1. Advocate William Redgrave
Partner
Ed Shorrock
Director of Regulatory Services
The Panama Papers:
What now for
Jersey?
Breakfast Briefing
29 April 2016
Royal Yacht Hotel
St. Helier
2. What is in the Panama Papers?
Why are they such big news?
What has the effect been so far?
What can we expect?
Are central registries the answer?
What now for Jersey?
Contents
4. 11.5m documents, 2.6 Tb.
40 years’ worth of records
Only 1% published so far
9 May: Database release of 200,000 entities
Panama Paper contents
5. Identifies 215,000 entities set up in 21 jurisdictions
Half the companies are BVI incorporated
Clients mainly introduced by banks and their
affiliates
Material includes identities of directors,
shareholders and UBOs
Panama Paper contents
6.
7.
8.
9. MF - a law firm, but mainly an incorporation agent
and registered agent
Offered "virtual office" with fake email and fake
names for $1,500.
For $17,500, a “very sensitive” service: would find
a “natural person trustee” – pretend UBO of a
company, who would “sign lots of documents”
(Guardian, 8 April 2016)
What did MF do?
10. Prominent people identified
Current leaders of UAE, Ukraine, Saudi, Iceland
Former leaders of Iraq, Jordan, Qatar, Sudan, Italy
(Berlusconi)
Relatives of current leaders: Xi, Assad, Sharif, Zuma, Abbas,
Cameron
Relatives of former leaders: Annan, Thatcher
Close friends of Putin (Roldugin)
Jackie Chan
Panama Paper contents
11. Poor client due diligence
Identified in BVI FSC inquiries re sanctions:
Cowie – North Korea link not picked up
Alaa Mubarak – MF fined $37,500 for not identifying UBO of $1bn
company
Previously extensive use of reliance on introducers
and intermediaries, often abused
Panama Paper contents
12. MF unable to name UBOs on request, but improved
following law change in 2008:
2005-2008 – of 100 requests could only name 5
2008 – 2014 – law changed - of 500 requests, could
name 70
2015 – 90 requests – named all but one
Panama Paper contents
13. MF financial model based on volume
Typical cost to incorporate: US$1,000, of which
US$400 goes to government
Generates 50% of BVI government revenue
UK government encouragement for OTs and CDs to develop
own economies
Panama Paper contents
15. History of data leaks: BVI (2013), Luxembourg
(2014), HSBC (2015) and now Panama, the biggest
Sheer quantity of info, and prominence of
individuals
Staged release – clever PR
To many in IFCs, ‘revelations’ about products and
services are entirely unrevealing
Media encourages popular prejudice
Why such big news?
16. Attitude of MF co-founder attracted criticism:
MF had no responsibility for what clients do with the
offshore companies that MF sells
Blaming MF for what people do with their companies
would be like blaming a car factory “if the car was
used in a robbery”
Why such big news?
18. Resignation of Iceland PM and Spanish minister
Pressure on Cameron: #resigncameron
Tax return publication for MPs?
5 EU countries agree on 14 April to automatically
exchange UBO information for trusts and
companies – now expanded to all EU countries
Panama effects
19. MF offices raided in Panama and Brazil
US DoJ (and other prosecutors) ask to see
documents and consider local investigations
Acceleration of signing of Exchange of Notes
between UK and Jersey (12 April) re UBO
information
Panama effects
21. Another round of disclosures on 9 May with
searchable database of 200,000 companies, trusts,
foundations and funds
Extension of pilot initiative re automatic exchange
of UBO information - globally?
What can we expect?
22. “As a next step, we should also call for the development of a
system of interlinked registries containing full benefit [sic]
ownership information and mandate the OECD, in co-
operation with FATF, to develop common international
standards for these registries and their interlinking.
…we are willing to ensure the effective implementation of
the exchange of information standards and to deal with non-
cooperative jurisdictions on the basis of an international list
and through defensive measures.”
George Osborne to European colleagues, 14 April 2016
What can we expect?
23. Prospect of more blacklists? (Some EU countries
have voiced concerns)
More media pressure to “crack down on offshore”:
“He [David Cameron] needs to get tough with the treasure
islands and follow Charles de Gaulle’s example. When
Monaco refused a tax measure he requested, he forced them
to surrender by surrounding the kingdom with soldiers and
turning off their water supply”
Polly Toynbee, Guardian
What can we expect?
24. Increasingly widely held view that even basic tax
planning using offshore structures is unacceptable
Registers of trusts back on the agenda
Offshore registries of all entities to be public?
The level playing field argument – the US
What can we expect?
25. Significant announcements expected at UK anti-
corruption summit in May
Legislative developments in the UK
Offshore companies buying British property could be
forced to reveal their UBOs
Criminalisation of companies for failing to prevent
their staff facilitating tax evasion
What can we expect?
27. Policy driven by journalists and politicians seeking
to dominate the news agenda. The 5 Ps:
1. Panama
2. Press
3. Population
4. Politicians
5. Policy
Are central registries the answer?
28. The speed at which the steps take place is ever
increasing
Does this make for sound policy development and
implementation?
Politicians feel under pressure to act
What is in the interest of the public is not
necessarily in the public interest
Are central registries the answer?
29. Garbage in – garbage out
Most registries are passive, archiving repositories
of information
Where is the evidence that central registries are
effective?
Easy to promise returns from a policy not yet in
practice
Are central registries the answer?
30. A registry designed to achieve stated objectives
needs:
Leadership
Resources: Skilled staff, infrastructure, IT
Ability to verify documents being provided to it
Enforcement powers
Does the UK have this in place? Reliance on self-
reporting
Are central registries the answer?
31. What is the alternative?
Licensing, supervision and enforcement of CSPs
CSPs have the direct client contacts: CSP is a
private sector information collection agency,
delivering a public good at no public cost
Can only work within the context of a proper
regulatory regime
Costs of a publicly funded registry?
Are central registries the answer?
32. What is the evidence that CSPs are effective?
Little evidence that central registries do work as
there are so few!
2011-2012 study by Griffith University on CSP
performance
Headlines: Half of responses did not ask for proper
ID, 22% for nothing; IFCs better than onshore;
Corruption risks less of a deterrent than
terrorism risks
Are central registries the answer?
33. Transparency is not an end in itself, it is part of the
answer but access to this information needs to be
balanced against legitimate privacy concerns
Are central registries the answer?
35. All IFCs are affected by political/reputational
impact
Jersey has featured in Panama reports already:
Spanish minister case - featured Jersey BBVA office,
from library footage
Azerbaijani president’s daughters – MF Jersey
provided nominee directors for company holding UK
property – UK lawyers say they have
“no political connections”
Jersey
36. Risks to Jersey:
Pressure for CDs to adopt register of trusts? Public?
EU initiative to automatically share UBO information
even if not public
Impact on attractiveness of Jersey products
Cost implications of expanded registry
Jersey
37. Regulatory attention
FCA call to firms to investigate MF links
Could it happen here? P.42/2016 (Southern)
“directs the JFSC (i) to request the handover of any information
held by financial institutions registered in Jersey about their
dealings with….MF, and (ii) to ask what action the institutions
concerned are taking as a result of any significant issues or
relationships identified”
Jersey
38. “7 Guiding principles
In exercising any of its functions the Commission may take into
account any matter which it considers appropriate, but shall in
particular have regard to –
………
(b) the protection and enhancement of the reputation and integrity of
Jersey in commercial and financial matters;
(c) the best economic interests of Jersey; and
(d) the need to counter financial crime both in Jersey and
elsewhere.”
Jersey
39. Litigation?
9 May database release likely to include structures
with Jersey links
Creditors (private individuals and states) will be
searching it for illegally obtained / concealed assets
Reputational and commercial damage to
institutions and clients
Jersey
40. What to do?
You know if you have used MF
Assess due diligence and commercial rationale – be
proactive
Put yourself in the shoes of a creditor or journalist
Be ready to handle media and client enquiries
Jersey