DOCSLIB.ORG

Offshore Planning Checklists International

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Offshore Planning Checklists International Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. O F FSH O RE PL ANNING C H E C K L ISTS IN TE RN A TIO NA L O F FSH O RE F INA NCI A L C E N TE RS (IO F Cs) O E CD CONCEPT OF “TAX HAVEN” The OECD identifies a tax haven where: ­ The jurisdiction imposes no or only nominal taxes and offers itself, or is perceived to offer itself, as a place to be used by non-residents to escape tax in their country of residence. ­ Practices of the jurisdiction prevent the effective exchange of relevant information with other governments on taxpayers benefiting from the low or no tax jurisdiction. ­ A lack of transparency exists. ­ There is an absence of a requirement that the activity be substantial, since this would suggest that a jurisdiction may be attempting to attract investment or transactions that are purely tax driven. ­ There is no or only nominal taxation within the jurisdiction. ­ The jurisdiction offers itself as a place where non-residents can escape tax in their country of residence. The OECD is introducing measures to counter the distorting effects of tax havens on the economies of other countries. Favoured tax treatment by high tax jurisdictions is under attack from the OECD, the European Union and the United Nations. C L ASSES O F T A X H A V ENS OR I O F Cs Countries that have no income tax or that grant extensive tax exemptions Page 1 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Countries that only tax locally arising income (territorial basis of taxation that exempts foreign income) Countries that combine features of either of the above with a treaty network Low tax financial centres in countries offering special incentives and privileges, including international business company legislation High tax countries offering special incentives for offshore companies and qualifying holding companies. An extremely large percentage of otherwise high tax countries have special regions or regimes where offshore activities can be conducted. PO T EN TI A L O PPOR T UN ITI ES FOR T A X H A V ENS AN D IO F Cs IOFCs and tax havens have the potential to: Create a new source of invisible earnings for the country Increase the inflow of foreign currency and attract foreign qualifying companies Generate employment Create training and educational opportunities Enhance the financial strength and status of the country Foster the introduction and increased use of modern technology Develop exports and associated activities Develop tax and/or non-tax incentive programs Provide for — offshore companies — offshore trusts — offshore banking — offshore insurance — offshore shipping — offshore funds — co-ordination centres — headquarters companies — management and administrative offices Page 2 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. G EN ER A L AN D C ORPOR A T E A C TI VI TI ES C AR R IED ON IN IO F Cs Holding companies Finance companies and partnerships International headquarters and administration International shipping and air transport vehicles Insurance, life insurance, and reinsurance companies International pension funds Trust corporations and related activities Banking, finance, and treasury management Brokerage and arbitrage activities Venture capital funds and offshore funds Counter trade activities Joint ventures Funds for leveraged buyouts Location for ownership of intangible rights and licensing companies Assembly and manufacturing Professional services International and wholesale trading with third parties Joint ventures and partnerships in construction, mining, onshore and offshore drilling, and exploration activities Leisure industry activities Hotels and resorts Property and investment and international real estate ownership Time-share and holiday homes SER VIC ES FOR IN D IVID U A LS C AR R IED ON IN TA X H A V ENS AN D IO FCs Offshore trusts and trust management Employment trusts and employee share ownership plans Offshore employment companies Investment holding companies and private group holding companies Property and portfolio investments Insulation vehicles for estate and capital taxes Page 3 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Exchange control vehicles and planning Investment services and asset administration Offshore ownership of intellectual property rights Offshore roll-up funds and investment trusts Life insurance free of withholding taxes Offshore banking activities and brokerage advice Venture capital planning Retirement location Vacation resorts and time-sharing Location for producing works of artistic and cultural merit Pension planning Location for tax residence and tax shelter Tax deferment and secondary sheltering opportunities K E Y SE L EC TI ON FA C TORS O F A T A X H A V EN AN D IO F C L O C A TION Political and economic stability Guarantees against future taxation Guarantees against expropriation or nationalisation Freedom from exchange controls Good professional and banking facilities Favourable long-term government policies Favourable attitude to offshore activities Confidentiality Strength of banking and commercial secrecy Freedom from banking controls and availability of local capital Location of offshore banking activities Effective legal, accounting, and administrative systems Favourable company law requirements Ability to use IOFC for central distribution activity Availability of duty-free zones Minimum import duty scales Good communications and transportation facilities Ability to conduct substantial business activities No withholding taxes Page 4 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Liberality of corporation legislation Low or no direct or indirect taxes on all or certain types of income and capital No inheritance taxes Flexibility to move out of tax haven location Minimum governmental controls Minimal currency risks Opportunity to obtain local tax rulings Acceptable level of fees and legal costs Availability of tax treaties Availability of investment concessions Freedom to import necessary raw materials and obtain work permits Security of property rights Minimal filing requirements (tax and corporate) Ability to take advantage of redomiciliation provisions Bearer shares availability Availability of share warrants to bearer or no par value shares Legislation permitting exempt companies and trusts Acceptance of trust legislation Ability to use nominee shareholders Good local directors Availability of qualified local staff B ASIC LIST O F T A X H A V ENS AN D IO F Cs Andorra Anguilla Antigua and Barbuda Aruba The Bahamas Bahrain Barbados Belize The British Virgin Islands The Cook Islands Dominica Gibraltar Grenada Page 5 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Guernsey/Sark/Alderney Isle of Man Jersey Liberia Liechtenstein The Maldives The Marshall Islands Monaco Montserrat Nauru Netherlands Antilles Niue Panama Samoa Seychelles St Lucia St. Christopher & Nevis St. Vincent and the Grenadines Tonga The Turks & Caicos Islands The US Virgin Islands Vanuatu C O UN TR IES TH A T H A V E N O IN C O M E T A X OR TH A T GR AN T E X T ENSIV E TA X EX EM PT IONS: Andorra Anguilla The Bahamas Bahrain Bermuda Brunei (individuals) Campione The Cayman Islands The Cook Islands French Polynesia Grenada Kuwait Maldives Monaco Nauru Oman (individuals only) The Turks and Caicos Islands United Arab Emirates Page 6 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Uruguay Vanuatu C O UN TR IES TH A T IM POS E N O IN C O M E T A X ON FOR EIGN SO UR C E IN C O M E: Costa Rica Djibouti Dominican Republic Ecuador France (special rules) Guatemala Hong Kong Ireland (non-resident company) Jordan Kenya Lebanon Liberia Macau Panama Swaziland Uruguay Venezuela C O UN TR IES TH A T C AN B E US ED AS L O W TA X AR E AS B U T A LSO H A V E C ER T AIN TA X TR EA T Y B EN E FI TS: Cyprus The Netherlands The Netherlands Antilles Switzerland LO W T A X FIN AN CI A L C EN T ERS AN D C O UN TR I ES O F F ER IN G SPE CI A L IN C EN TI V ES AN D PR IV IL EG ES: Angola Anguilla Antigua Barbados The British Virgin Islands Brunei Cyprus Gibraltar Grenada Guernsey Page 7 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com Authoritative Texts on Practically Anything About Practically Everything Everywhere. Hong Kong Ireland The Isle of Man Jamaica Jersey Liechtenstein Luxembourg Macau Madeira Malta The Marshall Islands Mauritius Montserrat The Netherlands Nevis Philippines Puerto Rico Samoa San Marino Seychelles Solomon Islands Sri Lanka St. Helena St. Vincent Switzerland Note: Certain of the above countries also offer tax treaty benefits. H AR M FU L PR EF ER EN TIA L TA X R E GIM ES Note: Many international bodies, such as the OEC D, the European Union and the United Nations, as well as high tax jurisdictions, have directed attacks against harmful preferential tax regimes. Insurance Offshore Banking Units Co-ordination Centres Captive Insurance Regime Financial Services and Insurance Centres International Financial Services Centres International Business Centres Provisions for Fluctuations in Re-Insurance Companies Foreign Non-life Insurance Companies Financing and Leasing Co-ordination Centres Page 8 of 10 © www.BarrySpitz.com
Load more

Recommended publications
  • FINANCE Offshore Finance.Pdf
    This page intentionally left blank OFFSHORE FINANCE It is estimated that up to 60 per cent of the world’s money may be located oVshore, where half of all financial transactions are said to take place. Meanwhile, there is a perception that secrecy about oVshore is encouraged to obfuscate tax evasion and money laundering. Depending upon the criteria used to identify them, there are between forty and eighty oVshore finance centres spread around the world. The tax rules that apply in these jurisdictions are determined by the jurisdictions themselves and often are more benign than comparative rules that apply in the larger financial centres globally. This gives rise to potential for the development of tax mitigation strategies. McCann provides a detailed analysis of the global oVshore environment, outlining the extent of the information available and how that information might be used in assessing the quality of individual jurisdictions, as well as examining whether some of the perceptions about ‘OVshore’ are valid. He analyses the ongoing work of what have become known as the ‘standard setters’ – including the Financial Stability Forum, the Financial Action Task Force, the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development. The book also oVers some suggestions as to what the future might hold for oVshore finance. HILTON Mc CANN was the Acting Chief Executive of the Financial Services Commission, Mauritius. He has held senior positions in the respective regulatory authorities in the Isle of Man, Malta and Mauritius. Having trained as a banker, he began his regulatory career supervising banks in the Isle of Man.
    [Show full text]
  • The Notion of Tax and the Elimination of International Double Taxation Or Double Non-Taxation”
    IFA 2016 MADRID CONGRESS “The notion of tax and the elimination of international double taxation or double non-taxation” Luxembourg national report Branch reporters: Chiara Bardini*, Sandra Fernandes** Summary and conclusions The concept of tax under Luxembourg domestic law is based on the basic distinction between compulsory levies that qualify as taxes (“impôts”) and other compulsory levies, such as fees (“taxes”). In general, the term tax can be defined as a compulsory monetary levy imposed by public authorities on the taxpayers in order to mainly raise revenue for which nothing is received in return. In Luxembourg, taxes can only be raised by the Luxembourg State and the municipalities in accordance with the principles of legality, equality and annuality. The Luxembourg tax system relies on the basic distinction between direct and indirect taxes. The Luxembourg direct taxes are levied on items of income and of capital. The main Luxembourg income taxes are the individual income tax, the corporate income tax and the municipal business tax. The net wealth tax, the real estate tax and the subscription tax are the most important Luxembourg taxes levied on items of capital. The Luxembourg notion of “tax” is crucial for the purpose of granting the domestic unilateral foreign tax credit, of applying the domestic participation exemption regime. As a rule, a foreign levy only qualifies for the purpose of such domestic provisions provided that such foreign levy is an income tax and that its main features are comparable to the Luxembourg income tax (i.e. a national income tax imposed on a similar taxable base.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Heavens: Methods and Tactics for Corporate Profit Shifting
    Tax Heavens: Methods and Tactics for Corporate Profit Shifting By Mark Holtzblatt, Eva K. Jermakowicz and Barry J. Epstein MARK HOLTZBLATT, Ph.D., CPA, is an Associate Professor of Accounting at Cleveland State University in the Monte Ahuja College of Business, teaching In- ternational Accounting and Taxation at the graduate and undergraduate levels. axes paid to governments are among the most significant costs incurred by businesses and individuals. Tax planning evaluates various tax strategies in Torder to determine how to conduct business (and personal transactions) in ways that will reduce or eliminate taxes paid to various governments, with the objective, in the case of multinational corporations, of minimizing the aggregate of taxes paid worldwide. Well-managed entities appropriately attempt to minimize the taxes they pay while making sure they are in full compliance with applicable tax laws. This process—the legitimate lessening of income tax expense—is often EVA K. JERMAKOWICZ, Ph.D., CPA, is a referred to as tax avoidance, thus distinguishing it from tax evasion, which is illegal. Professor of Accounting and Chair of the Although to some listeners’ ears the term tax avoidance may sound pejorative, Accounting Department at Tennessee the practice is fully consistent with the valid, even paramount, goal of financial State University. management, which is to maximize returns to businesses’ ownership interests. Indeed, to do otherwise would represent nonfeasance in office by corporate managers and board members. Multinational corporations make several important decisions in which taxation is a very important factor, such as where to locate a foreign operation, what legal form the operations should assume and how the operations are to be financed.
    [Show full text]
  • The History, Evolution and Future of Tax Havens
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Repositori Institucional de la Universitat Jaume I THE HISTORY, EVOLUTION AND FUTURE OF TAX HAVENS NÁYADE GUERRERO GÓMEZ [email protected] 2016/2017 TUTOR: GREGORI DOLZ BENLLIURE TITULACIÓN: FINANZAS Y CONTABILIDAD THE HYSTORY, EVOLUTION AND FUTURE OF TAX HAVENS INDEX: 1. Summary. .3 2. Introduction. 4 3. Historic evolution. .6 3.1. Why did they appear? 3.2. Problems with tax havens 4. Concepts and definitions. .10 4.1. User classification 5. Tax havens‘ basic characteristics. 13 5.1. Characteristics 5.2. Factors to consider when choosing a tax haven 5.3. Role in global economy 6. Efforts to eradicate them and Why do they still exist? . 19 7. Conclusion. .24 8. Bibliography. .26 2 THE HYSTORY, EVOLUTION AND FUTURE OF TAX HAVENS 1. SUMMARY Since the very early 20th century tax havens have played a very important role in global economy. Corporations and individuals have always seeked their services in order to avoid tax. Tax havens as such have always existed but it has been in the last century when they have developed a more financial approach to the services they provide. Offshore banking, secrecy, neutral taxation and ease of investment is amongst them. The purpose of this paper is to analyse and focus on the history of tax havens, its characteristics and how they have been able to become so powerful and influential in today‘s world. As much as there have been efforts to eradicate them, external support and backing has allowed them to keep expanding and keep performing their services.
    [Show full text]
  • The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy
    The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy Alex Cobham, Petr Janský, and Markus Meinzer Abstract Both academic research and public policy debate around tax havens and offshore finance typically suffer from a lack of definitional consistency. Unsurprisingly then, there is little agreement about which jurisdictions ought to be considered as tax havens—or which policy measures would result in their not being so considered. In this article we explore and make operational an alternative concept, that of a secrecy jurisdiction and present the findings of the resulting Financial Secrecy Index (FSI). The FSI ranks countries and jurisdictions according to their contribution to opacity in global financial flows, revealing a quite different geography of financial secrecy from the image of small island tax havens that may still dominate popular perceptions and some of the literature on offshore finance. Some major (secrecy-supplying) economies now come into focus. Instead of a binary division between tax havens and others, the results show a secrecy spectrum, on which all jurisdictions can be situated, and that adjustment lfor the scale of business is necessary in order to compare impact propensity. This approach has the potential to support more precise and granular research findings and policy recommendations. JEL Codes: F36, F65 Working Paper 404 www.cgdev.org May 2015 The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy Alex Cobham Tax Justice Network Petr Janský Institute of Economic Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague Markus Meinzer Tax Justice Network A version of this paper is published in Economic Geography (July 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • AICPA Comments on Small Business Relief from Definition of Tax Shelter
    February 13, 2019 Mr. William M. Paul Mr. Scott K. Dinwiddie Acting Chief Counsel Associate Chief Counsel Internal Revenue Service Income Tax & Accounting 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW Internal Revenue Service Washington, DC 20224 1111 Constitution Avenue, NW Washington, DC 20224 Re: Small Business Relief from Definition of Tax Shelter Dear Messrs. Paul and Dinwiddie: The American Institute of CPAs (AICPA) requests that the Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) provide certain small businesses relief from the definition of a tax shelter to ensure that they will qualify for the small business simplifying provisions available under Public Law No. 115-97, commonly referred to as the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA). TCJA contains numerous simplifying provisions for small businesses. In particular, small businesses that meet the $25 million gross receipts test have the ability to use the overall cash method of accounting; account for inventory under special rules of section 471(c); receive an exemption from the uniform capitalization rules; receive an exception for certain construction contracts from using the percentage-of-completion method; and receive an exemption from the section 163(j)1 limitation on business interest deduction for years beginning after December 31, 2017. However, a small business that meets the definition of a tax shelter, regardless of its ability to meet the $25 million gross receipts test, is ineligible to use the above simplifying provisions. BACKGROUND Many simplifying provisions under TCJA provide an exception for certain small businesses. Certain small businesses are generally defined as “any taxpayer (other than a tax shelter prohibited from using the cash receipts and disbursements method of accounting under section 448(a)(3)) which meets the gross receipts test of section 448(c).” Specifically: Section 448(b)(3) provides an exception to the limitation on the use of the cash method of accounting to “entities which meet gross receipts test” of section 448(c).
    [Show full text]
  • Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives
    Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives Jane G. Gravelle Senior Specialist in Economic Policy August 1, 2017 Congressional Research Service 7-5700 www.crs.gov RL34115 Reform of U.S. International Taxation: Alternatives Summary A striking feature of the modern U.S. economy is its growing openness—its increased integration with the rest of the world. The attention of tax policymakers has recently been focused on the growing participation of U.S. firms in the international economy and the increased pressure that engagement places on the U.S. system for taxing overseas business. Is the current U.S. system for taxing U.S. international business the appropriate one for the modern era of globalized business operations, or should its basic structure be reformed? The current U.S. system for taxing international business is a hybrid. In part, the system is based on a residence principle, applying U.S. taxes on a worldwide basis to U.S. firms while granting foreign tax credits to alleviate double taxation. The system, however, also permits U.S. firms to defer foreign-source income indefinitely—a feature that approaches a territorial tax jurisdiction. In keeping with its mixed structure, the system produces a patchwork of economic effects that depend on the location of foreign investment and the circumstances of the firm. Broadly, the system poses a tax incentive to invest in countries with low tax rates of their own and a disincentive to invest in high-tax countries. In theory, U.S. investment should be skewed toward low-tax countries and away from high-tax locations.
    [Show full text]
  • Mapping Financial Centres
    Helpdesk Report Mapping Financial Centres Hannah Timmis Institute of Development Studies 15 May 2018 Question What are the key financial centres that affect developing countries? Contents 1. Overview 2. IFCs and developing countries 3. Key IFCs 4. References The K4D helpdesk service provides brief summaries of current research, evidence, and lessons learned. Helpdesk reports are not rigorous or systematic reviews; they are intended to provide an introduction to the most important evidence related to a research question. They draw on a rapid desk- based review of published literature and consultation with subject specialists. Helpdesk reports are commissioned by the UK Department for International Development and other Government departments, but the views and opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect those of DFID, the UK Government, K4D or any other contributing organisation. For further information, please contact [email protected]. 1. Overview International financial centres (IFCs) are characterised by favourable tax regimes for foreign corporations. They are theorised to affect developing countries in three key ways. First, they divert real and financial flows away from developing countries. Second, they erode developing countries’ tax bases and thus public resources. Third, IFCs can affect developing countries’ own tax policies by motivating governments to engage in tax competition. The form and scale of these effects across different countries depend on complex interactions between their national tax policies and those of IFCs. In order to better understand the relationship between national tax regimes and development, in 2006, the IMF, OECD, UN and World Bank recommended to the G-20 that all members undertake “spillover analyses” to assess the impact of their tax policies on developing countries.
    [Show full text]
  • THE TRUTH ABOUT TAX REFORM Michael J
    University of Florida Law Review VOLUME 40 FALL 1988 NUMBER 4 DUNWODY DISTINGUISHED LECTURE IN LAW THE TRUTH ABOUT TAX REFORM Michael J. Graetz* I. INTRODUCTION .......•••••••••.••...•... 617 II. THE SORRY STATE OF PRIOR LAW. ••••••••..• 618 III. THE POLITICAL MIRACLE ••••••••••.......• 619 IV. THE CRITICAL IDEA ••••••••••...•....•.•• 622 V. AN UNEASY MARRIAGE •..••••••••••••••••• 623 VI. THE TwIN TOWERS: REVENUE NEUTRALITY AND DISTRIBUTIONAL NEUTRALITY ••••••••••••••• 623 VII. THE OVERALL EFFECTS OF THE 1986 ACT •..... 625 VIII. THE DEMISE OF FEDERAL TAX PROGRESSIVITY •• 626 IX. THE TENUOUS CAPITAL GAIN LINCHPIN •...••• 628 X. A GREAT LEAP FORWARD FOR TAX FAIRNESS? •. 629 XI. SIMPLIFICATION •••••••.•....•••••••••••• 633 XII. THE 1986 ACT AS A SOLUTION TO THE TAX COMPLIANCE PROBLEM AND OTHER IMPOSSIBLE DREAMS •••••••••••••••....•...••••••• • 635 XIII. CONCLUSION............................ 637 I. INTRODUCTION The Tax Reform Act of 1986 has been widely heralded as the most important tax legislation since the income tax was converted to a tax on the masses during the Second World War. Since his favorite pro­ posal for a constitutional amendment - the one calling for a balanced budget - was not adopted, the 1986 Tax Reform Act clearly will be *Justice S. Hotchkiss Professor of Law, Yale. B.B.A., 1966, Emory University; LL.B., 1969, University of Virginia. This article was delivered as the Dunwody Lecture at the University of Florida College of Law, on March 11, 1988. Certain portions of this article appeared as commentary by the author in TAX TIMEs. 617 HeinOnline -- 40 U. Fla. L. Rev. 617 1988 618 UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA LAW REVIEW [Vol. 40 the major domestic achievement of Ronald Reagan's presidency. This law even produced the new Internal Revenue Code of 1986; no more Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended.
    [Show full text]
  • Sisyphus Had It Easy Reflections on Tax and Budget Reform
    Sisyphus Had it Easy Reflections on Tax and Budget Reform By Eugene Steuerle In the heady days after his re-election, Presi- dent Bush promised to replace the current tax system with something better. Politicians often delude themselves that reform can be sum- moned by proclamation. But, a wholesale trans- formation of the income tax system isn’t about Ito happen quickly or painlessly. In fact, only painstaking bottom-up planning could do the trick. The three major tax reforms since World 18 The Milken Institute Review First Quarter 2005 19 War II – in 1954, 1969 and 1986 – all required highly cherished tax breaks for higher educa- an enormous amount of staff work and tion, not to mention preferential tax rates on Congressional coalition building. And of the income received as capital gains. three, only the 1986 changes amounted to a Meanwhile, the average citizen faces an true makeover. array of tax-based retirement-plan provisions Since the tax system now affects nearly that makes the fabled Clinton health reform every facet of American life, hardly anyone plan look simpler than a Starbucks menu. likely to pay more goes to the shearing with- Check that: I meant Starbucks before the lat- out a bleat. Tax breaks provide indirect subsi- est tax legislation, which grants a tax break to dies to homeowners that are greater than the some integrated coffee chains on “the value of entire budget of the Department of Housing roasted coffee beans used to brew the coffee,” and Urban Development. The Earned Income provided the roasting is done off premises.
    [Show full text]
  • Following the Money: Lessons from the Panama Papers Part 1
    ARTICLE 3.4 - TRAUTMAN (DO NOT DELETE) 5/14/2017 6:57 AM Following the Money: Lessons from the Panama Papers Part 1: Tip of the Iceberg Lawrence J. Trautman* ABSTRACT Widely known as the “Panama Papers,” the world’s largest whistleblower case to date consists of 11.5 million documents and involves a year-long effort by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists to expose a global pattern of crime and corruption where millions of documents capture heads of state, criminals, and celebrities using secret hideaways in tax havens. Involving the scrutiny of over 400 journalists worldwide, these documents reveal the offshore holdings of at least hundreds of politicians and public officials in over 200 countries. Since these disclosures became public, national security implications already include abrupt regime change and probable future political instability. It appears likely that important revelations obtained from these data will continue to be forthcoming for years to come. Presented here is Part 1 of what may ultimately constitute numerous- installment coverage of this important inquiry into the illicit wealth derived from bribery, corruption, and tax evasion. This article proceeds as follows. First, disclosures regarding the treasure trove of documents * BA, The American University; MBA, The George Washington University; JD, Oklahoma City Univ. School of Law. Mr. Trautman is Assistant Professor of Business Law and Ethics at Western Carolina University, and a past president of the New York and Metropolitan Washington/Baltimore Chapters of the National Association of Corporate Directors. He may be contacted at [email protected]. The author wishes to extend thanks to those at the Winter Conference of the Anti-Corruption Law Interest Group (ASIL) in Miami, January 13–14, 2017 who provided constructive comments to the manuscript, in particular: Eva Anderson; Bruce Bean; Ashleigh Buckett; Anita Cava; Shirleen Chin; Stuart H.
    [Show full text]
  • The Excise Tax Treaty for the Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf
    The Excise Tax Treaty for The Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf The Excise Tax Treaty for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) The members of the Cooperation Council for the Arab Gulf States (GCC), namely: the United Arab Emirates, Kingdom of Bahrain, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, Sultanate of Oman, State of Qatar, and State of Kuwait, Pursuant to the objectives set out in the Statute of the Gulf Cooperation Council aimed to further develop existing cooperation rela- tions amongst them in various fields; In line with the objectives of the GCC Economic Agreement of 2001, which seeks to reach advanced stages of economic integration, and develop similar economic and financial legislation and legal foundations amongst Member States, and with a desire to promote the GCC economy and proceed with the measures that have been taken to establish economic unity amongst member states; and Pursuant to the Supreme Council’s decision, during its 36th session (Riyadh 9-10 December, 2015), which empowers the Financial and Economic Cooperation Committee to complete all the requirements for the adoption of the GCC Excise Tax Treaty and ratify it; have agreed to the following: Chapter 1 General Provisions Article (1) Definitions In the implementation of the provisions of this Agreement, the following terms shall bear the meanings set forth against each of them, unless otherwise implied in the context: Council/GCC: Cooperation Council for the Arab States of the Gulf. Agreement: The GCC Excise Tax Treaty. Tax: The Excise Tax for the GCC. Member State: Any state with full membership in the Gulf Cooperation Council in accordance with the Council’s Statute.
    [Show full text]