Tax expert predicts less impact from NDO than first amnesty
Wednesday 6th January 2010, 2:30PM GMT.
THE latest UK tax amnesty will not have had the same impact as the first one three years ago, according to one local tax expert.
HM Revenue and Customs’ new disclosure opportunity closed at midnight on Monday and although the original deadline for people avoiding tax with offshore accounts to come clean was extended from the end of November, KPMG tax partner Tony Mancini (pictured) believes that would have made little difference.
Firstly, many of the 300 banks contacted by HMRC to disclose details have not advised their clients of the facility as they are appealing against the NDO itself and as a result will not have handed over any details and, secondly, many who would have disclosed would probably have done so in 2007.
‘From a Channel Islands perspective there is going to be a lot less people who haven’t disclosed by now,’ said Mr Mancini.
‘And from our experience at KPMG it is a lot quieter this time around.
‘Before, we had been contacted by a number of trust companies, for example, whose clients have got accounts here and who wanted to make disclosures, but there has been a lot less activity this time.’
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details
- 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
The article states
“many of the 300 banks contacted by HMRC to disclose details have not advised their clients of the facility as they are appealing against the NDO itself and as a result will not have handed over any details”
Why?
If there is any risk of harbouring criminal evaders then surely it’s worth disclosing rather than be seen to facilitate the crime?
The UBS v IRS recent fight over releasing details of US non-tax paying accounts highlights the priorities of the multinat finance corps, and how they hide behind a jurisdiction’s legal or constitutional framework to undermine other jurisdictions’ laws.
Is under this basis that an appeal is being made?
Let’s hope the reason for ‘less impact’ is the second point made, and that there is political pressure from Deputies on the finance houses to rid their books of the perpetrators of crime that pose further risks to Guernsey’s reputation as a whole, if not as a ‘respected’ OFC.
Report abuse