Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace

A Lot of Our Money Is Buried in the Cayman Islands -- Let's Get It Back

By David Cay Johnston, The Nation. Posted May 16, 2009.


Obama and Congress must get tougher on offshore tax cheats -- prosecute them as criminals and require full payment.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The Cayman Islands are well known to those seeking sun, sand and sea--and for their hospitality to US corporations seeking to escape taxes, launder money and use other discreet financial services. The islands' tax dodgers help multinational corporations move jobs offshore; they also give aid and comfort to terrorists, drug dealers and divorcing spouses trying to hide money. Honest taxpayers have to make up for the revenues lost through this offshore cheating in three ways: we pay more in taxes, we get fewer government services and we incur rising government debt. Interest on that debt, which doubled under the Bush administration, now equals all the individual income taxes paid from New Year's to around June 10. And that cost means less government investment in research, education and the infrastructure on which commerce depends. Untaxed money hiding in the Caymans and other tax havens means the rest of us pay a higher price for less civilization.

In short, the Caymans, and other tax havens, are parasites that weaken the United States and other developed nations.

President Obama proposed on May 4 to crack down on offshore tax cheating; that proposal does not go nearly far enough. Instead of settling for a dime on the dollar, as Obama's plan would do, let's get serious about offshore tax cheating, both legalized and criminal. Let's do what we did to halt the imagined threats of communists in Grenada, depose a drug-dealing president in Panama and find those imaginary weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. Let's invade the Caymans!

The islands, which belong to Britain, have no military and just 300 or so police. An invasion force composed of tax lawyers, forensic auditors and a handful of computer technicians could execute a hostile takeover without firing a shot.

The Caymans are not really a country; they are a law firm posing as one. More than 12,000 "companies" operate out of a single building known as Ugland House, home to the law firm Maples & Calder. As Obama put it, "Either this is the largest building in the world or the largest tax scam." Under Caymans law these companies are barred from doing any business in the Caymans except hiding assets and profits. That means shares of stock, bonds and cash may technically be owned in the Caymans--which claims to be the world's fifth-largest center of bank deposits--but are really housed in New York, Greenwich, Houston, San Francisco. There is $1.9 trillion in bank deposits in the Caymans--money actually invested in the United States and other countries but invisible to the IRS.

The Clinton administration enabled this through a rule known as "check the box," which helped companies funnel profits into untaxed havens. US tax rules, liberally expanded by the Bush administration, enabled frauds like Enron to create hundreds of paper companies in the Caymans and other tax havens like Liechtenstein, Turks and Caicos, and the Isle of Man. Enron, as I revealed in a New York Times story in January 2002, paid no taxes because it had created hundreds of paper companies in these places. A subsequent investigation by the Congressional Joint Committee on Taxation uncovered internal documents describing Enron's tax department as a "profit center." Dick Cheney's Halliburton subsidiary, KBR--the old Kellogg Brown & Root construction company--has at least 21,000 employees paid via Caymans subsidiaries to escape taxes. KBR hired executives through these paper companies, enabling them to evade Social Security and Medicare taxes on their salaries and bonuses, much of which the taxpayers provided through Pentagon contracts.


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: barack obama, banking, cayman islands, tax evasion, finance industry, tax haven

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Corporate Accountability and WorkPlace! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
Tax all transfers to/from such tax havens and USA
Posted by: LeonBNJ on May 16, 2009 5:19 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Perhaps one approach would be to put in a small tax, like 1-2% on all transfers of money over $1000 to/from the USA and such tax dodging states. This would pay for the enforcement, allow tracking of all transfers of significant amounts for income/corporate taxation opportunies and reduce the benefits of them.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Its the banks in Israel
Posted by: weathered on May 16, 2009 5:41 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
that should concern us even more.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Rusta
Posted by: Rusta on May 16, 2009 6:19 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It is such an American view to suggest invading Cayman. You invaded Iraq for Oil. The US is only 1 country out of 220 in the world. There are more Shell Corporations in Delaware than in Cayman.

Financial Capital flows to the area of least resistance and just because the US cannot get it right, doesn't mean they have the right to interfere with other soveriegn nations.

The US should fix their own Tax Regimes.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: usta Posted by: Rain53
Why this will NEVER happen
Posted by: AMERICAN VETERAN on May 16, 2009 6:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The ones who have $$$$$$$$ in banks in the Caymans and other places like it are the ones who OWN our government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Politicians love the Caymans
Posted by: alturn on May 16, 2009 7:57 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I worked against the theft of $1 billion of prime coastal public land (given away for free with hundreds of millions in taxpayer subsidies). The developer's partner was a Delaware LLC (which requires no disclosure of ownership) with operations in the Caymans. That LLC is how half the profits from the development deal ended up tax-free in politicians' and their best friends pockets, while phony deal losses were written off on their federal tax returns.

The amount of money lost is probably estimated low in this article. Every crook doing business with the government knows about the Caymans and uses it to make their government contract profits tax-free. Closing offshore money laundering operations such as the Caymans should be a top priority in the battle to return the government to the people.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the rich can't hide their money
Posted by: bjackle2@msn.com on May 16, 2009 8:12 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
senator paul wellstone was trying to take this on when his plane "crashed"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

American Express
Posted by: rg on May 16, 2009 8:17 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
is one of the companies that stashes money in the Caymans. They recently restructured so that they meet the requirements of the definition of a bank so that they could get bailout money from the U.S. government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: American Express Posted by: masthead
Caymans
Posted by: Sir Jim on May 16, 2009 8:25 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
There can more there than tax money potentially involved.
It's a haven.
The proceeds of rampant non-prosecuted
white collar crime can be stashed there
and in other places like it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why Do They Need A Law?
Posted by: FoonTheElder on May 16, 2009 8:32 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
It amazes me that they all of a sudden need a law to go after sham tax shelters, which is all that these are.

The IRS has determined that any tax shelters that Americans use in the U.S. are considered to not have 'economic substance'. This means that they exist to avoid taxes, not for any legitimate business purpose.

Now tell me what legitimate business purpose does any giant corporation have in the Caymans, Channel Islands, Liechtenstein, etc? Are they doing anything there but avoiding taxes? Of course not.

The laws already exist to prosecute these companies. It is just politically dangerous to do so when the same corporations own the government.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Why Do They Need A Law? Posted by: JSquercia
Cayman Islands Not the Problem
Posted by: chirho33 on May 16, 2009 9:18 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The Cayman Islands are not the problem. The cumbersome, obscure U.S. tax laws are the problem. Our tax system is inequitable and unfair, both to the individual and the corporate taxpayer. What this article gets wrong is that many companies incorporate in U.S.-based tax havens: Delaware, South Dakota, Nevada, e.g., and do a pretty good job of avoiding astronomical tax bills. If I had $10,000,000 and I wanted to protect it from the double, triple and quadruple tax penalties that our current tax system imposes, I would very much consider incorporating as a shell company overseas and move my money likewise. It's not that I don't want to pay my fare share. I just don't want to keep paying taxes on income or investments that I should only be taxed on once. It's time to completely do away with the IRS and redo the American tax system. Taxes are necessary but at least make the taxation just, fair, and equitable.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» Delaware, SD, Nev are Not Tax Havens Posted by: FoonTheElder
I like the idea of an EMP
Posted by: hardwroc on May 16, 2009 10:03 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
We just need to drop an emp bomb in the vicinity and totally ERASE all electronic functions, records and let them all wish they had left it in the banks of their nations.
OR, just simply freeze all assets recorded in these "hideouts" and allow the "rightful owners" come forth to claim their property.

Much like luggage on some international flights, where you must claim your luggage prior to its being loaded onto the plane right on the tarmac. This matches you up with your stuff and anything unclaimed is suspicious and treated as such.
And should an American corp come forth claiming funds in the Caymens, they should be required to explain how so.

I much prefer the choice of merely erasing all records and funds on file. Poof, sorry patriot, your money isn't here now!

You are totally free to offshore your business, but, if you do, you should live offshore. IF India is such a fine place you feel it's a BETTER place to do business, then fine, I hope you like living there. Since your employees live there, you should too. And, since your business there directly competes with and undermines the economy of the US, you sure as hell should not be enjoying the life that the US offers while working against it's very survival. BuBBye Patriot

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Support prosecution of banks laundering money
Posted by: zrants on May 16, 2009 10:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some state prosecutors in New York are investigating banks laundering money for criminals and terrorists, should be press charges soon. The money laundering involves the offshore banks. The best we can hope for right now is action by the courts. The laws are in place. It is up to the courts to enforce them. A few billion or trillion ought to be worth some time and effort. Support these actions any way you can.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't it clear by now . . .
Posted by: yesman on May 16, 2009 2:29 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
. . . that the Obama administration is going to do absolutely NOTHING that will in any way ruffle the feathers of the Wall Street crooks, thieves and scammers. Prosecute them? Hah! This administration is no better than the last one in that regard--it's part of the problem and will coninue to be so. Any solution to our predicament is going to have to be more radical than simply electing a different talking head to appear on TV.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Lew Rockwell Dot Com
Posted by: login@bugmenot.com on May 16, 2009 7:21 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Other people's money, which is allegedly in the Caymans (we can only hope), must be looted as "our money," even if a military invasion is required, and the actual owners of the money put in federal cages. Then their money can be spent on White House dogs or murdering Muslims. Ah yes, the compassionate left.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The author is morally bankrupt. Pull this article.
Posted by: Adam Selene on May 16, 2009 11:06 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Whoever wrote this article is morally bankrupt, and all the commenters who support it ought to be ashamed of themselves for advocating such thuggery. You shall reap what you sow for blood-lusting after another's property.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Why is it so hard to understand . . .?
Posted by: Walks-in-Storms on May 17, 2009 8:20 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Why is it so hard to understand that big corporations do not pay taxes? It is as obvious to anyone as the nose on his face that corporations are in the first place created for the express purpose of avoiding liability for their owners' actions - that including tax liability.

Secondly, it is just as obvious that any tax paid by a corporation is added to its supposed operating costs and handed back to the consumer - which includes the governemnt - in the form of price increase. Why in hell does anyone think prices have increased by ten to twenty times since WW-2?

And then anyone even a little knowledgeable could go on to a dozen more reasons. The tax code - big, big surprise here, in view of the fact that the big (read that "military industrial complex") corporations own the government who taxes - is designed specifically to let IRS decide who pays and what. It is incomprehensible, meaning that only IRS can say what it means (how's that for an obviously unconstitutional law and/or contractually unenforceable deal?).

Does anyone sane actually believe the corporations who own government will tax themselves?

We need first to remove everyone from congress, audit the federal reserve and all the books otherwise (i.e., find out where all the money the Federal Reserve created has gone), and take steps to get all the money back.

How does anyone balance his checkbook and arrange a budget until he knows where all his money is? We're being told by the bank there's eight to ten trillion dollars missing from our checking account and that all we need to do is send more money. Who the hell would do anything as stupid as that?

People brain-washed by a MOCKINGBIRD media, that's who.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do things at the state level
Posted by: BailoutBenny on May 17, 2009 10:11 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rather that forcing people across different states to comply with a federal income tax, all things could be done at the state level. The current system is punitive to people who do not want or need federal aid in the form of entitlement programs. There are really 2 options:

1) Only collect taxes from individuals that WANT to participate in the federal programs. The individuals must opt in to these programs. Things like social security, unemployment, education, etc. should all be opt in programs with the stipulation that participation involves taxation and ALL participants must pay taxes, no free rides.

2) Every state develops and runs their own entitlement programs. Personally I believe this to be the better option and more in line with the original intentions of the Constitution. Each state, acting under its owns sovereign status, can implement entitlement programs and a tax system to pay for them with the approval of its citizens. I believe this option to be most effective and can work for many other issues besides taxation. This could work issues such as abortion, gay "marriage" (I believe marriage to be a religious ceremony and thus dictated by the dogmatic teachings of individual religions, hence the quotation marks. Civil unions, administered by a state and without any religious affiliation, is perfectly fine.), and others.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

susan28@susan28.com
Posted by: susan28 on May 17, 2009 1:54 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we could start recouping this MASSIVE amount of lost taxes by bringing the drug dealers in from the cold; most i've known would love the chance to do business legitimately and would be more than happy to pay their fair share of taxes if we'd stop treating them like criminals and start treating them as what they are: businesspeople engaging in transactions involving a sought-after commodity with consenting adults - or at least that would be the case if they were licensed and had a valuable business to lose from selling to kids, as with alcohol sellers now. in a taxed/licensed scheme the bad apples would be out of business overnight once their illegal supply lines dried up along with most of their customer base as people had other options - that is provided we don't go gung-ho with the neo-Puritanism like Mr Bloomberg and try to eliminate use by sin taxes like we are with cigarettes and cranking the black market back up again.

yearly Drug War expenditure: approx $80b.
lost taxes: approx $80b.
net gain from ending the madness: approx $160b/yr.

notwithstanding the lives saved from taking the illegal cartels out of the game and massive reduction in domestic gang violence as their primary income source is transferred to legitimate vendors, and reduced addiction as children's access to drugs is curtailed.

that's alot of healthcare, including drug treatment and reality-based information campaigns so people can make informed decisions, not ONDCP propaganda which only makes the goverment look stupid and encourages kids to ignore them.

Prohibition = job security for the Cayman crowd..

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

DAVID CAY JOHNSTON IS THE SMARTEST REPUBLICAN IN THE WHOLE UNITED
Posted by: Raymond Emerson on May 17, 2009 10:00 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
States. I wasn't sure I would ever say anything nice about a republican ever again. I must make this exception. You don't possibly think you could run for president. Mr. Johnston?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Prosecute those who Legalized Racketeering and Tax Evasion
Posted by: Purple Girl on May 18, 2009 8:03 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
That all sounds great to go after those who have stashed the cash- but there are legislators who made such things impossible.
Let's go after them first for basically castrating the RICO statutes.
Here's where their 'Trickle Down' mantra proves to have been othing mroe than Reinstituting Feudalism. If the liquidity gained throught blood sweat and tears of the working class is siphoned off into tax sheltered accounts, then the already measely amount designated to Trickle Down is further depleted. So the laws that allowed this siphoning were meant to assure less and less was available to 'trickle down' in the economy. This was economic treason, not just pilferring off the American Economy but slowly Starving it to death. Who didn't see this coming- when it is a fact the wealthy Grant themselves extravagant compensation,Hoard where they can with tax loop holes and then are able to hide the rest?
Really we may find the Upper echelons behaviors Reprehensible and UnPatriotic, but Congress made them Legal, and former Presidents signed off. We are not seeing as many Wall Streeters being prosecuted for acts clearly covered under RICO, and other Organized Crime laws, because they were exempt from being prosecuted as such.
Clinton shouldn't be seen as a criminal for lying to congress about Sex, He should be prosecuted for signing the Economic Treasonous 'Modernization Act'. As for Bush- he has plenty of High Crimes to be prosecuted for- merely add his Tax cuts for the Rich as one more Charge of Betraying this country. In fact I'm sure Reagan could be found guilty within this realm of Economic treason- so try him in absentia. Then nail every SOB who penned these Bills- From Deregulation, to Off shore Accts, to Credit Card & Mortgage loan Sharking practices.That would finally clean out th eCorp Whores who have ruined this country and Derailed our Economy, and negate such 'liberties' from being granted again in the future.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When you see how much Clinton played ball with the status quo should give one pause about Obama
Posted by: RR#1 on May 18, 2009 11:12 PM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
no putting single health payer health plan on the table because the insurance system has already evolved is an insult to everyone's intelligence. If Obama is worried about putting poeple out of work he could hire the rank and file to help adminster the new single payer program.
Cheers,
RR

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the solution is simple
Posted by: Willyb4000 on May 19, 2009 4:06 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
First let's start with the fact that keeping money in places where the tax laws are more favorable is not illegal but it is smart. These corporations are not in business to fund our oversized money hungry government. As individuals we do what we can to keep our tax bill low why would we expect anything different from the companies we invest in. So here is your simple solution; create a tax envoriment in this country that encourages companies to leave their money here or even better yet encourages companies from around the world to move their money here. It is as simple as the "fair tax". Since no business actually pays taxes but instead takes the money it recieves from consumers and passes in along to the taxman let's just cut out the excessively complicated and convoluted tax code make it easy for individauls and tax free for business then we can watch the money roll in.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement