Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
tyres

Swiss Bank Helped Clients Dodge Taxes And Hide Millions

Recommended Posts

Bricks of cash, aggressive tax avoidance and banking for international criminals ..

HSBC files show how Swiss bank helped clients dodge taxes and hide millions

Data in massive cache of leaked secret bank account files lift lid on questionable practices at subsidiary of one of world’s biggest financial institutions

HSBC’s Swiss banking arm helped wealthy customers dodge taxes and conceal millions of dollars of assets, doling out bundles of untraceable cash and advising clients on how to circumvent domestic tax authorities, according to a huge cache of leaked secret bank account files.

more here...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

and more on tax avoidance

The people connected to David Cameron who are linked to tax avoidance

Details have emerged this week that the company Samantha Cameron - the prime minister’s wife - works for is based in a tax haven. Smythson - a luxury leather goods retailer with a Royal Warrant from the Queen - is owned through a parent company in Luxembourg and connected to a trust in Guernsey. Mrs Cameron worked as a creative director for the company before husband David came to power and has since worked for them in a part-time consultancy role. Despite the prime minister repeatedly speaking out against tax avoidance in the past, his wife isn’t the only one in his inner circle to be connected to unusual tax arrangements.

Ian Cameron (father) In 2012, the Guardian reported that Cameron’s father had built up the family’s fortune in a “network of offshore investment funds”. Though entirely legal, the funds based in Panama City and Geneva were reported to have boasted of their ability to skirt UK tax jurisdiction.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having previously worked for a private bank offering offshore bank accounts, I can confirm that it is all about the tax. The official policy was that we assumed that our clients were not breaching any laws in their home country, but it was hard to see any reason why clients would want our service for any other reason than tax evasion.

There is a huge difference between evasion and avoidance, which The Guardian appears to ignore, but much of what I saw could only be for evasion purposes.

Many of the structures were about concealing the actual owner of the assets. You get assets owned by a Luxembourg company, which is owned by a Liechtenstein company, which is owned by a Liberian company, held within a Panamanian Trust. All very dodgy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
HSBC 'helped clients dodge tax'_80869267_80869258.jpg

HSBC, Britain's biggest bank, helped wealthy clients cheat the UK out of millions of pounds in tax, thousands of documents seen by BBC Panorama show.

I'm sure it will all be settled by a deal in which a small amount of the tax owed is paid, meanwhile if your average prole did this they'd get to pay 100% back plus fines.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having previously worked for a private bank offering offshore bank accounts, I can confirm that it is all about the tax. The official policy was that we assumed that our clients were not breaching any laws in their home country, but it was hard to see any reason why clients would want our service for any other reason than tax evasion.

There is a huge difference between evasion and avoidance, which The Guardian appears to ignore, but much of what I saw could only be for evasion purposes.

Many of the structures were about concealing the actual owner of the assets. You get assets owned by a Luxembourg company, which is owned by a Liechtenstein company, which is owned by a Liberian company, held within a Panamanian Trust. All very dodgy.

It could also be for divorce settlement avoidance purposes?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roll it out for the plebs as well, tax evasion is practically a moral duty these days.

I don't mind paying taxes for public services I'm actually going to use, but in reality it all gets jizzed on scamsters of various sorts and various client groups, while my local council is unable to take my bins out more often than once every 3 weeks and the army and cops are being cut below the minimum. They've lost the plot, frankly, and lost it a long time ago.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Cameron last night issued his strongest defence of the finance industry since the economic crisis, claiming those who ‘trash the banks would end up trashing Britain’.

The Prime Minister used his annual speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet – which is traditionally focused on foreign policy – to instead deliver a warning that Britain is in a battle to survive as a major economy.

He defended both the banks and defence firms, insisting the Government would stand up for sectors vital to the country’s economic future.

Read more: http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/news/article-2232157/Trash-banks-end-trashing-Britain-Cameron-strong-defence-UKs-financial-sector.html#ixzz3RElZWhSj

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just one bank?....this has been going on for years, nobody who could do something about it wants to do anything about it...one rule for some, another rule for special flowers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having previously worked for a private bank offering offshore bank accounts, I can confirm that it is all about the tax. The official policy was that we assumed that our clients were not breaching any laws in their home country, but it was hard to see any reason why clients would want our service for any other reason than tax evasion.

There is a huge difference between evasion and avoidance, which The Guardian appears to ignore, but much of what I saw could only be for evasion purposes.

Many of the structures were about concealing the actual owner of the assets. You get assets owned by a Luxembourg company, which is owned by a Liechtenstein company, which is owned by a Liberian company, held within a Panamanian Trust. All very dodgy.

I have a CHF account at Barclays. Whenever you talk to the department which handles it they pretty much assume you're tax dodging; I've had to tell them, "It's not a tax fiddle, I just like keeping my savings in Swiss Francs." (Imagine my joy when they unpegged.) However, I know people in Switzerland and times are getting hard there - the jobs are drying up. The high franc is hurting them.

The Barclays dept which handles CHF accounts is completely divorced from the rest of the bank. As far as the rest of the bank is concerned you don't exist, eg, change of address you must notify them separately - the branches have never heard of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Barclays dept which handles CHF accounts is completely divorced from the rest of the bank. As far as the rest of the bank is concerned you don't exist, eg, change of address you must notify them separately - the branches have never heard of you.

That's because of Swiss data protection and privacy laws.

As for this story - its fairly obvious that the middle class become corporate lawyers and accountants to help the ruling class hide the fact they don't operate on the same rules as the pretend democracy we live in.The "value add" of accountants and lawyers isn't some rare intelligence found through years of learning - its a complex system built over time to given them just enough to keep them happy whilst obfuscating the reality of where this idea of "money" and "debt" comes from. Its all a big game to keep people working and using up their lives rather than focussing on being "equal" - the aim of all this is ultimately power.

Banks are the same - why do we even both complaining. Its not going to change. Even the nobles had to threaten the monarchy with imprisonment and death to get them to sign the magna carta - no one relinquishes power without a fight. The masses don't care, the religious turn to faith, the few people who are aware simply waste their entire lives pointing out the facts to people who aren't interested.

Syrian or Iraqi leaders being deposed is nothing to do with humanitarian efforts - its to stop Russia gaining complete control of gas supplies in Europe. The drop in oil price is not some magical market miracle its an effort to stop Russian power (and bankrupt the shale gas fields in USA). The rise in the franc was basically to prevent huge capital flows into Switzerland prior to Euro devaluation through QE. Remember when you have a monopoly you flex prices to prevent competition - because long term all you care about is always owning the market, because then you can set your own price.

We're just serfs trying to make a living...

Edited by katchytitle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that I have also had "international bribery" explained to me by a Swiss person. The deal is you must open a Swiss bank account in order to give or receive a bribe of any consequence. Bribe money never leaves Switzerland, except as cash or goods, it just moves from account to account inside the country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

David Cameron last night issued his strongest defence of the finance industry since the economic crisis, claiming those who ‘trash the banks would end up trashing Britain’.

The Prime Minister used his annual speech at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet – which is traditionally focused on foreign policy – to instead deliver a warning that Britain is in a battle to survive as a major economy.

He defended both the banks and defence firms, insisting the Government would stand up for sectors vital to the country’s economic future.

Says a Prime Minister who has contributed as much as any other person in government to trashing the UK's real economy - house price policy and bank bail outs et al and the destructive results.

Now at every opportunity he's trying to make claim to a cushy sinecure job if he loses the general election - and that seems to be well on the cards now.

Edited by billybong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Says a Prime Minister who has contributed as much as any other person in government to trashing the UK's real economy - house price policy and bank bail outs et al and the destructive results.

Now at every opportunity he's trying to make claim to a cushy sinecure job if he loses the general election - and that seems to be well on the cards now.

Pure career stepping stone.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should add that I have also had "international bribery" explained to me by a Swiss person. The deal is you must open a Swiss bank account in order to give or receive a bribe of any consequence. Bribe money never leaves Switzerland, except as cash or goods, it just moves from account to account inside the country.

That used to be referred to as "Chocolate Money" - ie." He was paid a fee in chocolate money for helping the deal go through"

Being naive I asked what chocolate money was - I was told it was a suitcase full of used $US deposited at the Swiss bank of ones choosing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How come HSBC is being singled out as the Pariah?

There are dozens of banks doing the same thing (and more) for clients all around the world.

Possibly because:

1) The HMRC chief who negotiated HSBC's previous get out deal quit to work for the bank as an adviser on financial crime.

2) The HSBC chief at the time quit to join the Government as trade minister, appointed to the house of lords and worked on cabinet committees for banking and finance reform.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Possibly because:

1) The HMRC chief who negotiated HSBC's previous get out deal quit to work for the bank as an adviser on financial crime.

2) The HSBC chief at the time quit to join the Government as trade minister, appointed to the house of lords and worked on cabinet committees for banking and finance reform.

All in it together. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My mate spent some time looking at buying a little corner shop and running it as a change of career. (He never went for it in the end). During his research he spent time with shop keepers working alongside them to see what it was like. He expressed his shock that the shop keeper doesn't declare all his business, and dips into the till from time to time. Oh the horror! He was apparently amazed that people do this from time to time to make ends meet. Obviously he's not cut out to run a business.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having previously worked for a private bank offering offshore bank accounts, I can confirm that it is all about the tax. The official policy was that we assumed that our clients were not breaching any laws in their home country, but it was hard to see any reason why clients would want our service for any other reason than tax evasion.

There is a huge difference between evasion and avoidance, which The Guardian appears to ignore, but much of what I saw could only be for evasion purposes.

Many of the structures were about concealing the actual owner of the assets. You get assets owned by a Luxembourg company, which is owned by a Liechtenstein company, which is owned by a Liberian company, held within a Panamanian Trust. All very dodgy.

From experience, I can tell you that it's not just about the tax. These offshore havens also allow people to set up businesses that typically wouldn't be in a position to do so in their home countries. It's a combination of lower overheads, lower tax (of course) and being able to set up a company without some busy-body trade association/bureacrat/lawyer demanding their "cut" to be allowed to do business.

The more less tax that is paid the better, and I'm not just talking about me, I mean everyone. Starve the beast!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • The Prime Minister stated that there were three Brexit options available to the UK:   203 members have voted

    1. 1. Which of the Prime Minister's options would you choose?


      • Leave with the negotiated deal
      • Remain
      • Leave with no deal

    Please sign in or register to vote in this poll. View topic


×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.