tag:blog.lff.lu,2010-02-26://4 2011-10-05T09:42:57Z Movable Type Pro 5.01 tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.58 2011-10-05T09:39:33Z 2011-10-05T09:42:57Z

So, you have a great story that you're determined to share with the rest of the world, but the facts just don't support your case? No problem, with a little imagination and a good dose of insolence you can go...

J-J Picard http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=22
The story goes like this: "Luxembourg is one of the world's top secrecy jurisdictions and a tax haven".

In order to make this story credible, begin by citing extracts from press articles that denounce alleged scandals, preferably in dramatic language. Whether these articles were the result of serious research, or whether they were adequately documented, is not of the least importance. What counts is that they create an impression and support the case.

Next, embellish your "report" with statements you have heard here and there or with your own assumptions, of the sort: "Luxembourg is hosting large tax-evading and other criminal assets from around th world". After all, your report is not part of a legal procedure where such "arguments" would be rejected as hearsay.

After this little warming up exercise, move on to the freestyle of cheap propaganda. For instance, take the European Savings Directive and announce, without the least embarrassment, that Luxembourg has refused to apply the automatic exchange of information. Carefully avoid mentioning that instead of this Luxembourg applies an automatic withholding tax on savings income, which could seriously weaken your case.

In order to uphold your claim that Luxembourg has signed very few double tax treaties that conform with OECD standards, be careful to quote figures from 30 June 2010. By contrast, if you then state that thanks to its wide range of double tax treaties Luxembourg offers better access to international markets than traditional tax havens, don't forget to insert a link to the website of the Bankers' Association that publishes an up to date list of 64 such treaties. By doing this you are in fact contradicting your assertion that Luxembourg is a tax haven, since the signing of a tax treaty only makes sense where there is effective taxation in both contracting jurisdictions leading to a real risk of double taxation, but this is a subtlety that will escape most readers.

Also criticize the fact that Luxembourg does not have a public register providing detailed information on trusts domiciled in the Grand Duchy. You must rely on the fact that your readers will already have forgotten that, on a previous page, you reproached the Banking Association with lobbying in favour of introducing a trust law into Luxembourg legislation which at present does not allow such vehicles.

You are of a sporting nature and the idea of a winners' podium appeals to you? Then you must convert the results of your work into a ranking. If, for some reason, your first effort does not yield the hoped for results, do not despair. The problem can be resolved by weighting the results. In the choice of criteria for weighting, give full rein to your imagination. Experiment with different criteria until you get the desired results. If you run out of ideas, or if you are in a hurry, fall back on the old rule of thumb that the economic success of a country is directly proportional to its size. If, therefore, a small country enjoys great success in a particular domain, something suspicious must be going on.

For the rest, be careful to use vague terminology such as "partly" or "not adequately" if you cannot avoid saying that international standards have been respected by the country under review. The reader will be able to develop his own negative opinion and you will have succeeded in your objective.]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.57 2011-09-20T14:53:32Z 2011-09-20T14:56:50Z

E Kugel http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=25  
1.     Social Media führt zu Kontrollverlust
2.     Sascha Lobos Freundin hat zuhause die Schlappen an
3.     Sony entwickelt gerade Kontaktlinsen, mit denen man Videospiele in 3D erleben kann (toll!)
4.     Wer zuviel twittert, bekommt nichts vom Vortag mit.
 
Wer hätte das gedacht? Alle, die sich jetzt schon zuviel im WWW herumtreiben, dürfen geschockt sein: Wer zu viele (persönliche) Informationen im Netz freigibt, fördert den Kontrollverlust über seine eigene Identität. Oder er nimmt es einfach in Kauf, dass jemand anderes, wildfremdes, eine Identität aufbaut, über die er nicht mehr selbst bestimmen kann. Genau dieses Problem haben Prominente wie Sascha Lobo, Deutschlands bekanntester Blogger und Indikator dafür, dass aggressive Frisuren nicht auf einen ähnlich gebildeten Charakter schließen lassen. Übrigens schon wieder so ein Bild, das durch die Medien geprägt ist, ich gebe es gerne zu. Fast ängstlich erklärt dieser, dass jeder, der im Social Web unterwegs ist, den Kontrollverlust akzeptieren muss. Die Frage sei nur, wie man damit umgehe.
 
Gott sei Dank ist der Mensch immer noch ein selbstbestimmendes Wesen, der eigenmächtig entscheiden kann, was er von sich ins Internet stellen will oder nicht. Zumindest dieser Punkt ist also kontrollierbar. Was andere aus und mit einem machen - sei es dahingestellt, ob die Information ursprünglich von uns freigegeben worden ist, oder nicht - steht jedoch auf einem anderen Blatt und wird eines der wichtigsten Themen der Medienbranche der Zukunft sein. Nicht nur für uns als Einzelpersonen, sondern auch für ganze Staaten oder Interessengemeinschaften jedweder Art, die meinen, ihr Bild im Social Web steuern zu können. Bei Lobos daheim postet die Freundin, jetzt Verlobte, die Verlobung jedenfalls auf Facebook. Hat die wohl nicht richtig zugehört.
 
Alfredo Triviño von News International bestätigt dann das, was Technikbegeisterte gar nicht freuen wird. Nachdem er akribisch eine Tablet-Version mit allen erdenklichen interaktiven Finessen für The Times entwickelt hat, bleibt die Erkenntnis, dass weniger mehr ist. Mehr inhaltlich sinnvoller Content, weniger Schnickschnack. Da helfen langfristig auch die 3D-Kontaktlinsen nicht weiter, die Spiele-Süchtige gerade bei Sony zusammenbasteln.
 
Unterdessen versuche ich, einige dieser neu gewonnen Erkenntnisse an unsere Twitter-Community weiterzugeben und siehe da, schon wieder den Faden verloren. Dagmar Reim, Intendantin des Rundfunks Berlin-Brandenburg, bezeichnet diese Tweets am Ende der Veranstaltung übrigens als Null-Nachrichten. Sie hat vollkommen Recht. Ich twittere trotzdem weiter, zum Beispiel dass Dagmar Reim Tweets als Null-Nachrichten bezeichnet. Könnte ja jemanden der Daheimgebliebenen interessieren. Ich beschließe, dass Twitter trotzdem einer der wichtigsten Nachrichtenverteiler der Welt ist (siehe Arabischer Frühling), ich aber voll und ganz verstehen kann, wenn sich die Frau Intendantin lieber auf die wesentlichen Dinge des Lebens konzentrieren will.
 
Nach zwei spannenden Tagen steige ich also mit einigen neuen Erkenntnissen und noch viel mehr Denkanstößen zurück in den Flieger, wo ich die Erlebnisse noch einmal Revue passieren lasse. Während unsere kleine Bombardier eine Schleife über das abendliche Berlin fliegt, kommen mir noch zwei weitere, jedoch weniger elementare Erkenntnisse:
 
5.     (Die meisten) Menschen, die in der PR arbeiten, haben schöne Klamotten
6.     Berlin hat die größte Dichte an beleuchteten Fußballplätzen Deutschlands.

]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.56 2011-06-24T07:11:34Z 2011-06-24T08:03:06Z

At the request of clients, JP Morgan has just launched a global Catholic Ethical Balanced Fund within its retail umbrella fund JP Morgan Funds. Perhaps we should thank our Islamic finance friends for opening up a new sector. Hopefully we'll...

Eleanor de Rosmorduc http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=45 http://bit.ly/kIqDwS]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.55 2011-06-20T08:20:00Z 2011-06-20T08:26:41Z

Eleanor de Rosmorduc http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=45
    English report:

    http://www.radiovaticana.org/en1/Articolo.asp?c=496635
    http://www.radiovaticana.org/en1/Articolo.asp?c=496733


    German report:

    http://www.radiovaticana.org/ted/Articolo.asp?c=497028


    French report:

    http://www.radiovaticana.org/fr1/Articolo.asp?c=497042

]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.54 2011-03-01T16:01:57Z 2011-03-02T17:53:25Z

James Carville, an advisor to former President Clinton, is famous for saying : "I used to think that if there was reincarnation, I wanted to come back as the president or the pope. But now I would like to come...

Julian Presber http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=44
" This year, Europe has discovered how right Carville was. The bond markets decided that the public finances of Greece, Ireland and now Portugal are not sustainable. The result was a prohibitive rise in the interest premium demanded by the market for their government bond issues, resulting in an inability to refinance current spending and expiring debt. This forced their governments into drastic and previously unthinkable austerity measures, and drove the creation of an EU bail-out fund to avoid the case of sovereign default of a Euro-country, a huge embarrassment with financial and political implications for the entire Eurozone. But the power of the bond markets went much beyond Greece and Ireland, and even beyond other countries of "peripheral Europe" with similar problems. Almost all countries in Europe, including apparently healthy ones such as Germany, Luxembourg and others, have recognised that the bond markets are now closely scrutinising public finances making real distinctions between them, and pricing in corresponding interest rate premiums. And we are now seeing with Ireland, once the markets refuse to refinance, they are in the position to dictate the type and extent of austerity that is required. Furthermore, the country can be subjected to pressure from its EU bailout partners - the best example being the insistence by France and Germany that Ireland should now also increase its corporate tax rate from the current 12,5% - a crass and disgraceful attempt to link EU bailout money to what these two countries consider "unfair" Irish tax competition.

A country that no longer has control over its tax and spending policy has lost important dimensions of its sovereignty. Luc Frieden, Luxembourg's finance minister, is on record as saying that Luxembourg's would lose its fiscal sovereignty should its accumulated debt reach 30% of GDP from its current level of roughly 15%. Since the Greek crisis, almost all countries in Europe, including those outside the Eurozone, have woken up to the danger of an adverse bond market judgments and the loss of sovereignty that this threatens. After record public deficits in 2009 to replace failing private demand in the wake of the financial crisis, governments everywhere have performed a sharp about-turn: although growth remains fragile, they are implementing more or less drastic austerity programmes, with the express purpose of reducing accumulated government debt. They are thus making a clear choice - satisfying the bond markets - over other policy objectives such as employment. One of the most visible of these was the UK's recent budget, where the government is reducing spending by 25% and eliminating 500 000 public sector jobs.

Governments are right to make such choices. As we have seen twice this year, once the markets have rendered a judgment, it is too late. Governments are dependent on market refinancing in the immediate term; by contrast, political lead times for implementing austerity measures are longer. And for many reasons, market-forced austerity and bailouts are never the best solution. They are politically difficult in the concerned country, and, in the case of bailouts, in the countries providing the bailout funds. As they are drastic, they represent a shock to the economy that creates far more disruption and costs to individuals and businesses than a pre-emptive programme implemented earlier, gradually, in measured doses. Far worse, they create a situation of confrontation between the markets and the street, as we are witnessing with the strikes in Greece. These seem manageable in this case; it is far from sure that this will always be the case. There is also much potential for populist politicians to exploit such situations.

The bond markets will be scrutinising European public finances even more intensely in the future. Under the changes to the Lisbon Treaty proposed by Germany and agreed to in principle by all other EU countries, bond holders will be required to bear a part of any future bailout costs after 2013. The proposals are sensible. Without a free ride in the form of automatic tax payer bailouts, the markets will be forced to make judgments and give signals on the public finances of bond-issuing governments much more carefully and much earlier. This will provide a much stronger market mechanism for ensuring that governments maintain sound fiscal policy: through much earlier interest rate signals, the markets will punish profligate governments and reward those pursuing sustainable policies. Recent austerity measures have mostly focussed on reducing spending. But ultimately, sustainable public finances will be determined by the revenues generated by sound economic fundamentals, in particular competitiveness in world markets. Wealth and related tax revenues are ultimately generated by competitive industries. This will be the main challenge for countries whose problem is declining competitiveness.

James Carville was right; bond markets can intimidate powerful governments. But bond markets are essential for government to fulfil its role in society. They allow society to redistribute the burden of public finance across generations, to make public investments before these provide a return, to finance emergency spending. In short, they are essential for nations to fully exercise their sovereignty. The bond markets are governments' friend, not its enemy. It is up to governments to keep their houses in order to be able to make best use of them.]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2011://4.52 2011-01-03T14:28:52Z 2011-01-03T16:14:56Z

Luxembourg having ranked third in the CIA's World Factbook in terms of GDP per capita, Tax Justice Network last week contemplated on its blog wherein Luxembourg's economic success lies. The activist organisation answered its own question about Luxembourg, this so-called...

Tom Theobald http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=41
Yet, the argumentation TJN uses to get to its facile secrecy jurisdiction conclusion bears consideration because it exposes a specific attitude as well as a number of preconceptions about Luxembourg as a banking and financial centre that many detractors share. And a lot of it has to do with size.

I should probably start with the initial factual error that triggered the TJN blog entry, by saying that Luxembourg's ranking in terms of GDP per capita is completely skewed. Not just in the CIA Factbook, but in any similar ranking. The truth is that more than 130,000 cross-border workers come to work in Luxembourg on a daily basis to contribute to our GDP. That is a lot of people for a country with a population of 500,000. When it comes to dividing the GDP by the population to establish the GDP per capita, however, these 130,000 people have disappeared. I'm pretty sure that quite a few countries would rank significantly higher if they suddenly dropped over a fifth of their population from such calculations.

TJN then references IMF foreign investment flow figures to establish that "Luxembourg attracts over three and a half million dollars of investment for each and every of its 497,538 inhabitants, and invests an almost identical sum overseas."

Now, dividing foreign direct investment flows by the number of citizens of a country may generate impressive figures, but an argument it ain't.

Indeed, Tax Justice Network seems to believe that investment flows, if they are not to be considered shady, should be proportionate to a country's number of citizens.

Consequently, the organisation surmises that the Luxembourg financial centre only exists for Luxembourg. This is of course utter nonsense. It's like saying that Wall Street only exists for the State of New York or that the City is only there for the citizens of London. Both London and New York are in fact financial hubs for their countries as well as for the rest of the world. Similarly, Luxembourg is an international financial centre within Europe. The country specialises in the distribution of cross-border financial services and products. The size of the population is completely irrelevant to this reality. Indeed, in an open global economy, why should or would Luxembourg limit itself to its modest domestic market?

Because it illustrates a common bias, the following paragraph is worth citing in its entirety: "So wherein lies Luxembourg's success? Not in steel, which has long since diminished in importance, nor in agriculture, which accounts for a mere 0.4 percent of GDP. According to national income stats, services (86 percent of GDP) provide the powerhouse to the domestic economy, with offshore financial services being the principal motor driving downstream activity in construction, retailing and hospitality services."

Reading this, I got the distinct impression that TJN believes the services industry to be somewhat less worthy as an economic activity than manufacturing or agriculture, that exporting banking and financial services is particularly objectionable as an economic activity, and that economic success is unmerited if 86% of a country's GDP is composed of services. Yet, just because Luxembourg's sources of iron ore have dried up, doesn't mean that the country should be condemned to cultivating potatoes and living on EU subsidies. Exporting services, and not just financial services, is how a small country with limited natural resources can play a significant international economic role. It is precisely how it adds value in a global economy. There is nothing reprehensible about this reality.

In its conclusion, TJN says that "it doesn't take an advanced degree in economics to come to the conclusion that while the IMF cross-border investment data might be accurate, it highlights a fascinating but unexplained story about the role of secrecy jurisdictions in global investment flows."

TJN is definitely right about one thing: you don't need an advanced degree in economics to come to this conclusion. In fact, all you need is a good dose of ignorance and a bit of imagination in interpreting figures so as to make them suit your conclusions.]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.51 2010-11-29T14:11:02Z 2010-12-07T07:45:11Z

Last week, the French Senate discussed the taxation of electronic services and internet activities. In this context, the French business daily Les Echos made a telling statement in an article on why France is missing out on tax revenues relative...

Tom Theobald http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=41
As a small country with an important international banking and financial centre, Luxembourg has become somewhat used to such misconceptions and even deliberate disinformation. But the nonchalance with which certain members of the press habitually make such false statements does not cease to surprise me.

The simple truth of the matter, of course, is that Luxembourg, like many other European countries, applies a VAT rate of at least 15%, as foreseen in EU law. And, as of 1 January 2015, the Grand-Duchy, along with everyone else in Europe, will switch to a system where VAT is charged in the country of residence of the client rather than the country of the supplier of electronic services.

The fact that Luxembourg applies the standard European rate of 15% is merely down to the fact that we traditionally prefer a socially more just direct taxation to an over-reliance on indirect taxation. That the standard VAT rate of at least 15% is perfectly in line with European regulation might irritate some member states, but there is nothing more sinister to it than that.

There is of course an easy solution to this tax revenue conundrum.

Nothing in the European texts forces France to apply a rate that is higher than 15% (despite the fact that France, for its part, appears to want to impose its national VAT rate on other countries). Rather than complain about so-called "unfair" tax competition, why not simply lower the VAT rate to the standard 15% foreseen in European legislation? Unsurprisingly, this is no guarantee that internet companies and electronic service providers will flock to France. Luxembourg did more than apply the lowest standard European VAT rate. As in the world of banking and finance, Luxembourg worked hard to develop the necessary expertise and to establish the regulatory, technological and business environment that successful international companies rely on.

http://www.luxembourgforict.lu/en/international-scoreboard/ict/index.html]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.47 2010-10-08T12:30:22Z 2010-10-08T12:32:19Z

In connection with banking, the meaning of the word "offshore" is obvious. According to Wikipedia, "An offshore bank is a bank located outside the country of residence of the depositor, typically in a low tax jurisdiction (or tax haven) that...

E Kugel http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=25
At its roots, the term offshore refers to a place that is located away from the mainland, an island for instance, or an oil platform. Used as an adverb, it can also describe a movement, e.g. the wind blowing or a boat moving away from the shore, or off the shore.

The term offshore bank has its origins in banks that were established on the British Channel Islands.  However, many so called offshore banks are located onshore. The origin of low taxed financial jurisdictions can be traced back to the Middle Ages when trade wars arose between different countries and regions competing for economic dominance.

Reasons to locate banking centres on islands were quite simple: direct central control remained loose and weaker in terms of geography, law and historic allegiance than on the mainland. The offer of an offshore remedy of lower taxation and promises of anonymity and confidentiality as well as political stability were attractive to wealthier clients.

In the modern period, it is commonly accepted that the definition of offshore jurisdictions as tax havens was first formed after World War I. However, in the post-war years, companies became over-burdened by taxation. This is when corporate tax havens and the offshore tax industry were born. Companies were able to take advantage of tax treaties between their country and the offshore tax jurisdiction to reduce liabilities.

During the recent financial crisis, the word was used as a synonym for tax haven or tax shelter. Avoiding any logical reflection the term is used to describe foreign banks, corporations, investments, and deposits. Companies are moving offshore for reasons of tax avoidance or relaxed regulations. Banking transactions with non-residents are called offshore.

In recent years, a growing demand for regulated products and trends in tax harmonisation have further muddied the picture. The OECD has defined a set of terms that differentiate an International financial centre from a tax haven, and these terms are pretty clear. However, the definition of a tax haven often lies in the eye of the beholder. ]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.46 2010-09-03T08:13:25Z 2010-09-03T08:30:22Z

"The European Lifelong Learning Index (ELLI) is an annual measure of Europe's "state of play" of learning throughout the different stages of life from "cradle to grave" and across the different learning environments of school, community, work and home life....

E Kugel http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=25
Luxembourg lies in fifth place out of 23, having scored well in the following areas:

•    Social democracy

•    Comprehensive education system

•    Integration of vocational education and training with the learning needed for university, lifelong learning and democratic
     participation

•    Possibilities for civic participation (volunteering, political participation, trust and tolerance)

•    Achievement in work-life balance (participation in cultural activities), called "Learning to be" in the study.

The last point strongly influenced the position of Luxembourg in the study.

http://www.elli.org/

]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.45 2010-08-13T13:23:22Z 2010-08-24T09:52:18Z

Fern http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=30
Comme nous le savons, le monde a changé depuis 2000, année où l'accord sur la fiscalité de l'épargne entre partenaires européens a été  passé:

• Un nouveau Gouvernement supranational auto-proclamé a vu naissance, à savoir le G20. Ce même G20 a adopté des standards de lutte contre la fraude fiscale, à savoir l'échange de renseignement sur demande conformément aux conventions standard de l'OCDE. Le Luxembourg a signé plus de 20 accords en ce sens. Ce standard est devenu la nouvelle norme internationale. Elle dépasse et remet en cause les accords européens de 2000. Ce standard est devenu la norme de coopération, de la Chine au Brésil en passant par Hong Kong, Singapour ou la Suisse.
• Le régime de la directive est discriminatoire à un double titre. D'abord il discrimine les centres financiers à l'intérieur de l'UE par rapport aux grands centres financiers hors de l'Union Européenne dont certains ont des taux de croissance vertigineux. Il discrimine également par rapport aux législations internes des pays européens. Ainsi les banques belges, françaises ou allemandes ne sont pas assujetties à des contraintes de reporting automatique pour leurs propres résidents nationaux. En revanche, les banques d'un pays tiers (luxembourgeoises en l'occurrence) le sont pour des services transfrontaliers à ces mêmes personnes. La directive fiscalité de l'épargne énonce d'ailleurs elle-même le principe de la non discrimination en dans son 4ème considérant.
  

Si le dossier fiscalité ne progresse pas, ce n'est donc pas la faute aux Luxembourgeois mais bien à ceux qui nient non seulement ces évidences, mais qui nient l'existence et la légitimité pure et simple du marché européen des services financiers. Depuis la fin des années 1980 il est légal de placer son argent à l'étranger. Des conditions équitables devraient dès lors être créées pour tous les intermédiaires financiers opérant sur ce marché sans privilégier l'épargne domestique.]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.44 2010-08-05T15:15:33Z 2010-08-24T09:43:01Z

With the holy month of Ramadan starting next week, the time seems ripe to buy shares in Muslim countries. Researchers have ascertained that during the month of Ramadan, stock returns are almost nine times higher in predominately Muslim countries than...

J-J Picard http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=22 http://bit.ly/aWUCTI

Having studied stock returns during Ramadan for 14 predominantly Muslim countries over the years 1989-2007, they noticed that the mean annualised return realised by investors during the holy month was 38.09 percent, compared to a rather modest gain of 4.32 percent throughout the rest of the year.

One might argue that during Ramadan, investors simply have more time to think about investments, rather than enjoying the delights of their gastronomy. But researchers Ahmad Etebari (University of New Hampshire), Jedrzej Pawel Bialkowski (University of Canterbury) and Tomasz Piotr Wisniewski (University of Leicester) have another explanation for the phenomenon. They believe that their findings are an indication that Ramadan positively affects investor psychology and leads to an optimistic state of mind that extends to investment decisions: "Ramadan brings about a sense of solidarity among Muslims, enhances their satisfaction with life and encourages optimistic beliefs. This optimism affects investor sentiment and decisions leading to the price run-ups."

If this is right, that would be great. Solidarity! Satisfaction with life! Optimistic beliefs! and: Investment decisions! Isn't that exactly what we all need to get out of the financial crisis and boost our Western economies? Politicians in Europe, the US and around: stop thinking about rescue schemes, tax incentives and subsidies, convince your populations to start a sound fasting period! The resulting optimistic mood will give a new kick to economic activity and will help you save a lot of money that you will be able to spend elsewhere. To counteract the resulting complaints by the  food industry for example. ]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.43 2010-08-02T14:51:24Z 2010-08-24T09:47:34Z

J-J Picard http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=22
Compared to traditional media, the Internet looks like a jungle. Anyone can launch blog posts and dispatch stories, rumors, gossip, hearsays... under no control of any authority.

Some think that they can avoid trouble by simply adding a statement at the very end of a blog post saying : "Information contained in this article is not guaranteed to be accurate.  Do your own research."

That's what a certain "Alban, a personal finance writer at Home Loan Finder" did in his research-light contribution "Where are the World's Tax Havens" posted these days on various websites (http://bit.ly/cgfEv1 ; http://bit.ly/bDoCdF).

This is what he writes about Luxembourg : "Luxemburg is the richest member state of the European Union and is Europe's number on investment fund centre, as well as being the world's leading hub for global fund distribution. Luxemburg is also not worried about what happened to their neighbour Liechtenstein, because in Luxemburg the laws prohibit them from revealing bank information to the outside world, unless it is a criminal matter."

So many hoaxes in only a few lines !

• No Mr Alban, unfortunately Luxembourg is not the richest member state of the European Union. It should be general knowledge now that the figures regarding the GDP per capita (which are at the origin of the perception that Luxembourg is one of the richest countries in the World) are completely distorted by the fact that the more than 147,000 commuters from neighbour countries working in Luxembourg (that has a population of only 500,000) are not taken into account when calculating the GDP/capita.
• Yes,  Luxembourg is Europe's number on investment fund centre, as well as being the world's leading hub for global fund distribution. But since you seem to assume that this is due to tax advantages, you are wrong. Investment funds do not enjoy any special tax treatment in Luxembourg. The tax regime applying to investments in Luxembourg funds is that of the investor's country of residence.
  

Why compare Luxembourg with Liechtenstein, a country - according to Mr. Alban - that was "the setting for the discovery of the largest case of tax evasion in Germany's history. with just 35,000 inhabitants, 70,000 foundations, but 110,000 million Euros deposited in anonymous bank accounts, a list of European tycoons was discovered to be using coded accounts to hide money which was not declared to the treasury...."

No, Mr Alaban:

• Liechtenstein is not a neighbour of Luxembourg.
• in Luxembourg, we have no foundations comparable to those in Liechtenstein.
• in Luxembourg, anonymous / coded accounts are prohibited by law.
• in Luxembourg the revealing of bank information is not limited to criminal matters, since Luxembourg adopted the OECD standards on information exchange more than a year ago.
  

My suggestion to Mr. Alban, and to bloggers and self-declared investigators of any kind: The statement that "information contained in this article is not guaranteed to be accurate" implies that your contribution is of no use to the reader. Such a statement does not absolve an author from responsibility for carefully checking the accurateness of what he writes. So if you doubt yourself that the information contained in your article is accurate, simply refrain from publishing it.]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.42 2010-07-14T13:45:24Z 2010-07-15T13:43:55Z

Dass auch die Fussballweltmeisterschaft 2010 ohne luxemburgische Beteiligung über die Bühne ging nehmen wir angesichts der fast chronischen Erfolglosigkeit der grossherzoglichen Kicker gelassen hin. Unsere Stärken sind offensichtlich weniger sportlicher als ökonomischer Natur. So erwirtschaftet Luxemburg seit Jahren mit schöner...

J-J Picard http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=22 Dass auch die Fussballweltmeisterschaft 2010 ohne luxemburgische Beteiligung über die Bühne ging nehmen wir angesichts der fast chronischen Erfolglosigkeit der grossherzoglichen Kicker gelassen hin. Unsere Stärken sind offensichtlich weniger sportlicher als ökonomischer Natur. So erwirtschaftet Luxemburg seit Jahren mit schöner Regelmässigkeit das bei weitem höchste Bruttoinlandsprodukt pro Kopf der Bevölkerung, was in den einschlägigen Ranglisten grosser internationaler Organisationen wie der Weltbank oder des Internationalen Währungsfonds auch entsprechend gewürdigt wird. Nicht so jedoch vom statistischen Amt der europäischen Union. Denn kaum liegen dessen erste vorläufige Schätzungen für 2009 vor - das BIP pro Kopf in Kaufkraftstandards läge demnach in Luxemburg bei 268% des EU-Durchschnitts, an zweiter Stelle läge Irland mit 131% -  versuchen die Erbsenzähler von Eurostat auch schon, diese herausragende Leistung klein zu reden, wenn auch vorerst nur in einer Fussnote, auf die allerdings in der diesbezüglichen Pressemitteilung des Amtes gleich zweimal verwiesen wird: Das hohe Niveau des BIP pro Kopf in Luxemburg, heisst es da, sei teilweise auf den hohen Anteil von Grenzgängern an der Gesamtzahl der Beschäftigten zurückzuführen, die zwar zum BIP beitragen, aber bei der Wohnbevölkerung nicht berücksichtigt würden, die zur Berechnung des BIP pro Kopf herangezogen wird.

Ach hätten die gemeinschaftlichen Statistiker doch eine ebenso sportliche Einstellung wie unsere bundesdeutschen Nachbarn. Nach vier Wochen WM hängt uns das Thema Fussball zwar zu den Ohren raus, doch kommt uns die Zusammensetzung der deutschen Nationalmannschaft als Beispiel gelungener völker- und kulturübergreifender Integration an dieser Stelle sehr gelegen. In der Tat scheinen uns Namen wie Podolski, Trochowski, Khedira, Oezil, Oaga oder Boateng eher auf einen osteuropäischen bzw. südländischen Ursprung ihrer Träger hinzudeuten, und nach allem was man über bundesdeutsche Behörden so liest, spekulieren wir mal, dass alles was klingt wie ein schokoladenhaltiges Heiss-oder Kaltgetränk bei einem deutschen Einwohnermeldeamt wohl nur schwer als namenstauglich durchgegangen wäre. Doch das stört in Deutschland offenbar niemanden, im Gegenteil.

Mit der gleichen weltoffenen Einstellung haben wir in Luxemburg unsere Unternehmen mit einigen Grenzgängern verstärkt. Dass es deren gleich 145.000 sind ist insofern ohne Belang, als der europäische Gerichtshof bereits 1995 in seinem berühmten Bosman-Urteil - und damit bleiben wir beim Fussball - jede zahlenmässige Beschränkung von EU-Ausländern in einer Mannschaft verboten hat. Da sich einerseits das Urteil des EGH nicht auf Sportmannschaften beschränkt und andererseits jeder Unternehmensberater bestätigen wird, dass auch wirtschaftliche Einheiten nur erfolgreich sein können, wenn sie als Team funktionieren, ist der Rückgriff auf ausländische Fachkräfte in der luxemburgischen Wirtschaft gleich doppelt legitim.

Auf unsere Fussballnationalmannschaft hat dies allerdings leider immer noch nicht durchgeschlagen. Aber wir arbeiten dran.

]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.41 2010-07-13T09:59:00Z 2010-08-24T09:53:44Z

EU Commissioner Michel Barnier has come up with the following proposals:Deposits of bank customers should be guaranteed up to 100'000 EUR .This has already been agreed upon in principle during the crisis but details were still to be finalized. Guarantee...

Fern http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=30

• Deposits of bank customers should be guaranteed up to 100'000 EUR .This has already been agreed upon in principle during the crisis but details were still to be finalized. Guarantee systems where banks step in for each other in case of failure are to be reviewed. They will be replaced by a system whereby banks pay a contribution into a pot which will allow payouts in case of failure within 7 days. The contribution into the fund will vary with the risk profile of each bank, the band being between 75 and 200 % of a "normal contribution". The contributions in this fund represent some 150 Bn EUR over the next 10 years.
• Securities deposits guarantees of customers will be raised from 20'000 to 50'000 EUR. The risk insured is not the counterparty risk (i.e. the risk of failure of the securities issuer) but the risk of fraud at the level of the securities depositor.
• A third proposal is aimed at setting up an equivalent protection fund for life insurance contracts.
  

Some observers would argue that these levies constitute a competitive disadvantage and a burden for the European finance industry. I would rather argue that these proposals clearly aim at establishing the EU as one of the most customer friendliest financial environments in the world when it comes to attracting deposits from outside the European Union. Europe must take the lead in terms of investor protection, offer a seriously regulated and safe banking and financial system.

]]> tag:blog.lff.lu,2010://4.40 2010-07-08T14:35:05Z 2010-09-03T08:22:56Z

Our friend Richard Murphy, founder of the Tax Justice Network, once again published a list of 10 tax havens for the UK Green Party (http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/06/tax-havens-delaware-bermuda-markets-singapore-belgium.html). Oh joy: Luxembourg is ranked just second out of the world's ten BEST tax havens....

E Kugel http://blog.lff.lu/cgi-bin/mt/mt-cp.cgi?__mode=view&blog_id=4&id=25 http://www.forbes.com/2010/07/06/tax-havens-delaware-bermuda-markets-singapore-belgium.html). Oh joy: Luxembourg is ranked just second out of the world's ten BEST tax havens. We are making progress! We are not at the top of the list!

Mr Murphy based his "fascinating research" on the two following criteria: "The first was a measure of a place's opacity, or how secret it is. (...) Secondly: To be considered significant, a place had to have the capability to move money in serious quantities, or it just didn't rank."

The first criterion yielded the following jurisdictions: Switzerland, Malaysia (Labuan), Barbados, Bahamas, Vanuatu, Belize, Brunei, Dominica, Samoa, Seychelles, St. Lucia, St. Vincent and Grenadine, and Turks and Caicos.

Sorry, but where is Luxembourg? Right, we are not in there, because we fulfilled the OECD-standards for the exchange of information long ago!

The second criterion, CASH FLOW, pointed up the U.K. (City of London), the U.S. (Delaware), Luxembourg, Switzerland, Cayman Islands, Ireland, Hong Kong, Singapore, Belgium and Bermuda.

So there you are: amongst some real tax havens. Just because the size and efficiency of the Luxembourg financial centre? Just because we know how to make business? Just because thousands of skilled people do their jobs well? Just because millions of clients trust in our experience and reputation?

Combine these two eclectic rankings and Luxembourg suddenly appears in second place, after the U.S. (Delaware), followed by Switzerland, Cayman Islands, the U.K. (City of London), Ireland, Bermuda, Singapore, Belgium and Hong Kong.

There must, indeed, be "money in serious quantities" for us to appear so high in this ranking.

Congratulations, all you employees of the financial sector. You've done a good job!

Seriously, Richard, what's the news?

]]>