{"id":55217,"date":"2021-01-28T13:34:41","date_gmt":"2021-01-28T13:34:41","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/?p=55217"},"modified":"2021-01-28T15:05:24","modified_gmt":"2021-01-28T15:05:24","slug":"jersey-says-it-isnt-a-tax-haven-but-there-again-every-tax-haven-says-that","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/2021\/01\/28\/jersey-says-it-isnt-a-tax-haven-but-there-again-every-tax-haven-says-that\/","title":{"rendered":"Jersey says it isn’t a tax haven, but there again, every tax haven says that"},"content":{"rendered":"

I noted a few days ago<\/a> that the European Parliament has voted to include Jersey on the EU's tax haven blacklist. That does not add them; the Commission has to agree, but it has raised a storm in Jersey.<\/p>\n

The Jersey Evening Post<\/a> has noted today that:<\/p>\n

JERSEY is not a \u2018tax haven\u2019 and there are \u2018no grounds\u2019 to include the Island on a tax blacklist, the head of Jersey Finance has said.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Well, of course he has. That's his job. But as they also note:<\/p>\n

\n
\n

But tax campaigner Richard Murphy of Tax Research UK, a long-time critic of the Island\u2019s tax regime, said that he felt that Brexit had increased Jersey\u2019s chances of being blacklisted.<\/p>\n<\/blockquote>\n<\/div>\n

\n
\n

\u2018The UK\u2019s presence at the table meant that blacklisting, the EU code of conduct and other things which could have been used as weapons against Jersey were mitigated,\u2019 he said.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u2018Now, with the EU quite worried that the UK is threatening to effectively become a tax haven itself, then I suspect there is little goodwill for Jersey, the Crown Dependencies and Overseas Territories.\u2019<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

Mr Murphy said that the EU would also be more likely to blacklist British territories, as they were no longer within the bloc.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n
\n

\u2018The EU Parliament doesn\u2019t always get its way. It tends to be more belligerent and gung-ho than the commission is and it signals its wishes is by passing motions,\u2019 he said.<\/p>\n

\n

\u2018However, the parliament is a barometer of EU mood music. And at the moment tax revenues are in short supply and there\u2019s a lack or sympathy for companies that see the opportunity to take advantage of low-tax jurisdictions.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

\u2018They may have difficulty agreeing on whether Malta is a tax haven because Malta is a member state. But Jersey and the UK being outside means that it is much likelier Jersey will be listed.\u2019<\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

He added that he believed that the development could mean the Island\u2019s \u2018zero-ten\u2019 corporate tax regime ends up \u2018back on the table\u2019 in negotiations with the EU in relation to the level playing field issue, which involves ensuring business have common rules and do not have unfair advantages.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/blockquote>\n

\n

I haven't got much to add to that. Except for those not familiar with my one-time engagement with Jersey and the fact that it was in no small part down to my persistent campaigning that Jersey was forced to change its laws to comply with EU requirements, there are 720 posts to read here.\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

I noted a few days ago that the European Parliament has voted to include Jersey on the EU’s tax haven blacklist. That does not add
 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":[44,7,80,32,97],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-55217","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-europe","category-jersey","category-secrecy-jurisdictions","category-tax-havens","category-tax-justice"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55217","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=55217"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/55217\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=55217"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=55217"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.taxresearch.org.uk\/Blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=55217"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}