Language:

  • Español
  • English

Counter

  • 764848Total visitors:

(English) US: Lifting the Corporate Veil

KYC 360

Posted on 03 August 2011 by Naomi Cohen

Senator Carl Levin, chairman of the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, and Senator Chuck Grassley, ranking member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, this week introduced the Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act. This is the third time the Act has come before the house; the first time it appeared President Obama had been a co-sponsor. Perhaps this time it will have more success.

Senator Levin is truly the indomitable champion in the fight against tax abuse and anti-money laundering initiatives in the US. The Act calls for transparency in company ownership. The Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act is designed to pierce the veil that currently allows beneficial owners to hide behind corporate structures that all too often have been misused to support terrorism, money laundering, tax evasion, or other misconduct. The Act would end the practice of the 50 States forming corporations for unidentified persons, and instead require the States to obtain the identities of the persons behind the corporations.

In one example cited by Senator Levin ‘a New York company called the Assa Corporation owned a Manhattan skyscraper and, in 2007, wire transferred about $4.5 million in rental payments to a bank in Iran. U.S. law enforcement tracking the funds had no idea who was behind that shell corporation, until another government disclosed that it was owned by the Alavi Foundation which was known to have ties to the Iranian military. In other words, a New York corporation was being used to ship millions of U.S. dollars to Iran..”

Some of the key points of the act are:

Beneficial Ownership Information.  Require the States directly or through licensed formation agents to obtain the names of beneficial owners of corporations or limited liability companies (LLCs) formed under a State’s laws, ensure this information is updated, and provide the information to law enforcement upon receipt of a subpoena or summons.  

Identifying Information.  Require corporations to provide beneficial owners’ names, addresses, and a U.S. drivers license or passport number; or if the owners do not have either a U.S. drivers license nor passport, information from their non-U.S. passports.  

Federal Contractors.  Require corporations bidding on federal contracts to provide the same beneficial ownership information to the federal government. Shelf Corporations.  Require formation agents selling “shelf corporations” – companies formed for later sale to a third party – to identify the beneficial owners of those corporations.  

Penalties for False Information.  Establish penalties for persons who knowingly provide false information, or wilfully fail to provide required information, on beneficial ownership.

Anti-Money Laundering Safeguards.  Require paid formation agents to establish anti-money laundering programs to guard against supplying U.S. corporations or LLCs that facilitate misconduct.  

Government Accountability Office Study.  Require GAO to complete a study of State beneficial ownership information requirements for partnerships, charities, and trusts.

“The U.S. financial system is a playground for corrupt, criminal, tax evading individuals from other countries,” said Global Financial Integrity’s Legal Counsel & Director of Government Affairs, Ms. Heather Lowe. “It is far too easy to gain access to financial services in the U.S. through anonymous U.S. corporations, while it is far too difficult for law enforcement groups to figure out who is really behind those corporations.” The bill has been welcomed by transparency groups around the world as well as law enforcement who will find the money trail easier to follow once the act is passed.

The act is supported by law enforcement groups and both the U.S. Department of Justice and the U.S. Treasury Department have agreed to provide a total of $30 million from their forfeiture fund accounts to help offset any costs that may be incurred in implementing this legislation.

A 2005 analysis by the Treasury Department’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) of suspicious activity reports indicated that as much as $18 billion in suspicious transactions occurred through international wire transfers utilising U.S. shell companies. Even Viktor Bout, the notorious arms dealer featured in the film ‘Lord of War’, and currently in jail facing charges for conspiracy to kill U.S. nationals, used shell companies around the world, including a dozen front companies formed in Texas, Delaware, and Florida.

The bill would help law enforcement trace assets in the fight against crime, and would bring the United States into compliance with the Financial Action Task Force by requiring the disclosure of corporate beneficial ownership information. “For years, the United States has been fighting offshore corporate secrecy laws, pointing out corporations were designed, not to hide ownership, but to protect owners from personal liability for corporate acts,” said Levin. “If we want to stop inappropriate corporate secrecy offshore, we need to stop it here at home as well.”

Last week, the US government released its’ new Strategy to Combat Transnational Organised Crime that stated that criminal networks “rely on industry experts, both witting and unwitting, to facilitate corrupt transactions and to create the necessary infrastructure to pursue their illicit schemes, such as creating shell corporations, opening offshore bank accounts in the shell corporation’s name, and creating front businesses for their illegal activity and money laundering.” The Strategy established as one of its action plans to “work with Congress to enact legislation to require disclosure of beneficial ownership information of legal entities at the time of company formation in order to enhance transparency for law enforcement and other purposes.”

(English) Another Ominous Development: OECD Targets. Tax Avoidance at Global Tax Forum

(Washington, D.C., Thursday, June 2, 2010) In a remarkable development, the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development asserted at the Global Tax Forum that it has the power to regulate and restrain tax avoidance and other forms of legal tax planning. The Multilateral Convention on Mutual Administrative Assistance in Tax Matters, which is now the OECD’s preferred vehicle for thwarting tax competition, openly references “combat tax avoidance” as a reason for the new pact.

While the assertion that it has the power to target tax avoidance is startling, this step is consistent with the OECD’s underlying philosophy on tax matters. The Paris-based bureaucracy’s tax work is guided by an ideology known as Capital Export Neutrality (CEN), which is premised on the notion that taxpayers should never have the ability to lower their tax burdens. The CEN ideology makes no distinction between tax avoidance and tax evasion.

For taxpayers, this new step by the OECD does not bode well. The business community almost certainly will be targeted, as will other taxpayers with cross-border economic activity.

Brian Garst of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation, who went to Bermuda for the Global Tax Forum, observed, “The OECD has continued to move the goal posts, and the addition of ‘tax avoidance’ is another example of this bad-faith behavior.” Andrew Quinlan, President of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity Foundation, added that, “The OECD tried a similar stunt during the 2009 Global Tax Forum, but that ‘Mexico City Surprise’ was fortunately not successful.”

Dan Mitchell, a Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute and part of the CF&P delegation in Bermuda, observed, “The OECD represents the interests of Europe’s high-tax welfare states and the Global Forum is nothing but a mechanism to seek ways of propping up those uncompetitive nations with more tax revenue. This assault on legal tax planning is reprehensible, but predictable.”

This development in the OECD’s anti-tax competition campaign, including the language and commentary from the Multilateral Convention, is contrary to American jurisprudence. As former Court of Appeals Judge Learned Hand succinctly observed, “Anyone may arrange his affairs so that his taxes shall be as low as possible; he is not bound to choose that pattern which best pays the treasury. There is not even a patriotic duty to increase one’s taxes. …[N]obody owes any public duty to pay more than the law demands.”

CF&P has fought for over a decade against attacks by international bureaucracies – and in particular the OECD – on tax competition, which should be celebrated as a beneficial force in both politics and economics. CF&P remains committed to its mission of defending tax competition, fiscal sovereignty, and financial privacy.

(English) Testimonial of Francisca Nordi – IRS Hearing

May 18, 2011

FRANCISCA MORDI:

“Good morning. My name is Francisca Mordi, and I am vice president and senior tax counsel at the American Bankers Association.”

 

https://sites.morimor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2011/07/ABA.pdf

(English) Testimonial of J. Thomas Cardwell – IRS Hearing

May 18, 2011 

THOMAS CARDWELL: 

“Thank you, lady and gentlemen. I’m Tom Cardwell. I am the commissioner of financial regulation for the state of Florida, and I appear before you today as a public official who has the responsibility for the safety and soundness of the institutions that are chartered in our state.” 

   

https://sites.morimor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2011/07/FloridaOfficeofFinReg.pdf 

(English) Comments on Proposed IRS Regulation REG-146097-09 Regarding Reporting Interest Paid to Nonresident Alien Individuals

 

 May 28, 2011

Stephen J. Entin:

“My name is Stephen J. Entin. I am President and Executive Director of the Institute for Research on the Economics of Taxation. Before joining IRET, I served as Deputy Assistant Secretary for Economic Policy, Department of the Treasury, from 1981 to 1988.  rom 1975 to 1981, I was a staff economist with the Joint Economic Committee of the  Congress. My areas of specialization include macroeconomics, international economics, and taxation. I am speaking today in my personal capacity as someone interested in tax policies that permit strong economic growth and a more prosperous world.”

https://sites.morimor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2011/07/entinIRStestimony-05-18-2011.pdf

(English) Testimonial of Alex Sanchez – IRS Hearing

May 18, 2011

Alex Sanchez: 

“Good morning. My name is Alex Sanchez, 

president and CEO of the Florida Bankers Association. Thank you for this opportunity for us to testify against the IRS proposal on the reporting of interest earned by nonresident aliens.”

 

https://sites.morimor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2011/07/FloridaBankersAssoc.pdf

(English) Business in The Beltway

Money & Politics

From Dan J. Mitchell

Lawmakers Fight IRS Proposal For Banks To Report Interest Earned By Foreigners

There hasn’t been much good economic news in recent years, but one bright spot for the economy is that the United States is a haven for foreign investors and this has helped attract more than $10 trillion to American capital markets according to Commerce Department data. Continue reading (English) Business in The Beltway

(English) CF&P Applauds Congressional Effort to Rein in IRS and Prevent Implementationof Destructive Regulation

From The Center for Freedom and Prosperity

(Washington, D.C., Wednesday, July 20, 2011) The Center for Freedom and Prosperity (CF&P) is applauding the recent introduction of legislation (H.R. 2568) that will prevent the IRS from implementing an unnecessary and destructive regulation. The bipartisan legislation filed July 15th by Congressmen Bill Posey (R-FL) and Gregory Meeks (D-NY) would prevent the IRS from requiring banks to report nonresident alien deposit interest information, even though such interest is not taxed under U.S. law.

“The bureaucrats just don’t seem to get it, despite the clear and overwhelming opposition from the financial industry, lawmakers and the public each and every time the IRS has tried this scheme,” said CF&P President Andrew Quinlan. “It’s about time that Congress starts taking seriously the need to rein in the unelected bureaucrats who think that they should be making policy instead of following it,” he concluded, “and we are thankful for the leadership of Rep. Posey and Rep. Meeks for introducing this bill.”

The regulation (REG-146097-09) would put the interests of foreign tax collectors ahead of both U.S. law and economic interests. A 2004 study by the Mercatus Center at George Mason University looked at a similar regulation that only applied to fifteen countries and found that it would result in the loss of $88 billion in foreign investment. The current version of the proposed regulation would be much more destructive, as it would apply to deposits from citizens of any nation. Despite this evidence, the IRS has never performed a cost-benefit analysis of the regulation as required by Executive Order 12866 for any regulation that would have an annual effect of more than $100 million on the economy. The bureaucrats have blithely dismissed their legal obligation by claiming that their proposal is “not a significant regulatory action.”

The Center for Freedom and Prosperity has lead the opposition against all forms of the interest reporting regulation since it was first proposed in the waning days of the Clinton administration. Organized by CF&P, members of the Coalition for Tax Competition have testified at three separate IRS hearings on the issue held over the years, including the most recent on May 18, 2011, and written numerous letters to Administration, Congressional and Treasury officials. Opposing the regulation is a top priority of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity.

(English) Senator Levin’s Latest Attack on Low-Tax Jurisdictions Would Backfire on American Competitiveness and Exacerbate FATCA Damage from The Center for Freedom and Prosperity

(Washington, D.C., Tuesday, July 12, 2011) In what is becoming an annual summer tradition, Senator Carl Levin (D-MI) introduced today legislation persecuting low-tax jurisdictions. His so-called Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act would not only fail in its stated purpose of raising new revenues, according to Andrew Quinlan of the Center for Freedom and Prosperity, but also would reduce investment in the U.S., increase burdens on American companies, and cost jobs.

“This is the same old tune from Senator Levin,” said CF&P President Andrew Quinlan. “For years he has seemingly made it his primary objective to place Americans at a competitive disadvantage when it comes to foreign investment and U.S. corporations competing overseas. Despite pushing this legislation under the false flag of increasing revenue, his bill would drive out foreign capital and end up reducing revenue. Simply put, he is cynically exploiting our deficit – created by out-of-control federal spending – in his ongoing vendetta against jurisdictions with pro-growth tax policy.”

Senator Levin claims his proposals will collect $100 billion in elusive “tax haven” revenue, but the former Democratic staffer, Jack Blum, who first claimed such a figure 10 years ago was forced to admit when pressed by the Congressional Research Service that he fabricated the number. There is no evidence that the alleged revenues would materialize under this bill. In fact, there are several provisions in Levin’s Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act which would likely produce the opposite effect.

Levin’s new bill would expand the burden of the Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), exacerbating its already negative impact on the U.S. economy. Because of FATCA’s draconian reporting requirements and onerous new burdens, many foreign financial institutions have simply decided to dump both U.S. investments and clients. In addition, more reporting requirements under the so-called Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act would also increase the burdens faced by U.S. corporations, further reducing already anemic levels of job growth.

Rather than spreading the tentacles of the IRS even further,” said Quinlan, “lawmakers should look toward reforms that will increase American competitiveness, create jobs and improve the economy. The U.S. should adopt the common-sense principle of territorial taxation, which means only taxing income earned within the territory of the United States, and reduce the exorbitant and uncompetitive 35% corporate tax rate.”

(English) Bankers on the Beach

by Maria Gonzalez and Alfred Schipke 

Finance & Development 

International Monetary Fund 

June 2011 

  

Offshore financial centers (OFCs)—which specialize in supplying financial services to nonresident companies and individuals in exchange for low taxes, stability, and secrecy—are under scrutiny, whether they like it or not. 

https://sites.morimor.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/20/2011/06/Bankers-of-the-Beach-June-2011.pdf