12/10/08

The offshore world created the conditions that led to this crisis?


"The threat lying offshore" is an article published by Richard Murphy and John Christensen, The Guardian, Friday 10 October 2008 Article history at http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2008/oct/10/tax-banking:


"Tax havens will sabotage attempts to re-regulate global finance. Democracy demands we tackle them.

The global economic crisis means financial re-regulation is, finally, on the agenda. Most agree it is needed on a global level. Some say this is impossible in a world of self-interested sovereign states, but we disagree: it is possible if we look at the context in which regulation is embedded. There we find the essence of the problem: tax havens. The offshore world created the conditions that led to this crisis, and unless the offshore world is tackled, it will undermine all efforts to deal with it.

What do tax havens do? In truth, the term is a misnomer, and we prefer the term "secrecy jurisdictions". This is because they offer not one thing but three: low or zero taxes, secrecy, and lax regulation. In doing so they "compete" against reputable countries, trying to outdo them on ever lower corporate taxes and laxer regulation. As we said in our June submission to the Treasury committee on offshore financial centres, tax havens set out deliberately to "undermine the impact of legislation passed in other jurisdictions". This is their core business, and this is the threat they pose to the world.

The impact of this is now visible in the economic crisis. The banking system has ceased to function because banks do not trust their peers' finances, structures and accounting disclosure. Opacity has been at the heart of the matter, and it is secrecy jurisdictions that create this opacity. First, they offer secrecy. All major banks have taken advantage of this, assisted by the "big four" firms of accountants who operate in all the world's significant tax havens.

Second, they create uncertainty about who owns what. Offshore entities were used to isolate ownership of financial vehicles from onshore parents to secure higher credit ratings. The arrangements are often abusive, involving trusts and supposed charities. The result was, for instance, that when Northern Rock was nationalised, the Commons did not know whether this meant its Jersey-based shadow, Granite, was too. Its £40bn of assets apparently existed in limbo. In consequence it is often the case that nobody knows who will honour the debts of what are, legally, separate entities. All of the victims of the current crisis had plunged very deep into this style of offshore operation.

Third, they generate complexity, a form of opacity. Complexity has without doubt been used to shift risk from big institutions to society. Companies have spread complex structures across jurisdictions to exploit regulatory gaps. Even if each haven's claim to be properly regulated were true, the regulation of such firms falls between stools, since each jurisdiction only accepts responsibility for what happens in its domain. Regulation cannot function in such a world - a fact the failing banks exploited. And tax havens will enable many beneficiaries of the years of exuberance to protect their winnings in offshore black boxes, even if law courts wish otherwise.

These havens are not just the palm-fringed islands of popular imagination. They are also places at the heart of the global economy. In particular the City has many offshore features. The IMF thinks London is offshore. When coupled with links to satellite havens like Jersey and Cayman, it becomes clear that Britain must be central to a global response to this problem. Gordon Brown and his predecessors have ignored this. As a result they have knowingly permitted the harm which secrecy jurisdictions wreak on the poor at home and abroad. Unless they are tackled, tax havens will sabotage any efforts to build global governance and international cooperation.

That is why we must gear up for a global fight against tax havens. In the long term this push must stop regulation being embedded in a context riddled with powerful actors deliberately aiming to undermine it. More immediately, it must help policymakers address the crisis's fallout by giving them back powers to tax wealth and capital properly, and constrain what is a hothouse for cross-border crime.

Tackling the increasing tension between global integration and a lack of credible international governance is impossible while these jurisdictions and their financial and criminal communities thwart attempts to deploy democratic controls. We emphasise, the secrecy jurisdictions' role in this is generic. Undermining democratic accountability is what they do for a living.

Politicians can, and must, be braver now - public interest demands it.

• Richard Murphy is a chartered accountant and founder of Tax Research LLP and Tax Justice Network; John Christensen is an economist and director of Tax Justice Network taxjustice.net



http://banksit.blogspot.com
http://internationaltax1.blogspot.com
http://assetprotection.wordpress.com
http://proteccionactivos.wordpress.com
http://proteccionbienes.blogspot.com

1 comentario:

  1. I think my handle will let you know what my point of view is right away. If someone as obviously statist and worshipful of government as Richard Murphy can write, would The Guardian please allow someone to present the libertarian view?

    We need more tax havens; we need more of them usuable by the poor proles on the PAYE. You poor sods, with your tax "contribution" deducted by force before you even see it. And yet, the "progressive" taxation system is legally described (in Canada, at least) as a "voluntary" one because YOU fill out the forms! Help! We need more ways to work in the underground economy and we need to encourage the use of cash.

    I'm not rich. But I do deeply resent government firstly punishing me through inflation and then by taxation. To top it off they then squander my money, hand it to their favourite "disadvantaged" groups and employ an army of regulators, police with guns, commissars and assessors, local nazis and do-gooders to use up any left over. And then they borrow even more, year by year, using their ability to extract money from me by force as their collateral.

    So I'm a bit ticked off. I - just like the rest of you - was born free into this life yet I find I'm subject to The Man with the Gun in the Room from birth. What happens if you don't pay taxes? The government - in reality a group of thugs with police, courts and guns - takes your property or your money if they can't physically punish or incarcerate YOU. Just like the playground bully.

    We all have a right - indeed a duty to the cause of individual liberty AND to our families - to do all we can to opt out of this system in every small way we can. Government, not the individual, is an imposition on a free society. Although I'm not saying it is practical to entirely phases it out, it should be drastically localized and shrunken greatly. We have NOTHING LIKE a free society or free markets now - no matter what those currently howling for the heads of bank presidents may say. We need LESS regulation, not more...

    I'm not a charity. Or maybe I am, but I would like very much to decide individually who and what cause to help with the money I earn from my own labour. Government has no money of its own: every penny they get is exacted by force from the productive sector of society.

    I'll say it again. I'm not rich. I don't work for a "right-wing think-tank" - I'm only a middle class self-employed. But I stand on my own two feet.

    ResponderEliminar