Podcasts about Mossack Fonseca

Jake Bernstein - Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global EliteJuly 14A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale.A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way.In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe.Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated.Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

The Panama Papers refer to the 11.5 million leaked encrypted confidential documents that were the property of Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca. The documents were released on April 3, 2016, by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), dubbing them the “Panama Papers.”The document exposed the network of more than 214,000 tax havens involving people and entities from 200 different nations. A yearlong team effort by SZ and the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) went into deciphering the encrypted files before the revelations were made public.Apologies there is a chunk from the beginning of this interview, it starts with talking about shell companies and money laundering and misses out Mr Bernstein's bio. Jake Bernstein is an American investigative journalist and author. He previously worked with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. During a 25-year career, he has reported on the civil war in Central America, industrial pollution in Texas, political corruption in Miami, system-crashing greed on Wall Street, and the secret world of offshore accounts and money laundering. He has written travel pieces, reviewed movies and books, and has appeared as a radio and TV journalist.His 2017 book, Secrecy World: Inside the Panama Papers Investigation of Illicit Money Networks and the Global Elite, takes an in-depth look at the evolution of offshore financial assets, as seen through the Panama Papers, and the journalists and investigators who tried to break through its secrecy. The book was made into a feature film titled The Laundromat, directed by Steven Soderbergh. Bernstein received an executive producer credit on the film.Become a supporter of this podcast: https://www.spreaker.com/podcast/the-opperman-report--1198501/support.

Esta segunda-feira, começou o julgamento de 27 pessoas no caso dos Panama Papers, oito anos depois do escândalo que revelou um vasto sistema de criação de offshores através de uma empresa no Panamá, a Mossack Fonseca. Micael Pereira, repórter no jornal português Expresso e membro do Consórcio Internacional de Jornalistas de Investigação, que trabalhou nos Panama Papers, falou-nos sobre esta investigação e sublinhou que “a criatividade de quem quer esconder dinheiro não tem limites”. RFI: O que são os Panama Papers?Micael Pereira, Jornalista: Os Panama Papers são um projecto de investigação baseado numa fuga de informação com mais de 11 milhões de ficheiros. Essa fuga de informação foi partilhada por um jornal alemão, o Süddeutsche Zeitung, com o ICIJ - que é uma organização sem fins lucrativos, o Consórcio Internacional de Jornalistas de Investigação - e que conseguiu reunir algumas centenas de jornalistas de todo o mundo para explorar estes documentos. Ora, estes documentos, esta fuga de informação tem origem num escritório de advogados no Panamá, Mossack Fonseca, que vendia serviços essencialmente de ocultação a clientes em todo o mundo. Quando eu digo ocultação é criação de companhias offshore para que tornasse mais fácil esconder a detenção de dinheiro em bancos na Suíça e noutros países.Mas criar e ter uma empresa offshore, com o objectivo a obter melhores condições de tributação fiscal, não é uma prática ilegal, em si...Isso depende de caso a caso. Embora possamos dizer que não basta ter uma arma para matar alguém, mas é preciso ter uma arma para matar alguém, no sentido em que muitos destes casos que foram relatados por jornalistas e por muitos meios de comunicação acabaram por se provar ser casos relacionados com fuga aos impostos, branqueamento de capitais, corrupção...Evasão fiscal...Evasão fiscal foi a situação mais comum e é, na verdade, a situação mais comum neste tipo de recurso a companhias offshore. Quais foram os casos mais mediáticos? Houve muitos casos em todo o mundo. Um dos casos foi com o primeiro-ministro da Islândia que foi apanhado, de surpresa, numa entrevista filmada, quando foi revelado que a família dele tinha contas offshore. Isso levou inclusive à resignação do primeiro-ministro. Mas houve outros casos. Lembro-me do ex-primeiro-ministro [britânico] David Cameron, do Lionel Messi, melhor futebolista do mundo, do primeiro-ministro do Paquistão. Houve casos praticamente em todo o mundo. E em Portugal e no mundo lusófono? Em Portugal, a fuga de informação permitiu revelar o uso de companhias offshore por uma série de pessoas, dezenas de figuras públicas, empresários. E também permitiu perceber, com muito detalhe, uma série de esquemas usados pelo Grupo Espírito Santo. A maior parte das revelações ou as mais significativas revelações relacionadas com Portugal - e também com países lusófonos, sobretudo Angola - estiveram relacionadas com o Grupo Espírito Santo, havendo a coincidência de o Banco Espírito Santo ter colapsado em 2014, portanto dois anos antes das revelações dos “Panama Papers”. Eu diria que o caso mais relevante dentro dessa esfera, ligado ao Grupo Espírito Santo, tem a ver com o processo do ex-primeiro-ministro português José Sócrates. O Expresso conseguiu encontrar documentação nos “Panama Papers” que revelavam como o esquema de branqueamento de capitais, de lavagem de dinheiro, foi feito para fazer chegar o dinheiro, a corrupção, ao primeiro-ministro José Sócrates, numa altura em que o ex-primeiro-ministro estava a ser investigado pelo Ministério Público em Portugal.Qual o impacto que esta investigação, os “Panama Papers”, teve? Conseguiu, de certa forma, ajudar no combate à corrupção?Eu julgo que os “Panama Papers” trouxeram uma série de coisas positivas. Para já, foi a maior revelação do género feita até à altura e a maior colaboração entre os jornalistas. Revelou que é possível haver jornalistas em todo o mundo capazes de colaborarem uns com os outros para revelar este tipo de situações, este tipo de histórias, portanto, teve logo à partida impacto. Depois fez com que as regras mudassem em uma série de países. Houve, inclusive, uma comissão dedicada aos “Panama Papers” no Parlamento Europeu, que trouxe uma série de iniciativas para reforçar o combate à evasão fiscal e ao branqueamento de capitais.  No próprio Panamá, onde agora este julgamento está a começar e que tem no banco dos réus os fundadores deste escritório de advogados da Mossack Fonseca, essas regras também foram reforçadas depois dos “Panama Papers”. Portanto, houve uma série de coisas boas a sair daí.Cinco anos depois dos “Panamá Papers”, houve os “Pandora Papers”, em que o Micael também participou na investigação. Continuou e continua a ser igualmente possível arranjar estratagemas para uma fuga massiva aos impostos?Sim, sim. Não falta espaço para a criatividade no mundo offshore. É verdade. Também é verdade que depois dos “Panama Papers”, que foram lançados em 2016, levando à produção de histórias nos anos seguintes, a verdade é que, também do ponto de vista do jornalismo de investigação, tem havido muitos outros projectos que têm sido capazes de trazer outras revelações sobre usos semelhantes ou muito parecidos deste tipo de estruturas, de companhias offshores, precisamente para esconder e para fugir. A criatividade e os recursos de quem quer esconder dinheiro não tem limites, mas a luta continua, digamos assim, do ponto de vista do jornalismo de investigação.Há 27 pessoas em julgamento, nomeadamente, os fundadores do escritório de advogados baseado no Panamá, Mossack Fonseca, e outros advogados, assim como ex-funcionários da empresa extinta. Mas os “Panama Papers” implicaram imensos nomes em todo o mundo. Quais são as expectativas relativamente a este julgamento? Eu acho que será um exemplo e as expectativas são que sirva de exemplo. Eu sei que os procuradores do Ministério Público pedem 12 anos de prisão para os dois fundadores do escritório de advogados. Eu acredito que, no final, é possível ou provável que haja uma condenação, não digo condenação tal e qual o Ministério Público pede, mas acredito que irá haver uma condenação e que essa condenação servirá de exemplo para outros empresários e advogados que oferecem este tipo de serviços, para eles pensarem duas vezes antes de se envolverem neste tipo de actividades.Estruturalmente, se este tipo de empresas existe é porque há procura. Não deveriam ser também os milionários que as procuram e as usam a irem para o banco dos réus?Alguns desses milionários acabam por ir parar aos bancos dos réus, como tem sido o caso de Ricardo Salgado, ex-presidente do Banco Espírito Santo. Não são só milionários que usam estes esquemas. Também há criminosos, em muitos casos de criminalidade organizada, às vezes até de crime violento, tráfico de droga e outros tipos de crimes. Acontece - se calhar menos vezes do que nós gostaríamos - que muitas destas pessoas acabam por se sentar no banco dos réus quando são expostas por investigações jornalísticas ou pela capacidade de procuradores, inspectores da polícia de reunirem informação e de conseguirem cooperar uns com os outros. Portanto, isso de alguma forma vai acontecendo.

27 personnes sont jugées depuis lundi au Panama dans le cadre de l'affaire des "Panama Papers", un scandale d'évasion fiscale et de blanchiment d'argent présumés, révélé il y a huit ans par le Consortium de journalistes. Des chefs d'Etats et de gouvernement, des politiques, des sportifs ou encore des personnalités du monde de la culture ont été mis en cause dans les articles. Les prévenus, pour la plupart ayant travaillé dans le cabinet d'avocats Mossack Fonseca clament leur innocence.  

The Panama Papers refer to the 11.5 million leaked encrypted confidential documents that were the property of Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca. The documents were released on April 3, 2016, by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ), dubbing them the “Panama Papers.” The document exposed more than 140 politicians from more than 50 countries, connected to 214,000 offshore companies in 21 different tax havens. Among those named in the leak were a dozen current or former world leaders, 128 public officials, politicians, hundreds of celebrities, business people, and other wealthy individuals.

Es ist das größte Daten-Leak, mit dem Journalisten je gearbeitet haben: die Panama Papers. Die bis heute unbekannte Quelle hatte die Informationen zuerst an die Journalisten Bastian Obermayer und Frederik Obermaier von der Süddeutschen Zeitung geschickt. In der neuen Folge sprechen Kayhan und Solveig mit den beiden Investigativjournalisten über ihre Recherche.

“Panama Papers” è il nome di un fascicolo riservato digitalizzato composto da 11,5 milioni di documenti confidenziali creato dalla Mossack Fonseca, uno studio legale panamense, che forniva informazioni dettagliate su oltre 214mila società offshore, includendo le identità degli azionisti e dei manager. Steven Soderbergh racconta l'indagine di una vedova vittima di una frode assicurativa che porta agli astuti avvocati di Panama che nascondono il denaro per i super ricchi.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale.A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way.In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe.Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated.Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.about 1 year ago #and, #ed, #elite, #global, #illicit, #inside, #money, #networks, #opperman, #panama, #papers, #report, #spreaker, #theThis show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/1198501/advertisement

Now a major motion picture. The two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Jake Bernstien takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale. A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In The Laundromat, Pulitzer Prize-winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca - a trove now known as the Panama Papers - as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe. The Laundromat offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.This show is part of the Spreaker Prime Network, if you are interested in advertising on this podcast, contact us at https://www.spreaker.com/show/1198501/advertisement

Třetí duben je důležitým novinářským výročím, a to především pro Mezinárodní konsorcium investigativních novinářů, zkráceně ICIJ, jehož jsme jako investigace.cz součástí. Třetího dubna roku 2016 totiž došlo k prvním odhalením v kauze Panama Papers, mezinárodním novinářském projektu založeném na bezprecedentním úniku informací z panamské advokátní kanceláře Mossack Fonseca. Zveřejněno bylo více než 11,5 milionu dokumentů, které se týkaly více než 214 tisíc offshorových společností a skandál zasáhl mnoho prominentních osobností, včetně politiků, celebrit a podnikatelů z celého světa. Třetí duben je ale také datum, kdy byla v roce 2013 publikována úplně první investigace ICIJ týkající se daňových rájů, označovaná jako Offshore Leaks či „Tajemství na prodej“. Jak se v malém týmu pracuje na velkých věcech? Mění novináři svět k lepšímu? A mohou svůj zdánlivý boj s větrnými mlýny vyhrát? Rozhovor se zakladatelkou a šéfredaktorkou investigace.cz Pavlou Holcovou. - Podcasty vznikají za finanční podpory Nadačního fondu nezávislé žurnalistiky. Úvodní znělku podcastu Odposlech vytvořil Michael Nováček za použití citací ze zpravodajství České televize.

O resumo das principais notícias de 2016, pela voz de Ana França, jornalista do Expresso. O texto é de Rui Tentúgal, a edição do áudio pertence a João Martins e a sonoplastia a João Luís Amorim. A coordenação é de Mónica Balsemão e Joana Beleza. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Kan en musiker som verkar i en diktatur hitta utrymme för protest i sin konst? Jens Nordqvist berättar om två cellister på varsin sida om det musikaliska samvetet. ESSÄ: Detta är en text där skribenten reflekterar över ett ämne eller ett verk. Åsikter som uttrycks är skribentens egna.Hur låter motståndets musik? Klingar den annorlunda än medlöperiets toner? Historien är full av exempel på musik som tjänat tyranniet, men också på musiker och tonsättare som utmanat makten. Som berättelsen om två ryska cellister, på varsin sida om det musikaliska samvetet.Läckta dokument från advokatfirman Mossack Fonseca avslöjade 2016 hur tusentals politiker, affärsmän och privatpersoner försökt dölja sina rikedomar i olika skatteparadis. En av dem var märkligt nog en professionellt verksam cellist från Sankt Petersburg.Sergej Roldugin, en av Vladimir Putins äldsta vänner, visade sig vara den ryske presidentens hemliga bankir och pengatvättare, med en egen förmögenhet på flera hundra miljoner dollar. När en reporter frågade hur en klassisk musiker kunde vara så rik svarade cellisten att han levde ett högst modest liv. Till och med min cello är begagnad, sade han i ett försök att skoja bort frågan. Instrumentet som är tillverkat av Antonio Stradivarius köpte han för tolv miljoner dollar.Likt andra oligarker lät han det ryska folket stå för fiolerna, så att säga. Och precis som många andra av Putins rika vänner hamnade han i samband med invasionen av Ukraina på EU:s sanktionslista.Historien om Putins cellospelande förmögenhetsförvaltare för tankarna till en annan berömd rysk cellist, som till skillnad från honom valde att spela motståndets musik. Tårarna strömmade ned för kinderna på Mstislav Rostropovitj när han lät solostämman i Antonin Dvoraks cellokonsert ljuda i ett fullsatt Royal Albert Hall i London den 21 augusti 1968. Kvällen innan hade sovjetiska styrkor gått in i Prag, och medan stridsvagnarna krossade det folkliga upproret framförde de ryska musikerna ett av de mest berömda tjeckoslovakiska verken.På väg in till konserthallen hade symfoniorkestern fått ducka för ruttna tomater från ilskna demonstranter. När musikerna sedan värmde upp hördes burop från publiken. Åk hem!Ryssarna ut ur Tjeckoslovakien!Den bedrövade Rostropovitj visste inte om han skulle klara av att spela. Invasionen av Tjeckoslovakien plågade honom rent fysiskt och det kändes först otänkbart att uppträda. Men så bestämde han sig. Han skulle låta musiken tala.Dvoraks cellokonsert är dramatisk, storslagen och djupt känslosam. Rostropovitj ville visa åhörarna att han delade deras smärta. Med sin cello framkallade han en böneliknande sorgesång över maktens brutalitet och förtryck. När de sista tonerna klingat ut lyfte den gråtande Rostropovitj upp Dvoraks partitur i luften i solidaritet med det tjeckoslovakiska folket, men också i protest mot sitt eget land.Den osannolikt begåvade Rostropovitj, Slava som han oftast kallades, var en sovjetisk nationalhjälte och ett kuttersmycke för kommunistpartiet. Men när han offentligt i utlandet dessutom vågade protestera mot invasionen blev Kremls stolta blickar snart hotfulla.Flera år tidigare hade han tagit stora personliga risker genom att stödja de förföljda tonsättarna Sergej Prokofjev och Dmitrij Sjostakovitj. Tack vare sin gränslösa talang och stora charm undkom Slava repressalier. Men efter konserten i London var han illa ute, och än värre blev det efter hans försök att beskydda Aleksandr Solzjenitsyn.Den regimkritiske författaren som 1970 tilldelades Nobelpriset i litteratur var en nagel i ögat på de sovjetiska ledarna. Rostropovitj vägrade böja sig för hoten och trots stor fara lät han Solzjenitsyn bo i familjens datja utanför Moskva.I takt med att riskerna ökade växte Rostropovitjs politiska samvete. När han i ett öppet brev som aldrig publicerades försvarade både Solzjenitsyn och rätten till konstnärlig frihet fick Kreml nog och beslöt att tysta både honom och hans cello. Slava fick i praktiken yrkesförbud, och några år senare tvingades han och familjen att lämna Sovjetunionen.När Berlinmuren föll var Rostropovitj ögonblickligen på plats med sin cello för att välkomna de befriade östtyskarna. Medan Slava spelade Bach vid muren satt den unge KGB-officeren Vladimir Putin i Dresden och gnisslade tänder. Två år senare föll det sovjetiska imperiet samman i vad Putin har beskrivit som historiens största geopolitiska katastrof.I augusti 1991 försökte krafter inom kommunistpartiet ta makten för att förhindra Sovjetunionens upplösning. Rostropovitj kastade sig omedelbart på ett plan till Moskva för att ge sitt stöd till den nye ryske presidenten Boris Jeltsin.Kuppförsöket misslyckades. Men några år senare inledde Jeltsins efterföljare Vladimir Putin en nedmontering av det öppna samhälle som börjat gro i Ryssland. Det fria ordet, oavsett om det skrivs, sjungs, målas eller ropas på gatorna, är ständigt ett hot mot den totalitära staten. Makten känner musikens starka kraft. Diktaturerna kräver därför konstens lydnad. Likt Rostropovitj på 1970-talet, tvingades tusentals konstnärer, musiker, författare och journalister att fly Ryssland när Putin bestämde sig för att med våld tysta deras röster. De som inte har möjlighet att lämna förtryckande regimer för friheten utomlands får välja mellan motstånd och tystnad. Eller att djupt inne i sin konst finna hemliga rum där protesterna kan ljuda. Kompositören Dmitrij Sjostakovitj Rostropovitjs nära vän försökte överleva som fri konstnär i ett totalitärt samhälle. Under den tyska belägringen av Leningrad 194144 blev han med sin sjunde symfoni hyllad runt om i världen som en symbol för kampen mot fascismen. Men snart hamnade hjälten i onåd. Hans påstått borgerliga och västinspirerade musik tilldrog sig Stalins ogillande, vilket kunde medföra en omedelbar livsfara.Varje natt väntade den skräckslagne Sjostakovitj på att KGB skulle knacka på dörren, på att Stalins mörker skulle sluka även honom. Han gjorde desperata försök att orientera sig i tyranniets landskap. Fylld av smärta insåg Sjostakovitj att han inte kunde både leva och tala sanning i en diktatur.När den berömde tonsättaren gjorde förnedrande politiska eftergifter såg många och han själv det som ett svek. I det fördolda försökte han i stället kommunicera med omvärlden via sin musik. Tonerna han skrev blev melodiska protester, som när han smög in sarkastiskt förvrängda fragment av Stalins favoritsånger.Förutom Dvoraks cellokonsert spelades även Sjostakovitjs tionde symfoni på den där konserten i London. Verket som uruppfördes kort efter Stalins död 1953 var i hemlighet ett ursinnigt porträtt av diktatorn och en förtvivlad skildring av förtryckets fasor. Även om Sjostakovitj saknade Rostropovitjs hjältemod försökte han på sitt sätt skapa motståndets musik. Vladimir Putins egen cellist och pengatvättare, han valde däremot att villigt spela maktens melodier.Jens Nordqvist, författare och journalistMusiken som spelades i programmet:Antonin Dvorak: Cellokonsert op. 104. Mstislav Rostropovitj, cello. USSR:s statliga symfoniorkester. Proms, Royal Albert Hall London 1968. Dmitrij Sjostakovitj: Symfoni nr 10. Jevgenij Fjodorovitj Svetlanov, dirigent. USSR:s statliga symfoniorkester. Proms, Royal Albert Hall London 1968.

“Buenos días, Panamá!” É da varanda com vista para a Cidade do Panamá que todos os dias a goiana Viviane Naves saúda seus seguidores de uma rede social. Deste ponto privilegiado da capital panamenha ela usa o humor para se conectar com o país onde chegou em 2020, em plena pandemia da Covid-19. Também é de lá que agora ela acompanha as manifestações que, nas últimas semanas, vêm agitando este país da América Central. Por Elianah Jorge, correspondente da RFI em Caracas A insatisfação que tomou conta das ruas de diversas regiões e da capital panamenha começou a ser sentida logo após o fim do confinamento e foi motivada principalmente pelo alto custo de vida. “Após esse período de euforia por recuperar a vida normal do cotidiano, começou essa sensação de que tudo estava caro, da falta de alimentos nos supermercados pela dificuldade de chegar [a mercadoria aos estabelecimentos]. Havia uma sensação de dificuldade de trabalho, das pessoas conseguirem dinheiro”, ela lembra. Neste país onde o Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) per capta é de US$ 14,5 mil, de acordo com o Banco Mundial, o desemprego chega a 10% e a informalidade gira em torno de 50%, informa a Contraladoria Geral do Panamá. E com a economia dolarizada, o custo de vida é bastante alto. “A comida aqui é muito cara. O custo de vida no Panamá é bem caro. Isso me assustou muito no início. Desde o início eu sentia essa preocupação [por parte do povo].” O recente fenômeno da inflação no Panamá fez com que o Índice de Preços ao Consumidor (IPC) chegasse a 5,2% em junho deste ano em relação ao mesmo período do ano passado. A taxa pode ser moderada se comparada com a de outros países, mas vem pesando no bolso das famílias. A alta mais significativa foi a de 40% no preço da gasolina durante o primeiro semestre de 2022. “O que eu vejo que deixa mais cara a condição de vida é a comida e os remédios. Então veio a guerra na Ucrânia e o preço da gasolina aumentou muito por aqui, de uma hora para outra. Isso foi muito forte”, destaca Viviane. Indígenas Por causa da distância entre as zonas agrícolas e as cidades de médio e grande portes, o preço do combustível, que não é produzido no Panamá, gerou um efeito dominó. “Tudo ficou mais caro ainda porque muitos alimentos vêm de caminhão da região de Chiriqui (a cerca de 420 km da Cidade do Panamá), onde há produção de café e de muitos tipos de produtos. Tudo ficou mais caro e isso também pesou muito para os produtores.” Uma das principais forças desses protestos sãos os indígenas, muitos deles detentores de terras em determinadas áreas do Panamá. Ao lado dos produtores de alimentos, eles têm sido a principal pedra no sapato do governo de Laurentino Cortizo. Por causa da pressão social, o presidente, que chegou ao poder em julho de 2019, decidiu congelar em US$ 3,25 (cerca de R$ 16) o preço do galão da gasolina, que antes chegou a custar US$ 5. Junto com o anúncio feito nesta terça-feira (26) estão subsídios a outros produtos, como o arroz e o atum. Os sindicatos e outras associações não ficaram satisfeitos com as medidas. Eles também pedem a redução do preço dos alimentos, energia, remédios, e o aumento do orçamento da Educação, além do combate à corrupção, o que continua motivando os protestos. As perdas estimadas por causa das manifestações e paralisações das últimas semanas superam a quantia de US$ 500 milhões. “Da [minha] varanda dá para ver os protestos. Eu vi o caminho que eles [os manifestantes] estavam fazendo e desci para me juntar ao protesto. Foi quando eu encontrei o humorista Kenny Dancer, que faz muito sucesso aqui com a personagem ‘La Ministra'”, conta a ex-fisioterapeuta que agora trabalha como tradutora e produtora de conteúdo. “São pessoas que estavam com muita raiva principalmente pela corrupção que existe dentro do Panamá, dos partidos políticos. Nos protestos as pessoas reclamavam muito dos subsídios que os políticos têm até para bebidas alcoólicas. Eles recebem garrafas de rum! Esse tema foi muito forte dentro dos protestos”, ela explica. Corrupção Além de ser um paraíso fiscal, o Panamá também carrega outra fama: a de ser um dos países mais corruptos do mundo. Em 2016, a investigação jornalística intitulada de Panama Papers denunciou um gigantesco esquema de corrupção articulado pelo escritório de advocacia Mossack Fonseca, então sediado na capital panamenha, junto a governos, autoridades e empresas de todo o mundo. Apesar das medidas e do início dos diálogos do governo com os grupos de opisição, ainda há manifestações no país. “Os protestos ainda continuam, mas não tem mais bloqueios de estradas. Houve um acordo com o governo na última mesa de diálogo. Alguns itens básicos, 72 de uma lista proposta ao governo, ainda não foram aprovados. Então eles ainda estão brigando, mas as principais vias não estão mais fechadas. Já está chegando mercadoria na Cidade do Panamá e nas províncias também”. Viviane, que já morou no Peru e em Cuba, além de desejar “Buenos días, Panamá”, também faz votos de um futuro melhor ao país que a acolheu: “O Panamá é um país lindo, rico e que merece dar uma melhor qualidade de vida a toda sua população. Eu espero que esses protestos, que esse anseio da população e dos meus amigos que querem um país melhor, consigam [resultados]”.

Intimement liées à l'histoire fiscale des pays, la naissance et la prolifération de paradis fiscaux au cours du XXe siècle semblent indissociables de la globalisation des marchés financiers. Explications de ce phénomène par Christophe Farquet, historien spécialiste de l'histoire économique et de la Première Guerre mondiale, professeur à la Sorbonne Paris III. Photo: Marine Le Pen, leader du Rassemblement national (ex-Front national), parti politique français d'extrême droite, lors d'une conférence de presse à l'Assemblée nationale en avril 2016. Les "Panama Papers" avaient révélé que des personnes de l'entourage de Mme Le Pen seraient impliquées dans le transfert de fonds vers des comptes offshore dans le sillage de sa campagne présidentielle de 2012. "Panama Papers" est le nom attribué à la fuite de plus de 11,5 millions de documents confidentiels issus du cabinet d'avocats panaméen Mossack Fonseca. (© IAN LANGSDON/EPA/KEYSTONE)

El Consorcio Internacional de Periodistas de Investigación, conformado por 109 medios de comunicación de 76 países, publicó la información en simultáneo un día como hoy, hace seis años. Los datos publicados se basaron en miles de correos electrónicos, certificados, datos bancarios de estados de cuentas, copias de pasaportes y documentos de identidad de los implicados. También en documentos y actas de alrededor de 214 000 sociedades guardadas en 11,5 millones de archivos que contienen el registro de 40 años de negocios de Mossack Fonseca, aunque la mayor parte del material analizado está referido a transacciones y operaciones entre 2005 y 2015. Entre las personalidades involucradas se destacan 12 jefes y ex jefes de Estado, entre ellos Mauricio Macri, 140 altos dirigentes políticos y personalidades públicas de 50 países diferentes que participan o han participado en sociedades offshore en 21 paraísos tributarios distintos.

Kādu laiku neesam bijuši Latīņamerikā. Tāpēc šoreiz dodamies uz vienu no pasaules transkontinentālajām valstīm. Dodamies uz valsti, kur ir vienīgā vieta uz planētas, kur saullēktu var redzēt Klusajā okeānā un saulrietu Atlantijas okeānā. Respektīvi, otrādi, nekā šķiet tradicionāli. Un izdarīt to var Baru vulkāna virsotnē. Dodamies uz valsti ar savdabīgu nosaukumu – Panama jeb oficiāli Panamas Republika. Savdabīgu, jo Panama daudziem var asociēties ar panamas cepuri, kas ir tradicionāla Ekvadoras izcelsmes salmu cepure ar malām. Mīts, ka tā ir no Panamas, iespējams, ir saistīts ar faktu, ka tas bija ļoti populāras starp amerikāņiem, kuri zelta drudža laikā šķērsoja zemesšaurumu, lai sasniegtu Kaliforniju. Tā ASV prezidents Teodors Rūzvelts tika nofotografēts ar tādu, kad viņš 1904. gadā apmeklēja Panamas kanāla būvlaukumu. Šobrīd valstī ir nepilni četri miljoni iedzīvotāju, kas ir vairākums spāniski runājoši kristieši. Pēc rasu piederības – divas trešdaļas ir metisi un nedaudz vairāk par 12 % ir Amerikas pamatiedzīvotāji. Starp citu, Panamas pirmie iedzīvotāji datēti apmēram pirms 4 tūkstošus  gadu. Stāstot par Panamu un tās pastāvēšanu, gribētos sākt primāri par Amerikas Savienoto Valstu un Panamas Republikas attiecībām, jo tieši tās raksturo Panamu visvairāk. 1903. gada novembrī Panama, ko atbalstīja Amerikas Savienotās Valstis, pasludināja savu neatkarību no Kolumbijas un noslēdza Heja – Bunavas-Varillas līgumu ar ASV. Līgums piešķīra Amerikas Savienotajām Valstīm brīvas tiesības uz zonu, kas bija aptuveni 16 km plata un 80 km gara. Šajā zonā ASV uzbūvēja kanālu, kas kļuva zināms par Panamas kanālu un bija 83 kilometrus garš. Darbs pie kanāla tika pabeigts 1914. gadā. Īpatnība bija tā, līgumu faktiski noslēdza Filips Bunavs-Varilla (Bunau-Varilla), franču inženieris un lobists, Panamas prezidenta vietā. Iemesls – līgums tika ātri izstrādāts un parakstīts naktī pirms Panamas delegācijas ierašanās Vašingtonā. Un Panamas vadība tika nostādīta fakta priekšā. Interesants fakts par kanāla būvniecību. Laikā, kad ASV senatori vēl nebija izlēmuši, kur būvēt kanālu — Panamā vai Nikaragvā, Filips Bunavs-Varilla, kurš lobēja Panamas kanālu, katram senatoram nosūtīja Nikaragvas pastmarku, kurā bija attēlots viens no daudzajiem Nikaragvas vulkāniem. Tas bija efektīvs triks, kā likt domāt, ka Panamā nav vulkānu un tāpēc tā ir drošāka vieta. Rezultātā ASV senatori piekrita, ka Panama ir labāks risinājums. Viss Panamas kanāls, apgabals, kas atbalsta kanālu, un atlikušās ASV militārās bāzes tika nodotas Panamai 1999. gada beigās. Valstī līdz 2016. gadam tika īstenots vērienīgs paplašināšanas projekts, lai vairāk nekā divas reizes palielinātu kanāla jaudu, nodrošinot vairāk kanāla tranzītu un lielākus kuģus. Tas izmaksāja apmēram 5 miljardus eiro. Šis kanāls tiek reizēm saukts arī par vienu no modernajiem pasaules brīnumiem tā sarežģītības dēļ. Un nedaudz vairāk nekā simts gadu laikā caur kanālu varētu būt izbraucis jau gandrīz miljons kuģu.  ASV un Ķīna ir galvenie kanāla lietotāji. ASV un Panamas draudzība nav saistīta tikai ar kanāla izbūvi. 1904. gadā līdz ar neatkarības iegūšanu Panama pieņēma ASV dolāru kā savu nacionālo valūtu. 1906. gadā Panama bija otra valsts pasaulē pēc ASV, kur varēja iegādāties Coca-colu. Un visbeidzot, 1936. gadā ASV piederošajā Panamas kanāla zonā piedzima slavenais un Latvijai vēsturiski tik nozīmīgais ASV senators Džons Makkeins. Viens no vēsturiski savdabīgākajiem Panamas un ASV attiecību posmiem bija 1989. gads, kad ASV iebruka Panamā, ziņojot, ka operācija ir nepieciešama, lai aizsargātu ASV pilsoņu dzīvības Panamā, aizstāvētu demokrātiju un cilvēktiesības, cīnītos pret narkotiku kontrabandu un nodrošinātu Panamas kanāla neitralitāti. Neskatoties uz lielo upuru skaitu – 4000 iedzīvotāju un vairāki simti karavīru abās pusēs, lielākā daļa Panamas iedzīvotāju atbalstīja iejaukšanos. Un tas tādēļ, ka valstī no 1983. gada līdz 1989. gadam pastāvēja Manuela Noriegas militāra diktatūra, kur valsts un viņa personīgo ienākumu pamatā bija no narkotikām un naudas atmazgāšanas gūtie līdzekļi. Turklāt Noriega savas valdīšanas laikā nogalināja un spīdzināja vairāk nekā simts Panamas iedzīvotāju un piespieda vēl vismaz simts disidentus doties trimdā. Noriegu ilgu laiku atbalstīja arī ASV. Jo kopš 1950. gadiem viņš bija kļuvis par vienu no nozīmīgākajiem CIP informatoriem. Bet runājot par Panamu, daudziem noteikti nāk arī prātā Panamas dokumenti jeb “Panamas papīri”, kas ir 11,5 miljonu slepenu dokumentu kopums, kas tika nopludināti no Panamas juridiskās firmas „Mossack Fonseca” datu centra. Tādēļ ir laiks parunāt arī par ekonomiku. Lielu daļu Panamas ienākumu un IKP veido ieņēmumi no nodevām par kanāla lietošanu un tūrisms. Bet finanšu pakalpojumu sniegšana un ārzonas jeb „ofšoru” teritorijas statuss valstij ir ilgu laiku ienesis būtiskus līdzekļus. Kas ir „ofšori” un kādēļ tādas valstis kā Panama izvēlas šādu darbības modeli, stāsta Ilze Znotiņa, Latvijas Republikas Finanšu izlūkošanas dienesta priekšniece. Kopumā par Panamas ekonomiku runājot, valsts ir paplašinājusi piekļuvi izglītībai un tīram ūdenim, taču sanitārie apstākļi un elektrības pieejamība joprojām ir slikti. Turklāt etniskie pamatiedzīvotāji veido arvien lielāku Panamas nabadzīgo un galēji nabadzīgo iedzīvotāju daļu. Kopumā Panama ir piemērs tam, kā valsts izmanto savu vietu kā planētas ekonomiskais centrs. Ja ar to, ka loģistikas viduspunkts, kas savieno Atlantijas un Kluso okeānu nepietiek, valsts sliecas meklēt alternatīvas un kļūt par pasaules finanšu viduspunktu. Pat, ja faktiski atbalsta neētiskas un nelegālas darbības tā rezultātā. Sausais atlikums gan ciniski raugoties – valstiskums un neatkarība, kā arī vidēji augsts ekonomikas attīstības līmenis.

Gerade in Zeiten von hohen Inflationsraten freut sich jeder über Steuerersparnisse. Doch welche Möglichkeiten gibt es eigentlich Steuern zu sparen ? Michael und Timo verraten in Episode 53 was Steueroasen, Briefkastenfirmen und Panama Papers miteinander zu tun haben und grenzen dabei legale Steuervermeidung und illegale Steuerhinterziehung voneinander ab. Sie werfen einen Blick in die Vergangenheit und geben auch eine Antwort auf die Frage weshalb wir für eine erfolgreiche Zukunft und die gesellschaftlichen Herausforderungen Steuereinnahmen brauchen.

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale. A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe. Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated. Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted. about 1 year ago #and, #ed, #elite, #global, #illicit, #inside, #money, #networks, #opperman, #panama, #papers, #report, #spreaker, #the

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale. A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe. Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated. Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted. about 1 year ago #and, #ed, #elite, #global, #illicit, #inside, #money, #networks, #opperman, #panama, #papers, #report, #spreaker, #the

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale.A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way.In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe.Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated.Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.about 1 year ago #and, #ed, #elite, #global, #illicit, #inside, #money, #networks, #opperman, #panama, #papers, #report, #spreaker, #the

Today we take a trip to the more mundane side of fringe topics and talk about offshore corporate tax avoidance structures... no seriously. I like to think its fun and I am the only person I polled so it has tested well! Please listen if you never learned about the Panama Papers, what happened, or just need a refresher. Lets take a trip to some place exotic where the line between us and our secret corporation are as loose as the bartender's pours. With special guest Mossack Fonseca!In the opener we discuss LAX's own Elton John, has the secretive rocketman been identified? Well they saw somethingDon't forget to follow and listen to any other episodes in our catalogue that may pique your interest. If you want to hear us talk about a specific topic be sure to send us an email a journeytothefringe@gmail.com and you can catch us live on Twitch this Monday at 8:30 PM PST, also please give our twitch a follow as we are pushing for affiliate status (https://www.twitch.tv/journeytothefringe).

It's been called the world's biggest-ever data leak of the secretive financial affairs and offshore tax structures used by some of the world's most rich and famous people, including celebrities like Elton John and Shakira and former British PM Tony Blair. This week's Pandora Papers eclipse in size the bombshell Panama Papers, which five years ago revealed the accounts of law firm Mossack Fonseca and led to the resignation of several world leaders and new laws designed to stamp out offshore tax evasion. Today on Please Explain, business investigative reporter Sarah Danckert joins Jess Irvine to discuss how exactly did this information come to light, and will any heads roll as a result? Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

It's been called the world's biggest-ever data leak of the secretive financial affairs and offshore tax structures used by some of the world's most rich and famous people, including celebrities like Elton John and Shakira and former British PM Tony Blair. This week's Pandora Papers eclipse in size the bombshell Panama Papers, which five years ago revealed the accounts of law firm Mossack Fonseca and led to the resignation of several world leaders and new laws designed to stamp out offshore tax evasion. Today on Please Explain, business investigative reporter Sarah Danckert joins Jess Irvine to discuss how exactly did this information come to light, and will any heads roll as a result? Subscribe to The Age & SMH: https://subscribe.smh.com.au/ See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

When it comes to understanding the underworld of corruption and criminality, you can't just look at the rich crooks. You also have to look at the lawyers who help them dot the i's and cross the t's as they try to stash their illicit cash somewhere offshore. And to accomplish that goal, you have to understand the world of shell companies, corporate entities that often exist only on paper to shield vast sums of wealth from the taxman or the prying eyes of journalists.   It's a dangerous world, and it has led to the assassination of at least one journalist who tried to expose the secrets of the world's super rich.   In this episode, we speak to the two journalists who broke the Panama Papers – the largest leak of offshore documents in the history of illicit finance. They walk us through the world they uncovered at Mossack Fonseca, a law firm in Panama, that helped set up some of the world's shadiest shell companies for some of the world's shadiest people.   Bastian Obermayer and Frederik Obermaier (who are not related) took immense personal risks to blow the story wide open.  They tell us how they did it – and what secrets they uncovered about the ways the world's richest people make up their own rules.   For further information about the Panama Papers, go here: https://www.icij.org/investigations/panama-papers/   And for the Daphne Project, visit this site: https://www.theguardian.com/world/series/the-daphne-project   Pre order Brian's book - https://www.simonandschuster.com/books/Corruptible/Brian-Klaas/9781982154097    Support the show on Patreon at Patreon.com/powercorrupts  

On April 3rd, 2016, information about 214,488 offshore companies established by Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca was leaked. Since the Panama Papers leak, a total of 81 jurisdictions worldwide have passed laws requiring beneficial ownership to be registered with a government authority. The U.S. Government has been openly critical of countries that act as money laundering safe havens and yet we were not taking any steps toward transparency. That changed on January 1, 2021 when both houses of Congress passed the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2021, which includes the Corporate Transparency Act (the Act). The Act requires a report be filed with the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) that identifies each beneficial owner of an applicant forming a reporting company. 

In this episode, I kick things off by giving you the lowdown on what exactly the Panama Papers are. Yes, the biggest data leak in history only seemed to impact the super-rich and that begs the question: why should you care? After all, most of us in crypto are libertarians and are unlikely to care too much about the super-rich dodging tax. However, I flag up numerous examples where the likes of Mossack Fonseca and the likes of HSBC actively helped the financing of dictators. For those wondering how big a deal the Panama Papers were; well, 29 people on the Forbes rich list were implicated and so were a bunch of politicians. I look into all that in this podcast. I then move on to explain how the Panama Papers data leak exposed the ugly underbelly of a rotten financial system. Finally, I look at how much money laundering actually goes on in crypto and tell you how that stacks up with those dirty transactions in the traditional system. Yes, I do podcasts but don’t forget that I also have a tip-top crypto channel on YouTube (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqK_GSMbpiV8spgD3ZGloSw)! Disclaimer: The information contained herein is for informational purposes only. Nothing herein shall be construed to be financial legal or tax advice. The content of this podcast is solely the opinions of the speaker who is not a licensed financial advisor or registered investment advisor. Trading cryptocurrencies poses a considerable risk of loss. The speaker does not guarantee any particular outcome.

I denne episoden av LØRNs bokbad snakker, Silvija Seres, med stortingsrepresentant for Arbeiderpartiet og forfatter bak boken, Rødt lys – Det store skatteranet – og hvordan vi kan stoppe det, Marianne Marthinsen. Boken ble skrevet med Maria Walberg, og sammen ønsker de å formidle at det er mulig for Norge å gjøre mer for å sikre skattegrunnlaget vårt. Boken inviterer til en ordentlig politisk debatt om konkrete tiltak, og er i følge Silvija nyttig for alle de ulike partiene. — Metodene for skatteplanlegging fremstår som veldig kompliserte, men i sin essens er de enkle. Vi må orke å ta i dette politisk selv om det kan virke utmattende, sier hun. Dette LØRNER du: Litteratur Politikk Samfunn Omstilling Skatt Anbefalt litteratur: Boka til Obermaier og Obermayer med tittelen «Panama Papers» som forteller historien om hvordan disse to journalistene fra Süddeutsche Zeitung plutselig satt med 11,5 millioner lekkede dokumenter fra advokatfirmaet Mossack Fonseca i hendene. Historiene de nøster opp er spektakulære og gir et sjokkerende innblikk i hva aggressiv skatteplanlegging og finansielt hemmelighold handler om. Etterpå kan du lese boka vår for å finne ut av hva vi skal gjøre med det. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Episodio 21 con Franco Rojas, Gerente General del Grupo AMLC, especializado en Prevención de Lavado de Activos y Gestión de Riesgos, con presencia en 9 países de Latinoamérica . (Hacemos aclaracion de que este episodio fue grabajo previo a las elecciones presidenciales en Bolivia.)Es Conferencista internacional. Fue Sub Director de la Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera de Bolivia, y Analista Financiero Senior en la Unidad de Investigaciones Financieras de la Superintendencia de Bancos y Entidades Financieras de dicho país, hoy conocida como Autoridad de Supervisión Financiera.En este episodio Franco nos comenta la evolución de la gestión del riesgo de lavado de activos en Bolivia hasta el gobierno de Evo Morales en 2005 donde uno de los cambios fue la suspensión de la Unidad de Inteligencia Financiera, ocasionando la expulsión de Bolivia del Grupo Egmont y demás organismos internacionales por considerarse como una región no cooperante. Según nos indica Franco, las autoridades luego pasaron a un cumplimiento en papel que ha servido a Bolivia hasta el 2019, donde el gobierno de transición realiza modificaciones en preparación para la evaluación del GAFI.Franco nos relata que era bastante conocido las fuentes de financiamiento que respaldaban al gobierno de Evo Morales, denominado hoy día como narco-terrorista, con procedencia dudosa. Nos explica que el narcotráfico ha financiado actividades para causar caos y provocar inestabilidad en Bolivia a través de lanzamientos armados, atentados contra periodistas y líderes de la oposición, donde se ha encontrado a ciudadanos cubanos y venezolanos que son pagados para causar estas situaciones.  En cuanto a la corrupción, Franco nos comenta que las autoridades del gobierno de Evo Morales fueron las impulsoras de la corrupción a través de reservas gasíferas, creando el fondo indígena donde utilizaron a las principales autoridades de las comunidades indígenas para supuestos proyectos que no se hicieron en un 90% y así robándose el dinero del pueblo.Conversamos sobre los recientes casos de fraudes por parte de ciertas empresas de auditoría, que tenían concomitancia en los actos delictivos y al brindar asesoría se convertían en cómplices. Según Franco, estas firmas auditoras han creado una desvirtualización de los hechos con valores trastornados. Y finalmente, hablamos de Mossack Fonseca donde Franco considera que no todo fue malo pues la estructura de cumplimiento solicitaba los documentos e informaciones iniciales, pero las decisiones se realizaban en otro nivel y hasta ahí llegaba el área de cumplimiento. Según Franco, era en las altas instancias donde sí existió un velo corporativo sin querer ver más allá, pues solo les interesaba el negocio.Sigan a Franco Rojas en: Linkedin: Franco Rojas               Facebook: Franco Rojas SagárnagaSigue al video podcast La Manche Indeleble en: Youtube: Grupo AMLC                                            Sigan al podcast Etikamente en: Instagram: @etika_menteradio              Twitter: EtikamenteRadio           

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale. A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe. Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated. Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale.A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way.In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe.Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated.Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.

A two-time Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist takes us inside the world revealed by the Panama Papers, a landscape of illicit money, political corruption, and fraud on a global scale. A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca—a trove now known as the Panama Papers—as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe. Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together—who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated. Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted.

Gonzalo Vila es el Director de Latinoamérica para la Asociación de Especialistas Certificados en Delitos Financieros (ACFCS), siendo responsable de su expansión y posicionamiento, de supervisar la certificación, de implementar proyectos de capacitación y desarrollar servicios para responder a iniciativas contra el delito financiero. Fue Director Editorial de las publicaciones especializadas en lavado de dinero y delitos financieros de Alert Global Media. Trabajó para The Wall Street Journal, primero en la edición impresa para Latinoamérica y luego como editor de la edición en Internet. Además es un expositor frecuente en eventos internacionales.En esta entrevista Gonzalo nos comparte su parecer sobre la toma de conciencia del mundo empresarial por la transparencia, con líneas de denuncia efectivas y mayor responsabilidad social corporativa. Nos explica sobre la evasión fiscal como delito fuente del GAFI y la necesidad de tener cuidado con el abuso de la elusión fiscal. También nos indica que las empresas y gobiernos deben adaptar sus controles e incluir programas de integridad para hacer negocios con entidades estatales.Abundamos en la necesidad de conocer el beneficiario final y las acciones que varias jurisdicciones han tomado para centralizar esta información, para así aportar a la cadena de transparencia.

The Panama Papers are a collection of leaked company documents that gave a glimpse into how the world’s richest and most powerful people avoid paying taxes by basically cheating the system and being shady AF.The Background:In 2016, journalists from a German newspaper obtained 11.5 million documents from the law firm, Mossack Fonseca, that exposed how some of the world’s most prominent politicians, business leaders and celebrities may have used offshore bank accounts and shell companies to conceal their wealth or avoid taxes.For those who are not familiar with the term- offshore banking refers to the deposit of funds by a company or individual in a bank that is located outside their national residence. Due to way less tax regulations, and like, zero transparency, you are able to get away with some shady sh*t.And then this little German cutie started leaking documents to a local German newspaper and it was j-u-i-c-y.We still don’t know who this guy is, he goes by Jon Doe to remain anonymous; however, since his first interaction with Bastian Obermayer (that Investigative Reporter), over 11.5 million documents from that sketchy law firm were leaked… Leading to history’s largest data leak, ever. WTF Moments:Offshore banking is 100% legal and has been going on for decades, but some see it as a trick or perk for the wealthy.In 2018, 60 of the largest companies in the USA paid no taxes on pre-tax income of 79 billion dollars.Conspiracies range from this being “an attack on enemies of western capitalism” to “being a distraction for the 2016 US Presidential Election Circus Show” to all of this being a “strategic leak” – we discuss these in more depth in this ep.Netflix is being sued over their movie depicting the story of the Panama Papers – btw, if it is still available, we highly recommend… plus Meryl Streep is in it.Oh ya, and the journalist that helped leak the story was f*cking murdered.Check out our website!Contact us!Support the show (https://www.patreon.com/join/cocktailsandconspiracies?)

Todo mundo já ouviu falar e provavelmente sabe citar um ou dois exemplos, mas o que isso significa exatamente, em termos práticos? Que tipo de pessoa e empresa usa esses serviços? Quais as consequências disso pra nós, pobres mortais tupiniquins? E o que diabos o COAF tem a ver com isso? Conversamos novamente com Charles Alcântara, presidente da Federação Nacional do Fisco Estadual e Distrital (Fenafisco). Ficha técnica   Hosts: Leticia Dáquer e Thiago Corrêa   Convidado: Charles Alcântara   Edição: Thiago Corrêa   Capa: Leticia Dáquer    Data da gravação: 28/11/2019   Data da publicação: 04/12/2019   Música: André de Oliveira - CPI do Céu Links relacionados ao episódio Mapa revela quanto do lucro corporativo no mundo vai para paraísos fiscais (Exame, 30/09/2019)   Estudo liga paraísos fiscais a desmatamento na Amazônia (DW, 13/08/2018)   O uso de paraísos fiscais pelos super-ricos empobrece o mundo? (BBC Brasil, 09/11/2017)   Sonegação custa ao país sete vezes mais que a corrupção, diz pesquisador (Rede Brasil Atual, 23/06/2017)   Paraísos fiscais e corrupção – uma luta global (Observatório da Cidadania, 2017 - pdf)   Site da Tax Justice Network   Aras e subprocuradores temem que mudanças em regras do Coaf tornem Brasil 'paraíso fiscal' (G1, 18/11/2019)   Paraísos fiscales más populares a nivel mundial para el bufete Mossack Fonseca en abril de 2016, según número de empresas en centros offshore (Statista.com)   Brasil é paraíso tributário para super-ricos, diz estudo de centro da ONU (Nações Unidas Brasil, 31/06/2016)   What is financial secrecy? (Financial Secrecy Index)   CPI DA SONEGAÇÃO TRIBUTÁRIA (Câmara Municipal de São Paulo, 21/11/2019)   A Balada do Pistoleiro Charles Alcântara Filme: Parasita (2019)   Poema: Aprendo com abelhas (Manoel de Barros) Aprendo mais com abelhas do que com aeroplanos. É um olhar pra baixo que eu nasci tendo. É um olhar para ser menor, para o Insignificante que eu me criei tendo. O ser que na sociedade é chutado como uma barata - cresce de importância para o meu olho. Ainda não entendi porque herdei esse olhar para baixo. Sempre imagino que venha de ancestralidades machucadas. Fui criado no mato e aprendi a gostar das coisinhas do chão- antes que das coisas celestiais. Pessoas pertencidas de abandono me comovem: tanto quanto as soberbas coisas ínfimas.   Leticia Dáquer Livro: Vulgo Grace (Margaret Atwood) Série: Queer Eye (Netflix)   Thiago Corrêa Documentário: Welcome to Leith (2015)   Jabás Charles Alcântara Twitter pessoal: @charlesalcant_   Twitter Fenafisco: @FenaFisco Fenafisco no Facebook   Fenafisco no Instagram   Leticia Dáquer Twitter: @pacamanca Blog: www.pacamanca.com Papo Cético, podcast do site Mitografias    Thiago Corrêa Twitter: @thiago_czz Parceria com Veste Esquerda: use o código de desconto PISTOLA10 pra ter 10% de desconto na sua compra de camisetas maneiríssimas esquerdopatas #MULHERESPODCASTERS Mulheres Podcasters é uma ação de iniciativa do Programa Ponto G, desenvolvida para divulgar o trabalho de mulheres na mídia podcast e mostrar para todo ouvinte que sempre existiram mulheres na comunidade de podcasts Brasil.   O Pistolando apoia essa iniciativa.    Apoie você também: compartilhe este programa com a hashtag #mulherespodcasters e nos ajude a promover a igualdade de gênero dentro da podosfera.   Responda à PodPesquisa 2019!   Links do Pistolando   www.pistolando.com   contato@pistolando.com   Twitter: @PistolandoPod   Instagram: @PistolandoPod   A capa do episódio é um quadrado branco. Uma foto colorida ocupa a maior parte do quadrado, deixando uma moldura em branco em volta, como uma foto Polaroid, sendo que a parte branca acima da foto é maior do que a que está abaixo da foto. A foto mostra um cofrinho em forma de porquinho, de vidro transparente, e dentro dele uma espécie de terrário imitando uma ilha tropical: terra marrom no fundo, uma camada de musgo imitando grama verde por cima, três palmeiras estilizadas verdes saindo de uma ilha verde. A cabeça do porquinho está virada para a direita. Na parte branca acima da foto, o número e o nome do episódio, em letras pretas em caixa alta, numa fonte sem serifa.

The Laundromat (2019) In this The Big Short (2015)-esque dramedy based on the Mossack Fonseca scandal, a cast of characters investigate an insurance fraud, chasing leads to a pair of a flamboyant Panama City law partners exploiting the world's financial system.

The Laundromat (2019) In this The Big Short (2015)-esque dramedy based on the Mossack Fonseca scandal, a cast of characters investigate an insurance fraud, chasing leads to a pair of a flamboyant Panama City law partners exploiting the world's financial system.

Estamos de vuelta en Luces, Rankia y Acción para hablar de la película The Laundromat: Dinero sucio, o como sería su traducción literal, "La lavandería". Una película producida por Netflix, estrenada en 2019, que cuenta con un reparto de lujo, entre ellos, Antonio Banderas, Meryl Streep, Gary Oldman, Sharon Stone, y muchos más. La película se centra en el escándalo llamado "Los papeles de Panamá" que se destapó en 2017 a través de una filtración de documentos de la firma de abogados panameña Mossack Fonseca, en la que gran multitud de personalidades del mundo tenían patrimonio no declarado en Panamá, famoso paraíso fiscal. En el pódcast hablaremos sobre la película y nos centraremos en explicar: - Diferencias entre evasión fiscal y elusión fiscal - Qué son las empresas offshore - Qué método seguían Mossack y Fonseca - Hasta que punto es ilegal tener patrimonio en paraísos fiscales - Mecanismos que se usan para evadir impuestos - Cómo blanquean el dinero - Cuánto hay de verdad en la película Y por supuesto, atenderemos a cualquier duda que tengáis. ►Visita el Blog Rankia Podcasts y todo su contenido: https://www.rankia.com/blog/podcast-rankia?cta_categoria=social-media&cta_tipo=transistor ►Visítanos y síguenos en:

Estamos de vuelta en Luces, Rankia y Acción para hablar de la película The Laundromat: Dinero sucio, o como sería su traducción literal, "La lavandería". Una película producida por Netflix, estrenada en 2019, que cuenta con un reparto de lujo, entre ellos, Antonio Banderas, Meryl Streep, Gary Oldman, Sharon Stone, y muchos más. La película se centra en el escándalo llamado "Los papeles de Panamá" que se destapó en 2017 a través de una filtración de documentos de la firma de abogados panameña Mossack Fonseca, en la que gran multitud de personalidades del mundo tenían patrimonio no declarado en Panamá, famoso paraíso fiscal. En el pódcast hablaremos sobre la película y nos centraremos en explicar: - Diferencias entre evasión fiscal y elusión fiscal - Qué son las empresas offshore - Qué método seguían Mossack y Fonseca - Hasta que punto es ilegal tener patrimonio en paraísos fiscales - Mecanismos que se usan para evadir impuestos - Cómo blanquean el dinero - Cuánto hay de verdad en la película Y por supuesto, atenderemos a cualquier duda que tengáis. • Suscríbete a nuestro Blog para poder estar atento de todos los pódcasts que subamos y plantearnos dudas o sugerencias: https://www.rankia.com/redirections/51171

Oggi parliamo di Panama Papers, ultimo film di Steven Soderbergh disponibile su Netflix. Link al film: https://www.netflix.com/title/80994011 Panama Papers: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panama_PapersSocietà Offshore: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Società_offshoreMossack Fonseca: https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mossack_Fonseca

Noticias legaltech del 21 de octubre de 2019. En este episodio hablamos sobre: Mossack Fonseca demanda a Netflix por película sobre la filtración de Panama Papers; Facebook y su falsa cruzada por la libertad de expresión: Dicen que no van a filtrar las fakenews de políticos en campaña; La guerra de las grandes corporaciones norteamericanas contra el Estado de Derecho. Spoiler: Ya ha pasado antes y no les fue bien; Demandan a Fortnite por estar creando adicción en menores de edad; Más de 100 Firmas de Abogados en Estados Unidos reportan brechas de seguridad en datos de sus clientes; y mucho más.¡Síguenos en nuestras redes sociales! Nos encuentras como @legaltechpod o como Legaltech en Español en twitter, facebook, linkedin e instagram, o mejor aún, visítanos en nuestra página web www.algoritmica.io para estar conectados con el mejor contenido de tecnología, innovación y derecho.

Rodrigo Noriega, asesor editorial de La Prensa, analiza la decisión de la Sala Tercera de la Corte Suprema de Justicia que anuló la Resolución del Consejo de Gabinete No. 3 del 15 de enero de 2013, por medio de la cual se eliminó la categoría de bien de dominio público y autorizó el traspaso de 10 hectáreas de relleno de lecho marino a favor de la Compañía Insular Americana, S.A., para el desarrollo de islas artificiales en la bahía de Panamá, frente a Punta Pacífica. Además, Jürgen Mossack y Ramón Fonseca, fundadores de la firma Mossack Fonseca, presentaron una demanda contra Netflix este martes 15 de octubre, a tres días de que la plataforma estrene un filme sobre el escándalo de las sociedades offshore.

This week, Courtney from Cult of Domesticity and I are discussing the Panama papers, the biggest information leak in recent times.If you are able to and would like to help me with the costs of this podcast, you can do that on Patreon where you can donate as little as two dollars a month and in return, get exclusive access to ad-free episodes, scripts, bonus episodes on various topics and other nice rewards. Visit the page at https://www.patreon.com/truecrimefinlandArt is by Mark PerniaMusic is "Night" by VVSMUSICMy art store: https://society6.com/minnanenPodcast swag store: https://www.redbubble.com/people/tc-finland/shop?asc=uEmail: truecrimefinlandpod@gmail.comWebsite: https://truecrimefinland.squarespace.comFacebook group: https://www.facebook.com/groups/507039419636994/Twitter & Instagram: tc_finlandSources:SVT and Reykjavik Media interview with Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xJ1Y_OrbT5oYle 4.4.2016: Grafiikka vallanpitäjien salaisista yrityksistä https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2016/04/04/grafiikka-vallanpitajien-salaisista-yrityksista -> click the link and scroll down to see an interactive illustration of all the power players implicated in the Panama papersEl Périodico 6.7.2016: Messi, condenado a 21 meses de cárcel por "haber tratado de eludir" la ley "por el camino que sea" https://www.elperiodico.com/es/barca/20160706/messi-fraude-fiscal-5250451Helsingin Sanomat 5.4.2016: Panaman paperit ajoivat Islannin pääministerin jättämään paikkansa – ”Tämä on todellinen farssi” https://www.hs.fi/ulkomaat/art-2000002894773.htmlMOT 6.4.2017: Historian suurin tietovuoto – osa I https://areena.yle.fi/1-3179044MOT 13.4.2017: Historian suurin tietovuoto – osa II https://areena.yle.fi/1-3179045MOT 29.4.2016: Suomalaisia välikäsinä veroparatiisiyhtiöiden pyörittämisessä https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2016/04/29/suomalaisia-valikasina-veroparatiisiyhtioiden-pyorittamisessaSpotlight 4.4.2016: Världens största läcka – del I https://areena.yle.fi/1-3083104Spotlight 11.4.2016: Världens största läcka – del II https://arenan.yle.fi/1-3083105Yle 3.4.2016: Islannin pääministerin seikkailut veroparatiisissa https://yle.fi/aihe/artikkeli/2016/04/03/islannin-paaministerin-seikkailut-veroparatiisissaYle 30.8.2017: Hallinto-oikeus: Ylen ei tarvitse luovuttaa Panama-aineistoa Verohallinnolle https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-9805078Yle 5.4.2016: Islannin pääministeri eroaa tehtävästään Panaman tietovuodon takia https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-8789950Yle 27.3.2019: Yle sai salata Panama-aineiston https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-10708807Yle 15.3.2018: Panaman papereiden vuoto kaatoi Mossack Fonsecan: asianajotoimisto lopettaa toimintansa https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-10117821Yle 12.5.2016: Mossack Fonseca haastaa toimittajajärjestön oikeuteen Panama-papereiden julkaisusta https://yle.fi/uutiset/3-8876891

Guest: Lucy Komisar. A deep dive into the story behind the “Magnitsky Hoax”. Lucy tells the story of Bill Browder, Hermitage (his hedge fund) and how he managed to create a massive political weapon called the Magnitsky Act to protect himself and his benefactors and to use against others. The story also involves shell companies, tax havens, money laundering, Mikhail Khodorkovsky, Robert Maxwell, Gazprom, HSBC, Natalia Veselnitskaya, the Trump Tower meeting, the resurgence of the Cold War with Russia, Russiagate, the Mueller Report, and more.  Lucy Komisar is a New York City-based journalist with a long history of investigating offshore banks and corporate secrecy and abuses. One of her current long term projects is the investigation of the Browder/Magnitsky hoax.  FOLLOW Lucy on Twitter @LucyKomisar where there is lively and active participation in this investigative work and find her work at her website TheKomisarScoop.com.  Around the Empire is listener supported, independent media. Pitch in at Patreon: patreon.com/aroundtheempire or paypal.me/aroundtheempirepod. Find all links at aroundtheempire.com.  SUBSCRIBE on YouTube. FOLLOW @aroundtheempire and @joanneleon.  SUBSCRIBE/FOLLOW on iTunes, iHeart, Spotify, Google Play, Facebook or on your preferred podcast app. Recorded on September 24th and 27th, 2019. Music by Fluorescent Grey. Reference Links: The Komisar Scoop The Man Behind the Magnitsky Act, 100Reporters, Lucy Komisar The BBC and the European Court get the Magnitsky story wrong, Lucy Komisar The Man Behind the Magnitsky Act: Did Bill Browder’s Tax Troubles in Russia Color Push for Sanctions?, Lucy Komisar Documentary: The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes, Andrei Nekrasov Timestamps: 2:00 Intro, Lucy’s background, how she met Bill Browder, investigating money laundering, Khodorkovsky, Avisma, Browder, Yukos, Peter Bond, Russia 9:00 The Magnitsky Hoax, how Browder/Magnitsky ties into other things like Russiagate, resurgence of the Cold War, Robert Maxwell, etc.  11:30 Bill Browder background, Robert Maxwell, Salomon Brothers, telecom Peter Star, Edmond Safra, IMF funds, Beny Steinmetz, Hermitage hedge fund, Mossack Fonseca, Ziff Brothers 16:30 Offshore shell companies, fall of USSR, “shock therapy”, shares/vouchers, Cyprus, Gazprom, Russia-Cyprus double taxation treaties, fraud, Kalmykia region in Russia, Browder tax evasion 23:45 Sergei Magnitsky (Browder’s accountant) investigated 2006, Browder lost Russian visa 2005, Putin, 2007 Browder companies docs seized, Firestone Duncan, Browder says companies stolen 31:00 Magnitsky interrogated 2008, prepares to flee, arrested & imprisoned, HSBC (trustee for Hermitage fund), tax refund fraud, Renaissance, Prevezon, OCCRP, Browder media stenographers, Rimma Starova blew the whistle, Russian reporter Oleg Lurie met Magnitsky in prison, Magnitsky doesn’t mention abuse to Lurie or human rights orgs, Browder doesn’t mention to US House Human Rights Committee,  Magnitsky dies in prison in Nov 2009 poor medical treatment, Russian authorities investigate and report terrible prison conditions, medical neglect 46:00 Russia still pursuing Browder for tax evasion, Jonathan Winer worked for John Kerry’s State Dept and later APCO, Khodorkovsky also client of APCO, Winer helps Browder craft a new story & strategy (“Magnitsky Hoax”) of Magnitsky murder, forgeries, used by media and govt for The Magnitsky Act, in his fraudulent document Browder names new culprits 54:30 Browder and Magnitsky Act help advance US anti-Russia foreign policy, OCCRP (Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project) helps Browder create docs, Magnitsky Act includes a section protecting Khodorkovsky 1:01:00 Documentary “The Magnitsky Act: Behind the Scenes” debunks Browder’s story, banned from broadcast  1:03:00 Ken Dilanian’s May 2016 reporting on Magnitsky and Browder was killed by NBC, Robert Otto State Dept emails leaked 1:11:45 Trump Tower meeting, Natalia Veselnitskaya, Rob Goldstone, Prevezon case, Russiagate narrative, Fusion GPS, Glenn Simpson 1:32:30 Trump-Russia investigation, The Mueller Report repeats Browder’s Magnitsky hoax story 1:43:00 in 2016 Browder found guilty in Russian court and new embezzlement charges filed as a result of his tax refund fraud 1:51:00 Complexity of tax havens, shell companies, money laundering, purpose of Global Magnitsky Acts campaign as a political weapon  

In 2015, journalist Bastian Obermayer from the Süddeutsche Zeitung , a Southern German Newspaper, was approached online by an anonymous source.  He or she provided him with a database from Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. They are the Panama Papers. Named in the leak were 12 current or former world leaders, 128 other public officials and politicians, […] The post Bullshit 5.1 – The Panama Papers (part 1) appeared first on The BS Filter.

Friedrich Lindenberg talks me through the investigative journalism data tools developed by the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and details of the Azerbaijani Laundromat. He is optimistic about the potential for lasting and significant structural change to dismantle the complex financial industries that support organised crime & money laundering worldwide. We agree on the importance of pirate radio! Organised Crime + Money Laundering + Data Journalism + OCCRP + #DNL15 ----more---- Data Team Lead, OCCRP, Organised Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, DEFriedrich Lindenberg leads the data team at OCCRP. He is responsible for the development of OCCRP Data and supports ongoing investigations where data analysis is needed. In 2014/2015, Friedrich was a Knight International journalism fellow with the International Center for Journalists, working with the African Network of Centers for Investigative Reporting (ANCIR), and in 2013 he was a Knight-Mozilla Open News fellow at Spiegel Online in Hamburg. Prior to that, Friedrich was an open data activist, and worked to promote the release of government information about public finance, lobbying, procurement and law-making across the world. Twitter: @pudo OCCRP: Azerbaijani Landromat OCCRP: The Russian Laundromat Exposed OCCRP: Investigative Tools (Find online sources / Search for leads / Map your investigation) OCCRP: Database for Researchers (145 Million entries) OCCRP: Data Visualisation Tools (for investigators) Guardian: Everything about the Azerbaijani Laundromat Reuters: National Crime Agency Account Freezing Order The Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) is an investigative reporting platform formed by 40 non-profit investigative centers, scores of journalists and several major regional news organizations around the globe. Our network is spread across Europe, Africa, Asia and Latin America. We teamed up in 2006 to do transnational investigative reporting and promote technology-based approaches to exposing organized crime and corruption worldwide. We help journalists anywhere to trace people, companies and assets across the globe. Our team has worked on dozens of award-winning investigations in different regions. Their support is free for reporters from anywhere in the world. DARK HAVENS PANEL LEAKING MASSIVE DATASETS: Security, Openness, and Collective Mobilisation Ryan Gallagher (Investigative Reporter & Editor, The Intercept, UK)Friedrich Lindenberg (Data Team Lead, OCCRP, Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, DE)Moderated by Tatiana Bazzichelli (Director, Disruption Network Lab, IT/DE) This panel poses issues of security and openness related to the analysis of data leaks and strategies of indexing data, to journalists, technical experts, researchers, and the larger civic society. In the case of the Panama Papers (April 2016) 11.5 million financial and legal records were leaked in 2015 from the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca; those were followed by the Bahamas Leaks (September 2016), where 1.3 million internal company register files were leaked; later, the Paradise Papers (November 2017) were a set of 13.4 million leaked confidential electronic documents about offshore investments. This huge amount of information was all leaked to the Süddeutsche Zeitung reporters Frederik Obermaier and Bastian Obermayer, who shared it with the Washington-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) who coordinated a worldwide investigation. Ryan Gallagher (The Intercept) and Friedrich Lindenberg (Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project, OCCRP) discuss the ethics of massive data leaks, security and secrecy vs. openness and transparency, as well as source protection and collective mobilisation in the analysis of the material. DARK HAVENS Confronting Hidden Money & Power #DNL15 DARK HAVENS brings together people from around the world who have been part of global investigations and leaks, have blown the whistle on corporations, been put on trial, and who have taken severe personal risks to confront hidden money and power. 15th conference of the Disruption Network Lab. Curated by Tatiana Bazzichelli. In cooperation with Transparency International. Disruption Network Lab: Dark Havens Twitter: @disruptberlin    Thank you for tuning in, we hope you enjoyed listening as much as we did talking! Transit Lounge Radio is 100% independently produced, and ad-free. Your generous support, event invitations and sharing to community networks will help to keep the conversation free-flowing! Support independent radio! Donate & keep the conversation flowing Hang out in the Transit Lounge on facebook Reviews and stars on iTunes make us happy Listen on the TLR YouTube Channel Subscribe to TLR RSS Feed Invite Transit Lounge Radio to record conversations at your event: signal at transitloungeradio dot net #DNL15, Transparency, Panama Papers, investigative journalism, tax justice, offshore tax havens, disruption, network, Dark Havens, Disruption Network Lab, journalism, treasure islands, finance curse, offshore tour operator, Paradise Papers, Lux Leaks, whistleblower, UBS, ICIJ, OCCRP, Berlin, transit lounge, radio, podcast, conversation

Frederik Obermaier on global crime & collaborative reporting, the demise of the 'lone wolf' investigative journalist, Panama Papers cocktails, writing that email to Vladimir Putin, and a thank you message to John/Jane Doe for the 11.5 million files contained in the Panama Papers. The stories are global, crimes are global and journalism needs to be global: Frederik dishes on the complexities of working collaboratively with 400 journalists from 80 countries over a year to publish the Panama Papers. Tax Havens + Investigative Journalism + Collaboration + Panama Papers + #DNL15 ----more---- Frederik Obermaier Investigative journalist, Süddeutsche Zeitung, DE "It was a difficult process, to be honest. Our editor-in-chief (Wolfgang Krach) was a big fan of collaborations, so he encouraged us to share the data. It think he's a visionary in this aspect. We also had colleagues who asked us: 'Frederik, Bastian are you stupid? You're sharing a scoop! Why should you?' Sometimes they're in this old lonely wolf mindset, journalists, especially investigative journalists being the lonely wolf not sharing anything even with his outlet... always secretive, always hunting for the scoop. These times are over in journalism. I think in investigative journalism, it's now the pack, the power of the pack. And it's only logical because crime is not limited to one country anymore. We're speaking about transnational organised crime groups. So it's only logical to team up as journalists to tackle this problem, to uncover it. And I think we need more. We do see a lot of collaborations currently in journalism, and I think that's good. The more, the merrier!" Frederik Obermaier is a Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative reporter for the Munich-based Süddeutsche Zeitung, Germany’s leading broadsheet. He is one of the two reporters first contacted by the anonymous source of the Panama Papers, the leaked documents that prompted a global investigation involving hundreds of journalists. He also initiated the Paradise Papers-revelations. Obermaier is a member of the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, ICIJ.org. Photo by Stefanie Preuin/SZ If you have data, contact Frederik Obermaier using a secure channel & encrypted communication. Please note that unencrypted email, skype and phone calls are highly susceptible to being monitored or accessed. Contact details on his website Email encryption via PGP Threema: FPN4FKZE Documentary: The Panama Papers (2018), directed by Alex Winter (TRAILER) “We’ve said it again and again: some stories are too big, too complex and too global for lone-wolf muckrakers or even individual news organisations to tackle. We believe collaboration is the wave of the future in global journalism. Pooling resources and sharing information is a powerful way to investigate and expose stories that politicians, corporations and organized criminals are determined to keep in the shadows.” Gerard Ryle, Director ICIJ Panama Papers wins Pulitzer Prize How the Panama Papers were unwrapped Reporting on The Panama Papers Reporting on The Paradise Papers The Panama Papers: Breaking the Story of How the Rich and Powerful Hide Their Money, by Bastian Obermayer & Frederik Obermaier. The inside story from the journalists who set the investigation in motion. ICIJ Investigations: Panama Papers / Paradise Papers ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database OCCRP: Organized Crime & Corruption Reporting Project Forbidden Stories: Network of Journalists Twitter: @f_obermaier PANAMA PAPERS: How the Rich and Powerful Hide Their Money WATCH VIDEO: DARK HAVENS KEYNOTE Frederik Obermaier (Investigative Journalist, Süddeutsche Zeitung, DE). Moderated by Max Heywood (Transparency International Global Outreach and Advocacy Coordinator, UK/DE). The Panama Papers began with a cryptic message from an anonymous whistleblower. “Hello, this is John Doe,” the source wrote. “Interested in data?” In the months that followed, the confidential source transferred emails, client data and scanned letters, from Mossack Fonseca, a notorious Panamanian law firm that has not only helped prime ministers, kings and presidents hide their money, but has also provided services to dictators, drug cartels, Mafia clans, fraudsters, weapons dealers, and regimes like North Korea or Iran. After the revelation several heads of governments had to step down, thousands of investigations were launched, approximately one billion $ recouped. The Panama Papers proved that there is a whole parallel world offshore in which the rich and powerful enjoy the freedom to avoid not just taxes but all kinds of laws they find inconvenient. In this Keynote, Süddeutsche Zeitung investigative journalist Frederik Obermaier reflects on the Panama Papers and their impact (arrests, changes in legislation etc.), as well as the crucial roles of whistleblowers and the need to protect them. In conversation with Max Heywood, the dialogue addresses what we learnt from The Panama Papers about political and economic power, what progress has been made against tax and dark havens, and how the Panama Papers have changed the way journalists think about and analyse tax havens. DARK HAVENS Confronting Hidden Money & Power #DNL15 DARK HAVENS brings together people from around the world who have been part of global investigations and leaks, have blown the whistle on corporations, been put on trial, and who have taken severe personal risks to confront hidden money and power. 15th conference of the Disruption Network Lab. Curated by Tatiana Bazzichelli. In cooperation with Transparency International. Disruption Network Lab: Dark Havens Twitter: @disruptberlin   Thank you for tuning in, we hope you enjoyed listening as much as we did talking! Transit Lounge Radio is 100% independently produced, and ad-free. Your generous support, event invitations and sharing to community networks will help keep the conversation free-flowing! Relax in the VIP Lounge Hang out in the Transit Lounge on facebook Reviews and stars on iTunes make us happy Listen on the TLR YouTube Channel Subscribe to TLR RSS Feed Invite Transit Lounge Radio to record a series of conversations at your world changing event: signal at transitloungeradio dot net #DNL15, Transparency, Panama Papers, investigative journalism, tax justice, offshore tax havens, disruption, network, Dark Havens, Disruption Network Lab, journalism, treasure islands, finance curse, offshore tour operator, Paradise Papers, Lux Leaks, whistleblower, UBS, ICIJ, OCCRP, Berlin, transit lounge, radio, podcast, conversation, Frederik Obermaier, Süddeutsche Zeitung

We unpack the nitty gritty of the fallout of the Panama Papers. What happened with Mossack Fonseca, how did the leak affect world leaders and the wealthy, and how did one of the biggest leaks in history change the legal and regulatory landscape in AML? All of these questions are framed for you in this installment.

We are starting our second season with a bang by discussing one of the most notorious leaks-the Panama Papers. Hosts Brianna and John go over the origins of the law firm at the center of the Panama Papers, Mossack Fonseca and how they managed to get away with helping their clients launder money and evade taxes for decades.

Kieran Beer interviews two-time Pulitzer-Prize winning investigative journalist Jake Bernstein about his new book "Secrecy World". Jake was a senior journalist on the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) team that broke the Panama Papers in 2017. His new book "Secrecy World", based on the story of Mossack Fonseca and the 2017 scandal, is about to be made into a major motion picture. "Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted." (Amazon) In this podcast, Kieran and Jake talk about how Mossack Fonseca was exposed, and what real-world impact this has had (and is continuing to have) across the globe. Find Jake on Twitter www.twitter.com/jake_bernstein

(With Andrea Bernstein and Meg Cramer, WNYC, and Peter Elkind, ProPublica) Since Donald Trump’s fortunes came surging back with the success of “The Apprentice” 14 years ago, his deals have often been scrutinized for the large number of his partners who have ventured to the very edges of the law, and sometimes beyond. Those associates have included accused money launderers, alleged funders of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard and a felon who slashed someone in the face with a broken margarita glass. Trump and his company have typically countered by saying they were merely licensing his name on these real estate projects in exchange for a fee. They weren’t the developers or in any way responsible. But an eight-month investigation by ProPublica and WNYC reveals that the post-millennium Trump business model is different from what has been previously reported. The Trumps were typically way more than mere licensors or bystanders in their often-troubled deals. They were deeply involved in these projects. They helped mislead investors and buyers — and they profited handsomely from it.  Patterns of deceptive practices occurred in a dozen deals across the globe, as the business expanded into international projects, and the Trumps often participated. One common pattern, visible in more than half of those transactions, was a tendency to misstate key sales numbers. In interviews and press conferences, Ivanka Trump gave false sales figures for projects in Mexico’s Baja California ; Panama City, Panama ; Toronto  and New York’s SoHo neighborhood . These statements weren’t just the legendary Trump hype; they misled potential buyers about the viability of the developments. Another pattern: Donald Trump repeatedly misled buyers about the amount (or existence) of his ownership in projects in Tampa, Florida; Panama; Baja and elsewhere. For a tower planned in Tampa, for example, Trump told a local paper in 2005 that his ownership would be less than 50 percent: “But it’s a substantial stake. I recently said I’d like to increase my stake but when they’re selling that well they don’t let you do that.” In reality, Trump had no ownership stake in the project. The Trumps often made money even when projects failed. And when they tanked, the Trumps simply ignored their prior claims of close involvement, denied any responsibility and walked away. (Projects Where A Trump Family Member Overstated Numbers and Projects Where the Trumps Suggested They Were Developers, Partners or Equity Owners - They Weren't) The cycle is exemplified in Panama City, where the Trumps were involved in a project to build a massive tower and complex known as the Trump Ocean Club . The project’s unfortunate turns included bankruptcy, then, years later, the forcible ejection of the Trump Organization from managing the hotel. There, as elsewhere, the Trump Organization disclaimed responsibility. It emphasized that it had merely licensed the Trump name to developers who handled everything from construction to marketing. “The Trump Organization was not the owner, developer or seller of the Trump Ocean Club Panama project,” it said in a statement last year. “Because of its limited role, the company was not responsible for the financing of the project and had no involvement in the sale of units.” That was false. For starters, Trump arranged financing — his promised commission: $2.2 million or more — by bringing in investment bank Bear Stearns , which issued the bonds that paid for the Panama project’s construction. Trump touted himself as a “partner” of the developer. His daughter Ivanka  briefly boasted that she had personally sold 40 units. (A broker on the project said he couldn’t remember her selling even one.) Meanwhile, Ivanka told a journalist at the time that “over 90 percent” of the Panama units had sold — and at prices five times as high as comparable buildings. Both statements were untrue. Not only were the Panama sales figures inflated, but many “purchases” turned out to be an illusion. That was no coincidence. The building’s financing depended on obtaining advance commitments from buyers, often before concrete had started pouring. But in between the sale of the bonds in 2007 and 2013, the year the building went bankrupt, buyers of 458 units in the 1,000-unit building abandoned their purchase contracts. Those buyers forfeited more than $50 million in deposits, and they never took possession of finished units. Given that the “buyers” were often shadowy shell companies or other paper entities, it was nearly impossible to discern who the actual purchasers were, let alone why they backed out. Trump licensed his name for an initial fee of $1 million. But that was just the beginning of the revenue streams, a lengthy and varied assortment that granted him a piece of everything from sales of apartment units to a cut of minibar sales, and was notable for the myriad ways in which both success and failure triggered payments to him. Consider the final accounting: In the wake of the project’s bankruptcy, a 50 percent default rate and his company’s expulsion from managing the hotel, Donald Trump walked away with between $30 million and $55 million. The Trump Organization did not respond to a long list of questions about its transactions. The White House didn’t have a comment. Trump’s licensing strategy originated with his early-2000s comeback, as “The Apprentice” propelled him to international TV stardom and restored luster to a reputation tarnished by multiple bankruptcies. As Trump put it in one promotional video  during that period, “When the first season of ‘The Apprentice’ finally finished shooting, I was able to get back to my core business, real estate, and I’ve made some really incredible deals.” That strategy is still playing out today. The Trump Organization, which pledged not to launch new projects during the Trump presidency, is aggressively pursuing existing ones, including in the Dominican Republic, Indonesia and India. Some long-assumed beliefs about Trump are being re-investigated, with surprising results. This month, The New York Times published a 13,000-word examination of how Donald’s father, the late Fred Trump, and his estate, funneled millions of dollars to his children, in possible violation of tax rules and criminal laws. With copious documentation showing that Fred directed $413 million in today’s dollars to Donald — not the single loan for $1 million, with interest, that Donald has always claimed — it exploded Trump’s long-propagated claim that he is a self-made man. This article examines another Trump claim: that his post-millennium comeback and global expansion rested on the brilliant purity of a licensing strategy that paid him millions simply for the use of his name. That, it turns out, is no truer than the notion that Donald Trump is self-made. “Development Wasn’t Our Big Forte” A Lebanese importer-exporter with expertise in the apparel industry seemed an unlikely choice as a partner for one of Donald Trump’s first international forays. Yet that’s precisely who Trump would team with to embark on a wildly ambitious construction project in a distant Central American location. Roger Khafif  divided his time between Panama, where he had become a citizen, and South Florida. He was a slick dresser who made big promises and exuded an intensity that could be viewed either as determination or stubbornness, according to people who did business with him. He had worked in the Panama Canal free-trade zone as an importer-exporter of clothing and had recently begun dabbling in real estate, documents show, via ownership interests in two Panamanian beach resorts. “Development wasn’t our big forte,” Khafif acknowledged in an interview with ProPublica. If Khafif seemed an implausible partner, Panama seemed an odd location for a project that would become a template of sorts for Trump’s international licensing deals. The country was better known as a cog in the Latin American drug trade than as a tourist destination. It was a place to turn illegal profits into useable cash. Money laundering helped fuel the proliferation of high-rises that gave Panama City its sleek, ultramodern skyline . The deal came together fast, according to Khafif. To get to Trump, he said, an associate put him in touch with a business partner of Marvin Traub, the Trump friend and former Bloomingdale’s CEO who had also brokered Trump Vodka. Traub’s consultancy got Khafif on Trump’s schedule. (Traub’s firm later sought almost $1.3 million for matchmaking, court documents show.) “We had a quick meeting,” Khafif recalled of his first encounter with Trump in New York in 2005. “Then I left. I went down to Miami, got a call the next day from Donald Trump saying they were interested in the project.” Khafif was so surprised he didn’t at first believe he was talking to Trump. Trump signed on to Khafif’s plan and decided to bestow the leading role in the project, at least as far as the Trump Organization went, on his daughter Ivanka, Khafif told Reuters. Just entering her mid-20s, she was leading a major deal for the first time. Ivanka traveled to Panama shortly after, and the agreement coalesced quickly. Khafif’s dream was audacious and grandiose. The planned complex, Ivanka claimed in a promotional video, would amass the largest square footage of any construction in all of the Americas. Fully Trumpian in its luxury and excess, the plan would call for a 69-story sail-shaped building with 1,000 condos and hotel-condo units, offices, a casino, spa, private beach, pool deck and yacht club. (When viewed from Panama Bay, the resulting edifice would look less like a sail and more like a giant lemon wedge perched on a square base.) One Monday in April 2006 in the marble atrium at Trump Tower in Manhattan, Khafif stood in a well-cut dark suit and pale pink tie  beside Trump, Ivanka and Donald Jr. to announce plans for the Trump Ocean Club’s birth. “I really think the time for Panama has come,” Trump proclaimed. Trump left multiple observers with the impression that he had an equity stake in the deal. “He said the Trump   does have a financial interest in the project but he would not disclose the amount,” reported a newsletter circulated to clients and associates, alerting them to news and investment opportunities, by the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, which would later become publicly known for sheltering wealth in offshore accounts. Marketing materials for the Panama project also implied that Trump was functioning as a developer. “I am honored to develop this extraordinary high rise with my partner Roger Khafif of the K Group,” Trump was quoted as saying in one promotional statement. Buyers believed the Trumps and their company were functioning as the project’s developers, in partnership with Khafif, according to a lawsuit later filed by dozens of buyers. But Trump did not have a penny of equity in the development, according to records of the bond sale and bankruptcy. Nor was he the actual developer, as the Trump Organization’s own statement confirmed. In Panama and elsewhere, Trump’s projects depended on outsiders’ willingness to invest. Trump claimed at the time that banks were “fighting to put up money” for the building. But there’s no evidence that was the case. His five casino and hotel bankruptcies meant financial institutions tended to shy away, and Khafif’s lack of building experience made him a risky financing prospect. (Khafif ultimately brought on the principals of a Colombian construction and design firm to deliver the necessary know-how.) Still, Trump had a card to play without which the tower would likely never have been built: his two-decade relationship with Bear Stearns. The investment bank agreed to underwrite a $220 million bond issue. Bear Stearns and Trump had worked together on a variety of endeavors. For example, two years earlier he and a Bear Stearns executive, Trump’s investment banking adviser, had launched Trump University , a non-accredited business education program that purported to teach his real estate strategies. (It later collapsed among accusations of fraud. Trump paid $25 million to settle a suit but denied wrongdoing.) And as far back as 1988, Trump paid a $750,000 civil judgment to the U.S. Department of Justice for having Bear Stearns make purchases of casino stocks in the bank’s name rather than in his. (Trump was looking to buy casinos at the time, and the Justice Department asserted that the concealed purchases violated antitrust laws.) As the bond underwriter in the Panama project, Bear Stearns played a dual role: It raised money for construction and also vouched for the soundness of the bonds it would sell. The bank was supposed to be checking that information disclosed to investors was accurate and provided a complete picture of the investment’s strengths and weaknesses. In reality, however, “the bank had significant lapses in exercising due diligence over their bond offerings” during that period, according to Gary Aguirre, an attorney and former SEC senior counsel who advocated for more accountability of Bear Stearns and other Wall Street banks involved in the financial crisis and said he researched Bear Stearns as part of that process. The bank, including a member of its Latin America group (which was involved in the Panama deal), faced multiple investigations by regulators into whether its employees in Miami and New York had improperly valued financial instruments, though they did not lead to charges, SEC records and media reports show. The bond sale barely squeaked through in November 2007. Tremors of what would become a global financial earthquake were already destabilizing markets. At the last minute, Bear Stearns postponed the offering only to reverse course a few days later. “I remember walking up Fifth Avenue and I put my arm around Roger [Khafif],” said Jack Studnicky, a lead real estate agent for the project, “and I said, ‘You are the luckiest SOB I ever met.’” This project, branded with the name of a longtime Bear Stearns client, was the only bond issue among eight at Bear Stearns at that moment that moved forward. Many investors turned up their noses at the bonds, even though Bear Stearns representatives had traveled to New York City, Miami and London to talk up the deal. Part of what drove some blue-chip corporate investors away was obvious: The bonds for the Panama project were rated “speculative” — “junk” in Wall Street parlance — reflecting what rating agencies viewed as an elevated chance of default. More risk-tolerant, and more anonymous, hedge funds and money managers proliferated among the bond buyers, making up 80 percent of initial investors. Within months of the offering, it became clear that the Trump Ocean Club would outlive its financial backer. Bear Stearns crumpled suddenly in March 2008 as creditors pounced on the heavily indebted institution. Less than six months after it delivered the money to construct the tower, Bear Stearns disappeared into the belly of J.P. Morgan. “We Needed Those Extra Sales” Trump’s connections landed financing for the Panama project, but they could take the deal only so far. The $220 million in bond proceeds wouldn’t have started flowing if Khafif’s team hadn’t satisfied a key prerequisite: Racking up “presales,” the term for purchase contracts signed while the building was under construction (and in many cases, before construction had even begun). Buyers promised to make a down payment of 30 percent, spread over four installments, and to eventually pay in full. These binding pledges served as collateral for the bond, a crucial source of value that bondholders could seize if the developers failed to pay back what they owed. Khafif and a cadre of brokers set out to move units, with what appeared to be dramatic success at first. The year Trump joined the project, 2006, the developers reported signing a whopping 585 presales contracts with prospective buyers (nearly 60 percent of the units in the building). The Moody’s credit-rating service cited the project’s rapid sales as a “positive credit characteristic.” But the project scrambled to nail enough contracts to fulfill the bank’s requirements, according to Studnicky, who worked for the project’s master brokers, International Sales Group (ISG). Over a meal in a Spanish restaurant in New York City, Khafif told Studnicky he needed “another 100 sales to make it valid” — scribbling numbers on the paper tablecloth, according to Studnicky. “It wasn’t fully collateralized, and we needed those extra sales,” he said. ISG leaned on its agents. “We knew there was a presale requirement in order to trigger the bond issue,” said Jeff Barton, another broker who worked at ISG at the time. “So there was definitely pressure.” In dealing with potential buyers, the ISG brokers communicated urgency of a much different sort: They acted as if the building were running out of units. The prices were in constant flux, keeping potential buyers off-balance. “You could never really get a straight answer in terms of what was actually available, what had actually sold and what the real price was,” said Kent Davis, who began looking to sell Ocean Club inventory soon after opening his own real estate company in Panama City in 2007. (One buyer echoed Davis’ comments. “When I invested it was ‘Oh wow, it’s almost sold out!’” said Al Monstavicius, a retired doctor who bought into the Panama tower. “I was told the units were selling real well. Well, they weren’t selling real well.”) ISG did not return messages seeking comment.  Davis said he sold a few units, splitting the commission with ISG. “I think some of their projections were exaggerated. I think the way they described how the project would ultimately be built did not come to fruition,” he said. “I think they were overpromising and, to be honest, at times I was complacent.” Just as Trump took millions upfront, financial incentives in the project were stacked to reward brokers for quick presales — rather than slow and steady contracts perhaps more likely to close once construction finished. Commissions were front-loaded to an unusual degree, Davis said. Agents making the earliest sales would receive 90 percent of their expected commissions by the time construction started, according to Barton. Only the final 10 percent was held back until closing, when the buyer had paid in full and the unit was ready to be occupied. (Davis said that brokers typically get commissions in increments in line with the percentage their clients have put in.) Even as brokers were taking cash out quickly, buyers were given time to put their money in. They anted up just 10 percent upon signing a purchase contract, according to the bond prospectus. They paid the remaining 20 percent in increments over the year after that. Khafif complained of soaring construction costs and raised prices even as brokers hustled for contracts, Studnicky said. “I kept saying I understand the problem, but if you keep pushing the prices up, people are never going to be able to close on these things,” he said. The higher prices climbed, the more the Trumps stood to pocket. Their licensing agreement gave them a base fee of 4 percent of gross sales when units closed. (This was on top of the $1 million Trump was given in advance for the use of his name.) They also received an “incentive fee”: the higher the price rose above benchmarks, the greater a proportion the Trumps earned, records show. A hotel-condominium unit that sold for $385,000, for example, would produce a payment of $20,650 — just over 5 percent — to Trump’s company. That was just the beginning. Along with the cut of sales, Trump’s 2006 licensing agreement provided the family other cash streams from the Panama project. The Trumps could take a 20 percent commission on construction costs if money was saved through Trump dealmaking, for instance. Once the hotel opened , they would pocket 17.5 percent of what hotel guests paid for their rooms, including what they spent on minibar items, internet service and even bathrobes; 4 percent for parking unit sales; and 12 percent of commercial space rentals. The Trump Organization would also receive 4 percent of the hotel’s gross revenue for managing it, plus an incentive fee equal to a fifth of the hotel’s net operating income. If everything went smoothly, according to the bond prospectus, Trump’s take would be $74 million by 2010. That sum was equivalent to about a third of the entire financing for the project. Of course, things would go less than perfectly. But Trump was protected if that happened, too. His contract created a safety net for him if prices rose so high that buyers failed to close. One provision required that two years after the first closing, developers would pay the Trumps fees for unsold units — basing the amount on the average sales prices of the units that had closed. In theory, avoiding such payments provided an incentive to sell more units; in reality, it meant that Trump would get paid whether or not units actually sold. The contract required that monthly sales and marketing reports be provided to the Trumps. It was a stipulation the Trump Organization appeared to value: In an email related to another project, Trump’s son Eric chastised business partners in the Dominican Republic  for delays in making such reports. “I am getting weekly emails from my team who requests this info on all projects for basic monitoring purposes,” Eric wrote. His sister, meanwhile, asserted her engagement with the company’s endeavors. “I’m involved in every aspect of our new construction projects,” Ivanka said in a 2008 interview. “[A] lot of what I do is get involved in the acquisition process, from sourcing the potential opportunities and then the initial due-diligence process, but then, of course, I follow the deals through to predevelopment planning, design, interior design, architectural design, sales and marketing, and, ultimately, through operations.” “Our biggest problem is not having enough inventory” Construction on the Trump Ocean Club had begun in May 2007, with customer deposits, investor money and a bridge loan tiding the developers over until the sale of bonds in November 2007. To hear the Trumps tell it, the project was a raging and immediate success, even in the face of a historic global financial and real estate crisis that erupted in 2008 and continued into 2009 and beyond. At times, the hyperbole crossed over into misrepresentation. In a November 2008 interview, Ivanka Trump bragged that she had “sold 40 units in Panama last month.” She added that “it’s a 1,000-unit building, we’ve sold over 90 percent of it.” The units, she said, had been going at a “500 percent premium to anything the luxury market has ever experienced prior to our entry.” All of that was exaggerated or outright false. When pressed by her interviewer about what she meant by “I sold 40 units,” Ivanka backed off, saying, “We did, our project,” a transcript of the interview shows. Studnicky, who was deeply involved with Ocean Club sales at the time and generally praised the Trumps, said Ivanka didn’t sell any units that he knew of. Three months after Ivanka’s comments were published, Moody’s reported that 79 percent of the building’s units were under purchase contracts. The Trump name did carry a premium, according to data filed with Panamanian securities officials. But even at its high point, it amounted to about 130 percent of what similar luxury properties fetched, not the 500 percent Ivanka claimed. Meanwhile, the Trumps used some of their glamour to encourage sales. Donald Trump himself hosted a gala for the Panama project at Mar-a-Lago where celebrity Regis Philbin dropped in. But difficulties were mounting and cash was tight. By 2009, some buyers were offered hefty discounts if they agreed to pay the full purchase price up front. (Monstavicius says he accepted such an offer, shaving $100,000 off his nearly half-million-dollar penthouse suite.) Ratings for the Ocean Club’s bonds were lowered in February 2009, but you wouldn’t have known that by listening to the Trumps. A few weeks after the downgrade, Ivanka gushed about Panama in an interview with a publication called the Latin Business Chronicle. “Given the global downturn, the fact that sales remain so robust is a testament to the product, the brand and Panama,” she said. “Our biggest problem is not having enough inventory. We only have a small percent of the building left.” The following year brought more trouble. There was another bond downgrade. One of the services that reduced its rating, Fitch, expressed concerns about the market and buyers’ “willingness and ability to close on units upon delivery.” The developers faced a $27 million construction shortfall and delays by subcontractors performing services such as millwork. Khafif and his team trimmed back some of their plans, which only irked buyers who had already committed their money. For example, buyers said square footage for some units was reduced. The location for a planned beach club was moved to a more distant spot with less cachet. And plans to have Trump manage the casino were abandoned. The issuing of the bonds hadn’t relieved pressure on the Ocean Club to move units. The developers needed to keep sales commitments and cash high or they risked defaulting on the bonds. By 2010, 25 contracts appeared in jeopardy as buyers missed payments toward their deposits. Facing pressure from multiple sides, the developers sought bondholders’ permission to make key changes to their agreement. They proposed relaxing the requirements for collateral and reducing the amount of cash they had to keep in a deposit account. In a company statement quoted in the press at the time, Newland International Properties (the entity formed by Khafif and the outside developers he partnered with) was blunt about its need: “The company believes that the proposed amendments are necessary to allow the company to continue construction.” “Nobody Ever Asked Where These Sales Were Coming From” From the beginning, the plan at the Trump Ocean Club was to draw a luxury-seeking international clientele with disposable income. With some 1,000 units to sell, brokers tapped networks of upper-crust buyers across the globe. In doing so, they netted purchasers with problematic pasts, including some with ties to organized crime and money laundering operations. ISG representatives and independent brokers fanned out to Russia, Spain, Switzerland, Dubai, China and South Africa, as well as other Latin American countries. As of mid-2007, roughly 60 percent of buyers came from outside the United States, bond documents show. (Much has been made of Trump’s buyers of Russian nationality or extraction, but the Panama sales were not tracked by nationality. Still, some were found in Moscow and, Khafif said, in Trump developments in  )  Several aspects of the Panama sales raised red flags, according to experts. For example, some buyers bought blocks of units. Purchases were typically made anonymously through shell corporations registered in Panama. That allowed some buyers to change the ownership of the unit in secret, simply by changing the ownership of the company. They often used so-called bearer shares, allowing a stake in a company to be transferred simply by passing a piece of paper. “Nobody ever asked where these sales were coming from, where the money was coming from,” said Studnicky, adding that this wasn’t unusual for such a building at the time. The purchase of multiple units and the use of bearer shares or shell companies are not illegal in themselves. But they can be hallmarks of money laundering, according to experts. “We have no idea of the people behind those companies,” said Eryn Schornick, a policy adviser for Global Witness, an international anti-corruption organization. The Panama deal, she said, bore signs of “classic money laundering.” Meanwhile, multiple buyers claimed they were promised quick profits through flips arranged by the developers, promises they say were not fulfilled. Some of those allegations began emerging in litigation even before the Trump Ocean Club opened. In late 2010, a group of buyers accused Trump, the Trump Organization, Khafif and Newland, Khafif’s development operation, of misleading them, according to a previously unreported lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in Florida. There were 37 plaintiffs, led by an independent broker, Greg Landau. The group — including South Florida residents, a family in Brooklyn, a Massachusetts psychiatrist, a New York fashion mogul and several Russians — had bought 42 Ocean Club condominiums between 2006 and 2009. The group alleged that Khafif had offered them a sweet enticement: If they put 30 percent down, either the developer or the Trump Organization would finance the rest. Khafif, plaintiffs claimed, said Newland or the Trump Organization would manage the investment — finding new buyers so they could flip it for a big profit before construction was finished and they had to close on the property. The deal soured after some of the Ocean Club plans were trimmed (including, as noted, reducing the size of units). Buyers discovered there was no developer financing, and no buyers lined up to flip to. They went to court. Trump had “stood by silently as Khafif made the misrepresentations” in a meeting at Mar-a-Lago in 2007 aimed at attracting investors and encouraging current investors to increase their deposits, the lawsuit claimed. It also cited the marketing materials in which Trump called Khafif his “partner.” “The Trump Organization knew these representations were being made by Khafif to Landau and of the fact that Landau was expected to repeat them to other potential investors,” it alleged. “Defendants Khafif, Donald Trump, and the Trump Organization were culpable participants in the fraudulent scheme.” In an interview with ProPublica, one of those buyers described what he had expected to happen. “There was an agreement that when the hotel is built, when the building is ready, we’ll sell our apartments, our shares, and quit the project,” said Victor Masaltsev, an internet entrepreneur who lives in Moscow and invested in the Ocean Club through a Panamanian shell company that became a plaintiff in the Landau suit against Trump. Masaltsev said he was invited to visit Mar-a-Lago for an event with Trump celebrating the project, but he couldn’t make the trip. “I’ve been doing business for a long time and, you know, there’s never a 100 percent guarantee,” he said through a translator. “But I was expecting to make no less than 50 percent profit on my money.” Instead, he said, he lost his deposit. In their legal papers, the Trump Organization and Newland asserted that the complaint was “completely devoid of facts sufficient to show that Donald Trump and The Trump Organization were conducting the affairs of a ‘fraudulent scheme.’” Khafif called the lawsuit a case of “buyers’ remorse, of course.” There were “a million” such lawsuits when the financial crisis came, he added. “They tried to invent anything in order to get their money back. It wasn’t our fault.” A U.S. judge ordered the case be moved to Panamanian courts, but the parties reached a confidential settlement before that happened. Other plaintiffs, reached by ProPublica, have a surprising take on the dispute today. Three of them echoed Khafif and said the project was simply a bad investment. “It’s nothing to do with Trump,” said David Feldman, speaking outside his Brooklyn duplex. He said he did not receive any money in the settlement and added that he thought Trump was hurt by the deal, too, before declining to talk further. Landau did not respond to requests for comment, nor did Roderick Coleman, the attorney named on the lawsuit pleadings. Landau’s group wasn’t the only one to claim it was sold on an unfulfilled promise of easy flipping. One buyer from Dubai made similar claims, according to emails in the Panama Papers, a collection of documents leaked from Mossack Fonseca and shared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. “The concept was pay the deposit and they would get it resold before completion,” a representative for the buyer wrote to a lawyer in Panama. “[T]he apartment was going to be resold for them by the agents that came from Panama to Dubai for Marketing the project.” Khafif called it another case of buyer’s remorse. “Our project was the cleanest one of them all” Unfulfilled promises weren’t the only questionable behavior alleged at the Trump Ocean Club. For example, one high-selling broker, Alexandre Ventura Nogueira , was linked to money laundering by Global Witness and a joint Reuters-NBC investigation. Nogueira confirmed in that article that some of his partners and investors on the Trump Panama project had connections to the Russian mafia. (He asserted that he had discovered those connections only after the fact.) Among the buyers Nogueira landed was a Colombian businessman who was subsequently convicted in the United States of conspiring to launder drug money. Khafif told ProPublica that he hired Nogueira because he was one of the highest-profile brokers in Panama City at the time. “That guy was very famous,” Khafif said. “We ended up suing him because he swindled the clients.” Nogueira, who was also accused of selling the same units to more than one buyer at the same time, fled Panama and described himself in the Reuters article as a “fugitive.” (He denied in that story, but could not be reached for comment for this article.) The Trump Organization denied the family knew Nogueira. But photos were published of Ivanka and her father smiling with an arm around Nogueira at events at Trump Tower and Mar-a-Lago. Project developers also seem to have made dubious presales themselves — and profitable ones at that — according to emails between bondholders and Newland obtained by ProPublica. Newland shareholders purchased some of the building’s units at below-market prices with down payments of just 5 percent. “I have never seen 8-10 percent of a 996 unit project reserved by the developers at prices as much as 70 percent less than list price (with just a 5% deposit),” asserted one email from Gary Lundgren, who now owns a sizable part of the building, to others in the project. The purchases were “not disclosed in the Bear Stearns’s bond offering circular, not disclosed in the quarterly financial disclosure, not disclosed in the annual audited financial statements,” he complained. Newland acquired some of the units by taking over ones that were in danger of default, Lundgren stated in the email, with the developers kicking in the 5 percent needed for the units to continue being counted as collateral under the bond terms. The developers resold some of the properties at higher prices, Lundgren’s email asserted, and they pocketed the difference. These resales effectively cut out bondholders from their share of the proceeds. His emails to Newland did not mention the Trumps. (In 2016, Lundgren was barred by the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority from acting as a broker after he failed to respond to an information request. His filings asserted that the complaint against him, filed by someone who was not his customer, was without merit, and that Panamanian law prevented him from disclosing the records.) The insider purchases potentially violated the terms of the project’s financing. The bond prospectus required down payments of at least 30 percent, which would “protect the economics of our project.” Since sweetheart deals generated less cash — which meant less collateral for the bonds — a provision of the bond agreement restricted sales made to affiliates of the developers. And if buyers stopped making payments, they were supposed to go through a default process rather than have Newland take over their purchase. “The developers made bad judgment calls, and they justified it by their support for the project,” said Alfredo “Dino” de Angelis, of Gapstone, which advised Newland in the bankruptcy. Ultimately, he said, the developers added money to stabilize the project, enough to equal or exceed what they appear to have made by re-selling units. Khafif said that bondholders looked into the questions and “found everything was 100 percent by the book.” He said developers didn’t need to buy units and followed the rules in the bond indenture. Khafif insisted that he conducted business the right way. “Our project was the cleanest one of them all,” he said. “We had to watch out for Trump, we had to watch out for bondholders. We had to work within the indenture, or else we’d be screwed.” “Replete with misrepresentations” Ivanka Trump ’s exaggerations about the Ocean Club reflected a tactic she and her father employed repeatedly in other cases, ProPublica and WNYC found. Their statements, typically made in the midst of sales drives, tended to overstate the number of units under contract or the Trump Organization’s equity stake in projects scattered around the globe. The Trumps’ propensity to overstate sales led them, as ProPublica, WNYC and the New Yorker reported last year, to be investigated on potential felony fraud charges in one case. Ivanka had announced in June 2008 that 60 percent of the units at the SoHo  tower had been bought when in fact 15 percent had, according to an affidavit filed by a Trump partner. The Manhattan district attorney’s office considered charging the Trumps but backed off after a visit from a donor — Trump’s attorney Marc Kasowitz . (The DA, Cyrus Vance , denied he was influenced by the donation but later changed his policy and now refuses donations from lawyers with cases before him.) Similar deceptions occurred elsewhere. In a marketing video for a project in Baja, Mexico, Ivanka referred to Trump International Hotel in Toronto as one of several “sold out” properties. The Toronto tower never did sell out. It was still three-quarters empty late last year, a few months after Trump’s name was removed from the building. Trump himself also made misrepresentations. In 2006, he said the Trump Organization would be a significant equity investor in the $200 million Baja project and repeatedly portrayed himself as the project’s developer. Yet in 2008, the company admitted it was neither a developer nor an investor. In Tampa, as noted, Trump told the press he had a significant ownership stake  when he had none. Moreover, his licensing agreement contained a confidentiality provision barring “under any circumstances” that anyone reveal the agreement existed, and hence that Trump was only licensing his name. The deal never got financing and ultimately fell apart. Panama also wasn’t the only project where questions emerged about insider deals. In Tampa, Donald Trump Jr. and three executives associated with the Trump Organization arranged to buy a unit under unusually attractive terms, according to emails between the executives and the developer. As early sales on the project surged, the Trump group — which formed a company called Busy Boys Investments to handle the purchase — bargained both for a discount price and a smaller deposit than other buyers paid. “Can you confirm the deal?” asked Russell Flicker, a former Trump Organization executive vice president, in a late-2004 email to one of the Tampa developers. “(We had discussed 5% down payment, discounted price and flip rights prior to closing — are all of these on the table?) You’re the man.” The developer replied, “The deal is as you state!” The Trump group also discussed backdating documents to reduce their tax liability, according to the emails. They excitedly anticipated a quick flip that would yield a $200,000 profit — $50,000 apiece, a handsome return on the $8,604 deposit each paid. (The emails were revealed in a court case filed by unhappy buyers; their suit ultimately settled, with the buyers receiving limited refunds of their deposits.) In January 2005, Flicker forwarded an email conveying the prospect of such a windfall to his partners in the side deal: Donald Jr. and Trump Organization executive vice presidents Bernie Diamond and Jason Greenblatt, with the message: “!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!” In a July 2005 email, Diamond, an attorney, explained to the others that the developer told him he would prepare a unit purchase contract “for Busy Boys to sign dated in 2004,” as well as an assignment of their contract to the proposed buyer, also “dated one year earlier.” Diamond noted, “This is good, as it will give us the best shot at capital gains treatment.” (The Tampa tower was never constructed, so the Busy Boys entity did not ultimately cash in. On behalf of Greenblatt, who is now a special representative for international negotiations in the Trump administration, a White House official said “Mr. Greenblatt complied with all applicable laws in connection with condominium purchase agreements.”) In Baja, Ivanka tried to leverage her own unit purchase to pull in other buyers. “I personally am very excited about it, I actually chose to purchase a unit in the first tower,” she said in a promotional video as she flashed a smile. She did not mention that the deposit she paid was less than half of the 30 percent other investors put in for their units, according to Univision. Univision also reported that the developers overstated the percentage of units sold and had assigned 34 units to their own executives and other related parties. Written materials became a matter of contention, as well; multiple buyers contended they were misleading. Trump had some say over such materials: Projects including Baja, Tampa, the Dominican Republic, Israel and Panama all required developers and other partners to obtain prior approval from Trump’s company before posting press releases. In some cases, the company had veto power over promotional materials in general, as well.  There were other deceptions. In marketing materials featuring a grinning image of the New York developer, potential buyers in a Trump-branded project in Toronto were shown investment projections that proved wildly optimistic, according to interviews and records from the extensive litigation that ensued. A Canadian appeals court, ruling after the Toronto deal went sour, unanimously found that estimates of profitability provided to purchasers “bore no relation to financial reality.” The panel quoted a trial judge’s findings that the projections were “deceptive” and “replete with misrepresentations of commission, of omission, and of half-truth.” (The case is still pending.) In Chicago , Trump promised discounts — some with down payments of as little as 5 percent — to friends and colleagues, only to rescind those arrangements when sales in the building picked up. Trump justified the broken promises, saying “we’re entitled” to the higher prices. Buyers who sued Trump have had mixed success. Most suits settled before trial, but Trump prevailed in cases in Las Vegas and Florida in which buyers accused his company of deception. The “Stormy Jack Daniels” The Trump Ocean Club in Panama was officially inaugurated on July 6, 2011. It was nearly a year behind schedule after cost overruns and construction delays. The Trumps had been more visible again during the final stages. Ivanka picked out design finishes, including helping deck out the “sky lobby” on the 15th floor with wood paneling, pillars and marble that echoed the ground floor entrance hall. The lobby’s “tropical color palette” was “reminiscent of indigenous flowers,” Ivanka said in one promotional video. July falls during Panama’s rainy season and a downpour swamped the city’s already-overwhelmed infrastructure on the day of the opening, turning the cramped roads near the tower into waterways. Trump had angered many Panamanians by declaring that the U.S. had “stupidly” turned over the Panama Canal “in exchange for nothing.” But the country’s then-president, Ricardo Martinelli , turned up for the ceremony nonetheless. He joined Trump, his two adult sons, Khafif, and other dignitaries to cut a ribbon  to mark the opening. Ivanka, days away from giving birth to her first child, did not attend. (In June 2018, Martinelli was extradited on corruption charges, unrelated to the Trump project, from the U.S., where he had fled in search of sanctuary. He has denied wrongdoing.) Trump was upbeat. “I think this hotel is truly magnificent,” he said, according to press reports. “You look at Panama’s skyline and you see how this one truly stands out.” The time had come for the hundreds of sales contracts that brokers had amassed over the previous five years — eventually covering about 85 percent of the building — to convert to actual sales. In the months that followed, however, it became increasingly clear that buyers were walking away in droves. Ultimately, only about half the sales contracts closed, leaving the building largely empty and developers struggling to make bond-related payments. One-bedroom units that once sold for $350,000 could be scooped up for $180,000. In November 2011, developers defaulted on a critical bond payment. The volume of people who abandoned their deposits far exceeded the ratings agencies’ worst-case predictions. Those predictions rested on the forbidding combination of tight post-crisis financing standards and the high prices that many buyers had agreed to pay. That strongly suggests that many of the remaining people who paid deposits and then vanished may not have intended to do anything more than put down enough cash to trigger the $220 million bond issuance. Newland declared bankruptcy in April 2013 in federal court in New York City, where it kept much of its cash. The Trumps agreed to reduce their fees, making concessions that bankruptcy records said would amount to $20 million over a period of years. Even after those concessions, Khafif’s company continued to run in the red in 2014 and 2015, with net losses nearing $28 million in 2014 alone, financial reports show. It missed another payment in 2015.So Trump didn’t make the $74 million he had hoped for. He appears to have walked away with between $30 million and $55 million, based on fragmentary information in his government disclosure forms, financial statements filed in Panama and estimates by observers. Khafif seems philosophical about it. At 63, he’s semiretired and travels to the U.S. and Europe often. These days, he said, his main business is laundering linens. The company, Perfect Cleaners, which Khafif called the largest industrial laundry plant in Central America, has served the Trump Ocean Club. (He did not respond to a question about his own financial outcome on the Trump project.) Khafif said his relationship with the family remains good. “I was in New York a couple months ago. I went to visit Eric Trump,” he said. “We’re fine.” The Ocean Club proved a disappointment in many respects, he said, “but life goes on. … It’s the best building in town.” As much as $120 million of the original bond was never paid back, according to one investor. Asked about that, Khafif pointed out that many investors sold their bonds — albeit at a discount — after receiving interest payments for years, allowing some to recoup much of their investment at a time when lots of people were hemorrhaging money. “It depends on how you look at it,” Khafif said. “You’re grateful at getting your money back, or you’re greedy and you want to make money when everybody lost their shirt.” Ocean Club buyers filed a host of lawsuits in Panama, complaining of the delays and changes in the building plans. The beach club was never built. A non-Trump company took over the casino. Some rooms were smaller than planned. By 2015, a new revolt was brewing, this time by Ocean Club unit owners fed up with the way the Trumps were managing the property — or more particularly, with how they were spending the building association’s money. Led by Lundgren, the owners alleged that Trump employees overspent budgets, taking excessive bonuses for themselves, and mishandled building finances, leading them to propose a steep increase in fees to owners. Trump responded by suing the condo owners, demanding up to $75 million for wrongful termination. (The litigation was settled  confidentially in 2016.) In 2017, Ithaca Capital Partners, led by Orestes Fintiklis, bought 202 of the hotel’s 369 hotel-condo units. In October of last year, his group sought to remove the Trump Organization as hotel managers — alleging in a legal action that it had mismanaged the hotel, leading to drastic drop-offs in occupancy and profits. The Trump Organization countersued, accusing Fintiklis of a “fraudulent scheme” that breached its 20-year management contract. The dispute reached a head early this year, when Fintiklis’ representatives, with a court order behind them, sought to take physical control of the building. Trump Organization employees and a group of security personnel tried to block the effort, leading to confrontations and shoving matches. Fintiklis’ group ultimately gained entry but discovered walls had been hastily erected in inconvenient places — in the middle of a hallway, in front of an elevator bank — to impede access to the building’s inner offices. Reports circulated of Trump employees shredding documents. In March of this year, the Trumps suffered the ignominy of seeing their name crowbarred off the stone wall in front of the tower . It was rebranded the Bahia Grand Panama. In late spring, the hotel, once touted as boasting stratospheric levels of luxury, was quiet, with rooms renting for the decidedly terrestrial rate of $169 a night. At the hotel bar, you could order drinks with a sardonic twist that reflected Fintiklis’ sense of humor, including the “Fire and Fury” and the “Stormy Jack Daniels.” In June, Fintiklis announced the hotel would have a new manager. “We are thrilled that our hotel will operate as a JW Marriott ,” he said in a statement, “and we believe this partnership, together with a talented team and spectacular hotel amenities, will be a success.” ### Additional reporting by Micah Hauser, Ian MacDougall, Gabriel Sandoval, Katherine Sullivan and Madeleine Varner.

Entre 2017 y lo que va de 2018, la estatal Agropatria -fruto de la expropiación de Agroisleña- ha importado productos químicos de una empresa panameña cuyos dueños, un matrimonio venezolano, fueron demandados civilmente e investigados penalmente en los Estados Unidos, por estar involucrados en ‘negocios detransmisión de dinero sin licencia’. Luego de esto, concentraron su actividad empresarial en Panamá, donde el bufete Mossack Fonseca les ayudó a crear algunas empresas, apenas una fracción de una maraña de casi 70 compañías en la que les acompaña un joven médico venezolano.

El ex edecán del comandante revolucionario era cliente desde 2013 de Mossack Fonseca, que había registrado en su nombre una empresa en el paraíso fiscal de Seychelles para manejar una cuenta bancaria del militar venezolano en Suiza. Pero en 2016, luego de las revelaciones de Panama Papers, esa relación se volvió indeseable para el bufete, que intentó deslindarse a toda costa de la cuenta. Ahora el mayor retirado y su esposa, ex tesorera de la Nación, esperan en Madrid su posible extradición a Venezuela.

Wieder gibt es geleakte Daten aus dem Inneren der Kanzlei im Zentrum der Panama Papers. Sie zeigen, wie dramatisch sich Mossack Fonseca in den letzten zwei Jahren verändert hat.

Gömul steypustöð og bifvélaverkstæði á Hvolsvelli hefur fengið nýtt líf en núna hýsir byggingin fjölskyldu og ferðaþjónustufyrirtækið Midgard. Þar er hótel, veitingastaður, ferðaskrifstofa og ævintýraferðir undir sama þaki auk þess sem þar eru reglulega haldnir menningarviðburðir sem heimamenn sækja í miklum mæli. Það er samheldin fjölskylda og vinir sem reka staðinn saman og Viktoría Hermannsdóttir hitti þrjú þeirra, þau Arnar Gauti Markússon, eiginkona hans Hildur Guðbjörg Kristjánsdóttir og móðir hans, Björg Árnadóttir á dögunum. Við fáum póstkort frá Magnúsi R. Einarssyni í París. Í þessu póstkorti verður meðal annars sagt frá áhugaleysi Frakka á Júróvisjón, en þeir eru samt með sigursælustu þjóðum í þessari sérkennilegu keppnisgrein. Það verður líka sagt frá undirbúningi Parísarbúa vegna væntanlegrar flóðbylgju fólks og fyrirtækja frá Bretlandi vegna Brexit og það segir líka af símaáráttu fransmanna, kröfugöngu Hollywoodstjarna og dómi yfir fyrrum ráðherra í ríkisstjórn Frakklands vegna skattsvika sem uppljóstruðust í Panama skjölunum frá Mossack Fonseca lögmannsstofunni alræmdu. Kristján Krossdal hefur í á þriðja ár hannað eigin byssuskefti úr límtré og meðal annars sigrað í frumkvöðlakeppnum sem haldnar hafa verið á Austurlandi en nú síðast sýndi hann skeftin á einni stærstu skotvopnasýningu heims. Við sláum á þráðinn austur í land í þættinum og fáum að vita meira frá Kristjáni. Umsjón í dag, Guðrún Gunnarsdóttir og Gunnar Hansson

A hidden circulatory system flows beneath the surface of global finance, carrying trillions of dollars from drug trafficking, tax evasion, bribery, and other illegal enterprises. This network masks the identities of the individuals who benefit from these activities, aided by bankers, lawyers, and auditors who get paid to look the other way. In Secrecy World, the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter Jake Bernstein explores this shadow economy and how it evolved, drawing on millions of leaked documents from the files of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca―a trove now known as the Panama Papers―as well as other journalistic and government investigations. Bernstein shows how shell companies operate, how they allow the superwealthy and celebrities to escape taxes, and how they provide cover for illicit activities on a massive scale by crime bosses and corrupt politicians across the globe.Bernstein traveled to the Caribbean, Latin America, Europe, and within the United States to uncover how these strands fit together―who is involved, how they operate, and the real-world impact. He recounts how Mossack Fonseca was exposed and what lies ahead for the corporations, banks, law firms, individuals, and governments that are implicated.Secrecy World offers a disturbing and sobering view of how the world really works and raises critical questions about financial and legal institutions we may once have trusted. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

In 2016 , the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists released The Panama Papers — a massive cache of 11.5 million records leaked from the law firm Mossack Fonseca — revealing that several heads of state have been sheltering their personal wealth in offshore accounts to evade taxes. This wasn’t surprising, after all dictators are known for draining public coffers and hoarding the ill-gotten funds in secret accounts. What’s more disturbing is learning that well-known global corporations and civic leaders have been doing the same thing for decades, and getting away with it. Mossack Fonseca specializes in setting up untraceable shell companies. There’s nothing overtly illegal about them, but they’re often used by political and financial elites to hide assets, dodge taxes, and launder money. Creating shell companies is a big business, and Mossack Fonseca is just one of many firms that do it. The Financial Accountability and Corporate Transparency Coalition says shell companies house up to $21 trillion globally. (By way of comparison, the US gross domestic product for 2015 was $18 trillion.) The firms employing the services of Mossack Fonseca include a rogues’ gallery of brand name corporations with a track record of breaking financial regulations with virtual impunity. Remember back in 2013 when HSBC was slapped with a $1.9 billion fine by the U.S. Justice Department for laundering drug cartel money? Its fine amounted to less than one tenth of its annual profits. And remember when UBS was caught in 2012 spreading false information to manipulate banking exchange rates? It was fined $1.5 billion, which sounds like a lot, until you learn that UBS’ revenues are almost $40 billion a year. Both banks are clients of Mossack Fonseca. The reason banks and financial institutions are ignoring regulations comes down to simple economics. The organized criminal economy is over $2 trillion a year, and someone has to launder it, says journalist Drew Sullivan, co-founder and editor of the Organized Crime and Corruption Reporting Project (OCCRP) and a 2014 Institute for the Future (IFTF) Fellow. “You can either be a bank that takes that money or a bank that doesn’t take that money. Because nobody is penalizing you seriously for this, and nobody holds it against you, you don’t get a reputation of being a bad bank, and you can keep doing this.” These slap-on-the-wrist fines are simply the cost of doing business, says Sullivan, who compares the bank’s criminal behavior to the Koch Brothers’modus operandi: violate sanctions and fight the fines in court for as long as possible. “It’s a risk minimization plan, rather than honorable business,” he says. I interviewed Sullivan in 2016 shortly after the release of the Panama Papers.

¿Qué está pasando hoy con el buffete de abogados Mossack Fonseca en el centro de las revelaciones de los Papeles de Panama? Habla la periodista panameña que participó en la investigación, co-autora de “Sociedades Peligrosas”

EN NUESTRO PROGRAMA DE DICIEMBRE 2017 Las repercusiones del escándalo de los Paradise Papers en América Latina en el análisis de los responsables de la revelación. Mientras tanto a un año y medio de su publicación los Papeles de Panama siguen produciendo revuelos y medidas: analizamos el caso de Bolivia. ¿Qué está pasando hoy con el buffete de abogados Mossack Fonseca en el centro de las revelaciones de los Papeles de Panama? Habla la periodista panameña que participó en la investigación, co-autora de “Sociedades Peligrosas”   Y, en medio de todo esto, créase o no, la OCDE, que agrupa a los países de más ingresos, dice que no habrá más paraísos fiscales en 2019. Analizamos las maniobras de los poderes centrales que buscan cambiar algo para que no cambie nada.   

In this interview anti-privatisation and anti-corruption whistle-blower, Penny Bright, talks on issues around the three Cs - Corruption, Contractocracy, and Corporate Welfare, as well as issues around the private procurement model for public services. Penny says the root cause of most corruption is privatisation. She asks why the Public Records Act is not being fully implemented and enforced in New Zealand. If New Zealand is truly 'the least corrupt country in the world' - shouldn't we arguably be the most transparent? She says public transport is not public, and asks what the implications are of a fuel tax. Penny has been involved in opposing the Tamaki 'Regeneration' project and speaks about dubious government and private dealings there. She talks on the murdered Maltese investigative journalist who exposed the Panama Papers and has found some disturbing New Zealand connections. Penny also speaks on State Capture, where private interests significantly influence the government’s decision-making processes to their own advantage.” INTERNATIONAL RULE OF LAW FORUM Penny Bright, was invited as a NZ 'Rule of Law' expert, together with nearly 300 attendees from 75 countries to the 2017 World Justice Project International Rule of Law Forum at The Hague. There she informed the delegates that New Zealand is a “Corrupt, polluted tax haven. She says, "My political 'bombshell' was about NZ's corruption REALITY, and in my opinion, New Zealand is a 'corrupt, polluted tax haven - a banana republic without the bananas'. I also stated that the Transparency International 'Corruption Perception Index' (which NZ topped 10 times, sometimes 1st equal) should be screwed up and thrown into the rubbish bin of history.” PRESS RELEASE THURSDAY JAN 26 2017 Penny Bright Independent candidate Mt Albert by-election says The 2016 Corruption Perception Index isn't worth the paper it's written on." She says, "This 'Corruption Perception Index' is not based upon measurable, objective yardsticks - but essentially the subjective opinions of anonymous business people." http://www.scoop.co.nz/stories/PO1701/S00171/the-2016-corruption-perception-index-isnt-worth-the-paper.htm “Here were objective, significant milestones or yardsticks for quantifying corruption REALITY, rather than relying largely upon the subjective opinions of anonymous businesspeople for PERCEPTION of corruption which in her view are a meaningless measure. I pointed out how in 2010 how I had attended the Transparency International Anti-Corruption Conference in Bangkok. Where we were told that the global procurement market was $14 TRILLION and the amount estimated to be lost in bribery and corruption was $2.5 TRILLION! I had a HUGE lightbulb moment! Wouldn't $2.5 trillion ($2,500,000,000,000, or $2.5 thousand billion) help to feed, clothe, water and shelter a few poor people? Then another 'lightbulb' moment - was that Transparency International were not looking at the underpinning private procurement MODEL, and only the private procurement PROCESS.” PRIVATE PROCUREMENT MODEL FOR PUBLIC SERVICES: As soon as you get into the private procurement (contracting out) of public services, formerly provided in house by staff directly employed under the public service model, you got into CONTRACT MANAGEMENT. Government or Council staff were regarded as not competent to do contract management - so a 'bureaucrats would then hire CONSULTANTS to 'project manage' the WORKS CONTRACTORS, who would then usually SUB-CONTRACT. So by the time you got down to those in the boots and overalls getting their hands dirty and actually doing something productive - you might have up to 4 layers of pinstripe suits clipping the ticket, while effectively doing nothing. How is that a more 'cost-effective' use of public money? Penny says, “In 2010, at the Transparency International Anti-Corruption Conference, I asked a (high-faluting) panel - where was the EVIDENCE that the private procurement of public services, that used to be provided at central and local government level, was more 'cost-effective' than former 'in-house' service provision? (It was like I had slapped the face of the person who was chairing the panel. He literally did a 'double-take' and mumbled that there was evidence - but none was ever provided.) My point to this 2017 World Justice Forum group - was that in my opinion, it was time to look at the whole underpinning private procurement MODEL for public services. ( IMO - it is the privatisation -private procurement - of public services which is the major source of GRAND corruption.” THE ROOT CAUSE OF CORRUPTION IS PRIVATISATION: Penny is one of the few people in the world actually saying that the root cause of most GRAND corruption- is PRIVATISATION. How is it decided who GETS the contracts? Remember - back in 2010 - the global amount estimated to be paid in bribery and corruption was $2.5 TRILLION! This is a BIG deal. The whole Neo-liberal myth and mantra - 'public is bad - private is good' upon which this massive privatisation of public services, locally, nationally and internationally was based - was NOT 'evidence based'. The BIG business globalists - just MADE IT UP! If there is no 'cost-benefit analysis' which proves the privatisation (contracting out of public services is more cost-effective' for the public majority of taxpayers and ratepayers - then it's 'CORPORATE welfare'. Penny asks the most pertinent questions. Shouldn't the public majority (the 99%) benefit from public monies - not a small minority of private corporates (the 1%)? While there is a punitive 'Social WARfare' /'War on the Poor' regime waged against the most vulnerable and disadvantaged, there is, a completely different attitude towards the rich' on 'corporate welfare'. Where exactly are billion$ of public monies being spent on private sector consultants and contractors? How can you check for 'cost-effectiveness' in the spending of public monies being spent on private sector consultant$ and contractors, if you don't know exactly where these costs fall? WHY IS THE PUBLIC RECORDS ACT NOT BEING FULLY IMPLEMENTED AND ENFORCED? NZ LAW is very clear on this requirement for transparency in public spending. The NZ Public Records Act 2005:. http://www.legislation.govt.nz/act/public/2005/0040/latest/DLM345729.html Requirement to create and maintain records (1)Every public office and local authority must create and maintain full and accurate records of its affairs, in accordance with normal, prudent business practice, including the records of any matter that is contracted out to an independent contractor. How can you have transparency or accountability without full and accurate records available for public scrutiny? The NZ Public Records Act 2005 has been the LAW for the last TWELVE years. Why is the Public Records Act not being fully implemented and enforced? Penny clearly states that the full implementation and enforcement of the NZ Public Records Act 2005, would transform transparency and accountability, and this should be an urgent priority for this new Labour-led Coalition Government. Penny’s call for transparency includes “OPEN THE BOOK$! CUT OUT THE CONTRACTOR$! BRING NZ LOCAL AND CENTRAL GOVERNMENT PUBLIC SERVICES BACK 'IN-HOUSE' UNDER THE GENUINE PUBLIC SERVICES MODEL! PURGE THE FORMER PRIVATE SECTOR BUSINESSPEOPLE FROM THE LOCAL AND CENTRAL GOVERNMENT 'BUREAUCRACY' AND BRING BACK GENUINE 'PUBLIC SERVANTS'. and STOP THE 'THREE 'C's! The CONTRACTOCRACY, CORRUPTION and CORPORATE welfare.” ------------------------------ FUEL TAX: In Auckland, what is being proposed is an Auckland Regional Fuel Tax, to help fund developments with 'public transport'. However - there is no such thing, as 'PUBLIC' transport in Auckland. The trains, buses and ferry services are PUBLICLY-subsidised, but privately owned, operated and managed, passenger transport operators. Auckland Transport won't reveal how many public millions are being paid to subsidise private passenger transport, on top of their private profits. Their 'books' are NOT open - regarding the millions of public monies paid to subsidise these private passenger transport operators. Penny calls to make Auckland Transport 'PUBLIC' again! Get rid of Auckland Transport as a CCO, and bring it back under direct Auckland Council control. And no Auckland Regional Fuel Tax! THE TAMAKI REGENERATION PROJECT: The Tamaki 'Regeneration' project - has proven to be a “HUGE GENTRIFICATION SCAM” pushing state tenants off prime real estate. Under the National Government the ownership of 2,867 properties from housing New Zealand were transferred into this Tamaki Regeneration Limited – a 100% crown owned crown entity company. This company then is on selling the land. Former Tamaki State tenants have been forced off prime real estate to make way for private mansions for the wealthy, and private profits for property developer. Penny speaks passionately about this, having spent months researching this issue and spending time on site with some of the tenants. Here is a video about this. Penny believes there should be an urgent parliamentary enquiry into the Tamaki “scam”. STATE CAPTURE A form of corrupt practice, which, in Penny’s opinion, is endemic in NZ, is 'State Capture'. 'State Capture' is where (corporate) vested interests get their way, at the POLICY level of government, in order to get laws passed that serve their interests. With whom are the 'policy analysts' consulting, before legislation goes through the Parliamentary 'sausage machine'? Penny says, “Check the Regulatory Impact Statements to find out.” PANAMA  PAPERS New Zealand in Penny’s opinion, is a corrupt, polluted tax haven. It was murdered Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia who 'blew the whistle' and twice exposed links between Maltese 'Politically Exposed Persons' (PEPs) and NZ foreign trusts being used for money-laundering, information that had been revealed in the Panama Papers. On 1 August 2017, the (former) Chair of Transparency International, Jose Ugaz, at a meeting of over 200 people at Rutherford House, Victoria University, Wellington, New Zealand, stated that John Key should be investigated over the Panama Papers. 2 days after Daphne was blown to pieces in a car bomb attack (16 October 2017), it was announced that former NZ John Key Prime Minister would become Chair of the Board of ANZ. The ANZ bank is the Australian bank which had been mentioned more in the Panama Papers than any other Australian bank. Why no NZ mainstream media coverage of this story? Penny calls for an investigation of John Key over the Panama Papers! MALTA SCANDAL EXPOSES NZ TRUSTS AGAIN: It was murdered Maltese investigative journalist Daphne Caruana Galizia who exposed, via the Panama Papers, how NZ foreign trusts were used as money-laundering vehicles by Maltese Politically Exposed Persons. The saga began in February 2016 when Caruana-Galizia revealed that Schembri and Mizzi had set up two Panama companies, Tillgate Inc and Hearnville Inc, owned by the Haast Trust and Rotorua Trust in New Zealand. In April 2016, the Financial Review published new details of Schembri and Mizzi's New Zealand trusts and their attempts to open a bank account in Dubai. A Malta magistrate is investigating the explosive claims of money laundering and corruption that have put New Zealand in the middle of a global cash trail from the family of Azerbaijan president Ilham Aliyev. President Aliyev's daughter, Leyla Aliyeva, is alleged to have channelled more than NZ$1.6 million to senior figures of the Malta government, including Prime Minister Joseph Muscat's wife. These include alleged payments to Panama companies owned by New Zealand trusts set up by the Malta Energy Minister Karl Mizzi and Muscat's chief of staff, Keith Schembri. On April 20, Maltese blogger Daphne Caruana-Galizia reported that she held copies of documents originally stored in a kitchen at Pilatus Bank, which showed that Egrant Inc, a mystery Panama Papers company identified by the Financial Review last year, was secretly owned by the Maltese Prime Minister's wife, Michelle Muscat. In March 2016, a Dubai company controlled by Leyla Aliyeva had transferred US$1.017 million (NZ$1.47 million) marked as a loan into Egrant's account at Pilatus Bank, Caruana-Galizia reported. Joseph Muscat denied the claims, calling it the "biggest political lie in Malta's history". Caruana-Galizia reported that other payments were made from Leyla Aliyeva's company to Pilatus accounts held by Egrant as well as Tillgate Inc and Hearnville Inc, two Panama companies that are owned by Schembri and Mizzi, through New Zealand trusts. The latest revelations, if substantiated, are an embarrassment for the New Zealand government, which announced an inquiry into its offshore trust laws on April 11 last year, the day after the Financial Review revealed details of how Panama law firm Mossack Fonseca's Malta agent, BT Nexia, began setting up Tillson, Hearnville and Egrant five days after Muscat's election victory in 2013. Mossack Fonseca's files were obtained by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists and German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung. New Zealand subsequently amended its offshore trusts regime, requiring foreign trusts to file annual accounts with the New Zealand tax office, but with no further restrictions. At that time, it appeared the Malta trusts had never been used, after Mizzi and Schembri's Panama companies were turned down by eight banks who refused to open accounts for them because they were Politically Exposed Persons (PEPs). The Panama Papers, however, show repeated cases of overseas investors filing false or implausible sets of accounts with New Zealand lawyers, who have limited means to verify the figures. NEW ZEALAND’S SIGNIFICANT ROLE: The latest wave of allegations in Malta underline how easily the New Zealand disclosure laws can be avoided, which the new laws do not change. If the reports are substantiated, they raise a far more serious picture of money-laundering, from one of the most corrupt countries in the world, in which New Zealand's foreign trusts played a significant role. We need far more mainstream investigative journalism and reporting on this issue. Here is a video of a small protest that Penny held in solidarity for Daphne Caruana Galizia, in Auckland on 3 November 2017. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Penny Bright has been arrested 22 times after being (unlawfully) denied speaking rights at Auckland City Council, mainly on matters relating to water. Four District Court Judges have acknowledged the 'Public Watchdog' role - so that is why she describes herself as a judicially recognised Public Watchdog' on Metrowater, water and Auckland regional governance matters. Penny has also been described in the NZ Herald as an 'anti-corruption campaigner' in the fight for more transparency and accountability particularly at local government. Penny Bright helped to set up the 'Stop the Supercity' group - which is totally opposed to the attempted corporate takeover of the Auckland region to run it 'like a business, by business - for business'. She hasn’t paid her rates for 9 years, and won’t until Auckland Council tells us how our rate payers money is being spent. See her Greenplanet interview about this – here. Having been a mayoral candidate three times, she has a public profile that people are bound to have an opinion about. Always campaigning with an element of humour, Penny signs her e-mails with, ‘Her Warship’. This interview was sponsored by The Awareness Party http://www.theawarenessparty.com/home/

In the August 2017 Taxcast: #10yearsafter the crash we ask - what will the next one look like? Can we avoid it? Also: Panama Papers fallout - another Prime Minister bites the dust, this time in Pakistan the offshore law firm Mossack Fonseca has closed 39 of its 45 offices around the world a UK court ruling spells the end for ‘employee benefit trusts’ being used by footballers to minimise their tax bills and the Bank Of England Governor has predicted Britain’s financial sector could double in size in the next 25 years. Has he not heard of the finance curse?

In April, the high volume leak of the Panama Papers revealed an often unseen world of money and power. The leak of 11.5 million files came from the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca, which helps facilitate movement of money across accounts and borders, frequently with the goal of evading taxation and legal judgments. The leak placed the financial dealings of global celebrities and politicians, including Simon Cowell and Pedro Almodovar, under scrutiny. Vladimir Putin, though unnamed in the leak was connected to upwards of $2 billion of assets. And the revelations provoked such controversy for the Prime Minister of Iceland that he was forced to resign. While the celebrity names got a good deal of the headlines, firms like Mossack Fonseca are instrumental to the creation of offshore tax havens. Our guest today, Brooke Harrington, set out to understand this world and the people who make it possible. She studied to become a wealth manager, so as to learn about the world of the global elite and how this labor force has contributed to global inequality. This study took her to 18 countries. And it offers a rare insight into the processes by which a small set of people control a good deal of the world’s assets. Like the Panama Papers, this research documents a world that is, as Brooke puts it, technically legal, but socially illegitimate. Brooke Harrington is Associate Professor of Sociology at Copenhagen Business School, Denmark. You can find out more about Capital without Borders here.

"The new name of the game is leaks. This has a lot of different effects; one is on our sense of privacy," says Jenik Radon, Professor at Columbia's School of International and Public Affairs. He sees the Panama Papers - an unprecedented leak of 11.5 million files from the database of the world' fourth largest offshore law firm, Mossack Fonseca - as a global problem. In this conversation with Meredith Smith, he shares his legal insight on corruption, privatization and more, and his wisdom about regulating as a shared civic responsibility that must actively involve an engaged public and media; and he notes how eliciting views and discussing appropriate actions is an important aspect of transparency and democracy. Photo: By VectorOpenStock ([1]) [CC BY-SA 3.0 (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0)], via Wikimedia Commons

Tonites episode, "FundingFrom Russia with Love"  discusses the wiki leak email of Hillary Clinton and her Bourgouse Friends. " WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange just raised an important point: If Hillary Clinton can email classified information on her personal email server and face no prosecution, why isn’t Assange treated the same way? The Wiki leaks scandal exposes how the Democrats are against Catholics.  "They must be attracted to the systematic thought and severely backwards gender relations and must be totally unaware of Christian democracy."Halpin added: "I imagine they think it is the most socially acceptable politically conservative religion. Their rich friends wouldn't understand if they became evangelicals." We will also be discussing the Podesta money laundering scheme in which John Podesta, was on the executive board of a client of the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca, which is at the heart of the the Panama Papers investigation into massive global offshore money-laundering. This show sponsored by Studentsforabetterfuture.com.  To make a donation,  go HERE    

This week, we sat down with Weinberg Profs. Jeffrey Winters and Jordan Gans-Morse to discuss the “Panama Papers,” or the 11.5 million documents detailing financial and client information about offshore companies administered by Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca. The documents, leaked to journalists more than a year ago, started making waves in early April when those journalists started publishing their first stories about the information in the papers. Since then, the Icelandic prime minister has resigned and several other political leaders have found themselves in hot water as a result of the documents’ contents. Winters, who studies elites and the wealthy, and Gans-Morse, who focuses on corruption, walked us through what, exactly, firms like Mossack Fonseca do, as well as the impact of these documents’ release.

今日は、最近騒動になっている、「パナマ文書」の話をしたいと思います。 何が起こったのかというところから見ていきましょう。昨年８月に、パナマの法律事務所モサック・フォンセカ(Mossack Fonseca)から、過去４０年間で顧客約１万４千人のために設立や運営に関与した２１カ国・地域における約２１万社のペーパー・カンパニーに関する１１００万件以上の文書が流出しました。そして、「ジョン・ドウ」と名乗る仮名の人物――彼は、自分のことを金銭の報酬はうけていない正義の味方だと主張しているのですが――によって、データが南ドイツ新聞に提供されたのです。南ドイツ新聞は自分たちだけでは処理しきれないということで、ＩＣＩＪ（国際調査報道ジャーナリスト連合）に協力を求めました。そこで、４００人のジャーナリストがかかわって１１００万件以上の文書が検証され、５月１０日にパナマ文書に登場する２１万社のペーパー・カンパニーの名前や住所などの情報がデータベース化されて、ウェブサイトに公表されました。 はじめ、そこにあがった名前に、世界は騒然となりました。日本では、セコム創業者の飯田氏をはじめ、丸紅や伊藤忠、ソフトバンク、楽天の三木谷氏などの名前が挙がりました。海外ではもっと大変な人たちの名前がでてきました。はじめは、イギリスのキャメロン首相が、父に儲けさせてもらったというようなことで問題になりました。アイスランドのグンロイグソン首相は、世間から非難を浴び、辞任に追い込まれました。ロシアではプーチンの友人、中国では習近平の親戚がタックス・ヘイブンを利用していたとみられます。ほかにも、オーストラリアのターンブル首相、マレーシアのナジブ首相の息子、シリアのアサド大統領のいとこ、アルゼンチンのマクリ大統領というように、次々と主要人物やその周辺者の名前があがりました。たくさんの国のお金持ちたちが、どうもタックス・ヘイブンにいろいろなものを作って利用していたようです。だいたいはタックス・ヘイブンに法人を作り、その法人の資産として、スイスの銀行で運用するというのがパターンのようです。 さて、タックス・ヘイブンというのは、「租税回避地」とも呼ばれます。タックス・ヘイブンで行われる「租税回避」というと、違法なものだという印象をもつ方も多いかと思います。パナマ文書に名前があがっていた人たちは、違法な「租税回避」をしていたのでしょうか。一概に、そうとはいえません。実は、「脱税」と「節税」という二つの言葉があります。「脱税」は違法なのですが、「節税」はミニマムの税金を払う賢いことだとされています。今回、公開された１１００万件の文書においては、脱税と節税が混じっている状況で、ほとんどは節税のはずなのです。ただ、弁護士事務所は「全部節税だ」と言っていますが、脱税も混じっているはずだということで、いま世界中で調べているということなのです。 そもそも、タックス・ヘイブンに置いてあるお金はどのくらいあるのでしょうか。２５０兆円、７２０兆円というように、いろいろな説があります。アメリカやＥＵの政府は年２０数兆円の法人税を世界で損しているのではないかと推計しています。これは全世界の法人税収の１割にあたりますが、つまりそれくらいの額が節税・脱税によって取り損ねていると考えられるわけです。 いま、法人税は、世界中で引き下げる流れになってきています。日本の法人税も、アメリカと並んで、かつては40％程度でとても高いといわれていたのですが、だいぶ引き下げられてきました。今年の４月から実効税率で30パーセントくらいに下がっています。さて、その法人税がどこにかかるかですが、日本の法人と、日本の法人の日本子会社にかかります。会計上の連結決算においては、日本の親会社が海外に持っている海外子会社も合算しますが、税務上の連結納税においては、日本企業の海外子会社の課税所得は合算しません。したがって、日本企業の海外現地法人の所得は、その法人がある国で課税されることになっています。そうすると、たとえば現在の日本の法人税の３０パーセントで考えると、中国や韓国では２５パーセントくらいなので、そのあたりに法人を持っていれば、５パーセント得をすることになります。あるいは、イギリスが最近２０パーセントに引き下げたのですが、日本の３０パーセントに比べれば、１０パーセント得をするということになります。ただし、法人税が０、もしくは１、２パーセントのような国もあるわけで、そうしたところに法人をおいて利益をためることを規制する「タックス・ヘイブン税制」が日本にはあります。これは、２０パーセント未満の法人税の国に子会社法人を置く場合には、その未処分所得を課税所得とみなす、という税制です。ちなみに、もとは「２０パーセント以下」としていたのですが、イギリスが２０パーセントに下げたことで、「２０パーセント未満」というように、税制を少し変更しました。イギリスはあまりに大国なので、「タックス・ヘイブン」に含めるわけにはいかないだろうということです。 パナマ文書によって流出した企業は、タックス・ヘイブンでの取引を行っていたということで、そこで行われていたのは違法な「脱税」なのか、合法な「節税」なのか、といった点が大きな問題となり、現在調査されているというわけなのです。 それでは今日のまとめです。 パナマの法律事務所のモサック・フォンセカから、南ドイツ新聞経由でＩＣＩＪにタックス・ヘイブンの利用者に関する文書が流出しました。この中に違法な脱税と適法な節税があり、各国で騒ぎが起こっています。これからどういう動きをみせるのか、世界中で関心が集まっています。

2.6 terabytes of information spanning over forty years of a Panamanian law firm’s life was leaked to a German newspaper and subsequently, the world. What questions does this raise about a law firm’s responsibility for the loss of client/customer data? What lessons can we learn about security as a result of this firm’s data being compromised? In this episode of the Digital Detectives, hosts Sharon Nelson and John Simek chat with Nuix Chief Technology Officer Stephen Stewart about the Panama Papers, the world’s largest breach of information. Stephen explains that a law firm in Panama named Mossack Fonseca had 2.6 terabytes of information taken from them by an anonymous party, who then gave that information to the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ). The leaked data contained 11.5 million items that consisted of roughly 5 million emails, 3 million databases, 2 million PDF files, and 1 million images. In an attempt to understand and further investigate the received data, SZ then contacted the International Consortium of Investigative Reporters (ICIJ). Stephen talks about what the ICIJ is (basically an international network that includes 165 investigative journalists over 65 countries) and how Nuix’s software was utilized to aid in the data analysis. The group discusses the authorities’ later raid on the law firm’s office and what evidence the digital forensics experts and financial analysts might be looking for. Stephen closes the interview with an summary of the practices that this breach sheds light on, like who the beneficiaries of offshore funds really are and what significant revelations might come from this particular breach. Stephen Stewart joined Nuix in 2008 and is responsible for leading the evolution of Nuix’s software. He is currently driving the development of Nuix's information governance and big data solutions. Stephen has more than 15 years experience working with both public and private sector organizations, designing and providing solutions for their email, file, document management and archiving systems.

"Enough time has gone by that it's worth following up on a question raised but then rapidly dropped this spring. Remember the Panama papers? That staggering dump of 11.5 million documents leaked on fourteen thousand clients of the law firm Mossack Fonseca in Panama. Mossack Fonseca offered legal assistance to people and businesses seeking to set up shop in tax havens around the world. A couple of hundred US addresses showed up in the Panama Papers. Not all belonged to American citizens, but some did. The Obama-connected Pritzker family name appeared, as did others, like John Michael Crim, a convicted tax-evader, and Democratic donor / movie mogul David Geffen. Still, no big American banks, no huge Americans firms. As a result, no crowds massed demanding resignations, and unlike in Iceland, no political heads rolled. But maybe they should have. Why so few Americans? Part of the explanation is probably media bias. You should never discount the deference in our media for those with money and influence, or the disdain they have for reporting that's done mostly elsewhere. But the most important part of the answer is: Americans don't need Fonseca. Plenty of US law firms manage offshore assets right here. They don't need to go to Panama because they can find those firms in the US. There's nothing illegal after all, about setting up an offshore trust. What's illegal is hiding your assets to avoid paying debts or tax. The US is a world-class tax-haven nation, because American laws on corporate structures are so flexible, the tax breaks we offer corporations are so big, and the tax we charge on capital gains is so extra-especially low. The fact is, it is hard to find a more attractive place to make a lot of money, than right here; and states like Nevada and Delaware offer virtual anonymity for corporate clients. Who needs Panama when we have the home state of Joe Biden? Come to think of it, maybe that's why we've heard the White House say so little about Fonseca. Scandal? What scandal? Finding legal ways to dodge your debts to the nation is the good old American way of doing business."

An offshore investment scandal known as the Panama Papers has taken the world by storm. The controversy centers around the Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca and its connections to high-ranking political figures, their relatives, celebrities, and business figures, including Iceland Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson. Recently, a German newspaper announced that 11.5 million confidential documents between 1970 and 2015 had been leaked from the firm to journalists. These "Panama Papers" revealed how clients hid billions of dollars in offshore tax shelters.  There are many issues at hand here: establishing these offshore entities, evading taxes, fraud, laundering money, and overall corruption. On Lawyer 2 Lawyer, hosts Bob Ambrogi and Craig Williams join Jessica Tillipman, the assistant dean for field placement at George Washington Law School and Professor William Byrnes, a member of the law faculty and an associate dean with Texas A&M University School of Law, as they take an inside look at the Panama Papers. They will discuss Mossack Fonseca’s role, shell companies and offshore bank accounts, the issue of data security, tax evasion, investigations into these clients, and future of Mossack Fonseca. Jessica Tillipman is the assistant dean for field placement at George Washington Law School and an expert in corruption, government ethics, and the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. She is a senior editor of the FCPA Blog, which has been following the Panama Papers revelations. Professor William Byrnes is a member of the law faculty and an associate dean with Texas A&M University School of Law. William held a senior position of international tax for a Big 6 firm and has been commissioned on fiscal policy by a number of governments. He is currently developing a tax and legal risk management online curriculum for professionals. Texas A&M University is the fifth largest U.S. public research institution and one of only 62 institutions to be designated a member of the prestigious Association of American Universities. Special thanks to our sponsor, Clio.

https://onthegroundshow.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/OTG-APRIL15-2016.mp3 On what is traditionally Tax Day, hundreds at the U.S. Capitol are arrested as a part of Democracy Spring to get money out of politics, to advocate for voting rights and for racial justice. We hear voices from the racial justice rally at Democracy Awakening. Also, Tony Medina, editor of the new poetry anthology, Resisting Arrest, joins us and reads from the book that includes more than 80 poets. Guests and voices: Tiffany Hunter, Gerald Horne, April Goggans, Stewart Anderson, Shani Smith, Dorie Ladner and more. Headlines: -Democracy Spring at the U.S. Capitol. -Fight for 15 strikes and actions in more than 300 cities. -Maryland General Assembly passes police reform legislation. -So far the other shoe has not dropped in the hack of Mossack-Fonseca. List of U.S. individuals and groups involved has not been released. -Gerald Horne visits the DMV for his new books, Confronting Black Jacobins: The United States, The Haitian Revolution and the Origins of the Dominican Republic and Paul Robeson: The Artist as Revolutionary Links: Democracy Spring Resisting Arrest poetry anthology Confronting Black Jacobins: The United States, The Haitian Revolution and the Origins of the Dominican Republic Paul Robeson: The Artist as Revolutionary

Consequences regarding abuses of power provide the central discussion this week on Latin Pulse. The program delves into the politics of impeachment in Brazil as President Dilma Rousseff tangles with members of Congress.  Congress says Rousseff misled them about the country's finances.  But many of those looking to prosecute Rousseff are themselves tangled in various corruption scandals.  The program's analysis gives the necessary context before a Congressional impeachment vote this coming weekend. The program also looks at the reaction in Latin America to the Panama Papers scandal.  The discussion revolves around the Panamanian view of the corruption scandal. The program includes in-depth interviews with:Alex Cuadros, the author of Brazillionaires; andLuis Botello of the International Center for Journalists (ICFJ).Executive Producer: Rick Rockwell; Technical Director: Jim Singer; andProduction Assistant: Brittney Madison.(To download or stream this podcast, click here.)   (The program is 30 minutes in length and the file size is 42 MB.) podcastnewsLatin AmericapoliticsBrazilPanamaimpeachmentArgentinacorruptionDilma RousseffPanama Papersmediaprotest movementEduardo CunhaPaulo MalufWorkers PartyMichel TemerLuiz Inancio Lula da SilvaJuan Carlos Varelaconspiracy theoriesBrazilian Democratic MovementGloboPetrobrasoiljusticeeconomicsPMDBfinancingjournalistsdemocracyviolenceMexicoEcuadorMossack FonsecaCentral AmericaVenezuelamilitarypoverty

Мысли по поводу слива архивов Mossack Fonseca и финансов вообще.

Grandi società, multinazionali, ma anche individui. ..I Panama Papers hanno scoperchiato il vaso di pandora dell'elusione fiscale, parola elegante per definire la pratica del sottrarre redditi e patrimoni al fisco con l'aiuto di leggi compiacenti. ..Dai quasi 3 TB di documenti sfilati allo studio legale Mossack e Fonseca di Panama usciranno altri nomi, oltri a quelli che hanno invaso le cronache di questi ultimi giorni. Ospite a Memos Vittorio Malagutti dell'Espresso e Elisa Bacciotti di Oxfam Italia. «Dobbiamo considerare – racconta Bacciotti - che i dati emersi dai Panama Papers riguardano un solo studio legale, di un solo paradiso fiscale. Nel mondo sono invece decine gli stati che possono considerarsi più o meno paradisi fiscali e sono moltissimi gli studi legali come Mossack Fonseca».

Grandi società, multinazionali, ma anche individui. ..I Panama Papers hanno scoperchiato il vaso di pandora dell'elusione fiscale, parola elegante per definire la pratica del sottrarre redditi e patrimoni al fisco con l'aiuto di leggi compiacenti. ..Dai quasi 3 TB di documenti sfilati allo studio legale Mossack e Fonseca di Panama usciranno altri nomi, oltri a quelli che hanno invaso le cronache di questi ultimi giorni. Ospite a Memos Vittorio Malagutti dell'Espresso e Elisa Bacciotti di Oxfam Italia. «Dobbiamo considerare – racconta Bacciotti - che i dati emersi dai Panama Papers riguardano un solo studio legale, di un solo paradiso fiscale. Nel mondo sono invece decine gli stati che possono considerarsi più o meno paradisi fiscali e sono moltissimi gli studi legali come Mossack Fonseca».

Phil Edwards, Andy Blume and Daniel Olivares are back in the studio with this week's look at all things Geek.Show Notes:Telstra's 'free data guy' is getting to test its 'world first' 1Gbps hotspot [SMH]Watch Waleed Aly Tackle Prime Minister Turnbull On The NBN [Gizmodo Australia]Labor hints at FTTdp NBN election policy [iTnews]Telstra gets $1.6bn to help deliver NBN's HFC rollout [iTnews]Panama Papers and Mossack Fonseca explained [ABC News]HP's world's thinnest laptop is as thick as a AAA battery [VentureBeat]Mashable cuts staff as it shifts focus from politics and world news [TechCrunch]AP Style alert: Don't capitalize internet and web anymore [Poynter]Erik Bauersfeld Dead: Admiral Ackbar Voice Actor Was 93 [The Hollywood Reporter]First Trailer: "Rogue One: A Star Wars Story" [Dark Horizons]Star Wars: Rogue One - breaking down the first trailer [Den Of Geek]Twitter lines up with the NFL to stream Thursday Night Football [CNET]Quickflix to axe Sydney and Auckland offices and staff as founder gives himself a pay cut [mUmBRELLA]Something we mentioned in the show but missing in the Show Notes? Let us know via our Contact Page.Questions, Comments, Feedback and Suggestions are all welcome.Website - http://geeksinterrupted.fmFacebook - https://www.facebook.com/GeeksInterruptedTwitter - https://twitter.com/GeeksOnAirVoicemail - http://www.speakpipe.com/GeeksInterruptedIf you enjoyed this episode head on over to iTunes and kindly leave us a rating, a review and subscribe.

Esta semana o A.Sousa partilha connosco mais um episódio épico sobre como pode a troca de telemóvel correr mal. Terminamos a falar da nossa experiência com a utilização do WordPress, o caso dos documentos do Panamá (#panamapapers) e de como a Mossack Fonseca facilitou o ataque aos seus sistemas por não manter atualizado o seu […]

Grandi società, multinazionali, ma anche individui. ..I Panama Papers hanno scoperchiato il vaso di pandora dell'elusione fiscale, parola elegante per definire la pratica del sottrarre redditi e patrimoni al fisco con l'aiuto di leggi compiacenti. ..Dai quasi 3 TB di documenti sfilati allo studio legale Mossack e Fonseca di Panama usciranno altri nomi, oltri a quelli che hanno invaso le cronache di questi ultimi giorni. Ospite a Memos Vittorio Malagutti dell'Espresso e Elisa Bacciotti di Oxfam Italia. «Dobbiamo considerare – racconta Bacciotti - che i dati emersi dai Panama Papers riguardano un solo studio legale, di un solo paradiso fiscale. Nel mondo sono invece decine gli stati che possono considerarsi più o meno paradisi fiscali e sono moltissimi gli studi legali come Mossack Fonseca».

This week on The Mandatory Sampson Podcast, Chris and Joey sit down to break down in detail the leaked 2.6TB trove of Mossack Fonseca documents known as The Panama Papers, a great, in-depth 2016 Presidential Campaign update, new commercial drone regulation recommendations, the potential global cost of climate change, and the recent progressive social changes in New York and California regarding the minimum wage and paid maternity leave. All that and more, so check it out. Thanks for listening! Follow us on Twitter: twitter.com/ManSamp ... twitter.com/JoeyFromJerzey ... twitter.com/StandUpNYLabs Please rate and subscribe on iTunes: itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/manda…id932147356?mt=2 Subscribe on YouTube for full episode videos and to watch the show stream LIVE Thursdays at 4:00pm: youtube.com/mandatorysampson Go to ComedyVoices.com to listen to all of the other great podcasts on the network.

https://onthegroundshow.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/OTG-APRIL8-2016.mp3 A new generation of civil rights advocates question whether the Black Congressional Caucus is working for Black people or for corporations. And while leaders of 50 nations gathered here last week to talk about the threat of nuclear terrorism, anti-nuclear forces said to U.S. leaders, well, WHY NOT start with the getting rid of the 15,000 nuclear existing nuclear weapons? Guests and Voices: Gerald Horne, Phil Mendelson, Omolola Adele-Oso, Rashad Robinson, activists at the Global Zero anti-nuclear rally April 1, 2016 in DC. Headlines: -So is there more to this data leak from Mossack Fonseca than the corporate media is telling us? -Police, criminal justice reform are the subject of several events and actions in the DC region. -A broad coalition is supporting legislation currently being considered by the Maryland General Assembly that would overhaul the state’s controversial Law Enforcement Officers Bill of Rights. -Second anniversary of nearly 300 girls in Nigeria being kidnapped by the extremist organization Boko Haram. -Black Millennials for Flint is holding a NoLeadZone Old School Pajama Jam.

In this episode of the Informed Choice Podcast, Martin talks about the personal finance things you need to know in the new tax year.  There is also a roundup of the latest personal finance news and an update from the world of Informed Choice. Things you need to know in the new tax year The new tax year started on 6th April 2016, bringing with it some changes to tax rates and allowances, as well as some investment and pension changes. As promised in the podcast, here are the facts and figures you need to know. The new personal allowance for 2016/17 is £11,000, up from £10,600 last year.  There is no more age-related personal allowance for people born before April 1938, removing the dreaded age-allowance trap. Higher earners face an income limit of £100,000 with their personal allowance reduced by £1 for every £2 of income over this limit, so earn over £122,000 and your personal allowance is reduced to zero. The personal savings allowance is now in force, giving tax-free savings interest to those with taxable income of less than £16,800, or a £1,000 tax-free savings allowance for basic rate taxpayers and £500 for higher rate taxpayers. Dividend income is subject to a new tax regime, with a £5,000 tax-free allowance and then income tax charged at 7.5% for the basic rate, 32.5% for the higher rate and 38.1% for additional rate taxpayers. The marriage allowance increases from £1,060 to £1,100, allowing unused personal allowance to be transferred to a basic rate taxpayer. Landlords and second-home buyers will pay a 3% stamp duty surcharge, applicable on completions from 1st April 2016 onwards. For existing landlords, the 10% wear and tear allowance is removed in 2016/17. Capital gains tax rates are reduced from 20% to 10% for basic rate taxpayers and 28% to 18% for higher rate taxpayers, with the exception of capital gains on residential property sales (other than your principle private residence). No change to the ISA allowance this tax year, which stays at £15,240. The Junior ISA allowance remains at £4,080.  The new tax year saw the launch of the new Innovative Finance ISA, allowing peer-to-peer lending to be held within an Individual Savings Account for the first time. The pension lifetime allowance is reduced from £1.25m to £1m for 2016/17. The annual allowance is reduced to as low as £10,000 for higher earners. Listen to episode 68 of the Informed Choice Podcast for more on these pension changes and to hear about the protection options available. Personal finance news update -The new state pension was introduced this week, offering a single flat-rate income to new pensioners from 6th April 2016. -Fewer people are cashing in their pension savings, one year after the launch of new pension freedoms. -The new National Living Wage has come into force, with workers over 25 now receiving a minimum income of £7.20 an hour. -Over 11.5 million confidential files have been leaked from the database of international law firm Mossack Fonseca, revealing details of how the rich exploit secretive offshore tax regimes. -HM Revenue and Customs has received more than £4bn in inheritance tax receipts during the past year, the largest amount ever received by the tax man in a twelve month period. Get answers to your personal finance questions Do you have a personal finance or investing question for Martin? Email martin@icfp.co.uk or ask on Twitter @martinbamford. You can call our dedicated podcast voicemail line on 020 8144 2745 with your question or visit www.speakpipe.com/InformedChoicePodcast to leave an online voicemail. Martin and Informed Choice Martin Bamford is a Chartered Financial Planner, Chartered Wealth Manager and SOLLA Accredited Later Life Adviser. As Managing Director of Informed Choice, the award-winning firm of Chartered Financial Planners in Surrey, he is responsible for nearly £200m of client assets. Martin is the author of several bestselling personal finance books and produced his first feature-length documentary in 2014, about the post-war Baby Boomer generation in retirement. “Bamford excels at making even the dullest topics interesting” – Pensions Management Visit www.icfp.co.uk to find out more about Informed Choice, or follow us on Twitter at www.twitter.com/informedchoice.

This week's massive leak of confidential documents from the Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca, has given unprecedented access to the way the rich and powerful have used tax havens to hide their wealth. But within the eleven and a half million documents, there is also evidence of how some of the shell companies set up by the firm, or the individuals that owned them, have been the subject of international sanctions and have been used by rogue states and oppressive regimes including North Korea and Syria. Simon Cox reveals details from the leaked papers and travels to the British Virgin Islands where a small office run by Mossack Fonseca was used to create more than 100,000 companies. One of them was a front for a North Korean Bank that was later sanctioned by the United States for supporting the regime's illicit nuclear and ballistic missile programme. According to the US, the BVI based front company managed millions of dollars in transactions in support of North Korea. Other companies set up by on the island were used by a billionaire businessman who is a cousin of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad and who was sanctioned by the US for using "intimidation and his close ties to the Assad regime at the expense of ordinary Syrians." Mossack Fonseca has said it never knowingly allowed the use of its companies by individuals with any relationship with North Korea or Syria and says it has operated beyond reproach for 40 years and has never been charged with criminal wrong-doing. Reporter: Simon Cox Producer: James Melley

This week, we examine a phishing scam that includes recipients’ home addresses, an Android Trojan that’s been downloaded 3.2 million times, a vulnerability in Domino’s pizza ordering app, and the big story of the moment: the data breach at Mossack Fonseca.

There are few better positioned to explain the relevance of the #PanamaPapers scandal than offshore tax haven specialist David Marchant. Just over a years ago, the Offshorealert.com editor exposed now collapsed Belvedere, a global Ponzi scheme masterminded by South Africans Cobus Kellermann and David Cosgrove. In this interview with Biznews.com's Alec Hogg, Marchant unpacks the relevance of 11.5m mostly top secret client documents leaked from the files of Panama-headquartered law firm Mossack Fonseca. Marchant explains why the information keeps making international headlines and suggests what we've seen so far is only the start.

1- Tra gli indignati di Place de la République che protestano contro la riforma del lavoro. " abbiamo votato per un governo di sinistra e, siamo radicalmente delusi “. . ( Reportage di Luisa Nannipieri) ..2-Panama Papers: il ruolo dei colossi bancari nell'evasione fiscale. 365 istituti sono ricorsi ai servizi di Mossack Fonseca. 28 sono tedeschi. ..( intervista a Andrea di Stefano – Valori )..3-NO all'associazione con Ue - Ucraina. In Olanda un nuovo referendum contro l'unione europea. ..4-La svolta cinese. Pechino impone sanzioni alla corea del nord in base alla risoluzione Onu. ( Gabriele Battaglia) ..5-in cimitero c'è posto per i musulmani: l'iniziativa della sindaca di Madrid. ( Giulio Maria Piantadosi) ..6-Musica e nuove tecnologie: Tidal conta 3 milioni di abbonati. ( Niccolò Vecchia )

The Panama Papers have revealed how close some global leaders are to a vast network of offshore wealth, insulated from prying eyes and domestic taxes by the now-famous law firm Mossack Fonseca. Dan McLaughlin and Clifford Coonan report on what the leaked documents reveal about Russian President Vladimir Putin, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Chinese Premier Xi Jinping, and the attempts to deflect criticism by pointing the finger at a Western conspiracy. Meanwhile South African president Jacob Zuma faces an impeachment vote over his failure to repay state money spent on his private residence. The scandal is arguably the biggest yet to hit the president, who has fended off accusations of corruption, influence peddling and even rape since before he took office in 2009. Bill Corcoran reports from Cape Town.

1- Tra gli indignati di Place de la République che protestano contro la riforma del lavoro. " abbiamo votato per un governo di sinistra e, siamo radicalmente delusi “. . ( Reportage di Luisa Nannipieri) ..2-Panama Papers: il ruolo dei colossi bancari nell'evasione fiscale. 365 istituti sono ricorsi ai servizi di Mossack Fonseca. 28 sono tedeschi. ..( intervista a Andrea di Stefano – Valori )..3-NO all'associazione con Ue - Ucraina. In Olanda un nuovo referendum contro l'unione europea. ..4-La svolta cinese. Pechino impone sanzioni alla corea del nord in base alla risoluzione Onu. ( Gabriele Battaglia) ..5-in cimitero c'è posto per i musulmani: l'iniziativa della sindaca di Madrid. ( Giulio Maria Piantadosi) ..6-Musica e nuove tecnologie: Tidal conta 3 milioni di abbonati. ( Niccolò Vecchia )

Millioner av dokumenter har lekket fra advokatkontoret Mossack Fonseca i Panama, men dette er nok bare toppen av isfjellet. Vi har invitert Guro Slettemark, generalsekretær i Transparency International Norge, og Frederik Zimmer, professor emeritus ved UiO og rådgiver i BA-HR til studio for å forklare dette med skatteparadiser. Programledere Per Valebrokk og Marius Lorentzen. Produsert av Magne D. Antonsen. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

This week's massive leak of confidential documents from the Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca, has given unprecedented access to the way the rich and powerful have used tax havens to hide their wealth. But within the eleven and a half million documents, there is also evidence of how some of the shell companies set up by the firm, or the individuals that owned them, have been the subject of international sanctions and have been used by rogue states and oppressive regimes including North Korea and Syria. Simon Cox reveals details from the leaked papers and travels to the British Virgin Islands where a small office run by Mossack Fonseca was used to create more than 100,000 companies. One of them was a front for a North Korean Bank that was later sanctioned by the United States for supporting the regime's illicit nuclear and ballistic missile programme. According to the US, the BVI based front company managed millions of dollars in transactions in support of North Korea. Other companies set up by on the island were used by a billionaire businessman who is a cousin of Syrian President Bashar Al Assad and who was sanctioned by the US for using "intimidation and his close ties to the Assad regime at the expense of ordinary Syrians." Mossack Fonseca has said it never knowingly allowed the use of its companies by individuals with any relationship with North Korea or Syria and says it has operated beyond reproach for 40 years and has never been charged with criminal wrong-doing. Reporter: Simon Cox Producer: James Melley

The leak of a huge trove of documents from Mossack Fonseca, a Panamanian law firm, creates an uproar from Iceland to China See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

The leak of a huge trove of documents from Mossack Fonseca, a Panamanian law firm, creates an uproar from Iceland to China See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

1- Tra gli indignati di Place de la République che protestano contro la riforma del lavoro. " abbiamo votato per un governo di sinistra e, siamo radicalmente delusi “. . ( Reportage di Luisa Nannipieri) ..2-Panama Papers: il ruolo dei colossi bancari nell'evasione fiscale. 365 istituti sono ricorsi ai servizi di Mossack Fonseca. 28 sono tedeschi. ..( intervista a Andrea di Stefano – Valori )..3-NO all'associazione con Ue - Ucraina. In Olanda un nuovo referendum contro l'unione europea. ..4-La svolta cinese. Pechino impone sanzioni alla corea del nord in base alla risoluzione Onu. ( Gabriele Battaglia) ..5-in cimitero c'è posto per i musulmani: l'iniziativa della sindaca di Madrid. ( Giulio Maria Piantadosi) ..6-Musica e nuove tecnologie: Tidal conta 3 milioni di abbonati. ( Niccolò Vecchia )

Depuis 2015, les attentats se multiplient notamment en France et en Belgique. Avec eux la couverture médiatique et son lot de témoignages, pris sur le vif, de victimes en état de choc, entretient un climat de peur et de stress. Mais comment gérer le stress post-attentat à l'heure des chaînes d'information en continu. Pour en parler, Marianne Kedia, psychologue et psychothérapeute au Centre du psychotrauma de l'Institut de victimologie de Paris, est dans la Matinale.  « Depuis quelques années, on parle d'un traumatisme par procuration. On est pas exposé directement, mais on peut l'être par les personnes qui racontent ce qu'ils ont vécu. Habituellement, on constate ce genre de traumatisme chez le personnel qui accompagne les personnes traumatisées. On a aussi observé qu'au travers des médias, les personnes qui regardaient beaucoup le télévision se trouvaient dans un état similaire à celles qui avaient été exposées.» En deuxième partie d'émission, Josué Morel, programmateur du Festival National du Court Métrage Etudiant organisé par  TéléSorbonne, est notre invité. Pour sa 15ème édition, qui se déroule les 6, 7 et 8 avril 2016, le festival a reçu près de 300 films de fiction, d'animation, de documentaire et expérimentaux. Pour découvrir la sélection, rendez-vous mercredi 6 avril à l'Université Paris 7 et jeudi 7 avril à Paris 3. La sélection réalisée par le public pendant ces deux soirées sera projetée pour la soirée de clôture le 8 avril, devant un jury de professionnel et récompensé par de nombreux prix : le prix du jury professionnel, la mention du jury professionnel, le prix du public et prix du jury étudiant. " Le court métrage s'est démocratisé avec les nouvelles technologies, les téléphones, les minis caméras etc … mais aussi avec la multiplication des formations et des écoles. Après, pour faire un court métrage, il y a des pièges à éviter. Il ne s'agit pas de compiler un long métrage sur 15 minutes, ni de faire une fiction à une seule vitesse. On a cherché à valoriser des films plus personnels, plus particuliers." En chronique, fraude et paradis fiscaux au menu. Léa revient sur l'affaire "Panama Papers" : 11,5 millions de données appartenant à la compagnie Mossack Fonseca, concernant les propriétaires de comptes off-shore au Panama.  Valentin, dans le cadre des élections américaines, revient sur le "mea culpa" des journalistes qui auraient malgré eux, offert une publicité renforcée à Donald Trump. Présentation : Camille Regache / Réalisation :Mikel Perez / Cointerview : Bastien Landier & Xenia Ivanova /Chroniques : Léa Capuano & Valentin Baudena / Coordination : Elsa Landard & Camille Regache / Web : Bastien Landier

The leaked “Panama Papers” show how a Panamanian law firm, Mossack Fonseca, secretly shepherded a web of offshore accounts that resulted in billions of dollars in transactions passing through its doors. Its client list includes some of the world’s wealthiest people, from members of Russian president Vladimir Putin’s inner circle to the prime minister of Iceland. Tom Burgis talks to Vanessa Houlder, FT tax correspondent and Alex Cobham, head of research at the Tax Justice Network, about the significance of the revelations. See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

TechLaw10 hosts Jonathan Armstrong and Eric Sinrod discuss legal issues related to information technology. In this episode, Jonathan and Eric discuss the hack of Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonseca and the possible impact on the firm's clients.

Depuis 2015, les attentats se multiplient notamment en France et en Belgique. Avec eux la couverture médiatique et son lot de témoignages, pris sur le vif, de victimes en état de choc, entretient un climat de peur et de stress. Mais comment gérer le stress post-attentat à l'heure des chaînes d'information en continu. Pour en parler, Marianne Kedia, psychologue et psychothérapeute au Centre du psychotrauma de l'Institut de victimologie de Paris, est dans la Matinale. « Depuis quelques années, on parle d'un traumatisme par procuration. On est pas exposé directement, mais on peut l'être par les personnes qui racontent ce qu'ils ont vécu. Habituellement, on constate ce genre de traumatisme chez le personnel qui accompagne les personnes traumatisées. On a aussi observé qu'au travers des médias, les personnes qui regardaient beaucoup le télévision se trouvaient dans un état similaire à celles qui avaient été exposées.»En deuxième partie d'émission, Josué Morel, programmateur du Festival National du Court Métrage Etudiant organisé par  TéléSorbonne, est notre invité. Pour sa 15ème édition, qui se déroule les 6, 7 et 8 avril 2016, le festival a reçu près de 300 films de fiction, d'animation, de documentaire et expérimentaux.Pour découvrir la sélection, rendez-vous mercredi 6 avril à l'Université Paris 7 et jeudi 7 avril à Paris 3. La sélection réalisée par le public pendant ces deux soirées sera projetée pour la soirée de clôture le 8 avril, devant un jury de professionnel et récompensé par de nombreux prix : le prix du jury professionnel, la mention du jury professionnel, le prix du public et prix du jury étudiant." Le court métrage s'est démocratisé avec les nouvelles technologies, les téléphones, les minis caméras etc … mais aussi avec la multiplication des formations et des écoles. Après, pour faire un court métrage, il y a des pièges à éviter. Il ne s'agit pas de compiler un long métrage sur 15 minutes, ni de faire une fiction à une seule vitesse. On a cherché à valoriser des films plus personnels, plus particuliers."En chronique, fraude et paradis fiscaux au menu. Léa revient sur l'affaire "Panama Papers" : 11,5 millions de données appartenant à la compagnie Mossack Fonseca, concernant les propriétaires de comptes off-shore au Panama. Valentin, dans le cadre des élections américaines, revient sur le "mea culpa" des journalistes qui auraient malgré eux, offert une publicité renforcée à Donald Trump.Présentation : Camille Regache / Réalisation :Mikel Perez / Cointerview : Bastien Landier et Xenia Ivanova /Chroniques : Léa Capuano et Valentin Baudena / Coordination : Elsa Landard et Camille Regache / Web : Bastien Landier