The Panama Papers.

plant hysteria

Uh oh, here’s another one to look forward to reading over and over and over again.

the wealthy minority running the country world to the benefit of themselves.

Let’s imagine for a moment that all of the following problems can be linked to offshore tax havens, most of which come under the jurisdiction of the British Crown

Illicit Arms Trafficking
ISIS/Daesh
The Refugee Crisis
Human Trafficking and organized Child Abuse
Environmental Catastrophe
Climate Change and the melting of the Polar Ice Caps

Worth having a go at making a positive change?

I see kimbers, thanks for clearing that up. This weekends wisteria seems to have been about something else.

Dd, but like #[insertname]bollocks isn’t it?

The Daily Mail reckons Hamilton was domiciled in Monaco in 2015. I was just using him as a visible example of a non-dom, and I also pointed out that his high mobility made the status more easily justified than the non-doms who have the status but still live in London and are clearly just using the status to avoid British tax. Even if the UK doesn’t adopt the US approach, there needs to be a simple rule such as if you hold a British passport and spend more time in the UK than any other country then the UK is where you pay your tax – or you give up your passport and have to apply for a visa for each time you want to spend time in the UK on the conditions that apply to nationals from your adopted tax haven.

Could be on to something there Ed – but the great GB public are a forgiving bunch judging by the fact that Lewis has won SPOTY in 2014 and been second twice too.

One rule for some, another for the rest of us….

A non-progressive tax system where the very rich pay FA. 😉

😀

Boom, tish

😀

[footie is a case study in regression in action not to mention odd financial stuff – and yet we cant get enough! edit: accept I might be reading too much into the FA double-entendre. I hope not]

You are mixing up your terms again, Hamilton was resident in Monaco, it is highly unlikely he would be domiciled there. Domicile is not a transient thing, it is inherited from your parents, one of his was originally from Grenada and one from the UK. He may therefore be domiciled in Grenada because of his father’s roots there.

You can acquire a new domicile but there is a very onerous burden of proof which essentially involves breaking off all ties with the country that you are “leaving”. I would suggest he would have difficulty doing this if he was UK domiciled as holding a flag up over your head when you win a grand prix and being voted SPOTY does not suggest you have broken off your ties.

Other than the special status of non doms, the benefits of which have been and will be significantly reduced, the UK rules of residence etc have pretty much the same effect as the rest of the developed world.

Do Footballers and Racing Drivers make the rules regarding taxes, tax havens, the arms trade and setting up of shell companies by the intelligence services?

They are advising HRMC now haven’t you heard?

You can acquire a new domicile but there is a very onerous burden of proof which essentially involves breaking off all ties with the country that you are “leaving”.

You only have to look at the wiki list of notable British-born and passport holding non-doms to know that is simply not the case in reality. It just involves setting up the necessary structures and paying the relevant taxes (a tiny fraction of what would normally be due for the very rich).

Edit: my term “domiciled” was lifted direct from the Daily Mail article so it’s not me mixing up my terms this time.

I’m just waiting for Jivebunny to get hold of the Unaoil story.

#boom

Good call there Flash…

Unaoil, the company that bribed the world

A massive leak of confidential documents has for the first time exposed the true extent of corruption within the oil industry, implicating dozens of leading companies, bureaucrats and politicians in a sophisticated global web of bribery and graft.

After a six-month investigation across two continents, Fairfax Media and The Huffington Post can reveal that billions of dollars of government contracts were awarded as the direct result of bribes paid on behalf of firms including British icon Rolls-Royce, US giant Halliburton, Australia’s Leighton Holdings and Korean heavyweights Samsung and Hyundai.

The investigation centres on a Monaco company called Unaoil, run by the jet-setting Ahsani clan. Following a coded ad in a French newspaper, a series of clandestine meetings and midnight phone calls led to our reporters obtaining hundreds of thousands of the Ahsanis’ leaked emails and documents.

The trove reveals how they rub shoulders with royalty, party in style, mock anti-corruption agencies and operate a secret network of fixers and middlemen throughout the world’s oil producing nations.

Corruption in oil production – one of the world’s richest industries and one that touches us all through our reliance on petrol – fuels inequality, robs people of their basic needs and causes social unrest in some of the world’s poorest countries. It was among the factors that prompted the Arab Spring.

Fairfax Media and The Huffington Post today reveal how Unaoil carved up portions of the Middle East oil industry for the benefit of Western companies between 2002 and 2012.

A handful of senior insiders at firms such as Spanish company Tecnicas Reunidas, French firm Technip and drilling giant MI-SWACO, not only actively supported bribery but pocketed their own kickbacks; US defence giant Honeywell and Australia’s Leighton Offshore agreed to hide bribes inside fraudulent contracts in Iraq; a Rolls-Royce manager negotiated a monthly kickback for leaking information from inside the British firm.

Keeping things on topic…

Unaoil scandal and the Panama Papers

It was only a matter of time before the Panama Papers controversy and the Unaoil bribery scandal overlapped.

Leaked emails obtained by Fairfax Media show the owners of oil industry bribe master Unaoil, the Ahsani family, used the Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca – just like thousands of other super-rich around the world – to establish companies in tax haven locations.

As the fallout from 2016’s two biggest international finance stories continues to reverberate, Fairfax Media can also reveal that one of the biggest donors of Britain’s ruling Tory party, property tycoon Javad Marandi?, was involved in Unaoil’s Azerbaijan affairs and also a Mossack Fonseca client.

In 2008 and 2009, Unaoil’s finance unit exchanged a series of emails with Mossack Fonseca’s Panama office regarding the power of attorney arrangements between Unaoil founder Ata Ahsani and the company’s two top executives, his sons Cyrus and Saman Ahsani.

The emails related to Unaoil companies established in the Caribbean tax haven of the British Virgin Islands. It is not illegal to use tax havens to create companies or hold accounts.

But in the case of Unaoil, Fairfax Media earlier this month revealed how its British Virgin Islands and Marshall Islands tax haven companies were used to channel corrupt payments to politicians, officials and oil industry executives in several countries.

You only have to look at the wiki list of notable British-born and passport holding non-doms to know that is simply not the case in reality. It just involves setting up the necessary structures and paying the relevant taxes (a tiny fraction of what would normally be due for the very rich)

Well you are simply wrong, based on the list you linked, pretty much all of them are lucky enough to have some roots overseas. For many of them it is obvious, the Russians etc, but of the others: The Goldsmiths have French roots, the Harmsworths have US roots I think, Caring has Italian roots etc etc. Looking at that list the only one who may have acquired a domicile of choice is Stuart Gulliver.

Essentially until recently, the best tax planing you could do was to have a foreign forebears.

Is this still so far fetched?

Further sources have revealed that Gerald Carroll’s Farnborough Aerospace Aerospace Centre in Hampshire England was “targeted” by BAE Systems and HSBC International within the framework of a systematic break-up embezzlement operation which effectively was impulsed by the fraudulent incorporation of UK Companies House “parallel registered” Farnborough Aerospace Development Corporation Plc Strategic Research & Development Corporation Plc and Carroll Aircraft Corporation Plc group structures.

The Carroll Foundation Trust files are held within a complete lockdown at the FBI Washington DC field office and the Metropolitan Police Scotland Yard London under the supervision of the Commissioner Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe who has an intimate knowledge of this case which stretches the globe.

Scotland Yard “leaked” sources have disclosed that the Carroll Foundation Trust criminal “standard of proof” prosecution files contain forensic specimen exhibits of fraudulently incorporated HSBC International offshore accounts Barclays International offshore accounts and Coutts & Co Gerald Carroll accounts which embezzled a staggering two hundred million dollars of the Carroll Foundation Trust’s huge treasury investment holdings.

Now where have I heard of Coutts and Co before?

Wonder if there’s anything that links them to Mossack Fonseca…

According to this Guardian article I’m not simply wrong. Some create roots overseas.

Intrigued by how many of the very rich were preparing the the future non-dom status of their children by having their babies born in exotic locations I came across this article on the Chinesse giving birth in the US.[/url]

As for the British rich and famous I didn’t bother to go beyond the Beckhams – Spain and the US for their kids.

Did you read it? It is completely consistent with what I have been saying, if you have foreign forebears you are very lucky namely:

If government advice is to be believed, what must have counted most in Caring’s successful claim to non-dom status was evidence that when he was born – in Finchley – his father still thought of home as America.

You can’t create facts but you can make use of helpful ones.

Good article here on the in-and-outs of acquiring a new domicile when you don’t have helpful forebears.

Link

EDIT:

Spain and the US for their kids.

Nope, where you are born is not that important in determining your domicile, parents are Brits, kids are Brits.

I reckon junior would find it fairly easy to get non-dom status. Born in France, never lived in the UK, French citizenship which didn’t even need confirming thanks to continuous residence to age 18. Oh, and his mum is half Polish.

Take Michael Ashcroft (again). British parents who worked in Belize for a while when he was a kid. Enough for him to get a Belize passport and non-dom status and still take up his peerage.

From wiki:

In 2009, the Prime Minister of Belize Dean Barrow told its parliament:[18]

Ashcroft is an extremely powerful man. His net worth may well be equal to Belize’s entire GDP. He is nobody to cross.

I get the impression, based on your posts on here, your move to France is permanent so yes I would have thought your son would have little difficulty – no doubt your posts are part of a sophisticated tax planning exercise to establish a fact pattern to secure such a result.

I have to say I have also been perplexed by Ashcroft’s non-dom status. It may have been possible because Belize became independent in his lifetime. It may be that it has never needed to be tested. We have only his statements on the subject and we may have assumed incorrectly he is reliant on it to shelter his income. There is no question in my mind he is more than capable of pushing any legal interpretation to its limit.

no doubt your posts are part of a sophisticated tax planning exercise to establish a fact pattern to secure such a result

if only… . 🙁

I’m currently happily accurately filling in my tax declaration and will pay the bill they send me with a smile on my face. It’ll probably be about the same as the grants we’ll get for junior’s education next year.

As regards the whole ‘it’s legal, so it’s OK’ thing…

https://theconversation.com/politicians-should-not-be-able-to-sidestep-money-laundering-scrutiny-58372

Banks typically monitor politicians for potential money laundering activity as part of their general monitoring requirements for tackling politically exposed persons (PEPs) – who are entrusted with prominent public functions. Yet, in discussing amendments to the bill, Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne expressed his concern:

Banks are at risk of going too far and being disproportionate when applying their rules to politically exposed persons in Britain, and their families in particular.

wonder why he thinks that you shouldnt look too closely at politician’s families and tax avoidance? hmmmmm

Quite a few results for Osborne* in the Searchable Database released today:

https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/

*Haven’t had time or energy to check any of them for links to Our Fearless Number Cruncher/Self Interested Financial Terrorist