18 ms·

The Americans of the Panama Papers have been exposed

119 points by acconrad 10y ago

mmaunder 10y ago
Looks like there's a big hollywood name in there. Hint: His brother and dad changed their names to sound more 'American'.
- eganist 10y ago
  Emilio Estevez? https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12121491 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12121491
  - mmaunder 10y ago
    Yup.
  - gk1 10y ago
    If you're trying to fly under the radar, I can't think of a more generic name than BUSINESS & CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
    - uola 10y ago
      Usually, at least in jurisdiction where this takes some time, companies will be pre-registered under a generic name and there's no real need to change it if you don't use it for trade. https://www.apintertrust.com/offshore_company/shelf_company_list.htm https://www.apintertrust.com/offshore_company/shelf_company_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_corporation
      - harryjo 10y ago
        > Not to be confused with "shell corporation". which is nearly identical but one key difference.
  - strictnein 10y ago
    "Big" name? Ehh... maybe 15-20 years ago.
- edko 10y ago
  It could be, but it could be not, so the "looks like" is very appropriate. Emilio Estévez may not be as common as John Smith, but it is not a very rare name/surname combination either.
seeingfurther 10y ago
Sanford I. Weill is the biggest name I've spotted so far. I'm sure there are many more. https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12116280 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12116280
- gk1 10y ago
  For anyone else wondering who that is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_I._Weill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_I._Weill
  - toomuchtodo 10y ago
    r3bl: Any chance Wikipedia links could be associated with the records?
- cloudjacker 10y ago
  that moment when you don't see your bearer share companies listed success
- bduerst 10y ago
  This was spotted last month. Not listed there is that he's the sole shareholder of April Fool LTD. The other company he is on, Brightao Corp., could be interesting, but it could also be legit.
dmix 10y ago
An interesting (but superficial) observation of the list of Canadian officers is how about 30-40% of the names sound Chinese while they represent only about 10% of the total population: https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?c=CAN&cat=1&e=&j=&q=&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?c=CAN&cat=1&e=&j=&q=&u... This must be a common tax/business strategy among Asian communities in Canada. Possibly due to the very large amount of Chinese real estate investors in Canadian properties in Vancouver and Toronto. I suspect this would be enough to throw off recent statistics I've heard that claim the Chinese real estate investor boom is a 'myth' [1]. It's possible they just route the transactions through local shell companies so any surface level investigation into the buyers would make it appear that they are local. [1] > In Canada, realtors do not tally foreign investment in residential real estate. However, the limited data compiled by research firms suggests the impact is negligible. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/scant-evidence-behind-myth-of-vancouver-real-estates-foreign-buyers/article9000860/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/scant-e...
- jsnk 10y ago
  How did you infer Korean from the names? I see barely any Korean names in the list.
  - gamegoblin 10y ago
    I took OPs comment of "sound Chinese/Korean" to mean that OP was unable to distinguish Chinese and Korean names. I interpreted OP as something like "East-Asian appearing names, but not Japanese since those are more distinctive to me."
    - dmix 10y ago
      Indeed, I'm familiar with the Japanese and Chinese distinction. Less so with Korean. I've replaced Chinese/Korean with just Chinese in my original comment. Anyway, this is just a superficial observation as mentioned in the first sentence.
- arnarbi 10y ago
rubidium 10y ago
an article about some of the americans: https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160509-american-fraudsters-offshore.html https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160509-american-fraudsters-o...
hackuser 10y ago
If you click one of the names, it displays an important message: Please read the statement below before searching There are legitimate uses for offshore companies and trusts. We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in the ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly. Many people and entities have the same or similar names. We suggest you confirm the identities of any individuals or entities located in the database based on addresses or other identifiable information. If you find an error in the database please get in touch with us.
- dmix 10y ago
  Any system that can be exploited will be. You can either blame that people who find loopholes or blame the system for allowing them to exist. I suspect the majority of the blame goes to governments who favour extremely complex tax law. As any hacker knows the bigger the attack surface the more vulnerabilities exist. Sadly the solution many countries are now calling for to confront the prevalence of shell companies is to add more regulations and reporting laws to identify stakeholders at the time the money is being used at the final destination. This might be effective at weeding out the bad players but further increases costs for the honest businesses and diminishes their right to privacy. Surely there must be solutions that allows for privacy of transactions among private individuals to exist while still ensuring that appropriate taxes get paid. Typically it's the source country that's the problem. For example, tons of money is siphoned out of African countries via "transfer mispricing" [1] which is largely a regulatory failure in those countries and tax haven middlemen. Whereas the burden of uncovering the stakeholders is largely left to the countries at the end of the chain, which face a much more complex and difficult task of uncovering the players, than it would be stopping it at the source. Simplifying tax law at the destination country to make tax obligations explicit plus shifting costs to the source/middlemen to incentivize reducing corruption in their own regulatory systems - instead of adding more burden to honest businessmen in the destination countries. Basically focusing energy/resources onto the source countries systems rather than just blindly throwing more aid money at corrupt governments which simply fuels the siphoning. The US and other western countries should be setting an example and fixing their own tax flight issues for other countries to follow. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_pricing#Fraud https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_pricing#Fraud
room505 10y ago
Does anyone blame these people for hiding their wealth when they know how wasteful government is? Shouldn't we be looking deep underground in government waste and political misconduct?
- hackuser 10y ago
  Yes. Why should I, and everyone else, pay more taxes to cover their fair share? I definitely want government to be less corrupt and wasteful (though I think the situation is greatly exaggerated, and the U.S. government is among the least corrupt), but somehow we need to pay for those services. If they want more or less services from government, they have a chance to convince their fellow citizens to vote for what they want. But an essential part of the deal is that, once the law is written, like it or not we're all covered by it. Majority rules.
  - deleted 10y ago
    [deleted]
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  > Does anyone blame these people for hiding their wealth when they know how wasteful government is? Yes. > Shouldn't we be looking deep underground in government waste and political misconduct? We can do both.
- striking 10y ago
  I'd rather they waste everyone's money equally. Not just the people who play fair. Taking care of waste is a separate problem.
- room505 10y ago
  I didn't mean to imply these people aren't doing anything wrong. I just wish governments were in the spotlight just as much. Thanks all for your replies.
- michaelmrose 10y ago
  Yes. There is no reason we can't work to make government less wasteful and keep people from cheating the system. While a lot of tax money is wasted a lot of it does a lot of good. They are skipping out on paying their fair share of those too.
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
dang 10y ago
The site was posted yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322
Alupis 10y ago
Do we have proof of wrong-doing here? I may have honestly missed it if there is some. From what I've seen, we have a group of folks who have used the laws of the land to their advantage. If that's the case, there's nothing wrong with that, and it would be fairly dumb to not use the laws to one's advantage. It's not patriotic to pay more in taxes than one is legally obligated to pay. Even us "mere mortals" do the best tax dance we can come April, cramming in all those extra credits and deductions, sometimes even fudging the numbers here and there. Our only disadvantage is we cannot afford to hire professional companies to do this tax dance on our behalf. I'd argue, if folks are upset by the current tax laws that allow (and some may even argue, encourage) this behavior, then we ought to change the laws, not get upset at those capable or smart enough to use them to their advantage.
- michaelmrose 10y ago
  "I'd argue, if folks are upset by the current tax laws that allow (and some may even argue, encourage) this behavior, then we ought to change the laws, not get upset at those capable or smart enough to use them to their advantage." Can't we do both. Personally I like to multitask. "It's not patriotic to pay more in taxes than one is legally obligated to pay." No but its stingy and crass for those who doing well to skip out on paying their share because they can. Can we admit their is a qualitative difference between filling out a form to take a credit and hiring a team of lawyers to hide your money in a foreign shell company? "sometimes even fudging the numbers here" So you regularly commit felonies in order to avoid paying your share?
r0m4n0 10y ago
Interesting this was banished from the front page. Any insight into why that would happen?
- greenyoda 10y ago
  People probably flagged it as a duplicate of yesterday's submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322

119 points by acconrad 10y ago

Looks like there's a big hollywood name in there. Hint: His brother and dad changed their names to sound more 'American'.

eganist 10y ago
Emilio Estevez? https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12121491 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12121491
- mmaunder 10y ago
  Yup.
- gk1 10y ago
  If you're trying to fly under the radar, I can't think of a more generic name than BUSINESS & CORPORATE SERVICES, INC.
  - uola 10y ago
    Usually, at least in jurisdiction where this takes some time, companies will be pre-registered under a generic name and there's no real need to change it if you don't use it for trade. https://www.apintertrust.com/offshore_company/shelf_company_list.htm https://www.apintertrust.com/offshore_company/shelf_company_... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_corporation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shelf_corporation
    - harryjo 10y ago
      > Not to be confused with "shell corporation". which is nearly identical but one key difference.
- strictnein 10y ago
  "Big" name? Ehh... maybe 15-20 years ago.
edko 10y ago
It could be, but it could be not, so the "looks like" is very appropriate. Emilio Estévez may not be as common as John Smith, but it is not a very rare name/surname combination either.

seeingfurther 10y ago

Sanford I. Weill is the biggest name I've spotted so far. I'm sure there are many more. https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12116280 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/12116280

gk1 10y ago
For anyone else wondering who that is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_I._Weill https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sanford_I._Weill
- toomuchtodo 10y ago
  r3bl: Any chance Wikipedia links could be associated with the records?
cloudjacker 10y ago
that moment when you don't see your bearer share companies listed success
bduerst 10y ago
This was spotted last month. Not listed there is that he's the sole shareholder of April Fool LTD. The other company he is on, Brightao Corp., could be interesting, but it could also be legit.

dmix 10y ago

An interesting (but superficial) observation of the list of Canadian officers is how about 30-40% of the names sound Chinese while they represent only about 10% of the total population: https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?c=CAN&cat=1&e=&j=&q=&utf8=%E2%9C%93 https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?c=CAN&cat=1&e=&j=&q=&u... This must be a common tax/business strategy among Asian communities in Canada. Possibly due to the very large amount of Chinese real estate investors in Canadian properties in Vancouver and Toronto. I suspect this would be enough to throw off recent statistics I've heard that claim the Chinese real estate investor boom is a 'myth' [1]. It's possible they just route the transactions through local shell companies so any surface level investigation into the buyers would make it appear that they are local. [1] > In Canada, realtors do not tally foreign investment in residential real estate. However, the limited data compiled by research firms suggests the impact is negligible. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/scant-evidence-behind-myth-of-vancouver-real-estates-foreign-buyers/article9000860/ http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/scant-e...

jsnk 10y ago
How did you infer Korean from the names? I see barely any Korean names in the list.
- gamegoblin 10y ago
  I took OPs comment of "sound Chinese/Korean" to mean that OP was unable to distinguish Chinese and Korean names. I interpreted OP as something like "East-Asian appearing names, but not Japanese since those are more distinctive to me."
  - dmix 10y ago
    Indeed, I'm familiar with the Japanese and Chinese distinction. Less so with Korean. I've replaced Chinese/Korean with just Chinese in my original comment. Anyway, this is just a superficial observation as mentioned in the first sentence.
arnarbi 10y ago

rubidium 10y ago

an article about some of the americans: https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160509-american-fraudsters-offshore.html https://panamapapers.icij.org/20160509-american-fraudsters-o...

hackuser 10y ago

If you click one of the names, it displays an important message: Please read the statement below before searching There are legitimate uses for offshore companies and trusts. We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in the ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly. Many people and entities have the same or similar names. We suggest you confirm the identities of any individuals or entities located in the database based on addresses or other identifiable information. If you find an error in the database please get in touch with us.

dmix 10y ago
Any system that can be exploited will be. You can either blame that people who find loopholes or blame the system for allowing them to exist. I suspect the majority of the blame goes to governments who favour extremely complex tax law. As any hacker knows the bigger the attack surface the more vulnerabilities exist. Sadly the solution many countries are now calling for to confront the prevalence of shell companies is to add more regulations and reporting laws to identify stakeholders at the time the money is being used at the final destination. This might be effective at weeding out the bad players but further increases costs for the honest businesses and diminishes their right to privacy. Surely there must be solutions that allows for privacy of transactions among private individuals to exist while still ensuring that appropriate taxes get paid. Typically it's the source country that's the problem. For example, tons of money is siphoned out of African countries via "transfer mispricing" [1] which is largely a regulatory failure in those countries and tax haven middlemen. Whereas the burden of uncovering the stakeholders is largely left to the countries at the end of the chain, which face a much more complex and difficult task of uncovering the players, than it would be stopping it at the source. Simplifying tax law at the destination country to make tax obligations explicit plus shifting costs to the source/middlemen to incentivize reducing corruption in their own regulatory systems - instead of adding more burden to honest businessmen in the destination countries. Basically focusing energy/resources onto the source countries systems rather than just blindly throwing more aid money at corrupt governments which simply fuels the siphoning. The US and other western countries should be setting an example and fixing their own tax flight issues for other countries to follow. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_pricing#Fraud https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfer_pricing#Fraud

room505 10y ago

Does anyone blame these people for hiding their wealth when they know how wasteful government is? Shouldn't we be looking deep underground in government waste and political misconduct?

hackuser 10y ago
Yes. Why should I, and everyone else, pay more taxes to cover their fair share? I definitely want government to be less corrupt and wasteful (though I think the situation is greatly exaggerated, and the U.S. government is among the least corrupt), but somehow we need to pay for those services. If they want more or less services from government, they have a chance to convince their fellow citizens to vote for what they want. But an essential part of the deal is that, once the law is written, like it or not we're all covered by it. Majority rules.
- deleted 10y ago
  [deleted]
toomuchtodo 10y ago
> Does anyone blame these people for hiding their wealth when they know how wasteful government is? Yes. > Shouldn't we be looking deep underground in government waste and political misconduct? We can do both.
striking 10y ago
I'd rather they waste everyone's money equally. Not just the people who play fair. Taking care of waste is a separate problem.
room505 10y ago
I didn't mean to imply these people aren't doing anything wrong. I just wish governments were in the spotlight just as much. Thanks all for your replies.
michaelmrose 10y ago
Yes. There is no reason we can't work to make government less wasteful and keep people from cheating the system. While a lot of tax money is wasted a lot of it does a lot of good. They are skipping out on paying their fair share of those too.

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

dang 10y ago

The site was posted yesterday: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322

Alupis 10y ago

Do we have proof of wrong-doing here? I may have honestly missed it if there is some. From what I've seen, we have a group of folks who have used the laws of the land to their advantage. If that's the case, there's nothing wrong with that, and it would be fairly dumb to not use the laws to one's advantage. It's not patriotic to pay more in taxes than one is legally obligated to pay. Even us "mere mortals" do the best tax dance we can come April, cramming in all those extra credits and deductions, sometimes even fudging the numbers here and there. Our only disadvantage is we cannot afford to hire professional companies to do this tax dance on our behalf. I'd argue, if folks are upset by the current tax laws that allow (and some may even argue, encourage) this behavior, then we ought to change the laws, not get upset at those capable or smart enough to use them to their advantage.

michaelmrose 10y ago
"I'd argue, if folks are upset by the current tax laws that allow (and some may even argue, encourage) this behavior, then we ought to change the laws, not get upset at those capable or smart enough to use them to their advantage." Can't we do both. Personally I like to multitask. "It's not patriotic to pay more in taxes than one is legally obligated to pay." No but its stingy and crass for those who doing well to skip out on paying their share because they can. Can we admit their is a qualitative difference between filling out a form to take a credit and hiring a team of lawyers to hide your money in a foreign shell company? "sometimes even fudging the numbers here" So you regularly commit felonies in order to avoid paying your share?

r0m4n0 10y ago

Interesting this was banished from the front page. Any insight into why that would happen?

greenyoda 10y ago
People probably flagged it as a duplicate of yesterday's submission: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11664322