If you don't want to pay your wife when divorce comes along then Jersey awaits your call.
This is from the Daily Mail:
Rich businessmen and women could use Jersey and other tax havens to try to protect themselves from multi-million pound divorce payouts after a landmark court ruling in the Channel Islands.
Mark Harper, partner at City law firm Withers, said the ruling could make wealthy people place money in tax havens to try to ring-fence it from payouts. He told the Financial Times: 'The Jersey court is saying stop meddling in its affairs.'
I stress: this is deliberate. Jersey has engineered this. What they are saying is that if assets are placed in a Jersey trust (even though we all know these to be sham arrangements) they are now protected from former spouses by the honourable actions of the trustees who refuse their claims, even if backed by the UK courts. Those trustees are of course the local professional elite of bankers, lawyers and accountants.
What does this mean? Simply that Jersey is going out of its why to evidence the fact that it is a secrecy jurisdiction - a place that creates regulation that they know is primarily of benefit and use to those not resident in their geographical domain which they support with a legally backed veil of secrecy that ensures that those from outside the jurisdiction making use of its regulation cannot be identified to be doing so.
Do we really want to tolerate places like this?
Does anyone think the actions of the professional people who engage in this activity?
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“Do we really want to tolerate places like this?” I am intrigued. Are you proposing to nuke it off the map?
Alastair
I guess that was meant to be ironic: I hope so.
Of course they won’t be nuked. But rather like Yorkshire lost its coal mines in the 1980s I’d exepct Jersey to lose its financial services industry.
And of course they’d need assistance to handle the transition.
Richard
Tolerate places like this? Like what?
Like the UK?
Take a good look at the history of the UK, before posting hypercritical garbage regarding other places.
I see you’ve quoted the Daily Mail! I wonder how many off-shore bank accounts that bunch of half-wits have, eh?
Danrok
If you bothered to read this site you’ll see I agree with you: the UK is massively abusive
You will have some considerable difficulty accusing me of hypocrisy
Richard
By all means have go at the Jersey government, States of Jersey, filthy rich, etc.
Broad sweeping remarks tend to tar everyone, including those who have no involvement in off-shore banking.
There’s nothing wrong with the “place”, the problem lies with the government and financial organisations, and specific individuals – many of whom are not even local.
Danrok
100% agreed
And I hope I make the distinction
But it doesn’t help that the people of Jersey keep voting these people back into office
Maybe Geoff Southern will get it this time
Richard
Thanks for warning us against Geoff Southern. He did not get in anyhow. I think you only have to look at the forced heirship rules of other countries to see why people choose other places.