Rumour reaches me that we should shortly see announcement of a massive increase in GDP in the Isle of Man.
Why could that be? Well, the VAT sharing agreement with the UK happens to be based on ratios related to relative GDP. So if the Isle of Man manages to report a significant GDP increase whilst the UK’s in the doldrums of near recession guess who wins significantly? Yes, our friends in the Irish Sea.
But surely they wouldn't do such a thing, would they?
Maybe it would be a job for the Audit Commission, if only we’d still got one.
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:
Buy me a coffee!
Rumour also reaches the PSA that Mr. Max Clifford is visiting the Isle of Man. So if the Isle of Man reports a significant GDP increase whilst the UK’s in the doldrums of near recession who wins?
Take no notice of the Isle of Man government’s decorative websites boasting effective regulatory control of the island’s financial services industry. These are a fantasy image of integrity, a thin veneer attempting to conceal a corrupt regime.
Whatever the dozens of people employed in the island’s Financial Services Commission do when they turn up at the office is a mystery; excepting that it is certainly nothing to do with protecting pensioners who were conned into transferring their life savings to the island.
The Isle of Man is about Candy Floss hiding particularly unpleasant activities.
you might want to take some advice on defamation.
@Gutbucket
Mr or Ms Premier Shareholders’ Group has no need to consult a defamation lawyer, as it is not possible to libel a country or its government. Notwithstanding, I don’t feel his or her comments are germane here; in fact, they have nothing whatever to do with the subject under discussion. I’m also somewhat baffled as to his or her reference to “rumour… reach[ing]” him or her about Max Clifford visiting the island. This event has been heavily promoted over here, so this is hardly insider news.
Obviously, it is Mr Murphy’s prerogative to moderate the comments as he sees fit, and he has clearly chosen to take the stance that “the enemy of my enemy is my friend”, but I really don’t see that this tangential outburst added very much to the debate. (It somewhat reminds me of the contributions of the now strangely silent Jim For Justice, whom I nicknamed “Tim With Tourettes” in my own mind for his ability to add cut-and-pasted splenetic rants to any posting here mentioning the Isle of Man.) In any case, I am naturally sorry for any distress and financial loss suffered by Premier Shareholders’ Group members and KSF depositors, although I am not convinced in either case that the island’s regulators were principally to blame.
@Richard Murphy
Moving on to the matter at hand, I think we are getting into the realms of conspiracy theory here. Would the Isle of Man Government really have the chutzpah to submit made-up figures to its vastly larger neighbour? Would the cash-strapped UK Government accept them at face value if it did? I really doubt this, and I suspect any significant increase in the island’s GDP probably stems from its rapidly swelling population. (At least, that is my perception from looking around at how busy our roads seem to have become.)
@Gutbucket
You can’t defame a government
The Isle of Man is doing very well thank you. We have legions of very well paid Public Sector workers and a thriving private sector (Financial Services). We have over 150 qualified Manx Advocates and they charge £100s per hour. So things are ok here thank you very much. Plus also, you may have heard that the Isle of Man has been named the fifth most likely nation to put the next person on the moon.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/isleofman/hi/people_and_places/newsid_8974000/8974794.stm
And with the likes of Iran wanting to register its ships with us we are able to look for gaps in the market as we make our own laws
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10604897
Some individual is responsible for those figures. You are accusing that individual of fraud.
To be fair, the figures must have been doubtful somewhere along the line to result in a £100-£140million cut in the annual VAT handout from the UK. However it was and at whichever end was responsible for such a massive overpayment (if indeed that is what it is) all these years should be given the Tynwald Honour. There didn’t seem to be much of a fuss kicked up when the cut was announced.
As a result of all this the Isle of Man has had to cut some children’s swimming lessons. There will probably be some more cuts on the way too I daresay.
Maybe it was all just a big mistake, which let’s face it, can happen especially now we use computers.
@ Iliam Dhone September 8th, 2010 at 21:10
Unfortunately “Jim for Justice” passed away earlier this year after a bravely fought battle with painful illness.
He was a dynamic, erudite and responsible campaigner in support of those who had “difficulties” with depositing or investing money on the Isle of Man.
Adopting a “nickname” based on an unkind opinion that his comments were marked by bad temper, animosity and spite demeans a generous man who would go out of his way to assist those oppressed by a dictatorial government.
He is remembered with great affection by many and the world is a poorer place since his passing.
May some of his spirit live on through the PSG.
@Premier Shareholders’ Group
Well, I am very sorry to hear of Jim’s untimely demise. I did wonder why he had suddenly stopped posting here, and why his own website had suddenly fallen silent, but I had no idea that this might be the explanation. My sympathies to his family.
@Iliam Dhone
I’ll join with that sentiment
The PSG disagrees with your view that: “…..although I am not convinced in either case that the island’s regulators were principally to blame”.
The Isle of Man Financial Services Commission (the island’s regulator) is to blame in this matter by launching EIFs which are not subject to any form of regulation on the Isle of Man (or anywhere else in the world) and allowing EIFs to be managed without any form of approval on the Isle of Man (or anywhere else in the world).
When pensioners are enticed into an EIFs by means of misrepresentation, misleading claims and failing to properly disclose critical information then the Isle of Man government should respond by ensuring they received a return of their money.
Regretfully the government appears focused on protecting the financial services industry at the expense of victims of this industry; and until such time it initiates concern for injured pensioners it remains in abuse of human rights.
It is in the public interest to give this matter attention and talk of “enemy of my enemy” is not constructive in a circumstances in need of sympathetically considered decency, justice and above all honesty.
The Isle of Man Office of Fair Trading has also failed to uphold consumer rights.
To use the word “tangential” seems tangential in its self.
You would think that the Isle of Man should have learned from the Savings and Investment Bank (SIB) fiasco. What the Isle of Man authorities did in fact learn from that was that if you procrastinate and hang about long enough and file things in the ‘hope it goes away’ tray, then….. “Hey Presto!” it actually does go away. Save for a few people shouting who will die sometime anyway, it really, really does go away
@Albie – September 9th, 2010 at 14:07
Good comment …
The Isle of Man government are well aware that the average age of the hundreds of pensioner victims of the EIF trick is over 70.
Some have already died, some in the stress related circumstance of losing their life savings.
Others have suffered strokes and heart attacks.
Another distressing aspect is speaking with frail, vulnerable people, often now living alone, about having their savings snatched. Most capitulate because EIFs are complicated products and these folks just do not have the experience or aptitude to understand them.
It’s only a few lousy bucks to the Isle of Man government, but they will let people suffer rather seek remedy. One wonders how they would respond if it were their parents or grandparents who had been stuffed?
It’s a repellent and harrowing business.
Will it go away?
Not while a few pensioners are still breathing.
Should the target for the misselling of the Experienced Investor Funds be the actual IFA’s as opposed to the Isle of Man authorities? Is there any link to the Isle of Man authorities and the IFA’s?
@Greg September 9th, 2010 at 15:45
The EIF product provider (pp) published brochures for use by unqualified and unregulated “introducers” (described by the pp as “professional” investment advisors) who were contracted with the pp to receive commission fees.
These brochures compared investing in the EIF with depositing money in a building society, promised “capital security “ (the fund lost up to 40% of its value) described the fund as “low risk” (the FSA has described similar Funds as “high risk) and disguised an exit penalty unlimited in both size and duration.
It was the content of these brochures that “persuaded” pensioners to transfer their savings directly to the EIF. The “introducers” (who were not qualified IFAs) were paid to circulate the claims contained in the brochures.
The pp contracted with the “introducers”
The pensioners contracted with the pp.
There was no contract between the pensioners and the “introducers”
There is no known link between the “introducers” and the Isle of Man government.
Most (if not all) “introducers” have now disappeared (maybe to run bingo halls) — but not before collecting reward (dispensed by the pp) via two secretive Caribbean shell companies.
There is a well established link between the Isle of Man government and the pp. The government is responsible for regulating the pp’s activities!
It failed. Dismally.
Further information will now have to wait until next week.
It sounds like there is overwhelming evidence to suggest mis-selling. If the product provider lied on the brochures then it will be easy for you to take action against the product product provider and for the IOM financial services regulator to take action against the product provider.
Increased IOM government spending (even if wasteful) probably contribute towards bigger GDP figures. More rich individuals and corporations relocating to the Isle of Man (even if contributing little more in direct taxation) probably make their contribution again, by increasing the GDP figure. As you have pointed out Richard, the higher the relative GDP figure, the more the IOM Government gets via the VAT agreement. I think you’ve figured out the Isle of Man’s strategy!
Spoon of Internet
You surely must be mistaken….
To imply the IOM government has a strategy is to assume they have some kind of intelligence and ability to forward plan. That surely can’t be the case given their track record!
I actually believe they stumble from one crisis to another and any benefit they bring to the Island is purely by accident.
I think Richard is also guilty of giving them too much credit from time to time.
Richard can actually stop campaigning to stop harmful practices in the IOM now….the government and regulator here is doing an excellent job of ruining the industry on its own.
That the Isle of Man government financial services regulator refuses “to take action against the product provider” is the sole reason for the PSG’s existence.
This despite the government being in possession of “overwhelming evidence” in the form of a fifty page dossier including the original brochures used by the directors to mislead pensioners into believing that capital transferred to the fund would be secure, guaranteed and similar to depositing money in a building society. Also copies of the House of Keys Hansard demonstrating that the “government” is prepared to mislead even its own parliament.
Please forward details of more “easy” solutions.