{"id":17932,"date":"2012-10-28T09:47:30","date_gmt":"2012-10-28T09:47:30","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=17932"},"modified":"2012-10-28T09:51:27","modified_gmt":"2012-10-28T09:51:27","slug":"jersey-is-doing-all-it-can-to-oppose-full-information-exchange-with-the-uk-and-that-can-only-be-to-help-tax-evaders","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2012\/10\/28\/jersey-is-doing-all-it-can-to-oppose-full-information-exchange-with-the-uk-and-that-can-only-be-to-help-tax-evaders\/","title":{"rendered":"Jersey is doing all it can to oppose full information exchange with the UK, and that can only be to help tax evaders"},"content":{"rendered":"

Three weeks ago I asked some questions of Jersey <\/a>on this blog. Since this blog is well read in Jersey - most especially by those in power in Jersey - the result was that the questions were sent to them, by Deputy Geoff Southern, who it is fair to say is a friend of justice in Jersey. As a result we now\u00a0have some answers<\/a>:<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Well, let's ignore the silliness at the start, since it's very obvious that a great deal of the\u00a0political\u00a0narrative in Jersey is a response to questions asked on this blog and on that of the\u00a0Tax Justice Network, and let's look at the real subtext to the answers.<\/p>\n

The first question has not been answered. An excuse for inaction has been\u00a0offered. No indication has been given as to whether the OECD has in fact made direct enquiry of Jersey as to whether it would sign (which I think it has done, and which was the reason for the question) and no indication is given as to whether it would actually sign if it could. As ever, prevarication rules the day. That's because the answer is clear: Jersey is not cooperating.<\/p>\n

The second question has not been answered. The question was whether the UK had asked\u00a0Jersey\u00a0to move to full\u00a0automatic information exchange under the\u00a0European Union Savings Tax Directive and there is no hint in the answer provided that it\u00a0refers\u00a0to the UK. So let me give the real answer: the UK has asked and Jersey has said no. That's the unambiguous case.<\/p>\n

The third answer is another exercise in\u00a0prevarication. I'll tell you the real answer: the UK has made clear to Jersey that if it can be FATCA compliant with the US it can provide the same information to the UK. And Jersey is saying at best it may attend a meeting about it. Take that as a no then.<\/p>\n

So much for Jersey's claim to be fully cooperative in information\u00a0exchange: the truth is is it doing everything possible to be as opaque as it can be and\u00a0there\u00a0is only one possible explanation for that,\u00a0which\u00a0is that it knows it is harbouring tax evaders and\u00a0wants\u00a0to\u00a0continue\u00a0to do so. After all,\u00a0automatic information exchange is solely intended to stop tax evasion and Jersey is opposing it. No other explanation for its behaviour bar its desire to ensure that tax evasion remains possible within its domain is \u00a0possible or credible.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Three weeks ago I asked some questions of Jersey on this blog. Since this blog is well read in Jersey – most especially by those
 Read the full article…<\/em><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[130,7],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17932","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-information-exchange","category-jersey"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17932","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17932"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17932\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17932"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17932"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17932"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}