Director of International Finance at the Chief Minister's department

[en830]

There's a big difference between using mortgage relief etc to reduce your tax bill (I presume you mean that) and using the attractive tax regimes of offshore finance centres to avoid tax.

No difference at all, we all want to pay the smallest amount of tax as possible, from Fred Blogs doing a job for cash in hand to the mighty conglomerate entering into a offshore structure to avoid capital gains. The only difference is that the HNI and large multi nationals have more clout behind them to set up structures that save them taxes than the ordinary man in the street.

[Limpet]

We have had these discussions before and it always seems to be the people that don't really understand what goes on within the Finance Industry that come out with these wild accusations.

When that argument fails they move onto ethics.  I don't care what ATTAC or the T J N thinks of offshore finance anymore, because they never listen to the people that work within it.  In fact I agree with the comment that they are enemies of Jersey.

But I will tell you now that if firms do take high risk dodgy business if the price is right, I recommend you report.  If you don't really know what is going on then I suggest you stop pointing the finger!

JTM, i've been working in the Finance industry for 30 years, the last 15 at director level - I'm been on risk commitees - I know what I'm talking about - you seem to have no knowledge of how financial business actually works in Jersey at the top level. Risks are taken everyday, especially if the fees are high enough. If you have a potential client, but from say a high risk territory, but who is prepared to pay substantial fees, then the appetite for risk becomes greater. It is normal behaviour.

I've done due diligence exercises on potential acquisitions of trust company business in Jersey and seen first hand the client and structures that are still being accepted and administered - sometimes it is unbelievable. Difficult clients are easily hidden from the JFSC at inspection time, and the larger Trust Company businesses seem exempt from the hooks of the JFSC - nobody really wants to rock the boat.

[Limpet]

No difference at all, we all want to pay the smallest amount of tax as possible, from Fred Blogs doing a job for cash in hand to the mighty conglomerate entering into a offshore structure to avoid capital gains. The only difference is that the HNI and large multi nationals have more clout behind them to set up structures that save them taxes than the ordinary man in the street.

The difference is one is legal, offering benefits by our local tax regime to mitigate taxes for local people. What you must ask yourself is what business, for example, has the former president of Nigeria got to do with channeling Nigerian public money for his families own use through Jersey vehicles. It might be legal from a Jersey taxation point of view, but the origination of those monies is definately illegal from the point of view of Nigerian law and the people of Nigeria.   

[Jason the Maverick]

Well I am surprised you are a director to be frank.

And if you have been in the job for 30 years and have witnessed what you claim then why come out with guilt now?

As for money from Nigeria and suchlike, the firm I work for has nothing to do with monies from these places.

[Limpet]

Well I am surprised you are a director to be frank.

And if you have been in the job for 30 years and have witnessed what you claim then why come out with guilt now?

As for money from Nigeria and suchlike, the firm I work for has nothing to do with monies from these places.

I'm not coming out with guilt - I'm stating it as it is.

As for your surprise that I'm a director, why, because I question? Isn't that what directors are obliged to do?

There is no doubt that most business these days is much cleaner and of much better quality - up to about 10 years ago trust companies in Jersey were actually forthcoming with dodges to help some obvious villians avoid/evade taxes- how to get around sham trust attacks etc. This was the bread and butter business before the advent of anti money laundering regulation and compliance, and many skeletons still remain in the cupboards. As I've already said, I've done several due diligence exercises which have involved client portfolio random investigation and each one has turned up some pretty 'nasty' tax evasion structures.

Your company is probably wise to avoid such countries as Nigeria - but I would be 100% sure that your company, like all others, has those clients hidden deep within its portfolio that it is not completely sure of or happy with.

[Jason the Maverick]

I am surprised you are making such assumptions to be frank.  I have worked for 4 local finance firms and have never seen business from Nigeria in any of them.

As for tax evasion that is illegal and is also under the wing of money laundering so I would imagine that if you have discovered such shenanigans you know what to do!

[Jason the Maverick]

You keep on moving onto tax so okay why do you think the UK welcomes wealthy Russian Oil Barons with open arms and does not charge them income tax?

Why do people have Swiss Bank Accounts?

Why do Companies set up captive insurance companies in Guernsey?

Why? Why? Why?  There are number of reasons people use the Channel Islands in order to transfer their cash.  Tax mitigation is one of the biggest reasons, forced heirship is another and even for confidentiality reasons.

What’s the problem?

You must have posted the above just about at the same time as my post.

Your 3 scenarios. which is applicable to all of them.  Proof of source of funds, copy of tax advice, copy KYC, references, confirmation of intention, we will do various checks including world wide checks to make sure none are a criminal or a PEP etc etc etc.

If you think we just accept suitcases of cash with no questions asked, you should be writing scripts for Bergerac, either that, or isthisjersey.

[Jason the Maverick]

Providing they pass through compliance, yes.

We do knock people back you know and it is not all down to the Director/Partner of a Firm as to whether a person is accepted.  I haven't worked in a bank for years but I know that they have teams of people making such reviews.

The only draw back with this red tape is that it is no longer possible to accept business quickly anymore.  I mean, try opening a local bank account.  Takes about a week now.

[Jason the Maverick]

Just going back to your 3 scenario question.

We will need tax advice from all them. 

[Jason the Maverick]

Well I dont think they would, but go on.

[Jason the Maverick]

I am thinking of tax reasons.  We dont get people from the UK who would be classed as ordinary resident opening bank accounts here.  If anybody works in a bank can they add to this or correct me?

[Jason the Maverick]

They used to but the tax legislation in place now would make it pretty pointless.

Most of the business I see come in is from emerging markets and that is not the UK or USA!

[Jason the Maverick]

You are making me laugh!

Source of wealth is covered in acceptance.  Ongoing money laundering provisions will always be there.  We wouldn't be interested in such business or profiles and alarms bells would be going off straight away, but Limpet's firm might be?  

[Jason the Maverick]

Emerging markets would this include India and China?

China yes. 

[Jason the Maverick]

You are getting silly.  Checking money that goes back 200-300 years and that goes world wide does it?

What is your point out of all this?