Factchecking the Financial Secrecy Index (part III)) Poor Finland gets marked down for 'having bearer shares in circulation' . On this basis.pic.twitter.com/OpL2kbz6w6
Show this thread
-
UK seems to get marked down because Limited Partnerships (in England) are not included in the beneficial ownership (PSC) rules ? (even though they are not separate legal entities like LLP and SLPs)pic.twitter.com/gRCtVO9o2q
Show this thread
Does Denmark really have local filing requirements for CBCRs that disregard the OECD legal framework? ( @Wouterlips @phdskat ?) (.....this one seems like a really weird criteria for not being a secrecy jurisdiction)pic.twitter.com/PAwh8fcChe
-
-
If it goes beyond OECD requirements (which is as I read it), then I don't see the problem?
-
The OECD framework sets limits for situations where countries may require local filing. 'Going beyond' means disregarding these limits. Following the guidance gets you marks towards being a secrecy jurisdiction. Which seems weird
- 1 more reply
New conversation -
-
-
Must admit I haven't scrutinised the regs as much as I might have, but I recall there was a discussion about this.
@SuneHein? -
Given that Denmark has a lot of exchange agreements in place (57), I guess the practical example might be a Chinese multinational subsidiary in Denmark -- are they required to file the CBCR locally?
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.