Mitt Romney avoids U.S tax by using Offshore bank accounts

[oldsport]

The people that told me about offshore accounts were all democrats.  They were 100% correct on what they tell you when you open your account.  You people should get out more.

When did Romney leave Cain Capital?

These idiots.....

 

Barry buys from crooks and hires tax cheats to be Director or Chairman of the Treasury.

[Bison66]

WHAT ROMNEY IS DOING IS PERFECTLY LEGAL.  HOWEVER, JUST HOW DO YOU THINK THE AVERAGE AMERICAN VOTER WHO MAKES $60-70K A YEAR IS GOING TO REACT TO A CANDIDATE WHO MADE $42M IN THE LAST 2 YRS FROM DIVIDENDS ON THAT MONEY AND NOT AS THE RESULT OF ANY WAGES?  YEP, ROMNEY HAS SO MUCH IN COMMON AND CAN RELATE TO THE AVERAGE AMERICAN VOTER. 

FAN,
What you say about the political ramifications of the Cayman funds is absolutely true.  I would add:

The Romney camp is quick to say that taxes were paid on the funds BEFORE they went to Cayman and IF so, all is well - as far as that goes.

First, it would take forensic accounting experts MONTHS, with complete access to all of the records, to verify that claim.

Second, as Iceman and perhaps others have pointed out, another issue is what happens AFTER the money gets to the Caymans.

Living in a "banking secrecy haven" as I do, I can tell you that once the funds are here, there are ways to hide the funds (at least until recently) with COMPLETE ANONYMITY.  Check out this short video in which a young intern talks to lawyers in Panama about setting up a "bearer shares" corporation in which the ACTUAL OWNER IS NOT PUBLICLY RECORDED ANYWHERE: http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=519 

One point not mentioned is that lawyers are subject to prosecution under Panamanian law if they divulge their clients' ownership of such anonymous corporations.  Also, the law makes it almost impossible to "pierce the corporate veil."  (In the US, one can successfully pierce it if a corp cannot produce, for example, minutes of all of its annual meetings and other technical requirements amid suspicions that it is a "front" designed PURELY to protect assets from, for example, liability lawsuits or alimony.  Am I right, Wildman?)

Once the funds are in a banking secrecy haven, Uncle Sam would have to do extraordinary investigations and without the cooperation of the govt and banks of the Cayman Islands, it will likely come up empty. 

Even the Tax Information Accessibility Agreement signed by Panama and US has huge loopholes.  I do not believe there is such an agreement with Cayman.

[iceman4221]

WHAT ROMNEY IS DOING IS PERFECTLY LEGAL.  HOWEVER, JUST HOW DO YOU THINK THE AVERAGE AMERICAN VOTER WHO MAKES $60-70K A YEAR IS GOING TO REACT TO A CANDIDATE WHO MADE $42M IN THE LAST 2 YRS FROM DIVIDENDS ON THAT MONEY AND NOT AS THE RESULT OF ANY WAGES?  YEP, ROMNEY HAS SO MUCH IN COMMON AND CAN RELATE TO THE AVERAGE AMERICAN VOTER. 

FAN,
What you say about the political ramifications of the Cayman funds is absolutely true.  I would add:

The Romney camp is quick to say that taxes were paid on the funds BEFORE they went to Cayman and IF so, all is well - as far as that goes.

First, it would take forensic accounting experts MONTHS, with complete access to all of the records, to verify that claim.

Second, as Iceman and perhaps others have pointed out, another issue is what happens AFTER the money gets to the Caymans.

Living in a "banking secrecy haven" as I do, I can tell you that once the funds are here, there are ways to hide the funds (at least until recently) with COMPLETE ANONYMITY.  Check out this short video in which a young intern talks to lawyers in Panama about setting up a "bearer shares" corporation in which the ACTUAL OWNER IS NOT PUBLICLY RECORDED ANYWHERE: http://www.citizen.org/Page.aspx?pid=519 

One point not mentioned is that lawyers are subject to prosecution under Panamanian law if they divulge their clients' ownership of such anonymous corporations.  Also, the law makes it almost impossible to "pierce the corporate veil."  (In the US, one can successfully pierce it if a corp cannot produce, for example, minutes of all of its annual meetings and other technical requirements amid suspicions that it is a "front" designed PURELY to protect assets from, for example, liability lawsuits or alimony.  Am I right, Wildman?)

Once the funds are in a banking secrecy haven, Uncle Sam would have to do extraordinary investigations and without the cooperation of the govt and banks of the Cayman Islands, it will likely come up empty. 

Even the Tax Information Accessibility Agreement signed by Panama and US has huge loopholes.  I do not believe there is such an agreement with Cayman.

Waiting on you Wildman and/or some other forum lawyer to enlighten us....  Thanks

[Bison66]

.

[CIAA-FAN]

-