May find there is no further use for those came and subsidiaries of the major u. S. Corporates. And so we may be involved in having one hundred or two hundred companies. No no no longer used in the Cayman Islands and possibly liquidated but bear in mind thats out of a total of around one hundred thousand so its a statistically irrelevant. Percentage well its been asked summated that this different deferral provision allowed companies to stockpile an estimated three point one trillion years dollars offshore and some of them for example apple have already said that they they would be paying those taxes directly in the United States you just said that it is a statistical irrelevance as far as the Cayman Islands. Are concerned but i wonder if this shift in the u. S. Taxation regime may alter. The the course of globalization in any way surely arlan should be feeling the pinch or do you think its a trick or treater truly are and should although there are other reasons why allah has been successful particularly and efficient at a low cost labor force. But the euro bear in mind the three point one trillion number you mentioned came about because u. S. Law wanted us corporations to be able to defer tax off shore because it operated what was known as a capital export neutrality system and if it hadnt allowed for the deferral us corporations would under the previous law have been taxed twice on that lower profits and therefore been noncompetitive with with say european corporations which was only tax once now in the us theyve they have just done under the tax cuts and jobs reform act theyve just amended that structure so that u. S. Corporates for now be taxed only territoriality basis that is to say in the jurisdiction where they make the profit and therefore there isnt as you rightly say towards globalization because that brings us corporations Global Trading profits more into line with the system that is operated for say european corporations which are also taxed on a territoriality basis well miss a traverse you just said that this deferred taxation regime was intended and in fact it was promoted by the American Government but at the same time the previous American Administration was very critical about it and i think thats the most ironic thing in all of that for me that these kind of changes were implemented not by the Obama Administration which one would think ideologically would have been most predisposed to it but by the tump administrator in your opinion it wasnt ultimately. Political will corporate might have perhaps Something Else i i have to say i agree with you im completely confused about why a Republican Administration made a change that was essentially part of the democratic philosophy and which the democrats have been frustrated about trying to change for well over fifty years i can only think that somewhere deep within what they call the deep state in the us treasury there were left leaning. Bureaucrats who implemented this change to a territoriality based system of taxation without anybody actually being aware of what was going on. But it is i agree with you very hard to explain in the the political positions of the two us parties historically well mr travers i think we would agree that as a flayed maybe Many American political positions are extremely hard to explain from a rational point of view but we have to take a very short break here lets go back to the discussion in the few moments statement. Very few not to speak the more attention to. The north Korean Nuclear issue and i believe that this coming can come with the solutions but. The u. S. Has been paying too much attention for military solutions but i would hope the u. S. Would be more peaceful solution to the north Korean Nuclear problem. Welcome back to worlds apart with Anthony Travers senior partner at an offshore law firm based in the Cayman Islands and just before the break we were talking about the United States finally returning to the territorial principle of tech taxation and some would argue that the. Americans want to take it there even further there is another standing initiative aimed at the repatriation of taxes im talking about before an account Tax Compliance act which compels non the u. S. Financial institutions to report on the assets of both u. S. Citizens and the u. S. Residents worldwide do you think trump is likely to make it work and dont you think that perhaps this territorial principle. May be taking way too far with essentially the extraterritorial nature of that act well i think think there are actually two quite Different Things moving us corporations to a territoriality based system of taxation with regard to Global Trading activity is one thing. The foreign account Tax Compliance a whole fat choruses no was directed at something quite different that was directed at ensuring that u. S. Citizens who are also tax on a citizenship basis. As were u. S. Corporations pay taxes on overseas and so what fat did was ensure that u. S. Citizens outside of the United States have to report on all accounts that they maintain outside the United States to charity its not just about that the american citizens or residents reporting on those accounts i want to with understand that but its about the making norms u. S. Financial institutions essentially. Be responsible for implementing that reporting in turning the branches of foreign Financial Institutions essentially into subsidiaries of the i rest dont you think thats a bridge too far now rio i agree with you i was describing what fact was intended to do what you just said is absolutely correct the way it is implemented is to to effectively make known u. S. Banking organizations or u. S. Banking organizations operating overseas as effective tax collectors for for for the i. R. S. And there is worse legislation that has now come out of europe called the common reporting standard which does exactly the same thing as between about ninety countries now that have signed out to it and clued in to that russia which requires those ninety countries to make automatic reporting to the home jurisdiction of every investor who has an account in a signatory jurisdiction so for example if we have russian. Citizens with accounts in the Cayman Islands we must ascertain the identity of those citizens and make reports on their trading profits in any Cayman Island account to the russian authorities i will tell you why the russians see well at least the majority of the russian people and that the some part of the russian government dont see much problem but that is because they believe that the main purpose of legislation is to provide a more intense Information Exchange between tax authorities worldwide which theoretically at least would make tax evasion which is a huge problem for this country a little bit more difficult especially as the new Technology Come on board the next day that this process is it too naive to suggest that big golden era of hiding assets especially ill gotten assets which is the problem for russia for example is slowly but surely coming to an end i think i have absolutely no. Right. I would say that it had come to an end in the Cayman Islands almost twenty years ago when we entered into the tax Information Exchange agreements for tax evasion which is what youre describing now. That was off the table for at least twenty years and they came at all it just was not possible to do it because of the ability of tax or thought has to make inquiry under the treaties the common reporting stat that takes it to a new and higher level by requiring proactive reporting with regard to those accounts of any known resident of the Cayman Islands back to the tax authorities in question so i think youre right it is true to say that not every country in the world is a signatory of the common reporting standard fatca operates in relation to the United States only and is extraterritorial globally as a matter of u. S. Law the cohen reporting said operates differently by way of a multilateral treaty and i would say that youre absolutely right it makes it virtually impossible now to evade taxes by way of known displeasure in a criminal way by use of any offshore account now you know i have a few friends wealthy relatively wealthy individuals who complain. And thats where this is how they call themselves starting to feel like refugees around the world and i understand thats a preposterous adjustment but it does relate a certain degree of desperation at the inability to find a home not just for yourself but for your capital and sometimes the origin of that capital is quite questionable youve been very forthcoming in saying that the Cayman Islands is stressing the transparency of the Cayman Islands and i believe it to the times just is not smart to verify your claims but i wonder if you believe there are still destinations in the world that may provide drive to reach for the for the people who fill. They are not welcome in countries like iraq for example i dont think i dont think that people who hide their money should be encouraged and i think its going to be extremely difficult for them to do so but i do have the answer for them if you are a russian citizen and you want to avoid paying russian taxes then you must come and live in the Cayman Islands because russia also applies a territoriality based system of taxation and the problem is is that i would from High Net Worth a High Net Worth individuals who want to live in london paris or new york and not pay the a placable taxes as a result of doing so that game i think is effectively overwrought and rightly so much as you say. So the answer therefore is that you actually need to take up residence in one of these indirect taxation jurisdictions and in that way you will be able to protect your assets and not pay Income Corporation profits or Capital Gains tax but that is i think the only legitimate way of doing it now now im not sure you should distribute such a such device especially for free on the airwaves but anywhere you mention london and there is an Interesting Development in that regard in the u. K. We just passed an order allowing the authorities to freeze and recover property in excess of fifty thousand pounds if individuals are unable to explain how they acquired those assets and it strikes me as a brilliant idea making the government the ultimate beneficiary of the large scale Money Laundering scheme that has been going on in london for decades what do you make of it do you see them the same light yes i mean i think i think the issue is this firstly its clearly borne out of frustration. Because the the problem the author or his have is this that the way the International Network works for lower enforcement all my. The laundering requires you to have a preliminary if an offense committed in that in the jurisdiction of the residence of the individual for example russia or or the hypothetical african state ruritania you have to have a predicate offense there for the international Money Laundering system to work and thats whether thats where the system is broken down because even after Panama Papers panama was a jurisdiction where no transparency which was very popular with money or grows. Even out of Panama Papers you five very very few criminal offenses now in the originating jurisdictions. And until you have an offense in those jurisdictions the International Network of information gathering cant operate and so what the United Kingdom legislation is down is reverse the burden of proof but you know if there isnt an additional thing even if there isnt an information about you committing some crime in your original country you can always claim to political prosecution and in fact the number zero for russian bankers who stole money from the people on the very large scale i doing exactly that in the United Kingdom it would be interesting to see whether the authorities will be able to go after them but i want to ask you something did different because youre always on the defensive when it comes to people from the u. K. Or the United States preaching transparency or you know taxes on avoidance but i think its also fair to turn the tables around because its not even controversial to say anymore that london and new york have become the largest offshore destinations i mean its its its i guess a statement of fact that in this day and age what do you think the mob motivates the british authorities to pull the plug on it now to pass that law at this point of time did they finally find the courage to do that and that address the problem or is it just an opportune moment to fill the state coffers well i think youre absolutely right i mean no money launderer invests his proceeds in an offshore jurisdiction mr malkovich invested his seven billion dollars a lot of proceeds through new york missed a batch or the nigerian dictator bested his his four billion pounds in this in the city of london money in order as nice things to buy they need houses on the east side or in belgravia london says the ultimate destination for these proceeds is always being the on the shore capitals i think that that is all of a sudden a new age if you like you might call it political opportunism. By it is. It has become politically very incorrect to be a jurisdiction like london and less so new york strength but like london where this kind of. Cover a range meant is is is tacitly accepted by your heart is and i think its extremely difficult for the british or thought is given the transparency theyve insisted on interesting like the Cayman Islands they have a double standard not to apply the same level of transparency with regard to. Places like london where these proceeds are actually loaned the special interest in this the charas because they dont seem to be losing much theyre only gaining as i said i think if that scheme is implemented at the end of the day the British Government will be the ultimate beneficiary of all those ill gotten assets because it can claim it for itself. Maybe maybe not i mean a government will claim it it may be the British Government will have to hand those money so its a Money Laundering occur for that if you need to cleanse ahmed rashid nation and that goes for years if not decades and there are also political issues involved so its easier to keep it for yourself and for your budgets that way i think thats a really brilliant idea. Well it may it may if may well be as i say you know im not here to defend the way the system of International Law enforcement works because no it doesnt work thats quite clear you know when i started in the offshore world over forty years ago it was said there were two trillion dollars a black man a thing annually and the still two trillion dollars of black money circulating annually so im not sure what evolves is of really being made. But i do think there are there are systems if money was lord. Out of nigeria if the British Government confiscates it in britain there are systems to ensure that money is paid out at the request of the nigerian or thora its not its not just a smash and grab operation by the British Government well lets hope for that and lets hold out the price to russia as well anyway mr travers we have to leave it there i really appreciate your being on the show and to our viewers please keep the conversation going and social media pages as i meet i hope to see you again same place same time here and will depart. Despite its turbulent history the soviet union. Was about the use of the eastern front. When on the show a number of this. New moon will be the battle for remember. This go through for world. Youll be like oh sure the first will be reserved for your wardle the first some of your limpy team of one hundred fifty two minutes needed seed survivors concentration camp prisoners and frontline soldiers. Only in that its good to go where there is corruption you go in and watch the Murder Mission for the government because youre working for your own from one fall through shell forward to get out of the earth with you if you think that the area or going to the variations your personal quest for personal personal enthusiasm will go for you know when youre at the actual more simply be there in your work for whatever we are in the world free of charge and token we. Headlines on r. T. International dozens of russian athletes have their hopes dashed just hours before the Winter Olympics kick off in south korea the court of arbitration for sport dismisses their appeals against a doping related. More than seven hundred fifty thousand children are in need of basic medical services in the war ravaged iraqi city of mosul. Mosul city probably faced one of the biggest urban warfare since world war two. And republican lawmakers in the us are threatening to cut funding to a Global Research program after it was linked to americas most widely used weed killer made by monsanto to cancer. And oclock friday morning here in moscow is watching r. T. International thank you for. A last minute appeal from forty five russian athletes and two coaches against a ban preventing them from competing in the Winter Olympics has failed the court of arbitration for sport secretary general announced the ruling with just hours to go before the games got underway in south korea. The treaters have considered that the process. To establish an invitation least. From russia could not be described as a sanction but rather as an eligibility decision. Applicants did not demonstrates that the manner in which two special Commission System by the i. O. C. Was carried out in a discriminatory. Party is a little trickier now live in the host city of pyong china crushing news for some of russias top athletes including key medal hopefuls can you tell us a bit more about this ruling from cas. How laurie so there you have it according to the court of arbitration for sport ridding the russian athletes of their olympic invitations isnt equal to punishment and theyre absolutely happy with the criteria that was originally chosen by the International Olympic committee for these and dictations the president of the World Antidoping Agency is pleased he is saying that the timing is great and also that all the clean athletes from around the world should be reassured right now besides this the i. O. C. As happy as well they have already applauded the decision as you can see from this tweet although the russians are obviously devastated. Didnt expect cast to reach this decision fifty fifty especially after thomas bach and one of his latest speech is pressured the court of arbitration for sport after ruled in our favor he was literally threatening the court he was almost seeing he would dissolve the court if it root again in favor of russian athletes. Its one of the biggest problems again is that the group of forty seven who never failed a dull boring test were never explained which criteria they didnt match to be shown that red card and the forty seven russian athletes and coaches who were suing the i. O. C. Were from two groups thirty two hadnt been sanctioned by the i. O. C. Officials as a result of the russian doping scandal at all then fifteen received a lifetime bans and had their medals taken away by the i. O. C. A few months ago but last week the very same court of arbitration for sport cancelled these lifetime bans they rehabilitated their podium finishes and allowed the russian athletes to compete again but what weve got right now is a decision that completely contradicts their previous ruling some have argued that since the original Court Decision to cancel the lifetime bans the court of arbitration for sport has been under immense pressure by the International Olympic committee and the olympic officials in general well see for yourself. Hausa decision is extremely disappointing and surprising care for. The the i. O. C. We would never have faith expected this. Decision show says the the urchin to meet for reforms in the internal structure of class. So did that pressure affect the verdict possibly well never find out for sure but team russia is devastated its a disaster for the athletes the coaches and the fans who are baffled by how unfair it could get some have already promised to go to civil courts about this to claim financial and moral damages but in any case even if they end up weighing this very long legal battle no one is going to give them back the chance to try and win some a limb pick medals here m. P. R. Chang. Movement does not consider me an athlete who deserves to be a part of it without even providing an explanation ive never given a reason to doubt my honesty and my integrity. The games in korea are to be the first in my career together with my partner weve been working towards that this olympics for many years and it was my cherished dream. I was shocked to lympics my dream and i was working towards this goal throughout my entire sports career ive given no reasons to doubt that im clean. Project about life and. Im trying thank you. Discuss this further now here on r. T. International sterling investigative journalist joining us live here on the program rick its good to see you today some of the people the band have no prior convictions what so ever so certainly many might struggle to make sense of the ruling by. Some people are already asking is this decision based more on sport or on politics. Well i think it i think its clearly politics unfortunately this is a disaster for the individual athletes its also a disaster for the Olympic Movement which is explicitly against national the discrimination so last week you had the court of arbitration in war clearing twenty the athletes of any charges of open violations and yet theyre all ineligible for participation in the Olympic Games so that in so is evidence of National Discrimination its a tragedy to see the Olympic Movement bending to the political winds and the western media and i recall that this all began two months before the rio olympics when as a big story in the New York Times featuring rewrote change. Om. Began a an investigation and then it was just literally days and or a week before the rio olympics that that athletes were banned that time and then mclaren came out with this report at the end of last year and theyve spent a year and then here we are just a few weeks before the olympics you got these rulings and then here we are the day of the olympics this final. This final ruling this final ruling comes down with the court of arbitration for sport i was going to ask you rick im sorry for jumping in there but if clean athletes can get banned for doping issues and yet they have nothing to do with that whatsoever i suppose i want to ask you what kind of precedent does it set for the world of sports. Its a terrible president and when you hear water talk theyre always talking about clean athletes but apparently russians dont count and that by their ruling so this is really a travesty of justice and there needs to be a lot more scrutiny of the Mclaren Report itself i have documented major contradictions and errors in inconsistent these in that report so the whole foundation of this is is very faulty it needs to be pursued into the future