This article and especially the link to the New York Times is required reading for all those who thought that peace had broken out about tax havens with the signing of 12 pieces of paper, otherwise known as the standard OECD double taxation agreement.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/31/business/global/31iht-tax.html
While the ink on the Franco-Swiss piece of paper called double taxation agreement isn’t yet even dry, the French rooster is scratching everything that is crawling and scribbling by the tax havens’ side. It has three thousand names of French customers in Swiss banks, but did not say which ones. All the children of the fatherland, who are hiding things in Switzerland, are invited to go and denounce themselves to the "regularization cell”. It will close on December 31, 2009. What comes then is the tax audit. Of course, the 3,000 names will not be made public. Those who know they are hiding something in Switzerland do not know if the French tax inspectors know. Therefore, to report or not to report, that is the question. The answer, I guess, is very French: double it or quits.
To all defenders of bank secrecy there are of course 2 immediate issues.
1. How did the French authorities get these names?
Official responses:
a. It is the fruit of a long tax investigation
b. Two financial institutions have submitted their names "spontaneously"
c. By “non- anonymous informants” who were not paid.
So bank secrecy has been defeated by three different methods at least. The first one is probably a mixture of cooperation with the intelligence services that have "paid someone anonymous" or that simply intercepted electronic communications of any kind. Amazing and interesting at the same time. Nobody in Switzerland, Luxembourg, and Austria and in the islands knows what services throughout the world know, ready to act. This is called "actionable" intelligence.
2. How can we guarantee bank secrecy in these conditions?
Simply, we cannot. Why defend it then? Is it really worth defending the indefensible because it is an open invitation to tax evasion that in addition doesn’t even keep its promise of absolute confidentiality? How can one ever compensate the foreign customer, caught in the scheme? Shouldn’t we be suspicious of a customer who would come along anyway and tempt fate? He probably has more to hide than he says. And how are we dealing with institutions that violate the banking secrecy "spontaneously"? Several doing this at the same time would be the equivalent of a spontaneous implosion of the system.
It is also interesting to realize how tomorrow’s news were announced on feierwon.blogspot.com over the last few weeks. As they are coming true faster than expected, let’s reread those old news of tomorrow as they are amazingly fresh.
Egide Thein
htpp://feierwon.blogspot.com
Sunday, August 30, 2009
Luxembourg, le secret bancaire et une nouvelle approche
Un ami a posté la vidéo suivante, en luxembourgeois et en français, avec l’essentiel du message en français :
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KvnR_to3D4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efacebook%2Ecom%2Fhome%2Ephp&feature=player_embedded#t=40
C’est un intéressant tour de la question du secret bancaire en effet, car Astrid Lulling semble abandonner la langue de bois qui handicape tant de politiciens qui pensent qu’ils ont un secret bancaire à défendre. Elle semble le penser aussi, mais la députée européenne ouvre les esprits et montre l’urgence de savoir et de définir enfin ce que c’est ce qu’il faut défendre et comment.
A mon avis il y a dans son message 2 sages conclusions, 2 erreurs qui ne manqueront pas d’être relevées par ceux d’en face et 2 omissions.
Les 2 sages conclusions sont les éléments innovateurs dans le discours politique luxembourgeois
1. Il ne peut y avoir de tabou dans les discussions. Bien ! Cela veut dire hélas, à Bruxelles seulement. A Washington il n’y aura pas de discussion. Ce qui viendra de Washington sera in diktat.
2. Le débat sera plus politique que technique. Bien aussi ! Et il faut savoir que c’est rare que le plus petit gagne. Le dernier était David.
Les 2 erreurs qui sont des coups de poing dans le vide
1. A moins d’être incompétent, tout le monde est d’accord que le secret bancaire n’a pas causé la crise. Personne de sérieux n’utilisera cet argument. Il faut donc se garder de dépenser trop d’énergies sur cela. On n’entend cet argument d’ailleurs plus que du côté luxembourgeois. Comme si c’était une création et une astuce luxembourgeoise pour divertir les discussions. Ou pire : quelqu’un aurait mal compris ? Cela me rappelle « atmosphère, atmosphère, ai-je l’air d’une atmosphère ! »
2. L’échange automatique ne fonctionnerait pas ? Hélas si, au même titre qu’aujourd’hui tous les rapports obligatoires que les institutions financières doivent faire fonctionnent (comme les STR pour suspicion, les transferts de fonds d’un certain montant) Ce sera même plus facile techniquement de traiter tous les clients de la même façon que d’appliquer des critères sélectifs. La seule question à décider est le routing de ces informations.
Par contre le Luxembourg pourrait plus efficacement invoquer des problèmes de protection des données pour opposer l’échange automatique d’informations personnelles d’institutions privées vers des administrations étrangères.
Les 2 omissions ou la politique de l'autruche
1. Le secret bancaire est surtout attaqué parce qu’il est l’outil de l’évasion fiscale et d’autres crimes financiers. C’est une omission capitale. Le secret bancaire ne survivra pas.
Le discours luxembourgeois a très difficile de s’en accommoder. Il faudra sans doute un peu plus de temps pour le deuil. Pourquoi ne pas invoquer plutôt la protection des données ?
2. Dans le même souffle que Bruxelles, il faut ajouter surtout Washington quand on parle des problèmes à venir. A Bruxelles, le Luxembourg est assis à la table de négociation, à Washington sur le banc des accusés.
Avertissement : la météo pour la place financière
L’autre discussion, qui n’est pas encore sur les écrans radar, est escamotée par le Luxembourg et bien d’autres pour le moment. Il s’agit de la discussion émergente sur les paradis judiciaires et réglementaires.
La règle générale ? Sera considéré paradis judiciaire et réglementaire toute juridiction qui applique des standards en matière financière qui sont inferieurs à ceux des Etats-Unis. Les entreprises et particuliers qui seront en relation avec ces paradis subiront quelque chose de mauvais. Barney Frank mijote encore les conséquences qu’il voudrait réserver à ceux-là.
Tout cela, en détail sur http://feierwon.blogspot.com bien sûr.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7KvnR_to3D4&eurl=http%3A%2F%2Fwww%2Efacebook%2Ecom%2Fhome%2Ephp&feature=player_embedded#t=40
C’est un intéressant tour de la question du secret bancaire en effet, car Astrid Lulling semble abandonner la langue de bois qui handicape tant de politiciens qui pensent qu’ils ont un secret bancaire à défendre. Elle semble le penser aussi, mais la députée européenne ouvre les esprits et montre l’urgence de savoir et de définir enfin ce que c’est ce qu’il faut défendre et comment.
A mon avis il y a dans son message 2 sages conclusions, 2 erreurs qui ne manqueront pas d’être relevées par ceux d’en face et 2 omissions.
Les 2 sages conclusions sont les éléments innovateurs dans le discours politique luxembourgeois
1. Il ne peut y avoir de tabou dans les discussions. Bien ! Cela veut dire hélas, à Bruxelles seulement. A Washington il n’y aura pas de discussion. Ce qui viendra de Washington sera in diktat.
2. Le débat sera plus politique que technique. Bien aussi ! Et il faut savoir que c’est rare que le plus petit gagne. Le dernier était David.
Les 2 erreurs qui sont des coups de poing dans le vide
1. A moins d’être incompétent, tout le monde est d’accord que le secret bancaire n’a pas causé la crise. Personne de sérieux n’utilisera cet argument. Il faut donc se garder de dépenser trop d’énergies sur cela. On n’entend cet argument d’ailleurs plus que du côté luxembourgeois. Comme si c’était une création et une astuce luxembourgeoise pour divertir les discussions. Ou pire : quelqu’un aurait mal compris ? Cela me rappelle « atmosphère, atmosphère, ai-je l’air d’une atmosphère ! »
2. L’échange automatique ne fonctionnerait pas ? Hélas si, au même titre qu’aujourd’hui tous les rapports obligatoires que les institutions financières doivent faire fonctionnent (comme les STR pour suspicion, les transferts de fonds d’un certain montant) Ce sera même plus facile techniquement de traiter tous les clients de la même façon que d’appliquer des critères sélectifs. La seule question à décider est le routing de ces informations.
Par contre le Luxembourg pourrait plus efficacement invoquer des problèmes de protection des données pour opposer l’échange automatique d’informations personnelles d’institutions privées vers des administrations étrangères.
Les 2 omissions ou la politique de l'autruche
1. Le secret bancaire est surtout attaqué parce qu’il est l’outil de l’évasion fiscale et d’autres crimes financiers. C’est une omission capitale. Le secret bancaire ne survivra pas.
Le discours luxembourgeois a très difficile de s’en accommoder. Il faudra sans doute un peu plus de temps pour le deuil. Pourquoi ne pas invoquer plutôt la protection des données ?
2. Dans le même souffle que Bruxelles, il faut ajouter surtout Washington quand on parle des problèmes à venir. A Bruxelles, le Luxembourg est assis à la table de négociation, à Washington sur le banc des accusés.
Avertissement : la météo pour la place financière
L’autre discussion, qui n’est pas encore sur les écrans radar, est escamotée par le Luxembourg et bien d’autres pour le moment. Il s’agit de la discussion émergente sur les paradis judiciaires et réglementaires.
La règle générale ? Sera considéré paradis judiciaire et réglementaire toute juridiction qui applique des standards en matière financière qui sont inferieurs à ceux des Etats-Unis. Les entreprises et particuliers qui seront en relation avec ces paradis subiront quelque chose de mauvais. Barney Frank mijote encore les conséquences qu’il voudrait réserver à ceux-là.
Tout cela, en détail sur http://feierwon.blogspot.com bien sûr.
Saturday, August 29, 2009
Luxembourg’s Schleck brothers and Kirchen at La Vuelta 2009, the Tour of Spain
Frank and Andy Schleck as well as Kim Kirchen go to the start of “La Vuelta”, or the Tour de Spain today at the 4.8 km prologue in ……………….. Assen, The Netherlands! The Vuelta will go over 21 stages and a total of 3,292.3 km from August 29 to September 20, with the final stage arriving in Spain’s capital Madrid. Unfortunately, there will be no good coverage of the event in the US. Versus will not carry it. Some local over the air channels though might do it. For most of us, a good bet seems to be:
and
with live streaming video.
Another source of information is the official website:
http://www.lavuelta.com/
It gives detail about the various stages as follows:
1 - Assen - Assen (ITT) 4,8 km
21 - Rivas-Vaciamadrid - Madrid 110,2 km
With the Giro d’Italia, La Vuelta is one of the two grand nieces of the mother of all Tours, the Tour de France. This year’s start in the Netherlands is not only following the trend in which Tours more and more cross the national borders. In this case it starts in a country that has no contiguous border with Spain. This makes those tours interesting beyond the sports event or even the touristic interest. In this case there is an obvious reference to history, when the Low Lands, which comprise today’s Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg were under Spanish rule from 1579 – 1713.
Below are links to two maps, showing La Vuelta 2009 and a historic map of the Spanish Netherlands.
With the Giro d’Italia, La Vuelta is one of the two grand nieces of the mother of all Tours, the Tour de France. This year’s start in the Netherlands is not only following the trend in which Tours more and more cross the national borders. In this case it starts in a country that has no contiguous border with Spain. This makes those tours interesting beyond the sports event or even the touristic interest. In this case there is an obvious reference to history, when the Low Lands, which comprise today’s Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg were under Spanish rule from 1579 – 1713.
Below are links to two maps, showing La Vuelta 2009 and a historic map of the Spanish Netherlands.
La Vuelta 2009 map: http://www.lavuelta.com/09/ingles/recorrido/mapa.html?e=p
Historic Spanish Netherlands: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d5/Netherlands_1559-1608.jpg/250px-Netherlands_1559-1608.jpg
Thursday, August 27, 2009
Luxembourg and the collapse of the international order, or: The coming era of international immorality
Globalization produces unexpected results. Whereas it delivered the desired effects, such as free trade, free movement of capital, openness and tolerance, it also became the platform used by many criminals to ply their trade. In doing so, they also take advantage of the fragmentation of the global world into national jurisdictions, that are more or less competing between themselves, more or less selfish, and that are sometimes even criminal themselves. Those international crimes tend to be considered more and more in a sanitized way and trivial occurrences.
Globalization and the trivialization of terrorism: Pan Am 103 and 9 / 11
On December 21, 1988, Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. 270 lives, mostly young, were lost in the attack perpetrated by the Libyan secret services. It was also the beginning of the end for an airline of global importance and history, Pan American, and the end of air travel as we knew it: flying without fear of sabotage. Since then, the whole world has to go through the hassle and the intrusion of the security checks before boarding a flight and has also to carry the cost of those.
The main conspirator, Abdel Basset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi, an agent of the Libyan secret service was actively protected by the Libyan Government from prosecution until 2001, when after long negotiations, he was sentenced to 27 years of imprisonment. That’s one year per ten victims, or 1.2 months for each murder. As everyone knows, he just was released for "health reasons" and after serving 8 years of his sentence, that is to say 10 days per murder, he returned to Libya. He only has three months to live, said his physicians, Drs Brown and Muammar.
The Libyan Government has dispatched a special plane to repatriate a great criminal whom it has consistently supported all over the years. The murderer of 270 people received a hero's welcome in Tripoli that state reason has tried to mitigate. If according to polls 95% of the American public condemn this release, probably 95% of the Libyan public support it. That is the reality of the deterioration of morality in international relations, governments and peoples alike.
The same dissonance occurred during the attacks of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington: unlike the revulsion of the Western world, the Arab world danced in the street.
So here we have two examples of international crimes of unequaled bestiality, but the criminals were protected by their publics, have benefited from the sympathy of their governments or even, they have carried out their orders. The net result is not only military retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq, but a cycle of threats, violence and terrorist nuclear escalation, that poison international relations and affect our everyday lives.
Globalization and the trivialization of white-collar crimes: UBS and Madoff
There are other international crimes, facilitated by globalization, which also tend to be more easily forgiven or minimized: these are the "white collar" crimes. Without finding any equivalency with the two murderous crimes listed above, these crimes are even so detrimental to good international relations and good international developments.
Consider the misfortunes that the Swiss bank UBS and the Swiss Confederation have with the United States. UBS, a leading global bank, has gotten out of its way to commit crimes in the United States by helping U.S. clients with all its know-how to evade US taxes. Tax evasion and complicity in tax evasion are crimes in the United States. Caught with their hands in the bag, the bank got the Swiss government to come to the rescue. They both deployed efforts and creativity worthy of a Swiss watchmaker, to protect the bank, its employees and the weapon of the crime, which is the Swiss bank secret.
Contemplated in terms of the Swiss national interest, the billions of dollars deposited in Switzerland have generated tens of millions of dollars in budget revenues in Switzerland, salaries for professionals, Swiss bankers, lawyers and auditors. Exact numbers are difficult to get to, as you would expect from a bank secrecy jurisdiction. One thing is certain, however: in each wage paid by the Swiss Government, whether the compensation of the President of the Confederation or the janitor at the Police Commissioner’s office in Pratteln, you’ll find small amounts of criminal money. It comes through the federal budget, which levied the tax, among others from the money of this crime, which of course, it will be said, wasn’t a crime in Switzerland. Except for the United States, where severe penalties and convictions were issued, no penalty has been handed out in Switzerland, to my knowledge, against the bank or its officers, on the contrary!
Now, it is not the purpose to specifically vilify Switzerland. It is only an example that is immediately available, because it currently makes the headlines. Similar situations exist elsewhere, which is precisely the issue here: the gradual trivialization of international crime and the negative consequences for international order.
Consider the Madoff case, where $ 65 billion were lost. Madoff claimed to generate revenues of around 15% annually, that is to say, about $ 10 billion. The nearly $ 3 billion invested in Luxembourg would therefore produce a profit of about $ 400 million annually and therefore income taxes by the tens of millions of dollars, of which about ten to twenty million would have gone to Luxembourg tax each year? Again it is difficult to know exact numbers, bank secrecy obliges. But what a strange feeling it is to know that in the salary of Prime Minister Juncker as well as in my pension or the police officer’s salary in Troisvierges and the customs agent’s salary in Frisange, there is dirty money coming from Madoff, through the good offices of the Luxembourg tax authorities, or maybe dirty money from fraudsters and other criminals who are also hiding around in the country! Again, except for the United States, there has been no conviction or punishment in Luxembourg, neither against the banks who were playing "feeders" to Madoff such as UBS (see, they're back) or HSBC, nor against other “net winners”. Yet the red flags alerting to fraud should have been noticed by some participants, as the ropes that Madoff pulled were so visible.
There has been a case of “cognitive dissidence” by those involved, or was it negligence, or the result of an accidental adoption of dishonesty, or was it willful blindness? The bungling by the Luxembourg authorities over several months about responsibilities in this area speaks volumes about the malaise that we rather would like to forget. How could this happen? If our ancestors saw us live off the fruit of ill-gotten gains, those ancestors who toiled at Hadir and Arbed, in the iron ore mines or in the barren fields of the Oesling, they would certainly say, "Hutt Dir Séi nach all!? "
According to American principles for the recovery of defrauded moneys, Madoff victims will use "claw back" strategies, that is to say a recovery of funds from the scammers first, and then the accomplices, professional intermediaries such as managers, lawyers and auditors, regulators and investors who have been net winners. Should they do the same to recover the missing funds with the US, Luxembourg, French, Austrian tax agencies, all of which have levied a tax on Madoff’s fictional profits? Indeed the balance sheet total is zero!
The consequences for Luxembourg and other "small" countries
Let’s go back to the initial thesis: international crime disrupts the proper international order. This is evident regarding terrorism and the fears associated with it, such as the fear of nuclear proliferation.
It is becoming increasingly clear that other crimes, such as tax evasion, although downplayed for a long time, have a similar effect. Gone are the times, when it was good enough to recite page number 1 of the Luxembourg Catechism: "An activity that is considered a crime in a foreign country is considered a crime by the Luxembourg authorities only if a Luxembourg court confirmed that such activity is also a crime in Luxembourg." This very conveniently excludes tax evasion.
In this troubled world where “every man is for himself” seems to be re-emerging as the winning principle, the past Luxembourg (or Swiss or Antiguan etc..) opportunism riled many. In a world that puts its plans on hold, in a stagnant Europe that has some good old fashioned protectionist reflexes, and where diplomatic civility goes AWOL, the law will be the law of the largest and strongest and fittest. Switzerland, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Antigua, they all are small countries, aren’t they?
True defense and advocacy of the Luxembourg, Swiss and other financial centers’ interest can only be anchored on positions that are morally unassailable. Among these we don’t include tax evasion or even banking secrecy, which is in essence a selfish pretext. There are however key principles to be defended, especially by smaller nations. They are those freedoms that make the world global and their corollary, competition of any kind, including tax competition. This is where small countries have a moralistic role to play; these very same countries that yesterday were accused to be the facilitators. Under the condition that these countries are able to get rid of what caused of their negative reputations.
Very little, however, seems to be done in this direction right now. We are still in denial, or in recriminations. However, it's time for the "small" ones to display their intransigence when the benefits of globalization are being questioned. Deceiving itself with untimely priorities, Luxembourg pursues a grotesque international ambition by applying for a seat on the United Nations’ Security Council! Luxembourg’s risk is that it is going to burn its fingers by trying to save a selfish world before trying to save itself. Knowing the kabuki of the United Nations for having been there, it doesn’t seem likely that there is anything to glean for Luxembourg, especially in a world where good neighborhoods are deteriorating. We have previously experienced that disappointment, when Luxembourg took a bold step at the UN and sponsored an initiative for the prohibition of child labor. Luxembourg instantly got 3 billion enemies in the world. Since in the meantime we have enough enemies in Europe, the G20 and OECD, shouldn’t we reserve our courage and boldness for the clashes to come and that need all our attention? This is called the economy of means.
Meanwhile, all is well in the brave new world between the United States and Luxembourg, or so we are told. This is what the Kindergarten Principal seems to have told us on a beautiful morning of a beautiful Thursday in the beautiful month of July. She seemed condescending, because the student Luxembourg had done his homework on the OECD, but she seemed a little harsh at the same time. She seemed to think about the $190 billion in taxes that the Obama Administration would retrieve from around the world. Given our past experience, let us fear for that uncertain Friday which will certainly come after this fine Thursday. The world is no longer what it used to be.
Egide Thein
Globalization and the trivialization of terrorism: Pan Am 103 and 9 / 11
On December 21, 1988, Pan Am flight 103 exploded over Lockerbie, Scotland. 270 lives, mostly young, were lost in the attack perpetrated by the Libyan secret services. It was also the beginning of the end for an airline of global importance and history, Pan American, and the end of air travel as we knew it: flying without fear of sabotage. Since then, the whole world has to go through the hassle and the intrusion of the security checks before boarding a flight and has also to carry the cost of those.
The main conspirator, Abdel Basset Ali Mohamed al-Megrahi, an agent of the Libyan secret service was actively protected by the Libyan Government from prosecution until 2001, when after long negotiations, he was sentenced to 27 years of imprisonment. That’s one year per ten victims, or 1.2 months for each murder. As everyone knows, he just was released for "health reasons" and after serving 8 years of his sentence, that is to say 10 days per murder, he returned to Libya. He only has three months to live, said his physicians, Drs Brown and Muammar.
The Libyan Government has dispatched a special plane to repatriate a great criminal whom it has consistently supported all over the years. The murderer of 270 people received a hero's welcome in Tripoli that state reason has tried to mitigate. If according to polls 95% of the American public condemn this release, probably 95% of the Libyan public support it. That is the reality of the deterioration of morality in international relations, governments and peoples alike.
The same dissonance occurred during the attacks of September 11, 2001 in New York and Washington: unlike the revulsion of the Western world, the Arab world danced in the street.
So here we have two examples of international crimes of unequaled bestiality, but the criminals were protected by their publics, have benefited from the sympathy of their governments or even, they have carried out their orders. The net result is not only military retaliation in Afghanistan and Iraq, but a cycle of threats, violence and terrorist nuclear escalation, that poison international relations and affect our everyday lives.
Globalization and the trivialization of white-collar crimes: UBS and Madoff
There are other international crimes, facilitated by globalization, which also tend to be more easily forgiven or minimized: these are the "white collar" crimes. Without finding any equivalency with the two murderous crimes listed above, these crimes are even so detrimental to good international relations and good international developments.
Consider the misfortunes that the Swiss bank UBS and the Swiss Confederation have with the United States. UBS, a leading global bank, has gotten out of its way to commit crimes in the United States by helping U.S. clients with all its know-how to evade US taxes. Tax evasion and complicity in tax evasion are crimes in the United States. Caught with their hands in the bag, the bank got the Swiss government to come to the rescue. They both deployed efforts and creativity worthy of a Swiss watchmaker, to protect the bank, its employees and the weapon of the crime, which is the Swiss bank secret.
Contemplated in terms of the Swiss national interest, the billions of dollars deposited in Switzerland have generated tens of millions of dollars in budget revenues in Switzerland, salaries for professionals, Swiss bankers, lawyers and auditors. Exact numbers are difficult to get to, as you would expect from a bank secrecy jurisdiction. One thing is certain, however: in each wage paid by the Swiss Government, whether the compensation of the President of the Confederation or the janitor at the Police Commissioner’s office in Pratteln, you’ll find small amounts of criminal money. It comes through the federal budget, which levied the tax, among others from the money of this crime, which of course, it will be said, wasn’t a crime in Switzerland. Except for the United States, where severe penalties and convictions were issued, no penalty has been handed out in Switzerland, to my knowledge, against the bank or its officers, on the contrary!
Now, it is not the purpose to specifically vilify Switzerland. It is only an example that is immediately available, because it currently makes the headlines. Similar situations exist elsewhere, which is precisely the issue here: the gradual trivialization of international crime and the negative consequences for international order.
Consider the Madoff case, where $ 65 billion were lost. Madoff claimed to generate revenues of around 15% annually, that is to say, about $ 10 billion. The nearly $ 3 billion invested in Luxembourg would therefore produce a profit of about $ 400 million annually and therefore income taxes by the tens of millions of dollars, of which about ten to twenty million would have gone to Luxembourg tax each year? Again it is difficult to know exact numbers, bank secrecy obliges. But what a strange feeling it is to know that in the salary of Prime Minister Juncker as well as in my pension or the police officer’s salary in Troisvierges and the customs agent’s salary in Frisange, there is dirty money coming from Madoff, through the good offices of the Luxembourg tax authorities, or maybe dirty money from fraudsters and other criminals who are also hiding around in the country! Again, except for the United States, there has been no conviction or punishment in Luxembourg, neither against the banks who were playing "feeders" to Madoff such as UBS (see, they're back) or HSBC, nor against other “net winners”. Yet the red flags alerting to fraud should have been noticed by some participants, as the ropes that Madoff pulled were so visible.
There has been a case of “cognitive dissidence” by those involved, or was it negligence, or the result of an accidental adoption of dishonesty, or was it willful blindness? The bungling by the Luxembourg authorities over several months about responsibilities in this area speaks volumes about the malaise that we rather would like to forget. How could this happen? If our ancestors saw us live off the fruit of ill-gotten gains, those ancestors who toiled at Hadir and Arbed, in the iron ore mines or in the barren fields of the Oesling, they would certainly say, "Hutt Dir Séi nach all!? "
According to American principles for the recovery of defrauded moneys, Madoff victims will use "claw back" strategies, that is to say a recovery of funds from the scammers first, and then the accomplices, professional intermediaries such as managers, lawyers and auditors, regulators and investors who have been net winners. Should they do the same to recover the missing funds with the US, Luxembourg, French, Austrian tax agencies, all of which have levied a tax on Madoff’s fictional profits? Indeed the balance sheet total is zero!
The consequences for Luxembourg and other "small" countries
Let’s go back to the initial thesis: international crime disrupts the proper international order. This is evident regarding terrorism and the fears associated with it, such as the fear of nuclear proliferation.
It is becoming increasingly clear that other crimes, such as tax evasion, although downplayed for a long time, have a similar effect. Gone are the times, when it was good enough to recite page number 1 of the Luxembourg Catechism: "An activity that is considered a crime in a foreign country is considered a crime by the Luxembourg authorities only if a Luxembourg court confirmed that such activity is also a crime in Luxembourg." This very conveniently excludes tax evasion.
In this troubled world where “every man is for himself” seems to be re-emerging as the winning principle, the past Luxembourg (or Swiss or Antiguan etc..) opportunism riled many. In a world that puts its plans on hold, in a stagnant Europe that has some good old fashioned protectionist reflexes, and where diplomatic civility goes AWOL, the law will be the law of the largest and strongest and fittest. Switzerland, Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Antigua, they all are small countries, aren’t they?
True defense and advocacy of the Luxembourg, Swiss and other financial centers’ interest can only be anchored on positions that are morally unassailable. Among these we don’t include tax evasion or even banking secrecy, which is in essence a selfish pretext. There are however key principles to be defended, especially by smaller nations. They are those freedoms that make the world global and their corollary, competition of any kind, including tax competition. This is where small countries have a moralistic role to play; these very same countries that yesterday were accused to be the facilitators. Under the condition that these countries are able to get rid of what caused of their negative reputations.
Very little, however, seems to be done in this direction right now. We are still in denial, or in recriminations. However, it's time for the "small" ones to display their intransigence when the benefits of globalization are being questioned. Deceiving itself with untimely priorities, Luxembourg pursues a grotesque international ambition by applying for a seat on the United Nations’ Security Council! Luxembourg’s risk is that it is going to burn its fingers by trying to save a selfish world before trying to save itself. Knowing the kabuki of the United Nations for having been there, it doesn’t seem likely that there is anything to glean for Luxembourg, especially in a world where good neighborhoods are deteriorating. We have previously experienced that disappointment, when Luxembourg took a bold step at the UN and sponsored an initiative for the prohibition of child labor. Luxembourg instantly got 3 billion enemies in the world. Since in the meantime we have enough enemies in Europe, the G20 and OECD, shouldn’t we reserve our courage and boldness for the clashes to come and that need all our attention? This is called the economy of means.
Meanwhile, all is well in the brave new world between the United States and Luxembourg, or so we are told. This is what the Kindergarten Principal seems to have told us on a beautiful morning of a beautiful Thursday in the beautiful month of July. She seemed condescending, because the student Luxembourg had done his homework on the OECD, but she seemed a little harsh at the same time. She seemed to think about the $190 billion in taxes that the Obama Administration would retrieve from around the world. Given our past experience, let us fear for that uncertain Friday which will certainly come after this fine Thursday. The world is no longer what it used to be.
Egide Thein
Wednesday, August 26, 2009
Memo to the Luxembourg August holiday-makers, or the two musical summer hits.
A French version was published at feirwon.blogspot.com on August 12, 2009.
I propose that the first song of the summer is: "Everything is going very well, Madame la Marquise." The Luxembourg people, lying on the beaches of Mallorca, only have one fear: that swine flu will fall on their heads.
Their resting is well deserved after several months of worrying about their fountain of wealth, the Luxembourg financial center, which feeds their well-being. It is in some way the warrior's rest, a reference to my earlier article about Luxembourg’s two wars. The first war is over. We lost it, as did all our allies.
What about the second war? We know that in our good old Europe it usually takes some time to rebuild a new generation of infantrymen. But in this case, this no longer true. We don’t even need as much time as to let the barrels cool down. We don’t have to rebuild a generation, there were no deaths: there were only losses. This means that the victorious veterans, now uniquely experienced, may restart fighting right away, because all of their objectives were not achieved during the first war. Could the oracle that predicted two wars be fulfilled so quickly, as at the opening of the Luxembourg “Schouberfouer”?
For sure, the jammed highways for the return from vacation will give us a flavor of war and remind us of the exodus of people fleeing the German invasion May 1940. Our ally, Switzerland came already under attack these days from Washington. The very experienced U.S. veterans Lawrence Summers, Tim Geithner and Barney Frank (Chairman, House Financial Services Committee) have more than one trick up their sleeves when it comes to repatriate millions and billions, as the Obama Administration intends to do and has to do. Even if Switzerland would recall the papal guard to defend that other sanctuary, the Swiss bank secrecy, the move would be futile.
One could however feel a great determination among the losers of the first war, after all was over. In the future, they would not yield one single inch. They would fight by the combat method of the firm defense here and now, in the trenches! These prospects inspire the choice of a second summer hit, by Georges Brassens in this case:
"Colonel, the one I prefer
Is no doubt the first World War "
Using this martial language is not because of a personal preference. It is rather because of the recognition of a fact during the first assault on tax havens these past months: a quasi-war was fought with the de facto suspension of an entire section of international law. No need for a Geneva type Convention, because no prisoners were taken.
What Switzerland is currently experiencing is indicative of the things to come. Like every war, this war for the substance of tax havens, that is their wealth, began like all wars, with a single first shot.
This shot was fired already a year ago in the case of UBS employee Bradley Birkenfeld. He was arrested in Florida in 2008 for his systematic support of tax evasion schemes for his U.S. clients and for forgery of "Qualified Intermediary" (QI) documents. UBS is a signatory of the QI status. The QI agreement imposes an obligation on the bank to report all US revenues of U.S. customers to the IRS. From this point on, UBS got gradually entangled in the regulatory and legal net that it made great efforts to ignore.
It is surprising that a world-class bank of that size can get so deeply into hot water. UBS has indeed known other dangerous episodes with the US Justice Department and U.S. regulators. Let’s just recall the case of the shredding of Holocaust records, in which the bank came close to losing its U.S. banking license. It got off the hook after agreeing to pay compensations in excess of $1 billion to victims of the Holocaust together with Crédit Suisse. Is this the result of arrogance or of an internal culture of mutual reinforcement, that got the proverbial donkey dancing on ice? The gradual treatment of suspicious activities with benign neglect finally let the bank sink into criminal activity, at least in terms of U.S. law, resulting in sanctions and condemnations.
Meanwhile the bank has received a new penalty of $ 780 million related to the case of tax evasion and Bradley Birkenfeld. UBS was actually forced to violate Swiss bank secrecy laws by delivering 252 customer names in order to appease the American appetite. Churchill once said that it is futile to feed the crocodile, hoping to be eaten last. The crocodile indeed came back and requested 52,000 more names. The “Firm Defense” cracked at the first rumblings. The Sovereign Swiss Confederation had to weigh in, threatening to seize all information from the bank. It had to agree to the de facto suspension of international law caused by a conflict of law and its replacement by the test of political wills and strength. Switzerland has thus committed its only strategic reserve, its sovereignty, for a glorious result in its own description, in reality however a catastrophic result for its future as a tax haven, with consequences that are not yet to be fully overseen. As for example, 52,000 potential lawsuits against the bank for abuses of all kinds.
Instead of 52,000 names, Switzerland does deliver "only" about 5,000. Is this a victory? Yes, a total one for the United States. Knowing US practices, these 10% of names are likely to represent 90% of US deposits at the bank. But most importantly, the release of these 5000 names will appear as the equivalent of the Hiroshima bomb. Switzerland has been reduced to a prohibited area for any U.S. bank customer. U.S. customers rush for the exits and go beg for forgiveness to the IRS. Worse, US clients are now considered as toxic. No Swiss bank wants them anymore, as some American friends who work in Switzerland confirmed. They have all the pain in the world to maintain at least one bank account there for their daily needs.
So it is in fact a political solution that emerges after a negotiation between two states, and Switzerland had to yield to the stronger side. Yet it must be remembered that Switzerland in this negotiation had at least one good card to play: the fact that it represents the United States diplomatically to all the "bad guys" of the planet with whom the U.S. has no direct relations.
Alas, my dear Georges Brassens, we now have proof that World War One, the one known for its firm defenses in the trenches, the static one, is not the one we should prefer. We must revert to something else, for there will be battle. One cannot appease the crocodile.
“Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I'll lift the Earth” said Archimedes. “Give me a Bradley Birkenfeld and UBS, and I will lift bank secrecy,”could say Larry Summers. This lever is a combat method that will be repeated in the future with other tax haven jurisdictions, up to the point of exhaustion.
But by the way, while on vacation, if you were passing by the Brandenburg Gate, the Arc de Triomphe or the Lincoln Memorial, listen to what Steinbruck, Sarkozy and Barney Frank are weaving for the near future. One of them would increase the pressure on tax havens by creating a list of his own, the other will have his own artillery aiming at his own troops, the French banks, located in jurisdictions with bank secrecy, and finally the last one considers another list of judicial and regulatory havens, that the United States would establish and back it up with sanctions.
These are the threats, with the conclusion that it will take something else for Luxembourg to do than a shortsighted statement about the firm defense of banking secrecy, or the obsessive repetition that "everything is fine Madame la Marquise." An in depth review of past policies is really of the essence. But let’s listen to a Prophet from elsewhere:
"There can be no more taboos, given our experiences of the last two years.” Philipp Hildebrand, Vice Chairman, Central Bank of Switzerland.
Will Luxembourg finally find its Hadubrand, who in the medieval saga is the (spiritual) son of Hildebrand, and put an end to the taboos?
Egide Thein
I propose that the first song of the summer is: "Everything is going very well, Madame la Marquise." The Luxembourg people, lying on the beaches of Mallorca, only have one fear: that swine flu will fall on their heads.
Their resting is well deserved after several months of worrying about their fountain of wealth, the Luxembourg financial center, which feeds their well-being. It is in some way the warrior's rest, a reference to my earlier article about Luxembourg’s two wars. The first war is over. We lost it, as did all our allies.
What about the second war? We know that in our good old Europe it usually takes some time to rebuild a new generation of infantrymen. But in this case, this no longer true. We don’t even need as much time as to let the barrels cool down. We don’t have to rebuild a generation, there were no deaths: there were only losses. This means that the victorious veterans, now uniquely experienced, may restart fighting right away, because all of their objectives were not achieved during the first war. Could the oracle that predicted two wars be fulfilled so quickly, as at the opening of the Luxembourg “Schouberfouer”?
For sure, the jammed highways for the return from vacation will give us a flavor of war and remind us of the exodus of people fleeing the German invasion May 1940. Our ally, Switzerland came already under attack these days from Washington. The very experienced U.S. veterans Lawrence Summers, Tim Geithner and Barney Frank (Chairman, House Financial Services Committee) have more than one trick up their sleeves when it comes to repatriate millions and billions, as the Obama Administration intends to do and has to do. Even if Switzerland would recall the papal guard to defend that other sanctuary, the Swiss bank secrecy, the move would be futile.
One could however feel a great determination among the losers of the first war, after all was over. In the future, they would not yield one single inch. They would fight by the combat method of the firm defense here and now, in the trenches! These prospects inspire the choice of a second summer hit, by Georges Brassens in this case:
"Colonel, the one I prefer
Is no doubt the first World War "
Using this martial language is not because of a personal preference. It is rather because of the recognition of a fact during the first assault on tax havens these past months: a quasi-war was fought with the de facto suspension of an entire section of international law. No need for a Geneva type Convention, because no prisoners were taken.
What Switzerland is currently experiencing is indicative of the things to come. Like every war, this war for the substance of tax havens, that is their wealth, began like all wars, with a single first shot.
This shot was fired already a year ago in the case of UBS employee Bradley Birkenfeld. He was arrested in Florida in 2008 for his systematic support of tax evasion schemes for his U.S. clients and for forgery of "Qualified Intermediary" (QI) documents. UBS is a signatory of the QI status. The QI agreement imposes an obligation on the bank to report all US revenues of U.S. customers to the IRS. From this point on, UBS got gradually entangled in the regulatory and legal net that it made great efforts to ignore.
It is surprising that a world-class bank of that size can get so deeply into hot water. UBS has indeed known other dangerous episodes with the US Justice Department and U.S. regulators. Let’s just recall the case of the shredding of Holocaust records, in which the bank came close to losing its U.S. banking license. It got off the hook after agreeing to pay compensations in excess of $1 billion to victims of the Holocaust together with Crédit Suisse. Is this the result of arrogance or of an internal culture of mutual reinforcement, that got the proverbial donkey dancing on ice? The gradual treatment of suspicious activities with benign neglect finally let the bank sink into criminal activity, at least in terms of U.S. law, resulting in sanctions and condemnations.
Meanwhile the bank has received a new penalty of $ 780 million related to the case of tax evasion and Bradley Birkenfeld. UBS was actually forced to violate Swiss bank secrecy laws by delivering 252 customer names in order to appease the American appetite. Churchill once said that it is futile to feed the crocodile, hoping to be eaten last. The crocodile indeed came back and requested 52,000 more names. The “Firm Defense” cracked at the first rumblings. The Sovereign Swiss Confederation had to weigh in, threatening to seize all information from the bank. It had to agree to the de facto suspension of international law caused by a conflict of law and its replacement by the test of political wills and strength. Switzerland has thus committed its only strategic reserve, its sovereignty, for a glorious result in its own description, in reality however a catastrophic result for its future as a tax haven, with consequences that are not yet to be fully overseen. As for example, 52,000 potential lawsuits against the bank for abuses of all kinds.
Instead of 52,000 names, Switzerland does deliver "only" about 5,000. Is this a victory? Yes, a total one for the United States. Knowing US practices, these 10% of names are likely to represent 90% of US deposits at the bank. But most importantly, the release of these 5000 names will appear as the equivalent of the Hiroshima bomb. Switzerland has been reduced to a prohibited area for any U.S. bank customer. U.S. customers rush for the exits and go beg for forgiveness to the IRS. Worse, US clients are now considered as toxic. No Swiss bank wants them anymore, as some American friends who work in Switzerland confirmed. They have all the pain in the world to maintain at least one bank account there for their daily needs.
So it is in fact a political solution that emerges after a negotiation between two states, and Switzerland had to yield to the stronger side. Yet it must be remembered that Switzerland in this negotiation had at least one good card to play: the fact that it represents the United States diplomatically to all the "bad guys" of the planet with whom the U.S. has no direct relations.
Alas, my dear Georges Brassens, we now have proof that World War One, the one known for its firm defenses in the trenches, the static one, is not the one we should prefer. We must revert to something else, for there will be battle. One cannot appease the crocodile.
“Give me a lever long enough and a place to stand and I'll lift the Earth” said Archimedes. “Give me a Bradley Birkenfeld and UBS, and I will lift bank secrecy,”could say Larry Summers. This lever is a combat method that will be repeated in the future with other tax haven jurisdictions, up to the point of exhaustion.
But by the way, while on vacation, if you were passing by the Brandenburg Gate, the Arc de Triomphe or the Lincoln Memorial, listen to what Steinbruck, Sarkozy and Barney Frank are weaving for the near future. One of them would increase the pressure on tax havens by creating a list of his own, the other will have his own artillery aiming at his own troops, the French banks, located in jurisdictions with bank secrecy, and finally the last one considers another list of judicial and regulatory havens, that the United States would establish and back it up with sanctions.
These are the threats, with the conclusion that it will take something else for Luxembourg to do than a shortsighted statement about the firm defense of banking secrecy, or the obsessive repetition that "everything is fine Madame la Marquise." An in depth review of past policies is really of the essence. But let’s listen to a Prophet from elsewhere:
"There can be no more taboos, given our experiences of the last two years.” Philipp Hildebrand, Vice Chairman, Central Bank of Switzerland.
Will Luxembourg finally find its Hadubrand, who in the medieval saga is the (spiritual) son of Hildebrand, and put an end to the taboos?
Egide Thein
Thursday, August 20, 2009
Dedication of the Luxembourg-American Cultural Center in Belgium, Wisconsin
I attended the dedication of the Luxembourg-American Cultural Center in Belgium, Wisconsin, August 6-10. Here is a moment with the Luxembourg Fun Brass Band: the Luxembourg Lion blows it to the Louisiana Tiger.
Rectification: Remarks With Luxembourg Vice Prime Minister and Minister of Foreign Affairs Jean Asselborn Before Their Meeting
Note some discrepancies with my original post of July 30, 2009 titled:
Luxembourg's Deputy PM Helps Secretary of State Clinton to Close Guantanamo
This is the final version:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/july/126764.htm
Luxembourg's Deputy PM Helps Secretary of State Clinton to Close Guantanamo
This is the final version:
http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2009a/july/126764.htm
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Tour de France 2010: the Resurrection of Luxembourg Cyclism.
A new recruit joins the Schleck brothers on the Saxobank team: Laurent Didier. He is the son of Lucien Didier and the grandson of Bim Diederich, both former professional cyclists.
The Schlecks being the sons of Johny Schleck, and Kim Kirchen’s granduncle Jeng Kirchen being a participant in several Tours de France, Luxembourg cycling definitely lies in the genes. Schleck, Kirchen and Didier are actually three hereditary cycling monarchies.
A note of nostalgia: I remember some of Bim Diederich’s feats in the 1950’s. As we children had no bikes, we were just running and the fastest would earn the prestigious title of “Bim”. Later I met the veteran, who kept an outstanding bike shop in Pétange, Luxembourg.
Luxembourg’s champions used to have an almost impossible task at winning the Tour France in those days of national teams. It is just the numbers game that will prevent such a small country from lining up a national team of ten or so strong members. It took a combined Dutch / Luxembourg team to allow Charly Gaul to have a strong team and to win the Tour 1958. The new way of commercially sponsored team building allows someone from a small country, be it the Vatican, to win the Tour.
Interesting how strategies, tactics and technology in cycling have evolved over the last 30 years: reason, good judgment, even good science build winning (international) teams. Nationalistic emotions however drive the enthusiasm of most fans and the success of the Tour de France enterprise.
In the meantime there is another Luxembourg newcomer to the profession: Ben Gastauer. This brings the number to five, an amazing number for that very difficult profession at a time when most young people are supposed to be “ couch potatoes”.
Finally, confirming Yogi Berra, the Schlecks came to a fork in their road just after the Tour 2009, and they took it…..
Schleck 2010?
Egide Thein
The Schlecks being the sons of Johny Schleck, and Kim Kirchen’s granduncle Jeng Kirchen being a participant in several Tours de France, Luxembourg cycling definitely lies in the genes. Schleck, Kirchen and Didier are actually three hereditary cycling monarchies.
A note of nostalgia: I remember some of Bim Diederich’s feats in the 1950’s. As we children had no bikes, we were just running and the fastest would earn the prestigious title of “Bim”. Later I met the veteran, who kept an outstanding bike shop in Pétange, Luxembourg.
Luxembourg’s champions used to have an almost impossible task at winning the Tour France in those days of national teams. It is just the numbers game that will prevent such a small country from lining up a national team of ten or so strong members. It took a combined Dutch / Luxembourg team to allow Charly Gaul to have a strong team and to win the Tour 1958. The new way of commercially sponsored team building allows someone from a small country, be it the Vatican, to win the Tour.
Interesting how strategies, tactics and technology in cycling have evolved over the last 30 years: reason, good judgment, even good science build winning (international) teams. Nationalistic emotions however drive the enthusiasm of most fans and the success of the Tour de France enterprise.
In the meantime there is another Luxembourg newcomer to the profession: Ben Gastauer. This brings the number to five, an amazing number for that very difficult profession at a time when most young people are supposed to be “ couch potatoes”.
Finally, confirming Yogi Berra, the Schlecks came to a fork in their road just after the Tour 2009, and they took it…..
Schleck 2010?
Egide Thein
Saturday, August 1, 2009
New Luxembourg-American Cultural Center, Belgium, WI.
Are you sure you are not of Luxembourg descent? You soon get help to find out.
Many people have helped ond worked on this project of a Luxembourg-American Cultural Center in Belgium, WI. It is opening on August 8. Be there!
http://luxamculturalsociety.org/documents/HeritageWeekend2009Booklet.pdf
Latest news: the Grand Duke of Luxembourg is attending the dedication.
Egide Thein
Many people have helped ond worked on this project of a Luxembourg-American Cultural Center in Belgium, WI. It is opening on August 8. Be there!
http://luxamculturalsociety.org/documents/HeritageWeekend2009Booklet.pdf
Latest news: the Grand Duke of Luxembourg is attending the dedication.
Egide Thein
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
