Pulsar wrote:Iceland’s prime minister walks out of interview over tax haven question:

https://embed.theguardian.com/embed/video/world/video/2016/apr/03/icelands-prime-minister-walks-out-of-interview-over-tax-haven-question-video

The look on his face when he realizes he's fucked...

Teague wrote:

Pulsar wrote:Iceland’s prime minister walks out of interview over tax haven question:

https://embed.theguardian.com/embed/video/world/video/2016/apr/03/icelands-prime-minister-walks-out-of-interview-over-tax-haven-question-video

The look on his face when he realizes he's fucked...

LMFAO that wasn't awkward at all

A record 22,000 people gathered in Austurvöllur square, in front of Iceland’s parliament, this evening to demand that Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson resign following last night’s revelations by the media that he and his wife Anna Sigurlaug Pálsdóttir have links to a company in Tortola. Iceland's population is roughly 330,000.

Earlier today, the prime minister stated that he will not resign.

DoctorE wrote:

Teague wrote:

Pulsar wrote:Iceland’s prime minister walks out of interview over tax haven question:

https://embed.theguardian.com/embed/video/world/video/2016/apr/03/icelands-prime-minister-walks-out-of-interview-over-tax-haven-question-video

The look on his face when he realizes he's fucked...

LMFAO that wasn't awkward at all

We want him out but he just continues to be awkward

A record 22,000 people gathered in Austurvöllur square, in front of Iceland’s parliament, this evening to demand that Prime Minister Sigmundur Davíð Gunnlaugsson resign following last night’s revelations by the media that he and his wife Anna Sigurlaug Pálsdóttir have links to a company in Tortola. Iceland's population is roughly 330,000.

Earlier today, the prime minister stated that he will not resign.

Continues: http://icelandreview.com/news/2016/04/0 ... rs-scandal

"Mr. President, the trade agreement with Panama would effectively bar the U.S. from cracking down on illegal and abusive offshore tax havens in Panama. In fact, combating tax haven abuse in Panama would be a violation of this free trade agreement, exposing the U.S. to fines from international authorities.

In 2008, the Government Accountability Office said that 17 of the 100 largest American companies were operating a total of 42 subsidiaries in Panama. This free trade agreement would make it easier for the wealthy and large corporations to avoid paying U.S. taxes and it must be defeated. At a time when we have a record-breaking $14.7 trillion national debt and an unsustainable federal deficit, the last thing that we should be doing is making it easier for the wealthiest people and most profitable corporations in this country to avoid paying their fair share in taxes by setting-up offshore tax havens in Panama.

Adding insult to injury, Mr. President, the Panama FTA would require the United States to waive Buy America requirements for procurement bids from thousands of foreign firms, including many Chinese firms, incorporated in this major tax haven. That may make sense to China, it does not make sense to me.

Finally, Panama is also listed by the State Department as a major venue for Mexican and Colombian drug cartel money laundering. Should we be rewarding this country with a free trade agreement? I think the answer should be a resounding no."

Panama Papers: Obama, Clinton Pushed Trade Deal Amid Warnings It Would Make Money Laundering, Tax Evasion Worse

Years before more than a hundred media outlets around the world released stories Sunday exposing a massive network of global tax evasion detailed in the so-called Panama Papers, U.S. President Barack Obama and then-Secretary of State Hillary Clinton pushed for a Bush administration-negotiated free trade agreement that watchdogs warned would only make the situation worse.

Soon after taking office in 2009, Obama and his secretary of state — who is currently the Democratic presidential front-runner — began pushing for the passage of stalled free trade agreements (FTAs) with Panama, Colombia and South Korea that opponents said would make it more difficult to crack down on Panama’s very low income tax rate, banking secrecy laws and history of noncooperation with foreign partners.

Even while Obama championed his commitment to raise taxes on the wealthy, he pursued and eventually signed the Panama agreement in 2011. Upon Congress ratifying the pact, Clinton issued a statement lauding the agreement, saying it and other deals with Colombia and South Korea "will make it easier for American companies to sell their products." She added: "The Obama administration is constantly working to deepen our economic engagement throughout the world, and these agreements are an example of that commitment."
[url]
http://www.ibtimes.com/panama-papers-ob ... ey-2348076[/url]

THWOTH wrote:

theguardian.com wrote:Fund run by David Cameron’s father avoided paying UK tax
Panama Papers reveal Ian Cameron hired Bahamas residents, including a part-time bishop, to keep offshore company exempt

David Cameron’s father ran an offshore fund that avoided ever having to pay tax in Britain by hiring a small army of Bahamas residents – including a part-time bishop – to sign its paperwork.

Ian Cameron was a director of Blairmore Holdings Inc, an investment fund run from the Bahamas but named after the family’s ancestral home in Aberdeenshire, which managed tens of millions of pounds on behalf of wealthy families.

Clients included Isidore Kerman, an adviser to Robert Maxwell who once owned the West End restaurants Scott’s and J Sheekey, and Leopold Joseph, a private bank used by the Rolling Stones.

The fund was founded in the early 1980s with help from the prime minister’s late father and still exists today. The Guardian has confirmed that in 30 years Blairmore has never paid a penny of tax in the UK on its profits...

http://www.theguardian.com/news/2016/ap ... ax-bahamas

Nobody has broken the law, therefore nobody has done anything wrong.

Briton wrote:Looks like Bernie might have got that one wrong. The reason Americans are not featuring too much in this particular scandal is because of that agreement, which made it unsafe to try and hide your assets in Panama. (Again, my source is RT).

Briton wrote:Looks like Bernie might have got that one wrong. The reason Americans are not featuring too much in this particular scandal is because of that agreement, which made it unsafe to try and hide your assets in Panama. (Again, my source is RT).

Teague wrote:

"Mr. President, the trade agreement with Panama would effectively bar the U.S. from cracking down on illegal and abusive offshore tax havens in Panama. In fact, combating tax haven abuse in Panama would be a violation of this free trade agreement, exposing the U.S. to fines from international authorities.

In 2008, the Government Accountability Office said that 17 of the 100 largest American companies were operating a total of 42 subsidiaries in Panama. This free trade agreement would make it easier for the wealthy and large corporations to avoid paying U.S. taxes and it must be defeated. At a time when we have a record-breaking $14.7 trillion national debt and an unsustainable federal deficit, the last thing that we should be doing is making it easier for the wealthiest people and most profitable corporations in this country to avoid paying their fair share in taxes by setting-up offshore tax havens in Panama.

Adding insult to injury, Mr. President, the Panama FTA would require the United States to waive Buy America requirements for procurement bids from thousands of foreign firms, including many Chinese firms, incorporated in this major tax haven. That may make sense to China, it does not make sense to me.

Finally, Panama is also listed by the State Department as a major venue for Mexican and Colombian drug cartel money laundering. Should we be rewarding this country with a free trade agreement? I think the answer should be a resounding no."

Teague wrote:

Briton wrote:Looks like Bernie might have got that one wrong. The reason Americans are not featuring too much in this particular scandal is because of that agreement, which made it unsafe to try and hide your assets in Panama. (Again, my source is RT).

You do know they haven't released the US names yet and apparently it's "red hot"

Teague wrote:

Briton wrote:Looks like Bernie might have got that one wrong. The reason Americans are not featuring too much in this particular scandal is because of that agreement, which made it unsafe to try and hide your assets in Panama. (Again, my source is RT).

You do know they haven't released the US names yet and apparently it's "red hot"

Briton wrote:Looks like Bernie might have got that one wrong. The reason Americans are not featuring too much in this particular scandal is because of that agreement, which made it unsafe to try and hide your assets in Panama. (Again, my source is RT).

Hobbes Choice wrote:The reason is that the leaked documents were a tiny proportion of the investments, in just one legal firm. To say this is the tip of an iceberg would be to exaggerate what it has revealed.

Hobbes Choice wrote:The 1% are fucking everybody over on an enormous scale.

tuco wrote:Or they are doing what they are allowed to in legal sense, is another way to put it, which leads me to asking: are there measures, for countries and/or supra-national structures, to adopt to change/prevent this?

aban57 wrote:

Teague wrote:

"Mr. President, the trade agreement with Panama would effectively bar the U.S. from cracking down on illegal and abusive offshore tax havens in Panama. In fact, combating tax haven abuse in Panama would be a violation of this free trade agreement, exposing the U.S. to fines from international authorities.

In 2008, the Government Accountability Office said that 17 of the 100 largest American companies were operating a total of 42 subsidiaries in Panama. This free trade agreement would make it easier for the wealthy and large corporations to avoid paying U.S. taxes and it must be defeated. At a time when we have a record-breaking $14.7 trillion national debt and an unsustainable federal deficit, the last thing that we should be doing is making it easier for the wealthiest people and most profitable corporations in this country to avoid paying their fair share in taxes by setting-up offshore tax havens in Panama.

Adding insult to injury, Mr. President, the Panama FTA would require the United States to waive Buy America requirements for procurement bids from thousands of foreign firms, including many Chinese firms, incorporated in this major tax haven. That may make sense to China, it does not make sense to me.

Finally, Panama is also listed by the State Department as a major venue for Mexican and Colombian drug cartel money laundering. Should we be rewarding this country with a free trade agreement? I think the answer should be a resounding no."

Source ?

Hobbes Choice wrote:

THWOTH wrote:Nobody has broken the law, therefore nobody has done anything wrong.

Is that you speaking or are you running in that brain for a friend?
What is legal is not the same as what is right.
What is illegal is not the same as what is wrong.

DoctorE wrote:The prime minister of iceland has resigned