effort to run them in their original format. There were surprises. The databases were formatted to record who really lay behind each entity, as required by international regulations on money laundering and "due diligence". Journalists hoped the truth was just a click away.

    In fact, entries for "beneficial owners" were often empty. The offshore agencies had frequently passed off their supposed legal responsibility to intermediaries in other countries. The lesson was that the empty fields were not an accident; it was the design.

    Only occasionally would an alert screen pop up, giving contact details for the persons who really owned the assets. ICIJ's fundamental lesson therefore had to be patience and perseverance.

    But persistently following leads through incomplete data yielded some great rewards: not just occasional and unexpected top names, but also the inside details of many nuanced and complex schemes for hiding wealth.
  • Rob62 said:

    http://m.guardian.co.uk/uk/2013/apr/03/offshore-secrets-offshore-tax-haven

    £21 trillion :o Sickening really, over a third of the worlds GDP, and made worse because its not even all the money that's being stashed away.

    On a lighter note I wonder if any of the 120,000 leaked entities could be linked to our ownership or cash.......


    Very subtle Rob! ;-)

    The Standard picks up particularly tonight on Scott Young, who was jailed for contempt earlier this year when the Judge decided he was not forthcoming with details of his "hidden assets". I believe he's been mentioned here before.

    http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/tycoon-in-bitter-divorce-battle-hid-fortune-in-british-virgin-island-accounts-8559930.html
  • Yeah, but it's alright because we're all in it together aren't we. Aren't we?
  • Yeah, we're all in it together. Unless you can afford not to be. Then you're not in it at all.
  • edited April 2013
    I see French government officials are among those implicated.

    Well, it's a good job British politicians do not evade tax or consider hiding their wealth there.
  • Lord Ashcroft? Or was that Belize, come to think of it.
  • RM owns an element of our club which as i understand is located in BVI in a company sense.

    Why would i begrudge a man like him for being legally tax efficient after he has put a vast amount of his personally earned wealth into keeping a football club i love going for years at huge loss to himself?
  • RM owns an element of our club which as i understand is located in BVI in a company sense.

    Why would i begrudge a man like him for being legally tax efficient after he has put a vast amount of his personally earned wealth into keeping a football club i love going for years at huge loss to himself?

    I agree with your sentiment Rodney, but in fact I don't think the BVI arrangement is RM's initiative, I think it was put in place by the new owners (But I am not 100% sure)

  • Sponsored links:


  • edited April 2013
    Thing is until we vote in a party who say we will abolish the legality of swiss bank accounts, offshore accounting, jersey and geurnsey trusts etc it is pissing in the wind.

    It winds me up something chronic seeing the amount of money that is allowed to be hidden perfectly legally but at the same time it is wholly legal so i dont get the outrage at things like this and the Jimmy Carr thing.

    Either let's elect a party who will abolish/ criminalise these efficiency practices or stop moaning about those who take advantage of such schemes. I would personally like to see the former and i dont think all of a sudden every multi millionaire would emigrate to luxembourg or lichenstein because of it.

    This is another example of the ridiculous tax system in the country with it's over complicated and opaque legislation.

    Everyone from those on minimum wage to the super rich (if they didnt put it offshore) feels cheated and short changed.

    Should have a simplified rate of tax. Why tax people at 40% over a certain threshold as it causes the super rich to pay to channel it elsewhere.
  • Fully agree with what you are saying here Rodney. The tax system needs a huge overhaul from ground up, but unfortunately there are a lot of very short sighted people in this country so noone would want to pay for the overhaul (would take a lot of expensive man hours) although it would potentially get more money in the long-term.

    Further to the short sighted-ness of the masses, I came across this anecdote about taxatition which highlights the importance of high earners / high tax payers in society, and is exactly why we cant afford to let the bankers leave!


    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…
    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
    The fifth would pay £1
    The sixth would pay £3
    The seventh would pay £7
    The eighth would pay £12
    The ninth would pay £18
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59

    So, that’s what they decided to do.

    The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

    “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20″. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

    The bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

    And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
    The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).
    The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).
    The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).
    The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).
    The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving).

    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

    “I only got a dollar out of the £20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got £10!”

    “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a pound too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

    “That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back, when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

    “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax exploits the poor!”

    The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

    The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier
  • Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…
    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
    The fifth would pay £1
    The sixth would pay £3
    The seventh would pay £7
    The eighth would pay £12
    The ninth would pay £18
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59

    So, that’s what they decided to do.

    The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the brewery threw them a curve ball.

    “Since you are all such good customers,” they said, “We're going to take the piss something rotten, it's now £5 for a pint of imported gnats water″. Most of the men could no longer afford to go to the pub and so sat at home drinking cheap vinegar from ASDAs - except the very poorest who were struggling to pay for their daily fix of tap water.

    Only the tenth man could afford to go to the pub every night, but it wasn't the same on his own, so he started going to the opera with his friends George and Dave. Within a couple of months the pub had shut and was bought out by a hamburger chain selling cheap saturated fat to the kids of the poorest workers.

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how rip-off Britain works. The people who own the system think they can take take take. But eventually, they hoard all the wealth so that the average person can no longer play the game and then the whole system grinds to a halt.
  • Stig. Award yourself post of the week immediately!
  • CL in shock horror revelation...

    The rich get richer and the poorer masses take it up the derrier !

    And all the bleating and tub thumping over the generations gone and those to come will never change it.
  • Stig said:

    Yeah, but it's alright because we're all in it together aren't we. Aren't we?

    Personally I'm sick of this same tired line being trotted out everytime the media spotlight falls on somebody with more money than they average man.

    Some people have more money than others. Sometimes it's 'fair', sometimes it isn't, but it's always been that way and always will. What good does jealousy do? (which is what it normally boils down to)...
  • edited April 2013
    Jodaius said:

    Stig said:

    Yeah, but it's alright because we're all in it together aren't we. Aren't we?

    Personally I'm sick of this same tired line being trotted out everytime the media spotlight falls on somebody with more money than they average man.

    Some people have more money than others. Sometimes it's 'fair', sometimes it isn't, but it's always been that way and always will. What good does jealousy do? (which is what it normally boils down to)...
    Interesting point of view. So you're not bothered by unfairness per se, but by people talking about unfairness. How unfair of me to mention it.
  • Stig, you are on fire today!
  • Stig said:

    Jodaius said:

    Stig said:

    Yeah, but it's alright because we're all in it together aren't we. Aren't we?

    Personally I'm sick of this same tired line being trotted out everytime the media spotlight falls on somebody with more money than they average man.

    Some people have more money than others. Sometimes it's 'fair', sometimes it isn't, but it's always been that way and always will. What good does jealousy do? (which is what it normally boils down to)...
    Interesting point of view. So you're not bothered by unfairness per se, but by people mentioning unfairness. How unfair of me to mention it.
    Quite the contrary. I just think that different people have different definitions of unfairness. And I wish that people would stop just crying 'unfair' at everyone who they perceive has it better than them.

    I also feel that there are certain things that can't/won't be changed, and if as much energy was expended in trying to fix the problems which can be addressed, as was spent sniping about those that can't, then the world would be a better place.

    It's easy to criticise, but what would you do to make things 'fair'?
  • I find the acceptance that things will always be that way, so just sit down and shut up about it extremely depressing.
  • Sponsored links:


  • So do you think that the media-sponsored pointing and screaming at 'the rich' which is currently going on is going to make things better then>
  • Jodaius said:

    So do you think that the media-sponsored pointing and screaming at 'the rich' which is currently going on is going to make things better then>

    I thought they were screaming at 'Tax Cheats'! In the same way they scream at 'Benefits Cheats' or MPs cheating on their expenses.



  • Jodaius said:

    So do you think that the media-sponsored pointing and screaming at 'the rich' which is currently going on is going to make things better then>

    If it helps make people realise that together we can create a fairer society, yes. As Red in SE8 says, there's plenty of screaming at supposed benefit scroungers too.
  • edited April 2013
    Chrispy51 said:

    Fully agree with what you are saying here Rodney. The tax system needs a huge overhaul from ground up, but unfortunately there are a lot of very short sighted people in this country so noone would want to pay for the overhaul (would take a lot of expensive man hours) although it would potentially get more money in the long-term.

    Further to the short sighted-ness of the masses, I came across this anecdote about taxatition which highlights the importance of high earners / high tax payers in society, and is exactly why we cant afford to let the bankers leave!


    Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this…
    The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing
    The fifth would pay £1
    The sixth would pay £3
    The seventh would pay £7
    The eighth would pay £12
    The ninth would pay £18
    The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59

    So, that’s what they decided to do.

    The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

    “Since you are all such good customers,” he said, “I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20″. Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

    The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men ? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

    The bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

    And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).
    The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).
    The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).
    The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).
    The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).
    The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% saving).

    Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

    “I only got a dollar out of the £20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,”but he got £10!”

    “Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a pound too. It’s unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!”

    “That’s true!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back, when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!”

    “Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison, “we didn’t get anything at all. This new tax exploits the poor!”

    The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

    The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

    And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier

    This analogy for a 'progressive tax system' (the tax system universally adopted by all modern democracies) must have been thought up by a US Tea Party activist who believes there is no role for taxes and government when there is a an all-seeing benevolent God looking down on us all.

  • Jodaius said:

    So do you think that the media-sponsored pointing and screaming at 'the rich' which is currently going on is going to make things better then>

    If it helps make people realise that together we can create a fairer society, yes. As Red in SE8 says, there's plenty of screaming at supposed benefit scroungers too.

    OK, so again, what would YOU do to 'create a fairer society'?
  • He doesn't even live here !!
  • He doesn't even live here !!

    snigger
  • Three ideas for a fairer society -

    1 - Don't pay UK pensions to anybody who lives abroad
    2 - Limit outward capital movements to anybody who moves abroad to the 40% tax threshold
    3 - Tax the capital gain on any property sales at 40% to anybody who moves abroad

    Ed you know it makes sense or is it just all Balls
  • Three ideas for a fairer society -

    1 - Don't pay UK pensions to anybody who lives abroad
    2 - Limit outward capital movements to anybody who moves abroad to the 40% tax threshold
    3 - Tax the capital gain on any property sales at 40% to anybody who moves abroad

    Ed you know it makes sense or is it just all Balls

    1 - What about somebody who has paid into it all their working life though? Or for 10 years, or 15 years or 20 years? Where does it stop? Not quite that black and white.

    In fact why should anybody be punished if they decide to move abroad for their retirement. No, it doesn't quite make sense.
  • There decision to leave the UK, there problem!
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!