Tweet
Ever accurate-ever sure-ever echoed by the Gleaner editorial
An appropriate perspective in this editorial 
Editorial | Embracing Julian Robinson’s Gift
The background noise to this issue, of course, is the controversy over the financing and other matters relating to the mansion in the Kingston suburb of Beverly Hills being built by Prime Minister Andrew Holness and held in a St Lucian offshore company. Mr Holness has rejected the allegation that using an offshore vehicle, in which his two juvenile sons are the other shareholders, to hold his properties was not to avoid taxes, but to facilitate "estate planning".
There is absolutely nothing illegal in what Mr Holness did, but perhaps for the optics. There are, however, likely to be moral questions for the PM, or anyone seeking high political office, of whether a country's leader should use offshore vehicles of this kind from which to manage their personal resources, when the domestic arrangements they bypass are the result of government policy, and the alternatives are not as easily available to the average citizen.
Moreover, Mr Holness' arguments notwithstanding, "estate planning", utilising offshore international business companies, like those registered in St Lucia, is precisely about tax efficiency - ensuring the beneficial owners enjoy the asset or the proceeds therefrom without the normal tax burdens thereof. For instance, inherent in bequeathing a home or selling property are the transfer taxes, stamp duties relative to real-estate transactions, which are avoided if the real estate remains part of the assets of a firm, which itself may be free from income and other taxes because of its offshore status.
Originally posted by Don1
View Post
LOL!
Offshore (paper) companies which don't conduct business are basically for obscuring the ownership of assets plus avoiding or evading taxes. The first 2 are not necessarily illegal...but can raise ethical issues
But I guess they all can be seen as "estate planning" woooiiiiiee
Offshore (paper) companies which don't conduct business are basically for obscuring the ownership of assets plus avoiding or evading taxes. The first 2 are not necessarily illegal...but can raise ethical issues
But I guess they all can be seen as "estate planning" woooiiiiiee
Editorial | Embracing Julian Robinson’s Gift
The background noise to this issue, of course, is the controversy over the financing and other matters relating to the mansion in the Kingston suburb of Beverly Hills being built by Prime Minister Andrew Holness and held in a St Lucian offshore company. Mr Holness has rejected the allegation that using an offshore vehicle, in which his two juvenile sons are the other shareholders, to hold his properties was not to avoid taxes, but to facilitate "estate planning".
There is absolutely nothing illegal in what Mr Holness did, but perhaps for the optics. There are, however, likely to be moral questions for the PM, or anyone seeking high political office, of whether a country's leader should use offshore vehicles of this kind from which to manage their personal resources, when the domestic arrangements they bypass are the result of government policy, and the alternatives are not as easily available to the average citizen.
Moreover, Mr Holness' arguments notwithstanding, "estate planning", utilising offshore international business companies, like those registered in St Lucia, is precisely about tax efficiency - ensuring the beneficial owners enjoy the asset or the proceeds therefrom without the normal tax burdens thereof. For instance, inherent in bequeathing a home or selling property are the transfer taxes, stamp duties relative to real-estate transactions, which are avoided if the real estate remains part of the assets of a firm, which itself may be free from income and other taxes because of its offshore status.
Comment