27 May 2009

Andorra, Liechtenstein and Monaco removed from OECD List of Unco-operative Tax Havens

In the light of recent political commitments made by Andorra, Liechtenstein and Monaco to implement the OECD standards of transparency and effective exchange of information and the timetable set for the implementation, the OECD’s Committee on Fiscal Affairs has decided to remove all three jurisdictions from its List of Unco-operative Tax Havens.

It is now considered that these jurisdictions have committed to the internationally agreed tax standard but not yet substantially implemented it, as shown in the
Progress Report initially issued by the OECD Secretariat on 2 April. It is expected that all three jurisdictions will now swiftly implement their commitments.

Ogier named “Best Offshore Law Firm 2009” by HFM Week

Ogier has been named “Best Offshore Law Firm, 2009” at the HFM Week Service Provider Awards held in London.

The HFM Week Awards recognise companies that have outperformed their peer group over the course of 2008/2009. The awards were judged both quantitatively and qualitatively, producing a shortlist of candidates that have demonstrated financial progress, growth and genuine innovation.

Ogier partner and co-head of Ogier’s Investment Funds practice Peter Cockhill, said: “I am delighted that we have been recognised again by industry peers for excelling in the investment funds arena, once again demonstrating that we are a market leader in this area across the globe. One of Ogier’s strong assets is the strength of our investment funds teams in each of our four jurisdictions and this was clearly a differentiating factor for the judges when selecting the recipient of the award.”

20 May 2009

IFSB, IDB-IRTI and UKTI cooperate in organising a Conference on Emerging Financial Stability Framework

The Islamic Financial Services Board, Islamic Development Bank and Islamic Research and Training Institute will be organising a Conference on Emerging Financial Stability Framework on 1st July in London, which the United Kingdom Trade and Investment is hosting.

The one-day Conference aims to highlight and discuss various regulatory and supervisory issues arising from emerging initiatives undertaken in establishing a framework for the financial stability of the Islamic financial services industry. By covering areas such as the structure of the industry and financial stability, the legal framework and safety nets, as well as the liquidity infrastructure, the Conference will attempt to facilitate a thorough analysis of factors and preconditions that should support the resilience of the Islamic financial services industry.

The Conference will bring together over fifteen renowned chairpersons and speakers, including The Honorable Lord Mervyn Davies, Minister for UKTI, His Excellency Dr Ahmad Mohamed Ali Al-Madani, President of the Islamic Development Bank, His Excellency Dr. Muhammad Sulaiman Al-Jasser, IFSB Chairman and Governor of the Saudi Arabian Monetary Agency, several other central bank governors as well as a line-up of senior industry experts and academics. These speakers will be sharing their views in four sessions entitled:

1. Structure of Islamic Financial Services Industry (IFSI) and Financial Stability;
2. Emerging Prudential Framework;
3. Legal Infrastructure and Safety Nets; and
4. Liquidity Infrastructure.

Participation in the conference is by invitation only and participants are expected to comprise financial regulators and supervisors, industry experts and academics.

For more information on the conference, please visit www.ifsb.org/london2009

UTVi: Mauritius says it's not a tax haven

Mauritius says it is not a tax haven and is willing to address India’s concerns on the tax treaty between the two countries.

The India-Mauritius tax treaty has been a subject of debate for many years, with the Indian government pushing for a renegotiation of the treaty.

But Mauritius has consistently refused to do so. The treaty provides capital gains exemption to all Mauritius- based investors investing in India, and that has billions of dollars of Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) being invested into India through Mauritius.

Now, for the first time, Mauritius has defended the treaty.

M Meetarbhan, CEO, Financial Services Commission of Mauritius, told UTVi that Mauritius is not a tax haven and the country was ready to address India ‘s concerns on tax treaty.

He said Mauritius was willing to exchange information with the Indian government and there was no round tripping from Mauritius to India.

Indian authorities have not reported any case of round tripping, he said.

Round tripping refers to using the tax holiday advantage in Mauritius to take money out of India only to bring it back, disguised as foreign investment.

The money is routed through firms set up in tax havens.

19 May 2009

IFSB promulgates international prudential standards to address specificities of Islamic capital markets

"The Islamic Financial Services Board has promulgated standards which address issues related to Islamic capital markets, namely governance for Islamic collective investment schemes, conduct of business and Sharî`ah governance". Rifaat Ahmed Abdel Karim, Secretary-General of the Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) said in the Seminar on Islamic Capital Markets in Mauritius today. The Seminar is hosted by the Bank of Mauritius and the Financial Services Commission of Mauritius.

The development of Islamic capital markets has seen the offering of a wide selection of new and innovative products and services such as Sharî`ah-compliant stocks, Sukûk, Islamic collective investment schemes and Islamic Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs). While there are no authoritative estimates of the current size of the Islamic capital market, there are many indications of how the appetite and the demand for Sharî`ah-compliant products exceed the available supply. This suggests that the potential for growth remains promising.

Rifaat said "The IFSB supports initiatives by regulatory and supervisory authorities from among its members to develop the Islamic financial services industry in their various jurisdictions." The Bank of Mauritius joined the IFSB membership in November 2007 and is initiating efforts to develop its Islamic capital markets. He added, "However, similar to many other jurisdictions, Mauritius has to address the challenges of introducing Islamic financial services, namely the prudential, legal and tax framework which should be adapted to Islamic finance."

The IFSB as an international standard-setting body for the Islamic financial services industry, has issued seven international prudential standards for the industry. While it has developed the equivalent of Basel II for the banking sector, the organisation is still developing standards which address issues related to Islamic capital markets and Takâful. To date, we have embarked on works on governance for Islamic collective investment schemes, conduct of business and Sharî`ah governance". Rifaat ended his speech emphasising, "We believe that the development and implementation of the IFSB standards would inculcate a strong and prudent risk management culture in the Islamic financial services industry premised on the ethical standards propagated by Islam, and hence contribute towards instilling confidence and promoting financial stability within the industry."

The Islamic Financial Services Board (IFSB) is an international standard-setting organisation that promotes and enhances the soundness and stability of the Islamic financial services industry by issuing global prudential standards and guiding principles for the industry, broadly defined to include banking, capital markets and insurance sectors. The 185 members of the IFSB comprise 43 regulatory and supervisory authorities, 6 international inter-governmental organizations and 136 market players and professional firms operating in 35 jurisdictions. The IFSB also conducts research and coordinates initiatives on industry-related issues, as well as organises roundtables, seminars and conferences for regulators and industry stakeholders. Towards this end, the IFSB works closely with relevant international, regional and national organisations, research/educational institutions and market players.

18 May 2009

Geography of Offshoring is Shifting : A.T. Kearney Study

India and China continue as top offshoring destinations; but Central/Eastern Europe falls while Southeast Asia and Middle East countries rise

Deteriorating cost advantages and improved labor quality are driving a dramatic shift in the geography of offshoring according to the latest edition of global management consulting firm A.T. Kearney’s Global Services Location Index (GSLI), a ranking of the most attractive offshoring destinations.

While India, China and Malaysia retain the top three spots they’ve occupied since the inaugural GSLI in 2004, a fundamental shift in the index has taken place as once strong Central European countries have yielded ground to countries in Asia, the Middle East and North Africa.

The GSLI analyzes and ranks the top 50 countries worldwide for locating outsourcing activities, including IT services and support, contact centers and back-office support. Each country’s score is composed of a weighted combination of relative scores on 43 measurements, which are grouped into three categories: financial attractiveness, people and skills availability and business environment.

Established Central European countries including Poland, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Slovakia, once among the premier offshoring destinations for Western Europe companies, have fallen significantly due to a rapid increase in costs driven by both wage inflation and currency appreciation against the dollar. Meanwhile, low-cost countries in Southeast Asia and the Middle East made significant gains this year as the quality and availability of their labor forces improved. Egypt, Jordan and Vietnam ranked in the GSLI’s top 10 for the first time ever.

“While cost remains a major driver in decisions about where to outsource, the quality of the labor pool is gaining importance as companies view the labor market through a global lens driven by talent shortages at home, particularly in higher, value-added functions,” said Norbert Jorek, a partner with A.T. Kearney and managing director of the firm’s Global Business Policy Council. “In response, governments all over the world are investing in the human capital demanded by the offshoring industry.”

The complete results of this year’s Index are provided below. A more detailed analysis and information on regional performance can be found at
www.atkearney.com

Highlights from this year’s GSLI include:

The Middle East and North Africa is emerging as a key offshoring region because of its large, well educated population and its proximity to Europe. In addition to Egypt and Jordan, ranked at sixth and ninth, respectively, Tunisia (17th), United Arab Emirates (29th) and Morocco (30th) all rank among in the GSLI’s top 30 countries. “The Middle East and Africa area has the potential to redraw the offshoring map and in the process bring much needed opportunities for its large, underemployed educated class,” said Johan Gott, project manager for the Global Services Location Index.
Saharan Africa also showed strength. Ghana ranked 15th, Mauritius 25th, Senegal 26th and South Africa 39th.
Countries in Latin America and the Caribbean continue to capitalize on their proximity to the United States as nearshore destinations. Chile placed highest among countries from the region, ranking 8th on the strength of its political stability and favorable business environment. Other strong performers in the region include Mexico (11th), Brazil (12th) and Jamaica, which rose 11 places to rank 23rd.
India, China and Malaysia continue to lead the index by a wide margin through a unique combination of high people skills, favorable business environment and low cost. In particular, India has remained at the forefront of the outsourcing industry and actually has become an enabler for industry growth through expansion of Indian offshoring firms into other countries.
The United States, as represented by the onshoring potential of smaller “tier II” cities such as San Antonio, rose to 14th in the rankings due to the financial benefits of a falling dollar. The country is the leader in the people skills category and the combination of rising unemployment and political pressure to create jobs is increasing interest in onshoring possibilities among smaller inland locations. Similar trends are evident in the UK, France and Germany, all of which also rose in the GSLI.
While the global financial crisis has slowed recent offshoring moves, the percentage of companies’ staff offshore may very well increase as a result of the crisis. Layoffs at home are not translating to layoffs among offshore workers as companies seek to maintain service but reduce costs. Additionally, offshore facilities tend to be more efficient because they are newer and lack years of inefficiencies often built up in onshore facilities.
“The dynamics of global offshoring are clearly shifting as companies re-evaluate the political risks, labor arbitrage and skill requirements in the context of the likely aftermath of the global economic crisis,” said Paul A. Laudicina, A.T. Kearney chairman and managing officer. “Risk management will take on new importance to protect global service delivery from interruption and ensure capabilities are strategically dispersed rather than concentrated in a few cost-effective locations.”

Global Services Location Index 2009
(number in parenthesis indicates ranking in 2007 GSLI)
  1. India (position in 2007 GSLI: 1)
  2. China (2)
  3. Malaysia (3)
  4. Thailand (4)
  5. Indonesia(6)
  6. Egypt (13)
  7. Philippines (8)
  8. Chile (7)
  9. Jordan (14)
  10. Vietnam (19)
  11. Mexico (10)
  12. Brazil (5)
  13. Bulgaria (9)
  14. United States (Tier II)* (21)
  15. Ghana (27)
  16. Sri Lanka (29)
  17. Tunisia (26)
  18. Estonia (15)
  19. Romania (33)
  20. Pakistan (30)
  21. Lithuania (28)
  22. Latvia (17)
  23. Costa Rica (34)
  24. Jamaica (32)
  25. Mauritius (25)
  26. Senegal (39)
  27. Argentina (23)
  28. Canada (35)
  29. United Arab Emirates (20)
  30. Morocco (36)
  31. United Kingdom (Tier II)* (42)
  32. Czech Republic (16)
  33. Russia (37)
  34. Germany (Tier II)* (40)
  35. Singapore (11)
  36. Uruguay (22)
  37. Hungary (24)
  38. Poland (18)
  39. South Africa (31)
  40. Slovakia (12)
  41. France (Tier II)* (48)
  42. Ukraine (47)
  43. Panama (41)
  44. Turkey (49)
  45. Spain (43)
  46. New Zealand (44)
  47. Australia (45)
  48. Ireland (50)
  49. Israel (38)
  50. Portugal (46)

*Based on lower-cost locations in each country: San Antonio (U.S.), Belfast (UK), Leipzig (Germany) and Marseilles (France).

16 May 2009

Ogier named “International Law Firm of the Year, 2009” at Citywealth Awards

Ogier has been named “International Law Firm of the Year, 2009” at the annual Citywealth Magic Circle Awards held in London last night. The Citywealth Magic Circle Awards shine a spotlight on those individuals and organisations who have raised the bar in terms of service, innovation and client care. These coveted awards, from the publishers of Citywealth, set the benchmark for excellence in the wealth sector.

A list of shortlisted firms was drawn up from industry nominations. Submissions from those firms were then scrutinised by a judging panel of industry experts to decide the winners.

Ogier Head of Private Client and Trusts, Steve Meiklejohn, said: “I am delighted that we have been recognised again by industry peers for excelling in the private client arena, demonstrating that we still thrive on providing a quality service to each of our clients. The launch of Ogier Private Wealth and our expansion into new regions will have also been contributing factors to our latest award success. Congratulations are due to all staff for their hard work and professionalism which continues to keep Ogier as a leading player in the wealth industry.”

Citywealth is a specialist wealth management publishing house that features global accountants, lawyers, trustees and private bankers who serve the super rich.

15 May 2009

FinanceMalta Gears up for its 2nd Annual Conference

FinanceMalta’s 2nd Annual Conference titled ‘The Financial Services Industry in Malta – Building on Our Success’, will follow up on the main events that have characterized Malta’s financial services industry over the last year, this within the context of the turmoil that has gripped the international financial markets. The full day conference, to be held on the 29th May 2009 at the Hilton Malta, will examine Malta’s place in the world’s financial services industry and highlight the challenges and opportunities being faced by industry practitioners in maintaining the growth momentum registered so far.

Mr Kenneth Farrugia, Chairman of FinanceMalta, said that “this year’s conference will amongst others provide the delegates present for this event with the opportunity to gain first hand information from key domestic and international leading experts on the major issues facing the financial services industry as a result of the current global market and economic climate.”
An impressive line up of keynote presentations both from within and outside the financial services industry will be addressing this conference. The Hon. Prime Minister Dr Lawrence Gonzi will be opening the conference following the welcome address that will be delivered by Mr Kenneth Farrugia. Commissioner Catherine Ashton, EU Commissioner for Trade has kindly accepted FinanceMalta’s invitation and will deliver a speech entitled “Trading our way out of the economic crisis”.

Following the mid-morning refreshments, Mr Michael Bonello, Governor of the Central Bank will be analyzing the challenges facing Malta’s banking system whilst Ms. Marianne Wolfbrandt from the Directorate-General on Market and Services within the European Commission will be delivering a presentation on Promoting Competitiveness within the Financial Sector emphasizing, in particular, the role of EU financial services policy in this field.

Mr Richard Ogden, partner at Ernst & Young in the United Kingdom will follow with his presentation on tax policy and its use for providing a stimulus in the current environment and implications for investment. Mr Ogden will then be followed by Mr Hamish McRae author of ‘The World in 2020’ and associate editor of The Independent and The Independent on Sunday in the UK who will be providing an analysis of the main events characterizing the global economy and the implications for the financial services industry.

The third session will be divided into two panels. The first panel will be moderated by Mr Roderick Chalmers, Chairman of the Bank of Valletta plc and will consist of Mr Richard Cottell from HSBC, Dr. Gordon Cordina an economist, Mr. Heikki Niemela from Nemea Bank plc and Mr Joaquim F. Silva Pinto from Banif Bank (Malta) plc. The panel will discuss ways to strengthen the growing economic importance of the financial services industry.

The second panel will be moderated by the High Commissioner of Malta to the UK, H.E. Joseph Zammit Tabona. The panelists, who will be exploring the national challenges and international opportunities that are presented by the current economic environment, are: Mr Mario Micallef, CEO of JM Ganado and Associates, Mr. Kevin Valenzia, Partner at PricewaterhouseCoopers, Dr Jean Philippe Chetcuti from Chetcuti Cauchi Advocates and Mrs. Helga Ellul President of the Malta Chamber of Commerce, Enterprise and Industry.

Hon. Mr Tonio Fenech, Minister of Finance, the Economy, and Investment will deliver the closing address to this conference.

The full day conference will provide all delegates present for this event with comprehensive information, the opportunity to participate in the debate sessions and to network with colleagues and peers from within the industry.

This event is of interest to senior executives within the financial services industry, policy makers and regulators in this field. Students are also encouraged to attend at a subsidized fee. Further detail is available on the ebrochure which may be downloaded from the FinanceMalta website: www.financemalta.org

14 May 2009

Bank Secrecy, Tax Havens and International Tax Competition

There is a growing perception in Washington, DC, that the U.S. corporate tax base may be eroding due to either the bank secrecy of "tax havens" or the so-called tax loopholes that are said to "encourage American businesses to shift jobs overseas."

Indeed, Congress recently held hearings to consider ways to modify bank secrecy rules so that taxpayers won't easily avoid paying tax by sheltering overseas income in low-tax countries. Meanwhile, President Obama's FY 2010 budget submission promises to raise more than $200 billion in new tax revenues from U.S. companies by restricting their ability to defer paying taxes on profits earned abroad and by modifying their ability to allocate various business expenses between U.S. and foreign subsidiaries.

Clearly, the U.S. government should demand that taxpayers follow the law and pay legally owed taxes. But lawmakers need to be careful not to confuse the act of wrongful tax evasion with the effects of global tax competition. U.S.-based firms are already at a competitive tax disadvantage compared to firms based in other major trading nations. Confusing tax evasion with tax competition could lead to policy changes that put the U.S. economy at an even greater competitive disadvantage.

While some lawmakers, such as Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel, have given a nod to the notion of cutting the corporate tax rate, the changes to the international tax rules proposed by the Administration would actually undermine the benefits of lower rates and make U.S. firms and employees less competitive abroad.

OECD countries such as Ireland, Poland, the Slovak Republic, and Switzerland have enjoyed an influx of foreign capital and investment not because they are "tax havens" but because they have dramatically lower corporate tax rates than the United States, France, Germany, Great Britain and Japan. Until these high-tax countries lower their corporate tax rates, they will continue to lose ground—investment and jobs—to lower tax competitors.

An increasing amount of economic evidence suggests that dramatically cutting the U.S. corporate tax rate while maintaining the current system of deferral (or, perhaps, moving in the direction of a territorial tax system) would make U.S. firms more competitive abroad while improving the wages and living standards of U.S. workers at home. This paper explains why the effects of global tax competition should not be confused with "harmful tax practices" or tax evasion, and how far out of step the U.S. corporate tax system—both the rates and international tax structure—has become in comparison to most other developed nations.

Jersey Finance Appoints Representative in Greater China

Jersey Finance has appointed Shanghai born, Zhaoan Li, to help promote Jersey’s Financial Services Industry in China and Hong Kong.

Zhaoan Li will promote Jersey to leading intermediaries, investors, regulators and other influential bodies in the finance and business communities in Shanghai, Beijing and Hong Kong.

Her career in financial services spans 13 years and has included sales, marketing and management roles for leading international banks such as UBS Investment Bank, Commerzbank and Bank of Boston in London, Hong Kong and Shanghai. Most recently, she worked for two and half years at BMO Capital Markets in London where she was responsible for fixed income sales working with institutional clients in both China and Hong Kong. In her new role as Head of Greater China Business Development for Jersey Finance, she will be based in Hong Kong and travel regularly to other locations in the region. She is fluent in both Mandarin and English.

Geoff Cook, chief executive, Jersey Finance Limited, commented :

Zhaoan Li’s appointment will help spearhead our increasing drive to win business in Asia and I am delighted to welcome her to the team. Zhaoan will help to co-ordinate visits and will alert the Industry to regional developments relevant to business opportunities. She will liaise with government, trade and regulatory bodies in Beijing, Shanghai and Hong Kong and she will progress specific issues which might bring new business to the Island, such as the listing of Jersey companies on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange. Having a representative on the ground is a valuable addition to our business development strategy in the region.

Jersey Finance Launch Web Based Tv Programmes

Jersey Finance has launched a new online television facility which includes programmes and features about the Finance Industry which are available for anyone to view at http://www.jerseyfinance.tv/

Included in the launch menu is a programme that examines the issue of regulatory transparency alongside client privacy featuring interviews with Jersey regulators and Industry professionals. There is a programme about the details of the new foundation vehicle which is explained through a panel discussion with three leading Jersey lawyers, and another on the US Stop Tax Haven Abuse Bill and the review of Crown Dependencies. There are further short programmes about the benefits of doing business in Jersey and the role of Jersey Finance, footage from some of the Jersey Finance hosted events and there is a separate section discussing career options for those seeking work in the Industry.

Geoff Cook, chief executive, Jersey Finance Limited, commented :

It is important to use the available channels of communication as effectively as possible in order to convey facts and information about the industry and so we are delighted to be launching our own television facility online. We intend to make the service as relevant as possible to finance and legal professionals that might use, or are considering, using Jersey by providing timely and topical content. It will serve as another important platform in which we can explain Jersey’s role as an international finance centre.

The individual programmes can be viewed repeatedly and downloaded by visitors to the site. It will also be possible for registered users to receive e mail updates so viewers can keep up to date with the latest material. The Industry Members of Jersey Finance will have the option to upload their own material in order to promote their business to the wide international audience this platform will reach.

13 May 2009

Global Intellectual Property Index 2009

With the value of many tangible assets, in particular real estate, falling in the current economic climate, there's a growing appreciation by businesses of the significant value of their intellectual property (IP) assets. These include various forms of creative output: inventions, know-how, information, copyright, brand names, designs and other intangibles. Many businesses now recognise that their success in this climate depends largely on how carefully they protect, defend and exploit their IP to establish and secure their competitive edge.

It is within this context that European law firm Taylor Wessing has today launched its second Global Intellectual Property Index (GIPI 2). This provides the most objective assessment to date on how jurisdictions are viewed in terms of ‘IP competitiveness’. In GIPI 1, jurisdictions were rated as places in which to obtain, exploit, enforce and attack the main types of IP: trademarks, patents and copyright. GIPI 2 updates this and adds ratings for domain names and design rights. The methodology combines a worldwide survey of experts (over 18,000 country assessments to date) with analysis of empirical data and a review of any recent material changes at a local level.

The overall results (covering all IP rights) are best understood by considering country groupings or ‘tiers’ of IP competitiveness, based on their rating. The tiers for GIPI 2 are shown below:

The Tiers of IP Competitiveness

Tier 1
UK; Germany; USA;
Australia; Netherlands

Tier 2
Canada; Ireland; New Zealand; France; Singapore

Tier 3
Japan; Israel; Spain;
South Africa; South Korea

Tier 4
Mexico; UAE; Italy

Tier 5
Turkey; Poland; Russia;
Brazil; India; China


Key findings

UK and Germany leaders in all areas of IP – they are the only two jurisdictions which are ranked in the top tier for every area of IP assessed.Australia and Netherlands elevated to top tier – they join the GIPI 1 leaders of the UK, USA and Germany. Generally upwards trend in ratings – indicating greater satisfaction with the IP regimes, especially evident amongst those lower in the rankings, save that the USA scored less well overall.Russia and Mexico on the up – the former is now leading the BRIC group of countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China) with the strongest score gain of any country in the patent index; and significant climbs in both the trade mark and copyright rankings. Mexico also made good gains and was especially favoured for cost-effectiveness of enforcement.Canada's copyright setback – whilst it gained a little in overall rating and remained unchanged in rank and tier, Canada's fall in copyright rating and rank was the biggest for any sub-index.UK 2nd for copyright, contradicting its recent consumer survey result of "worst" in world – the UK only lost out to 1st placed USA by a narrow margin on copyright. The consumer survey was a measure only of the "fair use" defences available, whereas the GIPI is a much broader measure. It suggests the UK has got the balance between owner and user interests about right. Key themes

The increasing importance of IP – 60% of the survey's respondents said that the time their organisation spends dealing with IP has increased over the past three years. This figure was a slight drop on the GIPI 1 figure, perhaps reflecting marginal cuts (but not slashes) in some IP budgets. Only 3% said they spend less time on IP than previously.Even in today's climate, cost not determinative - despite the pressures of the current economic climate, cost-effectiveness is not a determining factor in IP competitiveness. Jurisdictions with a perceived high cost of obtaining and enforcing IP, for example the UK and USA, are still ranked highly in the overall index. Catering for the online trading environment – there is heightened awareness of the risks and opportunities posed by the digital market, user generated content and Internet trading generally. The ability of a jurisdiction's legislation to adapt and address these issues clearly affects its rating and rank. Respondents also see the cooperation from responsible Internet service providers as key.Lack of European harmonisation - with Poland now featuring in the bottom tier, there is a an even wider spread of rating, rank and tier within the EU market than in GIPI 1. Is harmonisation going backwards? Roland Mallinson, IP Partner at Taylor Wessing LLP, comments:

"As businesses see real value in their IP and that of competitors, they are still prepared, notwithstanding the global recession, to spend the time and money needed to protect their own IP and manage the risk of infringing other's IP. The opportunities and risks presented by the Internet have especially sharpened people's focus on IP. Respondents' ratings on cost effectiveness alone consistently put Germany top. However, even mid-tier results on that for the UK and near-bottom tier for the USA did not materially change their overall GIPI rating and ranking. It means, for now at least, cost is not dictating the results.

The greater divergence within the EU is disappointing, given the years of harmonising legislation for some IP rights (with the stark exception of patents). This is not just an issue of legislation but operation of the laws in practice, including some sort of centralised court system. Technology-led small and medium enterprises need this in particular. The European Commission's revived interest in providing a harmonised patent system is good news for them, but this has been looked at for 30 years. I would like to say the next GIPI will see greater consistency across the EU but I doubt that is imminent."

To see a detailed breakdown of the IP Index including rankings for each of the 24 jurisdictions in regard to specific Trade Mark, Patent, Copyright, Design and Domain Name Indices, country analysis and commentary on the findings, rationale, implications, and the methodology, please visit
http://taylorwessing.com/ipindex

12 May 2009

Standard & Poor’s Publishes Islamic Finance Outlook 2009

Standard & Poor’s today announced the release of Islamic Finance Outlook 2009, its latest annual compendium of topical research and commentaries on Islamic finance. The new yearbook includes Standard & Poor’s latest analysis and rating methodologies on almost 40 rated Islamic debt issues and issuers, and an overview of its suite of global benchmark and investable Sharia indices.

While total global sukuk issuance more than halved to $14.9 billion in 2008 from $34 billion in the previous year, Standard & Poor’s believes the outlook for Islamic finance remains strong. Sharia-compliant assets now total about $700 billion after growth exceeding 10% annually during the past decade.

“The sukuk market suffered heavily in 2008 but we believe the outlook for asset-backed sukuk is positive, despite the doubts raised by the disruption in global financial markets and in structured finance,” said Mohamed Damak, credit analyst at Standard & Poor’s Ratings Services. “When economies begin pulling out of the downturn, we expect Islamic finance to resume its rapid growth. The long-term pipeline for sukuk issuance is healthy, and the market is attracting interest from an increasing number of issuers in both Muslim and non-Muslim countries.”

Mr Damak said Islamic financial institutions have remained somewhat insulated from the global financial downturn because Sharia law strictly prohibits them from handling interest-based instruments. The knock-on effects of the current economic slowdown, however, are pressuring Islamic financial institutions and creating new obstacles for their development.
“We see specific sources of risk stemming from the deepening economic slowdown in many countries, scarce liquidity, pronounced stock market declines, and plummeting real estate prices,” Mr Damak added. “Standard & Poor’s has taken some negative rating actions on some Islamic banks over the past six months to reflect these adverse changes.”

Standard & Poor’s continues to widen its coverage of Islamic finance and issued several new ratings on sukuk transactions and takaful companies during 2008, including Tabreed 08 Financing Corp (National Central Colling Co PJSC) and the three tranches of a sukuk issued by Sun Finance Ltd. (Sorouh Abu Dhabi Real Estate LLC).

“Standard & Poor’s continues to foresee a bright future for Islamic finance and is committed to supporting its expansion by providing objective and independent opinions and benchmarks for Islamic issuers and investors,” said Jan Willem Plantagie, Middle East Regional Manager at Standard & Poor’s. “Through our knowledge of Islamic finance and its key players, we consistently aim to share objective and accurate insights in this developing realm of global finance for the benefit of all investors.”

Download the full copy of the S&P Islamic Finance 2009

Global Investment Promotion Benchmarking 2009

A new report by IFC, a member of the World Bank Group, finds that over 70 percent of government investment-promotion intermediaries miss out on investment and job-creating opportunities by failing to provide accurate and timely information to potential investors.

Global Investment Promotion Benchmarking 2009 shows how effectively government agencies are promoting their countries to foreign investors. The report, jointly produced by IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank, examines the ability of 181 countries to influence foreign investors’ site-selection process.

It assesses the response of these agencies to two potential projects—a software developer and a beverage-manufacturing company seeking to expand operations in each country. According to the report, only 10 out of 181 countries followed up with potential investors to secure projects.

“If country information is hard to obtain, investors will simply go elsewhere,” said Cecilia Sager, a manager for the World Bank Group’s Investment Climate Advisory Services. She also noted that in the global slowdown, foreign direct investment offers prospects for growth and employment. Attracting investment, however, requires professional facilitation which, unfortunately, many countries do not provide.

The report shows that professional facilitation efforts do pay off. For example, Sitel, a global leader in business service outsourcing, contacted PRONicaragua to request information during the site-selection process. PRONicaragua provided detailed information packages that helped Sitel choose Nicaragua for its $5 million investment project, which created 1,000 jobs.

The Austrian Business Agency emerged as number one worldwide, based on the report’s rankings. Middle-income countries are showing immense progress in competing for mobile investment, particularly Brazil, Botswana, Colombia, Lithuania, and Turkey. Lower-income countries like Honduras and Sri Lanka, which offer strong facilitation services, are evidence that a country’s income is not linked to performance.

The Global Investment Promotion Benchmarking 2009 report is the second in a series that covers the effectiveness of government agencies in facilitating foreign investment projects. It uses a methodology originally piloted by the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency. This initiative is led by the Investment Climate Advisory Service, which is jointly funded by IFC, MIGA, and the World Bank.

Download Full Report

07 May 2009

Bahrain moves forward to strengthen tax information exchange provisions

A protocol to the existing Bahrain-France Convention for the Avoidance of Double Taxation was signed today in Paris. The aim of the protocol is to ensure that the existing convention complies with the OECD standard on exchange of information.

The protocol amends the 1993 convention by inserting a new article which allows the competent authorities in Bahrain and France to exchange tax information in accordance with the OECD standard.

Bahrain already has conventions with three other OECD countries that meet the OECD standard including an agreement signed yesterday with Luxembourg. Negotiations are also underway with other countries.

FSA calls for more effective governance and risk management at firms

Financial companies need to create board-level governance structures that allow for challenge without creating conflict, Hector Sants, chief executive of the Financial Services Authority (FSA), said today in a speech to the Securities and Investment Institute.

Sants outlined the changes being made in the regulator’s approach to judging the competence of firms’ senior management as well as their probity.

He said the crisis had demonstrated that “albeit with the benefit of hindsight, there are some management decisions that have revealed a degree of incompetence, and at times a rather cavalier approach regarding risk management. The necessary challenge was missing from governance structures, in particular boards, and there may well be questions that can reasonably be asked about the openness and thus, arguably, the integrity of firms dealings with regulators, shareholders and their customers.”

But he added, “the structure of governance in financial companies does not need radical overhaul. The attitudes and competence of the individuals who conduct that governance does. In particular we need to create governance that fosters challenge without creating conflict. The effectiveness of governance is the key issue and addressing this challenge is the responsibility of all of us, not just regulators and boards.”

He stressed, however, that “this by no means weakens our fundamental view that firms’ senior management carry primary responsibility for their actions and their resulting consequences.”

The FSA is not seeking to establish non-executive directors as a competing governance mechanism against the executive. It is about making both much more effective. The FSA therefore, continues to support the ‘unitary board’ model but, as Sants said “it must be recognised that such a structure runs the risk of encouraging the herd instinct both in the sense of encouraging ‘follow the leader’ behaviour and in the sense of the reluctance to ‘break away from the pack’ and express an independent view.”

As part of the Significant Influence Function ("SIF") review, the FSA has introduced interviews for candidates for a number of the key functions in an authorised firm. The presumption is that any application submitted by a high impact firm for the roles of Chair, CEO, Finance Director or CRO/Risk Director will result in an interview. Other SIF candidates may also be interviewed at the supervisor’s discretion.

In the first six months of the enhanced approval process, 51 SIF interviews were carried out. In a number of cases applications were or are being refused as the FSA was not satisfied the candidates had demonstrated fitness and propriety. The FSA published a Consultation Paper (CP08/25) in December 2008 which outlines a number of proposed changes to significant influence controlled functions under the approved person regime. The FSA expects to publish a further statement on this alongside the Sir David Walker’s Review of governance.

Full version of the speech


Report sets out vision for UK financial services sector

A reformed financial services sector will play an important role in Britain’s economic recovery, according to a report published today by the Financial Services Global Competitiveness Group, co-chaired by the Chancellor Alistair Darling and former Citi Chairman Sir Win Bischoff.

The report, which reflects the view of the UK’s financial services leaders, states that the UK’s financial services sector can continue to be a world leader by working as a genuine partner of British business and emerging economies while embracing the need for global regulatory reform.

The Group was tasked in June 2008 with examining the medium to long-term challenges to London’s continued success in global financial markets. Working against the backdrop of the most severe financial crisis in generations, the Group has proposed a ten to fifteen year framework for strengthening the UK’s place in the rapidly changing global financial services industry.

The report highlights the contribution of regional financial centres, noting that the majority of financial sector jobs are based outside the City of London, providing employment for hundreds of thousands of workers in regional economies. It also argues that the UK-based industry must seize opportunities to help meet the financial services needs of businesses and citizens in emerging markets, such as China.

The Group acknowledges the huge fiscal costs of the banking crisis to the global economy, taxpayers and public finances, and strongly argues that effective regulation – with the UK taking a leading role in formulating global and European standards – will be the most important determinant of the sector’s future success.

Alongside regulation, the Report also highlights the importance of maintaining effective long-term performance in areas such as the UK’s skills base, tax environment, innovation and promotional efforts to ensure that the financial services sector is well positioned to play a role in meeting the future economic opportunities of the UK and global economy.

Speaking ahead of the Report’s formal launch at the London School of Economics, Alistair Darling said:

“Next month, we will publish proposals for strengthening the regulation of the financial services industry. Building on that we need to plan for the future. Britain has been a world leader in banking for centuries. Financial services will always be an important part of our own economy, and not just in London. We will all gain from a strong and competitive financial services sector that helps to meet important needs like small business financing, clean energy infrastructure and investment for retirement. And we will also gain from a strengthened financial services sector throughout the world.”

Sir Win Bischoff said:

"International financial services are not a zero sum game: progress in one country need not come at the expense of another. It is strongly in the UK's interest to build on its existing relationships with capital markets around the world, especially in the emerging economies. The timing is right as the financial landscape is changing around the world and we must make sure that world-class centres like London participate and benefit from this trend."

The report can be found on the Treasury’s website:

06 May 2009

AIMA Publishes First Global Sound Practices Guide for Funds of Hedge Funds Managers

The Alternative Investment Management Association (AIMA) – the global hedge fund industry association - has published the world’s first global Guide to Sound Practices for Funds of Hedge Funds Managers.

The guide was developed by some of the world’s leading funds of hedge funds practitioners. It focuses on areas including risk management, due diligence, disclosure to investors, valuation, management of conflicts of interest and other operational issues.

It will be a practical business tool for funds of hedge funds managers and will also seek to provide relevant and insightful information for investors, regulators and policy makers, and the hedge fund industry’s service providers.

The guide was produced by a steering group of leading funds of hedge funds managers. The group consisted of Unigestion, Financial Risk Management; Man Investments; Fauchier Partners; Pacific Alternative Asset Management; Ivy Asset Management; HDF Finance; Penjing Asset Management and Simmons & Simmons.

Andrew Baker, CEO of AIMA, and a member of the steering group, commented, “AIMA has produced a huge body of work on sound practices and this was the ‘missing book in the library’. It is particularly important given recent events that there should be dedicated guidelines for funds of hedge funds managers. Funds of funds are a critical sector in the industry, are of particular interest to institutional investors, and it is right that AIMA has taken the lead in documenting sound practices. We hope that these guidelines that have been drawn up by such a distinguished and experienced group will be widely observed within the industry.”

The Guide to Sound Practices for Funds of Hedge Funds Managers will expand AIMA’s substantial, international body of work developed over the last 10 years including guidelines on Managers; Valuation; Administration; Governance; Business Continuity; Due Diligence for Managers and Service Providers; Anti-Money Laundering; and Industry Certification [in conjunction with the Chartered Alternative Investment Analyst (CAIA)].

Ogier Global Investment Funds Updater

This first edition of the Ogier Global Investment Funds Updater is an in-depth look at some of the issues surrounding the global funds industry. We consider a number of international initiatives that will affect the offshore financial centres as well as the alternative investment fund industry which are currently in play. These initiatives are varied, with multiple objectives and diverse potential implications and we look carefully at what these are and what the outcomes may be. On a related note, we also look at why investment managers may be interested in setting up offshore.

Liquidity has been a key issue for many funds in the wake of the credit crisis and we take a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction look at the mechanisms employed by funds to manage these issues, such as structural tools and the legal position of redeeming and redeemed investors.

Finally, as we are a combined legal and fiduciary services organisation, no Ogier updater would be complete without a contribution from our fiduciary colleagues and here they provide insight into fair value accounting for private equity funds.

Click here to download the Updater.

05 May 2009

Brazil has untapped opportunity for UK

A new report commissioned by the City of London Corporation finds that Brazil offers substantial opportunities for UK financial services firms. ‘The Challenges and Opportunities for Financial Services in Brazil’ assesses Brazil’s economic prospects, focusing on developments and threats in six key areas: banking and capital markets; consumer finance; insurance and reinsurance; energy infrastructure and project finance; agribusiness and biofuels.

The research, conducted by Trusted Sources, is published to coincide with a visit to Brazil and Argentina by a delegation led by the Lord Mayor of the City of London. It finds that whilst some short term risks exist as export flows and commodities remain vulnerable in the current crisis, Brazil is in an excellent position to emerge from the global recession earlier and stronger than many other countries. The report finds that despite its prominence on the global stage Brazil has not received the attention it deserves from UK companies. There is also evidence that Brazilian economic players consider that reinforcing London’s historical ties with Latin America, and with Brazil specifically, would bring substantial mutual benefits.

Lord Mayor of the City of London, Ian Luder said:

"This is the first report we have ever commissioned specifically into Brazil's economy as seen globally. It finds that the UK and Brazil have many areas of common interest where further collaboration could bring real benefits from commercial links, and we are well placed to develop these. Brazil is a global powerhouse that has seen and will see a rapid pace of development, so for the canny practitioner the opportunities are boundless.”
Brazil’s fiscal problems during the nineties generated a response by the Central Bank that laid the foundations for a banking sector which remains largely unaffected by the global financial crisis. Its banks have strong capitalisation and avoided heavy exposure to the toxic assets that have affected many banks globally.

The outlook for capital markets and consumer finance looks particularly promising due to the burgeoning middle class and demographic profile. The Brazilian middle class now accounts for a small majority of the population, up from around a third fifteen years ago, which has boosted sales of consumer goods and the rapid expansion of consumer credit. In addition, the proportion of the population under the age of 14 (27%) is high in comparison with the UK (17%) and should underpin the country’s economic growth, by keeping labour costs relatively low and encouraging innovation. But more importantly it will also fuel the ongoing development of Brazil’s consumer credit markets as 34 million people enter the workforce over the next decade. Retail banking expansion will be rapid, sustained by mortgage and consumer-durable financing and growing penetration of credit and debit cards.

Brazilian energy and infrastructure as well as new oil and gas discoveries require major new investments from global energy and financial firms in order to sustain continued economic growth. The experience of British firms with public private partnerships could prove invaluable in structuring these infrastructure projects and Brazilian banks, which have a limited presence today in the City of London, will be positioning themselves to facilitate the involvement of UK investors in projects coming to market over the next decade.

The Brazilian insurance industry has expanded rapidly over the past decade and looks set to continue. The domestic industry is well capitalised and able to support growth in traditional product segments but development of large scale energy and infrastructure projects in the medium term will drive rapid growth in new insurance coverage. They will require the sophisticated insurance and reinsurance solutions that UK firms are competitively well-positioned to offer.

With Brazil strengthening its lead as one of the world’s agricultural powerhouses agricultural producers have a growing interest in trade financing and M&A advisory services. It also has the largest, most successful ethanol industry in the world and hopes to become the Saudi Arabia of ethanol in the next decade, but producers are looking for capital injections and there is opportunity to acquire valuable assets at distressed prices. The development of liquid ethanol futures is another important innovation that sooner or later will have to happen.

Lord Mayor of the City of London, Ian Luder said:

"City of London institutions need to listen to what their potential Brazilian partners have to contribute. They are justly proud of their country’s economic and political achievements in the past decade and want their voice to be heard, both at home and increasingly on the global scene.”

Activity in Financial Markets Drops but London Maintains Lead in Many International Markets

• London maintains leading share in many international markets but loses share in IPOs
• All 12 financial services indicators decline in year up to first quarter of 2009
• UK trade surplus in financial services rises to record £43bn in 2008
• Global investment banking fee revenue down 30 per cent to $59bn

Global share of UK financial services Despite a drop in activity in financial markets over the past year, London has maintained a leading share of international trading in many markets according to the six-monthly International Financial Markets in the UK report by International Financial Services London (IFSL), the independent organisation promoting UK financial services worldwide. London had a 35 per cent share of global foreign exchange trading in 2008, 18 per cent of international bank lending, 18 per cent of hedge fund assets and 29 per cent of international debt securities issuance. Its share of foreign equities turnover and IPOs however halved to 22 per cent and 8 per cent respectively.

Financial markets activity IFSL’s latest City Indicators Bulletin found that there was a further general downturn in financial markets activity in the first quarter of 2009 with all 12 indicators declining year on year. Nine out of 12 indicators were also down between Q4 2008 and Q1 2009. Of the three indicators that rose: UK bank lending to non-financial private sector was up slightly; the value of turnover at Liffe recovered following three successive quarterly declines; and UK mergers continued to show some recovery.

In Q1 2009 the job market saw a large gap of 11,000 between the number of new candidates and new City job vacancies available. “City-type employment” in London declined by 29,000 in 2008. The CBI’s quarterly survey found that although the volume of business in financial services continued to decline in the first quarter, the pace of decline is expected to ease in the second quarter.

A marked downturn in business is being seen in markets directly affected by the credit crunch such as banking, hedge funds and securitisation. Other sectors and markets such as securities markets, insurance and legal services, are facing a fall in business that might be expected during a downturn in the business cycle. In securities markets, for example, the fall in mergers and acquisitions and flotations has contributed to a decline of a third in global investment banking fee revenue to $59bn in the 2008.

Recently published data for 2008 points to more robust activity in other areas. For example, the UK trade surplus in financial services rose 16% to a record £43bn in 2008. This was probably underpinned by growth in banks’ spread earnings from foreign exchange, derivatives and securities transactions. Separate data on foreign exchange trading also points to a buoyant market during 2008.

Sir Stephen Wright, Chief Executive at IFSL, said: “The crisis in global credit markets and the falls in asset values and international trade are hitting UK financial services. But our sector is still very much in business, many of our member firms have as much work as ever, and overall the sector will recover in time. Major emerging markets are still enjoying enviable rates of growth, especially in East Asia, India and the Gulf region, and UK business partners and advisers are still very much sought after to help them develop their potential.”

Conyers named Offshore Law Firm of the Year for legal work in Asia

In a double win, Conyers Dill & Pearman (“Conyers”) scooped awards for Offshore Law Firm of the Year and Debt Market Deal of the Year at the ALB China Law Awards, which were held on April 24, 2009 in Shanghai’s Westin Bund Centre.

The ALB China Offshore Law Firm of the Year Award is presented annually to the firm which has consistently delivered excellent legal work in China. Since its expansion into Asia over two decades ago, Conyers has long been a conduit for international business growth and financing across the Asian region through its offices in Hong Kong and Singapore.

Conyers’ provision of Cayman Islands legal advice has been a key factor in this growth, as the appetite for Cayman Islands vehicles continues apace in the Asian markets. Cayman Islands companies have long been the vehicle of choice both for Asian investors entering the US market and for foreign direct investment into Asia. Asian investors making IPOs via the HKSE or Nasdaq often use Cayman Islands companies. The British Virgin Islands, Bermuda and Mauritius are also domiciles of choice for the Asian market, and Conyers’ expertise in the laws of these jurisdictions complements its Cayman Islands capabilities.

Conyers also received the Debt Market Deal of the Year Award for its role in the Country Garden Convertible Bond Offering. Other firms involved were Commerce & Finance, Jingtian & Gongcheng, Linklaters and Sidley Austin.

Lilian Woo, partner in Conyers’ Hong Kong office, commented: “These awards are a great recognition of our commitment to providing exemplary service to our clients and of the strength of our team. Over the past year we have worked with clients in the ever-growing PRC markets who are looking to become more familiar with offshore concepts and issues. We look forward to continued service to clients in the region, providing responsive, timely and thorough advice on the key jurisdictions of the Cayman Islands, British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, and Mauritius.”

04 May 2009

Curbing Tax Havens

There is no higher economic priority for President Obama than creating new, well-paying jobs in the United States. Yet today, our tax code actually provides a competitive advantage to companies that invest and create jobs overseas compared to those that invest and create those same jobs in the U.S. In addition, our tax system is rife with opportunities to evade and avoid taxes through offshore tax havens:

--In 2004, the most recent year for which data is available, U.S. multinational corporations paid about $16 billion of U.S. tax on approximately $700 billion of foreign active earnings--an effective U.S. tax rate of about 2.3%.
--A January 2009 GAO report found that of the 100 largest U.S. corporations, 83 have subsidiaries in tax havens.
--In the Cayman Islands, one address alone houses 18,857 corporations, very few of which have a physical presence in the islands.
--Nearly one-third of all foreign profits reported by U.S. corporations in 2003 came from just three small, low-tax countries: Bermuda, the Netherlands, and Ireland.

Leveling the Playing Field: Curbing Tax Havens and Removing Tax Incentives For Shifting Jobs Overseas
1) Replacing Tax Advantages for Creating Jobs Overseas With Incentives to Create Them at Home
• Reforming Deferral Rules to Curb A Tax Advantage for Investing and Reinvesting Overseas
• Closing Foreign Tax Credit Loopholes
• Using Savings To Make Permanent The Tax Credit for Investing in Research and Experimentation at Home
2) Getting Tough on Overseas Tax Havens
• Eliminating Loopholes for "Disappearing" Offshore Subsidiaries
• Cracking Down on the Abuse of Tax Havens by Individuals
• Devoting New Resources for IRS Enforcement to Help Close the International Tax Gap

Today, President Obama and Secretary Geithner are unveiling two components of the Administration's plan to reform our international tax laws and improve their enforcement. First, they are calling for reforms to ensure that our tax code does not stack the deck against job creation here on our shores. Second, they seek to reduce the amount of taxes lost to tax havens--either through unintended loopholes that allow companies to legally avoid paying billions in taxes, or through the illegal use of hidden accounts by well-off individuals. Combined with further international tax reforms that will be unveiled in the Administration's full budget later in May, these initiatives would raise $210 billion over the next 10 years. The Obama Administration hopes to build on proposals by Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus and House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel--as well as other leaders on this issue like Senator Carl Levin and Congressman Lloyd Doggett--to pass bipartisan legislation over the coming months.
1. Replacing Tax Advantages for Creating Jobs Overseas With Incentives to Create Them at Home:The Administration would raise $103.1 billion by removing tax advantages for investing overseas, and would use a portion of those resources to make permanent a tax credit for investment in research and innovation within the United States.
Reforming Deferral Rules to Curb A Tax Advantage for Investing and Reinvesting Overseas:Currently, businesses that invest overseas can take immediate deductions on their U.S. tax returns for expenses supporting their overseas investments but nevertheless "defer" paying U.S. taxes on the profits they make from those investments. As a result, U.S. taxpayer dollars are used to provide a significant tax advantage to companies who invest overseas relative to those who invest and create jobs at home. The Obama Administration would reform the rules surrounding deferral so that--with the exception of research and experimentation expenses--companies cannot receive deductions on their U.S. tax returns supporting their offshore investments until they pay taxes on their offshore profits. This provision would take effect in 2011, raising $60.1 billion from 2011 to 2019.
Closing Foreign Tax Credit Loopholes: Current law allows U.S. businesses that pay foreign taxes on overseas profits to claim a credit against their U.S. taxes for the foreign taxes paid. Some U.S. businesses use loopholes to artificially inflate or accelerate these credits. The Administration would close these loopholes, raising $43.0 billion from 2011 to 2019.
Using Savings from Ending Unfair Overseas Tax Breaks to Permanently Extend the Research and Experimentation Tax Credit for Investment in the United States:The Research and Experimentation Tax Credit--which provides an incentive for businesses to invest in innovation in the United States--is currently set to expire at the end of 2009. To provide businesses with the certainty they need to make long-term investments in research and innovation, the Administration proposes making the R&E tax credit permanent, providing a tax cut of $74.5 billion over 10 years to businesses that invest in the United States.
2. Getting Tough on Overseas Tax Havens: The Administration's proposal would raise a total of $95.2 billion over the next 10 years through efforts to get tough on overseas tax havens by:
Eliminating Loopholes for "Disappearing" Offshore Subsidiaries: Traditionally, U.S. companies have been required to report certain income shifted from one foreign subsidiary to another as passive income subject to U.S. tax. But over the past decade, so-called "check-the-box" rules have allowed companies to make their foreign subsidiaries "disappear" for tax purposes--permitting them to legally shift income to tax havens and make the taxes they owe the United States disappear as well. The Obama administration proposes to reform these rules to require certain foreign subsidiaries to be considered as separate corporations for U.S. tax purposes. This provision would take effect in 2011, raising $86.5 billion from 2011 to 2019.
Cracking Down on the Abuse of Tax Havens by Individuals: Currently, wealthy Americans can evade paying taxes by hiding their money in offshore accounts with little fear that either the financial institution or the country that houses their money will report them to the IRS. In addition to initiatives taken within the G-20 to impose sanctions on countries judged by their peers not to be adequately implementing information exchange standards, the Obama Administration proposes a comprehensive package of disclosure and enforcement measures to make it more difficult for financial institutions and wealthy individuals to evade taxes. The Administration conservatively estimates this package would raise $8.7 billion over 10 years by:
-- Withholding Taxes From Accounts At Institutions That Don't Share Information With The United States: This proposal requires foreign financial institutions that have dealings with the United States to sign an agreement with the IRS to become a "Qualified Intermediary" and share as much information about their U.S. customers as U.S. financial institutions do, or else face the presumption that they may be facilitating tax evasion and have taxes withheld on payments to their customers. In addition, it would shut down loopholes that allow QIs to claim they are complying with the law even as they help wealthy U.S. citizens avoid paying their fair share of taxes.
--Shifting the Burden of Proof and Increasing Penalties for Well-Off Individuals Who Seek to Abuse Tax Havens: In addition, the Obama Administration proposes tightening the reporting standards for overseas investments, increasing penalties and imposing negative presumptions on individuals who fail to report foreign accounts, and extending the statute of limitations for enforcement.
Devoting New Resources for IRS Enforcement to Help Close the International Tax Gap: As part of the Obama Administration's budget, the IRS will hire nearly 800 new employees devoted to international enforcement, increasing its ability to crack down on offshore tax avoidance.
Leveling the Playing Field: Removing Tax Incentives For Moving Jobs Overseas and Curbing Tax Havens
Backgrounder
I. Replacing Tax Advantages to Create Jobs Overseas with Incentives to Create Jobs at Home
As the first plank of its international tax reform package, the Obama Administration intends to repeal the ability of American companies to take deductions against their U.S. taxable income for expenses supporting profits in low-tax jurisdictions on which they defer paying taxes on for years and perhaps indefinitely. Combined with closing loopholes in the foreign tax credit program, the revenues saved will be used to make permanent the tax credit for research and experimentation in the United States. This will be accomplished through:
1. Reforming Deferral Rules to Curb A Tax Advantage for Investing and Reinvesting Overseas
Current Law
Companies Can Defer Paying Taxes on Overseas Profits Until Later, While Taking Tax Deductions on Their Foreign Expenses Now:Currently, a company that invests in America has to pay immediate U.S. taxes on its profits from that investment. But if the company instead invests and creates jobs overseas through a foreign subsidiary, it does not have to pay U.S. taxes on its overseas profits until those profits are brought back to the United States, if they ever are. Yet even though companies do not have to pay U.S. taxes on their overseas profits today, they still get to take deductions today on their U.S. tax returns for all of the expenses that support their overseas investment.
Deferral Rules Use U.S. Taxpayer Dollars to Create A Tax Advantage for Companies That Invest Abroad:As a result, this preferential treatment uses U.S. taxpayer dollars to provide companies with an incentive to invest overseas, giving them a tax advantage over competitors who make the same investments to create jobs in the United States.
Example Under Current Law:
• Suppose that two U.S. companies decided to borrow to invest in a new factory. Company A invests that money to build its plant in the U.S., while Company B invests overseas in a jurisdiction with a tax rate of only 10 percent.
• Company A will be able to deduct its interest expense, reducing its overall U.S. tax liability by 35 cents for every dollar it pays in interest. But it will also pay a 35 percent tax rate on its corporate profits.
• Company B will also be able to deduct its interest expense from its U.S. tax liabilities at a 35 percent rate. But it will only face a tax of 10 percent on its profits.
• Thus, our current tax code uses U.S. taxpayer dollars to put companies that invest in the United States at a competitive advantage with companies who invest overseas.
The Administration's Proposal
Level the Playing Field:The Administration's commonsense proposal, similar to an earlier measure proposed by House Ways and Means Chairman Charles Rangel, would level the playing field by requiring a company to defer any deductions--such as for interest expenses associated with untaxed overseas investment--until the company repatriates its earnings back home. In other words, companies would only be able to take a deduction on their U.S. taxes for foreign expenses when they also pay taxes on their foreign profits in the United States. This proposal makes an exception for deductions for research and experimentation because of the positive spillover impacts of those investments on the U.S. economy.
Raise $60.1 Billion From 2011 to 2019: This proposal goes into effect in 2011, and would raise $60.1 billion between 2011 and 2019.
2. Closing Foreign Tax Credit Loopholes
Current Law
Companies Can Take Advantage Of Foreign Tax Credit Loopholes: When a U.S. taxpayer has overseas income, taxes paid to the foreign jurisdiction can generally be credited against U.S. tax liabilities. In general, this "foreign tax credit" is available only for taxes paid on income that is taxable in the U.S. The intended result is that U.S. taxpayers with overseas income should pay no more tax on their U.S. taxable income than they would if it was all from U.S. sources. However, current rules and tax planning strategies make it possible to claim foreign tax credits for taxes paid on foreign income that is not subject to current U.S. tax. As a result, companies are able to use such credits to pay less tax on their U.S. taxable income than they would if it was all from U.S. sources--providing them with a competitive advantage over companies that invest in the United States.
The Administration's Proposal
Reform the Foreign Tax Credit to Remove Unfair Tax Advantages for Overseas Investment: The Administration's proposal would take two steps to rein in foreign tax credit schemes. First, a taxpayer's foreign tax credit would be determined based on the amount of total foreign tax the taxpayer actually pays on its total foreign earnings. Second, a foreign tax credit would no longer be allowed for foreign taxes paid on income not subject to U.S. tax. These reforms would go into effect in 2011, raising $43.0 billion from 2011 to 2019.
3. Making R&E Tax Credit Permanent to Encourage Investment in Innovation in the United States:The resources saved by curbing tax incentives for jobs overseas and limiting losses to tax havens would be used to strengthen incentives to invest in jobs in the United States by making permanent the R&E tax credit.
Current Law
R&E Credit Is Set to Expire At End of 2009: Under current law, companies are eligible for a tax credit equal to 20 percent of qualified research expenses above a base amount. But the research and experimentation tax credit has never been made permanent--instead, it has been extended on a temporary basis 13 times since it was first created in 1981--and is set to expire on December 31, 2009.
How It Works
• Through the research and experimentation tax credit, companies receive a credit valued at 20 percent of qualified research expenses in the United States above a base amount. Taxpayers can also elect to take an alternative simplified research credit that provides an incentive for increasing research expenses above the level of the previous three years. Taxpayers may also take a credit based on spending on basic research and certain energy research.
• Any uncertainty about whether the R&E credit will be extended reduces its effectiveness in stimulating investments in new innovation, as it becomes more difficult for taxpayers to factor the credit into decisions to invest in research projects that will not be initiated or completed prior to the credit's expiration.
The Administration's Proposal
Create Certainty to Encourage New Investment and Innovation at Home By Making the Research and Experimentation Tax Credit Permanent: To give companies the certainty they need to make long-term research and experimentation investment in the U.S., the Administration's budget includes the full cost of making the R&E credit permanent in future years. By making this tax credit permanent, businesses would be provided with the greater confidence they need to initiate new research projects that will improve productivity, raise standards of living, and increase our competitiveness. And with over 75 percent of credit dollars attributed to wages, the credit would provide an important incentive for businesses to create new jobs.
Paid For With Provisions That Make the Tax Code More Efficient and Fair:This change would cost $74.5 billion over 10 years, which will be paid for by reforming the treatment of deferred income and the use of the foreign tax credit.
II. Getting Tough on Overseas Tax Havens
Some countries make it easy for U.S. taxpayers to evade or avoid U.S. taxes by withholding information about U.S.-held accounts or giving favorable tax treatment to shell corporations created just to avoid taxes. In certain cases, companies are taking advantage of currently legal loopholes to avoid paying taxes by shifting their profits to tax havens. In other cases, Americans break the law by hiding their income in hidden overseas accounts, and these tax havens refuse to provide the information the IRS needs to enforce U.S. law. Either way, these tax havens make our tax system less fair and harm the U.S. economy. President Obama proposes to address tax havens by:
1. Eliminating Loopholes that Allow "Disappearing" Offshore Subsidiaries: Current law allows U.S. businesses to establish foreign subsidiary corporations, but then to "check a box" to pretend that the subsidiaries do not exist for U.S. tax purposes. This practice allows taxes that would otherwise be paid in the U.S. on passive income to be avoided, at great cost to U.S. taxpayers.
Current Law
Disappearing Subsidiaries Allow Corporations to Shift Income Tax-Free:Traditionally, if a U.S. company sets up a foreign subsidiary in a tax haven and one in another country, income shifted between the two subsidiaries (for example, through interest on loans) would be considered "passive income" for the U.S. company and subject to U.S. tax. Over the last decade, so-called "check-the box" rules have allowed U.S. firms to make these subsidiaries disappear for U.S. tax purposes. With the separate subsidiaries disregarded, the firm can shift income among them without reporting any passive income or paying any U.S. tax. As a result, U.S. firms that invest overseas are able to shift their income to tax havens. It is clear that this loophole, while legal, has become a reason to shift billions of dollars in investments from the U.S. to other counties.
Example under Current Law
• Suppose that a U.S. company invests $10 million to build a new factory in Germany. At the same time, it sets up three new corporations. The first is a wholly owned Cayman Islands holding company. The second is a corporation in Germany, which is owned by the holding company and owns the factory. The third is a Cayman Islands subsidiary, also owned by the Cayman Islands holding company.
• The Cayman subsidiary makes a loan to the German subsidiary. The interest on the loan is income to the Cayman subsidiary and a deductible expense for the German subsidiary. In this way, income is shifted from higher-tax Germany to the no-tax Cayman Islands.
• Under traditional U.S. tax law, this income shift would count as passive income for the U.S. parent--which would have to pay taxes on it. But "check the box" rules allow the firm to make the two subsidiaries disappear--and the income shift with them. As a result, the firm is able to avoid both U.S. taxes and German taxes on its profits.
The Administration's Proposal
Require U.S. Businesses That Establish Certain Foreign Corporations To Treat Them As Corporations For U.S. Tax Purposes: The Administration's proposal seeks to abolish a range of tax-avoidance techniques by requiring U.S. businesses that establish certain corporations overseas to report them as corporations on their U.S. tax returns. As a result, U.S. firms that invest overseas would no longer be able to make their subsidiaries--or their income shifts to tax havens--disappear for tax purposes. This would level the playing field between firms that invest overseas and those that invest at home.
Raise $86.5 Billion from 2011 to 2019: This loophole would be closed beginning in 2011, raising $86.5 billion from 2011 to 2019.
2. Cracking Down on the Abuse of Tax Havens by Individuals: The IRS is already engaged in significant efforts to track down and collect taxes from individuals illegally hiding income overseas. But to fully follow through on this effort, it will need new legal authorities. Current law makes it difficult for the IRS to collect the information it needs to determine that the holder of a foreign bank account is a U.S. citizen evading taxation. The Obama administration proposes changes that will enhance information reporting, increase tax withholding, strengthen penalties, and shift the burden of proof to make it harder for foreign account-holders to evade U.S. taxes, while also providing the enforcement tools necessary to crack down on tax haven abuse.
Current Law
• A Free Ride for Financial Institutions that Flout Reporting Rules
: A centerpiece of the current U.S. regime to combat international tax evasion is the Qualified Intermediary (QI) program, under which financial institutions sign an agreement to share information about their U.S. customers with the IRS. Unfortunately, this regime, while effective, has become subject to abuse:
--At Non-Qualifying Institutions, Withholding Requirements Are Easy to Escape: Currently, an investor can escape withholding requirements by simply attesting to being a non-U.S. person. That leaves it to the IRS to show that the investor is actually a U.S. citizen evading the law.
--Loopholes Allow Qualifying Institutions to Still Serve as Conduits for Evasion: Moreover, financial institutions can qualify as QIs even if they are affiliated with non-QIs. As a result, a financial institution need not give up its business as a conduit for tax evasion in order to enjoy the benefits of being a QI. In addition, QIs are not currently required to report the foreign income of their U.S. customers, so U.S. customers may hide behind foreign entities to evade taxes through QIs.
--Legal Presumptions Favor Tax Evaders Who Conceal Transactions: U.S. investors overseas are required to file the Foreign Bank and Financial Account Report, or FBAR, disclosing ownership of financial accounts in a foreign country containing over $10,000. The FBAR is particularly important in the case of investors who employ non-QIs, because their transactions are less likely to be disclosed otherwise. Unfortunately, current rules make it difficult to catch those who are supposed to file the FBAR but do not. And even when the IRS has evidence that a U.S. taxpayer has a foreign account, legal presumptions currently favor the tax evader--without specific evidence that the U.S person has an account that requires an FBAR, the IRS cannot compel an investor to provide the report or impose penalties for the failure to do so. This specific evidence may be almost impossible for the IRS to get.
The IRS Lacks the Tools It Needs to Enforce International Tax Laws:In addition to the shortcomings of the QI program, current law features inadequate tools to crack down on wealthy taxpayers who evade taxation. Investors who withhold information about overseas investments face penalties limited to 20 percent of the amount of the understatement. The statute of limitations for enforcement is typically only three years--which is often too short a time period for the IRS to get the information it needs to determine whether a taxpayer with an offshore account paid the right amount of tax. And there are no requirements that U.S. individuals or third parties report transfers to and from foreign accounts, limiting the ability of the IRS to determine whether taxpayers are paying what they owe.
Example Under Current Law
• Through a U.S. broker, a U.S. account-holder at a non-qualified intermediary sells $50 million worth of securities.
• If the seller self-certifies that he is not a U.S. citizen and the non-qualified intermediary simply passes that information along to the U.S. broker, the broker may rely on that statement and does not need to withhold money from the transaction.
• As a result, a U.S. taxpayer who provides a false self-certification can easily avoid paying taxes, since the non-QI has not signed an agreement with the IRS, and the IRS may have limited tools to detect any wrongdoing.
Proposal
In addition to initiatives taken within the G-20 to impose sanctions on countries judged by their peers not to be adequately implementing information exchange standards, the Obama administration proposes to make it more difficult to shelter foreign investments from taxation by cracking down on financial institutions that enable and profit from international tax evasion. These measures--expected to raise $8.7 billion over 10 years--would:
Strengthen the "Qualified Intermediary" System to Crack Down on Tax Evaders:The core of the Obama Administration's proposals is a tough new stance on investors who use financial institutions that do not agree to be Qualifying Intermediaries. Under this proposal, the assumption will be that these institutions are facilitating tax evasion, and the burden of proof will be shifted to the institutions and their account-holders to prove they are not sheltering income from U.S. taxation. As a result, the Administration proposes to:
Impose Significant Tax Withholding On Transactions Involving Non-Qualifying Intermediaries:The Administration's plan would require U.S. financial institutions to withhold 20 percent to 30 percent of U.S. payments to individuals who use non-QIs. To get a refund for the amount withheld, investors must disclose their identities and demonstrate that they're obeying the law.
Create A Legal Presumption Against Users Of Non-Qualifying Intermediaries: The Administration's plan would create rebuttable evidentiary presumptions that any foreign bank, brokerage, or other financial account held by a U.S. citizen at a non-QI contains enough funds to require that an FBAR be filed, and that any failure to file an FBAR is willful if an account at a non-QI has a balance of greater than $200,000 at any point during the calendar year. These presumptions will make it easier for the IRS to demand information and pursue cases against international tax evaders. This shifting of legal presumptions is a key component of the anti-tax haven legislation long championed by Senator Carl Levin.
Limit QI Affiliations With Non-QIs: The Administration's plan would give the Treasury Department authority to issue regulations requiring that a financial institution may be a QI only if all commonly-controlled financial institutions are also QIs. As a result, financial firms couldn't benefit from siphoning business from their legitimate QI operations to illegitimate non-QI affiliates.
Provide the IRS With The Legal Tools Necessary to Prosecute International Tax Evasion: The Obama administration proposes to improve the ability of the IRS to successfully prosecute international tax evasion through the following steps:
Increase Penalties for Failing to Report Overseas Investments: The Administration's plan would double certain penalties when a taxpayer fails to make a required disclosure of foreign financial accounts.
Extend the Statute of Limitations for International Tax Enforcement: The Administration's plan would set the statute of limitations on international tax enforcement at six years after the taxpayer submits required information.
Tighten Lax Reporting Requirements: The Administration's plan would increase the reporting requirement on international investors and financial institutions, especially QIs. QIs would be required to report information on their U.S. customers to the same extent that U.S. financial intermediaries must. And U.S. customers at QIs would no longer be allowed to hide behind foreign entities. U.S. investors would be required to report transfers of money or property made to or from non-QI foreign financial institutions on their income tax returns. Financial institutions would face enhanced information reporting requirements for transactions that establish a foreign business entity or transfer assets to and from foreign financial accounts on behalf of U.S. individuals.
3. Hire Nearly 800 New IRS Staff to Increase International Enforcement: As part of the President's budget, the IRS would be provided with funds to support the hiring of nearly 800 new employees devoted specifically to international enforcement. The funding would allow the IRS to hire new agents, economists, lawyers and specialists, increasing the IRS' ability to crack down on offshore tax avoidance and evasion, including through transfer pricing and financial products and transactions such as purported securities loans. According to estimates by the IRS, every additional dollar invested in enforcement in recent years has yielded about four dollars in added tax revenues.

03 May 2009

Comprehensive ranking of the world's IP jurisdictions

New research has for the first time established a statistical ranking of 22 of the world's leading economies and trading nations in relation to protecting and enforcing intellectual property.

The Global Intellectual Property Index (GIPI), launched today by European law firm Taylor Wessing, presents a statistical comparison to date of how jurisdictions are viewed in terms of ‘IP competitiveness’. Jurisdictions are rated as places in which to obtain, exploit, enforce and attack the three main types of IP: trademarks, patents and copyright.

It is most useful to consider the results of the GIPI in terms of five groupings or ‘tiers’ of IP competitiveness. These groupings are shown below:

The Tiers of IP Competitiveness

Tier 1
UK, USA, Germany

Tier 2
Netherlands, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Singapore, France

Tier 3
Israel, Japan, Spain, South Africa, South Korea

Tier 4
Poland, Dubai (UAE), Italy, Mexico

Tier 5
India, Brazil, Russia, China

Key findings

Cost does not seem to be a major factor in the rankings – the jurisdictions where costs of obtaining and enforcing IP are high are generally towards the top of the GIPI rankings;The tier 1 jurisdictions - UK, USA and Germany perform strongly in all three areas of IP. The UK heads up both the trademark and patents index and is second in the copyright index. The USA leads the copyright index but is down in 6th place for trademarks. Germany is in the top three in all three indices. With the USA being in 6th place in the trademark index, the UK, Germany & the Netherlands are the only jurisdictions to appear in the top 5 in all indices.There is a wide variance in the ratings of European jurisdictions, despite the intended harmonisation of laws within the EU. The UK and Germany are tier 1 jurisdictions whereas Poland and Italy are in tier 4.Seven of the nine jurisdictions in tiers 1 and 2 of the GIPI have legal systems based on common law.The BRIC jurisdictions (Brazil, Russia, India, China) of developing countries form tier 5 of the GIPI. They are at the bottom of the list in all four indices and by a significant margin. China is bottom of each index although several questionnaire respondents noted that China has made significant strides in recent years at improving its IP protection systems. At present the perception of the effectiveness of those systems appears to be lagging and it remains to be seen whether China’s position improves going forward. Brazil, Russia and India are still seen as very poor jurisdictions in which to manage all forms of IP.The highest Asian jurisdiction is Singapore in tier 2. Singapore is rated significantly higher than the other Asian jurisdictions, with Japan and Korea in tier 3. Japan is the second Asian jurisdiction but is 50 points behind Singapore. China is in tier 5 and is more than 300 points away from the tier 1 jurisdictions.The size of a jurisdiction (measured by GDP) seems to have little effect on the ability to manage IP. Both large and small jurisdictions can get IP management right if they are generally places where the rule of law is highly regarded;IP competitiveness is not a ‘zero-sum’ game where one jurisdiction’s gain is another’s loss. Jurisdictions that manage IP well are seen as mutually supportive and encourage better IP management globally.

Michael Frawley, Managing Partner at Taylor Wessing LLP, comments:

"We live and work in a global market and IP is a global issue. For companies operating in this market, safeguarding IP in today’s developing economies is just as important as securing protection in the developed ones."

"IP law is developing rapidly in order to meet the challenges of the ever increasing change in technology and no jurisdiction can afford to be complacent about how its legal system accommodates these changes

"There is much anecdotal comment about how well IP is protected in different jurisdictions and what needs to be done about it. The Global IP Index provides real data based on a combination of objective factors and the knowledge and experience of people operating in the field. We hope that the Index will make a valuable contribution to the ongoing debate in this vitally important area."
For a detailed breakdown of the IP Index including rankings, country analysis and commentary on the findings, rationale and implications, please click here