There was an article in the New York Times this weekend that showed that paradigms can shift.
As I've just noted - the OECD's attack on tax havens is not, unfortunately, working. That's because it is working in an old paradigm. It's the paradigm of tax havens. But the OECD needs to move on. Only then can it beat this curse.
That shift is possible. I'll give an example. In 2008 I, and colleagues in the Tax Justice Network, were starting work on the first Financial Secrecy Index. I was at the same time working with Ronen Palan and Christian Chavagneux on our book 'Tax Havens: How Globalization Really Works'. We struggled with the tax haven problem - and just what it was. In the end I gave up with defining a tax haven and the book (without using the term secrecy jurisdiction) and the TJN (by explicitly using the term) moved towards redefining the language of offshore. My exploration of that issue, written in 2009, is here. I'd venture to suggest you really won't understand what the offshore issue is really all about unless you read it.
The important point was that we pretty much gave up on the term 'tax haven' that no one could adequately define and replaced it in most of our work with the term secrecy jurisdiction. I offered then what I'm told by others is now pretty much the standard definition of the term which is:
Secrecy jurisdictions are places that intentionally create regulation for the primary benefit and use of those not resident in their geographical domain. That regulation is designed to undermine the legislation or regulation of another jurisdiction. To facilitate its use secrecy jurisdictions also create a deliberate, 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.
Notice how often tax is mentioned? Not once.
Low tax is offered by these places but is just another regulation that can only be used if secrecy permits it. The point is a critical one: secrecy is key.
Now in 2008 we began to say that, but had no idea if the world would respond as we wanted it to, but that response was critical if we were to explain it was not low tax per se that we objected to in the places often called tax avens; it was the fact that the secrecy they created permitted criminal use of those low tax rates that we objected to in the main (but not solely: corporates abuse these places legitimately, albeit secretly).
In 2012 I can confidently say the world has responded. That NYT article was by a friend of tax justice, Robert Morgenthau, but that's not the sole point. He said:
[S]ecrecy makes offshore tax fraud almost impossible for law enforcement to detect. When I was the Manhattan district attorney, we learned of offshore accounts only through whistle-blowers, cooperators and serendipity.
That's the point we've made key. And as he added:
Offshore secrecy jurisdictions provide the perfect cover to funnel money and arms to rogue states and non-state actors.
There's that phrase, now in common use. Pascal St Amans of the OECD used it last week.
We've changed the language for a reason. It's not tax information exchange that we need to crack offshore abuse. It's shattering secrecy that is key to that. And only automatic information exchange will do that job. The OECD haven't shifted paradigms yet although even some in Switzerland have.
The OECD will catch up with us. Then we'll see the consequence of the paradigm shift. And given what UBS now know that may take less time than many think.
Have no doubt: paradigms can be shifted.
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,
just one of many e.gs. People on the right often decry foreign aid because so much of it is stolen by 3rd world kleptocrats. They tend to stay silent on their friends who aid & abet said kleptocrats.
“James Ibori bought three homes in London – a £2.2m mansion in Hampstead with cash, a house in Regents Park and a flat in St Johns Wood; a £311,000 home in Dorset and a £3.2 million mansion in Johannesburg, as well as a house in Houston, Texas. He also bought and renovated properties in Nigeria which were “lavish in the extreme”, the court heard.
His three daughters were sent to the £23,265-a-year Port Regis boarding school in Dorset, his monthly credit bills alone topped £125,000, and at the time of his arrest he was trying to buy a £15m private jet.
A fleet of armoured Range Rovers cost another £600,000, with a £120,000 Bentley, a Jaguar and a £335,000 Maybach limousine bought for his various homes as his “greed and acquisitiveness” grew.
When he was held in Nigeria in 2007 the High Court froze assets worth £35 million despite him only earning around £4,000 a year from his governorship.
The court was told that Ibori amassed the fortune by inflating state contracts and awarding them to relatives, taking kickbacks and stealing money directly from state accounts.
He used a series of offshore companies to hide the money in Guernsey and elsewhere, helped by his wife, his sister, his mistress Udoamaka Oniugbo and three others, who have been jailed for a total of 30 years.”
Guernsey, eh ? A decent little island that’s just standing up for high taxpayer’s rights to retain some funds & some hard-won privacy. Ha ha ha.
The court heard that former Governor Victor Attah of Akwa Ibom State finally introduced Ibori to Badrash Gohil, a lawyer who “specialised in money laundering,” according to Wass. She added that Gohil helped the former governor of Delta State to set up Swiss bank accounts and trusts in the tax havens of the Seychelles as well as the Channel islands in order to hide his thieving.
It gets better…..
“The UK prosecutor revealed details of huge deposits that the former governor held in a variety of bank accounts that were never disclosed on official asset declarations in Nigeria as required by the Nigerian constitution. Among the deposits were ‚¬20 million in a trust fund called Zircon in the Channel island of Guernsey, and £1 million in another trust called Onyx. In addition, Ibori had six accounts with Barclays Bank in London with more than £1million in total. He also had an account in Colorado in the U.S. as well as the use of (Mr X the lawyer)’ s client account.
But these places and companies are, of course, totally clean
Trust us, they say
[…] corrosiveness of offshore tax havens stems from ‘a deliberate, legally backed veil of secrecy’Â (10). But at the very point that, the ‘imperative of shattering secrecy’ by transparency and country […]