The Panama factor: offshore investment in an era of unprecedented tax transparency
Offshore centres should be more proactive in presenting their case to the public, the Legal Week Offshore Investment Forum heard
June 14, 2016 at 07:09 PM
7 minute read
The Panama papers featured heavily during Legal Week's inaugural Offshore Investment Forum in London.
Delegates at the half-day event, which was held at the Sofitel London St James, agreed that the drive for transparency and the exchange of information between offshore and onshore tax authorities would only intensify in the aftermath of the leak of 11.5 million files from Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca.
But there were also calls for the offshore centres to be more proactive in presenting their case to the public.
Ross Webber (pictured above), chief executive of the Bermuda Development Agency, said the Panama papers controversy presents Bermuda with: "An opportunity to differentiate ourselves from those jurisdictions that can't claim our longstanding, blue-chip record of transparency and compliance; an opportunity to explain the basic economics of globalisation; and an opportunity to clarify that our regulatory and business ecosystem is pragmatic and appropriate."
He was also keen to point out that several of his "jurisdictional cousins" might apply the same approach.
Attended by funds specialists, lawyers from international law firms and general counsel, the forum addressed a broad range of issues including funds regimes in different jurisdictions, the growth of insurance-linked securities, the impact of increased regulation and the effects of global tax transparency.
The regulators are very approachable, you can get hold of them and get an answer
Stephen Sims, who heads the European investment management group at Skadden Arps Slate Meagher & Flom, said one of the continuing attractions of offshore centres was that "the legislators listen". He added: "The regulators are very approachable, you can get hold of them and get an answer."
He said speed was also a factor. "How long does it take to get regulated as a manager in the UK at the moment? Many months," he continued. "There are fast-track procedures in a number of offshore jurisdictions, where it takes only a couple of weeks for the due diligence to be completed."
Elizabeth Denman (pictured below), a Bermuda-based director at Conyers Dill & Pearman, highlighted the transatlantic tension between flexibility and regulation: the "quick and snappy" US model of regulation, versus the European model, "which is becoming increasingly regulated". She added: "The offshore centres have to decide how to be all things to all people."
On the issue of privacy, she pointed to peer reviews undertaken by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), in which the British offshore dependent territories scored very high marks for having robust and transparent systems in place on beneficial ownership.
Meanwhile, there was plenty of evidence that the offshore funds market is continuing to evolve, with insurance-linked securities (ILS) as an asset class coming under the microscope. "In its purest form, an ILS transaction involves creating a fluid vehicle through which the capital markets can access risk," said Greg Wojciechowski, president and chief executive officer of the Bermuda Stock Exchange. "They provide fuel for the reinsurance industry."
The best-known vehicles are catastrophe bonds, or 'cat bonds', which enable institutional investors to invest in insurance companies that face claims from businesses affected by large-scale natural disasters. Simultaneously, risk managers gain insurance coverage and immediate access to capital in the event of claims. Critically, from a regulation viewpoint, the rights of investors are always subordinated to the rights of the cedant or sponsor (the insurance or reinsurance company) under the contract for risk transfer, said London-based Mayer Brown corporate partner Colin Scagell.
A panel discussion followed on private debt funds. Macfarlanes partner Alex Amos highlighted the growth of direct lending funds, which are of increasing appeal to several types of asset manager, including hedge funds. Ajay Pathak, a London-based funds partner at King & Wood Mallesons, said there are two key drivers fueling their growth: the continued pressure on European bank balance sheets has caused a reduction in available lending; and simultaneously there is increased investor appetite, with institutional investors in particular viewing private debt as an asset class in its own right.
On the issue of fund structure and domicility, large US sponsors typically use a combination of Cayman, Delaware and Bermuda jurisdictions, according to Dechert partner Gus Black; however, US managers are increasingly looking at European structures for a parallel European fundraise. Amos concurred, indicating that European sponsors tend to favour the Channel Islands and more recently, Luxembourg, which is attractive because of investor familiarity and its extensive treaty network.
Regulation of direct lending across the jurisdictions of Europe varies widely, according to Black, although there are efforts underway to harmonise the position. Most significant is the Capital Markets Union – a European Commission plan to improve access to capital by mobilising capital flows. Debt funds are seen as part of the solution, with regulator the European Securities and Markets Authority attempting to drive harmonisation. The funds panel agreed that, in principle, and most likely in practice, debt funds will also be subject to Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive regulation, and hence it is too early to say whether further specific legislation in this area would be helpful.
After examining the origins of global tax transparency, the tax panel discussed how this ideal has gained significant traction since the crisis: first via OECD tax information exchange agreements, which were quickly followed by the US Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act 2010. This, in turn, was a catalyst for 53 countries to agree Automatic Exchange of Information (AEOI), known as the Common Reporting Standard (CRS). In addition, there is the current, and continuous, OECD-led global fight to combat tax evasion and tax avoidance through the OECD's Base Erosion and Profit Shifting regime. "We are looking at transparency and automatic information exchange on a global scale," said Steven Rees Davies, a corporate partner at Appleby Global.
The early adoption of CRS was a very clear signal from the major offshore centres: we are very serious about tackling tax evasion
Ross Munro, global head of fiduciary at Harneys, said: "'In terms of tax transparency, the early adoption of CRS was a very clear signal from the major offshore centres: we are very serious about tackling tax evasion. We don't see AEOI as a problem for the underlying client base."
Although he predicted that AEOI will inevitably add to costs, implementation will also drive fund volume to those offshore centres that have the established expertise to manage the reporting – a relatively small number of international offshore centres.
At the same time, Munro cautioned about a new blacklist agreed by European Union finance ministers, and likely to be announced before the end of the year: "The criteria used to establish any blacklist is critical. In terms of where funds are domiciled in international offshore centres, simply being a tax-neutral jurisdiction with no or low taxation on corporate profits should not be a factor for a jurisdiction being put on a blacklist."
Related event: Legal Week International Private Client Forum
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllInternational Arbitration: Key Developments of 2024 and Emerging Trends for 2025
4 minute readThe Quiet Revolution: Private Equity’s Calculated Push Into Law Firms
5 minute read'Almost Impossible'?: Squire Challenge to Sanctions Spotlights Difficulty of Getting Off Administration's List
4 minute readTrending Stories
- 1'David and Goliath' Dispute Between Software Developers Ends in $24M Settlement
- 2Supreme Court Takes Up the Corporate Transparency Act: Recent Litigation and Potential Next Steps
- 3Brogdon: The Final Nail in Corbin’s Coffin in Premises Cases
- 4What to Know About the New 'Overlapping Directorship' Antitrust Development
- 5'Quiet, Appropriate End:' NY Court of Appeals Formally Removes Erin Gall From Bench
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250