Estimados sub******ores,

Como ustedes saben, desde hace tres años, el LEAP/E2020 no ha cesado de
ofrecer regularmente consejos y recomendaciones dirigidas a las
instituciones y los gobiernos de los principales países del mundo,
buscábamos evitar llegar a la situación actual. A pesar de una creciente
recepción por los círculos dirigentes de numerosos países e
instituciones internacionales, este esfuerzo ha sido vano. En vista de
la gravedad del contexto actual, pesa desde ahora un gran riesgo sobre
el sistema internacional y poco es el tiempo que resta para evitar lo
peor, consideramos que es nuestro deber dar nuestras recomendaciones con
una claridad tal que su contenido no pueda ser desconocido por los
dirigentes del G20 y sus asesores, en vísperas de la Cumbre de Londres
del próximo 2 de Abril la que constituye la última oportunidad.

Como hemos anunciado en el GEAB N°33, el LEAP/E2020 ha decidido escribir
una carta abierta a los dirigentes del G20, firmada por Franck
Biancheri, Director de Estudios del LEAP, que será publicada en
inglés este Martes 24 de Marzo en el Financial Times (a nivel mundial).
El LEAP/E2020 la difundirá, por supuesto, igualmente en alemán, español
y francés en sus sitios y a través de sus bases de datos.
Simultáneamente, el movimiento Newropeans la difundirá en una decena de
lenguas (italiano, holandés, polaco, rumano, ruso, portugués,... ) vía
sus propias redes. Esta difusión debería permitir que esta carta abierta
sea leída por alrededor de 25 millones de personas en más de cien países.

Como pueden imaginar, la publicación en el Financial Times representa
un gran esfuerzo financiero para el LEAP/E2020. Si hemos sido capaces de
hacerlo, es gracias a vuestras suscripciones y a la confianza que
testimoniáis a nuestros trabajos. Así que, es gracias a ustedes, por su
adhesión, que podemos contribuir activamente al esfuerzo colectivo para
evitar que durante los próximos meses, nuestro planeta sea precipitado a
una década trágica. Les agradecemos que permitan de esta manera al
LEAP/E2020 difundir sus recomendaciones en un momento donde nuestros
dirigentes parecen tan desprovistos frente a esta crisis sin precedentes.

Gobernar, es prever. Hace tres años que prevemos con considerable
acierto. Consiguientemente, esperamos que esta carta abierta ayude a
nuestros dirigentes a gobernar mejor.


Cordialmente,

Marie-Hélène Caillol, President LEAP/E2020

As his cabinet colleagues know all too well, it is almost as hard to coax a smile out of Peer Steinbrück, Germany’s famously irascible finance minister, as it is to gain his agreement for an extra budget item. Yet as he headed to Brussels this week to meet European counterparts, he could barely suppress his jubilant mood.

Grounds for the euphoria: the tax investigation launched by state prosecutors in Bochum two weeks ago, the biggest in the country’s history. Armed with a list of 1,400 anonymous trusts managed by Liechtenstein’s LGT bank, the investigators have begun raiding the homes of German account owners and hope to recover hundreds of millions of euros in unpaid taxes.

EU tax plan targets bank secrecy - Feb-02
Brussels strengthens ‘e-invoicing’ - Jan-29
Editorial comment: A template for tax - Jun-10
Loopholes exposed in savings directive - May-14
Ireland’s low levy continues to woo business - Apr-16
Foreigners pay more to settle in Switzerland - Apr-15

Most of the public’s attention has focused on the inquiry itself – the list that sparked it was secured by Germany’s BND intelligence service, which last year paid a former LGT employee €4.2m ($6.4m, £3.2m) for the explosive documents after months of cloak-and-dagger negotiations worthy of a James Bond novel.

Peer Steinbruck

Yet the prospect that a tiny fraction of all German residents who hide their income from the state will be brought to justice is not why Mr Steinbrück (right) has been rubbing his hands. For the minister, the boon lies instead in the shock the investigation has caused to the secretive principality of Liechtenstein and Europe’s remaining tax havens. The scandal, Mr Steinbrück hopes, could lead Liechtenstein and places such as Monaco to reform bank secrecy rules that Berlin sees as an open invitation to tax dodgers. At stake are not millions of euros but the €30bn the German government thinks it alone loses to tax evasion every year.

“The really interesting aspect is the political and media discussion, and not just in Germany,” says a ministry official. “You can bet no one is opening new accounts in Liechtenstein right now. It is this kind of relentless pressure and bad publicity that will make these countries change their ways.” As a senior official close to Chancellor Angela Merkel puts it: “Our demands are quite simple. Ultimately, we want states such as Liechtenstein to provide us with information on any German resident holding assets on their territories.”

Indeed, there are signs that the German investigation could mark a turning point in the decade-long battle by industrialised countries to prise open the banking secrets of tax havens. Secretive centres such as Liechtenstein have become an increasingly serious headache for industrialised countries since the relaxation of capital controls, the progressive elimination of withholding taxes and the development of electronic money transfers, which have encouraged growing numbers of reluctant taxpayers to shift their wealth offshore.

In 2006 the US Internal Revenue Service admitted “acute and growing” difficulties in uncovering illegal offshore arrangements. “They often involve other sovereign jurisdictions over which we have little or no control and with taxpayers that are often difficult to identify.”

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, one of the most active multilateral organisations in the fight against tax havens, estimates that some $5,000bn-$7,-000bn is held offshore. Occasional amnesties offered by national authorities and targeted raids such as the German investigation have so far done little more than give tax inspectors tantalising glimpses of what they are missing.

Operation Wickenby, Australia’s biggest fraud investigation, shone a spotlight on prominent sportsmen, entertainers and other celebrities who had used a web of offshore trusts across the world. Ireland collected almost €840m from 15,000 Irish residents hiding undeclared income abroad. In Italy, a recent amnesty resulted in the disclosure of €75bn of assets held offshore. Last year the UK raised £500m in an “offshore disclosure facility” after legal rulings forced banks to hand over details of hundreds of thousands of offshore accounts.

Streets of Vaduz

But as the case of Liechtenstein illustrates, political progress has been slow. After the BND uncovered evidence in 1998 that criminals had been using banks in the principality to store their funds, Vaduz (above) reacted by pledging full co-operation with Germany in fighting money laundering, terrorism financing and tax fraud. The principality, which is not a European Union member, says it abides by the EU’s 2005 savings tax directive, an agreement to tackle evasion. Like Switzerland, it does not exchange information on suspected tax evaders but has been levying a withholding tax on savings parked in its banks by foreign residents and passing on the bulk of the receipts to these individuals’ tax authorities.

The German investigation, however, has exposed weaknesses in the directive, which exempts trusts, companies and foundations and applies only to interest payments, not to other types of returns such as dividends and capital gains. Such loopholes, say German officials, explain why receipts from the withholding tax in Switzerland and Liechtenstein have been small. Like Monaco and Andorra, Liechtenstein remains on the OECD’s blacklist of “unco-operative states” in tax matters.

“Liechtenstein is a jurisdiction where you have an inability to discover information and assets like few others. In fact, I’d say it is a singular problem,” says Rick Rein, head of the international asset recovery practice for Schwartz Cooper, a Chicago law firm. “This means that if [a suspected tax dodger] refuses a demand by a US court to repatriate the money, there’s nothing the US can do. That person would get thrown in prison for up to 10 years. But if he holds out, he still has the money.”

The dilemma, says one aide to Mr Steinbrück, is that “these countries are slowly realising they need to reinvent themselves as normal – as opposed to parasitic – economies. Yet by doing so they would be destroying their very business model”.

Proponents of the big-stick approach to tax evasion have long argued that governments could solve the problem by imposing withholding taxes on payments to tax havens or stopping financial institutions from providing services to them. In the wake of the investigation, Mr Steinbrück threatened to do just this. If Liechtenstein did not change its ways, he warned, Germany would impose a levy on all fund transfers to the principality, in effect reinstating pre-1990s-style capital controls.

But in private, ministry officials say Berlin, having criticised the US for imposing sanctions on companies doing business with Iran, would find it hard to take unilateral action. “We would be the bully. We would be crucified,” says one, pointing to accusations two weeks ago by Pierre Mirabaud, head of the Swiss Banking Federation, that the BND had used “Gestapo methods” to get its information. Mr Mirabaud later apologised for the comparison.

Some governments have achieved limited successes with strong-arm tactics. As far back as 1962, Charles de Gaulle set a precedent in Europe by forcing Monaco to impose taxes on its French residents: the general sent customs agents to set up barriers at the border. But there have been political setbacks too. The OECD watered down its campaign on harmful tax practices in 2001 when the administration of US President George W. Bush, under pressure from the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, a Washington lobby group, complained it would stifle tax competition.

Accusations of double standards have proved a stumbling block for the industrialised countries. Franck Biancheri, who until 2006 was Monaco’s minister of finance, says the refusal to co-operate with the OECD boiled down to a simple principle: “I said, ‘How can you impose on Monaco things you cannot get from OECD members such as Switzerland and Luxembourg?’”

More credible than Mr Steinbrück’s dangling of the torture instruments of capital control are his ministry’s efforts to redraft the savings tax directive. His officials have been working on a version that would extend the scope of the directive to all types of returns on assets and to legal entities such as trusts. Under the proposed text, signatory countries would have to provide information to foreign tax authorities about the identity of suspected tax evaders holding accounts in their banks.

Pushing such changes through, however, will be hard work. EU rules in tax matters must be approved unanimously and Austria and Luxembourg, which have bank secrecy provisions, have already signalled their misgivings. Still, talk of a beefed-up directive and Mr Steinbrück’s warning of unilateral action are part of a broader psychological offensive that Berlin thinks could be its most effective weapon in its war on Europe’s tax havens. “We want to maintain a degree of fuzziness over how far these governments think the crazy Germans will go,” says one Berlin official.

For now, the tactics seem to be having an impact. When visiting Berlin two weeks ago, a cowed Otmar Hasler, prime minister of Liechtenstein, promised more co-operation with Germany and a reform of the principality’s trust and tax laws. A week later, Prince Albert of Monaco agreed to talks on a new co-operation agreement with Germany’s tax authorities.

Tax investigators across Europe also hope the fact that their German colleagues obtained their information from a whistleblower within LGT – and that he was handsomely rewarded for his “betrayal” – could encourage others to follow suit. Paul Walsh, head of offshore assets investigations at the Irish Revenue Commissioners, was only half joking last week when he said he would welcome a call from any Liechtenstein bank employee with either a grudge or a bad conscience.

“There was someone eager to give out names,” says Paolo Ciocca, chairman of the OECD’s committee on fiscal affairs. While not openly shopping for information, governments such as the US have made it clear that whistleblowers can expect financial rewards. “This can happen anywhere.” Mr Ciocca says. “Frankly, I wouldn’t be surprised if it happened again.”

Back in Germany, the hundreds of raids carried out by the prosecutor’s taskforce seem to be having a psychological impact too, persuading dozens of other offenders to volunteer information about their Liechtenstein accounts. “There is a huge amount of insecurity around,” says Carsten Tiemer, a tax lawyer at Harms-Ziegler, a Berlin law firm. “The demand for information among our clients has rocketed.”

The investigation, Mr Steinbrück hopes, could help abolish the widespread German notion that tax evasion is a trivial offence on a par with driving through an amber traffic light. The shopping day-trip to Luxembourg or the Austrian skiing weekend with suitcases full of cash could soon lose its appeal, especially if the courts uphold stiff sentences in the current cases.

In the past two weeks, Sweden, France, Italy and several other countries have confirmed investigations into holders of Liechtenstein accounts, pointing out that they were using different information from that obtained by the BND.

The admissions allowed a glimpse behind the veil surrounding the networks through which tax commissioners exchange information on suspected offenders. The implied message: even if you are not on the German list, you may be in our sights.

Iniciado por hugolp

Ostia ***** otros que se apuntan a la moneda mundial y al banco central mundial... Nos quieren dar por culo por todas partes.