That was one country. Let’s say 25,000 used Jersey. Let’s say the UK supplies 10% of Jerssy’s business. So that’s 250,000 tax evaders in the place. And not one report of money laundering in 2006 to the Jersey police.

What are you? Gullible, stupid or just turning a blind eye?

Richard claims that “I lost the argument”. But there was never any “argument” because we do everything you claim we don’t do. So the accusations are fascicle.

End of.

I’d be curious to know which of the “allegations” made are “fascicle”. Do you deny that there’s money in the Channel Islands that is the product of tax e evasion? Or just that there’s anyone there who knows about it?

He’s lost this debate elsewhere and is trying again here.

His argument is ludicrous. It’s akin to ‘you can’t understand that criminality is wrong unless you’ve been a criminal’. But actually, we do, because we can see the consequences.

And so far JTM has not answered one question put to him or provided any evidence at all to refute the claims made here or by others.

In which case it is reaonable to assume that he is at that stage of the debate where he thinks abusing the messenger works. He’s wrong. The debate has progressed well beyond that stage.

Which is why he has been ridiculed elsewhere too.

No critics on this forum show that they have that practical experience and can only prance around with guess work.

But this has been mentioned time and time again.

Thanks - I do try to provide evidence and am grateful that someone has noticed. It is baffling that the industry seems quite unable to read or comprehend it.

And I agree with you that somewhere, some people in that industry are facilitating - and whether it’s through incompetance, negligence or deliberate intent is largely irrelevant, tax evasion.

Richard

1) All Jersey banks can report all people who are refusing information exchnage under the EU STD - there are reasonable grounds for presuming them all to be tax evading
2) The Jersey police can be given the resources they need
3) All FS firms who have never filed a suspiscious transaction report can be asked why not - and this is the majority. I have to say that in Jersey I would find it hard to believe that any cannot have come across someone tax evading
4) Those who handled the Abache money could be prosecuted
5) Jersey could opt for automatic information exchange under the EU STD

I could keep going

But my point is simple. I’m not saying the staff in Jersey Finance are corrupt. Jersey Finance is, in any event, simply a marketing exercise so I presume you are referring to the JFSC anyway. But I am saying there is a lack of will amongst those staff and the political leadership in Jersey to tackle this issue which means people are not reporting as they should.

All this could be changed.

To argue no more could be done is ludicrous. To have been unable to see this is an indication of lack of will - and an openness to see the world as it really is. That’s Jersey’s problem.

Richard

Nobody’s saying (or at least I don’t think they are) that everybody in the Jersey finance industry is corrupt, or criminal. But somewhere, some people in that industry are facilitating - and whether it’s through incompetance, negligence or deliberate intent is largely irrelevant, tax evasion. If they weren’t, the recent Off-Shore Disclosure facility wouldn;n’t have resulted in so many returns.

Do you actually have any evidence of this?