tax secrecy "should be vigorously addressed".

"Harbours of resentment", an article by Vanessa Houlder, published at Financial Timesfrom www.ft.com

Published: December 1 2008 02:00 | Last updated: December 1 2008 02:00

In the Victorian seaside town of Douglas, a new mood of uncertainty has punctured the customary ebullience of the Isle of Man's senior legal and financial officials as they fret about the loyalty of their most powerful neighbour. "If jettisoned by the UK, we will have to fight tooth and nail for our survival," says William Corlett, the island's attorney general.

In the 1960s, young Manx people began to leave the windswept island until politicians started creating jobs for them by scrapping taxes and luring financial institutions to do business in the self-governing Crown dependency. Finance, says Mr Corlett, is what has saved the Isle of Man, 60 miles off the western coast of Britain, from the fate suffered by other isolated outposts such as Scotland's Western Isles, which are plagued by depopulation.

Hence the sense of vulnerability as the island's close relationship with the City of London is called into question. Alistair Darling, the UK chancellor of the exchequer, launched a review last week into London's financial ties with what he has described as "a tax haven sitting in the Irish Sea". From next month, the White House will be occupied by an avowed enemy of tax havens who backed a bill targeting "offshore secrecy jurisdictions", including the Isle of Man.

This icy blast is a sign of the growing hostility to the tiny states and islands around the world that harbour an estimated $6,000bn (£3,895bn, €4,725bn) of offshore assets. After months of financial crisis and banking scandals that rocked Liechtenstein and Switzerland, the world's most powerful countries have lost patience.

In Washington last month, finance ministers from the Group of 20 leading industrial and developing nations concluded that tax secrecy "should be vigorously addressed". This weekend, it was the turn of the developing countries. At a United Nations meeting on development in Doha, tax havens came under fire for fuelling capital flight.

Tax havens are used to threatening language. Ever since they came into vogue after the second world war as places for individuals to shelter money and savvy international corporations to manage their tax affairs, havens have faced pressure from bigger countries. Will it be different this time? If it is, what future is there for the small island and mountain countries that turned the dusty notions of privacy and opaque corporate architecture into lucrative national industries?

"The political climate on the issue of tax havens has changed dramatically over the past three months," says Jeffrey Owens of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. As the official who has driven the international crackdown on secrecy for more than a decade, he says the new climate could turn the reform promises extracted from many offshore centres into a reality. The financial crisis has intensified the attack on havens. The near-collapse of the west's banking industry has drastically increased governments' need to raise funds, brutally exposed the risks inherent in small countries with large financial sectors, and raised questions about the role of offshore centres in destabilising the system.

Some European finance ministers claim that the "opaque environment" of offshore finance - particularly hedge funds - contributed to reckless behaviour and, ultimately, the current crisis. President Nicolas Sarkozy of France is among those questioning whether, at a time of taxpayer-funded bail-outs, banks should even be allowed to operate in tax havens.

Onshore businesses in London and New York exploit the offshore benefits offered by the likes of Jersey and the Cayman Islands to optimise the tax efficiency of certain deals, such as the repackaging of debt and cross-border lending. The havens themselves reject claims that they fuelled the crisis. "It is like blaming a car manufacturer for road crashes," says an official in one of Britain's overseas territories.

The arrival of Barack Obama in the White House provokes even more anxiety for the havens. As well as launching last year's Stop Tax Haven Abuse Act, the president-elect helped this year to launch the Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act. This aims to make it easier for investigators to "see through" opaque corporate ownership structures and stop the flow of offshore funds to the US from hedge funds and private equity that are "of unknown origin" but do not have to pass money-laundering checks.

On the campaign trail, Mr Obama also laid bare his hostility to the corporate use of offshore jurisdictions for international tax planning, which analysts estimate accounts for between one third and a half of the revenues that Washington loses through offshore evasion and avoidance. "There's a building in the Cayman Islands that houses supposedly 12,000 US-based corporations," he said. "That's either the biggest building in the world or the biggest tax scam in the world, and we know which one it is."

Turning tough talk into real action will require considerable political will. Any reform of US tax to stop offshore fiscal planning is sure to face fierce opposition from US multinationals worried about being put at a disadvantage to foreign competitors. Martin Sullivan of Tax Analysts, a non-profit US publication, says: "Nothing will sail through. It will be much diluted."

Havens hope the likely differences between the Obama administration and that of President George W. Bush have been exaggerated. "The Democrats are never as bad as their rhetoric; the Republicans never as good," says an official at a centre bruised by concessions on transparency that were extracted after the 2001 terror attacks.

But the prospect of a renewed crackdown on secrecy is jangling nerves. The more reputable offshore centres are fearful that the difference between co-operative and unco-operative jurisdictions will be lost. "Politicians like scapegoats. In a crusade, the details get swept away," says Allan Bell, the Isle of Man's treasury minister. He complains that the nuances of the debate - including offshore-style tax dodging in many large "onshore" countries - are being overlooked. In October, he won support from Angel Gurría, OECD secretary-general, who called for "clear political recognition" of the half-dozen jurisdictions, such as the Isle of Man, that had taken "high political risk" in their move to greater transparency.

But even the most co-operative havens are only partially transparent. Information about private companies or trusts is not on public record. At best they will surrender information only to foreign tax inspectors who already have a "smoking gun" demonstrating evidence of wrongdoing. In practice, information exchange is rare.

Yet moving too far, too fast, might put the more co-operative tax havens at a competitive disadvantage. Wealthy individuals can be highly sensitive about financial privacy. Advisers at leading banks report that clients are already moving their money to Singapore and Switzerland - widely perceived as the last hold-outs against the international drive for transparency.

The danger of focusing solely on small players while ignoring similar shortcomings in some industrialised countries was one lesson of an OECD crackdown on secrecy launched in 1996. Tax havens have exploited this evident hypocrisy to stall reforms pending the introduction of a "level playing field". The success of the latest crackdown is likely to depend on the attitude of relatively powerful countries such as Switzerland and Singapore.

Even if secrecy is eliminated, the leading offshore jurisdictions will survive, reckons Tax Analysts' Mr Sullivan. "Will there still be Switzerland, Jersey, the Cayman Islands and the Isle of Man in a world where there was no tax evasion? Absolutely." But for dozens of others, the outlook is bleak. "There is so much competition. Some would go out of business."

That message has yet to reach the many eager wannabes. Last month, Tax Justice Network, one of several campaign groups that have vigorously lobbied against havens, proclaimed the Indian Ocean island of Anjouan to be the "new kid on the block". But such newcomers may not have reckoned with the ever-mounting costs of new regulations designed to tackle terrorist financing and money laundering.

Smaller, less successful tax havens are caught in a pincer as competition and regulatory costs mount. As recession arrives, their fragile economies are also feeling the pain from declines in tourism and other industries. Construction companies are pulling out across the Caribbean. In the Turks and Caicos, a UK dependency in the region, unpaid workers stranded by the Lehman Brothers collapse prevented managers from leaving the premises.

Some locations have tried to diversify. Liechtenstein is the world's largest false-teeth exporter. Monaco has more jobs in manufacturing than in finance. The Isle of Man has a foothold in the space industry and a lively manufacturing sector. Bermuda wants to break into the gambling business.

Despite such efforts, the tax havens still fear a bleak future if the international firms of accountants, lawyers and bankers pull out. "They are birds of passage. If they up sticks and go somewhere else, unemployment would be dramatic," says one official.

The tiny states and protectorates that thrived in the free-wheeling second half of the 20th century are left struggling to shore up their defences against the coming storm. But as big countries try to block the leakage of much-needed tax revenues and stanch the flow of dirty money, sympathy for the tax havens is in short supply.

Additional reporting by Rachel Keeler

Delaware: America's own home to corporate anonymity

Joe Biden, the US vice-president-elect, has a distinction that went all but unnoticed during the election campaign: he is senior senator for a state prominent in the world of tax havens.

Delaware, represented by Mr Biden since 1972, is infamous for allowing corporate financial secrecy of the kind that president-elect Barack Obama and many others are seeking to shatter in offshore financial centres.

Arguments over Delaware - whose more than 600,000 registered companies compare with an estimated 865,000 inhabitants - are part of a broader fight over what many havens see as rich-country double standards in international action to tackle money laundering and tax evasion. "The reality of Delaware is not lost on anybody," says one official involved in efforts to improve financial transparency.

Delaware corporations are under no obligation to file names of shareholders or beneficial owners, according to a 2006 report by the intergovernmental Financial Action Task Force on money laundering. The state offers a structure known as a limited liability company, which can be registered with not much more than a name and address.

The report says Delaware company agents advertise the state as allowing even greater secrecy than offshore tax havens. "The Delaware LLC provides the anonymity that most international jurisdictions do not offer," claims one agent website quoted by the task force.

Carl Levin, the senator with whom Mr Obama has campaigned on tax haven reform, is critical of the US failure to heed the task force's calls to lift the confidentiality surrounding companies in Delaware and states such as Nevada and Wyoming. Before the election, a Levin aide told the FT the senator believed that the US "ought to meet its international commitments, especially when it is urging other countries to strengthen their anti-money-laundering controls".

The debate highlights the vulnerability of the global campaign on tax havens to accusations that leading economies fail to practise what they preach.

Offshore financial centres

Cayman Islands Home to most of the world's hedge funds

Bermuda Leading insurance centre. Finance employs one in 16 of the population

Panama Operates strict bank secrecy

British Virgin Islands World capital for incorporating offshore companies

Turks and Caicos Islands Hosting trusts is a feature

SwitzerlandForeign assets make up 35 per cent of bank balance sheets

LiechtensteinRocked by an evasion scandal at LGT, its biggest bank. Had announced concessions over secrecy

Monaco Dubbed unco-operative by the OECD. Residents are mostly tax exiles

GuernseyEurope's leading captive insurance domicile

Jersey Fund management grown rapidly

Singapore Leading world financial centre, employing 127,000. Foreign law enforcement authorities say it is unco-operative and slow in answering requests for help

Anjouan Politically unstable part of the Comoros islands located in the Mozambique Channel. Launched an offshore centre in 2005 - one of a rash of newcomers
Copyright The Financial Times Limited 2008

This Blog/Web Site ("Blog") does not to provide specific legal advice, it is for educational purposes only. This Blog is made available by the international adviser, lawyer or law firm for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice.

The Blog does not constitute legal advice and is not a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Any comment posted on the Blog can be read by any Blog visitor; do not post confidential or sensitive information. Any links from another site to the Blog are beyond the control of us.

By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog.

The Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional adviser or lawyer in your country.

Our firm and do not convey their approval, support or any relationship to any site or organization. The use of this Blog does not implicitly or explicitly convey any warranties or representations as to the accuracy of the information contained herein.

This Blog has created this privacy statement in order to demonstrate our firm commitment to privacy. The following discloses the information gathering and dissemination practices for this Blog.

This Blog takes your privacy very seriously. Our customers told us they want to see clear, easy-to-read information about our privacy commitments and policies. We have made our privacy policies easier to find and easier to read. And we're listening. We welcome your questions and feedback on our privacy policies, and invite you to contact us with your thoughts.

Customer Privacy Controls and Choices:
• You can review and correct your Personal Information collected by us.
• You can limit certain types of solicitation communications from AT&T, including marketing contacts made via telephone, e-mail and text messaging.
• We will provide you with notice of changes to this policy.

Our privacy commitments are fundamental to the way we do business every day. These apply to everyone who has a relationship with this Blog and visitors.
• We will protect your privacy and keep your personal information safe. We use powerful encryption and other security safeguards to protect customer data, when available.
• We will not sell your personal information to anyone, for any purpose. Period.
• We will fully disclose our privacy policies in plain language, and make our policies easily accessible to you.
• We will notify you of any revisions to our privacy policy, in advance. No surprises.
• You have choices about how this Blog uses your information for marketing purposes. Customers are in control.


This Privacy Policy identifies and describes the way This Blog uses and protects the information we collect about visitors. All use of this Blog is subject to this Privacy Policy.

Use of Location Information
• When your wireless device is on, it sends periodic signals to the nearest cell site. We use that information to provide your wireless services;
• You can use your wireless device to obtain a wide array of services based on the approximate location of the device, referred to as Location Based Services, or LBS. The information you receive in connection with your use of LBS may include advertisements related to your request and your location;

Online Activity Tracking and Advertising
• We collect information about your activity on this Blog for a number of purposes using technologies such as cookies, Web beacons, widgets and server log files.
• We and our advertising partners use that information, as well as other information they have or we may have, to help tailor the ads you see on our sites and to help make decisions about ads you see on other sites.

The Information We Collect, How We Collect It, And How We Use It

We collect different types of personal and other information based on your use of our products and services and our business relationship with you. Some examples include:
• Contact Information that allows us to communicate with you -- including your name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address;
• Equipment, Performance, Site Usage, Viewing and other Technical Information about your use of our network, services, products or Web sites.

We collect information in 2 primary ways:
• You give it to us when you register to provide comments;
• We collect it automatically when you visit our Blog.

We use the information we collect in a variety of ways, including to:
• Provide you with the best visitor experience possible;
• Deliver customized content that may be of interest to you;
• Address network integrity and security issues;
• Investigate, prevent or take action regarding illegal activities, violations of our Terms of Service or Acceptable Use Policies; and
• For local directory and directory assistance purposes.

Aggregate or Anonymous Information:

We may share aggregate or anonymous information in various formats with trusted entities’ only for purposes such as:
• Our knowledge, and offer of information that may be of interest to you;
• Universities, laboratories and other entities that conduct scientific research; and
• Media research companies for general information only.

Europa y el IVA

Publicado el 06-01-2009 , por Expansión

El Tribunal de Justicia de las Comunidades Europeas ha regalado a las comunidades autónomas una rebaja por Navidad al entender que es posible cobrar por una misma operación el Impuesto sobre el Valor Añadido (IVA) y el Impuesto de Actos Jurídicos Documentados en su modalidad de Documentos Notariales (AJD-DN).


La duda la planteó en su día a Luxemburgo el Tribunal Superior de Cataluña porque consideraba que el impuesto sobre las escrituras era un “recargo” que se añadía al IVA.

Si el tribunal europeo le hubiera dado la razón, las autonomías tendrían que haber devuelto unos cien millones de euros que en concepto del impuesto de actos documentados las empresas han ido ingresando en los últimos cuatro años. Pero no ha sido así.

De esta forma, Luxemburgo ha liberado a España de una suerte de carga fiscal que las comunidades autónomas ya no tendrán que soportar. La clave de la discusión jurídica es sencilla, ya que se trataba de dilucidar si estos dos impuestos estaban relacionados entre sí o pueden explicarse de forma separada.

Y Europa ha optado por este segundo planteamiento, ya que el impuesto sobre las escrituras es diferente al del IVA, porque éste grava el volumen de negocio y el de actos jurídicos documentados el acceso a un registro público de las transacciones económicas.

Why to blog "International Tax"?

This is something often colleagues asked me, since lawyers generally do not have enough time to write. This reminde me a very good article, from november 2004, entitled “What's the Use of this Weblog?” and posted by Evan Schaeffer (Legal Underground)

“….Why do I have a weblog—or more specifically, three weblogs? I’ve been thinking about that too, especially as I think about where Notes from the (Legal) Underground might be headed after almost a year of posting every day. Why keep it up? Generally speaking, lawyers don’t read weblogs. Though this seems to be changing as weblogs get more media attention, the reaction from lawyers who know both me and my weblogs is not always favorable. Some lawyers are openly hostile: Why am I wasting my time surfing the Internet? And why weblogs? They’re a fad. Few people read them, and those that do are mostly young girls. “

In his defense, the autor says that the weblogs have now generated a number of good clients; that the weblogs have given him a forum to state the case against tort "reform"; and other reasons.

And about the choosing of blogs against books, Evan Schaeffer write “It’s true that for me, a book will always be a more satisfying resume credit than a weblog. But weblogs do allow serious writers to try out new ideas, new styles, new methods for telling a story. This is one of the things I like about this weblog, and why I’ll probably keep it going, at least for a while, after I pass the one-year mark. But I must admit I’m a little ambivalent, at least from day to day.”

His partner in teaching bloggins for lawyers, Federalist No. 84, add that “it occurred to me that every legal blog I read is top quality. Hell, even the legal blogs I don't read are very good. Really, there's not a crappy one out there. We mused for a while before realizing that the reason is that a good lawyer (re: an attorney who has the personal motivation and professional accomplishment to walk his own path) will live and die on his reputation.

Generally, only good lawyers and law profs blog. And since they're so concerned about their reputations, they want to produce their best work. Thus, lawyer blogs are very good since a blogger, more so than any group other than professional scholars, put themselves out to the world for criticism and correction.

He also wrote one of the best tips for bloggers that I never read, about “Brand Your Blawg”: “You need a unique name for two reasons. First, you want something to stick in my mind. Second, you want me to be able to find you on Google. Thus, “lawyer blog” or “criminal law blog” would be a very bad idea for a name. For Ken Lammers, CrimLaw works well, but that’s only because of his terrific Google ranking (which resulted from all of blawggers linking to his first class blawg). A fledgling blogger needs something distinct. …Your unique name should be in the URL of your blawg. Lawdork used to known as Law, Politics, and Press with an according mismatch between name and URL. That’s a mouthful, and a mistake. Chris is a savvy guy, he fixed this problem, and we’re all better off.

Our good friend David from HaikuEsq is the worst culprit. I can’t remember his URL, so every time I want to read him, I need to Google him or click-through from my blogroll. However, if I’m were not a blogger, he might have lost me as a reader, since I would have forgotten the title of his blawg.

One of the most underrated blawgs, I’m A PD, has a weird Xanga URL. I know how to find the blawg, but imagine the hapless reader who wants to find her but can’t, because Googling “public defender blog” brings up a lot of results, but I’m A PD is not in the first 100. She has a catchy title, but a crappy URL. Accordingly, she has probably lost of a lot of readers. Worst of all, her blawg is among the best. Everyone loses when you don’t brand your blawg.

Thus, in branding your blawg, ask two questions: Will my readers remember me; and will they be able to find me on Google?”

Privacy; a Necessity, not a Luxury

There is an interesting article named "Privacy; a Necessity not a Luxury" posted by Corbett & Kish at its blog.

"The year was 1917 and the location was Latvia. A poor and mostly agrarian country in Northern Europe’s Baltic region bordered to the north by Estonia and to the south by Lithuania. My grandparents were children at the time. As the saying goes, “timing is everything,” and theirs could not have been much worse. The Bolshevik Revolution began in October that year starting in Petrograd (now St. Petersburg). It was quickly followed by another civil war - later to be coined the Russian Revolution - and spread throughout the various countries doomed to become possessions of the Soviet Union. It would be bloody and last until 1922. My great-grandfather became a casualty when a local preacher turned him in as a dissident and he was shot. Having personally witnessed this event, my grandfather would flee to the United States, leaving behind a world and relatives he would never see again. He met a woman, also of Latvian heritage, and together they started a new life.

Vladimir Lenin got his wish and rose to prominence, becoming Russia’s most powerful figure. Although Lenin’s post-revolutionary Soviet Union would forge much advancement – most notably education and industrial development - the cost would be enormous. The State was to become godlike. Human rights and the individual spirit were quashed. Citizens feared to even whisper dissent for Siberia, or worse would be a likely sentence. The seeds of the KGB had been sown, and privacy was altogether nonexistent.

History teaches us many lessons if we are only willing to pay attention. Perhaps none as profound and recurring as the importance of protecting an individual’s right to privacy which equates to civil liberties. It is impossible to live in peace and obtain true prosperity without privacy. The tragic events of 9/11/01 changed the landscape of human rights in the United States and throughout the world. If the truth be told, however, personal privacy was under attack long before that day. And while the right to privacy is not completely lost, it should give one pause that history is full of examples wherein these privileges become reduced under the guise of “national security”.

In recent years the same holds true; the inception of the Patriot Act in 2001 gave law enforcement agencies more authority to search the phone, email and financial records of some citizens while wiretaps and searches of suspected homes and businesses were made more accessible. International security measures that have inhibited the civil liberties of citizens include hidden cameras & microphones in public transportation areas like taxis and subway stations as well as roving taps, illegal search & seizures and more.

As recently as 2006, USA Today reported that The National Security Agency has been secretly collecting the phone call records of tens of millions of Americans, using data provided by AT&T, Verizon and BellSouth. The database is currently the largest ever collected, and, while it focuses mostly on international calls, either those ending or originating outside the U.S., it does keep track of domestically placed calls as well.The struggle to preserve essential human rights is a theme most recently tapped by Hollywood. In 2009, it is paying tribute to those individuals who stood against tyranny with films such as Tom Cruise’s “Valkyrie” or Daniel Craig’s “Defiance”.

While it remains to be seen the acclaim these films receive, the mere fact that Hollywood producers have allotted their production dollars to bring these true stories to the big screen further affirms the emotional connection we feel towards human rights and those who guard them.

In no way are we promoting civil disobedience, nor are we attempting to draw a parallel between western society and tyrannical governments of long ago. Yet we do feel it is essential for individual citizens to take common sense steps to protect themselves from the prying eyes of individuals seeking monetary gain or the potential of a government becoming dysfunctional and over-stepping its bounds. The economic events of 2008 and collapse of some of the world’s largest banks re-emphasizes this need. Anyone of substantial wealth should be taking measures to diversify and protect their privacy. It is really not that difficult to find a safe haven from these turbulent times. One of our favorite strategies is to utilize Switzerland and have our clients “take matters into their own hands” through owning their own financial facility. This allows for effective planning and extensive control. There are, however, other locations and other strategies that can be implemented. The key is to be proactive.

The lessons to be learned from the past are not ivy tower philosophy or vague political rhetoric but real-world and relevant to current events. We live - as the ancient Chinese saying goes – in interesting times.

This Blog/Web Site ("Blog") does not to provide specific legal advice, it is for educational purposes only. This Blog is made available by the international adviser, lawyer or law firm for educational purposes only as well as to give you general information and a general understanding of the law, not to provide specific legal advice.

The Blog does not constitute legal advice and is not a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed attorney in your state. Any comment posted on the Blog can be read by any Blog visitor; do not post confidential or sensitive information. Any links from another site to the Blog are beyond the control of us.

By using this blog site you understand that there is no attorney client relationship between you and the Blog.

The Blog should not be used as a substitute for competent legal advice from a licensed professional adviser or lawyer in your country.

Our firm and do not convey their approval, support or any relationship to any site or organization. The use of this Blog does not implicitly or explicitly convey any warranties or representations as to the accuracy of the information contained herein.

This Blog has created this privacy statement in order to demonstrate our firm commitment to privacy. The following discloses the information gathering and dissemination practices for this Blog.

This Blog takes your privacy very seriously. Our customers told us they want to see clear, easy-to-read information about our privacy commitments and policies. We have made our privacy policies easier to find and easier to read. And we're listening. We welcome your questions and feedback on our privacy policies, and invite you to contact us with your thoughts.

Customer Privacy Controls and Choices:
• You can review and correct your Personal Information collected by us.
• You can limit certain types of solicitation communications from AT&T, including marketing contacts made via telephone, e-mail and text messaging.
• We will provide you with notice of changes to this policy.

Our privacy commitments are fundamental to the way we do business every day. These apply to everyone who has a relationship with this Blog and visitors.
• We will protect your privacy and keep your personal information safe. We use powerful encryption and other security safeguards to protect customer data, when available.
• We will not sell your personal information to anyone, for any purpose. Period.
• We will fully disclose our privacy policies in plain language, and make our policies easily accessible to you.
• We will notify you of any revisions to our privacy policy, in advance. No surprises.
• You have choices about how this Blog uses your information for marketing purposes. Customers are in control.


This Privacy Policy identifies and describes the way This Blog uses and protects the information we collect about visitors. All use of this Blog is subject to this Privacy Policy.

Use of Location Information
• When your wireless device is on, it sends periodic signals to the nearest cell site. We use that information to provide your wireless services;
• You can use your wireless device to obtain a wide array of services based on the approximate location of the device, referred to as Location Based Services, or LBS. The information you receive in connection with your use of LBS may include advertisements related to your request and your location;

Online Activity Tracking and Advertising
• We collect information about your activity on this Blog for a number of purposes using technologies such as cookies, Web beacons, widgets and server log files.
• We and our advertising partners use that information, as well as other information they have or we may have, to help tailor the ads you see on our sites and to help make decisions about ads you see on other sites.

The Information We Collect, How We Collect It, And How We Use It

We collect different types of personal and other information based on your use of our products and services and our business relationship with you. Some examples include:
• Contact Information that allows us to communicate with you -- including your name, address, telephone number, and e-mail address;
• Equipment, Performance, Site Usage, Viewing and other Technical Information about your use of our network, services, products or Web sites.

We collect information in 2 primary ways:
• You give it to us when you register to provide comments;
• We collect it automatically when you visit our Blog.

We use the information we collect in a variety of ways, including to:
• Provide you with the best visitor experience possible;
• Deliver customized content that may be of interest to you;
• Address network integrity and security issues;
• Investigate, prevent or take action regarding illegal activities, violations of our Terms of Service or Acceptable Use Policies; and
• For local directory and directory assistance purposes.

Aggregate or Anonymous Information:

We may share aggregate or anonymous information in various formats with trusted entities’ only for purposes such as:
• Our knowledge, and offer of information that may be of interest to you;
• Universities, laboratories and other entities that conduct scientific research; and
• Media research companies for general information only.

RESIDENCIA Y TRIBUTACIÓN DE NO RESIDENTES

1- PRESTBURY Ltd, empresa inglesa, está planteándose tener una filial o una sucursal (establecimiento permanente) en Alemania. Prevén que los primeros 3 años tendrán pérdidas en Alemania. ¿Qué le interesa más a PRESTBURY?.

2- La empresa española TOLEDANA DE VENTAS A DISTANCIA quiere expandirse al mercado francés. Su asesor jurídico se pregunta si tiene establecimiento permanente en Francia si:
a. Anuncia sus productos en “Le Figaro”, donde los lectores pueden rellenar el cupon de pedido y enviarlos a la empresa, que sirve los productos contra reembolso.
b. Tiene una oficina en París solo para recoger información del mercado
c. Tiene un local en Lyon sólo para exponer los productos a la venta
d. Tiene un apoderado en Francia que toma ciertas decisiones
e. Abre un almacén en Persignan para atender cambios de productos defectuosos.
f. Crean una página web en francés dedicada exclusivamente al mercado francés.
g. Coloca el servidor de los pedidos franceses en un Data Center de Marsella.

3- PRETSBURY Ltd. finalmente ha decidido invertir en Alemania a través de una filial. Le preocupan varias cosas:
a. Le interesa invertir mediante ampliación de capital o préstamo, tanto a nivel tributario como a nivel de imagen para conseguir financiación?
b. No le hubiera interesado más invertir mediante cuentas de participación con un socio local?
c. Cuando la filial alemana tenga beneficios, los dividendos procedentes de la matriz tributarán en Alemania si PRETSBURY tiene en el 2009 más del 10%, aplicando la Directiva Matriz-Filial, dando igual lo que diga la norma interna alemana?.
d. Dado que el IS de la filial alemana es mayor que el de la matriz inglesa (PRETSBURY), tiene esta un crédito fiscal y no pagará impuestos la matriz inglesa?.
e. La matriz de la inglesa es una sociedad de Panama, considerada por muchos países como paraíso fiscal. Habrá retención por los dividendos de PRETSBURY?.
f. Si entre la sociedad de Panama y PRETSBURY se interpone una ETVE española, es más beneficioso para el Grupo?.

4- Indira, residente en la India, ha leido sobre las ventajas de la Directiva Matriz-Filial para sus inversiones en Italia. Y sabe que uno de los requisitos es que el Grupo esté finalmente controlado por residentes en la Unión Europea, pues en caso contrario se aplicaría el Convenio, y desde Italia habría retención. Indira ha ideado lo siguiente, qué os parece la mejor solución?:
a. La accionista de sus sociedades activas italianas es una sociedad holding holandesa, cuyos derechos políticos los ostenta una Fundación privada holadesa y los económicos una sociedad de Andorra, país que no es miembro de la Unión Europea.
b. La accionista de sus sociedades activas italianas es una sociedad holding inglesa (con administrador fiduciario inglés o panameño), cuyos derechos políticos los detenta otra sociedad europea fiduciaria, y los económicos una sociedad de Belice.

5- MIKE está preocupado porque sus hijos son un poco irresponsables y cree que podrían dilapidar la fortuna que él ha ido amasando los últimos 40 años. Se esta planteando algunas soluciones, y precisa que le ayudéis en la búsqueda de la mejor:
a. Crear una Fundación de Interés Privado en Panama (la de Lichenstein tiene muy mala fama últimamente)
b. Crear un Trust en Jersey
c. Invertir a través de un Seguro de Vida de una compañía de seguros de Luxemburgo en acciones cotizadas
d. Constituir una LLC en Delaware con un pacto de accionistas pensando en su sucesión.


6- Jorge tiene un proyecto empresarial internacional muy ambicioso, y precisa capital, pero en un ambiente de “credit crunch” como el actual no consigue financiación bancaria. Hay posibles socios extranjeros interesados, pero él no quiere perder el control, por lo que se plantea las siguientes alternativas, y precisa de vuestro consejo para elegir la mejor:
a. Una Limited Partnership (LP) o Limited Liability Partership (LLP) inglesa
b. Una sociedad PLC inglesa que cotice en los mercados AIM o PLUS.
c. Una entidad de capital riesgo español
d. Independientemente de todo lo anterior, agrupar a los inversores en una LLC americana.

7- John es un cirujano independiente prestigioso en Estados Unidos. Cada año debe subir sus honorarios porque la compañía de Seguros que le cubre en caso de una sentencia por malpractica profesional le sube constantemente los precios de su poliza. Ahora le acaba de comunicar la Compañía que sólo le cubrirá 1 millón de dolares al año. John tiene 5 hijos, un apartamento en Manhattan y un rancho en Minesota. Necesita que le aconsejeis cómo proteger sus bienes.

8- La empresa NICOR, no residente en España, transmite su participación en una empresa española cuyo principal activo es un inmueble situado en España. Cuáles serían sus tributos directos e indirectos si la empresa NICOR es residente en Luxemburgo, Holanda o Mongolia, país este último sin convenio con España?.

9- Resulta que el dueño de más del 50% de NICOR es Luis y su familia, residente español. Luis ha oído decir que, al no tratarse de una actividad empresarial, sino pasiva, se le aplicaría la “transparencia fiscal internacional”, y por tanto tributaría por IRPF o IS. Es cierto?.