4 ms·

If you want more insight into this with less pejorative language, ditch the ICIJ and the Brookings study and look at KPMG, Deloitte and PwC annual reports on th

If you want more insight into this with less pejorative language, ditch the ICIJ and the Brookings study and look at KPMG, Deloitte and PwC annual reports on the offshore industry. The also know what they are doing instead of trying to reverse engineer it like these studies are.

awestroke 6y ago
Do you have a link to one of these reports?
ficklepickle 6y ago
> KPMG, Deloitte and PwC But aren't they in bed with the companies using these schemes?
- airstrike 6y ago
  Even if they were, these are massive organizations, so different people may have different views on the matter.
- vmception 6y ago
  The companies that wish to use these would go to KPMG, Deloitte and PwC if it is in the budget, yes. They have offices in every jurisdiction for an unparalleled and holistic view of an ever changing landscape.
pdimitar 6y ago
Any links, please?
smashah 6y ago
Is there some sort of issue with ICIJ reporting?
- vmception 6y ago
  Yes. Over time they've balanced out their reporting by at least acknowledging legitimate uses of tax havens, and even going as far to point out that it is probably the predominate use of tax havens - compliant to all countries involved. But their headlines still lead their readers towards assuming impropriety. And now that they bother to acknowledge the existence of legitimate uses, given the ongoing criticism from anybody educated in the financial sector, they don't bother with the advantages or "the why". They could educate, but choose to only raise awareness towards the assumption of guilt for using leading and competitive jurisdictions. They just instigate populist sentiment and make a tally of the few people adversely affected due to the populist sentiment after being doxxed, alongside the different and fewer people that actually broke their country's laws.
  - smashah 6y ago
    Well, just because it's not breaking laws doesn't mean the use of tax havens has positive benefits for society which ,I guess, is the point of these ICIJ investigations - to eventually change laws.
joe_the_user 6y ago
Citations for any of this? I have noticed nothing "pejorative" in the language used in the document. I'd be more pejorative myself. The individuals with accounts are described clinically - "high net worth individuals". The ethics of using the leaked data is examined. The situation that individuals with these accounts may be committing crimes is also described dispassionately. It is a fact that these accounts are often used for the crime of tax evasion. Do you want to dispute this fact? Or do you want language that tries avoid any mention of this likelihood? That would be less "pejorative" I suppose. Edit: OK, the Mel Brooks quote is an exception to the generally clinical language. But by that point the author has made their case and should get at least a little cookie.
- Havoc 6y ago
  >The situation that individuals with these accounts may be committing crimes What happened to innocent until guilty? Hell I've got an account in an offshore jurisdiction. I guess I need to go do some introspection about my "crime of tax evasion"...
  - IshKebab 6y ago
    "Innocent until proven guilty" is really "innocent until there's sufficient evidence to strongly suspect you are guilty". There aren't very many innocent reasons to have accounts in tax havens.
    - vmception 6y ago
      > There aren't very many innocent reasons to have accounts in tax havens. Courts disagree. The primary form of investment firms (PE firms) rely on an "onshore" feeder, for certain countries taxable persons to invest into, and an "offshore" feeder for everyone else as well as those same countries non-taxable persons (charities, retirement plans) to invest into. The offshore feeder typically being an offshore corporation taxed only at the entity level, in a place that does not levy tax on the kinds of transactions conducted, and in many cases also means banking and brokerage accounts offshore. But it also means banking and brokerage accounts onshore under the name of the offshore entity, because it is completely legal and the relevant financial professionals are completely familiar with it. Status in our society is based on understanding whose opinion matters, and that is the executive and judicial branch, while the legislative branch and head of states pretends to act like they are in an adversarial relationship with people that keep their money.
walrus01 6y ago
> look at KPMG, Deloitte and PwC annual reports on the offshore industry I'll add that to my reading list alongside the 'climate change' reports written by the global petrochemical industry, and the reports written by hedge-fund traders on what really happened in the 2008 financial crisis.
- vmception 6y ago
  occasionally some people like to know what they are doing, while the academics and regulators play catch up. instruction manuals are better than studies and leaks decades after the fact.
  - walrus01 6y ago
    Although that seems to presume they would put the most honest information on what we could call 'trade secrets' in tax minimization through offshoring in a public document published for the whole world to read.
    - vmception 6y ago
      Yes, that's a good assumption because there is nothing secret about it. I'm telling you, and everyone, that the entire phrasing of "leaks" and "secret" and "loopholes" is either complete clickbait or the musing of the completely ignorant, and both of those outcomes means you should go to the actual source of truth instead of bothering with this wealth-porn. And yet you want to argue that. Plato-esque.
      - walrus01 6y ago
        The massive pile of internal client correspondence, documents and information that escaped from Mossack Fonseca, from their internal file servers, wasn't "secret"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossack_Fonseca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossack_Fonseca https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/ https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/

awestroke 6y ago

Do you have a link to one of these reports?

ficklepickle 6y ago

> KPMG, Deloitte and PwC But aren't they in bed with the companies using these schemes?

airstrike 6y ago
Even if they were, these are massive organizations, so different people may have different views on the matter.
vmception 6y ago
The companies that wish to use these would go to KPMG, Deloitte and PwC if it is in the budget, yes. They have offices in every jurisdiction for an unparalleled and holistic view of an ever changing landscape.

pdimitar 6y ago

Any links, please?

smashah 6y ago

Is there some sort of issue with ICIJ reporting?

vmception 6y ago
Yes. Over time they've balanced out their reporting by at least acknowledging legitimate uses of tax havens, and even going as far to point out that it is probably the predominate use of tax havens - compliant to all countries involved. But their headlines still lead their readers towards assuming impropriety. And now that they bother to acknowledge the existence of legitimate uses, given the ongoing criticism from anybody educated in the financial sector, they don't bother with the advantages or "the why". They could educate, but choose to only raise awareness towards the assumption of guilt for using leading and competitive jurisdictions. They just instigate populist sentiment and make a tally of the few people adversely affected due to the populist sentiment after being doxxed, alongside the different and fewer people that actually broke their country's laws.
- smashah 6y ago
  Well, just because it's not breaking laws doesn't mean the use of tax havens has positive benefits for society which ,I guess, is the point of these ICIJ investigations - to eventually change laws.

joe_the_user 6y ago

Citations for any of this? I have noticed nothing "pejorative" in the language used in the document. I'd be more pejorative myself. The individuals with accounts are described clinically - "high net worth individuals". The ethics of using the leaked data is examined. The situation that individuals with these accounts may be committing crimes is also described dispassionately. It is a fact that these accounts are often used for the crime of tax evasion. Do you want to dispute this fact? Or do you want language that tries avoid any mention of this likelihood? That would be less "pejorative" I suppose. Edit: OK, the Mel Brooks quote is an exception to the generally clinical language. But by that point the author has made their case and should get at least a little cookie.

Havoc 6y ago
>The situation that individuals with these accounts may be committing crimes What happened to innocent until guilty? Hell I've got an account in an offshore jurisdiction. I guess I need to go do some introspection about my "crime of tax evasion"...
- IshKebab 6y ago
  "Innocent until proven guilty" is really "innocent until there's sufficient evidence to strongly suspect you are guilty". There aren't very many innocent reasons to have accounts in tax havens.
  - vmception 6y ago
    > There aren't very many innocent reasons to have accounts in tax havens. Courts disagree. The primary form of investment firms (PE firms) rely on an "onshore" feeder, for certain countries taxable persons to invest into, and an "offshore" feeder for everyone else as well as those same countries non-taxable persons (charities, retirement plans) to invest into. The offshore feeder typically being an offshore corporation taxed only at the entity level, in a place that does not levy tax on the kinds of transactions conducted, and in many cases also means banking and brokerage accounts offshore. But it also means banking and brokerage accounts onshore under the name of the offshore entity, because it is completely legal and the relevant financial professionals are completely familiar with it. Status in our society is based on understanding whose opinion matters, and that is the executive and judicial branch, while the legislative branch and head of states pretends to act like they are in an adversarial relationship with people that keep their money.

walrus01 6y ago

> look at KPMG, Deloitte and PwC annual reports on the offshore industry I'll add that to my reading list alongside the 'climate change' reports written by the global petrochemical industry, and the reports written by hedge-fund traders on what really happened in the 2008 financial crisis.

vmception 6y ago
occasionally some people like to know what they are doing, while the academics and regulators play catch up. instruction manuals are better than studies and leaks decades after the fact.
- walrus01 6y ago
  Although that seems to presume they would put the most honest information on what we could call 'trade secrets' in tax minimization through offshoring in a public document published for the whole world to read.
  - vmception 6y ago
    Yes, that's a good assumption because there is nothing secret about it. I'm telling you, and everyone, that the entire phrasing of "leaks" and "secret" and "loopholes" is either complete clickbait or the musing of the completely ignorant, and both of those outcomes means you should go to the actual source of truth instead of bothering with this wealth-porn. And yet you want to argue that. Plato-esque.
    - walrus01 6y ago
      The massive pile of internal client correspondence, documents and information that escaped from Mossack Fonseca, from their internal file servers, wasn't "secret"? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossack_Fonseca https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossack_Fonseca https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/ https://panamapapers.sueddeutsche.de/en/