Tax haven reviewer to reveal all at watchdog event
Posted on Tue, 12/22/2009 - 03:21 in Business
(CNS): Well known to many in the Cayman Islands, Michael Foot, the author of the UK’s report on the state of its OT’s finances will be lifting the lid on his findings when he attends the OffshoreAlert conference in Miami next year. Only one of the interesting line-up of ‘headline acts’ Foot, will join among others, best selling crime author Jeffrey Robinson and Allen Stanford’s former financial adviser Charles Rawl. Organisers of the conference said that 2010 promised as ever to look at the good and the bad in the financial industry.
Former financial adviser for Allen Stanford's $8 billion offshore banking group, Charles Rawl blew the whistle to US authorities, leading to the collapse of one of the biggest-ever offshore frauds. Jeffrey Robinson the best-selling author of books like 'The Laundrymen’ and an expert on organized crime, fraud and money laundering will reveal his insight into the offshore world and Foot the man who conducted the UK’s review for Britain’s potential liabilities where its overseas territories were concerned promises to give a close up on his findings.
Returning speakers also include Martin Kenney and Ed Davis, who are two of the world's foremost authorities on asset recovery – one of the few sectors of the global economy that is currently booming, and Bob Roach, who is Counsel & Chief Investigator to US Senator Carl Levin's investigations committee.
The conference takes place 2-4 May at the Ritz-Carlton, South Beach and David Marchant the publisher of offshore alert described it as the most credible event about Offshore Financial Centres because of the diversity and the quality of speakers and topics as well as its independence.
“Every other offshore-specific conference I know of comprises people in the industry getting up and telling each other how wonderful they are. What use is that to anyone? The OffshoreAlert Conference deals in reality, not fantasy. We look at the good and the bad,” Marchant stated.
“Where else can you attend an event where, as in 2009, you could have mingled with the person in charge of the IRS’ offshore programs and the UBS investigation, the head of tax at the OECD, US Senator Carl Levin’s chief investigator, attorneys who represent the best-known tax dodgers and professionals who set up and administer complex offshore financial structures? We had 275 registrants from 29 countries and the conference was covered by 19 reporters from seven countries, including reporters from The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Bloomberg, and Reuters, to name but a few.”
He said it was exactly the sort of independent event that offshore leaders need to participate in as part of their general effort to improve the image of OFCs to the wider world and meet those who oppose them. Marchant said there fore he was disappointed that for the second consecutive year, the chair of Cayman Finance, Anthony Travers turned down a speaking invitation to the event.
Marchant said that Travers had been given 11 months notice of the 2010 conference. “Why someone whose mandate to spread Cayman’s message across to the international community would turn down a speaking engagement at the leading offshore conference is a mystery to me. He really ought to get out of his comfort zone,” he said.
“When OffshoreAlert first burst onto the scene in 1997, Cayman’s establishment regarded the newsletter as ‘Public Enemy Number One’, apparently for no other reason than it was exposing financial crime. That was a truly pitiful situation that reflected very poorly on Cayman. However, the jurisdiction has matured significantly since then and OffshoreAlert is now widely respected on the island.”
Email this page
Comment Policy
The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of CNS or any individual staff member. All comments are posted subject to approval by CNS. Read more
Recent Comments
- what does this have to do
3 hours 9 min ago - Anon 9:33: Good one! You
3 hours 9 min ago - ALL Caymanians have
3 hours 14 min ago - surprising from
3 hours 19 min ago - Stop hating.
3 hours 33 min ago - You too? What's your excuse
4 hours 2 min ago - How about Steve or Theresa?
4 hours 6 min ago - HOORAY ! well done to all of
4 hours 7 min ago - What will it take for the
4 hours 9 min ago - We don't hold them
4 hours 18 min ago
Search
Join Our Mailing List
Follow CNS via ...
Facebook Twitter RSS
Comments
Regardless of whether you
Regardless of whether you like me or not, or appreciate the work being done by OffshoreAlert or not, I leave you with this as a final posting and I hope that it strikes a chord with at least some of you.
There are many positive aspects of the Cayman Islands as an international business centre but, as with any jurisdiction (onshore or offshore), there are also negative aspects.
The consequences of ignoring the negatives have never been more dire than they are currently due to the economy, the ever-growing need for spend-happy governments of major countries to fund their activities, and the raised awareness of serious financial crime, the latter of which puts pressure on law enforcement and regulators to prosecute misdeeds more vigorously.
On the publicity-side, I deal with journalists from all over the world, at the regional, national and international levels, on a regular basis and most of them know virtually nothing about how ofshore financial centres operate. What little they do know is almost always negative and all complain that trying to obtain information from anyone in OFCs is all but impossible.
It is imperative for the long-term well-being of the Cayman Islands that the jurisdiction responds to the immense challenges it faces in a progressive manner, learns what it can do to improve and engages the international community in a mature and professional manner.
Dear Mr. Marchant, If you had
Dear Mr. Marchant,
If you had only started off on this tone at the beginning of this thread people may have reacted differently to you. But you instead you came across as arrogant and patronising. Sorry but that was the impression you created. Have a good conference, and please remember that it is not the case that people are either for you or for worldwide fraud. If you bear that in mind when people question you in the future it may result in bridges being mended rather than burned down as happened over the last few days.
All the best in 2010.
Abração
GFI
Thank you David.
Thank you David. Unfortunately, like everywhere else, you're going to run into some true boneheads, expat and Caymanians alike. It's disgusting to see the personal attacks leveled against you and your publication, and the many juvenile postings. Everyone cries for greater government/private sector transparency, yet behave like complete idiots when asked a simple question.
Mr Marchant you should
Mr Marchant you should perhaps change your publication title to
" Mein Rant"
Mr Marchant, you seem to have
Mr Marchant,
you seem to have big issue with Mr Travers and have cut off your nose to spite your face?
smacks of desperation really?
all you have really done is highlighted the fact that you are desperate for the endorsement of Mr Travers by him speaking at your conference - and that it just won't be the same without him.
which - cemented by your rather irrational posting - he clearly won't be...
Mr Marchant seems to be
Mr Marchant seems to be having a childish trantrum and throwing all of his toys out of his cot.
Unprofessional would be an understatement.
He has been struggling for credibility for this conference for years, and was doing a pretty good job.
He has lost all of that hard won credibility in one silly and totally unexplainable tantrum.
Cayman Finance has provided
Cayman Finance has provided speakers to, and additionally been a sponsor of, the OA conference for the past 2 years.
Just last year our current Vice-Chairman, and former Chairman, Eduardo D'Angelo P. Silva gave two speeches to the conference in Miami that were very well received and widely quoted in the international press.
The fact that Mr. Marchant fails to supply this rather essential information while implying our organisation is somehow avoiding his conference because it is not in our 'comfort zone' is intentionally misleading and disrespectful. It is also self serving as he attempts to promote this conference as 'the' leading offshore conference which it clearly is not. Any 'respect' that Mr. Marchant believes he has won in Cayman has most likely been lost with these inaccurate and inappropriate representations.
Current Chairman Anthony Travers has been incredibly active on the international stage since his election to the board. He has conducted interviews with reporters from around the globe and appeared on live television and radio broadcasts with no preconditions or limitations on questions. Cayman Finance welcomes such opportunities since all available facts and evidence support our claims of being a world class financial centre with an excellent record of compliance, transparency, and cooperation.
More importantly Mr. Travers and Cayman Finance, in partnership with the Cayman Islands Government, have been engaged in high level talks with foreign governments such as the US and the UK to ensure any legislative action they may be considering is undertaken with full and proper supporting facts about our jurisdiction and not based on flawed or biased information. The success of these initiatives have been noted in recent news articles and can be found on our website. These are far more important activities than attending every minor conference where our messages have already been delivered many times over.
Furthermore, Cayman Finance has no obligation to present at each and every conference that Mr. Marchant chooses to put on. And this latest behaviour by Mr. Marchant has caused us to question his integrity and character. As a result Cayman Finance will be terminating its sponsorship of the OA conference and disassociating itself completely with OA and Mr. Marchant.
Weekend in Miami attending a
Weekend in Miami attending a conference . . . $6,000.
Hour of attorney's time to write a letter saying Offshore Alert will dodge paying any judgments against it in Cayman . . . .$500.
Watching David Marchant get snubbed in public and throwing his toys out of the pram . . .PRICELESS
What an immature remark. Is
What an immature remark. Is this what the Cayman financial community is worthy of. I think not.
It is quite funny though.
It is quite funny though.
It is reasonable to assume
It is reasonable to assume that this was written by, or upon the instruction of, Tony Travers.
Firstly, it is highly amusing to me that the writer is so wrapped up in himself or herself that he or she cannot see the sheer hypocrisy in attacking my "integrity and character" while hiding behind anonymity.
To correct the poster, CIFSA has provided speakers for far longer than two years. In fact, I remember well that, in Cayman's time of need in 2004 after Hurricane Ivan had struck, I created a special slot at short notice to allow Eduardo D'Angelo Silva, someone whom I like and think is an excellent ambassador for the island to come and speak to assure attendees that Cayman was still open for business.
Now, in the first year that Tony Travers has taken over as Chairman, Cayman Finance has taken the bone-headed decision that it does not want to be associated with one of the biggest and certainly the most prominent and widely-reported about offshore conference. Is this a case of Travers' apparently-gargantuan ego being bruised so Cayman must suffer?
Re. "The fact that Mr. Marchant fails to supply this rather essential information while implying our organisation is somehow avoiding his conference because it is not in our 'comfort zone' is intentionally misleading and disrespectful."
I did not state or imply that Cayman Finance was avoiding the conference and no reasonable or intelligent person could possibly have inferred this from anything I have said or written. I stated that Tony Travers had turned down a speaking invitation.
Although you seem to think so, Tony Travers is not the be all and end all of Cayman Finance. I have an excellent relationship with several members of Cayman Finance and will continue to do so.
Your immature response to some honest debate makes me believe that Cayman Finance is not being well-led at the moment.
You are quickly losing any
You are quickly losing any shred of credibility you and your publication may have had with me. TT declined your invitation to your party. Get over it, stop the childishness.
The post you are referring to
The post you are referring to is not listed as anonymous, but in fact is clearly an submitted on behalf Cayman Finance.
The writer did indeed post
The writer did indeed post this message anonymously, i.e. the name of the person who wrote the message is not disclosed.
Maybe you could sue if it
Maybe you could sue if it wasn't "under a law that is abhorrent to any genuinely-civilised person" in a "lesser-developed country which had laws that were abhorrent to a civilised person".
By you never did start to explain why Cayman has an "anti-truth libel law". Care to expand?
It was written on behalf of
It was written on behalf of Cayman Finance as a collective body so it is NOT anonymous
Mr Marchant why do you
Mr Marchant why do you assume Tony Travers was behind the response from Cayman Finance - Now you are insulting the board members of Cayman Finance - it may not have occured to you that some of the content with regards your postings and the original article is not the way myself and other members of the financial / legal community see things.
You appear to have a serious case of paranoia and one wonders whether it is infact in OA best interests to have someone like you at the helm-
Perhaps its time to take a long holiday - ( please dont come to Cayman )
David Marchant, the fact of
David Marchant, the fact of the matter is that if they can't kill the message, they: 1. distort the message 2. arrive to unreasonable conclusions 3. side-track the discussion 4. fabricate evidence that is not there 5. go after the messenger And yet again, who in their right mind would be opposed to a publication that makes an honest attempt at keeping some of these financial giants honest? It's not like your publication deals with Ma and Pa's corner grocery store, as some (ie. Girl who Likes to Cry Wolf) would like to lead the readers to believe...
Au revoir, are you David
Au revoir, are you David Marchant's mother?
No, actually I'm his mother's
No, actually I'm his mother's sister's cousin, once removed. But don't worry about it, you go on to support the crooks of the world, and I'll support those who try to expose them.
Give me a "c", give me a
Give me a "c", give me a "r", . . .
Who has said anything about supporting crooks other than David Marchant and Au Revoir?
Saying that I bet the crooks throw better weekends in Miami . . . . ;)
I'm sure they do throw better
I'm sure they do throw better weekends in Miami, but they all stash their money in Cayman. :) Don't worry, soon you'll be just another insignificant, tiny, murder-plagued island. Oops, you're already there, aren't you?.
Given the significant role
Given the significant role that the financial service industry plays in the Cayman Islands, it is noteworthy that the Cayman Islands are not represented. This conference isn't about "shaming" the participants, but rather to provide all participants in the industry (the good, the bad, and the ugly) with an opportunity to meet, share ideas, and find ways to improve practices. Unless one has something to hide or to fear, there is no reason for the Cayman Islands not to be represented. Those who argue that Mr. Travers is somehow too good to participate in a conference which deals in "tabloid journalism", one ought to consider that in 2009 there were a number of far more influential and powerful attendees.
It is also noteworthy that no
It is also noteworthy that no credible figurehead in the Cayman industry has identiifed themselves on this site as supporting OA or denying the allegation that it should be considered a tabloid publication.
1. Just as you have
1. Just as you have identified yourself, right?
2. Do you know of anyone on a work permit who is willing to rock the boat?
3. Anything that is in any way critical of an industry is not going to be given any merit or publicity by that industry...
4. This is Cayman, remember? Transperancy, responding to criticism, supporting "unpopular" causes which may threaten its livelyhood etc. is not its forte...
Just a quick question, how
Just a quick question, how much does it cost to attend this conference for information that will be publicly available the next day?
Is this the only post that
Is this the only post that David "must have the last word" Marchant is not answering?
It makes no difference how
It makes no difference how much it costs; I don't imagine it costs any more than half of any of McChavez' recent globetrotting trips. It certainly costs less than any of government's past and more recent failed initiatives, adventures, etc. As for the information being publicly available the next day for free -- irrelevant. The financial service industry is one of the pillars that sustains Cayman and its population - the Cayman Islands should therefore have been represented.
Well stated au revoir. Having
Well stated au revoir. Having attended many conferences I always note that the conference is well supported by the Cayman Financial Industry and in most years several speakers have been supplied by them.
You may call the newsletter what you wish, tabloid or not; it makes no difference. It is an intersting tool in identifying the bad guys such as Stanford, which David did long ago. As I stated in an earlier message why knock David. After all he is only the messanger.
"When a [libel] action is
"When a [libel] action is brought, there is a thought-process involved that goes something like this: 1. How credible is the jurisdiction in which the action has been brought?; 2. How credible is the jurisdiction's libel law?; 3. How much will it cost to defend?; 4. Would a default judgment be enforceable in the USA, which is the only jurisdiction in which OffshoreAlert is incorporated? and 5. What is the reputational damage to me and my company should a default judgment be entered?"
Wow - whether Offshore Alert can show it has a justifiable basis for its allegations appears NOWHERE! Says a lot.
I find it incredible that
I find it incredible that you're so offended and up-in-arms about a publication that is trying to expose corrupt and under-handed practices; unless of course, you were exposed in previous publishings for some reason or another; and the reason couldn't have been all that good... Hmmh, makes you wonder.
It somehow offends you that you may not be able to sue OA and collect... yet, reverse the situation and see how easy it is to sue and collect in the Cayman Islands - near to impossible. Judge Henderson received his award of 1.2 million, for wrongful arrest, only because the governor ordered that the money be paid out. Had it been any other ordinary citizen, good luck with collecting...
I for one am concerned about
I for one am concerned about a publication which appears to be shirking responsibility for making incorrect accusations. That is the quite disturbing outcome of the postings from the publisher, who, from what he had written himself, does not seem to care if he is subject to a hypothetical future judgment of a Cayman Court since he will not pay out on any Cayman judgment. This judgment could represent an allegation that could ruin a Cayman business or cost Caymanians jobs. That is what I find very disturbing from a man who claims to be a friend of Cayman.
Should call yourself Girl who
Should call yourself Girl who likes to cry Wolf - nice attempt to divert the discussion. 1. The focus of the article was about Mr. Travers not attending this conference. 2. Even if your claim has some basis, which it doesn't (see explanation below as to why a "blanket yes" answer to judgements is not possible), Mr. Travers could have attended this conference and made your "hypothetical future judgements" of a Cayman Court the focus of his speech. 3. Hypothetical analyses of potential future judgements are irrelevant, far too complicated, and serve little value to the main point of the discussion; that being that the Cayman Islands are not being represented at an important conference.
It's in the nature of threads
It's in the nature of threads like this to get off topic. A good example might be your characterisation of the focus of the article being " about Mr. Travers not attending this conference."
The article contains 9 paragraphs. The first 6 are puff pieces to promote the conference. Travers' name does not appear until the 7th paragraph and then in a context which I interpret as a none too subtle attempt to shame Travers into speaking, if not in 2010, then later. Good luck with that.
No one would dispute that every offshore jurisdiction, Cayman included, attracts dodgy business, but it is a small part of the total; the vast majority of business in Cayman is legit and passes the sniff test. And this is where the interests of OffshoreAlert and Cayman/Travers part company.
OffshoreAlert is only interested in the dodgy stuff. It is not interested in the solid, clean business. There are few subscriptions to be had or conference attendees to attract by explaining that the bulk of what Cayman does is clean. It's not even really interested in what Cayman does to weed out the suspect business. This is not what keeps bringing the punters back. Exposing the dodgy client and service provider is OffshoreAlerts raison d'etre, which is fine, but I fail to see why Travers not wanting to assist in this limited brief raises any eyebrows.
Some of the reasons put forward for Cayman to be represented deserve closer scrutiny. For example Mr. Marchant suggests participation may help support Cayman's flagging image, but would it? Cayman's image has taken a few knocks of late, from Bush declaring us broke, through the farce of Operation Tempura and the largely unfounded attacks by Gordon Brown and crew, but how are these addressed at a conference promoted by an organisation specialising in " exposing serious financial crime?" In my view the danger of guilt by association with this conference and the potential for mere attendance to be misinterpreted is just not worth it. Mr. Marchant does not agree with this position and that's his prerogative, but he is hardly impartial.
Our conference is primarily
Our conference is primarily an educational event where people with vested interests can meet and exchange information about OFCs. We look at all aspects of doing business offshore. As anyone who has attended our event can testify to, it is certainly not an anti-offshore event and, if it were, we would not have so many offshore-resident attendees. Some of our sessions deal with plotting the way forward for OFCs in the modern era.
About half of our attendees live in offshore financial centres and, outside of the USA, Cayman provides more attendees than any other country.
The conference is a high-quality event and we bring together people who normally would never meet (people who, on the surface, appear to be on different sides of the fence).
It is exactly the sort of event that Tony Travers, if he truly does represent the interests of Cayman's offshore sector, should be attending. It would certainly be a better way for him to spend his time than writing silly letters to Barack Obama and throwing gratuitous insults at the OECD. If I were a member of Cayman Finance, I would be very concerned about such conduct.
Cayman's financial sector has to decide whether it wants to go back to the dark, old days in which dinosaurs wrapped up in a cloak of parochialism drove the jurisdiction towards the end of the cliff or whether it wants to enter the new era in a more thoughtful, mature and enlightened manner.
Your conference may or may
Your conference may or may not be a high-quality event, I don't know. I did learn long ago, though, not to rely too much on the assessment of an individual with an obvious vested interest, so you'll understand if I wait for the reviews before subscribing to your opinion.
I am not anti-OffshoreAlert, it serves a function. But I don't see that this provides a platform for you to challenge Travers' competence when assessing what is and isn't best for Cayman. Nor do I accept that Travers' refusal to speak at your conference somehow signals a return to the "dark old days." You are in danger of attributing far too much significance to Travers' decision and far too much influence to your organisation.
Well said !!!
Well said !!!
Mr Marchant did Santa just
Mr Marchant did Santa just leave you a lump of coal
No, actually. Santa left me a
No, actually. Santa left me a copy of Dale Carnegie's book 'How to Win Friends and Influence People'.
I decided to come here and try out the techniques.
Judging by how easily I have won everyone over to my viewpoint, the book clearly works!!
I hope you kept the receipt.
I hope you kept the receipt. I would ask for a refund.
Mr Marchant you clearly have
Mr Marchant you clearly have an issue with Tony Travers - You are doing yourself no favours in what can only be seen as a very personal attack on him -I am all for free speech etc however you seem to be hell bent on insulting this man at every opportunity .
I agree with previous posters - Who made you God that you have a divine right to dictate what people choose to do and not to do -
If your behaviour is represenative of the way your publication (gutter press) operates then no wonder he is giving it a body swerve
No intelligent or reasonable
No intelligent or reasonable person could draw the conclusions from my messages that you have drawn.
Really? Here is how the
Really? Here is how the conclusion was drawn:
1) You said that you would not respond to a defamation suit in Cayman.
2) You said that you considered a judgment against you in Cayman unenforceable and it would go unpaid.
3) Hypothetically a Cayman business is harmed by an unjustifiable allegation and jobs are lost.
4) That Cayman business, harmed by a publication published in Cayman to Caymanian subscribers by yourself for a fee, will not get compensation because of your statements in 1 and 2.
Why is the chain from 1 to 4 lacking intelligence or reason? It looks like the logical result of your own propositions.
You stated that OffshoreAlert
You stated that OffshoreAlert was "shirking responsibility for making incorrect accusations" and that the publisher (i.e. me) "does not seem to care if he is subject to a hypothetical future judgment of a Cayman Court since he will not pay out on any Cayman judgment".
No intelligent or reasonable person could possibly believe that a publication defending every libel action brought against it (in five separate jurisdictions, one of which was Cayman) and spending in excess of $500,000 in legal fees in the process is an example of "shirking responsibility".
No intelligent or reasonable person could possibly construe my comments as being an example of me 'not caring'.
No intelligent or reasonable person could possibly interpret a decision by me not to defend myself against any third-world laws (e.g. Britain's libel law, a criminal's best friend) as evidence that the accusations contained in an article are "incorrect".
I can assure you that the only 'Cayman jobs' being lost as a result of exposes by OffshoreAlert are those that involve dishonesty and illegality. Such people, and perhaps you are one of them, deserve to be out of work. Long may they remain unemployed.
OffshoreAlert will honor its legal obligations. A default judgment obtained under a law that is abhorrent to any genuinely-civilised person does not constitute a legal obligation in the USA.
Very well said! au revoir
Very well said! au revoir
Thank you - likewise, to your
Thank you - likewise, to your previous posts...
Re. "Wow - whether Offshore
Re. "Wow - whether Offshore Alert can show it has a justifiable basis for its allegations appears NOWHERE! Says a lot."
That thought-process takes place before an article is published, not after an action is brought. That should go without saying. It is comical that you should think I only concern myself with the evidence after an action is brought.
The question remains: Why
The question remains: Why would someone whose remit is, in part, to improve Cayman's flagging image in the international financial community turn down a speaking engagement for the biggest offshore conference that is reported on by the world's biggest news organizations?
If the only or principal reason is that it is because OffshoreAlert specializes in exposing serious financial crime then I would find that bizarre (in the extreme) and insightful.
Mr Marchant even on his worst
Mr Marchant even on his worst day I am certain Tony Travers would wipe the floor with you - having seen the man in action on many occasions over the years as a keynote and also debating / fielding questions with regards the offshore industry.
I dont know what you are trying to achieve by harping on about the fact he declined your invitation - I dont for one minute believe that it is" bizarre in the extreme and insightful "
He has chosen not to accept your invitation and that is good enough for me .
You are behaving like a cyber space bully - there are others in Cayman and elsewhere I am sure who if you invited would also turn you down You are not Queen of the Commonwealth -
Mr. Travers wasn't invited to
Mr. Travers wasn't invited to "wipe the floor" with anyone; he was invited to give a speech. His absence can be viewed with some skepticism, as there are a number of prominent people attending this conference. The cyber bully is not Mr. Marchant, but rather those trying to intimidate him for exposing serious financial fraud. If you believe that Cayman is somehow immune from corruption, financial fraud, et al, you're living in some other universe.
Post new comment