It should come as no surprise that China and Hong Kong have been revealed in the Panama Papers as being among the most prolific in hiding entities that use offshore financial centers and tax havens. This partly stems from the fact that Hong Kong was a British territory for most of the past 150 years, and it was the UK more than any other country that saw the economic opportunity in providing financial and professional services to those seeking a favorable tax or legal environment.

It is also no coincidence that British territories over the past 75 years have dominated this offshore space, and why increasingly, corporate profits are parked overseas in low-tax jurisdictions with double tax-avoidance treaties. Laws in Panama and in many popular offshore jurisdictions are specifically tailored to circumvent the regulatory and disclosure burdens that exist in many developed economies. As often as not, English law forms the legal basis of many offshore jurisdictions, which is why Hong Kong, as China’s gateway to the world, has so many Chinese nationals owning offshore holding companies and accounts.

There are many legitimate reasons why the wealthy and businesspeople take advantage of the services and products offered up by offshore centers such as Panama. Apart from this cyber breach, resulting in the leak of 11.5 million files, offshore centers had been relatively risk-free. They offer greater personal privacy and lower taxes, and they are loosely regulated, if at all.

For those who conduct multiple transactions, using an offshore entity limits downside risk in terms of potential litigation or legal contamination from unrelated parties or transactions. Some high-profile Asians, including actor Jackie Chan and the daughter of former Chinese Premier Li Peng, Li Xiaolin, have been identified as clients of Mossack Fonseca, the Panamanian law firm at the center of the media storm.

Many named in the Panama Papers have not broken laws. They are simply using what is legally available to them. Neither Chan nor Li created any of the legal or tax-friendly structures that were allegedly set up for them. Hence, moral outrage should also be directed at the politicians and third-party professionals that made all this possible.

Read the full article here.

Panama Papers: Secret accounts of the rich and powerful

Click on thumbnail to view photos. Source: 

AFP, Reuters, The Star/ANN

THIMPHU – Britain’s Duke and Duchess of Cambridge arrived on Thursday in the tiny Himalayan kingdom of Bhutan, where they will meet its glamorous young royal couple for the first time.

Prince William and wife Kate touched down at Bhutan’s only international airport, nestled deep in a river valley, to be welcomed by members of the royal family and receive flowers from a boy and girl wearing traditional dress.

Bhutan’s fifth king, Jigme Khesar Namgyel Wangchuck, and Queen Jetsun Pema will meet the British royals in a private audience and later host them to dinner, besides treating them to a display of archery, the national sport.

The 25-year-old queen, born a commoner, as Kate was, is viewed as a style icon across much of Asia.

Both couples have started families, with Jetsun Pema giving birth to her first son, the crown prince, this February.

“The prince and princess of England have never visited Bhutan, so, I think it is a great moment for Bhutan,” said Tsering Pem, a resident of the capital, Thimphu, where the 16th-century seat of government was given a fresh coat of paint before the visit.

“Two of the best royal couples in the world are meeting, so I think it is pretty exciting,” she said.

During their two-day stay the British royals, who have been touring India, will trek to the Tiger’s Nest, an ancient Buddhist monastery perched 3,000 metres (10,000 feet) up a mountain.

William’s father, Prince Charles, failed to complete the steep ascent to the Tiger’s Nest during a visit in 1998, opting instead to paint a watercolour of the scene.

Their week-long tour ends back in India next Saturday at the Taj Mahal, revisiting the scene of a solo – and much photographed – visit in 1992 by the late Princess Diana, to the monument to love.

Britain’s William and Kate head for taste of India

Click on thumbnail to view photos. Source: 

AFP, Reuters

Kate Middleton’s Asian-inspired wardrobe in India

Click on thumbnail to view photos. Source: 

AFP

Sydney – The father of a Down’s syndrome baby at the centre of a surrogacy scandal did not abandon him in Thailand and can keep his twin sister despite being a convicted paedophile, a court ruled Thursday.

Australian couple David Farnell and Wenyu Li sparked international furore in 2014 when they were accused of leaving baby Gammy in Thailand and returning home with his healthy twin sister Pipah.

Thai surrogate Pattaramon Chanbua, who gave birth to the siblings, tried to get Pipah back the following year after learning Farnell was a convicted child sex offender.

But the Family Court of Western Australia ruled that Pipah could continue to live with the Farnells in the western city of Bunbury.

“I have decided Pipah should not be removed from the only family she has ever known, in order to be placed with people who would be total strangers to her,” Chief Judge Stephen Thackray wrote in a 272-page decision.

Thackray said he did not think the child was at risk from her biological father, and pointed to the “strong attachments that Pipah has now formed with the Farnells”.

“I have accepted the expert evidence that while there is a low risk of harm if Pipah stays in that home, there is a high risk of harm if she were removed,” he said.

The conditions attached to the two-year-old’s stay in Australia included Farnell not being left alone with Pipah and the couple always keeping Western Australia’s Department for Child Protection informed of their address.

Abandoned baby Gammy left with Thai surrogate

Click on thumbnail to view photos. Source: 

Hope for Gammy’s Facebook page, Reuters, The Nation/ANN

The judge also found that Gammy, who he said appeared to be “thriving” in his Thai home, was not abandoned by the Farnells, but rather Pattaramon wanted to keep him.

Pattaramon claimed in 2014 that the Farnells at first requested an abortion and then walked away when they learnt of his condition.

The judge added that the couple was not seeking access to a trust fund, set up from public donations to help Gammy, for Pipah’s welfare needs or to meet their legal costs.

While family court proceedings are not usually published, Thackray said he had made his judgement available as it was in the public interest.

He also said the case “serves to highlight the dilemmas that arise when the reproductive capacities of women are turned into saleable commodities, with all the usual fallout when contracts go wrong”.

Pattaramon told AFP she did not want to comment “because I don’t know the details (of the court decision)”.

Commercial surrogacy is illegal in Australia, prompting growing numbers of infertile couples to head overseas.

Debate over the legal and moral issues raised by Gammy saw Thailand pass a law last year banning foreign couples from using Thai women as surrogates.