Offshore News blog posts all the latest news, articles and reports on the Offshore Banking world, including Offshore Finance, Offshore Credit Cards, Offshore Merchant Accounts, Tax Haven Companies and Offshore Investments.

 

Thursday, August 04, 2005

Changes to offshore bank accounts

Many people in Northern Ireland have savings offshore - perhaps in Jersey or the Isle of Man. Others
have interest-bearing accounts in European countries, perhaps because they have a holiday home.

All people are affected by the new European Savings Directive - or ESD to its friends ? if it has
any. Its friends will mainly be tax inspectors around Europe who hope to uncover hidden millions,
and may indeed do so.

This new piece of law has been set up to ensure people pay the right tax on their overseas savings.
It provides for a massive exchange of information between countries.

My fellow columnist Nicholas Watts (the Naked Investor) laid bare the workings of the scheme in his
helpful article last week.

Regular readers of my column will know that I have often warned that the UK Revenue does hear of
savings held in the Channel Islands or the Isle of Man. This often sparks a tax investigation if the
interest has not been declared on annual tax returns.

At this stage I would like to make it clear that it is perfectly legal to have a bank account
outside the UK. What is illegal is investing money abroad to hide it from the taxman rather than
declare the income.

Also illegal (no matter where the money came from originally) is failure to declare the annual
interest your overseas savings produce. If you do not receive a tax return then the duty is on you
to write to the Revenue and advise them that you receive this income.

So how will this all affect you? It depends on where your savings are. If they are in the Channel
Islands, Isle of Man, Austria, Belgium or Luxembourg, for example, then read witholding tax option.

If your savings are elsewhere in mainland Europe then read the reporting countries section.

WITHOLDING TAX OPTION.

The countries I mentioned above, including the popular Isle of Man and Channel Islands, offer you a
choice.

Either they take tax off your interest at source, or they tell your home tax authorities. The tax th
ey will take off will start on July 1 this year at 15%, rising to 20% and 35% in 2008 and 2011.
Accepting this loss of tax will mean your interest will not be automatically notified to the UK tax
offices.

The alternative will be to ask that your interest be paid in full and the amount notified to the UK
Revenue. Your bank may ask for you to produce a tax certificate from the Revenue before they will do
this. This is obtained by supplying to your local tax office:

* your full name and address;

* your National Insurance number or, if you do not have one, your date of birth and the town and
country in which you were born;

* the account number(s) of the investment(s) you hold overseas;

* the name and address of your overseas bank, and so on;

* the period (not exceeding three years) for which you want the certificate to be valid.

REPORTING COUNTRIES

If you have money on one of the other countries then you can expect that details of your interest
earning WILL be supplied to the UK tax office. No tax will, however, be taken off the interest at
source. So long as you have declared this income then you have nothing to fear.

This new law is already concerning an awful lot of people who have money offshore. The withholding
tax option makes such savings less attractive, and the reporting option will throw out lots of names
of people who have not declared overseas income before.

This may take years for the UK Revenue to sort out, but I suspect will be a factor in thousands of
tax investigations.

If you have hidden money abroad maybe this is the time to admit it to the Revenue. Then whatever is
left (when they have been paid up) you can enjoy without fear of the future. This is serious stuff
so speak to a tax specialist rather than simply contacting the Revenue yourself.

Adrian Huston, a former tax inspector, is now a partner in Belfast tax and accountancy firm Huston &
Co.

© 2005 Independent News and Media (NI)
a division of Independent News & media (UK) Ltd
http://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/news/business_telegraph/story.jsp?story=646615

Will the taxman probe my offshore cash?

Will taxman probe my offshore cash?

I have had an offshore bank account for 30 years. Now the rules on disclosure have changed do I have
to notify the taxman and does this mean I face a huge tax bill? TG, London.

John Whiting, personal tax partner at the accountants PWC, replies:

To start at the beginning, I'll assume that you are UK resident and domiciled, so this is your home
and you live here. In that case, you are liable to tax on all your income, wherever it arises. So,
if there was interest on your offshore account, that should have been declared to the Revenue and UK
tax paid on it.

That has always been the case: it's the taxpayer's responsibility to declare a source of income that
the Revenue doesn't know about such as an offshore account or rental income. By contrast, you don't
have to declare the existence of your salary - the Revenue knows about that from your employer. But
you're also supposed to disclose anything that creates a tax liability they don't know about, such
as UK interest when you are a higher rate taxpayer.

Nothing has changed on this basic duty to disclose. What has - and is - changing is the increased
exchange of information between tax authorities, and the obligation of banks in the rest of the EU
(and some non-EU territories) to either deduct tax at source or disclose information on account
holders to other tax authorities.

If you've had an account for a while and the Revenue hasn't known about it then you really should
write and tell them. It could well result in some questions as to why you didn't disclose, what the
source of the fund is and of course how much interest you have earned. The result is likely to be a
tax bill plus interest (and possibly penalties) covering at least the last six years - they can go
back 20 - but penalties may well be reduced for your disclosure and co-operation.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/help-and-advice/ask-an-expert/tax/article.html?
in_article_id=401245&in_page_id=112

Hong Kong's excellent taxes

Alan Reynolds

June 2, 2005

President Bush gave former Sens. Connie Mack of Florida and John Breaux of Louisiana the unenviable
task of trying to say something new and interesting about tax reform.

When it comes to designing a simple tax system that does the least damage to the economy, it would
be difficult to find a better role model than Hong Kong. As The Economist wrote a few years ago,
"The territory's tradition of simple and low taxes ... is widely seen as a main reason for its
stunning rise to prosperity."  Many advantages of the Hong Kong tax system have been widely emulated
in Asia, yet remain poorly understood in this country. One such misunderstanding may have resulted
in an unfortunate spat between two old friends, Steve Moore and Bruce Bartlett.

Moore proposes that individual taxpayers should be allowed to either pay taxes under the current
rules, or instead forego deductions for mortgage interest and charitable deductions and pay 20
percent on that broader measure of income. "Bruce Bartlett attacked this plan as a gimmick," writes
Moore. "But he fails to realize this is precisely how the Hong Kong tax system works. Hong Kong has
a complicated system and a simple flat tax, and filers choose between the two."

Gimmick or not, Moore's "freedom to choose flat tax" is not remotely similar to the Hong Kong tax
system, which is not complicated in any respect. I may have been partly at fault for that
misunderstanding.

Steve Moore and Bruce Bartlett were advisers to Jack Kemp's tax reform commission in 1995, and I
was research director. Asked by one commissioner about Hong Kong's "flat tax," I replied that the
tax on salaries is not flat but steeply progressive. There are four marginal tax brackets of 2
percent, 8 percent, 14 percent and 20 percent. I would prefer a single tax rate, for reasons I
explained last November in "The Case for One Tax Rate." But any tax with a top rate of 20 percent is
hard to fault.

Unlike the United States, Hong Kong is not plagued with tax credits that create random spikes in
marginal tax rates as the credits are phased out. But Hong Kong does allow charitable deductions up
to 25 percent of salary income and a mortgage interest deduction up to about $13,000 (in U.S.
dollars). Other deductions are allowed for adult education, care of elderly relatives and retirement
savings plans.

Personal exemptions are so generous that most employees owe little or no tax on salaries. For those
with high salaries, however, it is cheaper to forego personal exemptions (but not deductions) and
pay a 16 percent "standard rate." Only the top 2 percent usually pay that standard rate, yet they
account for nearly half of all revenue from the salaries tax.

Groping for an explanation of the standard rate a decade ago, I suggested it was something like an
"alternative maximum tax" -- a phrase Moore has used to describe his own, very different tax
proposal. But the standard rate is automatic, not a matter of choice. Taxpayers fill out a one-page
online return declaring their salary and deductions, and the government sends them a bill.

The standard rate does not make Hong Kong's tax system simpler, but it does make it more efficient.
Academic studies of optimal taxation have long concluded that marginal tax rates should be lowest at
the highest levels of income. As Joseph Stiglitz wrote in 1987, "the marginal tax rate on the
highest income (ability) individual should be zero." Hong Kong does not go quite that far, but the
marginal rate is reduced from 20 to 16 at the highest incomes, while keeping their average tax high
by eliminating personal exemptions.

As clever as this is, it is not the most interesting aspect of the Hong Kong tax system. What makes
taxes in Hong Kong so uniquely simple and effective is that businesses pay all the taxes on income
originating in business (profits), and employees pay all the taxes on salaries.

Hong Kong has no payroll tax for Social Security, no general sales or value-added tax, no tariffs
on imports and no personal tax on income from financial assets. What Hong Kong has is called a "Dual
Tax" -- progressive tax rates on labor income but a flat tax of 17.5 percent on corporate profits,
16 percent on property owners and unincorporated enterprises.

The low tax on profits brings in substantially more revenue than the tax on salaries, in marked
contrast to the United States, which collects little from profits taxes that are nominally twice as
high. Corporations in Hong Kong pay the profits tax before distributing dividends to shareholders,
so there is no extra tax on dividends to be collected from individuals. Reinvested profits result in
more business income to tax in the future, so there is no extra tax on capital gains to be collected
from individuals.

Companies in Hong Kong deduct interest payments, however, so it would be theoretically appropriate
to tax individuals on income they receive from local corporate bonds. This exemplifies the key tax
principle of symmetry: Whatever is a deductible expense for those making any payment ought to be
taxable income for those receiving that payment. But there would still be no need for individuals to
report interest income, because a flat tax can easily be collected at the source, before the check
goes out.

The United States could easily adopt something similar to the Hong Kong tax. It would require no
wrenching changes, such as giving up interest deductibility for corporations or homeowners. Some tax
rates would presumably have to be higher (the 2 percent rate is ridiculously low anyway), but not as
much higher as you might think.

Hong Kong's taxes on salaries and profits amounted to about 7 percent of GDP last year, while
combined U.S. corporate and individual taxes brought in only 8.6 percent of GDP. Since a larger
percentage of American employees have higher salaries, a salary tax such as Hong Kong's would raise
more money even without higher tax rates.

The Hong Kong tax system has one major advantage over even the most elegant theoretical
alternatives. It has been tested for more than 50 years. It works.

***

Correction: Where my last column said, "Jobs have not been shrinking since 1979 because (of)
labor-saving devices," the word "not" is not right. Before being shortened it read, "Jobs have not
been shrinking because manufacturing was shrinking, but because (of) labor-saving devices ..."

©2005 Creators Syndicate
All site content © 1995-2005 Townhall.com
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/alanreynolds/ar20050602.shtml

Myanmar, Thailand to cooperate in money laundering suppression

Myanmar and Thailand are due to sign a memorandum of understanding (MoU) here later this month to
cooperate in suppressing money laundering especially against laundering of funds obtained from
transnational crimes, a local weekly journal reported Monday.

The MoU, to be inked between the Central Control Board (CCB) of Myanmar and the Anti-Money
Laundering Office of Thailand, would provide for the two countries in information sharing on money
laundering control, the Department Against Transnational Crimes was quoted by the Myanmar Times as
saying.

According to the journal's earlier report, Myanmar is introducing a plan to fight money laundering
in the country and the draft of the plan, once finalized and approved by the CCB, will be submitted
to the Paris-based Financial Action Task Force (FATF) which had listed Myanmar as among
non-cooperative countries and territories in dealing with money laundering.

The FATF move partly hindered Myanmar's chance to obtain aid from international financial
institutions, the Myanmar police force blamed, saying that although the task force withdrew other
measures against the country after it enacted the Mutual Assistance in Criminal Matters Law in 2004,
Myanmar still remains on the said list until it fully implements the necessary laws.

Myanmar promulgated a law in June 2002 to control money laundering and financial institutions such
as banks are required to report to the CCB their clients' fiscal activities and report any cashes
exceeding 100 million kyats (100,000 US dollars) and any other suspicious account activities.

However, no suspected laundering has so far been reported although the board had monitored over
2,000 reports on cash and property transactions, according to the International Relations Department
of the Home Ministry.

Meanwhile, the CCB has provided trainings to some dozens of officials from more than 20 state and
private banks in Yangon and Mandalay on countering money laundering and financing terrorism.

To step up fight against money laundering, Myanmar has set up an eight-member investigation body
under the CCB to launch probe into matters legalizing money and property obtained by illegal means.

Meanwhile, the Myanmar authorities revoked in the end of March the business licenses of two local
private banks -- the Myanmar Mayflower Bank (MMB) and the Asia Wealth Bank (AWB)-- which had been
under government investigation for allegedly linking with money laundering since December 2003.

As part of its increased international cooperation in the aspects, Myanmar joined in signing the UN
Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime in April 2004.

Source: Xinhua

Ireland Rated as Top Location for Foreign Investors

"Ireland is rated, throughout the world, as one of the best locations for
foreign direct investment", John Dunne Chairman of IDA Ireland, the
country's investment promotion body, told those gathered at the launch of
the organisation's annual report.

According to Mr Dunne, international investors are attracted to Ireland
because it is the most globalised country in the world, with the highest
rate of foreign direct investment flows as a percentage of GDP and also
boasts a low corporate tax rate and a good quality of life.

"Business and community leaders everywhere point to our success as a model
of how a country and its people can transform into a dynamic world-leading
centre for business growth" he stated, adding that:

"Ireland's value proposition today is substantially different from the past.
We have moved away from low cost, low value assembly and service operations
where the primary objective was simply job creation. The Ireland of the 21st
century presents the opportunity for the international business investor to
be part of a leading global business location offering world-class
innovation and development, superior performance and efficiency and cutting
edge business integration and support solutions."

"The benefits of this for Ireland have to be measured differently also. We
should no longer just count the number of jobs created but also measure the
levels of investment, the nature and quality of the employment and the
strategic relevance of the activities. In our report today we have begun the
process of showing our performance in this way."

Describing 2004 as a "watershed" year in terms of investment, Dunne noted
that several high-calibre firms invested in Ireland last year, including
Lucent Bell Labs, IBM, Hewlett Packard, Intel, Centocor, Guidant, Yahoo and
Merrill Lynch.

"Our business in 2005 continues to be buoyant and is on target. The quality
of the investments is being sustained and in particular we have had
considerable success in locating projects in towns throughout the country,"
he observed.

Dubai DIFC to Attract 500 companies in 3 years

At least 500 firms are expected to set up shop in the Dubai International
Financial Centre in the next three years, according to a senior official
from the DIFC.

Speaking to Gulf Daily News, Aseem O. Kabesh, DIFC's chief business
development officer, predicted that the impending opening of the Dubai
International Financial Exchange (DIFX) within the DIFC would be a
significant lure for blue chip companies from around the world.

"In three years of operations I see we (DIFC) would have a minimum of 500
firms, between financial and non-financial institutions. Around 60 per cent,
if not more, would be financial institutions," he told the paper.

The DIFX, which is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the DIFC, is set to commence
trading on September 26. A wide range of financial instruments will be
traded on the market's electronic platform and the DIFC board is looking to
attract listings from companies across the Middle East and the Indian
sub-continent as well as from Europe.

Established in September 2004, the DIFC offers firms 100% foreign ownership,
no taxes on income or profits, no foreign exchange controls and no
restrictions on the repatriation of capital or profits and has already
attracted many big names in the financial services and banking fields, such
as Barclays, Merrill Lynch and AIG.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005

Ex Swiss ambassador found guilty of money laundering

The former Swiss ambassador to Luxembourg, Peter Friederich, has been sentenced to three and half
years in jail.

The Federal Criminal Court found him guilty of money laundering as well as embezzlement, damaging
creditors' interests and falsifying documents.

But the court in Bellinzona cleared him of accusations of belonging to and assisting a criminal
organisation.

Friederich was ordered to pay a SFr15,000 ($12,000) fine and a number of his assets were seized.

Judges said the former ambassador had accepted SFr2.4 million from Spanish-Colombian drug dealers in
2001 while he was ambassador to Luxembourg.

He deposited the money in various bank accounts and received SFr134,000 as a reward, the judges said
on Monday. They added that he should have known that the money was of criminal origin.

Prosecutors had called for a six-year jail sentence for Friederich who pleaded not guilty to most of
the charges.

Stock market
During his diplomatic career, Friederich invested large sums of money in the stock market on behalf
of friends and associates, promising them a high return on their investments.

But when the stock market crashed in 2000, the former ambassador lost SFr5 million ($4.2 million),
putting him under financial pressure.

The court said Friederich embezzled investors' money to pay off debts and for his own ends. It is
not clear whether he will appeal against the verdict.

Friederich was arrested in July 2002 after SFr2.37 million ($2 million) in cash deposits turned up
in his private account in Luxembourg.

The 63-year-old was held in custody for over a month in the Swiss capital, Bern, before being
released pending court proceedings. Later in the year he was suspended from his post and given early
retirement.

Friederich's 30-year diplomatic career included postings to Vietnam, Cuba and finally Luxembourg in
1999.

swissinfo with agencies

Copyright © Neue Zurcher Zeitung AG
http://www.nzz.ch/2005/06/07/eng/article5847953.html

Tax but dont discriminate

 
by Byong-Ki Lee (eye@donga.com legman@donga.com)Tax agreements and domestic tax laws are being reformed to tax foreign capital that benefits fromprofits gained domestically, even if it was invested through establishing a paper company in a taxhaven. However it is undetermined whether tax agreements will be able to be revised, due to the factthat tax treaties must be discussed with the country in question and it is difficult to getcountries to surrender their vested rights.On June 6, the Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOFE) announced, "We will stipulate precise tax lawsto enable the Korean government to tax incomes that have been invested in Korea through tax havensto evade taxes whether they are foreigners or Koreans."They also added, "We will stipulate laws so that a resident of a third country will not be able toreceive benefits by establishing paper companies in a country that Korea has formed tax agreementswith."Korea currently has tax agreements with 62 countries including Malaysia, the U.S., and Japan.The international taxation manager of the MOFE, Lee Gyeong-geun, explained the situation, saying,"We need to establish definite regulations because there are foreign funds that are insubordinate totaxation on the grounds of tax agreements."This guideline of the government's seems to be a result of the government's awareness of thecritical public opinion that some foreign capital sources are raising an enormous amount of profitby using tax havens and tax agreements.Through June 7 to 10, the MOFE is planning to hold a second round of negotiations with Malaysia todiscuss revising tax agreements to exclude Labuan, which is currently used as a tax haven.Additionally, the MOFE is planning to enable the Korean government to tax foreigners who areoligopoly stock-holders possessing over 25 percent of a company's total stocks or who earninvestment yields by transferring the stocks of a company with over 50 percent of its assets in realestate.Copyright 2002 donga.com.All rights reserved.http://english.donga.com/srv/service.php3?bicode=020000&biid=2005060609518June 7, 2005 KST 14:24 (GMT+9)Tax, but don't discriminateThe government has said that it will develop measures for taxing foreign funds that have madeprofits in Korea after setting up a paper company in a tax haven. The government also said that itwould try to find a way to tax foreign funds' capital gains from acquiring management control inKorean companies and selling the shares back later, or from selling a company in Korea whose valuederives mostly from its real estate.Currently, the Korean government cannot tax foreign investors' earnings from the Korean stockmarkets, or from real estate transactions here. This is because no provisions for doing so werewritten into Korea's tax laws, or because laws dealing with the issue are vaguely written. Anotherreason is the tax treaties Korea has signed with other countries, treaties designed to preventdouble taxation. Thus, it is a relief that the government plans to establish a legal basis forlevying such taxes, though it comes a bit late.But the government should take care that such measures not be seen as an intentional exclusion offoreign funds from the Korean market, or as discrimination against foreign investors.Many of the foreign funds that have made enormous profits in Korea invested here after the 1997-98financial crisis, for Korea's sake. Back then, most of the Korean companies and financialinstitutions that were put on the market would otherwise have been liquidated, or the governmentwould have had to shoulder the struggling companies.Now, some complain that Korean companies were sold to foreign funds at dirt-cheap prices, or arguethat it would have been better if Korean funds had purchased them. But at that time, every singlecent was desperately needed. Of course, there were some cases in which foreign investors here tookadvantage of loopholes in Korea's capital market regulations, knowing that Korean funds could notafford to compete.But as long as foreign funds do not violate laws and regulations, it would be going too far topunish them for making money by excluding them from the market, or otherwise discriminating againstthem. If we do so, the lessons we learned from the difficulties of restructuring, and the fruits ofglobalization that we have acquired since then, will be in vain. Korea needs realistic,sophisticated measures that can expand the government's right to tax foreign funds without inflamingemotions against them.Copyright by Joins.com, Inc.http://joongangdaily.joins.com/200506/06/200506062355054079900090109011.html

Schumacher to lose his tax haven?

(GMM)  The roof on F1 champion and millionaire Michael Schumacher's tax paradise might soon cave in.

A petition before Switzerland's parliament - named 'The Schumi Initiative' - aims to close a
loophole allowing wealthy foreigners to negotiate low rates of tax.

Schumacher, 36, moved near Lake Geneva in 1996 to dodge Germany's 42 per cent income tax.  He now
pays about four per cent ($2m) of his $50m income to the Swiss government.

''We expect a decision in the autumn,'' said the 'Schumi' petition's author, Suzanne Oberholzer, a
social democrat.

''(The current situation) is unfair to the Swiss people and to the people of neighbouring lands.  He
should pay his fair share like everyone else.''

High profile millionaires and Swiss residents like Sir Jackie Stewart, Boris Becker, David Bowie,
Celine Dion and Roger Moore also would be affected.

Written: Mon, 06 Jun 2005 09:23:03

Copyright 2005 UpdateSport. All rights reserved.
http://formula-1.updatesport.com/news/article/1118049783/formula_one/
f1headlines/the-swiss-onto-schu/view.html

Swiss vote for closer ties with EU

 
By Tom Wright International Herald TribuneMONDAY, JUNE 6, 2005GENEVA Swiss voters on Sunday approved plans to join the European Union's passport-free zone, a movethat shows Switzerland is moving further away from its traditional isolation in the region.In a referendum, 55 percent of voters agreed to join the EU's Schengen and Dublin accords, which theSwiss government signed last year.Under the Schengen accord, Switzerland will dismantle passport controls at its borders with othercountries in the zone, and beef up security cooperation. The Dublin accord harmonizes asylumprocedures between members of the group.Samuel Schmid, Switzerland's president, said at a news conference in Bern that the result "willallow Switzerland to intensify its cooperation with the EU."The result goes against the prevailing mood in the EU, which was underscored by the rejections byFrench and Dutch voters of a proposed constitution for the 25-nation bloc.In Brussels, the EU foreign affairs commissioner, Benita Ferrero-Waldner, and the justicecommissioner, Franco Frattini, welcomed the vote on behalf of the European Commission."The ratification of these association agreements is an important step in the relations betweenSwitzerland and the European Union," Ferrero-Waldner and Frattini said in a joint statement to TheAssociated Press. "On the one hand, freedom of movement will obviously be facilitated; on the otherhand, the cooperation on internal security can be strengthened."For Switzerland, which has carefully guarded its neutrality in foreign affairs for much of the past400 years, accords like Schengen and Dublin show how things are changing, analysts say.The Swiss government, which supports eventual EU membership, argues that cross-border threats liketerrorism and organized crime mean that the country has to work with other nations.But a large number of older voters, especially from rural German-speaking eastern parts of thecountry, believe Switzerland should stick to its isolation.Most German-speaking cantons, excluding Zurich, Bern, Basel and Zug, voted no Sunday to the accords.French-speaking cantons, like Geneva, were strongly in favor.The far-right Swiss People's Party, known by its acronym SVP, was able to increase the no vote inthe past few weeks by linking the referendum to voter fears about immigration, unemployment andcrime.The Swiss People's Party accused the government of using the accords to move Switzerland closer tofull EU membership, which it claims a majority of Swiss do not want."People were told this was a security issue," said Luzi Stamm, a lawmaker for the party. "But reallyit was about getting closer to the EU."The government, backed by police and immigration services, sold Schengen-Dublin as a measure thatwas needed to reduce crime and illegal immigration.Authorities stressed that the accords would not mean giving up any power to Brussels, which helpedwin over voters, analysts said.Because Switzerland is still not part of the EU's customs union, border guards will continue tocarry out controls on goods at the frontier.Since the early 1990s, Swiss voters have twice rejected plans to begin negotiations to join theEuropean Union. The government admits that Swiss voters are still far from backing membership.Swiss people have been slow to accept change to their neutrality. Switzerland only joined the UnitedNations in 2002 after voters finally approved the move in a referendum that year.Fewer people support EU entry today than a decade ago, when the fall of Communism created anatmosphere of detente in the region, said Johann Aeschlimann, a political commentator.A sputtering economy and fears that efforts to open Switzerland's economy will lead to greaterunemployment have helped the Swiss People's Party sow its anti-EU message, he said.A second referendum planned for the fall, on a pact with the EU to make it easier for East Europeansto work here, is likely to face stiffer resistance, analysts say.In Switzerland's direct form of democracy, the Swiss People's Party was able to force referendums onboth of the EU agreements by collecting signatures.On Sunday, Swiss voters also agreed to allow homosexual couples to register their relationships.The law gives same-sex couples the same legal rights as married couples in financial matters liketaxes.But it stops short of allowing them to adopt children or obtain access to fertility treatment.The Parliament passed the law last year, but a small conservative religious party forced areferendum on the issue.http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/06/05/news/swiss.php

US targets diamond dealers in money laundering laws

 
(June 5, '05, 10:11 Albert Robinson)The U.S. Treasury's Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) has issued an interim final rulerequiring dealers in precious metals, stones or jewels to establish anti-money laundering programs.Dealers affected by the rules based on their business activities this year will be required to setup an anti-money laundering program by January 1, 2006 that comprises at least the following fourelements:Policies, procedures and internal controls, based on the dealer's assessment of the money launderingand terrorist financing risk associated with its business; a compliance officer who is responsiblefor ensuring that the program is implemented effectively; ongoing training of appropriate personsconcerning their responsibilities under the program; independent testing to monitor and maintain anadequate program.FinCEN said it issued the regulation to better protect dealers in jewels, precious metals andprecious stones from potential abuse by criminals and terrorists."The characteristics of jewels, precious metals and precious stones that make them valuable alsomake them potentially vulnerable to those seeking to launder money," said William J. Fox, Directorof FinCEN. "This regulation is a key step in ensuring that the Bank Secrecy Act is appliedappropriately to these businesses."The interim final rule applies to "dealers" who have purchased and sold at least $50,000 worth of"covered goods" during the past year. The dollar threshold is intended to ensure that the rule onlyapplies to persons buying and selling a significant amount of these items, rather than smallbusinesses, occasional dealers and persons dealing in such items as a hobby."Covered goods" include jewels, precious metals, and precious stones, and finished goods (includingbut not limited to, jewelry, coin collecting items, and antiques) that derive 50 percent or more oftheir value from jewels, precious metals or precious stones contained in or attached to suchfinished goods.http://www.idexonline.com/portal_fullnews.asp?id=24133

Korea moves in on Tax Havens

 
Seoul to Close Tax Loopholes for Overseas InvestorsSeoul wants to change double taxation treaties with other countries so it can tax overseasinvestment funds that operate here, under plans that also target Korean and foreign investors whoavoid taxation by setting up paper companies in tax havens.It wants to tax the capital gains of foreign funds that own more than a 25 percent equity in localfirms including financial firms, which under current double taxation treaties are exempt. It is alsotargeting overseas-based funds that invest in Korean companies with more than 50 percent holdings inreal estate and sell their stake in equities.The Ministry of Finance and Economy said Sunday it will supplement local laws and seek changes todouble taxation treaties to stop tax-haven based investors from avoiding duties in Korea.But the proposed changes will have no influence on ongoing tax probes of overseas funds like LoneStar, Newbridge and the Carlyle Group since they would only apply to future investments.The ministry also decided to enshrine in law the practice of tracking down and taxing Koreans andforeigners that operate and invest in Korea by way of tax-haven paper companies.(Park Jong-se jspark??chosun.com)http://english.chosun.com/w21data/html/news/200506/200506050015.htmlKorea Seeks to Tax Foreign Capital from Tax HavenBy Kim Jae-kyoungStaff ReporterSouth Korea seeks to levy a tax on any capital gains made here by foreign funds headquartered in taxhavens abroad, such as Labuan in Malaysia, by modifying double taxation avoidance treaties and localtax rules.The Ministry of Finance and Economy (MOFE) said yesterday that it decided to revise tax treatieswith foreign nations and domestic tax rules to prevent domestic and foreign capital from dodgingtaxes by using tax havens.To that end, the ministry plans to turn in a revision to the National Assembly this year under whichthe tax authority will be allowed to tax any capital gains earned by a paper company headquarteredin a tax haven abroad.It plans to track down the real investor of a paper company and levy a tax on capital gains,interest and dividend income earned by the real investor, if it is found they set up a bogus firm toevade taxes.Under the double taxation pacts, capital gains on the sale of shares and properties are not taxed,and the same is true with respect to Korean investments in foreign countries, including the U.S.Currently, Korea has signed agreements with 62 countries to avoid double taxes, including the U.S.,Japan and Malaysia.As the first step, the government plans to have a meeting with Malaysia from Tuesday to Friday todiscuss a plan to exclude Labuan, a frequently used tax haven by foreign funds when investing inKorea, from the double tax treaties.However, the government's plan to amend double tax treaties seems infeasible, given that such anamendment will only be possible when they sign new tax treaties with counterpart nations.Analysts say that since this is not an issue limited to Korea, the Korean government should be morecautious about dealing with this issue."This issue is very new to Korea and thus generates a lot of attention, but it is a problem thatarises in many places, for example in the U.S.," Institute for International Economics (IIE)senior economist Monty Graham said."Koreans should see the problem in this context, and moreover, my impression is that othercountries, including the U.S. and Canada, that face this issue have all concluded that the benefitof foreign investment is more important than the potential loss of tax revenue," he added.The government's decision to amend tax treaties came as a result of growing anti-foreign capitalsentiment here after a few foreign private equity funds, including New Bridge Capital and Lone Star,made a huge capital gains, without paying a penny in taxes, by bypassing local rules.The Carlyle Group and Newbridge did not pay anything on their capital gains of 700 billion won and1.15 trillion won, respectively, after selling Korean banks under their control, while Lone Staravoided being taxed on capital gains of 260 billion won after selling the landmark Star Towerbuilding in southern Seoul.kjk@koreatimes.co.kr06-05-2005 19:01http://times.hankooki.com/lpage/200506/kt2005060518585710440.htm

Selling house at a loss could have nasty tax implications

 
Kathleen PenderSunday, June 5, 2005Everyone knows residential real estate is a wonderful tax shelter. What's less well known are someof the tax disadvantages that can bite homeowners when they sell at a loss or wind up losing a housethat is worth less than they owe on it.With home prices soaring and foreclosure activity close to nil in the Bay Area, this is notsomething most homeowners are thinking about.In the nine-county Bay Area, there were only 39 residential foreclosure sales in April, down from 46in March, according to DataQuick.By comparison, in March and April 1995, there were 858 foreclosures in the Bay Area.I'm not saying whether the housing market will collapse, but people who are buying at today's loftyprices or who have leveraged their houses to the rafters may want to consider the tax consequencesif things take a turn for the worse.No tax deduction: If you sell your primary residence at a loss -- meaning for less than you paidplus the cost of improvements -- you get no tax deduction.This makes a certain amount of sense because the gain on the sale of a primary residence is tax freeup to certain limits. Assuming you lived in the house long enough, you can exclude up to $250,000 incapital gains if you are single and $500,000 if you are married filing jointly. Any profit overthose limits is taxed as a capital gain.No matter how much you lose on your primary residence, however, your tax deduction is always zero.This seems obvious, but it's not always.Sunnyvale CPA Leonard Williams says, "A prominent attorney referred a client to me. He paid $4.5million for a house that was now worth $4 million. He was going to go through this convoluted thingto sell it at a loss," thinking he could deduct it. "I said, 'This is a personal residence. Youcan't take a deduction.' "On the other hand, a loss on the sale of rental property is deductible. Williams says some peoplewho have a loss in their primary residence think they can move out, convert it to a rental and takea tax deduction."The problem is, if you bought it for $400,000 and it goes to $350,000, your cost basis in therental is not $400,000. It's going to be $350,000."If you sold it immediately for $350,000, you would realize no gain or loss.The value of the rental "would have to continue to go down to get the benefit of a loss," saysspokesman Jesse Weller of the Internal Revenue Service. "You wouldn't be able to claim the portionof the loss that occurred while it was your home."Foreclosure taxes: Suppose your house becomes worth less than you owe, you can't keep up themortgage payments and the lender forecloses on the property.You may be liable for two types of taxes: capital gains and cancellation of debt income. The sameholds true if you abandon the property or voluntarily turn it over to the lender.These taxes depend on whether you have a recourse or non-recourse loan.Non-recourse generally means that if the lender takes over your house, your debt is satisfied andthe lender can't go after your other assets, even if the proceeds from the foreclosure sale are lessthan the debt.In California, if you take out a loan to buy a house or a building with up to four units and youlive in the house or one of the units, the loan is non-recourse.A recourse loan generally means the borrower is personally liable for repayment. If the lender takesover the house that is worth less than the debt, the lender can go after the borrower's other assetsto pay the difference.A home equity loan or line of credit is a recourse loan. So are consumer loans secured by yourhouse.In most instances, if you refinance your house, the new loan is a recourse loan, says MichaelPfeifer, a real estate attorney with Pfeifer & Reynolds.However, Roger Bernhardt, a professor at Golden Gate University School of Law, says there is noCalifornia case law that definitively establishes this as fact.If you borrow money to buy investment property, it is generally a recourse loan unless it wasfinanced by the seller, in which case it is typically a non-recourse loan.-- Non-recourse loans. If you default on a non-recourse loan, you could be subject to tax on capitalgains, but you won't be taxed on the cancellation of debt.When a lender takes over a property, it's treated as a sale. Your "sales" price is the outstandingdebt.Your capital gain or loss is the difference between this debt and your adjusted basis, which isusually the amount you paid plus capital improvements (minus depreciation, if it's a rentalproperty).If the debt exceeds your basis, you will have a capital gain even if you don't get a dime in yourpocket. If this is your primary residence, and the gain is less than $250,000 (single) or $500,000(married), you won't owe tax.If the debt is less than your cost basis, you will have a capital loss.Suppose you buy a house for $600,000 and make no improvements. You put down $60,000 and borrowed$540,000 with an adjustable-rate, interest-only mortgage. Interest rates shoot up, home values falland a year later you can no longer make your payments. The bank takes over your house, now worthonly $500,000.You will have a capital loss of $60,000 ($540,000 in debt minus your cost basis of $600,000.) Youwon't owe tax, but you won't get a deduction if this is your primary residence. The biggest hit willbe to your credit rating.-- Recourse loans. With a recourse loan, your "sales" price is the fair market value of the house atthe time of transfer. Your capital gain or loss is that value minus your cost basis.In the above example, if the mortgage was a recourse loan, you would have a $100,000 capital loss($500,000 in fair market value minus $600,000 cost basis).With a recourse loan, you also may owe tax on cancellation of debt income. If the home is worth lessthan the debt and the lender does not go after you for the difference, that difference becomescancellation of debt income, and it will be taxed unless certain exceptions apply.In the above example, you would have $40,000 of taxable debt forgiveness income ($540,000 in debtminus $500,000 in fair market value), assuming you don't qualify for any of the exceptions.Cancellation of debt is not taxed if the loan forgiveness was intended as a gift (not likely unlessthe lender was a close relative), if the borrower is bankrupt or insolvent and in certain othercases.Cancellation of debt tax is rare, but it usually comes as a nasty surprise to those who owe it."A lot of people don't understand the tax consequences of walking away from their property," saysWeller.Cancellation of debt is taxed as ordinary income. If it exceeds $600, most lenders are supposed tosend you IRS Form 1099-C showing the amount you must report on your tax return.Here's one more example:Pretend you bought a house for $100,000. Its value goes up to $280,000. You refinance your originalmortgage with a new one for $250,000. The value goes down to $200,000, you default and the bankforecloses.This will probably be treated as a recourse loan because it was not acquired to buy the house.Assuming you still owe $250,000, you will have $50,000 in cancellation of debt income and a capitalgain of $100,000 ($250,000 market value minus $100, 000 cost basis.) Once again, the capital gainwon't be taxed because it falls within the exclusion for primary residences.Net Worth runs Tuesdays, Thursdays and Sundays. E-mail Kathleen Pender at kpender@sfchronicle.com.Page E - 1http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/06/05/bugg5d3fns1.dtl

Tax evaders keep step ahead of EU

 
By Tom Wright International Herald TribuneWEDNESDAY, MAY 25, 2005GENEVA After more than a decade of haggling, the European Union is now just one month away fromstarting its biggest, coordinated assault on tax evasion: a new law aimed at uncovering - andtaxing - interest earned on the hundreds of billions in savings stashed by EU citizens outside theirhome countries.Yet the windfall of new revenue that some cash-strapped countries, led by Germany and France, hadbeen hoping for is unlikely to materialize, according to bankers in Switzerland and other taxhavens.Not only are historic low interest rates keeping the potential pot to be taxed low, but manyinvestors are restructuring their deposits to legally avoid paying anything, bankers say.Others have already moved their money even farther afield - to places like Singapore - where it canremain hidden from tax collectors at home."We should certainly not expect to see any kind of fiscal miracle," said Urs Roth, chief executiveof the Swiss Bankers Association in Basel.Most European nations have been trying for years to recoup some of the lost revenue - estimated atmillions or billions of euros over the years - on interest earned by their citizens in tax havenslike Switzerland and Luxembourg.Tax amnesties offered in recent years have brought some deposits back, with Italy showing betterresults than Germany. Places like Switzerland are now finding it harder to accept money withoutasking questions because of stricter money-laundering rules adopted since Sept. 11, 2001.But huge amounts of potentially taxable funds remain out of reach of EU tax collectors. InSwitzerland, about 1.2 trillion Swiss francs, or $975 billion, was held by foreign private investorsand some three-quarters of that was not declared to tax authorities, Deutsche Bank estimated in areport last year.The new EU law, which takes effect July 1, allows governments to track at least some of that hoard.Negotiations, which started in 1989, bogged down for years over divisions between nations that lostout on taxes, like France and Germany, and financial centers like Luxembourg and Britain thatprofited from the investment business."It's a very political issue," said Roger Kaiser, a tax specialist at the European BankingFederation in Brussels. "From the start it was very difficult to reach agreement."The law was eventually whittled down to aim at only interest income from savings and bonds. Itcovers only individuals, not companies and trusts, and earnings from other assets, like stocks andderivatives, are exempt.Finance ministers gave their final endorsement to the pact a year ago, but implementation wasdelayed to allow time for countries to pass the necessary legislation."At the beginning we wanted much more," said Maria Assimakopoulou, taxation spokeswoman at theEuropean Commission. "That was the best compromise we could get."In 2007, the EU will review the directive with a view to possibly broadening its scope.In the meantime, neither the commission nor national capitals will speculate on how much revenuethey think they will collect.Generally, EU banks must report interest payments they make to residents of other EU nationsdirectly to those customers' home governments.Banks in Luxembourg, Belgium and Austria, which have banking secrecy laws, can levy a withholdingtax on interest income if clients choose not to have that information given to their homegovernments. The rate starts at 15 percent and will rise to 20 percent in 2008 and 35 percent as ofJuly 1, 2011.Three-fourths of the money collected will be forwarded to the country where the account holder is aresident - without identifying the depositor.Countries like Switzerland or Monaco, which are not in the EU, as well as dependent territories ofEU nations, like Jersey and the Cayman Islands, have also agreed to the withholding tax.The German government, which is one of the biggest losers from tax evasion, estimates its citizenshave some €300 billion to €500 billion, or $378 billion to $631 billion, in so-called offshore bankaccounts.But Charles Hermann, a partner at KPMG, an accounting firm, in Zurich, estimates that Switzerlandwill collect only about 30 million francs to 50 million francs annually in withholding tax."The directive is full of loopholes," Hermann said.Rather than spur depositors to bring their money back home, he expects most will rejigger theiraccounts to avoid any tax by such methods as moving them into trusts.Funds that are less than 40 percent invested in interest-paying assets, like bonds, are also exempt,according to Kaiser at the banking federation.The chief executive of a private, Zurich-based bank, who declined to be identified, said largeinvestors have "got their money structured in a way so it doesn't trigger the taxes."Swiss bankers say the new EU law also has sparked an outflow of money to Singapore, a relativelysafe haven that will not come under the withholding tax.Credit Suisse, Switzerland's second-largest bank after UBS, decided recently to move its head ofinternational private banking, Joachim Straehle, to Singapore from Zurich to take advantage offaster growth rates in Asia."We see lots of money flowing in to Singapore from all over the world these days," Straehle saidduring an interview."I feel Switzerland is becoming more part of Europe," he added. "We need to build up an alternativeto Switzerland, to put our eggs in different baskets."While Switzerland is still a huge financial center, little new money is coming into the country amidthe tightening of financial surveillance, bankers say.Kaiser at the European Banking Federation, which represents 4,500 banks, said some parts of thedirective were still not clearly defined, but conceded that there was little chance of postponing itagain.The law was already held up from a planned start date of Jan. 1 as Luxembourg and other countriesasked for more time to get laws through their Parliaments.A banker from Pictet & Compagnie, a private bank based in Geneva, said he is now advising Europeanclients not to bring funds to Switzerland.In the past, a French family that he advises was able to transfer money to Geneva without payingtaxes at home. By linking the account to a credit card, they could spend the money wherever theytraveled.But now, with tighter control by European governments, using a credit card might raise suspicion,the banker said. The family now buys vacation packages from Switzerland as a way of spending themoney."I'm not advising European clients to bring money to Switzerland anymore," the banker said oncondition of anonymity.Swiss banks are instead opening new branches in European capitals to manage their clients' taxablemoney, he said.http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/05/24/business/tax.php

Cayman Islands assists in US fraud case

 
Cayman Islands International Cooperation Regime Instrumental in Bringing Two U.S. Fraud CasesSuccessfully to JusticeMore than 15 Years After Its Ratification, Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty Still A Key Resource inthe Fight Against Global Financial Crime    WASHINGTON, May 27 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- The Cayman Islandscooperation with the U.S. Department of Justice on two criminal investigations-- including one that began more than seven years ago -- culminated in aspecial meeting Thursday between senior Cayman and U.S. officials inWashington, D.C.    Cayman Islands Chief Justice Anthony Smellie and Attorney General SamuelBulgin met with U.S. Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales and other officialsat the U.S. Department of Justice to exchange funds, stemming from the asset-sharing agreement as part of Cayman's Mutual Legal Assistance Treaty (MLAT)with the U.S.    The Cayman delegation received just over US$1.7 million, the result of thesuccessful prosecution of the two fraud cases. For the second case, the CaymanIslands in return presented the U.S. government with US$675,000, to be used asrestitution for the victims of that fraud, which has been successfullyprosecuted and the proceeds confiscated.    "Our relationship with the U.S. and our moral obligations as a member ofthe global community to assist in the efforts to combat the scourge oforganised crime and money laundering are of the highest importance to theCayman Islands," said Chief Justice Smellie. He also expressed Cayman'sappreciation to several members of the Office of International Affairs andcommended the strong working relationship that has developed between the twogovernments.    Attorney General Bulgin made the following remarks: "The occasion heretoday is indeed a reaffirmation of the long history of cooperation between theU.S. and the Cayman Islands -- with able guidance from the U.K. -- in thefight against criminal activities. It is an unequivocal pledge of the CaymanIslands to continue to cooperate with other countries, including the U.S., innot only prosecuting the perpetrators, but in confiscating their proceeds ofcrime."    Since the MLAT's introduction in 1990, in excess of US$10 million, arisingfrom some 230 cases in which the two governments have cooperated, has beenshared with the Cayman Islands. Several million dollars have also beenreturned to the United States for the restitution of victims of fraud andother cases.    The Cayman Islands has an agreement with the U.S. to share any proceedsfrom cases in which the two governments cooperated which are not to bereturned, for various reasons, to victims, shareholders or creditors. The MLATencourages use of funds for local drug rehabilitation, law enforcement andjustice administration programmes.    The Cayman Islands was the first regionally, and among the firstworldwide, to criminalise the laundering of the proceeds of all seriouscrimes, extending such legislation beyond the ambit of drug-money laundering.The legislation gives the courts of the Cayman Islands power to restrain andultimately to forfeit the proceeds of drug trafficking and all other seriouscrime, including fraud and official corruption.    In 2003, the Cayman Islands passed a comprehensive piece of anti-terrorismlegislation in addition to adopting, as part of its domestic law, UnitedNations Security Council resolutions dealing with the financing of terrorism.    The Cayman Islands Government has been continuously working bothdomestically and internationally to maintain a strong regulatory andcompliance framework. Domestically, this includes adherence to the FATFinternational anti-money laundering standards and the Basel Committee, IOSCOand IAIS global standards in the regulation of financial services and updatesto governing legislation.    Internationally, this includes bilateral mutual co-operation arrangementssuch as the mutual legal assistance treaty with the U.S. and variousregulatory co-operation arrangements maintained by the Cayman Islands MonetaryAuthority.    The Monetary Authority Law (2003 Revision) vests CIMA with powers to makelicensing, supervisory and enforcement decisions, and to co-operate withinternational regulatory authorities.About the Cayman Islands Financial Services IndustryBuilding on more than 40 years of steady growth, the Cayman Islands todayis recognised as a sophisticated, mature and diverse financial centre. Overthe past 15 years in particular, the Cayman Islands has focused on two mainobjectives:  building a world-class specialization of institutional businessand developing strong international cooperation agreements with the U.S. andother countries. The Cayman Islands financial services industry encompassesbanking, trust services, company services, mutual funds, insurance, vesselregistration, capital markets products and the Cayman Islands Stock Exchange.SOURCE Portfolio of Finance & EconomicsWeb Site: http://www.gov.kyCopyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved.

Shanghai citizens dumping US dollars

 
Chinanews, May 25 - Affected by the recent anticipated adjustments in the RMB, quite a fewShanghainese residents lean towards getting rid of the U.S. dollars they own. In April this year,many Shanghainese banks have experienced the pressure of rising volume of foreign currencytransactions. Many banks reflected that near end of April and beginning of May, residents' forextransactions amounts were up 30% or more over last year. Certain individual banks even reportedsingle day currency transactions amounting to several hundred thousand U.S. dollars.Because individual forex account holders flock to dumping the greenback, banks have experienced theever more serious issue of losing their foreign currency deposits. The Shanghai branch of thePeople's Bank of China reveals in its latest currency lending statistics that at the end of April,the entire city's Chinese financial institutions have lost a total of US million in their varioustypes of foreign currency balances, with savings deposit accounts losing US million.Many of Shanghai's banks active in forex businesses reflected that based on considerations of forexrisks, long-term forward currency transactions have been very active, with volume rising by themonth. In particular, forward transactions longer than 3 months have been increasing theirproportion of total forward deals.Financial experts point out that concentrated and larger-scale forex transactions enable total forexvolume to grow rapidly and if the Yuan were to be re-valued, banks would face the risks of losingmoney.Copyright© 2004 Chinanews.com. All rights reserved.

Treasury issues anti money-laundering rules

 
The U.S. Treasury Department issued its Patriot Act anti-money laundering rules for the jewelryindustry, the Jewelers Vigilance Committee announced Saturday. The rules require jewelry dealers toset up compliance programs within six months. However, it appears to let most jewelers off the hook.According to the rules, dealers in covered goods (meaning jewels, precious metals, precious stones,and finished goods) will have until January 1, 2006, to implement an anti-money laundering program.Those programs involve:* Performing a risk assessment in order to evaluate their particular risks of being exploited formoney laundering purposes;* Appointing a compliance officer to implement the program;* Designing and implementing an anti-money laundering program, based on prior developed riskassessment;* Training employees;* Testing the anti-money laundering program independently to ensure that the program functions asdesigned.Most retailers appear not to be required to implement the program - with the exception of retailerswho purchase more than $50,000 of covered goods from non-U.S. dealers or members of the public, andsell more than $50,000 of those goods.Pawnbrokers are also exempted from the rule.To help companies design anti-money laundering programs, the Jewelers Vigilance Committee haddeveloped the USA PATRIOT Act Compliance Kit.© 2005 Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.http://www.jckgroup.com/article/ca606299/jck?section=legislative%2c+regulatory+%26+legal

US probes Isle of Man scheme used by Bush donors

 
By Jason Nisse05 June 2005The Manhattan District Attorney, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the US InternalRevenue Service (IRS) are jointly probing a tax-shelter plan run out of the Isle of Man.The scheme, devised by one of America's biggest banks and used by two billionaire donors to GeorgeBush's election campaign among others, is being probed for possible breaches of securities andanti-money-laundering rules.The investigating bodies believed that up to $100m (£55m) of tax was saved through one scheme alone,and as much as $700m in taxes may have been avoided over an 11-year period. The scheme involvedexecutives and corporations handing over stock to trusts that they declared they neither owned norcontrolled. When the options were cashed in, no tax was payable. However, the IRS changed the rulesin 2003 to say that tax should be paid anyway.In the previous 11 years, tax schemes were marketed by Bank of America to at least 42 corporations.Earlier this year the Manhattan District Attorney, Robert Morgenthau, started probing allegationsthat some of these trusts were controlled by the people passing on the stock options. Both the IRSand the SEC have now joined in this probe.They have contacted the regulators on the Isle of Man asking for information on one particularscheme used by two Texan billionaire brothers, Charles and Sam Wyly.The duo, who made their money in computing and retailing, not only gave over $200,000 to PresidentBush's re-election campaigns, but also bankrolled TV adverts attacking his rivals, John Kerry andSenator John McCain.Sam Wyly describes himself as "the entrepreneur's entrepreneur" and came to prominence when heunsuccessfully tried to oust the board of Computer Associates in 2001 - only a year after thebrothers sold their Sterling Software business to the group for $4bn.The Isle of Man authorities have passed documents to US investigators relating to 20 differententities linked to the Wyly brothers that are registered in the Irish Sea tax haven. One, DevotionLtd, is a holding company with two directors and no employees; it is run, according to SEC filings,from a remote farm on the island. Another director, who lives in a terraced house, signed a transferdocument for $25m. At one point, Isle of Man entities owned 20 per cent of the shares in SterlingSoftware, as well as 12.8 per cent of another Wyly group, Michaels Stores, and 42 per cent of athird, Green Mountain Energy.The Isle of Man authorities have said they are co-operating fully with the US investigations, as hasBank of America. A spokesman for the Wyly brothers' lawyers said "they felt they only did what wasappropriate".The US authorities said they could not comment on ongoing investigations.©2005 Independent News & Media (UK) Ltd.http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/story.jsp?story=644159

How the city has become hooked on hot money

 
The ObserverLondon increasingly looks like an offshore centre serving many dubious financiers while at the sametime claiming to have regulation that puts it among the world's top onshore jurisdictions.Its offshore status is underlined by the large number of banks and branches of foreign banks in theCity. More are based there than anywhere in the world. Its onshore claim rests on a long-heldreputation for respectability - who after all would ever cast an aspersion on the Bank of England? -buttressed by a mass of anti-money laundering and anti-fraud regulation as severe as anywhere elsein the world. But as each new scandal breaks, London's status looks increasingly ambiguous.London's vulnerability to launderers is not in its laws but in their implementation. Government hasfailed to invest in sufficient skilled law enforcement officers or regulators to curb its sprawlingfinancial system. But this is no accident. The UK's economy cannot afford to curb its income fromthe 'invisible' financial sector, while its industrial sector becomes anorexic.As the United Kingdom feeds its growing addiction to finance and hot money, its regulators blusterever less convincingly about the security of the UK's financial system and its antipathy tomoney-launderers. Anti-money laundering legislation has mushroomed in the Britain to keep thisoffshore haven in line with international standards.The Financial Services and Markets Act of 2000 (FSMA) provides the legal basis for the FinancialServices Authority, which acquired its money-laundering powers on 1 December, 2001. Supervision ofUK banking had been subsumed into the FSA in 1997, an early initiative driven by the Chancellor ofthe Exchequer, Gordon Brown, and his assistant, Ed Balls, in response to the Bank of England'sfailure to act promptly on the BCCI money-laundering scandal.Action against money laundering gained a new urgency when the FSA took charge, says one moneylaundering reporting officer. 'Prior to 2001, no one did a damned thing. It was another "tick in thebox" exercise. You had a compliance department, you probably had an old bombed-out complianceofficer who was the money laundering reporting officer, who had no resources and no respect. Thebanks saw no risks to themselves, no one was going to fine them and no one was going to give themany grief. They were never going to get caught by the law.'Bankers' dissatisfaction with the UK's anti-money laundering system is fuelled by resentment at thepolice, who appear detached from the realities of the financial markets.Carol Sergeant, the FSA's former managing director for markets and risk (she is now the head ofcompliance at Lloyds TSB), said: 'The information that the banks are providing may not actually meetthe needs of law enforcement. But they are not getting any feedback on what law enforcement peoplewant. One of the main areas that has been successful has been terrorist finance because it has beenmuch clearer as to what the authorities want.'The Financial Services and Markets Act has instilled a sense of fear and foreboding into UK banking.This law allows for banks to receive surprise dawn visits from the regulators to check that theirprocedures correspond with the bank's perceived risk as well as with the regulator's own principlesand regulations. Bank training in money-laundering procedures has mushroomed, creating a demand forconsultants and trainers.The minutiae of the law and regulation are closely watched by the regulator, says one former FSAofficer, but more complex problems of vulnerability to fraud or abuse are overlooked.Bureaucratic competence is valued by the organisation, which answers to Her Majesty's Treasury, butlateral thinking into a bank's deeper weaknesses in knowing client affairs is harder to obtain.One money laundering reporting officer (MLRO) of a foreign bank based in London said caustically:'The people that have been fined so far have made pretty glaring errors in terms of basicidentification of clients. The FSA would probably not feel capable of fining people who had theright documents on file, ticked in the right boxes, but failed to make the conceptual leap tounderstanding the client and the client's business.'The officer continued: 'The FSA prefers to keep people back in the office, doing what it likes tocall desk-based reviews of firms. It is less likely to find wrongdoing in its patch; it has far toomany firms to look after for its complement. More staff would increase the cost to the industry, andthat in turn would increase the pressure on government.'Mike Adlem, the London-based managing director of the consultants Protiviti, commented: 'Have welost the plot? The whole point about AML [anti-money laundering] legislation was to go aftercriminal money, freeze it and take it out of circulation. But we have now got to the point where itis only a compliance issue. The vast majority of the effort is now focused on making sure that theFSA are happy. The sums recovered are negligible and totally out of proportion with the amount thatis being spent on compliance.'Michael Foot, the FSA managing director with responsibility for deposit takers, confirmed in May2003 that the United Kingdom had a considerable problem in maintaining and enforcing anti-moneylaundering procedures.He said: 'Operation of procedures to combat the laundering of the proceeds of drugs and other crimesthrough banks and building societies is not satisfactory. There is a great deal of money-launderinggoing on throughout the UK.'Policing the system is one arm of the government's anti-money laundering strategy. Another is thefight against those who hold the proceeds of crime. This was the context for the establishment ofthe Assets Recovery Agency. But observers say that the ARA compares poorly with its opposite numberin Dublin. Felix McKenna, the chief bureau officer of the Dublin-based Criminal Assets Bureau, sayscriminal prosecutions against gang lords are often cumbersome and unreliable, as the wealthy gangleader is likely to be near-untouchable.He said: 'You're not getting the big boys or the principals of the crime organisations. You won'tget the godfathers or the man who's controlling everything. You won't get him into a criminal courtand have him convicted of his crimes, and he will still be able to enjoy the benefits and profitsthat he has generated through his group or gang of the criminal activities they've been involved in.You'll catch his runners and his people lower down the gang.'The big guy can avoid prosecution through the threat of intimidation, fear, and the reluctance ofpeople to give evidence against him within his own organisation. They have no inhibition abouthiring a contract killer to kill a witness and intimidate witnesses and intimidate their families.They intimidate juries. They go to, not extreme lengths, but they're just the normal run of whatorganised crime does - this fear factor that they instil in people.'Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1499284,00.html

The financial washing machine

 
In explosive excerpts from his new book, Nick Kochan digs the dirt on how an army of criminals hasbroken into the world's financial system, and investigates the Square Mile's growing addiction tocriminal cashSunday June 5, 2005The ObserverMoney laundered through the world's financial system has now reached stratospheric levels, trillionsrather than billions. Fresh figures from the International Monetary Fund put it at the $2 trillionmark. But when you include the cost of fighting money laundering, the number reaches $2.5 trillion.That is approaching 10 per cent of global GDP, according to the IMF.These numbers indicate the amount of global crime where there is a financial component. Thatincludes everything from tax evasion and very basic fiddles to money made from computer-gamecounterfeiting, people-smuggling and drug-dealing.Big-time launderers pay heavily to deceive police, banks and tax authorities. They hire lawyers,accountants and bankers to make and launder illegal cash to ensure its entry into the legal economy.City professionals are easily tempted. Many of those who co-operated with the corrupt Bank of Creditand Commerce International came from leading firms. When push came to shove, ethics went by theboard and they joined the ranks of sleazy money launderers.The offshore world provides the funnel for most offshore money. This reservoir of anonymous accountsand bogus banks is accessed by institutions for both genuine and illicit purposes. Money passes fromaccount to account to acquire a genuine appearance. It is likely to reach the City of London after along journey to obtain the City's stamp of blue-chip credibility. For many, that is the final stop.Taking peddlers of dirty money out of the system, and out of London, challenges the FinancialServices Authority on a daily basis.Identification checks on small-time bank customers keep compliance officers in jobs but yield fewclues about laundering. An organised criminal worth his salt can mock up, or purchase, a utilitybill or passport.No wonder some suggest the checks are put there as a Revenue ploy to catch tax dodgers. Banks don'tthink the checks are funny. Sir John Bond, chairman of HSBC, was not laughing when he said hisbank's annual compliance bill is £400m.The bureaucracy that haunts the system is resented by the banks. Heavy spending on computers,software and staff yields few money laundering convictions. In theory, unusual payments or deposits,the surprise transfer of funds, or a suspect name will enable regulators, banks and investigators tointercept the money along the way. Red flags alert banks which, in turn, alert the financial police.In practice, the system is faster than the checks. Globalisation benefits all of us, crooksincluded.Terrorist money taxes the system even more. Small amounts of charitable money raise no red flags inbanks or police computers. At best, the money's source may yield a clue. Dispatches from a MiddleEastern or East African bank and bearing Islamic names might alert an official somewhere. Stoppingit in mid-track is possible but catching the payee or the recipient almost impossible.Electronic financial systems move too quickly for hide-bound compliance. This is reflected in thetiny amounts confiscated from terrorists. Breaking into the system today is no harder than breakinginto a bank, and perhaps easier. The criminal who possesses black money fabricates an explanation tomake the source look genuine. Corrupt elements in the financial system are persuaded by a goodstory. That story gains credibility in the telling. As more financial institutions handle money withdirty origins, those origins are lost.Money launderers fall into four key groups: global corporations engaged in fraud; corruptgovernments and their politicians who accept bribes; organised criminals who trade in drugs andother illegal goods; and terrorists. These are nebulous forces, and there will be those who say muchtalk of global money-laundering is fuelled by paranoia and even hysteria. But tyrants have triumphedby having their money laundered, drug gangs have ruined countries by passing their money throughcomplicit banks, terrorists have waged wars on the financial system to fund their outrages andcompanies have made themselves available to organised criminals.Those who perpetrate bankruptcies, frauds, huge share scams and bogus schemes such as Enron andWorldCom exploit the system's crevices. Structures of governance and trust are lost, undermining theintegrity of those who administer a country's economy. When these key roles are suborned by bankersin smart suits, as well as crooks and conmen, participants in the economic system are weakened.Global corporations have key roles in the laundering chain. They provide the services to move blackmoney. Criminals and corrupt politicians in developing countries and the former Soviet Union look towestern banks for a huge array of devices including offshore companies and tax structures, falsenames for their bank accounts, and lawyers and accountants for their complex financial structures.Competitive pressures spread into risky new markets and deals with criminal counter-parties drivebanks to abuse. The taint of corruption is unavoidable when doing business in many parts of theworld. An enforcement vacuum found in many developing countries draws in the criminal fraternity.The criminal who makes the break through into respectability can determine the conditions underwhich western companies do business. Trade with these criminal entities becomes a condition of entryinto the country. Launderers understand the system at least as well as those who work in itlegitimately. The language of the legitimate system enables them to explain the provenance of theirwealth. Technical developments such as the global electronic movement of money and complex financialderivatives turn black money into grey.Police forces lack many of the means to pursue funds as they cross borders or move at speed roundfinancial or governmental institutions. Corrupt money mingled with legal funds complicates theissue.Corruption fuels money-laundering. Bribery puts dirty money into the hands of politicians, butcorrupt politicians are exposed to extortion from mafiosos. Those may be small-time hoodlums oroligarchs (including, most dramatically, but not exclusively, Russians). The two forms of blackmoney-transfer link together seamlessly.Money launderers operating on this global scale have great intellectual ability. They are alsointriguing and complex personalities. Other Russian money launderers have demonstrated considerableintellectual ability before turning their cerebral firepower towards breaking down the financialsystem's controls.Mafia who have gained access to newly privatised state industries in countries experiencingpolitical change are pursued by the West. Financial manipulation can be institutionalised, asdemonstrated by the speed and efficiency with which the West has absorbed capital released from thebankrupt former Soviet Union. Established banks in the West collaborated with some dubious operatorsin Russia under the noses of politicians both in Russia and in the United States.Intelligence agencies, such as the CIA, handling and distributing black money for governments,influence unstable regimes. These shadowy groups are arguably among the most active of all moneylaunderers. The financial resources possessed by Oliver North, the architect of the Iran-Contraaffair in the 1980s, put him in the top echelon of money launderers.The proceeds of the drugs trade or other contraband finance organised crime groups. The moreestablished parts of organised criminal gangs seek to make investments in the 'legitimate' economy,by buying companies or real estate. The less established parts are likely to trade in illegal armswhere commissions and profits are massive.The cash economy is still the criminal's bulwark. Talk of 'dematerialisation', that is, turningmoney into digits and bytes, has not stopped the movement of dollar bills across borders the worldover. Couriers operating for drug dealers or terrorists are routinely caught with dollar bills orlarge-denomination euro notes strapped round their torsos. Launderers took a leaf from the drugdealers' book in devising systems for moving money.Groups perpetrating political violence are key customers for arms dealers. The red flags of criminalmoney-making differ from those thrown up by terrorist money-making, because the first showsexploitation of the financial system for acquisitive ends. Most terrorist money, on the other hand,is spent in the black market buying arms.Intelligence agencies working in conjunction with police are likely to be more effective in stoppingterrorist trades than banks. They are better-placed to understand the political strategy of theterrorist group.Banks can see the upshot of the strategy in the form of a money movement from a suspicious source,but by the time they have seen the money move the banks have lost the plot. The financial systemthat they created has beaten them.Dirty businessThe 10 most common sources of laundered money. US $US 1.3 trillionItaly 150bnRussia 147bnChina 131bnGermany 128bnFrance 124bnRomania 115bnCanada 82bnUK 69bnHong Kong 63bnSource: John Walker Crime Trends Analysis· From The Washing Machine: How Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing Soils Us, by Nick Kochan,Texere, £19.95Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1499283,00.html

Britain closes expat tax loophole

 
Conal WalshSunday June 5, 2005The ObserverThe Inland Revenue has closed a loophole that has allowed thousands of wealthy Britons to avoidpaying capital gains tax.The measure is part of Chancellor Gordon Brown's crackdown on tax avoidance and targets many Cityinvestors who have achieved 'temporary non-resident' status by living in certain European countries.Treasury officials hope that their action, contained in the small print of the new Finance Bill,will be worth up to £100 million for the Revenue. 'It's a very clear signal that if you make acapital gain in this country, you're going to have to pay tax on it,' said John Whiting, a taxpartner at PricewaterhouseCoopers.Because of bilateral treaties, Britain has agreed with Belgium, Portugal and Austria, UK nationalsliving in those countries have been able to claim 'non-resident' status just one year after leavingthe UK. This enabled them to avoid paying capital gains tax to the Exchequer. Elsewhere, expatBritons have to spend five years abroad before qualifying for this privilege.Closing this loophole is just one feature of the Finance Bill's anti-avoidance effort, which hasattracted criticism from multinational companies. It also contains measures likely to increase thetax bills of insurers and venture capital firms.Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005http://observer.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,6903,1499280,00.html

South Dakota man charged in tax scheme

 
CARSON WALKERAssociated PressSIOUX FALLS, S.D. - A former Brookings man who used his parents' address to file a tax return hasbeen charged as the result of a tax shelter scheme, according to federal prosecutors.A grand jury in Sioux Falls indicted Robert Marking, 43, of Scottsdale, Ariz., on three counts oftax evasion and one count of conspiracy to impede the IRS in its attempt to assess and collect hisincome taxes.He pleaded not guilty to the charges Thursday and was released on bond. A trial date has not beenset. If convicted, Marking could get up to five years in prison on each count, a fine and be orderedto pay restitution.According to an affidavit filed in federal court, Marking became involved in 1998 with an anti-taxorganization called Anderson Ark and Associates, or AAA, which sold tax evasion programs.Justice Department officials called the venture one of the most far-ranging tax shelter schemes everprosecuted.The scheme involved investments in shell companies, illusory loans from Costa Rican bank accountsand other superficial transactions to make it appear that clients had legitimate, tax-deductiblebusiness expenses.Marking did not file federal tax returns from 1993 through 1997, and then in 1998 filed a returnthat applied supposed business losses from the three previous years, according to the affidavit.Marking used his parents' Brookings address to file the return, which is why the court case wasfiled in South Dakota. The return included a claim for a refund of $8.12, which was sent to thataddress, the document states.An investigation concluded that Marking actually owed $95,979 for 1998 taxes. The indictment againsthim also accuses him of not paying $78,414 for 1999 taxes and $131,148 for 2000.http://www.aberdeennews.com/mld/aberdeennews/news/11809254.htm

Money laundering ring smashed

 
>From correspondents in MadridJune 04, 2005From: ReutersSPANISH police have arrested 13 suspected gang members who may have laundered up to 100 millioneuros ($163 million) from extortion, bribery and contract killings in Eastern Europe.The Ukrainian-run gang channelled its illegal gains into hotel and property investments fromBarcelona to the southern Mediterranean region of Almeria, before sending the profits into offshoreaccounts in tax havens, police said today.Among those detained in the operation, dubbed "Red Marble", were nine Spaniards, three Ukrainiansand a Russian.Authorities seized a 400 room hotel in Almeria, 50 luxury flats awaiting sale, and art by renownedartists such as Catalan surrealist painter and sculptor Joan Miro.Authorities also froze 60 bank accounts in Spain, the Dutch Antilles, Belize, the Bahamas and theVirgin Islands.Copyright 2005 News Limited.http://www.news.com.au/story/0,10117,15504492-23109,00.html

Two young Indians cash in on online poker

Vijay Dutt

London, June 3, 2005

Two Indian technology graduates, a former Internet porn baron and her husband are about to become
dollar billionaires as a result of the phenomenal growth in online poker. After only seven years in
operation, the four owners of the world's largest Internet poker company, PartyGaming, have a
business worth £5.5bn.

They now plan, the Independent reported, to float it on the London stock market. "It is set to
become one of the biggest companies in Britain by value, overtaking household names such as Boots,
Sainsbury's, British Airways and Cable and Wireless."

The four brains behind the venture are Ruth Parasol, a Californian lawyer who reportedly made her
original fortune in online pornography, her husband, Russ de Leon, and two Indian technology
graduates, Anurag Dikshit and Vikrant Bhargava. They are, according to the daily, "cashing in
£1.26bn between them by selling part of their stakes to outside shareholders. They are holding on to
the rest of the shares themselves - giving each of them a worth of between £750m and £2bn".

Bhargava, 32, is originally from Rajasthan and specialises in banking before joining the
PartyGaming. His friend Anurag Dikshit, 33, is said to be a computer whizzkid who created the
technology behind online poker. He is a graduate of the Indian Institute of Technology in Delhi, and
he was working as a software developer in the US for various companies when he hooked up with Ruth
Parasol in 1998. He owns 40 per cent of the company, which is said to be worth around £2.2bn.

The company's 1,100 staff, ranges from top management to call centre workers in India, who all will
also share in the bonanza. Even those at a basic level in PartyGaming's Hyderabad call centre could
earn more than three times their salary from the windfall.

Richard Segal, the chief executive of PartyGaming, was quoted saying: "What we have done using the
technology of the internet is give people the chance to play whenever they want, in their own homes,
without the intimidating prospect of having to look their opponents in the eye if they were in a
real-life game."

The online poker market has grown by a staggering 466 per cent in 12 months to reach $1.4bn (£770m)
last year. It is expected to double this year to $2.9 billion. Britons are responsible for
four-fifths of Europe's online gambling. More than four million Britons claim to have gambled
online.

Gamblers Anonymous, the gambling counselling service, said it had seen a dramatic rise in the number
of calls it receives from people blaming the Internet for their addiction." Gambling on the Internet
is like pornography on the Internet. Clicking a screen on a computer is much easier for many people
than going in to a sex shop and buying the goods face to face. People who are too scared or
embarrassed to go in to a betting shop will bet online, and they can also bet unnoticed," a Gambling
Anonymous spokesman told Independent.

© HT Media Ltd. 2005.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/5983_1386890,00430005.htm

Doing business in Panama

 
Press ReleaseSource: Research and MarketsResearch and Markets: Doing Offshore Business in the Panama 2005Friday June 3, 11:00 am ETDUBLIN, Ireland, June 3 /PRNewswire/ -- Research and Markets(http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c18351) has announced the addition of Offshoring SpecialReport: Doing Business in the Panama, 2005 to their offering.>From small beginnings early in the 20th century, the offshore sector has grown ever faster inresponse to high tax rates in the developed countries, until it is estimated now that more than halfof the world's money is offshore. Offshore has no precise dictionary meaning: the word simplyreflects the fact that most low tax jurisdictions are islands. Loosely, it is used to mean outsidethe control of the highly-taxed Western nations, although those nations could have controlled thegrowth of offshore jurisdictions (International Offshore Financial Centres = IOFCs) much moretightly if they had wanted to. It is an interesting question, why they didn't -- maybe a combinationof individual self-interest and muddle? Our "Offshoring Special Report, 2005" provides in-depthbusiness, legal, political and economic perception as well as attractiveness of this location asoffshore tax haven.    The contents of this report are as follows:     Summary     Geography     Population Language And Culture     Government     Economy And Currency     Entry And Residence     Business Environment     Foreign Investment Regime     Company Incorporation         Corporate         Trust         Partnership         Sole Proprietorship         Branch     Offshore Sectors     Offshore Activities            Banking            Holding Companies       Insurance            Trusts               Case Studies     Offshore Regulations         Table Of Statutes         Banking Law     Law & Taxation         Offshore         Forms Of Offshore Operation         Fees Payable By Financial Institutions         Taxation Of Foreign Employees Of Offshore Operations         Exchange Control     Employment And Residence         Domestic         Corporate     Business License Fees         Payroll Taxes         Property Taxes     Personal         Residence And Liability For Taxation         Payroll Taxes         Municipal Taxes     Labour Environment         Regulations         Work Permits     Foreign Relations         Geopolitical         Taxation Treaties         Trade Alliances     Conclusion     Appendix 1     Process Flow Charts     Appendix 2     Law Firms     Company Formation And Ship Registration     Trust Management     Accounting And Auditing     Tax Planning     Banking Services And Asset Management     Listing Agents And Stockbrokers     Isp/Hosting & E-Commerce Service Providers     Official Regulatory Bodies     Captive Insurance ManagementFor more information visithttp://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c18351

Indonesian president satisfied with money laundering lobby

President Susilo Bambang  Yudhoyono has expressed satisfaction with the results of  lobbying
launched by the government seeking to lift the country  from the blacklist of the Financial Action
Task Force (FATF) on  Money Laundering.

In mid January Susilo sent a number of ministers carrying  his letters to leaders of a number of
countries including  Japan, Brazil, France, Britain, the United States, Australia  and New Zealand
seeking to persuade the countries to vote in  favor of Indonesia when the FATF meets later this
month.

Presidential spokesman Dino Patti Djalal said the reports  from the ministers are quite encouraging,
adding Indonesia is  expected to be lifted from the blacklist.

Minister at the State Secretariat Yusril Ihza Mahendra said  the government will not only be seeking
technical improvement  such as in the implementation of money the laundering law but  it would also
use diplomacy by approaching countries considered  to greatly influence the decisions of the FATF.

Indonesia and number of other countries have been  blacklisted as non cooperative by the FATF on
money  laundering.

Indonesia denied the allegation describing it unfair.

Copyright © 2004 - 05 Moneyplans.net
http://archives.moneyplans.net/frontend211-verify-5993.html

US asks for help in money laundering fight

By JEANNINE AVERSA, AP Economics Writer

Friday, June 3, 2005

06-03) 15:08 PDT WASHINGTON (AP) -- The Bush administration, in its latest effort to nab drug lords
and terrorist financiers, will require major dealers in gold, diamonds and other precious metals and
gems to set up comprehensive anti-money laundering programs.

The Treasury Department's Financial Crimes Enforcement, dubbed FinCen, announced the action on
Friday.

Specifically, such dealers will need to take steps including establishing policies and procedures to
identify risks and minimize opportunities for abuse, training employees and designating a point
person to assess compliance.

The provision applies to dealers who have bought and sold at least $50,000 worth of precious metals
and gems. Dealers whose activities for the 2005 calendar year fall into that dollar threshold will
have until Jan. 1, 2006, to set up anti-money laundering programs.

Given the dollar threshold, most retailers in this industry are not required to set up such
programs, a statement issued by FinCen said.

"The dollar threshold is intended to ensure that the rule only applies to persons engaged in the
business of buying and selling a significant amount of these items, rather than small businesses,
occasional dealers and persons dealing in such items for hobby purposes," the agency said.

The Treasury Department has required a broad range of financial companies to adopt anti-money
laundering programs. The issue took on heightened importance after the Sept. 11, 2001, terror
attacks.

"The characteristics of jewels, precious metals and stones that make them valuable also make them
potentially vulnerable to those seeking to launder money," said FinCen's director William Fox.

In one money-laundering scheme uncovered by authorities, drug-money cash was exchanged for gold,
which was then molded into tools, belt buckles, light switches and other items to be smuggled out of
the country.

Congressional investigators have told the Treasury Department it needed to get a firmer grip on how
terrorists may be using alternative means - such as trafficking in gold and hard-to-trace diamonds -
to raise and move financial assets.

On the Net:
Financial Crimes Enforcement Network: www.fincen.gov/

©2005 Associated Press

BofA in tax shelter probe

Probe of offshore investments expanding
Knight Ridder - Friday, June 03, 2005
The Dallas Morning News

By Will Deener

DALLAS _ A state and federal investigation into offshore trusts involving Dallas billionaires Sam
and Charles Wyly first reported in February may actually involve dozens of other corporations and
executives who used a similar tax shelter.

The Wyly brothers in the 1990s set up offshore trusts that held stock and options in the names of
family members. They claim the trusts were set up to benefit their family members and some
charities, but apparently regulators think they might have been set up as tax shelters.

"The Wylys are cooperating with all inquiries and look forward to successfully resolving these
issues," said Bill Brewer, the Dallas lawyer representing the Wylys.

The Internal Revenue Service has said as many as 42 corporations and many more executives may have
been involved in "an abusive tax avoidance transaction" involving the transfer of stock options to
family controlled entities. However, an IRS spokesman refused to identify the companies and
executives involved.

Earlier this year, Michael's Stores Inc. said the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and the
New York County District Attorney were examining stock transactions between these trusts and the
company's chairman Charles J. Wyly and vice chairman Sam Wyly.

Michaels said that it had received a grand jury subpoena from the Manhattan district attorney's
office for documents related to offshore trusts that held Michaels shares on behalf of family
members of the Wyly brothers..

During the 1990s, Bank of America advised the Wyly brothers on tax matters and is under scrutiny by
regulators, according to a Wall Street Journal report Friday.

Bank of America spokeswoman Shirley Norton refused to confirm or deny that the company is under
investigation. "We don't comment on those kinds of matters," she said.

The Wyly brothers set up numerous trusts in the Isle of Man, a small but well-known tax haven in the
Irish Sea. The 227-square mile island is a British dependency and attracts some of the United
Kingdom's wealthiest residents, primarily because of its low tax rate.

Apparently, the Wyly brothers aren't the only ones who used the popular stock option transaction
marketed by Bank of America. The IRS earlier this year released a statement regarding the
transactions, saying it had identified 42 corporations, many more executives and unreported income
of more than $700 million.

In a May 19 statement, IRS Commissioner Mark Everson called the transfer of stock options to
family-controlled entities an "abusive tax transaction."

But Brewer said the offshore trusts and related transactions are "complex and sometimes
misunderstood." Further, he said, several different financial institutions and experts advised the
Wyly brothers, and all the transactions were reported appropriately.

"These are family and charitable trusts that were established for purposed such as estate planning,"
Brewer said. It's not entirely clear how the Wyly trusts operated. But in general here is how the
IRS describes the tax shelters:

First a public company grants stock options to a senior executive. The executive then transfers the
options to a trusts or partnership controlled by the executive's family.

The parties structure the transfer as a "sale" and the trust then "pays" the executive for the
options with a long-term or deferred note _ say due in 30 years. Shortly after the options are
transferred, the trust exercises the stock options and sells the stock in the open market.

The executive then takes the position that tax is not owned until the date of the deferred payment _
in this case 30 years _ although the executive has access to the partnership assets.

The IRS announced a settlement offer for anyone involved in these types of transactions. The offer
expired last week, but the IRS spokesman said he did not know how many executives or companies
responded.

(c) 2005, The Dallas Morning News.
http://www.menafn.com/qn_news_story.asp?storyid=cqp_vweict0zgu0hpuku


Report: BofA in tax shelter probe
Regulators investigate bank's role in $100 million-plus transaction, WSJ says.

June 3, 2005: 7:59 AM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Bank of America, the nation's third-largest bank, is under investigation for
helping two wealthy Texans hide their fortunes from taxes, a newspaper reported
Friday.

The Wall Street Journal, citing unnamed sources, said federal and state authorities are probing
whether Bank of America violated securities and anti-money laundering laws in helping Sam and
Charles Wyly shelter more than $100 million in stock-option gains from U.S. taxes. The paper
indicated the probes could expand to include other wealthy clients of the Charlotte, N.C.-based
bank.

A Bank of America spokeswoman told the Journal the bank is cooperating with investigators and
doesn't believe it broke any laws. A lawyer for the Wylys said his clients did nothing wrong.

The Internal Revenue Service, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and New York District Attorney
Robert Morgenthau are reportedly focusing on a popular stock-option transaction that Bank of America
and other financial services companies marketed to executives and prominent investors during the
1990s bull market.

The IRS concluded the transaction was an illegal tax shelter and banned it in 2003.

According to the Journal, The IRS alleges that more than 40 unidentified U.S. companies and dozens
of executives used the shelter to avoid more than $700 million in taxes.

The Journal noted that the Bank of America investigation comes amid a broader IRS campaign to
penalize tax professionals for marketing improper shelters.

© 2005 Cable News Network LP, LLLP. A Time Warner Company ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.
http://money.cnn.com/2005/06/03/news/fortune500/bofa_probe/


BofA in tax-shelter probe
Charlotte Business Journal - 9:10 AM EDT Friday

Bank of America Corp. and other financial institutions that marketed a once-popular stock-option
transaction are being investigated by Manhattan District Attorney Robert Morgenthau.

The Internal Revenue Service and the Securities and Exchange Commission have joined in the probe,
lawyers familiar with the case told The Wall Street Journal.

The investigation could have broad implications for big investors who sought help from
financial-services companies during the bull market of the 1990s in locking in gains on stock
options.

Under the shelter, which the IRS outlawed in 2003, executives donated options to trusts that they
said they neither owned nor controlled. Authorities, however, contend that users did in fact retain
control. The IRS says at least 42 unnamed U.S. corporations and dozens of executives used the
shelters and failed to report income and pay taxes totaling more than $700 million.

It isn't clear how many of the companies and executives were clients of BofA or its predecessor
banks, such as NationsBank Corp., which merged with BankAmerica Corp. in 1998 to form
Charlotte-based BofA (NYSE:BAC).

BofA spokeswoman Shirley Norton told the newspaper the bank is cooperating in the investigations and
believes it followed the law.

"We always cooperate with investigations, and we can't comment on customer relationships," she said,
declining further comment.

© 2005 American City Business Journals Inc.
http://charlotte.bizjournals.com/charlotte/stories/2005/05/30/daily28.html?jst=b_ln_hl

New rules crack down on tax havens

 
By Lucy Warwick-ChingPublished: June 3 2005 13:46 | Last updated: June 3 2005 13:46Study a map of the globe and you could miss them entirely. But discreet tax havens such as Guernsey,Jersey and the Isle of Wight, will become the focus of Inland Revenue tax avoidance legislation whenthe EU Savings Directive takes effect from next month.Under the directive, financial institutions in EU member states and some neighbouring territorieswill be required to hand over to the relevant tax authority information about savings incomereceived by EU individuals not resident in the country where the account is held.“The objective of the directive is to ensure that information on deposits is communicated to the taxauthorities,” says Charlie Hill, tax investigations officer at Grant Thornton. “The information canthen be compared with what has been declared on their domestic tax returns and the tax inspectorscan keep an eye on who’s paying the right amount of tax, and more importantly, who isn’t.”For investors with nothing to hide (those who already declare everything to the taxman) there willbe nothing to worry about under the new rules. Administrators have agreed to pick up any additionalcosts involved and there is not expected to be much extra paper work.“It is only those people that have been hiding money from the taxman that will be affected,” saysHazel Weston, tax adviser at the Investment Management Association. “We are expecting some people tomove their money farther afield [out of the reach of the Savings Directive] to places like Singaporeor Bermuda.”The rules will apply to all EU member states, certain dependent and associated territories of memberstates, including the Isle of Man, the Channel Islands and the British Virgin Islands.For a transitional period, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria will be allowed to apply a withholding taxinstead of providing information, at a rate of 15 per cent for the first three years (2005-2007), 20per cent for the subsequent three years (2008-2010) and 35 per cent from 2011 onwards. Switzerland,Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man will be able to continue to apply the withholding tax optiongoing forward.The launch of the Savings Directive signals the start of the EU’s assault on tax evasion and isaimed at uncovering and taxing interest earned on the hundreds of billions in savings held bycountries outside their home countries. Grand Cayman, in the Caribbean, for example, looks after$1,000bn in private deposits while Guernsey, 80 miles from the south coast of England holds around£70bn in assets.But, despite already being six months late, the rules are still expected to take some time to takeeffect.“We expect some teething problems because all the countries will have different research methods,”says Mona Patel at the IMA. “But we expect there to be a bit of an amnesty while countries work outwhat they need to do.”There are signs of misgiving among financial services providers too. A survey of 500 senior financeprofessionals from the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey, conducted by IoM-based firm Acuity lastyear, showed that more than 50 per cent of those polled believed that the directive was “bad news”,although some 30 per cent felt that the planned withholding tax would not have a negative impact onthe jurisdictions.The results of this survey suggest that the industry is uncomfortable with the information exchangeaspect of the legislation, and many believe the effect of measures like the EU directive will merelyresult in capital flowing to jurisdictions where interest reporting is not an issue.“We are concerned that people might start to move their money to other countries where it can retainits mystery and remain hidden from the Inland Revenue,” says Patrick Firth, managing director atButterfield Funds Services in Guernsey.He also believes that the windfall of new revenue that had been expected from the extra tax may notmaterialise as many investors are restructuring their deposits to legally avoid paying anything.A type of investment that is expected to benefit from the directive is the alternative sector: hedgefunds, investments in films, venture capital funds and private equity funds have greater attractionssince they all fall outside the rules.“The Savings Directive is particularly targeting people who keep money in safe investments such asbank accounts rather than those that invest their money in equities,” says David Frood, tax directorat PricewaterhouseCoopers. “The Inland Revenue believes the worst offenders for tax evasion arepeople that hide their money in cash accounts.”All UK investors should be aware that merely depositing or investing funds abroad or in alternativeinvestments does not absolve him or her from paying tax on them.© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the FinancialTimes.http://news.ft.com/cms/s/be9eb30e-d42c-11d9-9db0-00000e2511c8.html

The myth of wealthy tax evaders

 
IRS success undercuts stereotypes, so why do they still drive policy debates?By Hank AdlerAssistant Professor of Accounting, Chapman University, George Argyros School of Business andEconomicAs millions rushed to file returns by last week's deadline, talk of big changes in the tax systemwere ubiquitous. The Presidential Advisory Panel on Federal Tax Reform continues to hold hearingsbut has already concluded the Internal Revenue Code needs a complete overhaul. Heeding academics andpundits who want to drop the code in favor of a consumption tax, Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., touts abill to replace income, payroll and estate taxes with a 23 percent national sales tax on everything.What's common to these and other calls for change? The contention that the wealthy are evading andavoiding federal income taxes.I believe this is a myth, and that the government is doing the best job of taxing the wealthy sincethe 16th Amendment was ratified in 1913 to allow a federal income tax.The evidence:The number of taxpayers whining about the alternative minimum tax indicates that wealthy taxpayersare paying federal income taxes.Because of "at-risk" rules and "passive income" rules, taxpayers can no longer invest in crazyschemes to reduce their taxes.The ongoing assault by the Justice Department on tax-shelter scams has been very effective. The IRSrecentlyannounced recouping $3.2 billion from the "Son of Boss" tax shelter. New tax-shelter schemeshave virtually vanished.The current confiscatory IRS penalties and interest now leave most wealthy taxpayers uninterested inpadding deductions or underreporting their income.This is not to suggest that drug dealers are reporting their income; no system of taxation is goingto cause people to report illegal activity. But I think a case can be made that overall thiscomplicated system may actually work.Further, Linder's proposed consumption tax is problematic. If adopted, the states would be forced tofollow suit. The result, predicts Bill Gale of the Brookings Institution, would be a totalconsumption tax rate of 50 percent. For a couple living on Social Security plus a small pension whocurrently pay little or no federal or state income tax, their disposable income would be reduced bythe amount of the consumption tax. This could move tens of millions of Americans to the wrong sideof the poverty line.There are five reasons to consider revision of the Internal Revenue Code or the creation of areplacement system of taxation:To decrease tax avoidance, discussed above;To increase or decrease the total tax burden;To achieve a redistribution of the tax burden from one economic class to another;To increase or decrease tax code social engineering such as the deductibility of home mortgageinterest; and/orTo effect tax simplification.But drastic steps aren't necessary to achieve most of these goals.Yes, reducing the social engineering within the code is politically difficult. For most individuals,there is a short list of deductions that dramatically impact their lives: home interest deductions,medical deductions and casualty losses (unexpected damage to property).But an increase or decrease in revenues or redistribution in the total tax burden can be achieved bysimply increasing or decreasing income tax rates. And the mosttransparent way of changing thedistribution of taxes between rich and poor would be to change the tax rates - higher for one group,lower for the other.As for tax simplicity, there are many Internal Revenue Code sections that can and should be combinedand a number that should be eliminated. Almost no one would pay the alternative minimum tax iflawmakers eliminated the tax deduction for all taxes and reduced income tax rates, etc., topercentages where the net federal taxes paid would not change.Beyond this type of change, simplicity generally means opening the tax code to innovativetax-planning activities that can reduce the taxes of the wealthy. But this sort of simplicity iswhat allowed rich taxpayers to pay little or no taxes and what forced legislators to enact at-riskrules, passive loss rules and the alternative minimum taxes.It's plain that any big change to the tax code or change to a different form of taxation must beanalyzed very carefully. A great deal of mischief can occur under the banner of tax simplificationor reform.Copyright 2005 The Orange County Registerhttp://www.ocregister.com/ocr/2005/04/19/sections/commentary/orange_grove/article_486064.php

Skype enables video calling

 
By FaultlinePublished Wednesday 1st June 2005 11:18 GMTSkype users can now download a free plug-in from Dialcom that will enable video conferencing usingthe Skype P2P engine. The Spontania Video4skype, allows any users with a webcam connected to theirPCs and a Skype account and broadband internet access, to make video-calls using the Skype client.Dialcom's Sponania video plug-in is designed to be integrated with any third party VoIP system andSkype just happens to be the first. We're not quite sure what the business model for Dialcom is, butperhaps, like Skype, there will later be paid versions and add-on sales.In the meantime, Skype has signed more than 1,800 affiliate websites that will share web trafficwith Skype and that's just after a test period with its affiliate program.The deal is that Skype will reward websites with commissions of up to 10 per cent of its own storepurchase revenues when a buyer comes from their site. The referral period credits publishers for allpurchases made from return visits to the Skype Store for up to 30 days after the original click.The operation will also work in reverse with Skype able to route upwards of its 39 million users toother sites through advertising links.Skype has partnered with a select group of super affiliates, sites with millions of registeredusers, including: 192.com, aSmallWorld, Firstream, LunarStorm Sweden, LunarStorm United Kingdom,MyFamily.com, Passado, SpyMac and SuperEva.Skype's VoIP system has more than 39 million registered users, increasing by more than 150,000 newusers per day.Copyright © 2005, FaultlineFaultline is published by Rethink Research, a London-based publishing and consulting firm. Thisweekly newsletter is an assessment of the impact of the week's events in the world of digital media.Faultline is where media meets technology. Subscription details here<http://www.rethinkresearch.biz/subscribe.asp>.

One of our disk drives is missing

 
By John LeydenPublished Tuesday 31st May 2005 16:36 GMTInvestment bank UBS has launched an investigation after a disc reckoned to contain sensitive clientdata went missing. The lost drive held data from the bank's Tokyo share trading division raisingfears that confidential trading histories from the bank's corporate clients might be disclosed, TheTimes reports. Japanese regulators told the paper they took the leak "extremely seriously". Japan'sFinancial Services Agency was told about the missing disc last week and though it's unclear when thedisc went missing, theories abound.The disc went missing during the course of a software upgrade between the bank's Tokyo and Hong Kongoffices. Although earmarked for destruction the disc remains unaccounted for. "Although the metalcase that once contained the disk is understood to have been retrieved, the storage machinery insidewas gone. It is not known whether the disk has fallen into the hands of anyone outside the bank,"The Times reports <http://business.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,8209-1633534,00.html>.Client data would normally be saved onto corporate servers rather than desktops but UBS is refusingto take any chances. The bank said it has launched a probe into the disc's disappearance. R

Using technology to follow the money

 
By ALLAN NACKANThursday, June 2, 2005 Updated at 10:05 AM EDTSpecial to Globe and Mail UpdateFront Lines is a guest viewpoint section offering perspectives on current issues and events frompeople working on the front lines of Canada's technology industry. Allan Nackan is a partnerspecializing in corporate insolvency and restructuring at A. Farber & Partners Inc.In today's high-tech world, fraud investigation has taken on many new dimensions. Funds can be movedinstantaneously and hidden in offshore accounts in places where they can't be tracked through normalmeans. While it is easier to use technology to play corporate shell games and park funds offshore,those with the job of tracking and recovering the funds are also developing new capabilities to keeppace.The speed with which money can be moved electronically across international borders through advancedand well-integrated global banking networks presents a real challenge to fraud investigators. In arecent case, we painstakingly traced $3-million to a Turks and Caicos bank, only to find that it hadbeen moved to another jurisdiction once the fraudster realized that we were hot on his heels.The Internet has been a major culprit in enhancing a fraudster's ability to dissipate and hideassets offshore. Whereas fraudsters once had to physically attend a branch to provide instructions,the prevalence and ease of use of electronic banking over the Internet allows for funds to be movedbehind the scenes and the use of false identities to conduct transactions through offshore trustsand nominee shareholders.In addition, the Internet has become a popular advertising medium for suspect financial institutionsand trust companies to aid fraudsters in their deception.The need to combat the Internet challenge is especially critical in an age where governments areincreasingly focused on regulating and attempting to control global money laundering - largelybecause of the link to organized crime and terrorism. Statutory and regulatory measures such asFintrac monitoring, Proceeds of Crime and Anti-Money Laundering legislation and the TerrorismFinancing Act, which have been put in place in Canada, are mirrored in many other foreignjurisdictions.Yet, despite these safeguards, the quantum leap in the amount of funds being transferredinternationally makes monitoring a daunting task. When one considers that the success ofinvestigative teams relies heavily on the ability to move swiftly and with the element of surprise,the speed of information flow across the Internet makes this even more challenging.For investigators to get one step ahead, it is necessary to anticipate the fraudster's moves bydeveloping timely intelligence and pinpointing the movement of money before the fraudsters becomeaware that they are under investigation. Legal tools to aid in the purpose can instigate disclosuresof bank records, freezing of accounts and funds tracing, and allow for premises searches. Althoughmany of these legal tools were not designed for this purpose, they have become vital nonetheless asthe methods used by the fraudsters have improved.Successful use of these methods however, requires a combination of good instinct, attention todetail and use of a number of sophisticated high tech tools, including:  * Increasingly sophisticated international on-line databases to uncover corporate fronts andaffiliations, locate assets, bank accounts and other background information which is helpful inprogressing the investigation;  * Computer forensics, which play an ever-increasing role in all investigations. This involvesthe identification, collection, preservation, analysis and Court presentation of computer-relatedevidence. In today's world this is especially key, since large volumes of information relating tobusiness and financial transactions are now kept electronically.Data mining tools that provide a systematic approach to analyze critical data. Techniques include:  * Advanced searching capabilities;  * Re-creating information that was routinely or intentionally deleted from hard drives;  * Analysis and tracing of e-mail messages;  * Location and utilization of hidden passwords and countering the use of encryption.An illustration of these tools at work is the real life case of Mr. D who defrauded investors ofapproximately $100-million. A. Farber & Partners Inc. was appointed as the Interim Receiver, whosejob it was to investigate the fraud and recover as much of the money as possible. On assignments ofthis nature, we work closely with our strategic partners, Intelysis Corp., who specialize inforensic accounting and investigations.Using bank records seized under the powers granted to us as the receiver over Mr. D, the teamconducted a detailed analysis of his financial activities as well as of his telephone and e-mailrecords, and identified two key recipients of funds. On-line research uncovered one foreigncorporation in Costa Rica, where we were able to identify a bank account where $54-million had beensent to the parent company of an Internet-based bookmaker. A second recipient, also identified as anoffshore bookmaker, was traced to Jamaica.Armed with this information, an injunction was obtained from the Ontario Courts, along withdocumentation enabling us to obtain the assistance of the Costa Rican courts. Our team then deployedto San Jose where we were eventually able to accompany the police on raids conducted at the premisesof two sports books.Using sophisticated computer forensic techniques on two hard drives that were discovered during thisprocess we also identified key e-mails and Internet usage records that identified the flow of moneyto accounts in Switzerland. Once again the Interim Receiver was able to freeze the accounts andlegal action for recovery is ongoing.So while the fraud artists are employing ever more sophisticated technology, sometimes it worksagainst them. In many ways, investigators and fraudsters are still playing the same old game of "catand mouse", but technology employed on both sides has certainly sped up the pace of the game.© Copyright 2005 Bell Globemedia Publishing Inc. All Rights Reserved.http://www.globetechnology.com/servlet/story/rtgam.20050512.gtflfarbermay12/bnstory/technology/

Revealed - the new scramble for Africa

 
Revealed: the new scramble for AfricaDavid Leigh and David PallisterWednesday June 1, 2005The Guardian new "scramble for Africa" is taking place among the world's big powers, who are tapping into thecontinent for its oil and diamonds.Tony Blair is pushing hard for African debt relief agreements in the run-up to the G8 summit inScotland in July. But while sub-Saharan Africa is the object of the west's charitable concern,billions of pounds' worth of natural resources are being removed from it.A Guardian investigation beginning today reveals that instead of enriching often debt-riddencountries, some big corporations are accused by campaigners of facilitating corruption and provokinginstability - so much so that organisations such as Friends of the Earth talk of an "oil curse".Simon Taylor, director of Global Witness, which has been prominent in urging reform, said: "Westerncompanies and banks have colluded in stripping Africa's resources. We need to track revenues fromoil, mining and logging into national budgets to make sure that the money isn't siphoned off bycorrupt officials."Looting of state assets by corrupt leaders should become a crime under international law, he said."The G8 should take the lead in this."The original Scramble for Africa took place in the late 19th century, when Britain, France andGermany competed to carve Africa into colonies.Today corporations from the US, France, Britain and China are competing to profit from the rulers ofoften chaotic and corrupt regimes.Our investigations in three African countries rich in resources - Angola, Equatorial Guinea andLiberia - show how British-based companies have negotiated deals that critics say are against theinterests of some of the poorest and most traumatised people on earth.The Guardian's inquiries focus on a big gas project in Equatorial Guinea; plans to exploit Liberia'sdiamonds, and western banks' readiness to provide Angola with huge oil-backed loans.In Equatorial Guinea, BG plc (formerly the British Gas state company) has closed a deal with theregime of President Teodoro Obiang to buy up the country's production of liquefied natural gas forthe next 17 years.Britain's HSBC bank has been accused by a US Senate committee of helping Mr Obiang move cash fromthe country's oil revenues into financial "black holes" in Luxembourg and Cyprus. The country isthreatened with repeated coups by outsiders keen to get their hands on the oil wealth.In Liberia, which has been beset by civil war, LIB, a private London bank, was behind attempts tomonopolise alluvial diamond production and the country's telecommunications. The UN and the WorldBank have criticised the schemes as secretive and against the country's interests. LIB has nowwithdrawn.And in Angola, the victim of an even more destructive internal war, one of the UK's leadingdevelopment banks, Standard Chartered, has been accused of damaging the country's economy byproviding record multibillion dollar loans which give a stranglehold over future oil production.A succession of scandals has already revealed how oil wealth was looted in billions from the formerAbacha military regime in Nigeria with the assistance of western banks and bribes paid by US oilfirms.In Sudan and Chad, Chinese companies are moving in, backing and arming military rulers and buildingpipelines.And in France, the then state oil company Elf has been accused in corruption investigations ofhaving paid kickbacks and encouraged regimes to run up debts as part of a deliberate "Africanstrategy".Congo-Brazzaville, the fourth-largest sub-Saharan oil producer, was dominated by Elf, and now hasthe highest per capita debt in the world.Global Witness says in a 2004 report: "Oil wealth [there] has left a legacy of corruption, povertyand conflict."The British government is pushing an international plan for disclosure by companies of how much theypay African rulers for their natural resources. The Extractive Industries Transparency Initiativehas been praised by anti-corruption bodies.But campaigners say that on present evidence improvements in western behaviour so far appear slight.And they fear the chances of these issues being raised as priorities at the G8 summit at Gleneaglesin July remain bleak as EU countries quibble about levels of aid and the US balks at innovativeschemes for debt relief.Gareth Thomas, the international development minister, said Britain hoped to have 20 Africancountries signed up to the transparency code by the end of the year. "There is big political supportfor this programme and we will be addressing the issue in the G8 summit communique," he said.Special reportsG8 http://www.guardian.co.uk/g8/0,13365,967228,00.htmlGlobalisation http://www.guardian.co.uk/globalisation/0,7368,408592,00.htmlUseful linksOfficial Sea Island G8 summit 2004 site http://www.g8usa.gov/University of Toronto G8 information centre http://www.g7.utoronto.ca/SavannahG8summit.org http://www.savannahg8summit.org/Canadian government: G8 site http://www.g8.gc.ca/No G8 - anti-G8 site http://www.nog8.org/International Festival for Peace and Civil Liberties (anti-G8 site) http://www.freesavannah.com/Guardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005http://www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/story/0,15756,1496561,00.html

Cyprus has lowest tax rate in EU

Cyprus Has The Lowest Tax Rate 10% Within The EU, More And More Businesses Set Up A Branch or
Head Office In Cyprus

Cyprus, lowest tax rate with 10% within the EU, Business Worldwide, Banking and Asset
Protection

(PRWEB) June 2, 2005 -- Cyprus is probably the only country in the world that is considered a tax
incentive country and at the same time offers important international tax planning opportunities and
advantages through its wide double tax treaty network.

Better tax planning is one of the many reasons why so many thousands of business people have chosen
Cyprus for establishing an International Business Company.

In addition to that IBC's in Cyprus offer an excellent tool for asset protection:
- To file first position liens against assets and property closing the door to predatory litigation
before it begins.
- To segregate high-risk investments from other more secure holdings.
- To protect retirement funds from possible bankruptcy.
- To provide for the transfer of assets for the next generation in an efficient and discreet
fashion.
- Nominee directors and officers can allow you to conduct business transactions for your benefit
while you remain anonymous.
- To access your funds with corporate debit or credit cards thereby maintaining absolute
confidentiality.

www.PRivacyManagement.info a team of multilingual management consultants, chartered accountants and
lawyers, specializing in matters like registration and operation of IBC's - International Business
Companies, Shipping Companies, foreign investments in Cyprus and investments abroad. We know that a
business needs auditors and advisors who understand their international strategy and can reflect
this in their audit approach.

For further information please visit www.EU-IBC.com

###

© Copyright 1997-2004, PR WebT. All Rights Reserved
http://www.emediawire.com/releases/2005/6/emw246342.htm

Ways to minimise withholding tax

 
Jane Hui2005-06-02 07:16A previous article noted that foreign investors have to carefully select the proper investmentholding vehicle for a mainland investment that will bring about the best result in terms of dividenddistribution. Now, we will discuss the tax implications of future disposal.Based on the Income Tax Law on Foreign Investment Enterprise, foreign investors of a foreigninvestment enterprise (FIE) are subject to withholding tax on any gain derived from the mainland onthe disposal of a mainland entity's equity interest. Such withholding tax had been set at 20 percent and was subsequently reduced to 10 per cent. Therefore, if a foreign investor disposes of itsinterest in a FIE or even a domestic enterprise, it is subject to 10 per cent withholding tax on thegain so derived. The gain from the disposal of interest is the balance of the sales proceeds afterdeduction of investment cost and capital surplus and the undistributed profits that the investor isentitled to and will be transferred to the new acquirer due to the change of ownership. As Chinaadopts a withholding tax system and the taxpayer in this case is a foreign entity, the taxwithholding agent will be the mainland entity to be transferred.To avoid the withholding tax, the holding vehicle and structure is very important. There aredifferent general rules that can be observed:How many layers of entity would be used for investment holding purposes; andWhich country should the direct holding entity be incorporated in.There are different corporate philosophies in the first item; some companies prefer a simple holdingstructure, while others don't. Companies which go for simple holding structures work on single layerholding vehicles and therefore the second item is the key to the success in tax saving. Companieswhich do not mind having complicated structures work on at least two layers of holding vehicle, andthen they don't worry too much about the second item as transfer will not happen at the directownership level.Let's look at the second type first. When we talked about mainland withholding tax on capital gain,we referred to the disposal of mainland direct interest, ie, the transaction is within the mainlandjurisdiction and thus mainland withholding tax applies. Therefore, the only way to avoid such tax isto transact outside of the mainland jurisdiction. There are two ways to do it. The two ways include:- Two layers of foreign investment holding and interest disposed at the upper layer level,therefore, the disposal is totally outside of the mainland jurisdiction. As there is no change inthe background of the immediate holding vehicle of the mainland entity, there is no obligation forthe mainland entity to report any change to the mainland authorities and also no mainlandwithholding tax will be imposed as the transaction is outside of the mainland jurisdiction.- Instead of disposing of the mainland entity's interest direct, the foreign investor disposes ofthe interest of the foreign immediate holding. As the transaction is outside of the mainlandjurisdiction, mainland withholding tax does not apply as well. There may be implications in terms ofother formalities as the background of the immediate holding has changed.In both cases, the foreign investor would be more casual in selecting the holding vehicle andusually go for a tax haven country holding company. This is because the gain so derived will also beexempt from tax in the home country.Then there is the case that foreign investors prefer simple holding structures and wish to opt for astructure which brings best tax result from both dividend receipt and capital gain purposes. Then atax treaty shopping is necessary. By looking at the different tax treaties signed between China andforeign countries, many tax treaties provide preferential rates for both dividends receipt andcapital gain. The tax efficiency will even be bettered if the home country provides tax exemption orlow tax treatment to the same income.For example, the Sino-Mauritius tax treaty provides exemption from withholding tax on capital gainif the interest is not mainly constituted by real property and the dividend withholding tax isreduced to 5 per cent; also Mauritius only taxed this income at a low effective tax rate of 3 percent.After selecting the most tax efficient holding vehicle, the foreign investor would not have too muchreservation in disposing of the mainland interest direct. On top of tax treatment, disposal ofdirect mainland interest would involve work on various formalities with different authorities forchanging the investor on records.The author is Partner, China Tax & Business Advisory, Ernst & Young, Hong Kong.(HK Edition 06/02/2005 page4)http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-06/02/content_447849.htm

Tax Cut feeds offshore tax havens

For: Canadian Labour Congress
Stock Symbol:
Contact: Jean Wolff, Canadian Labour Congress
Primary Phone: 613-526-7431
Secondary Phone: 613-878-6040 ext.
E-mail: communications@clc-ctc.ca

Date issued: June 2, 2005
Time in: 11:34 e

Attention: Assignment Editor, Business/Financial Editor, News Editor, World News Editor,
Government/Political Affairs Editor


Tax Cuts Feed Offshore Tax Havens, Not Working Families

OTTAWA, June 2 /PR Direct/ - Large Canadian corporations used the generous tax cuts of recent years
to stash larger amounts of money in offshore tax havens instead of delivering productive
jobs-creating investments in Canada. This is only one among other startling findings in a research
paper titled "The Dubious Case for More Corporate Tax Cuts" distributed today to the members of the
House of Commons' Standing Committee on Finance. The Committee is reviewing the two budget bills
that prompted the very dramatic second reading votes two weeks ago.

"Corporations have shipped profits out of Canada in recent years, especially in 2004 when the net
outflow reached almost $50 Billion," explains economist Andrew Jackson, director of social and
economic policy at the Canadian Labour Congress who conducted that research. "More significantly,
there has been a large and growing outflow to offshore financial centres (or tax havens), led by the
financial sector which now has $72 billion invested in these centres."

Jackson invited the members of the Finance Committee to work quickly and to recommend that the full
House of Commons adopt the two bills.

"When the promised investments in children, in skills, in housing and in infrastructure materialize,
the two budget bills - C-43 and C-48 taken together - will make our economy more attractive. They
will also provide results that working families will measure on their kitchen tables. That's why
working people expect Parliament to pass these budget measures without delay," Jackson says.

The Canadian Labour Congress, the national voice of the labour movement, represents 3 million
Canadian workers. The CLC brings together Canada's national and international unions along with the
provincial and territorial federations of labour and 137 district labour councils. Web site:
www.clc-ctc.ca

- END PRESS RELEASE - 6/2/2005

/For further information: Andrew Jackson, 613-526-7445 and 240-3869/

CO: Canadian Labour Congress
ST:
IN: ECONOMY FINANCE LABOUR POLITICS SOCIAL
PRD: 200506020006

Press release distributed by PR Direct 866-736-3779

All press releases are written by the client and have NO affiliation with the news copy written by
either The Canadian Press or Broadcast News newsrooms. Any questions that arise due to the content
or information provided in the press release should be directed to the company/organization issuing
the release, not to CP or BN.

Copyright The Canadian Press 2005
http://www.prdirect.ca/en/view_release.aspx?trafficid=2901

Human traffickers target Cayman Islands

 
Franz Manderson,Chief Immigration OfficerThursday,  June  2, 2005The Cayman Islands appears to be an increasingly attractive destination for the illegal movement ofpeople in the wake of a large group of Chinese nationals being allegedly trafficked through theCayman Islands earlier this year. Two people from Albania and Ukraine using fake Dutch passportsrecently travelled through Grand Cayman to get to Canada where they were apprehended by Immigrationon 22 May.The two unidentified people then requested political asylum. In another incident, the ImmigrationDepartment is currently investigating several Costa Ricans who attempted to enter the countryillegally and have been detained.These incidents along with the eight Chinese nationals who used Grand Cayman as a transit point toenter the US in February appear to be part of a trend to target Caribbean countries to illegallyenter the US and Canada, according to Chief Immigration Officer Franz Manderson."The Cayman Islands is being targeted by illegal migrants to transit to the US and Canada," said MrManderson. "From our investigations these people try various routes to get into North America. OtherCaribbean countries have been experiencing the same problems and it seems that the Cayman Islands isnow being targeted."Mr Manderson added that two people, from Albania and the Ukraine travelled from Jamaica to GrandCayman. They stayed for a few days before flying to Canada on Air Canada where their fake passportswere detected, before they could travel onward to the US.Subsequently, both people applied for political asylum after they were detained.Mr Manderson stated that illegal migrants gravitate toward countries, which allow them in. Further,these fake passports are increasingly sophisticated and more difficult to detect, a relatively newphenomenon for the country.The Immigration Department is tackling the problem from two angles. Firstly, the Department isseeking to provide the most recent information on false documents for the frontline Immigrationofficers to identify fake passports and prevent illegal entry. Secondly, officers will be scheduledto attend updated training from the Immigration Department in the United Kingdom, which areconsidered experts in forgery detection."We take this situation very seriously and since using the Islands is a new phenomenon, we need moretraining to update ourselves in detecting fake passports," he said.On 7 February, six Chinese nationals and two Singapore nationals were detained after entering the USthrough Grand Cayman using false travel documents to Tampa, Florida. Investigations followed intosuspected human trafficking, but there was not enough evidence to prosecute.In recent months, questions have arisen that the Cayman Islands may have become attractive to humantraffickers attempting to bypass the increasing restriction of US Homeland Security, because ofCayman's reputation as a wealthy jurisdiction as well as its proximity to the US.Copyright © 2003 - 2005 Cayman Net Ltd   All Rights Reservedhttp://caymannetnews.com/2005/06/849/traffickers.shtml

Jersey promises to outlaw bribes

 
David LeighThursday June 2, 2005The GuardianBritain's offshore tax haven of Jersey has failed to plug a loophole under which bribery paymentsmade in Africa remain legal.Despite a promise to a mission from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD)last year that the loophole would end early this year, it remains open. Jersey-registered companieswill be able to pay overseas bribes with impunity.Lord Falconer's Department for Constitutional Affairs refuses to take action, although it has thepower to enforce change on the nominally self-governing island.The UK mainland outlawed overseas bribery three years ago, although no one has been prosecuted andthe OECD has criticised Britain's failure to provide sufficient resources.Legal sources on Jersey say the promise has been broken because of administrative delays and thedecision to redraft the law to conform with a UN convention against bribery.There will be further delays while the island holds elections this autumn, and the loophole will notbe plugged until next year at the earliest.Although the Channel Islands have become a notorious - and wealthy - haven for "black money", Jerseyhas had an improving record in recent years.President Olusegun Obasanjo of Nigeria visited the island last year to thank its attorney general,William Bailhache, for a ground-breaking investigation which recovered nearly $200m (£110m) lootedby relatives of Nigeria's late dictator, General Sani Abacha.A conduit through which more than £100m had flowed in undercover payments from Britain and France tothe regime in Qatar was also stopped up, exposing along the way a £6m payment from the arms firm BAeto the Middle Eastern country's foreign minister in connection with a deal for Hawk warplanes.These investigations used anti-money laundering powers, which island investigators say are avaluable weapon.But the ease with which Jersey transactions can be concealed was demonstrated when about £100m ofAngola's oil money was discovered to have been moved to Lloyds bank accounts in Jersey in 2000. Thatincluded oil contract "signature bonuses" from the US Marathon oil company, and loans from Swissbanks.Commission for AfricaCommission for Africa http://www.commissionforafrica.org/11.03.05: Full text of Our Common Interest, the Report of the Commission for Africa (pdf)http://www.commissionforafrica.org/english/report/thereport/english/11-03-05_cr_report.pdf11.03.2005: At a glance: the main recommendationshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/story/0,15756,1435550,00.htmlLinksUN Convention Against Corruptionhttp://www.unodc.org/pdf/crime/convention_corruption/signing/Convention-e.pdfChristian Aid: Africa 2005 http://www.christianaid.org.uk/africa2005/Africa Confidential http://www.africa-confidential.com/BBC: Africa 05 http://www.bbc.co.uk/africa05Special reportHear Africa 05 http://www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/0,15756,1399090,00.htmlFacts and figuresHear Africa 05: vital statisticshttp://www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/statistics/0,15844,1435604,00.htmlFocus on Maputo, MozambiqueHear Africa 05: Maputo http://www.guardian.co.uk/hearafrica05/maputo/0,15760,1402516,00.htmlNews guideAfrican media sources http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldnewsguide/africa/0,11376,618238,00.htmlMore special reportsAids http://www.guardian.co.uk/aids/0,7368,405525,00.htmlFamine http://www.guardian.co.uk/famine/0,12128,736805,00.htmlG8 http://www.guardian.co.uk/g8/0,13365,967228,00.htmlOil http://www.guardian.co.uk/oil/0,11319,608464,00.htmlWater http://www.guardian.co.uk/water/0,13790,1012137,00.htmlEquatorial Guinea http://www.guardian.co.uk/equatorialguinea/0,15013,1291350,00.htmlKenya http://www.guardian.co.uk/kenya/0,12689,849973,00.htmlLibya http://www.guardian.co.uk/libya/0,14139,1111726,00.htmlRwanda http://www.guardian.co.uk/rwanda/0,14451,1183763,00.htmlSouth Africa http://www.guardian.co.uk/southafrica/0,13262,942621,00.htmlSudan http://www.guardian.co.uk/sudan/0,14658,1235601,00.htmlTanzania http://www.guardian.co.uk/tanzania/0,11441,622421,00.htmlConflict in west Africa http://www.guardian.co.uk/westafrica/0,13764,1004331,00.htmlGuardian Unlimited © Guardian Newspapers Limited 2005http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/story/0,3604,1497213,00.html

Monitoring service proposes tougher money laundering laws

 
MOSCOW, May 30 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian Financial Monitoring Service, Rosfinmonitoring, saidtoday it was pursuing legislation that would broaden its jurisdiction in the fight against financialcorruption."One of the norms that may become law is the authority to suspend financial operations on thesuspicion that they may be involved in money laundering," Viktor Zubkov, chairman ofRosfinmonitoring, said at an anti-money laundering conference in Moscow. "Another norm is themonitoring of financial accounts of certain persons."Rosfinmonitoring, the Russian counterpart to the international Financial Action Task Force on MoneyLaundering (FATF), is currently involved in 18 joint international investigations, Zubkov said.He also said the upcoming ratification of the UN anti-corruption convention requires that clientsand beneficiaries in operations be identified. The convention will also include measures tointensify the fight against corruption in the private sector."It is obvious that the ratification of the convention will call for amendments to [our]legislation, firstly to the Criminal Code," Zubkov said.In the past five months, Rosfinmonitoring sent authorities 680 reports on suspicious operations,with a total value of 110 billion rubles ($4 billion).Zubkov said this was twice as much in volume as the same period last year and three times the sum.Rosfinmonitoring now receives 12,000 to 14,000 reports a day compared to the 5,000 - 6,000 a day itreceived in 2004.Zubkov said that in 2004 Rosfinmonitoring conducted 3,260 financial investigations, several of whichresulted in convictions. "There were not that many, only six, but they were serious violations ofthe law involving large sums of money," he said."So far this year several cases have been brought to trial based upon our materials," Zubkov said.In one of the cases the accused was sentenced to 12 years in prison, which sends a serious signal topeople involved in money laundering. © 2005 "RIA Novosti"http://en.rian.ru/business/20050530/40442042.html

Russia cracks down on money laundering

 
NOVO-OGARYOVO, June 1 (RIA Novosti) - The Russian government has approved a concept of measures tocounter money laundering and financing of terrorism, Viktor Zubkov, director of the federalfinancial monitoring service (FFMS), said when meeting today with the president.He expressed hopes that the FFMS would coordinate all relevant effort provided for in the concept,which was compiled by an inter-departmental group and various ministries and agencies, including theFFMS, for a period until 2010.Zubkov believes that his service is not inferior to the leading world financial intelligence taskforces."Last year 1,500 materials referring to hundreds of transactions were submitted for consideration atlaw-enforcement bodies, with of many of them supplied evidence for instituting legal proceedings andsome have already seen court judgments, passed on them," said Zubkov. "These are major casesinvolving millions of US dollars and tens of billions of rubles and we are acting on a par with thebest intelligence services of the world," said the FFMS head.Zubkov dwelt on the work, which has been done since last October within the framework of theEuro-Russian regional group. "Its participants are members of the European-Asian EconomicCooperation (Russia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan) with observers from virtuallyall G-8 countries, with the exception of Canada," he said."We are working with Canada and hope that it will join the alliance soon," said Zubkov. "Practicalwork is underway, with such functioning links as the secretariat, groups on legislation, methodologyand technical assistance.""Early in July, Singapore will be the venue of a plenary session of the Financial Action Task Forceon Money Laundering and we are going to make a report on our work," said the head of the Russiankind of FATF.© 2005 "RIA Novosti"http://en.rian.ru/business/20050601/40457571.html

Doing business in Switzerland

Offshoring Special Report: Doing Business in the Switzerland, 2005
Knowledge Solutions, June 2005, Pages: 130

>From small beginnings early in the 20th century, the offshore sector has grown ever faster in
response to high tax rates in the developed countries, until it is estimated now that more than half
of the worlds money is offshore. Offshore has no precise dictionary meaning: the word simply
reflects the fact that most low tax jurisdictions are islands. Loosely, it is used to mean outside
the control of the highly-taxed Western nations, although those nations could have controlled the
growth of offshore jurisdictions (International Offshore Financial Centres = IOFCs) much more
tightly if they had wanted to. It is an interesting question, why they didnt - maybe a combination
of individual self-interest and muddle? Our "Offshouring Special Report, 2005" provides indepth
business, legal, political and economic perception as well as attractivness of this location as
offshore tax haven.



* This product is pre-publication and is due to be released in June 2005. Order now at this special
pre-publication price.

All rights reserved. © copyright 2005 Research and Markets
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reportinfo.asp?report_id=301084&t=d&cat_id=2

Research and Markets: Study the Offshore Sector in Switzerland in 2005

DUBLIN, Ireland, May 31 /PRNewswire/ -- Research and Markets
( http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c18345 ) has announced the
addition of Offshoring Special Report: Doing Business in the Switzerland, 2005
to their offering

>From small beginnings early in the 20th century, the offshore sector has
grown ever faster in response to high tax rates in the developed countries,
until it is estimated now that more than half of the world's money is
offshore. Offshore has no precise dictionary meaning:  the word simply
reflects the fact that most low tax jurisdictions are islands. Loosely, it is
used to mean outside the control of the highly-taxed Western nations, although
those nations could have controlled the growth of offshore jurisdictions
(International Offshore Financial Centres = IOFCs) much more tightly if they
had wanted to. It is an interesting question, why they didn't -- maybe a
combination of individual self-interest and muddle? Our "Offshoring Special
Report, 2005" provides in-depth business, legal, political and economic
perception as well as attractiveness of this location as offshore tax haven.

    The contents of this report are as follows

     Summary
      Geography
      Population Language And Culture
      Government
      Economy And Currency
      Entry And Residence
      Business Environment
      Foreign Investment Regime
      Company Incorporation
         Corporate
         Trust
         Partnership
         Sole Proprietorship
         Branch
      Offshore Sectors
      Offshore Activities
            Banking
            Holding Companies
            Insurance
            Trusts
               Case Studies
      Offshore Regulations
         Table Of Statutes
         Banking Law
      Law & Taxation
         Offshore
         Forms Of Offshore Operation
         Fees Payable By Financial Institutions
         Taxation Of Foreign Employees Of Offshore Operations
         Exchange Control
      Employment And Residence
         Domestic
         Corporate
      Business License Fees
         Payroll Taxes
         Property Taxes
      Personal
         Residence And Liability For Taxation
         Payroll Taxes
         Municipal Taxes
      Labour Environment
         Regulations
         Work Permits
      Foreign Relations
         Geopolitical
         Taxation Treaties
         Trade Alliances
      Conclusion

      Appendix 1
      Process Flow Charts

      Appendix 2
      Law Firms
      Company Formation And Ship Registration
      Trust Management
      Accounting And Auditing
      Tax Planning
      Banking Services And Asset Management
      Listing Agents And Stockbrokers
      Isp/Hosting & E-Commerce Service Providers
      Official Regulatory Bodies
      Captive Insurance Management


For more information visit
http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c18345

     Laura Wood
     Senior Manager
     Research and Markets
     press@researchandmarkets.com
     Fax: +353 1 4100 980


SOURCE Research and Markets
Web Site: http://www.researchandmarkets.com/reports/c18345
Photo Notes: NewsCom:
http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/prnh/20040820/RESEARCH AP Archive:
http://photoarchive.ap.org PRN Photo Desk,
photodesk@prnewswire.com

Copyright © 1996- PR Newswire Association LLC. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?acct=109&story=/www/story/05-31-2005/0003766797&edate=

Government hunting for offshore millions

CROWN POINT: Sentencing delayed while worldwide search continues

BY BILL DOLAN

CROWN POINT | The federal government has spent years looking for the telemarketing fortune William
H. Tankersley has squirrelled away.

It has asked and received permission from a judge to delay next month's sentencing of the
60-year-old Crown Point tycoon for defrauding more than 100,000 victims across the country to give
investigators a little more time to hunt down his hidden millions.

U.S. District Court Judge Allen Sharp has postponed his sentencing until Oct. 21 after receiving
newly disclosed documents indicating Tankersley continues to outfox his pursuers with a maze of
offshore accounts and corporations he constructed in the 1990s.

He also has sent investigators on a wild goose chase through a dusty crawl space of a Florida
condominium for what he promised were satchels crammed with cash, credit cars and passports to the
Caribbean.

The worldwide search appears to be worth the effort.

The government claims Tankersley raked in $28 million during the 1990s when his commercial empire,
which operated under at least eight names, was thriving. Tankersley's company had 80 employees
working in Crown Point and Merrillville until the government raided and closed it down in 1998.

Despite protestations the government was crushing the constitutional rights of a legitimate
merchant, a federal court judge declared the business to be a fraudulent enterprise in 2000, ordered
a freeze on his assets and ordered Tankersley to turn over all profits and property purchased with
those profits so they could be used to reimburse the victims.

Last week, the government disclosed its investigation of his financial manipulations shows that in
1992 Tankersley began establishing multiple international business companies and offshore trusts,
and used nominee incorporators, directors and registered agents to avoid putting his own name on
them.

The government said he began funneling money into something called Paterlic Marketing, a bank
account on the Isle of Man, just off the coast of England.

But it didn't sit long there.

Tankersley created Atwell Corporation Ltd., Helix International Ltd., and Toncor Investment Ltd., --
named after his children Tonia and Corey. He transferred more than $2.2 million into their accounts
at Barclays Bank, and Bank Leu, in Nassau, Bahamas.

After the government shut down Tankersley's Northwest Indiana operation, he moved much of his
offshore funds from Toncor to his other Bahamian trusts and wrote numerous checks on his accounts in
violation of a court order freezing his business assets.

The government claims Tankersley next created Atwell Corporation Ltd., and established a trust in
the family's name.

The government claims $864,000 once in the Atwell trust mysteriously moved last fall into other
Bahamian bank accounts. When questioned under oath last month at a "debriefing" by government
investigators, Tankersley claimed ignorance of the Atwell trust.

Tankersley did tell the government he had hidden $240,000 in cash, three credit cards, checks and
passports to the Dominican Republic in soft-sided luggage he stuffed into a crawl space or duct work
above a utility room at the Florida condo.

However, a government investigator said he searched the condo April 28 and found nothing and
concluded nothing was ever secreted there.

Gregory Ashe, an attorney for the Federal Trade Commission, writes, "Tankersley will claim someone
must have stolen the money since he is in prison, but that nevertheless, he should get credit for
revealing it. With his story of two phantom bags of money ... Tankersley was taking steps to make
his criminal proceeds unavailable to the victims of his crime."
---------

Rise and fall of a scam artist

William Tankersley had 80 employees working in his Merrillville telephone room and his Crown Point
administrative office.

He guaranteed in community newspaper classified advertising sections that he could move people to
the front of the line for lucrative postal jobs if they bought his training materials for $46.95.

His customers would receive a packet of outdated tests and other material the government gave free
to anyone and a promise from Tankersley they would achieve job test scores that in truth only four
out of 100 people ever attain.

Agents of the Federal Trade Commissioner and local police raided and closed down his Northwest
Indiana operation in January 1998.

A federal court receiver moved to take over control of Tankersley's $1 million home in the exclusive
Carmel area north of Indianapolis, but a suspicious fire destroyed it days after Tankersley moved
out and before the government could insure the property.

Tankersley sold his $213,000 yacht and tried wiring the money to an offshore bank in the Bahamas.
The government intercepted that.

Authorities and arrested him and his wife, Linda in early 2001 at a Naples, Fla., condominium as
they prepared to flee the country.

After four years in confinement for contempt of court and awaiting trial on fraud charges,
Tankersley pleaded guilty in February to mail fraud, wire fraud, money laundering and filing a false
tax return.

Tankersley could be sentenced from 57 months to 71 months in prison and be ordered to reimburse
Indiana for $450,000 in back taxes.

Copyright © 2005 nwitimes.com.
http://www.thetimesonline.com/articles/2005/05/31/news/top_news/46202e188fe440b68625701100810c63.txt

Prosecutors Looking For Telemarketer's Fortune
A Telemarketer's Sentencing Is Delayed As Search For Millions Continues

POSTED: 11:03 am EST May 31, 2005
UPDATED: 11:10 am EST May 31, 2005

HAMMOND, Ind. -- A federal judge has delayed sentencing a telemarketer accused of defrauding more
than 100,000 customers to give prosecutors more time to track down millions of dollars they believe
he hid in offshore accounts.

William Tankersley, 60, pleaded guilty in February to conspiracy, mail fraud, money laundering and
filing a false tax return and was awaiting a June sentencing date.

However, U.S. District Court Judge Allen Sharp moved Tankersley's sentencing to Oct. 21 after newly
released documents suggest he hid his fortune in a maze of offshore accounts and corporations.

The government claims Tankersley raked in $28 million during the 1990s through a commercial empire
that operated under at least eight names.

Tankersley's company had 80 employees working in Crown Point and Merrillville until the government
closed it down in 1998.

Prosecutors said Tankersley sold job hunters what he claimed was inside information on how to obtain
lucrative government positions.

In 2000, a federal court declared the business a fraudulent enterprise, froze his assets and ordered
Tankersley to turn over all profits and property purchased with those profits so they could be used
to reimburse the victims.

Last week, the government said its investigation showed that Tankersley created multiple
international business companies and offshore trusts, using several methods to avoid putting his own
name on them.

The records show that he transferred money between the trusts and corporations to elude
investigators trying to track down the missing money.

According to the records, about $864,000 that had been in one of the trusts was mysteriously moved
last fall into other offshore bank accounts.

When questioned under oath last month by government investigators, Tankersley said he knew nothing
about that trust.

He did tell the government that he had hidden $240,000 in cash, three credit cards, checks and
passports to the Dominican Republic in he stuffed into the crawl space or duct work at a Florida
condo.

But a government investigator who searched the condo in April found nothing there.
Copyright 2005 by The Associated Press. All rights reserved.

© 2005, Internet Broadcasting Systems, Inc.
http://www.theindychannel.com/news/4549722/detail.html

Europe to adopt money laundering rules

 
Iain Martin, Accountancy Age 31 May 2005European accountants face new money laundering rules on 7 JuneContinental European accountants will face the same difficulties experienced by their UKcounterparts over the last year, if EU finance ministers adopt new money laundering rules on 7 Junein Luxembourg.European politicians backed EU laws to crackdown on money laundering and terrorist financing on 26May. The European Parliament's adoption of the new rules will force accountants and otherprofessions to check the identity of customers, and report suspicions of money laundering orterrorist financing.Charlie McCreevy, the EU's internal market commissioner, said: 'the fight against money launderingand terrorist financing is a political priority for the EU. Not only will the fight against moneylaundering and terrorist financing benefit from this, but also the integrity and stability of thefinancial sector.'John Davies, head of business law at the ACCA, said that the new rules on money launderingeffectively bring the rest of the EU up to the standard imposed in the UK from March 2004, whenfresh money laundering legislation was introduced.Davies said that the EU directive would define the trust and company service providers captured bythe regulations, although this will be 'a headache' for the UK government to monitor effectively. Hesaid that the move to a more proportionate assessment of clients was a 'welcome move'.Last year, a report by Transparency International warned that London was in danger of becoming ahaven for money launderers. The anti-corruption campaign group criticised the British government'sfailure to regulate operators of shell companies. Official estimates indicate that £25bn islaundered through the UK every year.Link: London attracts money launderershttp://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2036287/london-attracts-money-launderershttp://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2137281/europe-adopt-money-laundering-rulesLondon attracts money launderersLarry Schlesinger, Accountancy Age 29 Oct 2004London is in danger of becoming a haven for money launderers according to a report released today byTransparency International.The anti-corruption campaign group says that Britain's failure to regulate operators of shellcompanies could lead to criminals hiding their ill-gotten assets in the capital.Other jurisdictions have already clamped down on anonymous corporate entities and trusts that can beused as vehicles for fraud and money laundering, by introducing legislation to regulate the serviceproviders that set them up.But Britain has left the sector unsupervised, potentially opening the door to unscrupulous operatorsof the shell companies.Official estimates indicate that £25bn is laundered through the UK every year.Link: Anti-fraud rules under reviewhttp://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2036244/anti-fraud-rules-under-reviewhttp://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2036287/london-attracts-money-launderersAnti-fraud rules under reviewAccountancyAge.com, Accountancy Age 25 Oct 2004Accountants' protests against current legislation to combat money laundering could be paying off ashome secretary David Blunkett considers changes to reporting processes.The Home Office has reportedly opened discussions with professional advisers who are adoptingdifferent approaches to deal with the new legislation.A Home Office spokesman said: 'The Home Office will be looking at the current legislation to makesure we've got the right balance. We are looking at the money laundering reporting processes to makesure they are as effective as possible', reported The Telegraph.Under new rules accountants, lawyers and other advisers must report to authorities any suspicioustransactions carried out by clients. The law was designed to target terrorists and fraudsters butadvisers have complained the restrictive laws are hindering their ability to work.Link: Blunkett's plans threaten client confidentialityhttp://www.accountancyage.com/1136644http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/news/2036244/anti-fraud-rules-under-review

Money laundering - bank cheif urges tougher checks

 
A third of banks failing the first audit stage to join the deposit-insurance system had not followedcertain legal requirements concerning money laundering, deputy head of the Central Bank ViktorMelnikov told a conference organized by the Association of Russian Banks.More than 1,100 banks filed applications to enter the system, and 27.7 percent of them - 300 creditorganizations - were denied access. This indicates that about 100 Russian banks are not observingthe money-laundering law.In total, some 824 banks from 79 regions joined the system at the first stage. Among them are 302Moscow banks (54.7 percent of all banks operating in the capital), with liabilities to depositors ofRUR1.6139 trillion (about USD57.48 billion). At the same time, 96 banks of Russia's 100 largestentered the deposit-insurance system, liabilities at RUR1.7602 trillion (about USD62.69 billion).Melnikov said that using the banking sector to fight money laundering and the financing of terrorismwas a world trend. He said the Central Bank would continue to audit banks to counter theseactivities.The approach of several credit organizations towards fighting money laundering was a mere formalityon their part, and this was not enough, he said, adding that "it is necessary to implement apractice of reasoned assessment based on credible information." The institution had alreadyrecommended that banks pay more attention to operations made by individuals, such as purchases ofsecurities and currency as well as cash withdrawals.Melnikov noted the importance of testing and monitoring bank activities. The Central Bank haddeveloped new technologies to audit their financial statements, he said. Audits were done on 2,500credit organizations and their branches last year. About 1,700 were checked in 2003.But there were credit organizations that had not sent a single notice of suspicious deals to thefederal financial monitoring service. More than two million such notices were submitted in 2004 and950,000 in 2003, the official said.The Central Bank's inspections have resulted in a 40 percent advance in the number of discoveredviolations of the money-laundering law. This growth was credited to better improvements inlegislation, retraining of auditors and, as Melnikov put it, the fact that some banks "have simplytaken a more lax approach." The official also cited results of KPMG research. This showed banks hadincreased their spending on countering money laundering 61 percent over the past two to three years,and would not spend less on the process.© Copyright Gateway to Russia 2003http://www.gateway2russia.com/st/art_277652.php

Swiss drop probe into al qaeda money laundering

Source: Reuters

GENEVA, June 1 (Reuters) - Swiss prosecutors have dropped an investigation into an international
network suspected by the United States of financing terror activities for al Qaeda, a prosecutor's
spokesman said on Wednesday.

Investigators ended the three-and-a-half year probe into Lugano-based Nada Management Organisation,
formerly known as Al Taqwa Management, without pressing charges, said Hansjuerg Mark Wiedmer,
spokesman for the Swiss federal prosecutor's office.

"We realised that the chain of evidence that we established would not be enough to go to trial. In
the chain of evidence, there were several key elements missing," he said by telephone.

Swiss authorities cooperated with Saudi Arabia in the probe but the Saudis were unable to find key
bookkeeping documents that the Swiss suspect were maintained in the Gulf Arab state.

"There was good cooperation with Saudi Arabia but as they don't know where the books are either,
they just can't provide them," Wiedmer said.

"Until new elements arrive, this case remains closed. If new elements arrive, we can reopen the
case," he said.

Swiss requests for judicial assistance from the Bahamas, the offshore financial centre where the
network is thought to have extended its operations, went unanswered, frustrating Swiss
investigators, Wiedmer said.

Youssef Nada, founder and senior executive of the company, has in the past dismissed allegations
that his company may have had links to extremist groups as "nonsense" and said he was confident his
name would eventually be cleared.

http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/l01607010.htm

Banking in accordance with the Koran

By Donald Greenlees International Herald Tribune

SINGAPORE John Lim was traveling the Middle East in 2002, searching for investors, when he realized
something was missing from his pitch.

His audience liked what he was selling: Asian real estate investments via a boutique fund management
business he had set up with the Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing. But potential clients in the
Middle East wanted the investments to comply with the strictures of their religion.

Two years later, Lim's ARA Asset Management entered one of the fastest-growing financial sectors in
the world. ARA, based in Singapore, started a $450 million Asian property fund that would invest and
be managed according to Shariah, or Islamic law.

"We think there is a huge market to be tapped in Islamic capital," Lim said.

In Asia, Europe and North America, bankers, fund managers, business consultants, accountants and
lawyers are showing a growing interest in the potential of the Islamic market.

As of mid-2004, the Islamic financial market comprised 265 banks with assets of more than $262
billion and investments of more than $400 billion, according to a report by the International
Organization of Securities Commissions.

The report estimated that Islamic banking, insurance and capital markets, although still only a
small part of the global industry, had been growing at 10 percent to 20 percent a year for a decade.
Within 8 to 10 years, the report estimated, as much as half the savings of the world's 1.3 billion
Muslims would be in Islamic banks.

Moreover, leading bankers and analysts say the development of Islamic finance has recently surged as
more Muslims seek to place money in Islamic investments and the sophistication and the range of
their investment choices grow.

"There has been a real acceleration in the past 12 months, from my perspective," said David Vicary,
a Kuala Lumpur-based banking consultant and expert on Islamic finance. "We have moved from 12 months
ago saying this is an interesting little niche to actually saying this is mainstream."

He estimated that if the pattern of growth continues, "20 percent of the world's assets could be
attracted to Shariah-compliant products" in 10 to 15 years. And as the quality of Islamic financial
products improves, Vicary said, growth will come from both Muslims and non-Muslims.

Bankers and analysts attribute the upsurge to a number of factors: historically high oil prices,
leaving the Middle East awash in money; the wider choice of products now available that comply with
Shariah; and greater consciousness of religious duty among wealthy Muslim investors.

"We have looked at numbers on the growth of Islamic wealth," said Ng Nam Sin, executive director of
the Financial Center Development Department at the Monetary Authority of Singapore, the nation's
central bank. "A large proportion is being generated from the Middle East, arising from the oil
money, in addition to wealth from this region. The momentum is there for further growth and demand
for Islamic finance as an alternative to conventional finance."

Shariah, which is drawn from the Islamic holy book, the Koran, and the example of the life of the
prophet Muhammad, governs all aspects of a follower's life, including financial affairs.

Forbidden commercial activities include production and sale of alcohol and tobacco and investments
in casinos and hotels where alcohol is sold.

One of the most basic rules of Islamic finance is the prohibition of paying interest on loans or
deposits. Islam also forbids certain kinds of risk-taking, especially financial activity akin to
gambling, and it encourages the linking of income to productivity, profit-sharing and equitable
contracts.

In the simplest Shariah contracts, known as musharakah or mudarabah, banks avoid charging or paying
interest by sharing profit and risk with the customer, effectively playing the role of equity
partner.

"You should not expect huge returns for doing nothing, is basically what Islam is saying," said
Vicary, a 33-year veteran of banking in Britain and the United States who converted to Islam a
decade ago.

In a sign of the enthusiasm for opportunities in this field, Singapore, a bastion of conventional
capital markets, is now chasing the Muslim dollar. Goh Chok Tong, former prime minister of Singapore
and now chairman of the monetary authority, last year signaled plans to build links to the Middle
East with the goal of turning his nation into the regional center for Islamic capital market
investments, private banking services and fund management.

The monetary authority has established an advisory group to provide guidance on development of the
Islamic financial market. In April, Singapore gained full membership in the Islamic Financial
Services Board, a global body that advises on Islamic financial market regulation and supervision.

Underpinning Singapore's push into Islamic finance is the hope that it can act as a conduit between
the fast-growing Chinese market and wealthy Middle East investors who want to invest in a
Shariah-compliant way.

Savvy investors, like Li Ka-shing's property empire, Cheung Kong Group, see the potential. In
September, ARA Asset Management, in which Cheung Kong is a partner, signed a deal with Dubai Islamic
Bank to create the Al Islami Far Eastern Real Estate Fund, with a forecast of 20 percent annual
returns.

"We have enough expertise and professionalism to bridge between the Middle East and China and East
Asia as a whole," said Lim, the ARA chief.

But the growth and interest in these new financial products are global. Major international banks
including Citigroup, HSBC, Standard Chartered, BNP Paribas and Deutsche Bank all have Islamic units.
What started in the 1960s as a Middle Eastern niche is taking off as a global banking phenomenon.
Hedge funds, bonds, derivatives - almost every conventional financial product - now have Islamic
equivalents.

Executives at Deutsche Bank's Islamic finance operations, based in London, say they will start
offering as many as 50 new Islamic products in the next six months after adapting their practices to
meet the requirements of Shariah scholars.

"We have always seen that the constraint in the Shariah market was on the offerings side," said
Geert Bossuyt, the Deutsche Bank head of Islamic retail structuring. "The limitation has to do with
the type of products that were offered, access to different asset classes and the costs attached to
it. We have taken away those constraints."

Deloitte, a New York-based business and financial consultancy, decided to get into the business
globally in February. The company plans to offer just about everything from advice on structuring
Shariah-compliant deals to Shariah accounting audits and Shariah compliance reviews for those
already in the business.

Vicary, who until recently headed Deloitte Consulting's practice in Kuala Lumpur and steered the
firm's move into Islamic finance, said he had overcome executives' initial skepticism by reaping
rich profits in the field.

"We have grown from practically nothing to a business which is generating a few million dollars'
worth of revenue a year; that is just in the first 12 to 18 months," he said.

Although Vicary recently left Deloitte to join an Islamic bank in Malaysia, his former team is
working on a blueprint to quickly expand the business. His ambitious forecast: "We could be looking
at a $500 million consulting business within five years."

http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/06/01/business/islamic.php

Freedom to choose flat tax

By Stephen Moore    All over the world, from Estonia, to Albania, to Russia to Hong Kong, flat taxes are in vogue.The flat tax is being instituted to enhance economic growth, increase tax revenues and make taxcodes fairer. Why not in the U.S.    After all, isn't the world topsy-turvy when Moscow, the onetime center of socialism, has a 13percent top income tax rate compared to 35 percent in America, the land of the free?    Former Sens. Connie Mack of Florida and John Breaux of Louisiana are trying to grapple with theissue of how to make tax reform politically palatable, as they enter their final stage ofdeliberations as chairmen of President Bush's federal tax reform panel. I would suggest onepolitically viable way to overcome the special interest opposition to tax reform is adoption of aFreedom to Choose Flat Tax.    The potential economic gains are gigantic for American workers and firms if the tax panel adoptsthis approach. For example, if the $200 billion a year compliance costs attributable to the tax codecould be cut in half, the financial windfall to the nation would be larger than the value of allgoods and services produced by every worker and business in the states of Maine, Vermont and NewHampshire combined. On top of that, Harvard University economist Dale Jorgenson estimated severalyears ago that if replacing the U.S. tax code with some kind of flat and simple consumption taxwould increase economic growth by about 10 percent.    The idea behind the Freedom to Choose Flat tax is an optional postcard flat tax, offered to taxfilers as an alternative to, rather than a replacement of, the current tax code. What I propose isan Alternative Maximum Tax of 20 percent. The current tax laws require millions of Americans to fillout their tax forms then compute the Alternative Minimum Tax and pay the greater of the two. Underthis Freedom to Choose Flat Tax, the filer would be allowed to pay the lesser of the two taxliabilities. In fact, this idea simultaneously solves the middle-class AMT problem by simplylowering the tax rate to 20 percent on all income and letting Americans opt into that system if theyso wish.    Wage and business income would be taxed at a maximum 20 percent. The corporate tax rate wouldfall to 20 percent, but all tax credits would end. Business capital purchases would be expensed,thus eliminating complicated depreciation schedules. Capital income -- from capital gains,dividends, and estates -- would also be taxed at 20 percent.    This plan would accomplish each major goal of tax reform. It would be: (1) sweeping, (2)dramatically simpler than the current tax code, (3) an enormous boost to U.S. economic growth, (4)fair and (5) politically feasible. The last point is the most significant: This plan would allow taxreformers to avoid the grueling task of dredging the Internal Revenue Service's tax code swamp. Theplan also would avoid the kind of ferocious opposition from deep-pocket special-interest groups thatinevitably leads to a political collision in which reform advocates suffer the most casualties.    The advantages are obvious. First, there are no winners and losers as with conventionaltax-reform plans. Under this optional flat tax, no one is forced into a losing position becauseevery filer could stick with the current tax system. So the conventional complaint about a flat tax,that it would raise taxes on the middle class, is rendered null and void.    Second, the plan does not force people to give up "sacred cow deductions" for homeowners, orcharitable givers or municipal bonds owners. If tax filers want the homeowners deduction, they cantake advantage of it by staying in the current system.    Third, the plan does not require writing horrendously complicated rules to get from one systemto the other.    Recently, economist Bruce Bartlett attacked this plan as a gimmick. But he fails to realize thisis precisely how the Hong Kong tax system works. Hong Kong has a complicated system and a simpleflat tax, and filers choose between the two. Also, both Dick Armey and Steve Forbes, flat taxchampions, have adopted a similar glide path in their respective plans. Steve Forbes would giveevery tax filer five years to choose between the flat tax and the current 1040 forms and then afterthe end of the transition period, the flat tax would be the law of the land.    Under the Freedom to Choose Flat Tax, every tax filer would be grandfathered into the old taxcode as long as they wished. But once they migrated into the flat tax, they would be there for good.All new workers would go immediately into the flat tax. Hence, in time, the old tax code wouldessentially phase out.    In testimony earlier this month, I told Sens. Mack and Breaux that fundamentally overhauling thetax system doesn't require a single change in a paragraph, word or comma of the Internal RevenueCode. Just a one-page supplement is needed to the current tax laws, providing workers and businessesthe option of bypassing the first 13,000 pages of legal gobbledy-gook and complying with a postcardreturn with one flat rate for all. That is: A flat tax can be achieved before this president leavesoffice, if only Congress gives taxpayers the freedom to choose.Stephen Moore is president of the Free Enterprise Fund and a senior fellow in economics at theCato Institute.All site contents copyright © 2005 News World Communications, Inc.http://www.washtimes.com/commentary/20050529-112428-1057r.htm

Taiwan to ease foreign investment rules for banks

TAIPEI: Taiwan plans to ease rules on foreign investment in banks and other financial institutions,
a financial regulator said on Friday, three weeks after the aborted offshore sale of key stake in
Chang Hwa Bank.

The proposed rule changes would remove a requirement for an approved foreign investor to set up a
Taiwan holding company if it wanted to buy more than a quarter of a bank, insurer or brokerage
house, Gary Tseng, the director of the Bureau of Monetary Affairs, told reporters.

Taiwan wants to attract foreign bank investment to bring in expertise and boost rationalisation of
the crowded sector but analysts say buyers are discouraged because they can not get tax advantages
by making a purchase through a tax haven country.

The monetary bureau also said qualified investors would be able to buy stock through the share
market or government auctions, if the changes were approved by Taiwan's parliament. Foreign buyers
would also be able to make purchases in the T$15.1 trillion ($481 billion) sector through debt or
equity swaps, relieving investors of the need to transfer large amounts of cash into Taiwan.

Foreign investors have shown an interest in buying into Taiwan's banks, which are currently 60
percent controlled by the government. The government wants to rationalise the sector, in which 47
banks serve a population of 23 million.

Media had named Japan's Shinsei Bank Ltd. and Dutch financial group ING as potential bidders for a
22 percent stake on offer in Chang Hwa, Taiwan's sixth-largest bank worth T$18 billion (US$573
million).

Taiwan officials say a General Electric Co. unit and Citigroup Inc. have separately expressed
interest in banking assets in Taiwan in recent days. But with foreign investors also facing
political and union resistance to restructuring the sector, President Chen Shui-bian's plan to halve
the number of state banks to six by the end of the year is in jeopardy.

reuters

Daily Times - All Rights Reserved
http://www.dailytimes.com.pk/default.asp?page=story_29-5-2005_pg5_28

Next call for Net phoning: VOIP Regulation

By Ivar Ekman International Herald TribuneSTOCKHOLM At this week's VON Europe conference on Internet phone service, there has been no shortageof accolades for Skype, the unparalleled poster child of this fledgling business. It is being called"the iPod of IP communications," and its chief executive, Niklas Zennstrom, was mobbed like a popstar by news media and admirers.But just as Skype is setting off on its victory lap, storm clouds are gathering. As phone callingover the Internet takes off around the world and as the services become richer and more complex,regulators are beginning to give it a harder look.With the rapid development that characterizes the field - which uses the Internet instead ofland-line copper phone wires to transmit voice calls between computers, usually for free or forcut-rate prices - few observers doubt that the next year or two will bring a host of regulationsdown not only on Skype, but on Internet telephony as a whole."Right now, at the dawn of this new world, we can make sure it goes as much our way as possible,"said Eli Katz, chief executive of XConnect and co-founder of the Internet Telephony ServicesProviders' Association, one of a plethora of new but comparatively weak industry organizations thathave sprung up around this nascent technology."Or," Katz said, "we can be involved in years worth of regulation mess and pain."Alain Van Gaever, who works with the issue at the European Commission, told the conference, whichends Thursday, that the industry has nothing to worry about. Generally, the European Union's centralbureaucracy seems to view as positive the innovative and disruptive nature of Internet telephony,which is also called voice over Internet protocol, or VOIP."Our approach is a light regulatory touch, to be pragmatic," he said in an interview."You want to provide a space where the industry can innovate, while at the same time providing someprotection for consumers."But much of the regulatory power in Europe remains on the national level, and the situation differsdramatically among the 25 EU countries. Some national regulators have welcomed VOIP - Britain andthe Nordic countries are most often mentioned. Others seem to see their role as protectors - of bothconsumers and incumbent phone companies - as more important.For example, nomadic services - that is, allowing Internet calling from locations other than auser's home base - are allowed in Finland but not in Spain, while they are partly allowed in Franceand under review in Germany.To use Internet phone services for emergency services - a highly regulated service of land-linephones - Portugal does not mandate that the location information of the caller be provided, whilethe Czech Republic does, and so does Britain - but only if technically feasible.And while most countries in Europe have a law requiring that emergency phone calls be routed to anappropriate emergency response center, Estonia, Hungary and Britain do not."One of the main reasons we came into the UK was the accommodating regulatory situation," said KerryRitz of Vonage, the biggest phone-replacement VOIP provider in the United States, which so far hasexpanded only to Britain."For example, we're allowed to offer geographic numbers to people anywhere in the U.K., so thatsomeone living in London can have an Edinburgh number," he said.Elsewhere, he added, "we see a lot of protection of the local incumbents. Germany is a good exampleof this, with Deutsche Telekom controlling the voice business, the long-distance business and thebroadband connectivity business."The European Commission, which has the power to influence regulation across Europe through bothguidelines and a kind of veto power, is waiting to see what steps the national regulators takefirst, according to Van Gaever. There is a possibility that the commission will issue new guidelines"if needed," he said.National regulators in the EU are supposed to report to the commission by the end of the year onwhether they intend to regulate VOIP in the same way as traditional telephone services. Thatdecision that will have a great impact on the market conditions for new entrants.If the commission vetos any of these reports, that would send a strong signal to nationalauthorities about the commission's desire to keep markets open and competition alive, according toSandro Bazzanella, director of regulatory affairs at the European Competitive TelecommunicationsAssociation, an industry group.Meanwhile, Skype claims that its software is the fastest growing downloadable product on theInternet ever, with 39 million registered users and growth of more than 150,000 per day. Because ofthe hazy regulatory picture, some industry observers are suggesting that Skype's honeymoon might beover."Well, I don't know if we ever had a honeymoon," Zennstrom said in an interview at the conference."But it's true, regulators have up until now had a hands-off approach. What I've noticed in the lastmonth or so is that regulators in Europe and elsewhere have started to look much more closely atwhat we do. We're definitely on their agenda."Last week, the U.S. Federal Communications Commission gave certain VOIP telephony providers 120 daysto include emergency calling capabilities in their services.The decision apparently doesn't apply to Skype, since Skype's software-based service is difficult toconfuse with regular telephone service, which was one of the FCC's criteria.Regulators are also looking at how VOIP services interact with the traditional phone networks, andat such basic questions as how to define these services: Are they regular phone services, electroniccommunication services, or something else altogether?Throughout this process, regulators are supposed to achieve a balance between the often differinginterests of consumers, the VOIP industry and the traditional phone industry."It's hard, because I don't think regulators really understand the new environment," Ritz said. "Alot of them have been regulating the telecom circuit-switched world for decades. They're trying toimpose that way of thinking on a new world. I think an educational process is necessary."But some observers think the debate over regulatory issues will make little difference in the longrun. They see Internet telephony as disruptive enough to break down all attempts to stop it."As with all political struggles you will see bloodless coups, some very bloody fights, and thosewho realize there is no need to fight at all," said Jeff Pulver, chief executive of the U.S.consulting firm Pulver.com and a leading analyst of the VOIP business."Some countries that are more forward-thinking than others might become havens for VOIP. And ifcertain countries become hostile to innovation, business will simply leave," Pulver said.Ritz added: "In Europe as a whole, it's a very complex situation that will keep lawyers busy foryears and years."http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/05/25/business/netphone.php

Orwellian adventure in Myanmar

By MARY VERNONGEORGE Orwell is well-known and loved in Myanmar, which is strange. Anyone who has read his bookBurmese Days written about the time he spent here with the English civil service will know that hedidn't care for the place at all. Add to that the fact that he admitted that both 1984 and AnimalFarm were based on Burmese politics and you would think they would revile him, but quite theopposite. They are very proud of having been the hosts of such a famous writer and all the places towhich he was posted boast of once being his home.ONE of these is the village of Twantee, across the Yangon river and about 25km downstream fromYangon. As well as being the one-time home of good old George, it is also famous for its pottery andits weaving, so it seemed like a good place for a Sunday jaunt.WE took a Myanmar friend, Maw Maw, with us as it is difficult to get there and we weren't confidentof being able to negotiate it all. First we caught a ferry across the river to Da Lat, a very poortownship where many of the street stall holders live. Each day they bring their stalls, theirchairs, and all their goods across in the ferry, set up on the downtown street, pack it all up againat night and take it home. The ferry ride, for locals is K10, or one cent which makes it viable forthem, as housing, such as it is, is very cheap in Da Lat as there is little electricity and noreticulated water supply.IN the main square at Da Lat, our friend negotiated a jeep ride to Twantee - the jeep had two plankbenches in the back and practically no springs, a fact we were going to become painfully aware of.For K7000 (about $9) we set off on a rutted, partly paved road bouncing up and down on the plankslike demented ping pong balls. The journey took about three quarters of an hour and as the road gotno better we could hardly appreciate the passing scenery, as all our attention was taken up withhanging on to avoid being thrown out at every pothole.ARRIVING in Twantee, the first thing we saw was a small carnival in the main square featuring aman-powered ferris wheel, the first I have ever seen. They load it up and then men swing from theframework, using their body weight to get it moving. It looks incredibly dangerous, but they don'tseem to mind. We passed on a ride on the ferris wheel however, instead being herded into a fleet oftrishaws by our friend and guide.OUR first stop was the pottery, a huge complex of kilns and shacks for the potters to live in, withthe kilns being by far the more palatial. Sadly, the pottery has little business these days becausethe cooking pots and water pots which formed their main business have been replaced by plastic andaluminium containers. Strangely, they haven't diversified into other things, despite having all theinfrastructure. They just keep on making the same things they always have, even though there is nomarket for them.IN the same way the weavers of Twantee, who all have looms under their houses which are built onstilts, only weave traditional stiffened belts. There is very little market for them these daysexcept for ceremonial occasions, so the looms lie idle and the people get poorer and poorer. I askedMaw Maw to ask them why they didn't weave other things, and the reply was that they had always wovenbelts.BACK into the trishaws - a very uncomfortable mode of transport for the large western bottom - andoff to admire the house and police station where Orwell worked. We made appreciative noises and wentto catch a ferry said to go direct from Twantee to Yangon at four o'clock, thus avoiding the horrorjeep ride back.ALAS, word on the dock that the ferry might come at five o'clock, or perhaps at eight o'clock, orperhaps not until tomorrow. After a restorative beer, we gathered our strength and rented alongboat, a kind of canoe with a motor common on all the waterways of South-East Asia, and wendedour way back down the river in the dusk - a perfect way to end the day.© The North Queensland Newspaper Company Pty Ltdhttp://townsvillebulletin.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,7034,15425516%5e24192,00.html

Drug money launderer is sentenced

Star-Bulletin staff

A Maui man was sentenced yesterday to two years in prison for laundering millions of dollars in
connection with a multi-ton marijuana smuggling ring and filing false income tax returns.

Michael K. Ritter, 56, also forfeited $1 million to the U.S. government, which represents the value
of the remaining assets he earned from his smuggling ventures, according to the U.S. Attorney's
Hawaii office.

>From the late 1970s to the mid-'80s, Ritter netted about $3 million by helping to smuggle at least a
dozen "multi-ton loads" of marijuana into the western United States from Thailand, according to
court documents.

One shipment that Ritter helped launder money for in 1986 involved three tons of marijuana worth
about $5.5 million, prosecutors said.

They said Ritter's part in the operation involved depositing $2.5 million in drug-trafficking
profits into accounts in Hong Kong and the Isle of Man to hide the money's origins.

Although Ritter's offenses were committed years ago, he was subject to prosecution because he
continued to manage foreign offshore trust fund accounts, according to the U.S. Attorney's office.

"This case emphasizes that we are very serious about forfeiting the ill-gotten gains of drug
dealers," said Ed Kubo, U.S. attorney for Hawaii. "Besides convicting them in federal court, we will
aggressively go after and seize all their drug proceeds ... and we will make sure that drug dealing
is never profitable."

© Honolulu Star-Bulletin -- http://starbulletin.com
http://starbulletin.com/2005/05/27/news/story14.html

ICAI welcomes new money laundering directive

By S Heaphy

The Institute of Chartered Accountants in Ireland has welcomed yesterday's decision by the European
Parliament to endorse the 3rd Anti Money Laundering Directive.  ICAI added that the transposition
into Irish Law of the Directive will provide the Irish Government with the opportunity to deal with
difficulties arising from the transposition of the 2nd Directive.  The Directive is now scheduled to
be discussed by the European Council in June.

Commenting, ICAI Deputy Director Professional Standards, Aidan Lambe said:

"While everybody supports the principle behind these directives, there have been a number of
difficulties in the practical implementation of the regulations arising from the 2nd Directive.

The issue of the scope of the regulations, and in particular the absence of a de minimus provision,
have proven particularly difficult.  Almost two years after the implementing statutory instrument
was signed, the anti-money laundering steering committee within the Department of Finance, is still
struggling with definitions.   We need to be sure that all designated bodies have a common
understanding as to what the legislation actually means and the broad scope of offences that now
fall to be regarded as money laundering.

The new Directive does provide an opportunity to deal with these issues.  In particular, the new
Directive introduces a risk based approach to client identification.  This is particularly welcome
as existing requirements have undoubtedly imposed significant cost burdens on designated bodies.
The new proposals would at least allow those designated individuals such as solicitors, estate
agents and accountants to adopt a common sense approach when dealing with new clients.

The transposition of the new Directive into Irish law will allow the Irish authorities the
opportunity to clarify the existing procedures.  It is an opportunity they should grab.

ICAI will be putting forward its own suggestions as to how to improve the current regime and how to
address the anomalies that currently exist.  We look forward to taking part in a consultation
process, which if undertaken by the Departments of Finance and Justice, will go some way to ensuring
the new regime is more workable and more widely understood."

©2005 Onus Ltd  All Rights Reserved
http://www.accountingnet.ie/content/publish/article_1021.shtml

Calls to shift tax burden in Bermuda

Larry Burchall, Guest Columnist

This is the second part of a two-part commentary.

Reality? Bermuda's long-term national economic interest lies in Bermuda's ability to continue as a
platform for International Business.

This requires two successes. One - attracting and holding enough operations on its business platform
so that 47,000 Bermudians are kept employed - or at least kept sufficiently economically active -
and able to satisfy their needs within Bermuda's economic environment. Two - defeating the
just-over-the-horizon threat that, like a slow tsunami, is heading towards us.

The threat? Using still developing control, oversight, and investigative powers spawned by
computers, the Internet, the greater ease-of-passage and interchange of information, money, and
accounting value; big economies will choke-off companies seeking to recognize revenues in far-off
'tax free' jurisdictions. In time, Bermuda, as a 'tax-free tax haven' can expect to be choked off.

Though slivers of global business will always manage to avoid significant taxation; these bits may
not have enough economic mass to allow business platform Bermuda to benefit as it now benefits from
the current activity of International Business.

>From this comes a need for Bermuda to re-position itself as a non tax haven country that does levy
corporate taxes just like every other advanced economy.

A critical difference! Bermuda's current taxes support a national economy that is small but
efficient.

Other jurisdictions might need billion dollar revenues from corporate taxes. However, smaller and
more efficient, Bermuda requires less than $200m annually from a levy on all corporate profits.

Reality? Bermuda can shift taxes from Customs' duty to corporate profits, give International
Business an 80 per cent profit tax rebate, take a national average corporate tax 'bite' of less than
two per cent, and still maintain - even improve - the standard of governance and provision that now
exists.

Such a shift would also enable material reductions in the cost-of-living and thus the real
cost-of-doing-business in Bermuda.

Using real typical numbers, the spreadsheet shows how this tax can work and what real revenues can
come from such a low tax rate.

With a national profits tax adjusted to meet Bermuda's national needs, and with the growing
influence of World Trade Organisation global policies and guidelines, Bermuda can withstand the
increasing pressures that the E.U. and the U.S. will bring to bear.

Right now, the world's smaller economies are tackling the bigger economies. As these esoteric
economic battles grind on, the global marketplace is becoming a fairer marketplace.

Tax-free 'havens' are economic artifices that are inherently unfair. Tax-free 'havens' will - must -
eventually go the same way as special tariffs, preferential quotas, and agricultural subsidies.

Around the globe, investigators and legislators digging into the huge corporate disasters like Enron
[USA], Parmaalat [EU], BICC [Middle East], HIH [Australia], have not missed a common denominator.

These corporate disasters are all linked to, and connected by, the ability to hide critical
transactions in the global undergrowth - New York attorney general Eliot Spitzer's 'black holes' -
created by unregulated or lightly regulated 'tax havens'.

Bermuda must anticipate, therefore, a global tightening of a global noose about the economic necks
of jurisdictions involved in 'hiding' transactions.

Increased openness - the U.S.'s Sarbanes-Oxley Act is one such result - is an important and new
global reality flowing from global efforts to counter these corporate shenanigans. If Bermuda
imposes a profits tax on International Business, Bermuda will help provide more openness.

Formally reporting profits - for tax purposes - will enable Bermuda authorities to spot business
activities that are likely to bring Bermuda into disrepute and thus incur the hostility of bigger
economies.

Bermuda will be able to keep its own house clean, and, incidentally, offer clearer tax and
accounting performance guidelines to businesses that choose to operate out of - and declare their
profits in - Bermuda.

This strategic tax choice also means that under still developing WTO guidelines, Bermuda will be
able use its national autonomy as the primary protection for businesses operating from Bermuda.

Bermuda will be taxing in exactly the same way as the U.S. and E.U. - just at a much lower level.

Bermuda will thus no longer be a tax free 'haven' - where corporations come to actually avoid paying
any taxes whatsoever.

Eliminating the 'tax haven' tag is in Bermuda's best long-term strategic interest.

Moving beyond that unfortunate catchword will take a vigorous global campaign emphasizing that, like
every other 'developed economy', Bermuda taxes all corporate profits.

If Bermuda makes this strategic tax shift now, Bermuda can avoid inevitable strangulation as the
bigger economies and the WTO tighten their grips around the necks of those countries that they
declare to be 'tax havens'.

http://www.bermudasun.bm/archives/2005-05-27/03business03/

MEPs crack down on money laundering

Author: Henrietta Billings

MEPs crack down on money laundering

MEPs have backed new EU laws to crack down onmoney laundering and terrorist financing.

The European Parliament adopted rules on Thursday that will force lawyers, estate agents, bankers
and other key professions to check the identity of customers, and report suspicions of money
laundering or terrorist financing.

Banks, credit companies and other financial institutions will have to verify a customer's identity
when they open an account or whenever the customer carries out a transaction of €15,000 or more.

Anonymous accounts, or accounts opened under false names will be banned and Casinos will also have
to identify customers gambling more than €2,000.

Charlie McCreevy, the EU's internal market commissioner said. "The fight against money laundering
and terrorist financing is a political prioritiy for the EU."

"Not only will the fight against money laundering and terrorist financing benefit from this, but
also the integrity and stability of the financial sector."

The new rules, which update exisiting EU legislation on money laundering, now make terrorist
financing a criminal offence.

Financial institutions, insurers or lawyers will have to report suspicious transactions to a
national "financial intelligence unit" which will process the information and deliver it to the
competent authorities.

The scope of the directive also covers the providers of all goods, when payments are made in cash
over €15,000.

The new law is expected to be adopted by EU finance ministers meeting on June 7 in Luxembourg.

©2005 EUpolitix.com
http://www.eupolitix.com/en/news/200505/8b811fd4-b59f-4db5-aa25-c69ba8c71642.htm

Tax the key to choosing right investment vehicle

Jane HuiWhen foreign companies invest in China, either in a start-up or a wholly-owned subsidiary, they needto select the proper investment vehicle. The most common considerations would include:A vehicle that follows the companies' policy in terms of an investment holding vehicle from acommercial point of view; andA vehicle that provides the most tax-efficient position in terms of dividend distribution andcapital gains from future disposal of the investment.For the first, every company has its own internal policy: some would prefer to have one investmentholding company for each new investment, while others would rather like to have a simple holdingstructure and hold all investments through the same vehicle.I would like to discuss more on item two.To choose the best vehicle for investment holding, tax considerations are always a key factor.Based on the Income Tax Law on Foreign Investment Enterprise, dividend income paid to the foreigninvestor of a foreign investment enterprise is exempt from withholding tax. Therefore, there is notax on dividend income to the investor as long as the company they invest in is qualified as aforeign investment enterprise (FIE). Such a company should have foreign interest of 25 per cent ormore, and the investor has to be a resident in a foreign country.But there are quite a lot of unknown factors on how the dividend income tax would apply in thefuture. After China entered the WTO, it has been working hard on providing a level playing field andis therefore opting for unifying the income tax on domestic and foreign investment enterprises.Based on the current Income Tax Law on domestic enterprises, investors of local enterprises - thosewith less than 25 per cent foreign interest - are subject to income tax on the difference of the taxrate between the parent company and the subsidiary. For example, if the domestic subsidiary is inShenzhen and subject to a reduced corporate income tax rate of 15 per cent, the domestic investorwould be subject to corporate income tax at 18 per cent if its applicable tax rate is 33 per cent.The 18 per cent is arrived at from the difference between the 33 per cent and the 15 per cent.A foreign investor of a non-FIE would be subject to withholding tax at 10 per cent as thewithholding tax exemption is not applicable to investors of non-FIEs. To provide a level playingfield and maintain a good stream of revenue to the tax authorities, it is possible that withholdingtax would be imposed on dividend income; but what would be the rate? And... would there be a way tocontrol the possible exposure if the tax law changes?Based on the old rule before the reduction of the withholding tax rate back in 2000, the originalwithholding income tax rate was 20 per cent. Would China go back to this rate? It is hard topredict.However, China has entered into tax treaties with different countries. In general, tax treatieswould provide preferred tax rates as compared to the local rules that give privilege to tax-treatycountry residents. In this respect, most of the tax treaties (including the tax agreement that themainland has entered into with the Hong Kong SAR) have provided a fixed dividend withholding taxrate of 10 per cent.To control the possible exposure if the new tax law introduces withholding tax on dividend,selecting a company from a tax treaty country would help.If a company does a little tax-treaty shopping, it will discover that some tax treaties in factprovide a preferential dividend withholding tax rate of 5 per cent, such as those with Mauritius andBarbados.Other than the dividend withholding tax issue, one should also consider the tax implication at thehome country level of the investor company.If the dividend withholding tax is low/exempt but the home country of the investor taxes thedividend income at a higher tax rate, the whole game of planning at the subsidiary level would be awaste. That is why, before China introduces withholding tax on dividend income, enterprises fromtax-haven countries, such as the British Virgin Islands, are quite commonly used as there would notbe any tax on the receipt of dividend income at the home country level.(HK Edition 05/26/2005 page4)Copyright 2005 Chinadaily.com.cn All rights reserved.http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-05/26/content_445809.htm

Are you guilty of devious offshore tax planning?

Did you buy an insurance policy in March and return it in April after claiming tax sops? The
insurance regulator and the tax authority may not let you get away with that one.

A friendly sop from insurance companies, allowing investors a free look facility for 15 days and the
right to a full refund if they return the policy, has become a potential tax leak.

This year, the 'free look period' clause offered by life insurance companies appears to have been
grossly misused, both by selling agents and by customers. Customers bought a policy in the last week
of March, claimed the tax benefits and returned the policy in April. This was a win-win situation
for both. The customer got a tax sop for free while the selling agents and company sales officers
could meet their year-end targets on paper.

What's free-look?

Insurance companies always come out with policy clauses with the noblest intentions. One of them is
the 'free look period'. This period is a time period of 15 days that an insurance company allows you
after having bought the policy, to understand whether you really want that policy. In short, if you
have bought a policy and within a period of 15 days, decide for whatever reason are unhappy with the
policy, you can return it and get full refund of your premium. The IRDA had made the free look
period compulsory for all life insurance policies in 2002.

The crackdown

The regulator says that it has received complaints that many policies bought in the latter half of
March, last year were returned in April. This investigation will be part of the on site inspection
that the IRDA is conducting of all insurance companies after it found irregularities in the sale of
key-man polices. IRDA has said that they will decide on appropriate action based on the findings of
their investigation.

AJS Jhala, CFO, Birla Sunlife insurance, warns the mischief mongers, "If someone takes a policy in
the period of 20th March to 31st March and uses the receipt for his tax benefits and then takes the
money back in the subsequent year by exercising the free look period and he doesn't disclose it to
the IT authority, in a subsequent assessment the a smart IT officer will catch him."

by Faye D'Souza and Deepa Venkatraghvan

Copyright © e-Eighteen.com Ltd. All rights reserved.
http://www.moneycontrol.com/backends/news/frontend/news_detail.php?autono=168309

New money laundering law puts more onus on professions

By Tobias Buck in Brussels

Bankers, lawyers, estate agents, accountants and a string of other professions in the European Union
will have to keep a closer watch on their customers, under a new EU money laundering and terrorist
financing law approved by the European parliament yesterday.

The law forces them to establish and verify the identity of their customers, report suspicions of
money laundering or terrorist fin- ancing and establish policies to prevent such crimes.

For example, banks and credit card companies must check customers' identities when they open an
account or make a transaction worth more than €15,000 ($19,000, £10,000).

It also imposes a number of specific requirements: casino operators will have to identify customers
gambling more than €2,000. Providers of goods, meanwhile, must identify anybody making a cash
payment of more than €15,000.

Charlie McCreevy, the EU internal market commissioner, said: "Not only will the fight against money
laundering and terrorist financing benefit from this, but also the integrity and stability of the
financial sector. The EU is setting an example to be followed and matched."

The new law, expected to win final backing by EU finance ministers in early June, is an update of a
1991 directive. The earlier legislation did not cover terrorist financing, and was less strict in
the obligations it imposed on the financial sector.

The new version was proposed by the European Commission last year, but was in parts watered down by
members of the parliament. The Commission had suggested that banks and other financial institutions
be required to identify every shareholder holding more than 10 per cent of a client company. MEPs
reduced that obligation to investors holding more than 25 per cent.

"We have agreed on a good compromise, which prevents the new rules from turning into an unnecessary
bureaucratic exercise," said Hartmut Nassauer, the German Christian Democrat MEP charged with
steering the law through parliament.

The European Banking Federation welcomed the changes made by the parliament but warned that the new
regime would still impose a burden on banks. Severine Anciberro of the FBE said: "There are still
parts that will cause problems."

Referring to the requirement to identify the ult-imate shareholder in a company, she added: "In some
countries you don't have the possibility to find out who the beneficial owners are."

© Copyright The Financial Times Ltd 2005. "FT" and "Financial Times" are trademarks of the Financial
Times.
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/4457bf4e-ce4d-11d9-9a8a-00000e2511c8.html

Money Laundering Directive To Cover Funding of Terrorism

The European Parliament gave its backing to Commission proposals to revise the current money
laundering directive so that it covers the funding of terrorism.

However, MEPs adopted amendments to define more clearly the responsibilities of financial
institutions, lawyers, insurance agents and others involved in money laundering or the funding of
terrorism.

The original 1991 directive set up a warning system to prevent financial transactions being used for
money laundering, mainly by imposing the financial institutions their obligation to identify their
customers.

The new proposal declares the financing of terrorist activities a criminal offence, like
money-laundering, and brings it within the scope of the directive.

Banks, credit companies and other financial institutions will have to check a customer's identity
when they open an account or whenever the customer carries out a transaction of €15,000 or more.

Anonymous accounts and those opened under false names will be banned. Casinos should also identify
those customers gambling more than €2,000 - the Commission had set the threshold at €1,000.

Stricter checks will be required where the risk of money laundering is higher, e.g. where there is
no face-to-face contact with the customer or in relations with "politically exposed persons" from
(individuals holding important public positions, their direct relatives or persons known to be close
associates).

If customers cannot be identified, the business relationship must be terminated and the accounts
examined. Clients must never be informed that their transactions are under investigation.

Each Member State will have to decide under what circumstances a financial operation poses a high
risk of money laundering or of financing terrorism.

In such cases, the financial institution or any other players - such as insurers or lawyers - will
be legally obliged to report the transaction immediately to a national "financial intelligence
unit", which will process the information and deliver it to the competent authorities. Member States
must penalise anyone who fails to do this.

The only exception counts for lawyers representing a client in legal proceedings: in such cases they
are not obliged to report suspicions of money laundering or terrorist financing.

Among their amendments, MEPs added to the Commission proposal a requirement for financial
institutions to identify not only the director of a company, casino or trust which carries out a
transaction but also all "beneficial owners" who control at least 25% of those entities. The
Commission had set the threshold at 10%.

Since all the Parliament's amendments follow an agreement with Council, the directive is likely to
be adopted at first reading.

Cost of VOIP calls may rise

By David M. Ewalt,, Forbes.com

NEW YORK - Internet phone calls aren't toast, but the business model is certainly being raked over
the coals.

A new ruling by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission (FCC) says that companies who sell
voice-over-Internet Protocol (VoIP) telephone service must automatically link customers to a 911
emergency service and provide emergency responders with an originating address for the call.

Carriers will have until October to comply. But many VoIP providers and supporters say the
challenges of providing 911 service could put serious pressure on their business, adding cost and
potentially slowing the explosive growth of VoIP services.
An even bigger concern of the VoIP providers is that the 911 ruling will make them vulnerable to
their largest competitors, the traditional phone companies. Since those carriers control the phone
connections to 911 centers, they'll be able to bill the VoIP vendors for handling calls that are
transferred along those lines - or block them entirely. The traditional phone companies have lobbied
hard for 911 regulations, hoping to slow down the explosive growth of VoIP services.

"The [traditional phone companies] have a lot to lose, and need to protect their turf as best as
they can," says Jon Arnold, an independent telecom analyst. "They're trying to put a line in the
sand and say to the regulators, 'If these guys are going to do it, they're going to have to do it
right.'"

The expense of implementing 911 service could lead VoIP vendors to raise prices. "I think it's going
to kill the pricing model," says Arnold. "It's probably going to force them to reexamine their cost
structure."

Internet phone service has become increasingly popular over the last year, helped in large part by
marketing pushes from companies including Verizon (nyse: VZ - news - people ), Comcast (nyse:
CMCSA - news - people ), Cablevision Systems (nyse: CVC - news - people ) and Vonage. According to
market research firm IDC, the number of U.S. subscribers to residential VoIP services will grow from
three million this year to 27 million by the end of 2009. Customers have been attracted to VoIP
service because it is cheaper than traditional phone calls, and customers can retain the same phone
number regardless of where they live.

But many new subscribers to the service don't realize their new phones don't connect directly to 911
services, and that even if they do, emergency responders may not get the same information they would
if the call came from a regular phone line.

Internet phone systems route calls to a particular computer on the Internet, not to a specific
physical location. Many VoIP providers have sold this as a feature, pointing out that users can get
online anywhere in the world and still place and receive phone calls from the same phone number. But
it also makes it difficult to provide a specific address for an Internet caller, and vendors worry
about the cost and complexity of adjusting their systems to do so.

Some VoIP vendors, including 8x8 (nasdaq: EGHT - news - people ), already offer 911 service to
customers. Market-leader Vonage is also close to compliance, and already offers 911 to customers in
Rhode Island.

But many companies will have to scramble to update their systems to make 911 service possible. "That
could be bad, especially for the smaller companies who are trying to scratch and claw to get
customers any way they can," says Arnold. "It could lead to the departure of a lot of the little
guys."

Even if they're able to cross the 911 hurdle and retain their customers, VoIP providers also worry
that the FCC ruling represents a change in the government's hands-off attitude towards the new
technology. Former FCC Chairman Michael Powell was a strong supporter of Internet telephony and
presided over a number of rulings that kept a hands-off attitude.

But Powell resigned in January, and VoIP supporters fear new Chairman Kevin Martin may not follow in
his footsteps. The 911 ruling could indicate his preference to side more with traditional phone
vendors, which would be bad news for VoIP providers trying to get off the ground.

Then again, it may be too early to put Martin into either camp. "This isn't an issue of 'Who's his
favorite vendor?' It's about public safety," says Elizabeth Ussher, an independent telecom analyst.
"Anything that is going to insure that information gets through in a timely manner, that makes it as
accurate as possible and easy for authorities to help people is a leap forward."

Ussher says it won't be a major problem for VoIP vendors to comply with the ruling. "I think it'd be
OK if they took less time complaining about it and more time fixing it," she says.

Meanwhile, the FCC isn't the only governmental body putting pressure on VoIP companies. On Thursday,
only hours before the FCC made its ruling, bills were introduced into both the Senate and the House
of Representatives that would require Internet telephone vendors to connect to 911, and also permit
state and local governments to tax those services in order to help pay for these 911 services.

© Copyright 2005 The Register
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2005/05/20/ne_phone_charges_may_rise/

Vonage VOIP opens in the UK

By Tony Smith

US-based VoIP call company Vonage formally set up shop in the UK today, moving its no-time-limit
call package for £10 a month out of the testing phase it's been in since January.

The tenner, paid up front by rolling credit-card billing, gives you free calls to other Vonage users
and to landlines in the UK and the Republic of Ireland. Calls to mobile phones are priced at 5-15p a
minute, depending on whether you call at weekends, in the evening or during working days.

International calls are extra too, but it's the same rate irrespective of when you call. Calls to
0845 and 0870 numbers are extra too, depending on the time of day. The package includes voicemail,
call forwarding, three-way calls, caller ID and call diversion. Emergency 999 calls are guaranteed.
Subscribing to Vonage brings you a new phone number, but you can select from any of the 120 local
geographical codes the service currently supports over here. By the end of the summer it will
support 400-450 local codes, local MD Kerry Ritz said - essentially all the DSL-equipped local BT
exchanges.

The catch is the need for not only a broadband connection - cable packages are supported as well as
phone-based ADSL links - but you need a phone adaptor too.

Unlike VoIP flavour-of-the-month Skype, Vonage's service is designed to be used with a regular
handset. The receiver connects to the Net via the adaptor, which digitises the conversation and
routes it though an Ethernet port to Vonage's servers and on to the recipient.

However you connect, the company said the call quality will be as good as or better than fixed-line
connections through telcos.

Vonage today launched a Linksys-made router with RJ-11 jacks for the handsets and Ethernet
connections for modems and computers. The router will sell through the company's first UK retail
partner, Staples, from 1 June, Ritz said. Pricing has yet to be determined, but the package will
include the £16.99 set-up fee Vonage charges folk who order online.

Vonage will also offer an adaptor that links handsets to existing broadband routers or direct to
modems. A wireless router will ship this summer, as will a package to connect a pair of DECT
cordless phones to the system.

Vonage also offers a software-based phone for £6 a month from which you can make up to 500 minutes'
of local calls for free. But you need to have a regular tenner-a-month Vonage account too. That
500-minute limitation also applies to the £19 Vonage Small Business package's fax-oriented second
line. The main line is unlimited, like the £10-a-month residential package.

Vonage currently has "a little over 700,000 subscriber lines", said Chairman and CEO Jeffrey Citron,
most of them in the US. Some ten per cent of those lines are small business subscriptions.

Citron said he was not concerned that telcos' ISP divisions will start to cap or even block VoIP
traffic in a bid to protect their revenues as Mexico's Telmex appears to have done. Telmex ADSL
subscribers can't even access the Skype website, he said.

"Such actions are already illegal in the US," he told The Register, "and we think the regulator
would look on them very unfavourably in the UK." ®

Wireless: A world of potential for e-passport market

Eric Sylvers, International Herald Tribune

That most Europeans and Americans will soon be using high-technology passports with an embedded
microchip holding a digital photo, fingerprints, eye scans and other forms of identification has
become something of a foregone conclusion.

What has not been decided is what technology, and specifically what type of microchip, will become
the standard for these new passports, often called e-passports, and that has companies scrambling to
get a slice of this emerging market. The list of pretenders circling and ready to pounce includes
most of the biggest makers of smart cards, the bulk of them European.

"The potential market for e-passports is enormous and basically will eventually include everybody on
earth who has a passport," said Graham Titterington, a principal analyst with Ovum, a British
consulting firm. "And then if you include national identity cards, the market gets even bigger."

Prime Minister Tony Blair of Britain recently told the House of Commons he wants to introduce the
country's first identity card since World War II. The cards, which would carry details like eye
scans and fingerprints, would improve security and hinder illegal immigration because the biometric
data would be difficult to forge, Blair said.

The debate about what technology to use for the e-passports revolves around two issues: privacy and
the speed with which the passports can be read.

Passports that do not need to physically touch the machine reading the data, referred to as
"contactless," are faster to read because they need only pass near the machine. These passports are
potentially more susceptible to people stealing the data in what is often called skimming.
Variations of these chips are used on some subways and highways to expedite payments.

The other type of chip, which must be swiped through a machine, uses the same technology used by
credit cards, phones cards and other so-called smart cards. Both these chips and the contactless
ones have the same potential to store data.

"The problem is that we need to store more data on passports and machine readable text just isn't
working anymore," Bruce Schneier, a specialist in the field of digital security and the author of
several books on the subject said, in an e-mail exchange.

Promoters of advanced contactless technologies, like Gemplus of France - which is making e-passports
for Singapore, Denmark, Sweden and Norway - say it can safeguard data because the chip uses software
that must give confirmation before any data are transferred. Another solution being floated is to
render e-passports more secure by issuing them with a metallic lining that makes skimming more
difficult.

Privacy advocates and conspiracy theorists, however, say the only reason a government would use a
contactless chip that at best saves about 10 seconds per scan is to keep tabs on people.

"There is a drive to move toward contactless chips, and as that happens the contact chip will lose
its cost advantage because at the end of the day, cost is a question of volume," said Kevin Scott of
Hewlett-Packard.

In the United States, the Bush administration has been pushing a less-sophisticated contactless
technology called radio frequency identification, or RFID, though some say the system has proved
unable to safeguard data during transfers. RFID uses a simple memory chip with no microprocessor and
no software.

There is a sense of urgency in the industry because the United States is requiring about 30
countries whose citizens can enter the country without a visa to begin using e-passports by the end
of October if they want to keep the visa-free status.

Companies fighting for market share include Gemplus, Oberthur and Axalto, all of which are French,
as well as SuperCom of Israel and Infineon Technologies of Germany. The U.S. government in October
chose Axalto, SuperCom and Infineon to take part in a testing phase for eventual work on its own
e-passports, which it plans to begin phasing in this year with a final switchover in a decade.

http://www.iht.com/bin/print_ipub.php?file=/articles/2005/05/22/business/wireless23.php

I.D. theft aided by rampant use of Social Security numbers

By JONATHAN D. EPSTEIN
News Business Reporter

Banks, retailers, insurers and others are taking steps to tighten security and reduce the use of
Social Security numbers to protect consumer information and prevent identity theft.

The efforts are part of the battle against a growing crime that can strike people almost a random:
the buying goods and services on credit using someone else's identity.

Consumer advocates have long complained that companies are collecting and storing too much
information on consumers. They also say the information isn't protected well enough from theft or
misuse by would-be criminals both outside and inside the companies.

In particular, advocates criticize the rampant use of Social Security numbers for employee or
customer identification.

Originally intended for Social Security benefits, the nine-digit number has been commonly used on
health insurance cards, employee IDs, driver's licenses and for passwords. Companies ask for it by
phone. Even government agencies use it.

Social Security numbers are one of four primary requirements for obtaining loans, getting credit
cards, opening bank accounts or even receiving other nonfinancial services.

Together with a name, address, and phone number, the Social Security number can give a thief enough
to open credit in someone else's name.

"It's very important to get away from using the Social Security number," said Jay Foley,
co-executive director of the Identity Theft Resource Center, a San Diego nonprofit. "There's too
many liability issues for the companies that do use it."

Two of Western New York's big three health insurers are dropping the use of Social Security numbers
for member identification this year, switching instead to random numbers. Several local banks have
also stopped using them for passwords and other uses, except where necessary.

Even so, the numbers and plenty of other information can be found online by people willing to take
the time and spend some money.

"I don't even know if stopping the use of Social Security numbers will solve the problem," said
Robert Hammond Jr., the Riverside, Calif.-based author of "Identity Theft: How to Protect Your Most
Valuable Asset."

"That number is out there in so many ways, that if someone really wants it, they can find it," he
said.

According to a September 2003 study for the Federal Trade Commission, an estimated 10 million
Americans are victims of identity theft each year, costing businesses and consumers about $50
billion. Almost all of that is absorbed by businesses.

April Riley, a 53-year-old Erie County Medical Center nurse, recently discovered she was a victim
when she received a letter from cell phone company T-Mobile. Someone had opened an account with five
phones in her name, prompting T-Mobile to get suspicious and close it.

She then received seven credit cards in the mail that she hadn't applied for from clothing retailers
such as Macy's, Limited, and Ashley. All were opened at stores in Georgia, and were charged to their
limit. She also got a letter from a jeweler, thanking her for her $3,500 purchase, and letters from
retailers that denied her credit.

Most accounts are now closed. She filed a police report, and alerted the credit bureaus.

"It's a hassle," she said. "I've worked so hard for what I have. And then you're always wondering
what else do they know and what else can they get of mine?"

Last year, the FTC received 635,173 actual consumer fraud complaints, of which 39 percent were
identity theft. The Buffalo area reported 682 identity theft cases, ranking it 44th among
metropolitan areas nationally, and third in the state behind New York City and Rochester.

In the past, criminals obtained information by "dumpster-diving" in the trash, retrieving employment
or credit applications with Social Security numbers, names, addresses and other information. But as
companies have amassed billions of computer records, thieves have been hacking into computer
systems.

Data has also been stolen by employees. And thieves send out mass "phishing" e-mails to millions of
consumers or set up fake Web sites, pretending to be familiar companies to trick people into
divulging information.

Experts say consumers should take steps to prevent identity theft. But recent losses of information
from retailers, banks and data firms raise questions about their responsibility, and draw attention
to what is being done to prevent such losses.

Already, 13 states - but not New York - prohibit the use of Social Security numbers for
identification. Schools are shifting away from it as well.

The new federal Medicare law requires insurers to move away from using the numbers for Medicare
plans. And the national Blue Cross Blue Shield Association, which licenses the Blues plans, mandates
that its companies stop using Social Security numbers for ID by year-end.

HealthNow New York's Blue Cross Blue Shield of Western New York said it's adopting secure numbers in
late May, although it will take several months to get new insurance cards to its 900,000 members.
The move will be done by year-end, said Donald Ingalls, vice president of government affairs and
community relations.

It will still use Social Security numbers for enrollment and to coordinate benefits.

Univera Healthcare in February began converting to letters and numbers that don't repeat. The
insurer finished in mid-March, and is mailing new cards.

Its Rochester parent, Lifetime Healthcare Cos., has been making the change for two years at its
Excellus Blue Cross Blue Shield unit. Lifetime has 2 million members.

"It's been a long and complicated process, and we want to make sure we get it right," said Jim
Redmond, spokesman for Excellus, which processes 51 million claims a year.

Independent Health Association still uses Social Security numbers for most of a member's ID, but may
change to a random code. For now, at a member's request, it will black out much of the ID number
with "X"s, even on cards.

"We've been listening to our customers and recognized that we needed to change," said Bob Hoover,
senior vice president, chief information officer and corporate security officer. "You read the paper
on a daily basis, and this is a real issue."

Even banks like HSBC Bank USA, KeyCorp, and Citizens Financial Group no longer use Social Security
numbers as account passwords for online or telephone banking. Instead, they use codes chosen
randomly or by customers, or ask only for the last four digits.

But banks still need the full number for credit checks and tax purposes, and must ask for it under
the USA Patriot Act when a new account is opened. And lenders say that without the Social Security
or another consistent number, fraud will only increase because verifying identity will be even
harder.


However, the efforts go beyond the use of the Social Security number. In the last year, information
on more than 2 million consumers was lost or stolen from data firms ChoicePoint and LexisNexis,
California State University, Bank of America and three other banks, and retailers BJ's Wholesale
Clubs, Polo Ralph Lauren and DSW Shoe Warehouse.

Critics say some of this could have been prevented. Visa and MasterCard bar retailers from storing
data from magnetic stripes of credit cards. Yet some of the data was stolen from retailers.

They also say companies should be responsible for alerting consumers to risks. California now
requires companies that have had security breaches to divulge that to consumers. And in March,
regulators began requiring banks to disclose if private information is stolen and is likely to be
misused.

"You can't just put it on the companies, but they have a lot of responsibility because they're the
ones using this data," Hammond said.

Companies say they're responding. "It's almost impossible to create a perfect system, so there are
still going to be some breaches from time to time," said J. Craig Sherman, spokesman for the
National Retail Federation. "But the recent incidents have companies looking to see where they can
plug as many holes as possible."

Retailers, insurers, lenders and others have enhanced computer "firewalls," passwords and security
procedures, on their own or in response to laws like the Health Insurance Portability and
Accountability Act.

"The hackers have a lot of free time, and they're out there developing programs to gain access to
our systems," said Hoover of Independent Health, which hires Computer Task Group to audit its
security and policies. "You have to put up a wall that makes it harder."

Health insurers must train employees on confidentiality, limit how much information they give out
and to whom, and verify identities. Confidential documents must be cleared off desks daily and
locked up.

"This is not a one-shot deal," said David McDowell, senior vice president and chief information
officer for Lifetime, which has spent as much as $20 million since 2001 on privacy, and $1 million a
year to upgrade security. "This is something that started many years ago and goes on forever."

Computer terminals also must be "locked" if someone leaves their desk, so that information is not
accessible until a password is re-entered. Anything sent to medical offices must be encrypted. And
visitors are not allowed where personal information is available.

In the banking world, KeyCorp screens all outgoing e-mail messages, blocking those containing what
appear to be account or Social Security numbers. It also limits how much data can be sent out.

Paper documents that are not needed are shredded. Any remaining documents are locked up in vaults or
long-term storage sites with limited access.

"It's becoming crystal clear that more and more companies are paying attention to the identity theft
issues, but there's still a lot of work to be done," Foley said.

e-mail: jepstein@buffnews.com

Tips to prevent identity theft

* Don't carry Social Security card
* Shred documents with personal information
* Check credit reports with all three major credit bureaus at least once a year (Experion, Equifax,
and TransUnion)
* Check bills for accuracy
* Don't use obvious passwords, like your mother's maiden name, and don't keep them written in your
wallet or purse
* Don't give personal information over the phone unless you make the call
* Don't respond to email requests from companies to verify your information; they're probably
fraudulent
* Report lost credit card, driver's license, or Social Security card immediately

If you are the victim of fraud or identity theft

* Contact credit card companies and banks immediately and close the account
* Report the fraud to the three major credit bureaus
* Report the crime to the police, and obtain a report number from them
* Contact the Federal Trade Commission at (877) ID-THEFT

Source: News research

Copyright 1999 - 2005 - The Buffalo News
http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20050522/1030147.asp

FBI asks Congress for power to seize documents

By Alan Elsner
Reuters

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The FBI on Tuesday asked the U.S. Congress for sweeping new powers to seize
business or private records, ranging from medical information to book purchases, to investigate
terrorism without first securing approval from a judge.

Valerie Caproni, FBI general counsel, told the U.S. Senate Intelligence Committee her agency needed
the power to issue what are known as administrative subpoenas to get information quickly about
terrorist plots and the activities of foreign agents.

Civil liberties groups have complained the subpoenas, which would cover medical, tax, gun-purchase,
book purchase, travel and other records and could be kept secret, would give the FBI too much power
and could infringe on privacy and free speech.

"This type of subpoena authority would allow investigators to obtain relevant information quickly in
terrorism investigations, where time is often of the essence," Caproni testified.

The issue of administrative subpoenas dominated the hearing, which was called to discuss
reauthorization of clauses of the USA Patriot Act due to expire at the end of this year.

The act was passed shortly after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. However administrative subpoena power
was not in the original law. The proposed new powers, long sought by the FBI, have been added by
Republican lawmakers, acting on the wishes of the Bush administration, to the new draft of the USA
Patriot Act.

Committee chairman, Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts, noted that other government agencies already had
subpoena power to investigate matters such as child pornography, drug investigations and medical
malpractice. He said it made little sense to deny those same powers to the FBI to investigate
terrorism or keep track of foreign intelligence agents.

But opponents said other investigations usually culminated in a public trial, whereas terrorism
probes would likely remain secret and suspects could be arrested or deported or handed over to other
countries without any public action.

CLOSED HEARING

Roberts intends to hold a closed meeting on Thursday, above the objections of some Democrats, to
move the legislation forward out of his committee. But the provision still faces a long road before
it becomes law, since the Senate Judiciary Committee also has jurisdiction over the bill, while the
House of Representatives is drawing up its own legislation.

Democrats on the committee expressed concerns and pressed Caproni to give examples of cases where
the lack of such powers had hampered an investigation.

"I am not aware of any time in which Congress has given directly to the FBI subpoena authority. That
doesn't make it right or wrong. It just needs to be thought about," said West Virginia Democrat Jay
Rockefeller.

Caproni said she could not cite a case where a bomb had exploded because the FBI lacked this power,
but that did not mean one could not explode tomorrow.

She gave a theoretical example of a case where the FBI suspected that a terrorist was about to do
something but did not exactly where he was. In such a case, it might subpoena hotel or EZ-pass
records, which would show where and when he had driven through toll booths in the eastern United
States.

Under the proposed legislation, those served with subpoenas would have the right to challenge them
in court. But civil liberties groups said few were likely to do so, and the person being
investigated would be unlikely even to know that the FBI was seeking his personal records.

For example, if the FBI demanded a person's medical records from his doctor, the doctor could
challenge the order if he wished, but the individual could not.

"Ordinary citizens are storing information not in their homes or even on portable devices but on
networks, under the control of service providers who can be served with compulsory process and never
have to tell the subscribers that their privacy has been invaded," said James Dempsey of the Center
for Democracy, one of several groups opposing the provision.

© 2005 Reuters

Chinese Rule restricts offshore investment by individuals

 Anthony Tam and Yolanda Li
2005-05-25 06:48

In January 2005, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE) promulgated Circular 11
relating to the Improvement of Foreign Exchange Administration for Acquisitions with Foreign
Capital. The circular could have a severe negative impact on mainland individuals who make
investments in offshore companies or acquire mainland companies indirectly through an offshore
company.

Before Circular 11, it was common for a mainlander who wanted his companies or assets to be listed
on an overseas stock exchange, such as the Hong Kong stock exchange, to adopt an "inversion"
acquisition structure. The mainland founder would invest in an offshore company which would acquire
his Chinese assets or companies. When the acquisition was completed, the offshore company would be
listed on an overseas stock exchange.

Another common practice was to use an offshore company in a merger and acquisition transaction
between a foreign investor and a mainland company. The foreign investor would invest in a Chinese
company through an offshore company and the original mainland owner of the Chinese company would
acquire and hold an equity interest in the offshore company. This effectively would allow the
mainland founder of the Chinese company to retain part of his interest in the Chinese company
through an interest in an offshore company.

Both of these structures enabled a mainland individual to convert his Chinese assets or companies
into offshore assets.

To ensure that such structures are properly approved by the various government authorities, SAFE
will closely scrutinize such situations. Circular 11 introduces two approaches to monitoring the
offshore investments of Chinese individuals.

First, overseas investments by mainland individuals are now subject to approval procedures similar
to those that apply to Chinese companies. Outbound investments by Chinese companies must be approved
by the Ministry of Commerce (MOFCOM) according to the 1989 "Measures on Foreign Exchange
Administration Related to Overseas Investments". Such investments by Chinese companies also must be
approved by the State Development and Reform Commission (SDRC) and the SAFE.

In October 2004, the SDRC enacted the "Provisional Administrative Measures on Ratification of
Overseas Investment Prefects" that require all overseas investments by mainland individuals to be
approved by the SDRC. This requirement previously only applied to Chinese enterprises. Circular 11,
as a follow-up to the provisional measure, provides that all "mainland residents" investing overseas
for the purpose of establishing or controlling an offshore company must obtain the approval of the
SAFE and the MOFCOM under the 1989 measure.

The second approach outlined in the circular restricts foreign-exchange registration of certain
foreign-invested enterprises (FIEs). Circular 11 also requires that all mainland residents who
intend to acquire any overseas equity or other property interests in exchange for domestic equity or
assets to obtain certain additional SAFE approvals in forming the FIE.

In accordance with the 2003 "Interim Provisions on Mergers and Acquisitions of Domestic Enterprises
by Foreign Investors", an FIE's acquisition of an interest of 25 per cent or more in a Chinese
company or any acquisition of Chinese assets must be registered with the SAFE.

In addition, Circular 11 requires that the FIE obtain the approval of the SAFE in Beijing if the
foreign investing company in the acquisition was formed or controlled by mainland residents, and if
the foreign investing company has the same management as the Chinese target company.

Although Circular 11 does not have a retroactive effect, the local SAFE is required to identify any
existing FIE that falls in the above category and to strictly monitor the foreign exchange-related
activities of such FIEs.

There are many unresolved practical issues relating to Circular 11, including:

The term "mainland resident" is not defined. Presumably, the regulation would not apply to mainland
citizens who are entirely resident abroad. It is also unclear whether the regulation applies to
foreign citizens who are residents on the mainland.

It is unclear whether the regulation applies to investments made by a mainland individual using
offshore assets denominated in foreign currency. Presumably, the SAFE regulations generally do not
purport to cover situations where the mainland investor uses such offshore assets to make an
offshore investment.

The SAFE approval refers to the 1989 measures, which require approval of the outbound investment by
MOFCOM. However, currently there is no MOFCOM procedure for approving outbound investments by
individuals. We understand that MOFCOM may issue regulations in the near future, but until such
guidance is issued, no SAFE approval and registration would be feasible.

The approval authority for the creation of an FIE currently is shared between the SDRC, which deals
with project approval, and the MOFCOM, which deals with contract approval. The additional foreign
exchange registration approval by the SAFE could pose a problem for FIEs. If the SAFE in Beijing
denies a foreign exchange registration by virtue of Circular 11, the FIE could not operate a foreign
currency account at all, including its ability to receive capital.

Finally, it is unclear whether the SAFE would require a certificate issued by the State
Administration of Taxation (SAT) to be provided by the mainland individual founder to demonstrate
that personal income tax has been paid in respect of the sale. It is possible that the SAT may issue
regulations in this regard in the future.

Circular 11 is a step towards preventing the unmonitored outflow of domestic capital and extending
the control on outbound investments to mainland residents. It remains to be seen how Circular 11
will be implemented as it is drafted broadly and loosely. In the meantime, the circular has
introduced a severe restriction on IPOs of domestic companies overseas via an offshore entity.

(HK Edition 05/25/2005 page4)

Copyright 2005 Chinadaily.com.cn All rights reserved.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/english/doc/2005-05/25/content_445446.htm