Island's Future As A Finance Centre

[piebaps]

I'm calling BS on your swagger and your "contacts" and your "roaming the world". You're trolling with the help of Google. Not even very well.

YOU are 'flaming'... bad forum etiquette used by 'trolls'

 

 

Fortunately this kind of thing is....................................

[Evil Goblin]

Bellyache/Pimpernel - if the IoM Finance Sector is devastated in the next few years it won't be because of KSF - the EUSTD will do it.

 

You mentioned this issue on another thread. Can you expand on how you think this will impact IOM ?

 

Isle of Man to Apply EU Bank Secrecy Rules Starting in 2011 (Bloomberg.com)

Pongo - please see these links for the full story - to cut a long story short, owners of trusts and companies ("owners" being as defined in the Directives) will automatically be grassed up to their home tax authorities. The administrative and compliance burden visited on CSPs, TSPs, etc. may be pretty devastating cost-wise, never mind the Clients involved.

 

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/taxat...ew/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou...2008)727_en.pdf

http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resou...008)2768_en.pdf

[pongo]

Hi Evil Goblin. Yes I read the links and a few others previously. When I asked you how you think that this will impact the IOM - what I mean is ... how do you see the industry developing and responding ? Roll over and die ? New products ? Excellence ? Cost cutting ? Armageddon ?

 

Do you think that the IOM has any serious or pragmatic alternative other than to comply with EU regulation (which is the regional implementation of increasingly international regulation) ?

[Evil Goblin]

Cambon - I suspect that a not inconsiderable number of people are worried about the following scenario:

 

1. An amount of income (perhaps a very small amount) is reported to HMRC because the person owning the Trust/Company is a UK Resident;

2. HMRC ask the Taxpayer "where did the money that generated this income come from?";

3. Taxpayer (worried) - I earned the £100k 5 years ago on a deal and a man in the pub said it wasn't taxable until I brought it into the UK;

4. Tax Inspector gives a nasty laugh - asks "do I look as if I came up yesterday?";

5. Tax Inspector raises tax assessments as of 5 years ago for 40% income tax + 40% penalty + interest on tax back to when it should have been paid - also raises back assessments on all the income and capital gains the cash has earned over past five years plus interest on those back assessments;

6. Taxpayer hands over the whole lot to Bottler's Treasury:

7. If Tax Inspector had a row that morning with his wife before leaving home he also issues criminal proceedings against Taxpayer with a view to "throwing the key away" and acting as an example to others.

[Evil Goblin]

Hi Pongo - the IoM really has no pragmatic option but to go along with the flow on EU Regulation, etc. I suspect that other havens like the BVI will also have to comply with EU and US strictures. If the major countries really want to put the screws on then "might is right" will triumph.

 

I am involved in a CSP business and I only wish I knew what the future held. I suspect that the Companies & Trusts sector will shrink radically under the weight of Compliance and Regulation and an exodus of clients for the Far East - costs are going to climb, not fall. I can't speak for the Banks, Insurance and Investment Management/Fund Sectors - perhaps someone else has a view on these.

 

We are certainly going to have to demonstrate some very inventive abilities to cope with it all. I reckon the sector will survive but on a much reduced basis and that the larger "sausage machine" outfits will suffer the most.

[pongo]

Is point 3 not true then - that offshore interest only has to be declared when repatriated ?

 

Isn't that how the whole business of separating the capital from the interest works - ie gradually repatriating the capital whilst banking the interest ? Or has that cunning wheeze already been ended?

[Evil Goblin]

Is point 3 not true then - that offshore interest only has to be declared when repatriated ?

 

Isn't that how the whole business of separating the capital from the interest works - ie gradually repatriating the capital whilst banking the interest ? Or has that cunning wheeze already been ended?

It may still be so for certain people, non-Doms, for example, but by and large it's never been true. The UK taxpayer is assessable on any income and gains made on a world-wide basis, irrespective of whether the money hits the UK or not.

[pongo]

In many cases, where a double taxation agreement exists, it is possible to pay the tax where the money is earned - and for no further tax to be due at home, where ever home is. Depending on the agreement in place etc.

 

So my question would be: Would not double taxation agreements be a way to go ? And tax any income here whilst still offering competitive advantages ?

[Cambon]

Cambon - I suspect that a not inconsiderable number of people are worried about the following scenario:

 

I expect there will be. A few years ago the UK government offered an amnesty if people declared any offshore accounts. They are currently doing it again in the hopes that they can "trick" a few more into declaring their offshore holdings. When they did it the first time, it was going to be a "one of" situation. This second time is being marketed as "your last chance". Ireland have to date done nine "one of" amnesties. So I guess these "one of" things must work.

 

The majority of accounts that I see are little old ladies/couples with a small nest egg of a few grand of savings for a rainy day. The majority of these already declare income from interest via exchange of information. The amounts of tax retained and reported are actually quite small. Besides, anyone with any serious amount of money that they are trying to "hide" will not be using traditional investments anyway.

 

I am actually getting tired of the UK and US governments banging the drums about offshores like IOM. They should get their own internal tax affairs in order before they start concentrating on little overseas places. I think the only reason UK is banging the drum about offshores is to be seen to be doing so by obama.

[chris watson]

Cambon - I suspect that a not inconsiderable number of people are worried about the following scenario:

 

I expect there will be. A few years ago the UK government offered an amnesty if people declared any offshore accounts. They are currently doing it again in the hopes that they can "trick" a few more into declaring their offshore holdings. When they did it the first time, it was going to be a "one of" situation. This second time is being marketed as "your last chance". Ireland have to date done nine "one of" amnesties. So I guess these "one of" things must work.

 

The majority of accounts that I see are little old ladies/couples with a small nest egg of a few grand of savings for a rainy day. The majority of these already declare income from interest via exchange of information. The amounts of tax retained and reported are actually quite small. Besides, anyone with any serious amount of money that they are trying to "hide" will not be using traditional investments anyway.

 

I am actually getting tired of the UK and US governments banging the drums about offshores like IOM. They should get their own internal tax affairs in order before they start concentrating on little overseas places. I think the only reason UK is banging the drum about offshores is to be seen to be doing so by obama.

 

Personally I don't consider offshores like IOM as "little overseas places". Literally billions pass through so-called tax havens like the IOM every month (I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact") and given the likely future tax burden facing Western governments for bailing out the banking industry, the UK and US governments (quite logically) wish to catch as many in their respective tax-trawler nets as possible so as to ensure future governmental funding. No wonder they are "banging the drums".

 

"Little old ladies" usually know that if you look after the pennies, the pounds look after themselves - and so do the UK and US governments.

[When Skies Are Grey]

(I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact")

 

that's my nomination post of the year so far....

[chris watson]

(I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact")

 

that's my nomination post of the year so far....

 

Yeah, yeah but I think everyone gets the gist

[Cambon]

Personally I don't consider offshores like IOM as "little overseas places". Literally billions pass through so-called tax havens like the IOM every month (I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact") and given the likely future tax burden facing Western governments for bailing out the banking industry, the UK and US governments (quite logically) wish to catch as many in their respective tax-trawler nets as possible so as to ensure future governmental funding. No wonder they are "banging the drums".

 

"Little old ladies" usually know that if you look after the pennies, the pounds look after themselves - and so do the UK and US governments.

 

Then they should stop wasting billions upon billions of tax payers money fighting wars in the middle east that they can never win. The "Factual billions" moving through the tax havens ARE small fry compared to that. As for cashing in on the tax payers for bailing out the banks - what a crock! The money will be repaid and governments paid handsomely for their assistance. However, governments (especially the UK one) are bound to foot the taxpayer with a bill for it that it does not owe. THey have to supplement the mismanaged government pensions somehow!

[007Pimpernel]

(I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact")

 

that's my nomination post of the year so far....

 

Yeah, yeah but I think everyone gets the gist

No they don't Chris. There's a lot of trolling, flaming & put-downs in this forum, and if you are not prepared to quote your source then you will be in the firing line of those whose surfing hobby it is to have a go at the likes of you!

 

I have read this post with great interest as it demonstrates that there are those in the Forum with brains & experience who can engage in a lively discussion with others on a topic of real interest & concern to the IoM. The powers that be are desperately concerned to stand on the world stage posing like knights in shining armour proclaiming themselves as the upholders & defenders of financial institutions that they believe to be squeeky clean, honest, open & transparent in the services they provide. One of the principal criticisms of off-shore financial centres is that ethics in the conduct of their business is not a guiding principle in the acquisition of their wealth (ref: the questionable involvement of certain finance houses in the Antiguan corruption scam scandal. The hard evidence is sub judice but will be out in the open when prosecutions take place in due course)

[chris watson]

Personally I don't consider offshores like IOM as "little overseas places". Literally billions pass through so-called tax havens like the IOM every month (I can't be bothered with qualifying this with a source, please treat is as a "fact") and given the likely future tax burden facing Western governments for bailing out the banking industry, the UK and US governments (quite logically) wish to catch as many in their respective tax-trawler nets as possible so as to ensure future governmental funding. No wonder they are "banging the drums".

 

"Little old ladies" usually know that if you look after the pennies, the pounds look after themselves - and so do the UK and US governments.

 

Then they should stop wasting billions upon billions of tax payers money fighting wars in the middle east that they can never win. The "Factual billions" moving through the tax havens ARE small fry compared to that. As for cashing in on the tax payers for bailing out the banks - what a crock! The money will be repaid and governments paid handsomely for their assistance. However, governments (especially the UK one) are bound to foot the taxpayer with a bill for it that it does not owe. THey have to supplement the mismanaged government pensions somehow!

 

Wasting money on fighting wars in foreign lands and monies being moved through tax havens is comparing apples to oranges.

 

I am not condoning the UK and US governments actions towards the tax havens, I'm trying to rationalise their actions.