Delegation found keen audiences in the Far East
Tuesday 11th November 2008, 2:30PM GMT.
GUERNSEY’S fiduciary offering has struck a chord with industry professionals in the Far East, according to a leading international private client lawyer.
Nick Jacob (pictured), a partner in tax and private capital at Lawrence Graham LLP, chaired the Guernsey fiduciary seminars during the island delegation’s recent visit to Hong Kong and Shanghai and feels it is starting to get its message across.
‘Historically, many practitioners in China have been familiar with trust and corporate structures from the BVI and Cayman, but less aware of what other international finance centres can offer,’ said Mr Jacob.
‘However, recently this has begun to change with Guernsey in particular starting to get its name known in the region.’
He said high net-worth clients in the Far East needed to be aware how much they could benefit from using trust and corporate services in Guernsey.
‘The island already has a great heritage of excellence in providing fiduciary services internationally and its offering has been enhanced this year through the introduction of new trust and company laws and a new company registry.
‘What we saw at the seminars is that these messages, and particularly the services of the new company registry, really seemed to strike a chord with lawyers, accountants and trust professionals.’
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full, click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
“However, recently this has begun to change with Guernsey in particular starting to get its name known in the region.”
Not just in China, but worldwide; the name ‘Guernsey’ will be synonymous with the Landsbanki Guernsey debacle for many years to come.
Only a pledge by the States to repay LGL savers with public funds, and later recover some of these funds via the Administrator, can even begin to salvage the reputation of Guernsey’s international finance centre, which lies in tatters.
The States really has no choice but to do so – despite its stiff resistance so far.
Report abuse
Mr Ashbey
Fortunately I believe you will be wrong in your forecast of despair.
Why on earth should the taxpayer finance the mistakes of depsitors.
It was hardly a secret that Icelandic banks were an accident waiting to happen, and it was well known the depsoitors were making deposits where there was no deposit protection.
Whilst sympathising with any potential loss the die has been cast, and the bank is now in the hands of the administrator who might well recover much of the deficit, albeit over a period of time.
Report abuse
Mr John
If the Icelandic banks were an accident waiting to happen, why did the GFSC authorise one of them to take deposits in Guernsey? Shouldn’t the GFSC have known better?
I didn’t deposit my savings in LGL, by the way, but rather in the Cheshire BS. I should, of course, have closed my account the moment the GFSC permitted my hard-earned savings to be transferred to a bank that I’d never heard of.
It could take considerable time but the States will be able to recover the public funds used to repay savers via the administrator.
The important thing is for Guernsey to emulate the UK and the Isle of Man and do the honourable thing now – if it wants to salvage its finance centre, that is.
Report abuse
Mr Ashbey
If you read past post of mine I have asked some searching questions as to the GFSC regulation of Guernsey Landsbanki post March of this year. That is after the well documented warnings.
I asked the same questions of Peter Neville and simply got referred to various post 7 OctoberPR statements . So, he didn’t answer the questions all of which you will see on Your Shout.
Report abuse
Mr John
That’s right. The real focus of the investigation should be why the GFSC permitted our safe building society savings to be transferred to an unknown bank with a totally different profile.
The statistics show that £110m was transferred to LGL, whereas client deposits amounted to £117 m at the time of the collapes.
This of course means that over 90 per cent of investors deposited their savings in the Cheshire, and not LGL.
If you take into account accummulated interest the percentage figure is probably higher.
I very much doubt that the over 90 per cent of LGL depositors would have taken their savings anywhere near an Icelandic bank that they’d never heard of, particularly in light of the absence of a deposit compensation scheme.
At the very, very least the States should implement the scheme up to £50,000 retrospectively. Banks would pay future claims and the States would pay LGL claims and eventually recover the funds from the Administrator.
This is what the Isle of Man have done with KSF and I salute them for it.
Report abuse