Just to add an interesting experience to this thread, I've flown to Bermuda and to the Cayman Islands (not an attractive place, but great diving). On the flight to Bermuda the in-flight magazine had several articles discussing Bermuda's aggressive moves against being a tax haven. Saw the same kinds of articles in the magazines while on the beach there. In stark contrast, the in-flight magazine to the Caymans had several large advertisements and one govt.-sponsored article promoting the fact that banking transactions of less than $50,000 (per transaction) are never reported to law enforcement inquiries unless it has been adquately proven that the transaction was the result of a drug deal. Other advertisements stated the cost of starting a bank (as little as $5K if I remember correctly) and of starting a private holding company (a little more than starting your own bank). Interestingly none of these islands/countries have the SA (societe anonamie (sp?)) laws of French islands. An SA company by definition never reveals the board members, officers, founders, etc. pz -----Original Message----- From: owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM [mailto:owner-cypherpunks@Algebra.COM]On Behalf Of Duncan Frissell Sent: Friday, January 12, 2001 11:04 AM To: cypherpunks@cyberpass.net Subject: Re: Re: As Dot-Coms Go Bust in the U.S., Bermuda Hosts a Little Boomlet At 11:29 AM 1/10/01 +0000, Ken Brown wrote:
One of the interesting, and to my mind odd, things is that they *aren't* "popping up in tax havens around the world". They are popping up in little islands that are formally or effectively under British colonial rule, if not actually occupied by the British army.
The British colonial possessions discussed in the article are, indeed, tax havens and have been described as such by every writer on the topic from the flakiest up to the Economist Intelligence Unit http://store.eiu.com/description/M727des.asp. Red Tony's attempt to corral his colonies has been going on for a few years now. The OECD has gotten into the act with its Financial Action Task Force (http://www.oecd.org/fatf/) handling Money Laundering and the OECD, itself, http://www.oecd.org/daf/fa/harm_tax/harmtax.htm handling what it calls "Harmful Tax Practices". By the latter, it means evil countries that set their taxes too low. It does not mean the harm involved in tax collection itself. The Barbados meeting http://www.oecd.org/media/release/nw00-123a.htm was co-sponsored by the Commonwealth (formerly the British Commonwealth). They released a hopeful closing statement of agreement and cooperation but nothing is likely to come of it since the world's largest tax haven (the US) is never the subject of these talks. After watching these activities since shortly after the US government started to crack down on trusts back in 1962, I have learned to ignore what governments say and watch what they (and the market) actually do. More important than bank secrecy itself is the ability to easily create legal entities. One of the reason that the US is a popular tax haven (for non-US persons) is because it is so easy to create various business and personal entities here. The Net have only made things worse. With a dozen P2P payment intermediaries created in the last 18 months or so and hundreds of online securities brokerages, it's rough for the control forces. DCF ---- "May the Lord enlighten ... the Swiss banks -- that they might uphold justice and preserve the integrity of their own laws and the laws of confidentiality, trust and basic decency between the banks and their clients." Imelda Marcos' Prayer for the Swiss Banks - Manila - Sunday 25 February 1996.