Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Quicken

Anything to Keep the Tax Havens Going

Recommended Posts

Quote

Ministers have pulled a financial services bill from the House of Commons, fearing the government was almost certain to be defeated on an amendment requiring Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man to clamp down on money laundering.

The Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell and Labour’s Margaret Hodge want the crown dependencies to introduce public share ownership records by December 2020, which the three territories are resisting.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/mar/04/house-of-commons-financial-services-bill-debate-pulled-crown-dependencies

Ministers not exactly covering themselves in glory here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Quicken said:

Ministers not exactly covering themselves in glory here.

Isn't the parliament part of the problem here? Or do we need a gvt defeat just to show how far the arm of money launderers and tax evaders can reach?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Tory boys have been back pedalling over the issue of offshore tax evasion ever since the Panama Papers dropped off the front pages.

It's even been suggested that liberating the City of London from prospective EU tax avoidance legislation is the Brexiteers' principal motivation.

https://medium.com/the-jist/was-eu-tax-evasion-regulation-the-reason-for-the-brexit-referendum-980ba88a8077

Quote

Back in 2015, Britain rejected plans announced by Brussels to combat “industrial-scale tax avoidance by the world’s biggest multinationals”.

Britain had built a corporate tax haven for multinationals that included slashing corporation tax from 28% to 20%, new favorable tax regimes for multinationals with offshore financing subsidiaries, and tax breaks for patent-owning companies. As a result, Britain saw a number of large corporations like Aon, Fiat Industrial, and Starbucks’s European operations, set up headquarters in the UK with a small number of staff in order to take advantage of these tax laws.

The common tax regulations would have clamped down on offshoring and removed many of these elements of Britain’s competitive tax advantages over other EU Member States. Then European Commissioner for Tax, Pierre Moscovici, stated that,

“The current rules for corporate taxation no longer fit the modern context, as corporate tax planning has become more sophisticated and competitive forces between member states have increased, the tools for ensuring fair tax competition within the EU have reached their limits.”

The Treasury at the time declined to give reasons for their rejection of the plans, but issued this statement,

“Direct taxation is a matter for EU countries, and any direct taxation matters require unanimity across all EU countries. We’re fully involved in international discussions on tax issues and have consistently supported global measures, through the EU, G20 and OECD, which will strengthen international rules to prevent corporate tax avoidance.”

Earlier in 2015, Conservative, UKIP and DUP MEPs also voted against EU’s plans to crack down on corporate tax dodging, by making companies report where they make their profits and pay taxes. The plan included a requirement for all Member States to agree on a common EU position for the definition of tax havens and for co-ordinated penalties to be imposed upon countries or territories across the world that are uncooperative in tackling tax evasion. It also called for a blacklist to be drawn up of these countries and, perhaps most importantly, it calls for

“The MSs to equip their competent authorities to carry out rigorous and thorough investigations, and put forward sanctions such as suspending or revoking the banking or advisory licences of financial institutions, accountants, law firms or other financial advisors if it has been proven that they have assisted in tax fraud…”

All present Labour, Liberal Democrat, SNP, Plaid, and Green MEPs voted for the plan, though some did not attend or vote.

In 2013, Cameron personally wrote to the then president of the European council, Herman Van Rompuy, to prevent offshore trusts from being dragged into an EU-wide crackdown on tax avoidance requesting that trusts should not automatically be subject to the same transparency requirements as companies.

The EU had planned to increase transparency on the dealings of offshore bodies by publishing a central register of their ultimate owners but, in a letter unearthed by the Financial Times, Cameron said,

“It is clearly important we recognise the important differences between companies and trusts … This means that the solution for addressing the potential misuse of companies — such as central public registries — may well not be appropriate generally.”

Rather than holding trusts to the same standards as companies by forcing them to make their owners publicly known, the Prime Minister argued that the EU should ask the Organisation for Cooperation and Development and the G20 to agree on a global framework for transparency agreements.

However, despite these protests, the EU has now moved forward with these plans, and rules are set to come into force in 2019. The UK has had legislation on the marketing of tax schemes since 2004, but these new rules would force all EU Member states to share details of all tax schemes every three months to be displayed in a central directory of avoidance schemes. These plans would tighten up restrictions on UK based intermediaries that take part in off-shoring and tax avoidance, of which Britain is a global leader alongside the US and Hong Kong.

It is possible that Britain would not be subject to these rules if a hard Brexit’ is pushed through Parliament, but were we to remain as a part of the single market, we would be subject to these laws and would be forced to be more transparent in our harboring of shell companies and intermediaries. Is this part of the reason that right-wingers are pushing for a hard Brexit and a categoric severance from Europe? Or is it simply a part of the vast web of regulation that they wish to free Britain from?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, prozac said:

?

Sorry - https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/anti-tax-avoidance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en

 

"The Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive contains five legally-binding anti-abuse measures, which all Member States should apply against common forms of aggressive tax planning.

Member States should apply these measures as from 1 January 2019."

 

The member states have to report to each other every three months. How much the public gets to know abuot I have no idea

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Trump Invective said:

Sorry - https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/business/company-tax/anti-tax-avoidance-package/anti-tax-avoidance-directive_en

 

"The Anti-Tax Avoidance Directive contains five legally-binding anti-abuse measures, which all Member States should apply against common forms of aggressive tax planning.

Member States should apply these measures as from 1 January 2019."

 

The member states have to report to each other every three months. How much the public gets to know abuot I have no idea

Could this be one of the narratives why part of our tptb want brexit, so as not to apply these rules 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, prozac said:

Could this be one of the narratives why part of our tptb want brexit, so as not to apply these rules 

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top-stories/is-the-anti-tax-avoidance-directive-the-reason-the-rich-want-out-of-eu-1-5669763

https://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/1034134/brexit-news-eu-tax-policies-uk-brexit-latest-jacob-rees-mogg

Ive heard/seen the rumour elsewhere too

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 04/03/2019 at 16:13, Freki said:

Isn't the parliament part of the problem here? Or do we need a gvt defeat just to show how far the arm of money launderers and tax evaders can reach?

I am not sure I understand you. The government could have clamped down on the tax havens themselves. They chose not to.

So now parliament is pushing the issue. The government could then have accepted the amendment to clamp down. They chose not to.

They will only be dragged to this kicking and screaming - scum bags. 

Q

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Quicken said:

They will only be dragged to this kicking and screaming - scum bags. 

Quite so. But they aren't the whole problem. Politics has been out of balance since 1979. We haven't had a party in power with the slightest interest in reforming or constraining the establishment / elite.

The miasma of failed VI trade unions on one hand & Blair on the other surrounds Labour like a fog, and they've added an obsequious permissive attitude to conservative Islam and a huge dose of identity politics on top.

It's entirely possible now to utterly detest the 2 largest parties in British politics in equal measure, I know I do. 

Edited by disenfranchised

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 295 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

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.