Emma Watson named in Panama Papers
Source: USA Today via msn.com
Emma Watson, the Harry Potter actress-turned-liberal activist, has been named in the Panama Papers.
But it's no big deal, she says, because having an offshore company or account is not illegal or unethical. But it is private. Or it was supposed to be.
"Emma (like many high-profile individuals) set up an offshore company for the sole purpose of protecting her anonymity and safety," said a statement issued by her representatives Tuesday. "Emma receives absolutely no tax or monetary advantages from this offshore company whatsoever — only privacy.”
The Panama Papers, in case you've forgotten already, are a cache of more than 11 million confidential documents from a Panama law firm leaked to and published online last month by an international consortium of journalists who have been busy combing the database for details on how rich, famous and powerful people hide their wealth in offshore accounts and tax havens.
Read more: http://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/emma-watson-named-in-panama-papers/ar-BBsT6CI?li=BBnbfcL
Conservatives and liberals alike will be caught in this. They probably use the same accounting firms.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
ReRe
(10,597 posts)... will be caught in this. Same accounting firms, same beds. 
Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)
nxylas
(6,440 posts)But this statement sent up a huge red flag.
The British conservative weekly The Spectator used the database and found that "Emma Charlotte Duerre Watson" is a beneficiary in an offshore company based in the British Virgin Islands. The magazine used the discovery to suggest that Watson's continued political activism could lead to more questions about her use of this offshore company.
In other words, even the most anodyne form of liberal activism (and surely her modest suggestion that men ought to treat women with more respect barely even qualifies in that regard) is enough to get the right-wing press going through your financial records with a fine-tooth comb, looking for dirt.
wildbilln864
(13,382 posts)so you have a few million tucked away. 
silvershadow
(10,336 posts)Lizzie Poppet
(10,164 posts)She stepped in it on this one, I'm thinking...
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)in the panama papers leak. Check it out.
http://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Major-Clinton-Donors-Caught-up-in-Fresh-Panama-Papers-Scandal-20160510-0033.html
Chicago1980
(1,968 posts)so so what.
Cassiopeia
(2,603 posts)
Orrex
(63,225 posts)7962
(11,841 posts)Thats why.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Last edited Wed May 11, 2016, 07:07 PM - Edit history (1)
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)w4rma
(31,700 posts)dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Learn some facts before you slander people
w4rma
(31,700 posts)You learn some facts, dbackjon. Delaware is the very definition of a tax haven:
A building that has become famous for helping tens of thousands of companies avoid hundreds of millions of dollars in tax through the so-called “Delaware loophole”.
The receptionist at 1209 North Orange Street isn’t surprised that a journalist has turned up unannounced on a sunny weekday afternoon.
“You know I can’t speak to you,” she says. A yellow post-it note on her computer screen reads “MEDIA: Chuck Miller” with the phone number of the company’s director of corporate communications. Miller can’t answer many questions either, except to say that the company does not advise clients on their tax affairs.
The Guardian is not the first media organisation to turn up at the offices of Corporation Trust Centre, and it’s unlikely to be the last.
This squat, yellow brick office building just north of Wilmington’s rundown downtown is the registered address of more than 285,000 companies. That’s more than any other known address in the world, and 15 times more than the 18,000 registered in Ugland House, a five-storey building in the Cayman Islands that Barack Obama called “either the biggest building in the world, or the biggest tax scam on record”.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/25/delaware-tax-loophole-1209-north-orange-trump-clinton
dbackjon
(6,578 posts)Delaware is mainly used for legal and corporate law reasons, not tax avoidance.
And the type of company that Clinton set up is a pass-through, and thus incapable of being used to avoid taxes.
But thanks for cutting and pasting an article you clearly don't understand.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Here is a fact that you chose to obfuscate away and ignore:
"A report by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, titled Delaware: An Onshore Tax Haven, said the state’s tax code made it “a magnet for people looking to create anonymous shell companies, which individuals and corporations can use to evade an inestimable amount in federal and foreign taxes”."
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2016/apr/25/delaware-tax-loophole-1209-north-orange-trump-clinton
Delaware: An Onshore Tax Haven
When thinking of tax havens, one generally pictures notorious zero-tax Caribbean islands like the Cayman Islands and Bermuda. However, we can also find a tax haven a lot closer to home in the state of Delaware – a choice location for U.S. business formation. A loophole in Delaware’s tax code is responsible for the loss of billions of dollars in revenue in other U.S. states, and its lack of incorporation transparency makes it a magnet for people looking to create anonymous shell companies, which individuals and corporations can use to evade an inestimable amount in federal and foreign taxes. The Internal Revenue Service estimated a total tax gap of about $450 billion with $376 billion of it due to filers underreporting income in 2006 (the most recent tax year for which this data is available). While it is impossible to know how much underreported income is hidden in Delaware shell companies, the First State’s ability to attract the formation of anonymous companies suggests that it could rival the amount of income hidden in more well-known offshore tax havens.
http://itep.org/itep_reports/2015/12/delaware-an-onshore-tax-haven.php#.VzO_EpUrJhF
glowing
(12,233 posts)Also, I would assume that many Americans would use the Cauman Islands as their offshore tax haven, like the Romney's. The Panama tax haven is better for "foreign investors" to hide their taxes in because of the "free trade" parameters and secret banking confidentials. By using Panama, they can change money into US currency; which may be more stable than some of these other countries have in existence...
I'd assume that wealthy Americans using Panama as a tax shelter do business offshore or have global investments. Otherwise, the Cayman's would be just dandy for them.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Do the admins even care?
ThinkCritically
(241 posts)I am anti-corruption. Hillary's name just keeps popping up. Sorry that you can't deal with reality, not my problem.
glinda
(14,807 posts) 
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)Enough that she needed an armed bodyguard at her side at her college graduation.
Ex Lurker
(3,816 posts)GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)How does having a secret bank account provide anonymity? Did she fly to the virgin islands every time she needed to deposit a check and somehow that makes it safer? I'm betting a young person like herself does 99% of her banking from her home computer, meaning the bank she uses doesn't even matter as long as they have a secure website and server
ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)And that's not any of our business.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)To the best of my knowledge we are all supposed to chip in to pay for roads, fire departments, school systems... that is still the case, right?
glinda
(14,807 posts)ProudToBeBlueInRhody
(16,399 posts)You do not give a shit.
Have a nice day.
Ex Lurker
(3,816 posts)is like killing a mosquito with an H Bomb. I'm not saying that stalker can't be dangerous. She is prudent to protect herself. But I'm hard pressed to think of any benefit in this scenario that couldn't have been accomplished by much simpler means.
Beaverhausen
(24,472 posts)C Moon
(12,221 posts)Can't these a-holes just buy 5 less cars and 2 less houses, and pay some fucking taxes like the rest of us "less-than-middle-class" citizens do? Are we supposed to foot the bill for all of these jerks?
Grrrrr!! The rich are lazy.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)It probably took a good amount of effort to setup all those phony corporations to hide the money such that IRS doesn't even see it
notadmblnd
(23,720 posts)What she pays in taxes is between her and the British government. I'm much more interested in Americans that are evading their taxes.
Bad Dog
(2,025 posts)And apololgises to her fans and leaves this particular scheme. She probably won't have a go at Cameron though.
Jimmy Carr has said it would be “morally wrong” to pass comment on another individual’s tax affairs – echoing words used by David Cameron when he publicly condemned the comedian over his tax affairs.
Four years ago Carr was singled out for criticism by the Prime Minister amid uproar over the use of complex financial schemes designed to minimise tax.
On Friday, without actually naming Mr Cameron, Carr hit back.
“I'm going to keep it classy," he posted on his Twitter account. "It would be ‘morally wrong’ and ‘hypocritical’ to comment on another individual’s tax affairs."
An investigation by the Times in 2012 exposed a single Jersey-based scheme that sheltered £168m a year from the taxman. The comedian was understood to have been the largest beneficiary of the legal tax avoidance scheme, which reportedly enabled members to pay income rates as low as one per cent.
The Prime Minister, speaking during a trip to Mexico in 2012, said to ITV: "I think some of these schemes – and I think particularly of the Jimmy Carr scheme – I have had time to read about and I just think this is completely wrong.
"People work hard, they pay their taxes, they save up to go to one of his shows. They buy the tickets. He is taking the money from those tickets and he, as far as I can see, is putting all of that into some very dodgy tax avoiding schemes.
"That is wrong. There is nothing wrong with people planning their tax affairs to invest in their pension and plan for their retirement – that sort of tax management is fine. But some of these schemes we have seen are quite frankly morally wrong.
"The government is acting by looking at a general anti-avoidance law but we do need to make progress on this. It is not fair on hardworking people who do the right thing and pay their taxes to see these sorts of scams taking place."
After Mr Carr's tax affairs were revealed, he apologised to his fans saying he "made a terrible error of judgement". He added that he was no longer involved in the tax shelter scheme .
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-cameron-offshore-fund-jimmy-carr-says-it-would-be-morally-wrong-to-comment-on-tax-another-a6975601.html
Ilsa
(61,698 posts)all of the HP movies were made there), and therefore taxed there, but I don't know squat about shielding from their tax laws.
Javaman
(62,534 posts)just another member of the 1% explaining away their tax dodging.
alarimer
(16,245 posts)It goes both ways, but it makes them seem like bigger hypocrites when they are found out.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)but from those aiming to extort her - do a slip-and-fall on her property, or worse things. Who knows if she's been threatened.
I like her, so I'm prepared to give her a break on this.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)She setup a secret foreign corporation to stash away money into because was afraid of someone suing her? that is hilarious... we should all setup a secret foreign corporation I guess... for uh, protection against, uh.... lawsuits! No more taxes for me!!
closeupready
(29,503 posts)for entities which target wealthy individuals who are looking to hide their wealth, and put it out of reach of Western governments/courts. Until recently, I believe it was legal as long as you reported these accounts to tax authorities.
Anyway, I suppose such a discussion is beyond the scope of this thread... Cheers.
Xithras
(16,191 posts)I have an account with BBVA in Mexico. There are a couple of extra forms that have to be filled out each year to report it (no extra taxes owed, since it's all earned in the U.S. and taxes are paid before it's transferred to Mexico), but it's a non-issue otherwise. Because BBVA is FATCA compliant, the IRS would know about the accounts even if I didn't report it (I'd still owe nothing, but I'd probably get audited if I failed to disclose it.)
closeupready
(29,503 posts)I left with $100 in it - probably closed now but I remember what a pain in the ass it was to open. Guess that makes me a tax dodger, lol, on this board.
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts).....I've had it for 50 years or so. It's convenient to use when I am there.
closeupready
(29,503 posts)
Bjornsdotter
(6,123 posts)
valerief
(53,235 posts)
dembotoz
(16,844 posts)the problem is that is is legal
the problem is not that people use it
w4rma
(31,700 posts)And, even then, she's not holding a public office, nor is she running a huge corporation, right now, so I wouldn't care anyway.
As said, above, the problem is that it's legal and that wealthy political donors are keeping it legal.
Frank Cannon
(7,570 posts)It's easy to be a champion for liberal causes when you know someone else's taxes will be paying for it.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)It's not hypocrisy to follow the law while working to change the law for the better.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Then it's okay.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Change the law. Don't needlessly demonize people for following an amoral law.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Unless they are rich people we like.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Democat
(11,617 posts)Missed the last few thousand threads about how all bankers and rich people are evil?
w4rma
(31,700 posts)
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)Leaving the burden on those with less money.
w4rma
(31,700 posts)And that she did it to keep her financials private - not that I support that policy, either. I'll take her at he word, unless I see specific information, otherwise.
FLPanhandle
(7,107 posts)Choose to believe her if it makes you feel better.
I'll go with old saying "Where there's smoke, there's fire".
w4rma
(31,700 posts)Finally: A reason to care about the Panama Papers leak—attractive people you know from your teevee screen.
Actress Emma Watson has turned up in the Panama Papers, now available as a searchable database, as the owner of a British Virgin Islands company called “Falling Leaves Ltd.” Her spokesperson said she’d set up the offshore account for “privacy.”
“UK companies are required to publicly publish details of their shareholders and therefore do not give her the necessary anonymity required to protect her personal safety, which has been jeopardised in the past owing to such information being publicly available,” the spokesperson said.
“Offshore companies do not publish these shareholder details. Emma receives absolutely no tax or monetary advantages from this offshore company whatsoever—only privacy.”
According to The Times, Watson used the anonymous holding company to purchase a £2.8 million ($4 million) home in London. She’d have been better off staying at 12 Grimmauld Place!
http://gawker.com/emma-watson-named-in-panama-papers-leak-1775984390
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)A couple of the 'named' have recently been charged with financial crimes, I think by the USA government? Assume to build a criminal case, it must have been a year or so ago *someone* had access to those bank records.
I wonder if the 'leaking' of names from many countries was selective, and some 'names' were omitted from the leak intentionally.
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)on an upset employee that was let go and wanted some payback. It could also be some super goody goody that actually wanted to do the right thing, but those are hard to come by in the banking/law/tax haven industry.
Sunlei
(22,651 posts)Putins a leaked account holder name & Assad. So the 'leak' could have come from "the group" in charge of Russian sanctions or "the group" who keeps an eye on Assad.
Goes to show the world, no pile of cash is really private these days. 
GummyBearz
(2,931 posts)The NSA knows just about everything, and I'm sure if they wanted to they could hack into a banking system and print documents that would be harmful to certain people
Nye Bevan
(25,406 posts)Banks, brokerages and fund managers in your home country have privacy requirements too. Plenty of rich people never send money offshore and don't have their privacy violated.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Even though many people setup Delaware corporations for privacy reasons.
MowCowWhoHow III
(2,103 posts)
She'd have to pay some tax on any interest earned if her money hadn't had to go into hiding because of stalking by HMRC.
Jimbo S
(2,960 posts)I wonder how much knowledge she has about the locations her wealth is placed.
NobodyHere
(2,810 posts)And her quotes indicate that she knew about it.
Democat
(11,617 posts)Do you allow the same excuse to Donald Trump and evil bankers?
Jesus Malverde
(10,274 posts)But when your a celebrity. Its prudent to buy and rent assets under a third party company so stalkers and other freaks can't find you in public records. It's extremely common for very expensive homes to be registered this way for the privacy of the owner.
As a celebrity who likely makes money all over the world, it's also normal to have international companies to facilitate those transactions.
Monk06
(7,675 posts)Nothing to do with taxes
Blue_Tires
(55,445 posts)Is everyone outed in the PP going to be automatically tainted regardless of reasoning, purpose, and the amount of $$$ squirreled away??
Is that what the leaker really intended??
