Le Blog Finance

Panama Papers : Deutsche Bank pris dans la tourmente

Deutsche Bank n’avait pas besoin de cela … Alors que la première banque allemande, empêtrée dans de nombreux scandales, provoque d’ores et déjà l’inquiétude des investisseurs, elle n’en figure pas moins parmi la trentaine de banques allemandes citées dans les Panama Papers.

Le journal allemand Süddeutsche Zeitung indique ainsi lundi soir que l’établissement financier a eu recours aux services du cabinet d’avocats panaméen Mossack Fonseca, au coeur d’un vaste scandale d’évasion fiscale. L’affaire a été mise au grand jour grâce au 11,5 millions de documents provenant dudit cabinet panaméen révélant que de nombreuses personnalités ont eu recours aux paradis fiscaux. Les documents, d’abord obtenus par la Süddeutsche Zeitung début 2015, ont ensuite été partagés par Consortium international des journalistes d’investigation (ICIJ) entre 370 journalistes de plus de 70 pays.

Selon le Süddeutsche, les banques allemandes ont créé ou administré chez Mossack Fonseca plus 1.200 sociétés écran pour leurs clients. Le quotidien ajoute qu’à elle seule, la Deutsche Bank a utilisé jusqu’en 2007 plus de 400 sociétés offshore, plusieurs milliers d’Allemands ayant eu recours aux services du cabinet panaméen et l’utilisation des sociétés écran associées.

Parmi les principales autres banques allemandes ayant utilisé les services de Mossack Fonseca figurent notamment Commerzbank, Dresdner Bank et BayernLB. Le le journal indique par ailleurs que des banques régionales ont également fait appel au cabinet d’avocats, sans toutefois citer donner leur nom.

Tentant de faire amende honorable, les banques incriminées ont toutefois affirmé avoir modifié leur politique ces dernières années . Si Commerzbank déclare avoir changé de cap de façon conséquente depuis 2008, Deutsche Bank reconnaît pour sa part « complètement l’importance de ce problème », ajoutant avoir amélioré ses procédures d’accueil des clients et de vérification des personnes avec lesquelles elle fait affaires.

Berlin espère pour sa part que les révélations des Panama Papers faciliteront la lutte contre le blanchiment et la fraude fiscale.  « Nous espérons que le débat actuel va contribuer à augmenter la pression », a ainsi déclaré lundi Martin Jäger, porte-parole du ministre allemand des Finances Wolfgang Schäuble.

Sources : AFP, Süddeutsche Zeintung

Elisabeth Studer – 05 avril 2016 – www.leblogfinance.com -

Partager cet article

Article de

24 commentaires

  1. retrouvé le retour 5 avril 2016 à 09:14

    Que les “cuisses propres ” des îles Caïman ” ne rêvent pas trop !! Assurances, RA et le reste !!

    • Elisabeth Studer 5 avril 2016 à 23:53

      simple hasard ????? il y a quelques jours a peine, la presse russe reprenait un article du FT. On en reparle au plsu tot !

      Les USA bientôt plus grand paradis fiscal du monde?

      Les Etats-Unis pourraient devenir dans un avenir proche le plus grand paradis fiscal du monde car des sociétés de gestions y transfèrent les capitaux des personnes fortunées d’Europe et d’autres pays du monde.

      Les investisseurs européens sont plus préoccupés par l’entrée en vigueur du Standard commun d’échange d’informations fiscales (Common Reporting Standard, CRS) que par les attaques du groupe terroriste Etat islamique (EI ou Daech), rapporte le journal américain Financial Times.

      D’après ce document, les pays signataires doivent échanger leurs informations fiscales en réponses aux demandes des services étatiques à compter du 1 janvier 2017. 96 pays l’ont déjà signé, mais pas les Etats-Unis.

      Le service des impôts américain, (Internal Revenue Service, IRS) soutient formellement le système d’échange d’informations, mais justifie sa non-participation au CRS par l’absence d’autorisation de la part du Congrès et par conséquent l’absence de financement.

      Cependant, une loi sur la taxation des comptes étrangers (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act, FATCA), qui impose aux organisations financières étrangères de transmettre des informations sur les contribuables américains à l’IRS, a été adopté aux Etats-Unis en 2010. Environ 50.000 Américains ont déjà rejoint le programme spécial de l’IRS visant à légaliser les capitaux non déclarés, versant ainsi près de 7 milliards de dollars au fisc (6,2 milliards d’euros).

      “Les Etats-Unis, c’est le trou noir de l’information. Les informations fiscales arrivent aux Etats-Unis, mais n’en repartent jamais”, a déclaré le directeur de la société de conseil Henley & Partners Christian Kalin.

      L’expert a également souligné que la question de la sûreté des données personnelles restait en suspens. Selon lui, il y a une grande différence entre la gestion des données personnelles en Suisse et, par exemple, en Indonésie, bien que les deux pays aient adhéré au CRS.

      “L’aspiration à transférer des capitaux aux Etats-Unis, territoire hors CRS, n’est pas toujours liée aux questions de sécurité. Les personnes les plus riches sont tout simplement très à cheval sur la confidentialité”, a conclu Peter Cotorceanu, juriste de la société Anaford.

      À la demande du G8 et du G20, l’Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques (OCDE) a élaboré une méthode standard internationale pour améliorer la transparence et l’échange automatique d’informations fiscales : le Common Reporting Standard (CRS – Norme Commune de Déclaration). Cette norme concerne d’ores et déjà tous les pays de l’Union Européenne (UE) et à vocation à s’appliquer aux 99 pays participants.
      CRS permet aux administrations fiscales d’avoir la connaissance systématique des avoirs financiers détenus à l’étranger par ses résidents fiscaux.
      Pour mettre en œuvre l’échange automatique d’informations, cette norme repose sur l’action combinée :
      - des clients titulaires de comptes qui doivent déclarer leur résidence fiscale pour déterminer s’ils sont considérés ou non comme des « non-résidents » via une auto-certification ;
      - des institutions financières qui doivent déclarer annuellement à leur autorité fiscale locale les clients « non-résidents », les soldes de leurs comptes et les revenus financiers qu’ils ont perçu dans l’année
      - des autorités fiscales des pays participants qui transmettent ces informations aux autorités fiscales du pays de résidence fiscale du client qui fait l’objet de cette déclaration.

      La mise en œuvre de cette réglementation est fixée au 1er Janvier 2016 pour les états qui se sont engagées à réaliser les premiers échanges annuels dès 2017. La communication par le client de sa résidence fiscale à jour s’intégrera aux processus de connaissance approfondie de nos clients.
      FATCA VS CRS ?
      FATCA (Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act) concerne uniquement les contribuables américains et leur déclaration auprès de l’administration fiscale américaine. CRS concerne l’ensemble des clients d’institutions financières établies dans les pays participants.
      arch 24, 2016 8:27 pm

      Article source du FT
      **********************************
      Fear and regulatory loathing makes America the top tax haven
      The US is becoming the largest tax haven in the world, says John Dizard

      Fear and regulatory pressure is pushing the globalised rich to bring tens or even hundreds of billions of portfolio investments out of Europe and into the US, and to do so within the next year and a half.
      The fear is not just created by Isis, the Islamist militant group, targeting Europe, but by the unintended consequences of the accelerating schedules European institutions face for complying with “Gatca”, an acronym for the international sharing of data among tax authorities — rules that US authorities believe bind others, but not themselves. Swiss-based investment managers will tell you that this is another example of American hypocrisy, and they are correct.

      As Christian Kalin, chairman of Henley & Partners, an ultra-multinational residency and citizenship advisory firm, says: “The US is a black hole of information for other countries now. Financial information goes in to the US, but does not come out.”
      This is true. The 2010 Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act requires international financial institutions to report details of their US clients’ accounts. The American drive to force compliance with Fatca led, in turn, to the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS). So far, more than 96 countries have agreed to reply, with one notable exception: the US itself.
      While the US administration and the Treasury declared themselves all in favour of adopting the CRS, they do not have the budget authorisation or appropriation from Congress to spend anything to do so. Therefore, while Switzerland set a deadline of January 1 2017 as the “effective date” for starting CRS-based tax information sharing with the other 95 signatories, the US Internal Revenue Service will not give its “reciprocal” partners any information about the foreign beneficiaries of any “entities”, such as Nevada or South Dakota trusts.
      The Swiss lawyers and asset managers are right. The US government is being hypocritical. Coincidentally, asset managers in places such as Miami, New York, Boston and Nevada stand to benefit from that hypocrisy.

      ax justice activists say the US failure to reciprocate the information sharing it demands from others is turning the US into the largest tax haven in the world. But there is more to it than that. Developed-world financial institutions and lawyers are putting themselves at grave risk if they openly encourage tax evasion.
      Having said that, as Mr Kalin points out: “If a Swiss bank shares information about an Indonesian national’s assets with the Indonesian government, that information can readily be sold by corrupt Indonesian officials. Then the Indonesian national and his family are at risk of kidnapping and extortion.”
      Peter Cotorceanu, a lawyer at Anaford, a Zurich-based law firm, says: “The move to put money in the US [out of the reach of the CRS] does not have to be tied to personal security issues. There is also this inchoate concern about having financial data unnecessarily flowing around the world. The superwealthy are just very concerned about privacy.”
      This all requires some fine legal parsing and carefully built financial structuring. After all, if you are a non-US resident, you are governed by the “anti-avoidance” rules of the CRS. Those rules invalidate anything done to avoid CRS reporting, as distinct from maintaining privacy. The anti-avoidance laws and their implementation dates vary from country to country.
      Except in one country. As Mr Cotorceanu says: “No such anti-avoidance measures have been implemented by the US, even under Fatca, for foreigners. And none are likely in the current environment.”
      So if a foreigner wants to set up a CRS or Gatca-safe structure in the US, that is his government’s problem, not the problem of the US government. Not surprisingly, Mr Cotorceanu says: “If I were a US portfolio manager, I would be telling as many people as possible about the benefits of putting their money in the US and in a US entity.”
      The effect of CRS and Gatca strong-arming global money into the US is another example of the broad consequences of the return of nationalism.

      Fear and regulatory pressure is pushing the globalised rich to bring tens or even hundreds of billions of portfolio investments out of Europe and into the US, and to do so within the next year and a half.
      The fear is not just created by Isis, the Islamist militant group, targeting Europe, but by the unintended consequences of the accelerating schedules European institutions face for complying with “Gatca”, an acronym for the international sharing of data among tax authorities — rules that US authorities believe bind others, but not themselves. Swiss-based investment managers will tell you that this is another example of American hypocrisy, and they are correct.
      As Christian Kalin, chairman of Henley & Partners, an ultra-multinational residency and citizenship advisory firm, says: “The US is a black hole of information for other countries now. Financial information goes in to the US, but does not come out.”
      This is true. The 2010 Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act requires international financial institutions to report details of their US clients’ accounts. The American drive to force compliance with Fatca led, in turn, to the OECD’s Common Reporting Standard (CRS). So far, more than 96 countries have agreed to reply, with one notable exception: the US itself.
      While the US administration and the Treasury declared themselves all in favour of adopting the CRS, they do not have the budget authorisation or appropriation from Congress to spend anything to do so. Therefore, while Switzerland set a deadline of January 1 2017 as the “effective date” for starting CRS-based tax information sharing with the other 95 signatories, the US Internal Revenue Service will not give its “reciprocal” partners any information about the foreign beneficiaries of any “entities”, such as Nevada or South Dakota trusts.
      The Swiss lawyers and asset managers are right. The US government is being hypocritical. Coincidentally, asset managers in places such as Miami, New York, Boston and Nevada stand to benefit from that hypocrisy.
      Tax justice activists say the US failure to reciprocate the information sharing it demands from others is turning the US into the largest tax haven in the world. But there is more to it than that. Developed-world financial institutions and lawyers are putting themselves at grave risk if they openly encourage tax evasion.
      Having said that, as Mr Kalin points out: “If a Swiss bank shares information about an Indonesian national’s assets with the Indonesian government, that information can readily be sold by corrupt Indonesian officials. Then the Indonesian national and his family are at risk of kidnapping and extortion.”
      Peter Cotorceanu, a lawyer at Anaford, a Zurich-based law firm, says: “The move to put money in the US [out of the reach of the CRS] does not have to be tied to personal security issues. There is also this inchoate concern about having financial data unnecessarily flowing around the world. The superwealthy are just very concerned about privacy.”
      This all requires some fine legal parsing and carefully built financial structuring. After all, if you are a non-US resident, you are governed by the “anti-avoidance” rules of the CRS. Those rules invalidate anything done to avoid CRS reporting, as distinct from maintaining privacy. The anti-avoidance laws and their implementation dates vary from country to country.
      Except in one country. As Mr Cotorceanu says: “No such anti-avoidance measures have been implemented by the US, even under Fatca, for foreigners. And none are likely in the current environment.”
      So if a foreigner wants to set up a CRS or Gatca-safe structure in the US, that is his government’s problem, not the problem of the US government. Not surprisingly, Mr Cotorceanu says: “If I were a US portfolio manager, I would be telling as many people as possible about the benefits of putting their money in the US and in a US entity.”
      The effect of CRS and Gatca strong-arming global money into the US is another example of the broad consequences of the return of nationalism.
      Pat Buchanan, the outspoken nationalist Republican politician, says on the US signing on to the CRS: “I don’t think Congress will do anything like that. On the contrary, on both the left and the right, the whole movement is against the Trans-Pacific Partnershiptreaty, the TTIP [Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership] with Europe, all of that.”
      Even Mr Buchanan agrees that what he calls “the micro biz of very rich dual nationals with lots of money will continue”, but that will become a much more intricate activity.
      I would recommend Cosmopolites, a book by Atossa Abrahamian about the economics of nationality acquisition. Rich globals can whisper through EU passport controls with a Maltese passport and their money can be shielded by US portfolio managers. Most people will be waiting in line eternally, holding their wads of rupiahs and shillings.
      Globalism has come and gone before. Consider those rich cosmopolites who lived in the Silk Road cities of central Asia. Their houses and wealth left only sand-filled lines of brick in the sand.

  2. retrouvé le retour 5 avril 2016 à 09:20

    C’est vraiment pas bien de ne pas surveiller la FED et La Banque d’Angleterre !!

  3. ES 5 avril 2016 à 12:39

    oui, bizarrement hier en France, on ne parlait pas trop de Poutine, alors que les depeches d’agence suisse regorgeaient d’infos sur le sujet
    ca doit etre un nouvel embroglio …. je regarde …

    a etudier egalement le maroc, pas trop d’infos non plus dans l’hexagone. Ces messieurs ont une nouvelle fois pour leurs ryads à marrakech …

  4. ES 5 avril 2016 à 12:40

    de tte manière, ne nous leurrons pas. il n’y a pas de hasard sur cette fuite ….
    C’est fort certainement une fuite orchestrée pour destabiliser quelques pays and co …

  5. retrouvé le retour 5 avril 2016 à 14:03

    Franchement cette “bombe à fragmentation” médiatico-people va faire quelques dommages collatéraux, mais pas ceux qui sont visés dans le plan !! Qui mange encore cette soupe médiatique ?? :)

  6. Elisabeth Studer 5 avril 2016 à 14:07

    le peuple moyen …. avide de fautifs et de grands coupables à jeter en pature …

  7. brazil nuts selenium 25 janvier 2019 à 00:19

    Thank you for another informative website. The place else
    could I get that type of information written in such a perfect
    approach? I have a undertaking that I’m simply now running on, and I have been on the glance out for such info.

  8. brazilian steakhouse tacoma 25 janvier 2019 à 00:25

    Pretty nice post. I just stumbled upon your weblog and wanted to say that I have truly enjoyed
    surfing around your blog posts. In any case I will be subscribing to your feed and I hope you write again soon!

  9. Gaye 26 janvier 2019 à 02:02

    Howdy! I’m at work surfing around your blog from my new iphone 3gs!
    Just wanted to say I love reading through your blog and look forward to all your posts!

    Keep up the superb work!

  10. Marina 26 janvier 2019 à 08:18

    A financial advisor is your planning accomplice.

  11. Yanira 27 janvier 2019 à 11:01

    Now it is time to decide your specific investments.

  12. Arnulfo 27 janvier 2019 à 14:13

    Buyers do pay direct and indirect costs.

  13. Bettye 28 janvier 2019 à 00:25

    Today, I went to the beach with my kids. I found a sea shell and gave it to my
    4 year old daughter and said “You can hear the ocean if you put this to your ear.” She placed the shell
    to her ear and screamed. There was a hermit crab inside and it pinched her ear.
    She never wants to go back! LoL I know this is completely off topic but I
    had to tell someone!

  14. Chong 28 janvier 2019 à 00:50

    Thank you for your interest in Funding Recommendation.

  15. Adrianne 28 janvier 2019 à 01:15

    All varieties of investments include sure dangers.

  16. Lenore 7 février 2019 à 05:03

    Now it is time to decide your particular investments.

  17. additional hints 7 février 2019 à 22:13

    I simply want to say I’m beginner to blogging and absolutely liked this web-site. Very likely I’m likely to bookmark your blog . You definitely have tremendous article content. Many thanks for sharing with us your webpage.

  18. John Deere Service Manuals 8 février 2019 à 22:31

    Spot on with this write-up, I truly assume this website needs far more consideration. I’ll most likely be once more to read rather more, thanks for that info.

  19. Tractor Workshop Manuals 9 février 2019 à 13:31

    It’s a comic book movie that stands out from a lot that have come before, and is a genuinely entertaining movie on all accounts.

  20. Jann 10 février 2019 à 15:20

    Financial advisors business is individuals business.

  21. Alisia 17 février 2019 à 01:25

    Think about investments that supply speedy annuities.

  22. John Deere Service Manuals 18 février 2019 à 23:32

    Oh my goodness! an incredible article dude. Thank you Nonetheless I’m experiencing challenge with ur rss . Don know why Unable to subscribe to it. Is there anyone getting similar rss drawback? Anybody who knows kindly respond. Thnkx