The Isle of Man has now agreed to implement a FATCA style agreement with the UK. Jersey and Guernsey have not. What might explain the difference in approach.
My sources suggest there may be one. Could it be that the Isle of Man is in negotiation with H M Revenue & Customs to offer a Liechtenstein Disclosure Facility arrangement in the New Year?
I have little regard for the LDF: it lets tax criminals off their crimes for a ten percent penalty, and that is ludicrous when higher penalties are often charged on small businesses in the UK who have made innocent errors. There is also immunity of prosecution for those tax crimes. But there's no doubting that the deal has been very good for Liechtenstein banks and tax advisers; that is those very people who have spent so much time helping people evade tax in the UK, because it has driven people their way, lured by the offer of low penalties if their disclosure has come through Liechtenstein.
Might it be that the Isle of Man's early consent has come at the price of a similar arrangement to boost its financial services providers? Let's wait and see, but let me assure you know: I'll like it no more than the grubby Liechtenstein deal if it's true. And it will undoubtedly confirm the Isle of Man will remain a tax haven. And that will be a definite shot in the foot by it if true.
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:
RIchard
As I said on another thread, the Swiss/UK treaty, and by association the Liechtenstein/UK agreement, are going to be huge barriers to the UK doing something more substantial with the CDs and BOTs. And if the deal with the CDs and BOTs was any less favourable than that with Switzerland or Liechtenstein, then Switzerland and Liechtenstein would be the big beneficiaries. What’s the point of that?
An “LDF” in the Isle of Man and Guernsey re. UK clients would barely generate enough money to cover the legal drafting costs. I think it would raise a fortune from Jersey though.
Oh dear, you neither understand the Swiss deal, or come to that the way the LDF works
Go and do some reading
Richard
Au contraire. I have had lots of actual dealings with the LDF. I act for clients AFTER they have legitimised their tax affairs under the LDF. What first-hand experience do you have then?
I admit that I have not used the new Swiss/UK treaty. What I do know though is that is enables the users to retain their anonymity, which puts off many because the LDF formally legitimises the user’s tax affairs. The LDF is invariably the better option.
Then you know the advantages to a location of having the LDF
Funds move to that place
You ignore that fact in what you wrote
Knowingly, it seems
Patrick,
Are you even remotely aware of the Swiss / UK agreement’s loopholes??? What a useless piece of work. Why would you advise anyone to use LDF when they can easily avoid the Swiss Rubik???’
I really hope that the isle of Man doesn’t get something similar to the LDF (I’m actually not sure why the UK would ever agree to something like that as well)… The LDF is a deal that needs to be scrapped. Here’s to hoping the UK stands firm and imposes straight out automatic information exchange.
Now that the Swiss have agreed to FATCA with the US any word if the UK will try to get the same?