This is in response to a need for information without delay where terrorist activities are involved and is of particular significance in the light of recent events in Paris and Brussels.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n
So let's be clear about\u00a0what this really means. \u00a0What David Cameron implied was that there was now going to be full and open access by UK regulatory authorities to information on \u00a0company ownership held in the British Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories. It has, however, been implied to me that this is nothing like what is going to happen \u00a0and Ian Gorst's \u00a0comments seem to confirm that. \u00a0As I understand it the UK will still have to make a request for data, with reasons given. \u00a0There will be no opportunity to trawl through the information, as a public register would make possible. All that will happen is that Jersey and others will guarantee to review and supply data somewhat more quickly than it has done in the past.<\/p>\n
Three things\u00a0follow. \u00a0The first is that, very obviously, it is now apparent that these places have not been transparent to date, despite their claims. If change is necessary, that must be the case. I have been right to say so in that case.<\/p>\n
Second, we are still being \u00a0asked to take it on trust that the Crown Dependencies and the Overseas Territories have the information to supply. Candidly, in very many cases I simply do not believe that that is true. If anyone really thinks that the British Virgin Islands have information on the beneficial ownership of all the companies that operate from that territory then they are living in Cloud Cuckoo Land.<\/p>\n
Third, as must be very obvious to anyone, David Cameron has, yet again, failed to get what he wants from the tinpot parish councillors who pose as ministers in places like Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man. \u00a0Very obviously they, in accordance with the wishes of their finance industry paymasters, are refusing to provide the information that is needed to ensure that we have fair and open competition \u00a0coupled with an absence \u00a0of tax avoidance, evasion and corruption.<\/p>\n
This makes clear where the priority of these places still lies: they are still wedded to opacity, to abuse, to corruption, to the undermining of fair competition, and the destruction of democracy. \u00a0No other interpretation is possible.<\/p>\n
And, in the face of this resistance, David Cameron has clearly made a choice: he has decided not to use the power of the UK to legislate to \u00a0force transparency on these places but will, instead, acquiesce with their actions. \u00a0And all the time \u00a0the so-called ministers from these places complain that they are assisting the fight against terror, when in fact their activities are determinedly aimed at undermining all the values that have underpinned what we think to be our way of life.<\/p>\n
To describe \u00a0this is an ongoing crisis is to underestimate the scale of the issue that we face.<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Two things happened as a result of yesterday’s announcement with regard to the relationship between the UK and its tax havens by David Cameron in
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":[89,22,14,4,6,7,80,55,32],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-33127","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-bvi","category-cayman","category-corruption","category-guernsey","category-isle-of-man","category-jersey","category-secrecy-jurisdictions","category-tax-evasion","category-tax-havens"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33127","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=33127"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/33127\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=33127"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=33127"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=33127"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}