Panama papers continued

I’m too busy to wade through all the Panama papers stuff and am already getting jaded by what seems to be overkill, where genuine issues of concern will be swamped by the volume.

So feel free to post related links and information here and discuss it.

I expect that by the end of the day you will have jointly summaries it all succinctly for me so I can update myself on what is going on.

From a comment by Gezza:

Dom Post editorial today:
http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/79801447/editorial-fiddling-as-we-lose-our-good-name-over-panama-papers

Search here if you have a few years to spare:

Offshore Leaks Database

Find out who’s behind almost 320,000 offshore companies and trusts from the Panama Papers and the Offshore Leaks investigations

Leave a comment

105 Comments

  1. Gezza

     /  10th May 2016

    And from The Herald:
    Late Allan Hubbard Named in Panama Papers Leak:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11636464

    Panama Papers: You can now search the secret accounts of the global rich yourself:
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/business/news/article.cfm?c_id=3&objectid=11636239

    Should NZ ban foreign trusts? – comments
    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/opinion/news/article.cfm?c_id=466&objectid=11635888

    TBH I’m getting “over it” as well. I’ve read the Hubbard article – nada.
    bj I think has identified already how to access the Panama Papers already some time back.
    The “Comments” one might perhaps be worth a look later to see how things are going down with the commentati. 😕

    Reply
    • Not Allan Hubbard – that paragon of Mainland virtue. Was his neighbour a National Party member, was he Bill English’s scoutmaster? Shock, horror, get my blue pills …NOW!

      Reply
      • The Disclaimer.

        “There are legitimate uses for offshore companies and trusts. We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in the ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly.

        Reply
        • Brown

           /  10th May 2016

          You smug, sanctimonious prick. You know nothing about the man, he cannot defend himself, you bag him and then you hide behind a disclaimer.

          Reply
          • Brown

             /  10th May 2016

            Or are you tongue in cheek which would require me to apologise? If so, I do. Must slow down and think I think.

            Reply
            • Can you call a woman a prick? Does that work? Anyway … Sorry, too late, already reported you to Jesus for language, 1st sentence, top comment above, Brownie. Sorry, had to be done. Possible breach of the 8th (well, 8th according to the Catholics) :/

      • Blazer

         /  10th May 2016

        may as well put the boot into a dead man.

        Reply
    • Nelly Smickers

       /  10th May 2016

      BREAKING:

      ‘Following explosive revelations discovered by Nicky Hagar in ‘The Panama Papers’, IRD is seeking advice from Crown Law as to whether they can bring charges of Tax Evasion against Alan Hubbard’

      Reply
      • MaureenW

         /  10th May 2016

        Yes, someone who died 5 years ago is named in the big reveal, but there is nothing to suggest his activities were illegal.

        Surely, this isn’t the extent of this Hagar, media story?

        Reply
  2. Iceberg

     /  10th May 2016

    Overkill is about right.

    It’s a bizarre groundhog day strategy by Labour, throwing everything at trying to find dirt on Key.

    If you think that there are monsters under the bed, and you constantly look and there are none, and others look and there are none, but you still believe there are, doesn’t that make you a four year old?

    Reply
  3. Blazer

     /  10th May 2016

    Simon Louisson on ‘honest John’….

    ‘When it was first revealed that Whitney, who is no longer a registered lawyer but is Key’s legal adviser, was integrally connected to New Zealand’s tax avoidance scheme for foreigners through his firm Antipodes Trust Ltd, Key was asked if Whitney had given him a personal assurance that Antipodes had no connection to Mossack Fonseca. “Correct,” was Key’s answer.

    “I know that he is of the highest ethical level and he is of the highest oversight, Key went on.

    Turns out its all not true.

    Reply
    • Are you serious? That’s a spurious connection.

      “Between 2012 and 2014 Whitney was a director of the New Zealand arm of Rothschild Trust Ltd, which owns two companies, Capewood Investments Ltd, and Exchange Securities. Mossack Fonseca’s branch in the Virgin Islands was the agent for both these companies.”

      Reply
      • Iceberg

         /  10th May 2016

        Louisson is a green party activist. Spurious is his stock-in-trade.

        Reply
  4. I am done and dusted with Panama Papers. I am sure it is a setup by Hager trying to globalise the Hager Manifesto using the unthinking MSM and the Labour Left who are in their final death throes. I will leave the subject and focus more on what the budget is going to do for New Zealand. I am satisfied that if there is a problem with Foreign Trust, the mechanisms in place will take care of it. To hose who publicise the idea of NZ being a Trust Haven, there is some truth to the old saying never defecate in your own nest. Repeating a half truth is a classic psyops technique – ask Hager?

    Reply
    • Hall

       /  10th May 2016

      Yes please comment somewhere else BJ. You’re not adding anything constructive to this thread with your conspiracy theories and hyperbole.

      Reply
      • I;m the one using hyperbole! Let others be the judge of that Hall. My hide is thickened by real insults from professionals in Australia.

        Reply
    • Yours is the sensible approach BJM. The poor Old Standard are turning themselves inside out to determine a Key connection. It’s frankly embarrassing and can only engender sympathy Key and antagonism to the promoting organ – Hager and his media pals.
      What I am finding with my associates is a general head shaking disbelief of the whole situation. The language being used is niflammatory and the bows being drawn are snapping at every launch.
      They clearly went into all this with no other intention than to specifically implicate Key in some sort of laundering, tax evasion kind of way. The persistent, obsessive nature of Hager’s personality means that he has been unable to let it go. The Press look like idiots, in my opinion.

      Reply
      • Hall

         /  10th May 2016

        Keys under fire because he has deliberately decided to do nothing, but the pressure to do something is forcing him to now act. My only criticism of Key is his inaction on this issue of nz being a tax haven. But this issue is way bigger then Key, it effects people all over the world. So this is going to go right over Key and there is nothing Key will be able to do to stop it. Changes will come of this and that’s a fact.

        Reply
        • Iceberg

           /  10th May 2016

          Did you not hear about the enquiry Halliver?

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  10th May 2016

            Please write out 90,000,000 times ‘I must not try to out Hall’ in a clear and legible writing and give it to me before the end of school tomorrow. And don’t ask Gezza to do half, I know his handwriting. Miss de Meanour, Headmistress.

            Reply
      • Blazer

         /  10th May 2016

        the Key connection is crystal clear and present from his talk and his deeds.

        Reply
        • Pantsdownbrown

           /  10th May 2016

          See below Blazer……..a far more solid link to you beloved Green party…….

          Reply
  5. Hall

     /  10th May 2016

    Breaking news! John Keys lawyer is involved with mossack fonseca. Remember Keys lawyer lobbied John Key to do nothing about nz tax haven, against IRD advice.

    https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/new-zealand/panama-papers-nz-law-firms-doing-business-mossack-fonseca-while-lobbying-govt-not-change-foreign-trust-laws?autoPlay=4885625483001

    more updates to come.

    Reply
    • Er, how’s that again? See above.

      Reply
    • Pantsdownbrown

       /  10th May 2016

      So is Green Peace according to the dump this morning……*yawn*

      Reply
      • alloytoo

         /  10th May 2016

        Really? ROTFLOL

        Reply
      • Nah – that’d be far too much hilarity for me PDB. I’ll be falling of me chair. Really? Link? 😮

        Reply
        • Pantsdownbrown

           /  10th May 2016

          Go to the ICIJ website and search for ‘Green Peace’ – see what comes up…….remember the left are putting ANYBODY in that database under suspicion of being criminals, regardless if they are or not.

          Reply
          • XD … Just got back into my chair. My tummy’s hurting … XD

            https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=green+peace&c=&j=&e=&commit=Search

            Better include ICIJ’s disclaimer I suppose:
            “There are legitimate uses for offshore companies and trusts. We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in the ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly. Many people and entities have the same or similar names. We suggest you confirm the identities of any individuals or entities located in the database based on addresses or other identifiable information. If you find an error in the database please get in touch with us.”

            Reply
            • Iceberg

               /  10th May 2016

              “We do not intend to suggest or imply that any persons, companies or other entities included in the ICIJ Offshore Leaks Database have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly”

              So you have to wonder what the motivations are for putting it out there, don’t you?

            • Somebody could be paying them I suppose, but in saying that I do not intend to suggest or imply that any of them may have broken the law or otherwise acted improperly.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              Incorporation Jurisdiction Linked To Data From
              GREEN PEACE INTERNATIONAL LTD. 19-SEP-1996 British Virgin Islands Hong Kong – Panama Papers
              GREEN PEACE LIMITED 12-JUL-2002 British Virgin Islands Hong Kong – Panama Papers
              GREEN PEACE INVESTMENTS LTD. 25-JAN-2002 British Virgin Islands Hong Kong – Panama Papers
              GREEN PEACE SECURITIES LIMITED 14-MAY-1997 British Virgin Islands Virgin Islands, British – Offshore Leaks
              ANDERSON GROUP GREEN PEACE INVESTMENTS LIMITED 12-JUN-2002 British Virgin Islands Virgin Islands, British – Offshore Leaks
              GREEN PEACE INTERNATIONAL CORP. 03-JAN-2008 Samoa Samoa – Offshore Leaks
              GREEN PEACE MANAGEMENT CONSULTANT CORP. 02-JAN-2007 Undetermined Virgin Islands, British, Hong Kong – Offshore Leaks
              GREEN PEACE GROUP CORP. 26-FEB-2008 Samoa Samoa – Offshore Leaks

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              Oh dear, how sad. Comment from Russel Norman please?

            • Hall

               /  10th May 2016

              I always knew Green Peace was dodgy. Never trust a hippie who burns fossil fuels.

            • Pantsdownbrown

               /  10th May 2016

              What about Greenpeace’s charitable status?

              The fact that they are clearly a political movement not a charity is a much bigger rort then what has been produced in the Panama papers thus far.

              http://www.pwc.co.nz/tax-tips/september-2014/supreme-court-decision-on-greenpeace/

              From the above link: “This decision is interesting given the significant tax concessions available for charities”.

              Another left-wing case of do as I say, not as I do?

            • Yup. Oh, and … James, Metiria – I know they’re not, like, your company or anything but … any thoughts … ?

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              Better point out that this spelling appears only once:
              Greenpeace International (linked to) Not Identified (source) Offshore Leaks

              I guess anyone can register a name so there is no proof the others are not spoof names.

            • Black Ops … ? Uggers’ll know, for sure. 😎

            • Had a horrible thought but that’s a relief. There’s no Svetlana&Ana International. ^^’

            • alloytoo

               /  10th May 2016

              Alan, Alan we don’t need no stinking proof…..it looks dodgy, therefore it must be dodgy….

            • Ratty

               /  10th May 2016

              Jesus…

              Do I have to do all your homework for you ?

              https://offshoreleaks.icij.org/nodes/169195

              You aren’t even close

              Legal structure
              Greenpeace International’s main legal entity is “Stichting Greenpeace Council” (SGC). It is a Dutch Stichting -a foundation-type non-profit entity- based in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. The Articles of Association (bylaws) specify its purpose and provide the framework for the governance and decision-making process in the global Greenpeace organisation. The entity is registered with the Dutch Chamber of Commerce under nr. 41200515; its RSIN number is 006623207.

              Greenpeace International is in charge of protecting the Greenpeace trademark, and providing global control on the use of it. This protects the public from any misleading or fraudulent use of the Greenpeace name by unauthorised third parties, and safeguards our independence, the integrity of our campaign work and fundraising reputation.

            • Gezza

               /  10th May 2016

              Jesus…
              Do I have to do all your homework for you ?

              No, no, it’s Gezza. It sounds a bit the same I know but that guy’s Brownie’s mate.

              Thanks for that – they did come up in my first search for Greenpeace.

              The point PDB is making, Ratty, is that all the hullaballo from Andy & others, according the MSM, is over who is included in the database. Greenpeace International is included in the database.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              Shock, horror. Greenpeace is a beneficiary of a secret trust!!!

          • Blazer

             /  10th May 2016

            Greenpeace International ?Why is it significant in this story?

            Reply
            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              If you can’t figure that out, Blazer, we are not going to tell you.

            • Gezza

               /  10th May 2016

              Look, Blazer, is this really the best you can do? Don’t you have any mates? To paraphrase TS, we need better LWNJ’s >:D

            • Ratty

               /  10th May 2016

              Not significant at all…

              I would have thought the word “LIMITED” may have been a giveaway

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              No “LIMITED” in the one I referenced.

      • Ratty

         /  10th May 2016

        Lol… well played…

        Completely irrelevant except in name only …

        but well played nonetheless

        Reply
  6. Zedd

     /  10th May 2016

    Listening to ZB this a.m. I just got bored listening to the RIGHT-wing host & all the ‘keyites’ ringing up & saying “nothing to see here” & “Key’s done nothing wrong” etc. etc. ho hum

    One person emailed & said ‘what about all the allegations of Drug dealers & GUN runners. (from Sth America etc.). stashing their ‘ill gotten’ cash in these trusts & massive ‘tax avoidance/evasion’ ?’
    to which the host, just umm’ed & ahh’ed then said ‘there MAYBE some crooked ones too’ (Brush it under the carpet.. nothing to see here)
    We shall see…. :/

    Reply
    • MaureenW

       /  10th May 2016

      Evidence would be better than insinuation. So far, there has been no evidence come to light of any wrong doing, so what is your point exactly?

      Reply
      • Zedd

         /  10th May 2016

        Its a conspiracy I tell ya ! 😀

        Reply
      • Blazer

         /  10th May 2016

        um…’More than 300 economists, including Thomas Piketty, are urging world leaders at a London summit this week to recognise that there is no economic benefit to tax havens, demanding that the veil of secrecy that surrounds them be lifted.’

        Reply
        • Alan Wilkinson

           /  10th May 2016

          Tell that to Morocco, Cayman Islands, London, Singapore …

          As Einstein said responding to “100 Authors Against Einstein”, “If I was wrong, one author would have sufficed”. 300 smacks of desperation.

          Reply
  7. Ratty

     /  10th May 2016

    I welcome a review of those Trusts by the IRD to see if any New Zealand Tax has been avoided, and for IRD to talk to other Jurisdictions …

    However I don’t believe NZ is a Tax Haven

    Reply
  8. Blazer

     /  10th May 2016

    I suspect history will prove NZ is a handy tax haven for laundering money,primarily through Auckland RE.

    Reply
    • Pantsdownbrown

       /  10th May 2016

      Based on previous history I predict Blazer will be wrong again.

      I sympathise with you a bit though Blazer – zero evidence of wrongdoing in the present so in desperation you are having to make a prediction of wrongdoing for some future time.

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  10th May 2016

      Based on the UN’s estimate of US$2 trillion worth of annual money laundering via real estate Auckland’s contribution will be minor.

      Reply
    • Ratty

       /  10th May 2016

      How are they going to get the money in for a start ?

      And if dirty money attracts Interest by making it clean, then that would attract Interest, therefore be Taxable in New Zealand

      Reply
      • Kitty Catkin

         /  10th May 2016

        It would be naive to think that there’s no money laundering in NZ, but I suspect that we’re a very small fish-it would be easier to do in a larger place, surely.

        Reply
  9. Hall

     /  10th May 2016

    I’m always quite critical of Andrew Little but today he handled himself like a pro when interviewed on the subject of NZ tax haven. I think hes winning the political debate.

    http://www.radionz.co.nz/audio/player/201800091#

    Reply
    • Pantsdownbrown

       /  10th May 2016

      The poster of misinformation…………you LOVE Andrew Little, he is the poor misunderstood union man in your eyes……

      Played any ‘Call of Duty’ lately?

      Reply
    • I’m usually quite critical of Andrew Little too so I know where you’re coming from on that one & good on you. I’ll have a listen to the audio a bit later.

      I think I know what he’s probably saying already, but I don’t think it’ll be “Eureka! I have it, and I will soon be tabling the actual evidence tying John Key directly criminals involved in evading tax and laundering money through Foreign Offshore Trusts and he’s going to be going away for a long long time … mark my words.”

      Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  10th May 2016

      Frankly, in all of my living memory, only Oliver had the cast iron idiocy to make that statement.

      Reply
      • Pantsdownbrown

         /  10th May 2016

        Shhhhhhhhhhh Alan! Don’t you know he is ‘undercover’ – utilising his vast surveillance experience and skills……

        Reply
        • Oh god, Hallers, just had a listen. Guyon’s quite a nice cuddly sort of interviewer & just by asking a few time what evidence Andy has to prove his allegations (um…none) even he managed to make Andy sound like a complete twat.

          Reply
          • Kitty Catkin

             /  10th May 2016

            Gezza, please don’t compare him to a nice, useful and delightful part of women’s anatomy 🙂

            Reply
      • Joe Bloggs

         /  10th May 2016

        Snnrk…! You guys!!!

        Reply
  10. Alan Wilkinson

     /  10th May 2016

    If you do a search on New Zealand you turn up:
    Offshore Entities (16) Officers (58) Intermediaries (5) Addresses (391)

    Or on NZ:
    Offshore Entities (7) Officers (16) Intermediaries (8) Addresses (15)

    This on a database containing 320,000 Offshore Entities and multiple times that numbers of Officers etc.

    Obviously NZ is a major player in tax evasion, Not.

    Reply
    • Blazer

       /  10th May 2016

      major or minor…it matters…not.

      Reply
      • Gezza

         /  10th May 2016

        Bloody well does. You play a minor when it should be a major at a key point in the song and the rest of the whole bloody band goes real stink on you. 😎

        Reply
      • Pantsdownbrown

         /  10th May 2016

        Here I fixed it for you Blazer – you’re welcome!

        “major, minor or non-existent…it matters not to the left”.

        Reply
        • Blazer

           /  10th May 2016

          Thanks.If you steal dozens of cars or if you steal only one….you are still a …thief!

          Reply
          • Alan Wilkinson

             /  10th May 2016

            Yes, but one is a successful thief and the other isn’t, Blazer. This time Hager is the unsuccessful thief.

            Reply
            • Blazer

               /  10th May 2016

              no…’its not the deed,.its not the thought,its not the crime….its..if…you …get caught’!

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              Exactly. An unsuccessful thief who caught nothing.

            • Gezza

               /  10th May 2016

              This better not be about Allan’s airworthy automobile …

            • Gezza

               /  10th May 2016

              (sorry about the extra L, Al)

            • Blazer

               /  10th May 2016

              so you can edit posts.

            • Alan Wilkinson

               /  10th May 2016

              @Gezza, I do like my Escort.

            • Kitty Catkin

               /  10th May 2016

              That ditty doesn’t scan, too many feet in the last bit.

    • Alan, I can substantiate your figures. I downloaded the same huge data base and then used “File Spy” to check each page showing the information you gave above and came out with the same result. BUT, I have only been able to check the information listed for the periods 2008 to 2015. I read that the dump was covering 40 years. It seems though that I have been restricted to checking entries for National Governance and have not yet had access to the information from Labour Governments! I wonder if this is a deliberate ploy as it follows the Hager manifesto on the need to control the distribution of information. Nah he wouldn’t do that eh?

      Reply
      • Alan Wilkinson

         /  11th May 2016

        Interesting, BJ. Could it be a deliberate selection to fall within statute of limitations legislation? Or just where they got to working backwards constructing it? Who knows.

        Reply
  11. Gezza

     /  10th May 2016

    “… Sorry to dissolution you …”

    From the Herald’s Should NZ ban foreign trusts? – comments article I posted the link to at the top of this page. Gawd. State of our education system in the past 30 years. :/

    Reply
    • Kitty Catkin

       /  10th May 2016

      Please let that have been spellcheck.

      Dissolution ? they mean disolve, its verb. 😀

      Reply
  12. Nelly Smickers

     /  10th May 2016

    As I commented yesterday, in order that I can look and sound.intelligent in front of Wayne’s mates who follow me on this blog, I’m doing some research into the PP stuff.

    Now I’ve never read ‘Dirty Politics’, so thought it might be worth starting with that for a bit of background. However, can someone confirm if the book was actually written by Nicky Hagar – or did he use a pseudonym?

    When I just searched his ‘Authors Profile’, it shows the last book he wrote was about 6 years ago :/

    https://www.icij.org/journalists/nicky-hager

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  10th May 2016

      I can well understand your interest in “Dirty Politics”, Nelly.

      Reply
    • Blazer

       /  10th May 2016

      Key had overseen a government involved in more personal attacks and negative politics than any in living memory. Robert Muldoon, National leader in the 1970s and 1980s, is remembered for his abrasive, attacking style, but the Key government had outstripped it in the frequency and breadth of attacks, while still managing to maintain the leader’s genial image. It had done this in part by using others – political allies, bloggers and the news media – to deliver the blows. The result was a new kind of attack politics that was rapidly changing the political environment in New Zealand. That is the subject of this book.

      Dirty Politics follows my earlier book, The Hollow Men, which told the story of the National Party from 2003 to 2006 under the former leader Don Brash. This sequel describes the years of John Key’s leadership between 2008 and 2014.

      The Hollow Men was based on a leak of leader’s office documents that revealed the internal discussions, strategy plans and secret donors behind an astonishingly cynical and manipulative plan to win the 2005 election. Brash resigned when the book was released and his successor, John Key, promised a different sort of leadership. He said he would not be using Brash’s advisers and pledged to ‘rise above the politics of personal attack’, saying that was not his style.[ii]

      Reply
    • Pantsdownbrown

       /  10th May 2016

      Most of the Dirty Politics book was written by Cameron Slater I thought?

      Reply
  13. Kitty Catkin

     /  10th May 2016

    I pity any poor person who’s had to read the whole PP. They will be carried out with a straitjacket on and straws in their hair, crying and whimpering pitifully.

    Imagine being on a desert island with nothing but that to read. I’d drown myself or hang myself from the palm tree that all desert islands have.

    Reply
    • Alan Wilkinson

       /  10th May 2016

      That’s a pretty accurate description of our Nicky.

      Reply
  14. Zedd

     /  10th May 2016

    even Al Jazeera are talking about it.. mentioned that NZ is being labeled a ‘TAX HAVEN’, then showed footage Key in ‘full denial/nothing to see here’ mode :/

    I’ve seen the needle & the damage done..

    Reply
  15. Pantsdownbrown

     /  10th May 2016

    A Green Party donor has been listed in the database of the Panama Papers documents leak.

    Kiwi rich-lister Forbes Herbert Elworthy was named in the offshore leaks documents, associated with a Singapore trust and entities in the British Virgin Islands.

    Elworthy donated $15,000 to the Green Party in 2011 during the election campaign.

    http://www.stuff.co.nz/business/79814716/panama-papers-green-party-donor-listed-in-offshore-leaks

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s