The Panama Papers: how the world’s rich and famous hide their money offshore Guardian analysis of leaked papers will show how influential people including heads of government have exploited tax havens

The hidden wealth of some of the world’s most prominent leaders, politicians and celebrities has been revealed by an unprecedented leak of millions of documents that show the myriad ways in which the rich can exploit secretive offshore tax regimes.

The Guardian, working with global partners, will set out details from the first tranche of what are being called “the Panama Papers”. Journalists from more than 80 countries have been reviewing 11.5m files leaked from the database of Mossack Fonseca, the world’s fourth biggest offshore law firm.

The records were obtained from an anonymous source by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung and shared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists with the Guardian and the BBC.
Though there is nothing unlawful about using offshore companies, the files raise fundamental questions about the ethics of such tax havens – and the revelations are likely to provoke urgent calls for reforms of a system that critics say is arcane and open to abuse.
The Panama Papers reveal:

• Twelve national leaders are among 143 politicians, their families and close associates from around the world known to have been using offshore tax havens.
  
• A $2bn trail leads all the way to Vladimir Putin. The Russian president’s best friend – a cellist called Sergei Roldugin - is at the centre of a scheme in which money from Russian state banks is hidden offshore. Some of it ends up in a ski resort where in 2013 Putin’s daughter Katerina got married.
  
• Among national leaders with offshore wealth are Nawaz Sharif, Pakistan’s prime minister; Ayad Allawi, ex-interim prime minister and former vice-president of Iraq; Petro Poroshenko, president of Ukraine; Alaa Mubarak, son of Egypt’s former president; and the prime minister of Iceland, Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson.
  
• In the UK, six members of the House of Lords, three former Conservative MPs and dozens of donors to British political parties have had offshore assets.
  
• The families of at least eight current and former members of China’s supreme ruling body, the politburo, have been found to have hidden wealth offshore.
  
• Twenty-three individuals who have had sanctions imposed on them for supporting the regimes in North Korea, Zimbabwe, Russia, Iran and Syria have been clients of Mossack Fonseca. Their companies were harboured by the Seychelles, the British Virgin Islands, Panama and other jurisdictions.
  
• A key member of Fifa’s powerful ethics committee, which is supposed to be spearheading reform at world football’s scandal-hit governing body, acted as a lawyer for individuals and companies recently charged with bribery and corruption.
  
• One leaked memorandum from a partner of Mossack Fonseca said: “Ninety-five per cent of our work coincidentally consists in selling vehicles to avoid taxes.”
  

The company has flatly denied any wrongdoing. It says it has acted beyond reproach for 40 years and that it has had robust due diligence procedures.
The document leak comes from the records of the firm, which was founded in 1977. The information is near live, with the most recent records dating from December 2015.
Three hundred and 70 reporters from 100 media organisations have spent a year analysing and verifying the documents.
The British prime minister, David Cameron, has promised to “sweep away” tax secrecy – but little has been done. He is planning a summit of world leaders next month, which will focus on the conduct of tax havens.
The prime minister set out his line in 2011 when he said: “We need to shine a spotlight on who owns what and where the money is really flowing.”

Masses more at http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/apr/03/the-panama-papers-how-the-worlds-rich-and-famous-hide-their-money-offshore

I doubt very much Cameron will do the above as these papers show his father is one of them.



France’s president, François Hollande, has become possibly the first world leader so far to welcome the leak. According to AFP he thanked the “whistleblowers” who brought the files to light, adding: “All the information revealed will lead to investigations brought by the tax authorities and to legal proceedings.”


Makes WikiLeaks look like a comic book

I thought all this was being clamped down on? Sometimes it's almost as if there is no political will to sort this out! :roll:

David Cameron's dad and top Tories named in leaked 'Panama Papers' about global tax haven firm

A sensational leak of 11 million confidential documents last night showed how the world’s richest people protect their wealth.

The records, said to be from secretive Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca, apparently show world leaders, sports stars and celebrities use offshore companies.

Among those mentioned in the “Panama Papers” were David Cameron’s late father Ian and several Tory peers and former MPs.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/david-camerons-dad-top-tories-7684150



The ones who are supposed to be dealing with it are the ones doing it.

Why highlight David Cameron?

If his father is guilty, how does that then make David complicit?

So your claim that the ones dealing with it are doing it, is false

As again its Peers, "former MP's" and one father.

This is only the first bit coming out, there are 11.5 MILLION files to be read, bet there are a lot of people quaking in the their boots.  David Cameron ranted at journalists today, won't surprise me in the least if he and other members of the cabinet are named.

lol if these files leaks are online, then they could know within seconds if David was complicit

Clearly they did search using the surname, hence why we know his father was cheating Tax


Seriously, who is using your remaining brain cell today?

sassy wrote:This is only the first bit coming out, there are 11.5 MILLION files to be read, bet there are a lot of people quaking in the their boots.  David Cameron ranted at journalists today, won't surprise me in the least if he and other members of the cabinet are named.

Cameron's family wealth is as old as the Rothschild's.

Of course he's quaking in his boots. I'm sure he's getting a lot of phone calls from various groups, including whoever is running his fathers offshore fund (Blairmore Holdings inc).

http://globaldocuments.morningstar.com/documentlibrary/Document/ec3dcb9ffb02c630042fa1ac2c7d56de.msdoc/original

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

sassy wrote:This is only the first bit coming out, there are 11.5 MILLION files to be read, bet there are a lot of people quaking in the their boots.  David Cameron ranted at journalists today, won't surprise me in the least if he and other members of the cabinet are named.

Cameron's family wealth is as old as the Rothschild's.

Of course he's quaking in his boots. I'm sure he's getting a lot of phone calls from various groups, including whoever is running his fathers offshore fund (Blairmore Holdings inc).

http://globaldocuments.morningstar.com/documentlibrary/Document/ec3dcb9ffb02c630042fa1ac2c7d56de.msdoc/original

Again why would he be if they are online documents

Its clear they more likely are and why they came out of the name of his father so quickly, clearly searching for David and failed to find any link on searches


Doh

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

sassy wrote:This is only the first bit coming out, there are 11.5 MILLION files to be read, bet there are a lot of people quaking in the their boots.  David Cameron ranted at journalists today, won't surprise me in the least if he and other members of the cabinet are named.

Cameron's family wealth is as old as the Rothschild's.

Of course he's quaking in his boots. I'm sure he's getting a lot of phone calls from various groups, including whoever is running his fathers offshore fund (Blairmore Holdings inc).

http://globaldocuments.morningstar.com/documentlibrary/Document/ec3dcb9ffb02c630042fa1ac2c7d56de.msdoc/original

He totally lost it with some journalists today, told them they were going around 'setting each others hair on fire'!  WTF did that mean!

A lengthy prospectus for Blairmore Holdings written in 2006 and meant to attract high net worth "sophisticated" investors, with at least $100,000 to buy shares, is explicit about how the fund sought to avoid UK tax. At the time more than half of the fund's 11 directors were UK nationals.

Advertisement

Under Panamanian law the fund was excluded from taxation derived from other parts of the world.

"The fund is not liable to taxation on its income or capital gains as long as such income or capital gains are not derived from sources allocated within the territory of the Republic of Panama," the 2006 prospectus reads.

"The Directors intend that the affairs on the Fund should be managed and conducted so that it does not become resident in the United Kingdom for UK taxation purposes. Accordingly ... the Fund will not be subject to United Kingdom corporation tax or income tax on its profits," the prospectus continues.

The investor document also credits Ian Cameron as a founder member of Blairmore Holdings and states that as an adviser he would be paid $20,000 a year – the highest paid director – whatever profits were realised.

In fact, the long-term Panamanian investment fund performed above market rate over many years averaging a 116% return from 2002-2007. Today many of the fund's largest holdings are in blue-chip stocks such as Apple, Unilever and Coca Cola.

Before his death, aged 77, Ian Cameron was also chairman and shareholder of Close International Equity Growth Fund Ltd, registered in Jersey and worth £9m according to papers filed in 2005. In that year just under half of the fund's holdings were in UK listed stocks.

A third fund set up in Geneva, Switzerland, had a shorter life span and finally dissolved in 2007 but had many of the same registered shareholders as the Panamanian outfit. These included a number of former employees of Panmure Gordon, the stockbroking firm where Ian Cameron spent much of his career and those from Smith and Williamson investment management where Cameron senior was a consultant.

One notable investor into the Panama fund was a charity established by Tory peer Lord Vinson. Accounts from 2009 show that a charitable trust set up under his own name invested £82,000 into the fund – almost one quarter of its investments in shares.

Vinson's trust that year went on to donate tens of thousands of pounds to rightwing think tanks including the Institute of Economic Affairs and Civitas.

David Cameron has recently remarked on companies who have taken advantage of offshoring to legally avoid tax. Speaking at the start of the year to small business leaders in Maidenhead, he said: "With the large companies, that have the fancy corporate lawyers and the rest of it, I think we need a tougher approach.

"One of the things that we are going to be looking at this year is whether there should be a general anti-avoidance power that HMRC can use, particularly with very wealthy individuals and with the bigger companies, to make sure they pay their fair share."

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2012/apr/20/cameron-family-tax-havens

And of course, Cameron wouldn't have inherited any of that, would he lol

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Cameron's family wealth is as old as the Rothschild's.

Of course he's quaking in his boots. I'm sure he's getting a lot of phone calls from various groups, including whoever is running his fathers offshore fund (Blairmore Holdings inc).

http://globaldocuments.morningstar.com/documentlibrary/Document/ec3dcb9ffb02c630042fa1ac2c7d56de.msdoc/original

Again why would he be if they are online documents

Its clear they more likely are and why they came out of the name of his father so quickly, clearly searching for David and failed to find any link on searches


Doh

See what his political stance on tax evasion is, in my post above.

D'UHMB ass.

He inherited 300 k

sassy wrote:And of course, Cameron wouldn't have inherited any of that, would he lol

Exactly. Conflict of interest everywhere.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:


Again why would he be if they are online documents

Its clear they more likely are and why they came out of the name of his father so quickly, clearly searching for David and failed to find any link on searches


Doh

See what his political stance on tax evasion is, in my post above.

D'UHMB ass.

Oh dear potty mouth yet again

Again are these files online?

If yes and the fact they found his father involved, means they actively searched the surname

Now I know you are a tad slow, so I will allow that to sink in if I was you

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

See what his political stance on tax evasion is, in my post above.

D'UHMB ass.

Oh dear potty mouth yet again

Again are these files online?

If yes and the fact they found his father involved, means they actively searched the surname

Now I know you are a tad slow, so I will allow that to sink in if I was you

See my reply above.

Seems you're slow, by at least 1 post.

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

See what his political stance on tax evasion is, in my post above.

D'UHMB ass.

Oh dear potty mouth yet again

Again are these files online?

If yes and the fact they found his father involved, means they actively searched the surname

Now I know you are a tad slow, so I will allow that to sink in if I was you

Has nothing to do with files being online.

Cameron's interests in Panama were exposed years ago.

It's about hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

Catching up yet?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:

Oh dear potty mouth yet again

Again are these files online?

If yes and the fact they found his father involved, means they actively searched the surname

Now I know you are a tad slow, so I will allow that to sink in if I was you

Has nothing to do with files being online.

Cameron's interests in Panama were exposed years ago.

It's about hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

Catching up yet?

Online?  11 MILLION FILES!!!!   No they aren't, and are in the process of being sorted and released, in the very first stages at the moment.  Already world leaders have been shown to be involved.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Didge wrote:

Oh dear potty mouth yet again

Again are these files online?

If yes and the fact they found his father involved, means they actively searched the surname

Now I know you are a tad slow, so I will allow that to sink in if I was you

Has nothing to do with files being online.

Cameron's interests in Panama were exposed years ago.

It's about hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

Catching up yet?

Do you have evidence he was aware?

If not you are talking gibberish

The fact they searched the files using his surname and never came up with him once shows you are clutching at straws.

sassy wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Has nothing to do with files being online.

Cameron's interests in Panama were exposed years ago.

It's about hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

Catching up yet?

Online?  11 MILLION FILES!!!!   No they aren't, and are in the process of being sorted and released, in the very first stages at the moment.  Already world leaders have been shown to be involved.

Wrong

How do you think they came up so quickly with the likes of Putin and Messi the footballer?

D

Didge wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Has nothing to do with files being online.

Cameron's interests in Panama were exposed years ago.

It's about hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

Catching up yet?

Do you have evidence he was aware?

If not you are talking gibberish

The fact they searched the files using his surname and never came up with him once shows you are clutching at straws.

Who was aware of what?

Also, don't get hung up on surnames, the Cameron money was in a company name Blair something.

Miffs2 wrote:

Didge wrote:



Do you have evidence he was aware?

If not you are talking gibberish

The fact they searched the files using his surname and never came up with him once shows you are clutching at straws.

Who was aware of what?

Do you know how long they have had these files nems?


Around 370 reporters from 100 media organisations have spent a year analysing and verifying the documents.

Didge wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
Who was aware of what?

Do you know how long they have had these files nems?


Around 370 reporters from 100 media organisations have spent a year analysing and verifying the documents.

Absolutely, so do think they release their biggest names first!?

Miffs2 wrote:

Didge wrote:



Do you know how long they have had these files nems?


Around 370 reporters from 100 media organisations have spent a year analysing and verifying the documents.

Absolutely, so do think they release their biggest names first!?

Are you claiming Putin is small fry Nems?

i am sure they are holding names back, but if David was involved, why wait to hit the headlines?


Twelve national leaders are among 143 politicians, their families and close associates from around the world known to have been using offshore tax havens.

Didge wrote:

Miffs2 wrote:
Absolutely, so do think they release their biggest names first!?

Are you claiming Putin is small fry Nems?

i am sure they are holding names back, but if David was involved, why wait to hit the headlines?


Twelve national leaders are among 143 politicians, their families and close associates from around the world known to have been using offshore tax havens.

Hahaha I didn't realise Putin was named. And surprise surprise the Chinese are at it too!

Well i'v got nothing to worry about.

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

sassy wrote:And of course, Cameron wouldn't have inherited any of that, would he lol

Exactly. Conflict of interest everywhere.

AND THAT  is why so many politicians have assets hidden away in trust accounts, Swiss Bank accounts, and companies listed in the Cook Islands, Panama,  and other tax havens...

DOWN HERE in Oz, meanwhile, the ABC ( our public broadcaster network) aired a story on this last night...

ONLY seen the beginning so far,  but I recorded it so that I can watch the whole programme at my leisure..

Miffs2 wrote:

Didge wrote:


Are you claiming Putin is small fry Nems?

i am sure they are holding names back, but if David was involved, why wait to hit the headlines?


Twelve national leaders are among 143 politicians, their families and close associates from around the world known to have been using offshore tax havens.

Hahaha I didn't realise Putin was named. And surprise surprise the Chinese are at it too!

NO SURPRISES THERE !!!!

SEVERAL years ago, some of Putin's domestic Russian critics stated he was one of the largest shareholders in some of Russia's biggest Mining corporations.

BACK THEN  it was said that his stock could have been worth between $US 2 biilion and $20 billion -- @ $US 2 billion he would have been one of the wealthiest Russians at the time;  $20 billion would have placed him among the wealthiest individuals in the world (and his fortune has probably been growing since..).

NO REAL surprises about the Chinese, either..      

Is anyone actually suprised that a number of rich and obnoxious people are hiding their wads of money, offshore?

These storiz alwayz smack of envy.

Stormee wrote:These storiz alwayz smack of envy.

I'm going to to regret asking this, but......What?

eddie wrote:Is anyone actually suprised that a number of rich and obnoxious people are hiding their wads of money, offshore?

no not suprised

the list should be used to fill the gov't coffers,
these indidivulas have systematically defrauded the nation and that in my opinon is treason.
100% confiscation of assets and let them be thankful they keep their heads.

In Iceland people are taking to the streets because of the information contained in the papers.  When Cameron was asked if he has money in the company that was run by his father, a spokesperson said 'that's private family business' and what do we do.  Fuck all, except to say we aren't surprised.  Well we should be, we should be tearing down the establishment.

10% of the Iceland population are on the streets demands answers:

Stormee wrote:These storiz alwayz smack of envy.

YOU really can be as thick as two short planks, when you put your mind to it,  Stormee !!!

THE MORE THAT wealthy individuals and corporations avoid paying their fair share of taxes,  the more that small and middle range taxpayers (i.e. the other 99% of the population..) have to make up the shortfalls in national budgets..


AND DO YOU support the criminal, illegal, underhanded, inhumane and/or immoral ways that so many of those wealthy people and companies gained their fortunes in the first place ?  
IT CERTAINLY seems so, from your comments..

Are you not TRUTHFULLY envious of their wealth?

Tax avoidance is not illegal, tax evasion is.

nicko wrote:Tax avoidance is not illegal,   tax evasion is.

 

TAX minimisation is "legal".
THAT is what most "small and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs)" have access to through fair taxation rules..

TAX avoidance is the unethical and immoral use of "loopholes" and "lurks" created by politicians and tricky accounting/legal firms to allow shonky and greedy businesse avoid paying one's fair contribution towards your country's taxation revenues...

TAX evasion is outright criminal activity..

This story covers both ways of the rich and obnoxious circumventing one's obligations. 
AND at the same time, helping them cover up the criminal and nefarious ways that they gained their wealth in the first place..

IT IS up to governments to close those loopholes that they put into place to help their wealthy friends and relatives avoid their corporate responsibilities..

Stormee wrote:Are you not TRUTHFULLY envious of their wealth?

Why would anyone be envious of people that are so money obsessed they will lie and cheat and let other people suffer in order to hang on to the relatively small amounts they should pay in tax.   If they all paid their tax we could wipe the national debt, have easily enough money for the health service and probably some left over for steel.  Envious of them?  I pity them.

Stormee wrote:Are you not TRUTHFULLY envious of their wealth?

NO, Stormee...

I'M one of that majority who aren't impressed by the criminal, unethical and downright dishonest means often used by the rich and despicable to avoid paying their fair contributions to the welfare and wellbeing of their countries..

LET ALONE in any way feeling "envious" of their immoral, indecent and/or illicit activities !



ARE YOU HONESTLY happy to see yourself, your children, relatives, friends and neighbours paying ever higher tax contributions, simply so that you can cheer on shady businessmen, greedy corporations, dictators and drug barons, and subsidise their vandalism of economies and national estates ?

SOME of you lickspits and supplicants may be willing to keep on pandering to your royal families, corporate heroes, drug bosses and arms dealers, greed merchants and criminals -- but I do believe that you will find that the majority doesn't support your parlous position !

I've been trying to vaguely follow this story, but I can't find any information on how this stuff got leaked. It's all very well berating these people for putting their money into these companies, but isn't anyone a bit concerned about the leak?

Raggamuffin wrote:I've been trying to vaguely follow this story, but I can't find any information on how this stuff got leaked. It's all very well berating these people for putting their money into these companies, but isn't anyone a bit concerned about the leak?

Not in the least concerned about the leak, applaud the person who did it, whose name is known and who is now in fear for his life.  Need more people like him so that the rich and powerful can't get away with it.

sassy wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I've been trying to vaguely follow this story, but I can't find any information on how this stuff got leaked. It's all very well berating these people for putting their money into these companies, but isn't anyone a bit concerned about the leak?

Not in the least concerned about the leak, applaud the person who did it, whose name is known and who is now in fear for his life.  Need more people like him so that the rich and powerful can't get away with it.

But it was lawful activity was it not, even if you think it's morally reprehensible. What if someone just decided to post details of your bank account and told everyone how much you had in it?

Was it hacked? Was it an employee?

Don't give a damn if it's 'lawful'.  It's only 'lawful' because the rich have had the power to make sure it is and have set it up that way.

sassy wrote:Don't give a damn if it's 'lawful'.  It's only 'lawful' because the rich have had the power to make sure it is and have set it up that way.

I think it's quite important. If it was illegal activity, I would agree, but this is a massive breach of confidentiality. What next? Publishing medical records?

Raggamuffin wrote:

sassy wrote:Don't give a damn if it's 'lawful'.  It's only 'lawful' because the rich have had the power to make sure it is and have set it up that way.

I think it's quite important. If it was illegal activity, I would agree, but this is a massive breach of confidentiality. What next? Publishing medical records?

It's not about legality. It's about political ethics and hypocrisy.

He claims he wants to clamp down on tax avoidance and indeed introduced many measures to do so. But if you're just rich enough, you can take advantage of certain rules to minimize your taxes.

But then other regular people have to pay more in taxes.

Do you like paying more in taxes that you should?

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I think it's quite important. If it was illegal activity, I would agree, but this is a massive breach of confidentiality. What next? Publishing medical records?

It's not about legality. It's about political ethics and hypocrisy.

He claims he wants to clamp down on tax avoidance and indeed introduced many measures to do so. But if you're just rich enough, you can take advantage of certain rules to minimize your taxes.

But then other regular people have to pay more in taxes.

Do you like paying more in taxes that you should?

I think that having to pay a much higher percentage than others is paying more than you should, so maybe they should think about that and make it fairer.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Fuzzy Zack wrote:

It's not about legality. It's about political ethics and hypocrisy.

He claims he wants to clamp down on tax avoidance and indeed introduced many measures to do so. But if you're just rich enough, you can take advantage of certain rules to minimize your taxes.

But then other regular people have to pay more in taxes.

Do you like paying more in taxes that you should?

I think that having to pay a much higher percentage than others is paying more than you should, so maybe they should think about that and make it fairer.

Ah, so you want a regressive tax system.

Sorry, disagree. And I say that as not a tax Angel, myself. I've avoided a lot of tax over the years. And evaded.

But the truth is £50 a month makes all the difference between barely living and poverty.