The Panama Papers

QueEx

Rising Star
Super Moderator
Those Who Are (and Are Not) Sheltered From the Panama Papers

Stratfor
Analysis
April 8, 2016

no-shelter-from-the-panama-papers-display.jpg

(Stratfor)


Summary
On April 3, the Panama Papers hit media outlets around the world, and the fallout was swift. A prime minister lost his job, and other global leaders are under mounting pressure to account for their actions. But the effects of the leaks are not evenly spread; the documents contained far more information about the offshore activities of individuals in the developing world than in the developed world. Whatever the reasons for the imbalance, it will likely limit the papers' impact. In the developing world, long histories of corruption have dulled the public's sensitivity to scandal, and repressive governments leave little room for popular backlash.

So although less information was released on Western leaders, it is already doing more damage. Iceland's leader has left his post, and relatively minor revelations have had a disporportionately large impact in the United Kingdom and France. Meanwhile, in the developing world, the Panama Papers' effects have been most strongly felt in the former Soviet Union, a region in which political tensions were already high. The leaks' results have been more mixed in China, where they have provided new targets for the anti-corruption drive already underway but have also implicated figures close to the administration's upper ranks.

This is only the beginning. The Panama Papers are the largest information dump of their kind, and the information that has been released so far appears to be just the tip of the iceberg. They are also the latest in a string of public leaks that seem to be happening more and more frequently. As revelations continue to surface, calls for greater global transparency will only get louder.

Analysis

Former Soviet Union
The publication of the Panama Papers has drawn leaders and elites from five former Soviet states into corruption scandals. In Ukraine, Russia, Kazakhstan, Georgia and Azerbaijan, politicians — or their family members or friends — have been accused of having ties to offshore accounts or corruption. This will be worse news for some leaders than for others.

Azerbaijan
As in Russia and Kazakhstan, corruption charges are a perennial feature of Azerbaijani politics. President Ilham Aliyev, the son of Azerbaijan's third president, and his wife, Mehriban, both come from influential families with extensive business connections at home and abroad. Several members of the president's family, including his wife, children and sister, have now been linked to secret offshore companies.​

Nonetheless, little will come of the reports in Azerbaijan. The political opposition is too weak to challenge the Aliyevs, and the media have already begun to spin the accusations as Western propaganda. Given the country's poor economic conditions, the scandal could spark protests, which Baku can quickly quell.​

Georgia
Former Prime Minister Bidzina Ivanishvili's foreign business dealings are also included in the Panama Papers. Allegations of corruption have plagued Ivanishvili ever since he threw his hat into the political arena in 2011. But until now, the accusations had centered on his activities in Russia.

Ivanishvili's power in Georgia has been steady for the past four years. In Tbilisi, he remains a kingmaker, planting his followers in all the country's top positions. His Georgian Dream coalition is fracturing, however, holding only a slight majority in the legislature. With parliamentary elections set for this fall, accusations are already flying between Georgia's various political parties. Although most of the country's population has ignored the news so far, the Panama Papers will fuel the opposition's politicking. Moreover, if it gains more traction among the people, the scandal could erode Ivanishvili's influence at a time when his ruling coalition is already falling apart.

Kazakhstan
Allegations of corruption, particularly concerning President Nursultan Nazarbayev and his family and friends, are constant and widespread in Kazakhstan. But because the country is on the verge of both economic recession and a succession of power, the fresh accusations could have greater impact than usual.

Nazarbayev's grandson Nurali Aliyev is accused of ties to offshore accounts. Just two weeks ago, Aliyev stepped down as deputy mayor of Astana to return to business, inviting speculation within the Kazakh media over his motives. Aliyev has long been considered a possible eventual successor to the presidency, although he is still too young to take a top government position.

On the other hand, his mother, Dariga, is a viable successor and already one of the most powerful figures in Kazakh politics. Following the March 20 parliamentary elections, she unexpectedly did not take a position in the legislature. This has led to speculation that she is jockeying for a more influential position before the formal succession commences. As the power struggle in Kazakhstan begins in earnest, rival political elites could use corruption charges provided by the Panama Papers against Aliyev or his mother.

Russia
In Russia, the loudest corruption allegations concern President Vladimir Putin. Although the president's name does not appear in any of the 11.5 million documents published, those of three of his closest friends — Sergei Roldugin, Arkady Rotenberg and Boris Rotenberg — do.

Longtime intermediaries for Putin's business, the Rotenberg brothers are unsurprising inclusions in the Panama Papers. Among Russia's elite, the brothers are not decision-makers. Nonetheless, they are considered to be some of the country's highest-ranked loyalists, trusted to handle Putin's furtive financial and business affairs. Roldugin, a cellist, is also outside of Russian politics. But he, too, is a loyalist and one of Putin's trusted associates; in fact, he is godfather to Putin's eldest daughter. Following the Panama Papers leaks, Roldugin stands accused of moving more than $2 billion for the president.

The Kremlin's reaction to the Panama Papers actually anticipated their release. Nearly two weeks ago, presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov warned journalists that a Western "information attack" on Putin was forthcoming but that it would not be factually accurate. On April 5, two days after the release, Peskov went a step further, denouncing the Panama Papers as a demonstration of "Putinphobia" and claiming that the journalists' allegations were nothing new. Indeed, corruption charges against Putin and his close friends predate the president's rise to power. By now, they have been assimilated into the Russian people's mindset.

Peskov also called the papers an attempt to undermine Russia before its elections in September. In this, too, there is a hint of truth. Putin's administration has been concerned about the possibility of protests after the elections, on a scale comparable to — or perhaps worse than — the mass demonstrations that followed the 2011 parliamentary elections. In the 2011 protests, corruption in the Kremlin was a central theme. Renewed corruption accusations could compound public resentment over the weak economy in Russia, fueling larger protests.

To reduce the risk of protest, the Kremlin is trying to turn the Panama Papers into a rallying point. Russian media and the government continually highlight this as another attack on the country and its president. After the West imposed sanctions on Russia, similar rhetoric was used successfully, reviving nationalism across the country.

Ukraine
Of all the former Soviet states, Ukraine will likely see the greatest fallout from the Panama Papers, which allege that President Petro Poroshenko holds accounts offshore. In response to the revelations, Ukrainian politicians are already calling for an investigation into Poroshenko's hidden funds. The head of the Radical Party has even pushed for the president's impeachment. But Ukraine's Office of the Prosecutor General said the papers contain no evidence that Poroshenko committed any crimes. For his part, Poroshenko has gone on the defensive. In a string of tweets, the president called himself the first of Ukraine's leaders to take corruption seriously. At the same time, he has skirted the issue of his culpability, claiming that he handed management of his assets over to a consulting firm upon taking office.​

The papers' publication came at an inconvenient time for Poroshenko. Over the past week, the president had been close to a deal on a parliamentary coalition between his party, Prime Minister Arseniy Yatsenyuk's People's Front and a group of independent lawmakers. In light of the scandal, Poroshenko's faction now believes the deal may not come through after all. Poroshenko had been lobbying for the new government, a prerequisite for Ukraine to receive its next tranche of money from the International Monetary Fund and increased financial assistance from the United States. Poroshenko's mention in the Panama Papers could not only further destabilize the fragile government, but it may also weaken the president's rule.


panama-papers.png



Europe

France
In France, the fallout from the papers has landed mostly on the National Front, a right-wing party that has found some electoral success of late. They implicate former party adviser Frederic Chatillon, who was previously charged with electoral fraud related to the 2012 election. The National Front has already distanced itself from Chatillon. Evidence of offshore financing would be particularly detrimental if it was linked to party leaders, who have crafted an image of their party as honorable alternatives to their corrupt establishment counterparts.

Iceland
The Panama Papers have had the biggest impact in one of Europe's smallest countries: Iceland. The papers revealed that Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson made suspicious transactions of some bank shares before the global financial crisis of 2008. Icelanders took to the streets in protest, and the prime minister resigned. (He would later say he had merely "stepped aside for an unknown period.") His coalition in parliament now appears insecure. A snap election could bring to power the Pirate Party, an anti-establishment party that currently leads in polls and advocates a system of direct democracy.

United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom, Prime Minister David Cameron has borne the brunt of the anger over the papers. His father was listed among those who held offshore accounts, and Cameron has now had to admit to owning a tax-efficient product before his premiership began. The media have begun to question actions he took in 2013 that appeared to hinder the process of increasing the transparency of offshore havens. Cameron's interference might have been in Britain's interest, since the United Kingdom could be said to have benefited from the global tax avoidance industry. Regardless of Cameron's intentions, the subject has added fire to an already heated atmosphere surrounding the Brexit referendum. Though the latest leaks are unlikely to unseat Cameron on their own, further revelations could, and any damage done to the British prime minister's reputation will hurt his campaign to remain in the European Union as well.​

Latin America
Argentina
In Argentina, the Panama Papers linked President Mauricio Macri to an offshore company, although he has since denied being a shareholder in the company. An Argentine prosecutor has already requested the opening of an investigation into Macri's involvement with the company. The opposition Front for Victory, which has been dealing with internal divisions, is eager to keep the spotlight on the Macri offshore company scandal ahead of legislative elections in 2017, and the opposition would use the investigation against the Macri administration.

Brazil
Brazil has enough political turmoil going on already that revelations in the Panama Papers will probably have minimal effect. The leaks have linked lower house leader Eduardo Cunha to an offshore company, but Cunha and other Brazilian politicians are already tied up in the graft scandal at state-owned energy firm Petrobras. Ongoing criminal investigations against members of the ruling Workers' Party, such as former President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva, and the impeachment attempt against President Dilma Rousseff will probably have a more immediate political effect than the Panama Papers will.

Guatemala
In Guatemala, the release of information through the leaked documents will draw greater scrutiny from the government investigative commission known as the International Commission Against Impunity in Guatemala (CICIG). The United Nations-sponsored body announced it would investigate the documents for evidence of wrongdoing. A CICIG investigation led to the indictment of former President Otto Perez Molina on corruption charges in 2015, and further evidence of Guatemalan officials' corruption, if found, could kick off additional investigations by CICIG in the country.

Venezuela
The fallout from the Panama Papers leaks in Venezuela is likely to be minimal. None of the key individuals in the ruling United Socialist Party of Venezuela are named in the leaks. The ongoing political standoff between the government and opposition, growing divisions in the ruling party, and the country's extreme inflation are all likely to more immediately influence the country's political future than corruption allegations.​

Asia-Pacific

China
Beijing imposed an almost total media blackout on the Panama Papers: The only state media coverage on the subject was a print edition of Global Times claiming that the Panama Papers were a way for the West to attack its enemies.

The papers uncovered at least eight cases of family members of current or serving Politburo members who have done business with Mossack Fonseca. These include President Xi Jinping's brother-in-law (though his accounts have been inactive since before Xi took power), family members of current Politburo Standing Committee members Liu Yunshan and Zhang Gaoli, the daughter of former Premier Li Peng, a granddaughter of former Standing Committee member Jia Qinglin, and a business partner of purged Politburo member Bo Xilai.

The papers are unlikely to affect the Politburo, whose members are all from the ruling class and are aware that other members of the same class tend to be wealthy (with some possessing ill-gotten gains). Given the pervasive anti-corruption campaign and the intense political struggle as Xi Jinping ascended to the presidency, there was incentive for factions to dig up any dirt on each other long ago. As a result, much of the political effect of any of the revelations is likely already tapped out. The revelations might, however, spotlight some lower-level or midlevel officials who have not yet become targets of anti-corruption investigations.

Chinese law enforcement and anti-graft authorities have shown a fair amount of skill in tracking down illegal capital flows abroad as part of fugitive hunting campaigns such as Operation Fox Hunt and Operation Skynet, uprooting Chinese underground banks that handled upward of $100 billion in transactions from April to November last year. These were domestic operations; whether Chinese law enforcement is good at tracing shell companies in offshore accounts remains unclear. Presumably, though, investigators have encountered the problem while handling the assets of fugitives — generally Party members and their families who flee China, bringing with them large amounts of embezzled or otherwise illegal wealth.

Chinese intelligence and anti-graft services will sift through the documents to identify potential new targets. To the extent that the papers shed light on how Chinese citizens like to hide their wealth, they may be able to seal off further escape options for fugitives and their assets. More interesting is the question of how much the Chinese already knew but never shared, both in terms of dirt on perpetrators and in understanding their tactics.​

Middle East and North Africa

In many countries in the Middle East and North Africa, corruption charges will not create much of a stir because of media restrictions and because it is widely known that wealth often primarily benefits the royal family or ruling elite. Given the lenient tax structures in those countries, the kinds of things described in the Panama Papers may not even be considered crimes. In countries such as Iraq, Jordan, Syria and Egypt, however, the charges against prominent former politicians will fuel distrust of the establishment.

Egypt
In Egypt, the papers indicate that Mossack Fonseca did not conduct due diligence in identifying and cutting ties with Alaa Mubarak, the son of deposed President Hosni Mubarak, quickly enough after the 2011 Egyptian revolution. (Alaa used the firm to hold cash in a British Virgin Islands firm.)

Gulf States
While Saudi King Salman and UAE President Sheikh Khalifa bin Zayed al-Nuhayyan were both implicated in Virgin Island shell companies, Gulf media coverage has focused on how the Panama Papers affect other places, such as Iran, and has not touched on domestic implications. It is unlikely that the revelations will instigate a serious challenge to the Saudi or UAE governments.

Iran
In Iran, the papers revealed that Mossack Fonseca conducted business for Iranian oil companies such as Petropars despite U.S. sanctions, a revelation more damning for Mossack Fonseca than for Iran.

Iraq
In Iraq, former Prime Minister Ayad Allawi's name surfaced in the Panama Papers in connection to various London properties. Allawi was removed from office in August 2015 when Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi abolished the vice presidencies in a bid to stem protests. The leaks could undermine any attempt by Allawi to re-enter the government in the event that al-Abadi's government collapsed. Iraq's central government has already been overwhelmed by protests demanding a purge of corrupt officials, though recent reshufflings to install technocrats are more likely to deepen Iran's influence in Baghdad than defuse anger at the government.

Israel, Palestinian Territories
In Israel, the papers implicated some major banks that have been linked to corruption before. Idan Ofer, the majority shareholder in Israel Corp., the largest private joint stock company on Tel Aviv's stock exchange, was also named in the papers. Moreover, Tareq Abbas, the son of Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, held shares worth nearly $1 million in a company associated with the Palestinian Authority.

Jordan
In Jordan, it was revealed that former Prime Minister and Defense Minister Ali Abu al-Ragheb became the director of an offshore British Virgin Islands firm before leaving office.

Syria
In Syria, Mossack Fonseca cut ties in 2011 with the Makhlouf brothers — cousins of President Bashar al Assad — after nearly 15 years of using offshore entities to invest in the brothers' Syrian tech firms.​

Sub-Saharan Africa
Though several prominent politicians of African countries or their close associates have been linked to the scandal, it will have little effect on the continent's governments. The threshold of corruption in many places in Africa, whose history is littered with elites who engaged in egregious acts of self-enrichment, is higher than in other places in the world. More important, many of those mentioned in the leaks are either no longer in office or are related to former leaders. Moreover, some of the people named with links to current rulers likely used offshore companies with their governments' blessing.

Angola
Angola Minister of Petroleum Jose Maria Botelho de Vasconcelos, a former president of OPEC, held interest in an offshore company that was deactivated in 2009. The revelation may damage his career in the image-sensitive country. He likely had implicit or explicit sanction from the regime.

Republic of the Congo
The Republic of the Congo's current minister of science research and former energy minister, Bruno Jean-Richard Itoua, requested that Mossack Fonseca create an offshore company in the British Virgin Islands. In a 2003 lawsuit, Itoua was accused of diverting oil revenues, but the case was dismissed. Itoua has close ties to President Denis Sassou-Nguesso, so any blowback on Itoua will likely be limited.

Rwanda
Gen. Emmanuel Ndahiro, Rwanda's former head of intelligence, is listed as the director of an offshore company owned by a former military colleague. Ndahiro is a close confidant of President Paul Kagame.

South Africa
Clive Khulubuse Zuma, the nephew of President Jacob Zuma, was linked to a company involved in acquisitions of oil fields in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. He has a reputation for being involved in shady business deals, and claims against him go back at least five years. He has denied any wrongdoing.​

South Asia

Pakistan
Some 500 Indians and 200 Pakistanis were implicated in the Panama Papers, the most prominent of them being three of Pakistani Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif's children. Although Sharif himself was not implicated, he went so far as to give a televised national address on April 5 to exonerate his family and announce the launch of a judicial probe to investigate the matter. But opposition lawmaker Imran Khan of the Tehreek-e-Insaf party quickly demanded that the prime minister allow the National Accountability Bureau, which leads Pakistan's anti-corruption efforts, to take charge of the probe. The leak is unlikely to lead to Sharif's resignation, but opposition parties will make political gains at the expense of the premier's Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz party.​



Those Who Are (and Are Not) Sheltered From the Panama Papers is republished with permission of Stratfor."







 
The Panama Papers:
Unraveling the secret shell game of the rich

Massive leak exposes how the wealthy and powerful hide their money
World leaders, soccer stars, billionaires and friends of powerful named.


Links in the offshore chain:














Politicians and their allies:














The uses of hidden fortunes











The spoils of corruption












Spies and shadowy allies lurk in secret


The fallout from the leak





Global anger over Panama Papers
Have an offshore? Maybe you’re feeling indigestion

Wyoming investigates Panama Papers law firm


The crux over shell companies: Who are the true owners?




Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article70324002.html#storylink=cpy
 

After Panama papers leak: U.S., Britain are eager for names


  • After leak of Panama papers, thousands demand Iceland leader step down
  • Names in Panama law firm’s secret database to be disclosed in May
  • Kremlin defends Putin and friends, who have offshores

Offshore-Reax_02

A man looks at television screens in an electronics shop as Russian President President Vladimir Putin addresses the 70th session of the United Nations General Assembly, Moscow, Russia, Sept. 28, 2015. Pavel Golovkin AP


Offshore-Reax_01

People gather to demonstrate against Iceland's prime minister, in Reykjavik, Iceland, on Monday, April 4, 2016. Iceland's prime minister insisted Monday he would not resign after documents leaked in a media investigation allegedly link him to an offshore company that could represent a serious conflict of interest, according to information leaked from a Panamanian law firm at the center of an international tax evasion scheme. Brynjar Gunnasrson AP


McClatchy News D.C.
tjohnson@mcclatchydc.com


WASHINGTON - The U.S. and British governments Monday vowed to examine more closely foreign politicians and tycoons who hide fortunes in secret offshore accountseven as governments across the globe felt a wave of public anger over leaders with hidden assets.

Thousands of protesters gathered in Iceland’s capital of Reykjavik to demand the ouster of that nation’s leader over revelations of his offshore holdings. Riot police stood nearby, but the protest remained peaceful.

Inside Iceland’s parliament, opposition legislators considered a no-confidence vote of Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson, a move that would lead to fresh elections, over news that he did not properly disclose his ties to Wintris Inc., a British Virgin Islands company with money tied to the nation’s collapsed banks. Gunnlaugsson denied that his ownership was a conflict of interest, insisted he’d broken no laws and said he would not resign.

From the White House to the Kremlin, and on to Panama City, Vienna and London, governments reacted to the disclosure of the so-called Panama Papers, a law firm’s once-secret database that details the offshore interests of 12 current or former world leaders, as well as 128 other politicians and public officials.

No U.S. politicians of note were found in the archives of the Mossack Fonseca law firm, a global leader in setting up offshore corporations. The U.S. Justice Department signaled that it could focus its gaze more intently on political corruption even when it occurs outside of U.S. borders.

“While we cannot comment on the specifics of these alleged documents, the U.S. Department of Justice takes very seriously all credible allegations of high level, foreign corruption that might have a link to the United States or the U.S. financial system,” Justice Department spokesman Peter Carr said.

White House spokesman Josh Earnest called the Obama administration a leader “in working against illicit financial transactions and in fighting corruption” and added that it would push to promote more financial transparency.

But Earnest defended one key U.S. ally, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko, who is under fire after the so-called Panama Papers revealed a secret offshore company in the British Virgin Islands set up in his name. Known as the “chocolate king” because of his candy business, Poroshenko is one of Ukraine’s richest men.


Earnest said that Poroshenko has led “a whole bunch of anti-corruption reforms in Ukraine.”

“When you consider the record of President Poroshenko's predecessor, it is clear that they have made some important progress,” Earnest said.

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), the Washington-based nonprofit that oversaw the collaborative media project, is expected to make public the names of the thousands of clients, shareholders and owners of offshore companies in May.

A former IRS official said the agency will likely look into the findings.

"Once the IRS becomes aware of the identities of these people, I almost can guarantee you that they will do some kind of triaging of the data to see if there are U.S. people in there and based on the results of that, they may elect to go after people," said Daniel Reeves, who helped create the IRS offshore compliance unit before retiring in 2012.


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article69918377.html#storylink=cpy

.
 
Funny how this is not playing more of an importance in the current primaries.

LOL, maybe this is why -- Be careful of what you ask for !!!:



Ecuador’s leader demands release of
Panama Papers, and learns he’s in them


President had bragged his country was among the most honest in
wake of Panama Papers’ release




AP_917900415059

Ecuador's President Rafael Correa attends a conference organized by the Pontifical A
cademy of Social Sciences, at the Vatican Friday, April 15, 2016. Andrew Medichini AP



AP_110627148916

In this photo taken June 27, 2011, Fabricio Correa, left, the eldest brother of Ecuador's President Rafael Correa, stands at the entrance of construction site he owns in Guayaquil, Ecuador. Fabricio Correa, a critic of his younger brother's government, is getting lots of attention for publicly ridiculing Rafael Correa and his inner circle with jokes, songs and satiric mimicry. Patricio Realpe AP


WASHINGTON -- In the weeks after the release of the documents now known as the Panama Papers, Ecuadoran President Rafael Correa called out his country’s journalists and boasted that, unlike other countries, he and his government weren’t found in the leak.

However, the secret documents show that he and his estranged brother, Fabricio, caught the attention of anti-corruption authorities in Panama in 2012.

Panamanian prosecutors confirmed to McClatchy that investigators looked into an offshore company in Panama because of embezzlement concerns. And a secret email within the Panama Papers says Correa and his brother, Fabricio, were the focus of the inquiry.

“The president is a very honest person,” Omar Simon, the president’s top adviser, told McClatchy. “This is all absolutely false. And he’s not involved in any offshore company directly or indirectly.”

“We’re happy with the Panama Papers,” Mera told the Ecuadoran daily El Universo in April 13 editions. “It has shown that the Ecuadoran government is one of the most honest in the world, there is no government functionary that has anything hidden.”

That’s not correct. Ecuadoran journalists published three names of officials connected to Correa’s government that appeared in the leak of the law firm’s documents. It was last week that McClatchy found the email mentioning President Correa.

The president berated the journalists who worked collaboratively to expose the Panama Papers — a leak of 11.5 million secret documents from the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. He has repeatedly demanded the full release of the massive archive.

First he took to Twitter to criticize the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, or ICIJ, the umbrella organization that organized more than 300 global journalists, including several from McClatchy, which is the sole U.S. newspaper partner.

Then on April 11, he excoriated the findings, which have led to investigations and resignations across the globe.

“They spent almost a year looking for something against the Ecuadoran government and they haven’t found anything,” Correa tweeted from his presidential handle @MashiRafael.

A day later, he tweeted the names and handles of Ecuadoran journalists who participated, asking his citizens to “demand from them that they reveal ALL the truth.”

In fact, Ecuador is often mentioned in the documents. Just searching the word “Ecuador” yields more than 160,000 secret documents. Guayaquil, the wealthy coastal city, shows up in 109,000 documents.

When taking office in 2007, Correa promised a “revolution against corruption,” but it remains a problem. Last year, Transparency International ranked 168 countries and territories on its government corruption index. It found that 106 nations were less corrupt than Ecuador.

Ecuador adopted the U.S. dollar as its currency in 2000. Correa, who holds a Ph.D. in economics from the University of Illinois-Urbana, has adopted a populist style, tightened Ecuador’s ties with China and fiercely criticized the U.S. government.

Correa and older brother Fabricio have engaged in a long-running family drama that has played out in the pages of newspapers and on television screens. Accused of profiting from his brother via state contracts, Fabricio unsuccessfully launched a presidential bid to run against his brother in 2012 on an anti-corruption platform.

They appear together in the Panama Papers, in an email from Mossack Fonseca lawyers in Panama to a law firm in Guayaquil.

“My name is Sara Montenegro, lawyer for Mossack Fonseca & Co. and I'm writing to notify you of an investigation being undertaken by the office of the Anti-Corruption Prosecutor of Panama, in reference to Misters FABRICIO CORREA and RAFAEL CORREA DELGADO for the crime of embezzlement against the Ecuadoran state, an investigation which involves a Panamanian corporation that was sold to you in 2006 called ORLION GROUP S.A.,” said the May 4, 2012, email to a lawyer working for the Legalsa & Asociados firm, which opened the offshore on behalf of an unidentified customer.​

Prosecutors asked Mossack Fonseca for shareholder information, “which we did not give since we don’t have it,” Montenegro added. She asked Legalsa & Asociados for information on the true owners of the Orlion Group S.A. because an official demand was likely.​

In a May 10, 2012, internal email, Mossack Fonseca’s head of compliance, Sandra de Cornejo, recommends that her firm drop services to the Orlion Group S.A.​

“Although we have not found anything that ties the Correas and the entity,” she cautions, “I suggest resigning … because of the scant cooperation received from the client.”​

De Cornejo notes that Mossack Fonseca had been seeking the required know-your-customer documents about Orlion since April 2010 from Legalsa & Asociados. More than two years later, and only after a visit from a Panamanian anti-corruption team, Mossack Fonseca decided to resign as the service provider to Orlion Group.​

McClatchy sent an email to the Legalsa lawyer who corresponded with Mossack Fonseca, but it bounced back. Requests for comment via its website were not returned, and the phone number on the website rings without answer or messaging service.


Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article73448692.html#storylink=cpy


.
 
Funny how this is not playing more of an importance in the current primaries.

. . . but soon it might !!!


What Panama Papers say - and don’t say - about Trump

Trump doesn't appear as an owner of offshores

His name, however, appears 3,540 times in leaked documents

Some of his partners and associates are in the documents

trump2

In this July 6, 2011 file photo, U.S. tycoon Donald Trump attends the inauguration ceremony of the Trump Ocean Club International Hotel and Tower in Panama City. Arnulfo Franco AP




GOP%202016%20Trump%20Panama%20(2)

This July 4, 2011, file photo, shows the Trump Ocean Club International Hotel and Tower, third building from left, in Panama City, Panama. Arnulfo Franco AP



By Kevin G. Hall, Franco Ordoñez and Vera Bergengruen



WASHINGTON
The massive leak of documents known as the Panama Papers illustrates how Donald J. Trump and others seek to profit off his very name alone.

The real estate mogul and billionaire doesn’t appear to be the direct owner of any offshore company formed by Mossack Fonseca, the Panamanian law firm that is now the subject of multiple investigations after its documents were leaked to journalists.

The Trump name shows up on 3,540 of those leaked documents, many shedding light on what has become a business model. Some of his associates and business partners are also in the files.

Early in his career, Trump developed properties. Over the decades, he has increasingly let others invest the capital and take the risks. He sells them his name and reputation, and is paid millions in return.


That’s the case with the Trump Ocean Club International Hotel & Tower in Panama. In the law firm’s files, it is the most frequent association with Trump’s name, since his business partners in the project appear as buyers of condo units, some of whom create offshore shell companies with Mossack Fonseca for the purchase.

More on that shortly.

Some Trumps aren’t Trumps
McClatchy's reporters are among 400 journalists across the globe coordinated by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists that are searching the leaked law firm's documents. The 11.5 million files contain emails, financial information, passports and incorporation papers for offshore companies.

The Republican presidential candidate has disclosed that he has 515 companies, with 378 registered in Delaware, he said last week while campaigning.

In many cases, others, like Trump, seek to capitalize on his famous name.

Trump Wise Investment Ltd. was created by the Hong Kong firm Instant Companies Limited and registered in the British Virgin Islands from 1998 to late 2005. The secret documents show Mossack Fonseca did not even know who the shareholders were.

Similarly, Trump World Capital Ltd in the British Virgin Islands was opened in late 2006 by Mossack Fonseca’s Singapore office. It remains active, with shareholders listing addresses in Palembang, Indonesia. One shareholder is a young woman whose LinkedIn profile describes her as merchandising supervisor at a small clothing retailer.

Neither of these appear to be connected to Trump in any way.

Brand Trump
Trump is distinctive because his name, in many ways, is actually his business. His name is a brand, synonymous with both luxury and brashness. The simple use of his name garners licensing fees and royalties. Panama offered him entry into a new line of business for the Trump empire —waterfront resorts in Central America.

In a promotional video ahead of the opening on July 6, 2011, Trump said he fell in love with the country during one of the Miss Universe contests he owned.

“And we’re now doing a great, great project in Panama that’s selling like hotcakes, and I think it’s one of the most beautiful buildings in the world,” Trump said, speaking in the collective and sounding like an investor. “So I’m really honored to be involved in Panama.”



However, the fine print on the resort’s webpage, reveals the hallmark of Trump’s business model.

“Trump Ocean Club International Hotel & Tower Panama is not owned, developed or sold by Donald J. Trump, the Trump Organization or any of their principals or affiliates,” it reads. “Newland International Properties, Corp., the owner and developer of the property, uses the ‘Trump’ name and mark under license from Trump Marks Panama LLC, which license may be terminated or revoked according to its terms.”

Newland, the project developer, paid Trump for the right to have his name splashed all over the 70-story mega condo, hotel, marina and casino constructed in the shape of massive sail. A draft contract found in the secret files suggests Trump also gets from Newland a small percentage from every condo sold, something later confirmed by the original developer.

To ensure that the hotel meets his quality standards, Delaware-based Trump Panama Hotel Management LLC manages the hotel operations. And K Group, owned by developer Newland, pays Trump Marks Panama about $5 million annually for the Trump name, the candidate’s financial disclosures show.

“You know Donald Trump. First it’s we, we, we, we, but after a while it’s me, me, me, me,” said Roger Khafif, who had the vision for the project and ran the company that developed the Trump resort. “That’s the art of the deal.”

Newland raised about $220 million in bond sales to fund the resort’s construction, but the bonds were downgraded just months after the ribbon-cutting ceremony. By 2013, the developer of the luxury resort that bore Trump’s name — despite his having little financial investment —filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection to restructure what it owed bondholders.

The bankruptcy affected Trump's licensing fees, according to an Oct. 11, 2015, report by the Associated Press that said Trump's total payout remained between $32 million and $55 million. The upper-end figure suggests his payment consumed a quarter of the money raised from the bonds.

Trumpless in Cartagena
Fernando March, an Ecuador-based investment banker and CEO of S&F Managers LTD, used Mossack Fonseca to create a trust so investors could contribute to projects such as one in Cartagena, Colombia. He asked Trump to invest in a multi-use development that included two hotels, condos and a golf course.

March said he met twice with Trump in 2013 but the billionaire wasn't willing to invest any money. He did offer the use of his name — for a fee. March even offered to change the posh Delano or Mondrian Hotels into a Trump-named hotel.

“He was not willing to invest and at that time we needed someone to put the money down,” said March. “We were not willing to use his name without any money. That is the kind of business he would love to do.”

Naming names
Over decades Trump has built a sprawling global real-estate empire, along with clothing lines and even a now-defunct university program that bears his name. So it’s no surprise that his business partners might appear in the documents that leaked from Mossack Fonseca.

Much like Hillary Clinton, the subject of an earlier Panama Papers story by McClatchy, Trump’s ties to people in the documents or their offshore companies are indirect. Like Clinton, he’s associated with people who turn up in the offshore world.

==========================================
An unprecedented look at offshores

A database leak at the Mossack Fonseca law firm in Panama exposes how it hides money for its clients.​

The leak: Munich’s Suddeutsche Zeitung newspaper was given the files, which were shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists.

Its size: 11.5 million emails and client records. It would take 24 hours to download the 2.6 terabytes at normal internet speeds.

The media partners: More than 350 journalists, including a U.S. McClatchy reporting team, in 77 countries examined the data.

Who was found: 12 current and former heads of state and government, 61 relatives and associates of leaders, and 128 other public officials.

Vincent H.S. Lo appears in the documents. The Hong Kong businessman is seen as a Trump-like Asian celebrity businessman. Like Trump, Lo had his own TV show, called “The Winner.” He made a fortune developing China’s business capital of Shanghai.

A decade ago, Trump sued Lo for $1 billion over the sale of a Manhattan property they jointly owned. The sale in 2005 was at the time viewed as the biggest residential retail sale in New York history, and Trump thought the $1.76 billion sale price was too low.

Lo’s company, Shui On, owns SOCAM Development Limited, which operates an active offshore company in the Bahamas called T.H. Industrial Management Limited that was registered in 1994. SOCAM officials did not return emails requesting comment.

Camilo Benedetti, an investment banker for one of Trump’s partners, Yun Capital Group, provided his passport to Mossack Fonseca to create what his lawyer called “a virtual office.” Often offshore companies use virtual offices to give the appearance of a brick-and-mortar firm. Calls and emails to company officials in Hong Kong and New York weren’t returned.

Yun Capital Group, a frequent partner on Trump projects around the world, and Trump are partnering on a planned luxury tower in Bogota.

Trump’s campaign declined to comment about his partners or his business practices.

Having associations with business people who use the offshore world won’t likely damage Trump politically, said Michael Tanner, a senior fellow at the libertarian Cato Institute.

That, said Tanner, is because “essentially he’s running on, ‘I’m a rich guy and I know rich guys.’ He’s not trying to hide it in any way.”

Offshore shell companies are legal and have legal uses. But they can often be abused, as the leaked documents show, for everything from laundering drug money to hiding the fruits of corruption and tax evasion.

Trump campaign aide’s links
Former partners and associates of Trump campaign strategist Paul Manafort, a lawyer and lobbyist, appear in the Panama Papers too. One is a Russian aluminum magnate Oleg Deripaska, currently suing Manafort and investment partners in a Cayman Islands court over a $26 million offshore entity that went bust about eight years ago.

“He and others gave deposition testimony last year under the auspices of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at the request of a Cayman Islands court,” Richard Hibey, Manafort’s lawyer, confirmed, adding Manafort has never done business through Mossack Fonseca. “The proceeding in the Virginia federal court is ‘terminated.’”

The documents show Deripaska as the true owner of Batu Mining Limited, an offshore company opened in the British Virgin Islands in 2003 and designed, the documents said, for investments in the Mongolian coal mining business. Attempts to reach Deripaska through his website and a Cyprus firm handling his offshore went unanswered.

A 2009 British lawsuit names Ziad Takieddine, a Franco-Lebanese businessman, as the owner of an offshore company called Warwick Estates Limited in the British Virgin Islands. The lawsuit, found in Mossack Fonseca files, suggests the offshore was a holding company for pricey London property.

Manafort and Takieddine have both become involved with an investigation of an ongoing scandal in France from 1995. The inquiry was about arm sales and the campaign funds of former French President Edoard Balladur, who Manafort was then advising.

“(Manafort) was interviewed by USDOJ (Justice Department) at the request of the French authorities. He was thanked for his cooperation. Nothing more transpired,” Hibey said, denying Manafort had any relationship with Takieddine.

The ties that wind
Trump partners or customers who appear in the leak of Mossack Fonseca documents now avoid association with the beleaguered Panamanian law firm.

Khafif’s, the resort developer, appears by name 118 times in the leak, mostly in contracts for the purchase of specific units. Khafif is working on the other side of Mossack Fonseca lawyers to close the sale.

“That’s it. We have no relationship with Mossack Fonseca,” said Khafif insisted. “I don’t know them.”

But the buyers of these units, some of them Americans, are often using offshore companies set up by Mossack Fonseca. Payments are sometimes made through the firm’s trust service.

One such offshore company was Trump Ocean Club Unit 2710 Inc., registered on May 7, 2007. Its shareholders include Connecticut lawyer Carlton Hume, who couldn’t remember why he and partners tapped Mossack Fonseca to create his offshore company before the project was built.

“They were obviously pitching stuff to folks in the U.S. to buy in their development,” Hume said. “If I had to guess, I would guess that it was the developer who recommended them to us.”

While the documents show they formed an offshore company in Panama to buy the unit, Hume said they backed out when the project appeared to be in trouble.

Seeing green in Trump
An industrial engineer, Carlos Saravia was Newland’s chief operating officer for the Trump-named Panama resort project. Reached by phone, the Colombian businessman first denied ever working with the Panama Papers law firm.

But when confronted with his email exchanges with Mossack Fonseca lawyer Ramses Owens, Saravia offered that maybe the Panamanian firm pitched its services to the Trump-named project.

“Because they offered, and we received them, and we heard them out and that’s it,” he said. “We solicited bids from various Panamanian firms.”

The emails show Saravia reached out to Mossack Fonseca, even agreeing to pay travel expenses up to $2,500 for each of two Mossack Fonseca lawyers.

After internal debate about who should go, Owens responded to Saravia. “We’ve talked about this with the upper management. It will be a great pleasure visiting you in Colombia,” he said.


McClatchy reporters William Douglas and Lesley Clark contributed, as did Nicolas Richter of Panama Papers partner Suddeutsche Zeitung.

Kevin G. Hall: 202-383-6038, @KevinGHall

Franco Ordonez: 202-383-0010, @francoordonez

Vera Bergengruen: 202-383-6036, @verambergen

Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article74789322.html#storylink=cpy



Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article74789322.html#storylink=cpy


.
 
Dale Kasler: dkasler@sacbee.com; @dakasler

The Secret Shell Game
A look inside how the wealthy and famous hide money.


Links in the offshore chain









Politicians and their allies


The uses of hidden fortunes


The spoils of corruption

The fallout from the leak

 
U.S. banks help their best customers find their way to offshore accounts

Panama Papers shows that banks refer clients to Mossack Fonseca

One client sought an offshore for $14 million transaction

None of the banks mentioned in leaked documents would comment

wakil-passport


Mossack Fonseca’s leaked emails describe the client as globe-trotting entrepreneur Naman Wakil, who is worth more
than $400 million and has business interests in both North Carolina and Miami. He wanted to reduce U.S. tax liability
and protect his assets from creditors, emails reveal. Courtesy of ICIJ


Rick Rothacker and Kevin G. Hall
The Charlotte Observer and
McClatchy Washington Bureau


CHARLOTTE, N.C. - In the spring of 2015, Miami-based Citigroup banker Victor Olivo emailed the law firm at the heart of the Panama Papers scandal. He had a wealthy client who needed assistance.

Mossack Fonseca’s leaked emails describe the client as globetrotting entrepreneur Naman Wakil, who is worth about $400 million and has business interests in both North Carolina and Miami. He wanted to reduce his U.S. tax liability and protect his assets from creditors, his lawyer’s memo indicates.

The law firm quickly proposed to create a series of trusts and offshore companies for the client. A year later, Wakil was embroiled in a controversy that tied him to a Venezuelan general in an alleged procurement scam that reportedly netted $76 million.

More than 500 banks, their subsidiaries and branches registered nearly 15,600 shell companies with Mossack Fonseca between 1985 and 2015, according to an analysis by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. That’s the umbrella group that partnered with 370 journalists from news organizations in 80 countries, including McClatchy as the sole U.S. newspaper partner, to examine the 11.5 million leaked documents from the law firm.


U.S. and global banks have come under intense regulatory scrutiny in recent years because of customers who stashed their wealth in secret Swiss bank accounts.

Yet the Panama Papers are full of examples of the wealth-management and “private banking” divisions of U.S. and global banks working with customers to hide their assets elsewhere. Banks listed in the documents – including Citigroup, Morgan Stanley, Wells Fargo, Merrill Lynch and SunTrust – declined to comment.

Many of these bankers in the Mossack Fonseca documents are located in Miami.

Ken Thomas, a Miami-based banking consultant, said there’s a lot of money and a lot of wealth in Latin America and Central America and “it’s all centered in Miami.”

In November 2004, for example, Mossack Fonseca met with Merrill Lynch Miami-based adviser Sandra Caldera. The law firm’s Florida representative Olga Santini wrote a note back to her bosses explaining that Caldera, a Panamanian, said Merrill advisers were prohibited from opening offshores with the law firm. They were, however, open to informal channels, the email said.

“Client advisors are encouraged to use their inhouse [Merrill] (sic) services but are also not allowed to obtain offshore corporate services for their clients; what they can do, however is recommend someone.... as a personal thing,” Santini recounted of Caldera’s advice, adding she “has promised to use us in the future.”

Caldera’s name appears in the Panama Papers as the reference on 13 Mossack Fonseca-created offshore companies. Caldera and Charlotte-based Bank of America, which acquired Merrill in 2009, declined to comment.


Big regional banks are part of Mossack Fonseca’s dealings as well.

In a Sept. 12, 2008, email to headquarters, Santini writes to Edison Teano, then-head of the Mossack Fonseca Corporations Department, that a Miami-based vice president in the private-wealth arm of SunTrust Bank needed a document.

It wasn’t just any document. First Vice President Jeanette Barker needed certification of who holds secretive bearer shares for a shell company the law firm registered in the Seychelles, remote islands in the Indian Ocean.

“A certification that we have these shares in custody is enough for them,” Santini tells Mossack’s Teano.

The Atlanta-based bank wanted to know only that these secretive ownership shares, now banned almost everywhere because they provide anonymity from regulators, are in Mossack Fonseca’s possession.

The email trail in the Panama Papers shows that the law firm days later produced a notarized certificate listing the Faith Foundation as the shareholder of two Seychelles companies. That Panama-based foundation is run by Mossack Fonseca and appears as a director or shareholder of several dozen offshore companies. The law firm used it to offer clients a cloak on true ownership. The real owners for the Seychelles company was not clear from the documents.

SunTrust declined to comment.

Here’s why it matters that there’s an intersection between offshore-formation companies and U.S. banks and their private-wealth management arms: After Sept. 11, banks were held accountable for knowing who their customers are, a safeguard aimed at preventing the movement of money for terrorism or other unlawful purposes.

Politically exposed individuals are also red flags for both banks and law firms in the due-diligence process. Iceland’s prime minister stepped aside after his offshore involvement became public.

Wakil had ties to the highest levels of the government of Venezuela, an oil-rich nation and U.S. nemesis that suffers under triple-digit inflation and appears near collapse.

Wakil is a Syrian-born U.S resident with a Venezuelan passport, and was named in a 2015 book called El Gran Saqueo (The Great Plunder), which alleged widespread government corruption. Then on April 19, online investigative news site www.cuentasclarasdigital.org posted a report alleging Wakil had provided nearly $6 million to the brothers-in-law of a powerful Venezuelan general, Carlos Osorio Zambrano, in exchange for a lucrative supply contract.

OPTIONAL TRIM

The general commands the state food distribution agency known by its acronym CASA, and his wife, Iraida, is the sister of the two men whom Wakil allegedly paid to secure a government contract to provide beef. The watchdog website’s report says that Wakil in 2012 bought 40,000 tons of Brazilian beef at a discount because it was reaching its use-by date, but invoiced the government at normal prices, pocketing a difference of $76 million.

Gen. Osorio has denied any role in the transaction, which involved offshore companies that were not created by Mossack Fonseca. News reports on May 11 said embattled President Nicolas Maduro declined to investigate government food purchases.

The Panama papers also include the U.S. passports for Wakil's three children and a Venzuelan passport for his wife, Ingrid Sayegh. In Panama's company registry, she appears as treasurer of a company called Perdigao Agroindustrial Group Inc., created for Wakil by a competitor of Mossack Fonseca. The government of Curacao froze almost $13 million in assets tied to Perdigao, considering it a suspicious operation, cuentasclarasdigital.org reported.


When Olivo brought his customer Wakil to Mossack Fonseca, he did so via a personal email address. But the law firm was clearly aware of Olivo’s Citigroup ties. The leaked documents show Mossack Fonseca listed at least nine companies where Citigroup is the client and Olivo is the “reference,” an internal term for customer referrals.

Olivo did not respond to a request for comment. He left Citigroup in April, but started this month at UBS in Miami, according to a BrokerCheck Report from the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority. Citigroup declined to comment, and Wakil did not respond to calls to his company, Wakil Properties, in Miami.

To open his offshores with Mossack Fonseca, Wakil provided a copy of his own passport and those of his relatives. He included a utility bill that showed a multimillion-dollar address on the Biscayne Bay in Coconut Grove, near Miami.

Olivo provided a letter that showed Wakil, now 54, had an account with Citigroup in the “low seven figures” and a reference letter from Wakil’s childhood friend Souheil “Tony” Azar, who lives in the North Carolina town of Gastonia.

Wakil “is an outstanding self-made man,” Azar wrote, adding his friend was an “enthusiastic and helpful individual who displays a strong moral character.”

Records show that Azar is a co-manager with Wakil and Wakil’s wife, Ingrid, in a real estate investment company in Gastonia called Wakil Properties. The company is also incorporated in Florida, records show. Azar declined to comment.

The Panama Papers show Citigroup Private Bank and Olivo on two Panamanian company profiles with Wakil as the shareholder – Obelisk Global S.A. and Conferencee S.A. A series of trusts were planned for Wakil with help from a West Palm Beach lawyer, Lazaro Mur.

In an August 2015 memo sent to Olivo, Mur described Wakil as a wealthy individual and a U.S. resident for U.S. income tax purposes. Of Wakil’s $400 million in worldwide holdings, only about $14 million would be involved in the transaction, the memo said.

Transferring these assets into a type of trust would mean they weren’t subject to U.S. income taxes, Mur wrote. The trust would also keep these assets “beyond the reach of creditors,” according to the memo. Mur declined to comment.​

Offshore companies can be used for a number of legitimate reasons, including easier transfer of properties in estate planning. But they can also be used to avoid paying taxes or to hide money from creditors and associates, said Daniel Reeves, a former high-level executive in the IRS.

“There could be a variety of reasons, but I guarantee that taxes are in the mix there somewhere,” he said.

Banks risk their reputation when stepping into the offshore world, warned Brent Newman, an executive vice president of Accuity, which provides compliance services to banks.

“It lends itself to issues around reputation even if some of these are created for legitimate purposes,” he said, noting that “peeling back the onion” to learn about the customer is essential.

Banks must determine the name, address and tax identification number of clients, but they should dig deeper, said Bob Pasley, an Alexandria, Va.-based anti-money-laundering specialist.

“The question has to be asked: Why are you trying to set up this trust for tax-related purposes?” he said. “What is the tax-related purpose? Is it tax evasion or legitimate tax avoidance? And why are you or we, the bank, using this Panamanian law firm? This is a bit unusual.”

Kevin Hall: 202-383-6038, @kevinghall; Rick Rothacker 704-358-5170, @rickrothacker



Read more here: http://www.mcclatchydc.com/news/nation-world/national/article77477797.html#storylink=cpy
 
Back
Top