31 January 2011

SEBI Adjudication order in respect of M/s. Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd

Securities and Exchange Board of India (hereinafter referred to as “SEBI”) conducted investigation into the alleged irregularity in the trading in the shares of M/s. Helios and Matheson Information Technology Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Noticee”) for the period February 2005 to September 2006 (hereinafter referred to as “Investigation Period”).

On the conclusion of investigation by SEBI, Adjudication Proceedings under section 15I of the SEBI Act, 1992 (hereinafter referred to as “Act”) were initiated in respect of the Noticee.



HMRC designation of the Stock Exchange of Mauritius as a recognised stock exchange for tax purposes

With effect from 31 January 2011, HMRC has designated the Stock Exchange of Mauritius as a 'recognised stock exchange' under section 1005 (1) (b) Income Tax Act 2007.

Securities admitted to trading and listed on the Official Market of the Stock Exchange of Mauritius will meet the HMRC interpretation of ‘listed’ as set out in section 1005 (3) (a) and (3) (b) Income Tax Act 2007.

Please note that securities listed on the Development and Enterprise Market (DEM) of the Stock Exchange of Mauritius will not meet the HMRC definition of ‘listed’.

With effect from 31 January 2011, the Stock Exchange of Mauritius will also be regarded as a recognised stock exchange for Inheritance Tax purposes.

UK: New penalties to tackle offshore tax evasion

HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC) has announced new penalties for offshore non-compliance.

These new penalties come into force from 6 April 2011 and apply to Income Tax and Capital Gains Tax. The first Self Assessment returns affected will be for the 2011-12 tax year, with paper returns due to be filed by 31 October 2012, and electronic returns by 31 January 2013.

The legislation can be found in Schedule 10 of Finance Act 2010.

How it works

The new penalty is an enhancement of the penalties for

  • failure to notify
  • inaccuracy on a return
  • failure to file a return on time

Under the new legislation, these penalties will be linked to the tax transparency of the territory in which the income or gain arises. Where it is harder for HMRC to get information from another country, the penalties for failing to declare income or gains arising in that country will be higher.

There will be three new levels of penalty:

  • where the income or gain arises in a territory in 'category 1', the penalty rate will be the same as under existing legislation
  • where the income or gain arises in a territory in 'category 2', the penalty rate will be 1.5 times that in existing legislation - up to 150 per cent of tax
  • where the income or gain arises in a territory in 'category 3', the penalty rate will be double that in existing legislation - up to 200 per cent of tax

The Treasury has laid legislation before Parliament which describes which territories are in 'category 1' and 'category 3'. All other territories (except the UK) are in 'category 2'.

Category 1Category 3
AnguillaAlbania
ArubaAlgeria
AustraliaAndorra
BelgiumAntigua and Barbuda
BulgariaArmenia
CanadaBahrain
Cayman IslandsBarbados
CyprusBelize
Czech RepublicBonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba
Denmark
(not including Faroe Islands and Greenland)
Brazil
EstoniaCameroon
FinlandCape Verde
FranceColombia
GermanyCongo, Republic of the
GreeceCook Islands
GuernseyCosta Rica
HungaryCuraçao
IrelandCuba
Isle of ManDemocratic People's Republic of Korea
ItalyDominica
JapanDominican Republic
Korea, SouthEcuador
LatviaEl Salvador
LithuaniaGabon
MaltaGrenada
MontserratGuatemala
Netherlands
(not including Bonaire, Sint Eustatius and Saba)
Honduras
New Zealand
(not including Tokelau)
Iran
NorwayIraq
PolandJamaica
PortugalKyrgyzstan
RomaniaLebanon
SlovakiaMacau
SloveniaMarshall Islands
SpainMauritius
SwedenMicronesia, Federated States of
United States of America
(not including overseas territories and possessions)
Monaco
Nauru
Nicaragua
Niue
Palau
Panama
Paraguay
Peru
Saint Kitts and Nevis
Saint Lucia
Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
San Marino
Seychelles
Sint Maarten
Suriname
Syria
Tokelau
Tonga
Trinidad and Tobago
United Arab Emirates
Uruguay

The tax system and the financial crisis

This paper investigates the effects of the tax system on the economic factors that triggered the financial crisis. We examine three cases in which the tax regime interacted with these factors, reinforcing them. First, we focus on the taxation of residential building: while the importance of capital gains taxes is disputed, the deductibility of mortgage interest may have contributed to the financial crisis by creating some of the raw materials for the securitization industry. Second, a narrow perspective on the tax treatment, together with specific provisions, may have fostered performance-based remuneration of managers, resulting in overemphasis of short-term profitability and incentive to excessive risk-taking. Third, the securitization process, which played a key role in the outbreak of the financial crisis, was accompanied by opportunities for tax arbitrage and reduction of the overall tax wedge paid by investors, through offset of incomes that are ordinarily taxed at different rates; a de facto exemption of CDS premiums received by non-residents supplemented the tax arbitrage.

Mauritius: Vice-Prime Minister Jugnauth leads Investment Promotion Mission to UK and France

The Vice-Prime Minister, Minister of Finance and Economic Development, Mr. Pravind Jugnauth, will be in Paris and London from 1 to 4 February to meet potential investors for the promotion of Mauritius as an investment destination.

In Paris, the Vice-Prime Minister will address potential investors and have talks with the management of Bluelink and Air France- KLM. In London, Mr. Jugnauth will present to British businessmen the various investment opportunities in Mauritius in the following sectors: ICT services, specialised health care services, Real Estate development, financial services, transport, agro-industry, aquaculture, seafood industry, the manufacturing sector and the duty free island project.

The Vice-Prime Minister will also hold discussions with Dr Mohan Kaul, CEO of the Commonwealth Business Council and Mr David Frost, Director of the British Chambers of Commerce. The investment promotion campaign is being organised by the Board of Investment (BoI).

During his visit in Paris, Mr. Jugnauth, will also attend the Sixth Global Congress on Combating Counterfeiting and Piracy to be held on 1 and 2 February. The Congress will bring together more than 800 delegates from 80 countries. Participants will consist mainly of government ministers, policy-makers, business leaders, senior law enforcement officials, judges and lawyers, stakeholders from inter-governmental organisations (IGOs) and non-governmental organisations (NGOs), consumer groups and members of academia.

The Congress will serve as a platform for the participants to share proposals for disrupting and curbing the worldwide illicit trade in counterfeit and pirated goods, identify more innovative and effective solutions and build upon successful strategies already in place.

29 January 2011

India's DTAA with Mauritius has gaps, says OECD study

The Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), the agency that has been at the forefront of the global crackdown on tax havens, on Friday said India's Double Tax Avoidance Agreement (DTAA) with Mauritius had gaps that needed to be filled. In addition, it concluded that Mauritius had lax norms that provided room for routing of funds from one country to another.

28 January 2011

CDP - Private Equity Investment into Africa: The Cayman and Mauritius Route

The recent invitation by China to South Africa to join the BRIC group of major emerging economies, to create the “BRICS” acronym, has heralded a new dawn, not only for the nation of South Africa, but arguably for the continent of Africa as a whole, with large parts of the African Continent now beginning to see real economic growth and development. Many African countries have taken bold steps to break the cycle of corruption and poverty by moving towards political stability and economic openness. This in turn has brought economic and social advancement as well as an unprecedented receptiveness to foreign direct investment (“FDI”). In addition to this, with increasing global demand for raw materials and commodities, many African countries are seeing renewed attention from the main industrial nations, in a 21st Century “Scramble for Africa”. India and China have been particularly active in Africa as they seek access to the resources essential for their own economic growth and take advantage of the continent’s under penetrated markets and business opportunities.

As well as growth in the mineral and energy sectors, economic expansion in the continent, particularly in Sub-Saharan Africa, is being supported by a broad base of other sectors including agriculture, technology, telecommunications, media and financial services. These industries are attracting massive FDI, a large chunk of which is coming through private equity investments. Flows of FDI to Africa have been increasing significantly during the last decade and the Cayman Islands and Mauritius both have an important role to play in the investment process.

In a world of economic uncertainty, the jurisdictions of Cayman and Mauritius, each in their own right, provide investors and investment managers with much needed comfort and certainty. When investing into Africa in combination with each other, the jurisdictions provide a stable, well regulated and tax efficient platform which can be relied upon.

This article is available in PDF Format, click below to view:

Private Equity Investment into Africa: The Cayman and Mauritius Route


Guernsey: QROPS Code of Practice

The Guernsey Association of Pension Providers has published its proposed QROPS Code of Practice as an Exposure Draft and is inviting comments during a consultation period which runs until 28 February 2011. The Exposure Draft will then be reviewed in the light of the comments received and it is intended that the final QROPS Code of Practice will be issued by 31 March 2011.

Laws in some countries do not meet global standards

The Global Forum on Transparency and Exchange of Information for Tax purposes, hosted by the OECD, has released ten reports which evaluate jurisdictions’ commitment to tax transparency and examine whether information is made available and accessible to foreign tax authorities. These reports follow eight others released in September 2010.


“These ten reports continue our work to monitor the compliance of jurisdictions with international standards”, said OECD Secretary-General Angel Gurría. “They also underline the importance of the review process the Global Forum has undertaken with the support of the OECD to ensure the advancement of transparency and exchange of information for tax purposes.”


The Global Forum has been mandated by the G-20 to assist specific jurisdictions, as well as the international community, to assess the status of national tax legislation, examine whether the laws are enforced, and make recommendations for improvement.


For five jurisdictions the Global Forum is releasing Phase 1 reports which assess the legal and regulatory framework of the jurisdictions. The other five combine Phase 1 and Phase 2 reviews assessing both the legal framework and the practical implementation of the standard.


Phase 1 reviews


Four jurisdictions, Barbados, the Seychelles, San Marino and Trinidad and Tobago fall short of the international standard and will need to implement the recommendations made in their reports before moving to the next phase of their evaluations. It has been noted in the case of San Marino that important legislation has recently been passed (see annex 1 of the report) and will further be examined by the Global Forum.


The report on Guernsey shows that a satisfactory legal framework is in place but that there are minor issues that Guernsey has been asked to address.


Combined reviews


Mauritius underwent a combined review which showed that there are missing elements in the legal framework such as accounting information on some of the offshore companies. The assessment of the practice in Mauritius shows that there is room for improvement, in particular as regards the access to bank information by the tax authorities.

The four other “combined” reviews show that the systems in place in Australia, Denmark, Ireland and Norwayhave achieved effective exchange of information in practice. However, there are some minor issues related to information on bearer shares or nominees which will have to be addressed.

More than 60 reports will be completed by year end.

The reports at a glance


Phase 1 Reviews: Legal and Regulatory Framework

Barbados: Some deficiencies have been identified in Barbados bilateral treaties and Barbados has not yet signed new agreements with all jurisdictions wishing to do so. The implementation of recommendations made in the report to address these and other matters will be reviewed in the next 12 months, and only then Barbados will be considered for moving onto the next phase of the evaluation.


Guernsey: The review of Guernsey showed that its legal and regulatory framework is largely in place to ensure effective exchange of information, notably sound access powers and an expanding network of bilateral agreements. Improvements to some accounting rules should nevertheless be made. The evaluation of the practical implementation of this framework will take place in 2012.


San Marino: The peer review has identified some deficiencies in the domestic laws of San Marino, notably including limitations in the authorities’ powers to obtain information mainly on civil tax matters for the purpose of international cooperation. As a result it is not yet ready to move to the next stage of the evaluation. San Marino has in the recent months passed a number of laws with a view to overcome these shortcomings. Its position will therefore be reviewed.


Seychelles: The review of the Seychelles showed deficiencies as regards the availability of ownership and accounting information in respect of offshore entities. In addition, powers to access information should be strengthened. Amendments to its legal and regulatory system are necessary in order for the Seychelles to qualify for the next phase of the evaluation.


Trinidad and Tobago: Trinidad and Tobago is party to a number of bilateral treaties and a multilateral convention. However, it is unable to exchange information to the international standard since not all but one of these agreements has restrictions on access to information by Trinidad and Tobago’s tax authorities. The implementation of the recommendations made in the report will be reviewed in the next 12 months, before Trinidad and Tobago is considered for the next phase of the evaluation.


Combined reviews: Legal and regulatory framework and also the implementation of that framework in practice

Australia: Australia is exchanging information to the standard with almost 80 countries. Australia’s legal and institutional framework supports effective access to and provision of information requested by competent authorities of other jurisdictions.


Denmark: Denmark is exchanging information to the standard with almost 100 countries. Denmark’s legal and institutional framework supports effective access to and provision of information requested by competent authorities of other jurisdictions.

Ireland: Ireland is exchanging information to the standard with over 50 countries. Ireland’s legal and institutional framework supports effective access to and provision of information requested by competent authorities of other jurisdictions.

Mauritius: Mauritius has revised its legal and regulatory framework to give its competent authority broad access to most relevant information. However accounting information is not available in all cases and powers to obtain some information are untested. A further analysis will be undertaken in 6 months to assess whether Mauritius exchanges this information effectively and in a timely manner.


Norway: Norway is exchanging information to the standard with more than 100 countries. Norway’s legal and institutional framework supports effective access to and provision of information requested by competent authorities of other jurisdictions.

27 January 2011

Launch of Bedell Cristin (Mauritius) Partnership

Address by the Hon. Yatin Varma, Attorney-General

Your Lordship The Chief Justice Hon. Bernard Sik Yuen
Mr. Yuvraj Juwaheer, Barrister-at-Law
Mr Anthony Dessain, Senior Partner at Bedell Cristin Jersey Partnership

Ladies and Gentlemen,

It gives me great pleasure to be here with you this evening for the launch of Bedell Cristin Partnership in Mauritius.

At the outset, I would like to convey on behalf of government our congratulations to all those associated with Bedell Cristin, in particular Mr Yuvraj Juwaheer, for this launch. We are delighted that Bedell Cristin has decided to set up on the island and indeed grateful for the trust bestowed to Mauritius, as a credible offshore financial services centre.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In my intervention this evening, I would like to take the opportunity to send the strongest possible message to the international business community that we stand ready to embrace and meet the challenges posed to us by the global economy.It does seem that when we speak of ‘globalisation’ today, we now do so with caution, not to say trepidation, as the term globalisation evokes the many serious crises that we have witnessed in recent years.

The 2008 financial crisis and the subsequent slow-down of the world economy, likethe 1929 crisis, will no doubt be remembered as one of the most serious in our history. The continuing difficulties experienced by the major economies and domestic markets, including more recently with the euro-zone crisis, will have exacerbated the fear of this phenomenon of globalisation.

However, in the face of such anxieties, the mistake that we can make is to recoil unto ourselves. For I will venture as far as to suggest that it is now conventional wisdom that the nations that do best are those that will seek to identify and utilise the opportunities brought about by globalisation.

Nations that do best – ladies and gentlemen - confidently open to the world. They shun protectionism, embrace global competitiveness, encourage and welcome foreign investment, attract foreign talents and skills, and run flexible labour markets. And these are indeed the very notions that have guided the actions of government over the last 5 years and which have gone on to help us to not only withstand the impact of the global financial crisis, but also to demonstrate strong resilience in the face of these external shocks.

It is easy to forget that not so long ago our prospects appeared less encouraging, as we faced the end of an economic cycle that had allowed Mauritius to make significant progress since independence. The end of that cycle saw unemployment rising to worrisome levels and a mismatch of skills that prevented the diversification and expansion of the economy in other sectors.

However, our response was timely, bold and imaginative. We worked hard to utilise our comparative advantage: our entrenched democratic values and traditions, our profound respect for the rule of law, our versatile and multi-lingual people, and our enduring links to the emerging powers of China and India. With a determined effort, we managed to reposition ourselves on a new trail of successful development, which led, amongst others, to the embrace of a new, open and competitive service platform that is fully integrated into the global economy. Our engagement in economic diplomacy saw the opening of new markets and strategic alliances, and culminated in an extensive double tax treaty network.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Our strategy from the outset was comprehensive and holistic, as we were determined not to leave any stones unturned. Recognising that law firms have an instrumental role in developing and consolidating the financial services sector, we engaged in amending the Law Practitioners Act to allow global players like Bedell Cristin, who can offer world class services, to operate in Mauritius.

The truth is that our legal services were not adapted or equipped to complement our ambition to develop as a major financial and legal services centre in the region. But the facilitation of more interaction between global players with our practitioners will no doubt be beneficial to our professionals and indeed the legal system. Many Mauritian professionals, who themselves trained in the world’s best universities, will now have the opportunity to participate in global transactions from their homeland.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In addition to this measure, we are pressing ahead with a number of reform initiatives to further strengthen the provision of legal services in Mauritius. As you will most probably be aware, we have also made significant headway in our efforts to position Mauritius as a state-of-the-art, attractive and unique venue to conduct international commercial arbitration and international investment arbitration proceedings. The International Arbitration Act 2008 represents a major breakthroughand offers features, solutions, and a framework to global businesses, that is unique
in the African region.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

We understand that the establishment of Mauritius as a credible centre for arbitration, is not a sprint, but an endurance race – to use the words of Jan Paulsson, the President of the International Council for Commercial Arbitration. But we, under the leadership of the Prime Minister, Dr the Honourable Navinchandra Ramgoolam who is personally invested and committed to this project, stand ready and determined to commit the necessary resources to ensure that this initiative is a success.

We are also presently considering further changes to our law to expand the scope for corporations holding Category 1 Global Business Licences to extend their operations to the domestic economy. Our belief and hope is that this initiative should invigorate even further our global business sector as well as the domestic economy. Our long term vision is the operation of regional headquarters activities in Mauritius and the positioning of Mauritius as the preferred gateway for investment into Africa, particularly from India and China.

We are also committed to improving the efficiency of our Courts. To that end, we are moving to set up a separate Court of Appeal section of the Supreme Court to hear all appeals from lower Courts, and of a High Court section. A Mediation Division of the Supreme Court has been set up to deal with cases first, before going to full blown trial.

We are also bringing forward a number of other law reform initiatives, such as the setting up of a full-fledged institute for the continuous training of Judges, Magistrates and law officers, and the introduction of a compulsory Continuous Professional Development programmes for all law practitioners.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I said at the outset that our aim is to send the strongest message to the international business community that we embrace and will meet the challenges posed to us by the global economy. There is of course no doubt that it is in our national interest to ensure a strong and credible service platform. But we can assure you that we also recognise that the criteria for success in the 21st century are inclusiveness, competitiveness and cosmopolitanism.

On those words, I would like to once more congratulate Bedell Cristin and wish them every success in their work.

Thank you.

OECD: Peer Review Report of Mauritius - Combined Phase 1 + Phase 2 - Executive Summary

  1. This report summarises the legal and regulatory framework for transparency and exchange of information in Mauritius as well as practical implementation of that framework. The international standard, which is set out in the Global Forum’s Terms of Reference to Monitor and Review Progress Towards Transparency and Exchange of Information, is concerned with the availability of relevant information within a jurisdiction, the competent authority’s ability to gain access to that information, and in turn, whether that information can be effectively and timely exchanged with its exchange of information partners.
  2. Mauritius is a small and open economy, dynamic, diversified and fully integrated into world markets. Financial services, including providers of services to the offshore sector, are the second pillar of the economy (in GDP). Today Mauritius has developed a legal and regulatory framework that gives its competent authority broad access to the full range of foreseeably relevant information. However, its access powers and enforcement remain to be tested in certain areas.
  3. In line with the international movement towards more transparency and exchange of information, Mauritius recently has taken significant steps to enhance its exchange of information legal and regulatory framework. Mauritius is now able to exchange information on non-resident individuals and companies. There are accounting requirements for all Mauritius entities, resident and non-resident.
  4. Mauritius has exchange of information mechanisms in force with 35 jurisdictions, which include most of its main trading partners, and continues negotiating new DTCs and TIEAs. While some of its oldest treaties do not meet the standard, most of them are under renegotiation. The Mauritian authorities also took preventive measures and introduced sanctions against alleged misuse of Mauritius’s treaty network. It is to be noted that Mauritius has never refused to sign an exchange of information agreement.
  5. As a result of the steps taken, the legal framework for exchange is now largely in place, but also largely untested in practice, particularly concerning ownership and accounting information in the case of some of its offshore companies, since Mauritius did not exchange this type of information until July 2009.
  6. Exchange of bank information is another area which is untested in practice. The assessment revealed that although bank secrecy does not prevent Mauritius’s authorities from accessing and exchanging information held by banks, its power to obtain information directly from the bank or through court order has remained so far untested. This too has raised concerns with some of Mauritius’s main treaty partners.
  7. It is recognised that Mauritius is putting in place a national strategy for an efficient exchange of information system, and answers most requests within 90 days. The competent authority (Mauritius Revenue Authority) has created a team of professionals to answer exchange of information requests and is enhancing their professional capacities and methods to cope with difficult cases or complex requests. Mauritius’s competent authority has also signed memorandums of understanding with the public authorities that maintain relevant information. In particular, smooth communication and cooperation between the competent authority and the Financial Services Commission and the court will be key to address the two main issues of exchange of information on some offshore companies and bank information.
  8. Given that the legal and regulatory framework of Mauritius in some aspects has not yet been tested in practice, and the element A.2 is not in place, the Global Forum will particularly follow-up the capacity of Mauritius to obtain and exchange ownership and accounting information on some of its offshore companies, as well as banking information. Further peer inputs and answers from Mauritius will be sought in 6 months of the adoption of the present report, to assess whether Mauritius exchanges these types of information effectively and in a timely manner.