Now awaiting the we the supervisory board statement on the hiring of Nicolai Tangen. The pliers have given the public insight into a nettverksstruktur by the use of traditional tax havens.Kristine Sævold Show more
the Structure can be seen as an example of the OECD and the EUROPEAN union calls "aggressive tax planning". Parliament has required the bank to incorporate aggressive tax planning in the Oljefondets etikkområde along with other themes such as child labour, tobacco, and climate.
It raises questions of principle. Set on the tip - could its oil wealth has been led by a who had turned up on child labor? What about a "tobacco king", or an internationally-profile "climate-skills steven hirschfeld"?
the Environment is not in itself a problem. It is the system he represents, and signaleffekten by the employment that is problematic. The structure he has built his career and fortune at the include use of the trust in Jersey, the fund in the cayman islands company in the British Jomfruøyer, the ownership of the boat from the Isle of Man, and the non-dom status in London (a british tax exemptions for wealthy foreigners).Criticizes the Tangen-promise: - Very unfortunate
That this way of organizing is "completely normal" is not a seal of approval. On the contrary. It is just the issue itself.
Until the 1980s, the was the use of traditional tax havens reserved for the owners, criminals and a few investors. From the 1960s did a lot of småstater as the cayman islands to a financial vekstmodell to establish themselves as tax havens. Financial actors followed after, and from the 1970s established tax havens activity to include unregulated markets for finance, often referred to as offshore financial centers.
Since the facilitators as lawyers, accountants, bank - and finansrådgivere built parts of its industry to assist clients to reduce tax liabilities and to offer hide for those who want anonymity.
put two results. On the one hand, it has made it easier for investors to find each other at the international level, they get access to safe and well-known law (the british system), and they can operate from politically neutral states which reduces the risk.
On the other hand, the multinational companies and wealthy individuals at the same time succeed in organizing themselves out of the state's obligations. Hollow turning states skattefundament has been a big problem that the EUROPEAN union expects to lose around 1/5 of their tax revenues due to aggressive tax planning. It comes in addition to illegal tax evasion.
Prior to the 1980s was skatteparadissystemet that the Environment is part of the regarded internationally as an acceptable "wastage" all political and economic systems had to expect.Turn On the LydErrorAllerede plus customer? Log into herError CONTROVERSY: Nicolai Tangen got the job as head of its oil wealth 26. march 2020, but there has been a lot of noise around the new boss. Video: Change Vellene / Dagbladet Show more
as have taken the system in use, have the politicians inherited a huge problem. Those who can afford to organize themselves out of the obligations to the country they live in can do it. As a consequence, the realized to the OECD already in the 1990s that states were in the process of losing control over own base. If all were to follow the Tangent example, it would not be much left in the statskasser to health care, and coronapakker.
Just that the practice of using tax havens has become so common, seems to have paved the way for that neither the governor, sentralbankstyret, or when the oljefondssjef see no problem with the Tangent nettverksstruktur.
the Way the Pliers have scheduled away from the tax constitute the core of the ongoing work of the OECD against international aggressive tax planning. Norway has been a driving force in this work for decades.Tangen-deadline: - Pull the emergency brakes
After the financial crisis in 2008, politicians around the world succeed with to close some "ordinary" loophole. The further work is a complicated political project that requires international consensus.
As a paragraph in this work has the Parliament imposed on its oil wealth, to contribute constructively by setting limits to how far companies can go in aggressive tax planning. It is expressed in Oljefondets own forventningsdokument, which sets the framework for the boards of the companies they invest in. Where is it expressed expectation that the boards will ensure that the companies do not participate in aggressive tax planning, that they follow the law's intention, and that the tax should be paid where value is created.
It is hard to see for themselves that Oljefondets leader with the credibility to be able to authorization requirements for companies to desist from aggressive tax planning. With the hiring of the Pliers, the central Bank has given the aggressive tax planning an "approved stamp". Its oil wealth may now lose a gained trust internationally, and employment provide an unfortunate signal, with potential impacts far beyond Norway.
There is therefore reason to ask whether the hiring is in line with the intention behind the Oecd's work, and thus also the Parliamentary intention behind the requirement of embodying tax planning in Oljefondets ethical work. Is Øystein Olsen on a collision course with Parliament? It is an unresolved question.Therefore, sent the money hit
Want to discuss?Visit Dagbladet debate!