May, 06 2016, 04:00pm EDT
Global Witness on Panama Papers Impact, Steps Taken by U.S. Government to Address Anonymous Companies, Need For Comprehensive Beneficial Ownership Legislation
On Eve of Panama Papers Searchable Database Release, U.S. Admin Actions Display a New Sense of Urgency
WASHINGTON
The Panama Papers exposed the dark world of tax havens, anonymous shell companies,and the various facilitators - attorneys, incorporation agents, and others - who love them. Yesterday, The Treasury Department finalized a long-awaited rule requiring greater due diligence requirements by banks. Treasury announced a plan for new draft legislation specifically to increase transparency of the ultimate owners of American companies and to strengthen the U.S. anti-money laundering framework. While we are glad the Obama Administration clearly recognizes the seriousness of the problems here and wants to take action to address them, the fundamental question is whether their proposals will actually do the job. There remains a dire need to institute strong transparency measures that will help end the crime and corruption facilitated by these instruments of secrecy and deception.
We've seen swift response in other countries in response to the scandals laid bare by this historic leak.Government officials have resigned, others are under investigations, and still others have announced actions they plan to take to address this.
We have initially reviewed the rule and proposed legislation to see if they include the core elements needed to address this urgent problem. These include:
- Global Witness believes that in order for banks to conduct due diligence to effectively prevent dirty money flowing through their accounts via anonymous companies, and for law enforcement and others to be able to determine the real owners of companies that may be involved in corrupt or criminal activity, they must have accurate, complete and timely information about those companies' owners.
- The definition of a company's beneficial owner or owners must include a robust definition that includes both the concept of 'ownership' as well as 'control' to guard against bad actors using proxies to conduct business on their behalf. The threshold for disclosure ought to be low enough to cover most business activity and shouldn't provide an easy blueprint for money launderers to evade new requirements.
- The information should be collected at the right times - both when the company is first formed and when the ownership changes.
- Lastly, the information should be accessible to those who need it most; at a minimum there needs to be a clear mechanism for law enforcement to gain access to this information in the appropriate course of an investigation.
Unfortunately an initial analysis of Treasury's new rule indicates that it falls far short of this mark. For example, under the new rule, the threshold for reporting ownership information is 25%, and entities reporting beneficial ownership information to banks can list a senior manager - not an owner - as the primary name on the disclosure form. This means that it is possible to comply with the regulation without actually naming a beneficial owner. While ultimately it may be that the rule creates some forward momentum, the weaknesses in this rule represent a missed opportunity by the Administration to get the details right the first time.
Global Witness has reviewed a draft of the proposed legislation and based on that information, it seems unlikely the Administration's proposed bill will meet this test.If it doesn't, the Administration risks muddying the waters by offering half-measures, which could undercut more comprehensive solutions, put the U.S. out of step with the rest of the world, and increase our position as a haven for dirty money.
Global Witness continues to support stronger due diligence requirements for banks and other players in the financial system in order to prevent the U.S. from becoming a hub for the proceeds of corrupt and criminal funds generated at home and abroad. We continue to support the Incorporation Transparency and Law Enforcement Assistance Act (S. 2489/H.R. 4450) bipartisan legislation introduced in Congress by Senators Whitehouse (D-RI) and Feinstein (D-CA) and Representatives Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Peter King (R-NY).
And, we hope that the Administration will be willing to work with civil society and allies in Congress who have championed this issue for years to pursue meaningful and effective legislation to tackle anonymous companies that will truly address this problem in the years to come.
LATEST NEWS
Groups Say Trump Trial Juries Must Be Protected From Right-Wing Threats
"Self-serving assaults on institutions and individuals are what Trump and his enablers do."
Oct 02, 2023
As former U.S. President Donald Trump appeared in New York Supreme Court on Monday for the beginning of a civil fraud trial, over 30 advocacy organizations released a letter stressing the need to protect juries in his four ongoing criminal cases.
Trump faces a total of 91 felony charges: four in the federal 2020 election case; 40 in the federal classified documents case; 34 in the New York case that stems from alleged hush money payments during the 2016 cycle; and 13 in the Georgia election case.
"Jurors—past, present, and future—are under attack from Donald Trump and those who do his bidding," states the groups' letter, which came just hours after the 2024 Republican front-runner's social media tirade about the civil case that will be decided by a judge.
"Self-serving assaults on institutions and individuals are what Trump and his enablers do," the letter argues. "These attacks threaten centuries-old American institutions designed by the Framers to hold to account any leader who would be king."
The letter highlights that in early August, after a Washington, D.C. grand jury indicted Trump, he wrote on social media, "If you go after me, I will come after you."
A few days later, he said, "No way I can get a fair trial, or even close to a fair trial, in Washington, D.C." The letter says that "it's hard to miss the import of this message in a jurisdiction that draws its jury pool from a population of which 45% are Black Americans."
As
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution—which exclusively reported on the new letter—noted:
Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis has sought increased protections after Trump supporters posted personal details about the grand jury that indicted the former president, leading to angry threats and harassment.
And Willis, herself, said she's been targeted by threats and racial slurs, forcing her to take steps to protect her daughters, father, and ex-husband.
Superior Court Judge Scott McAfee recently banned reporters and the public from identifying jurors in the trial against Trump and 18 co-defendants or disclosing other personal details about them. He also required lawyers to refer to them only as their numbers in court.
In addition to detailing examples of the ex-president and his allies' recent attacks on juries, the letter points out that Trump claimed the 2016 and 2020 elections would be "rigged" against him, and after his loss last cycle, he spread the "Big Lie" that he won and "successfully eroded faith in democracy and elections among his followers."
"Trump is now deploying the same, pre-judgment playbook upon the jurors and system of justice positioned to decide his fate in criminal court," asserts the letter. "His attacks are designed to eviscerate an institution of justice inherited from English law and in existence in America before the Constitution that enshrined it. Juries protect individual freedom."
"Trump, by undermining institutions that check both government power and lawless individuals, aims to release himself from all constraints. For this reason, his vicious attacks on juries are sure to escalate," the letter warns, concluding with a call for all "who believe in the rule of law and the jury system" to "speak up and defend such institutions under attack."
The letter was organized by the Not Above the Law coalition. Signatories include Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), Common Cause, Free Speech for People, Government Accountability Project, Indivisible, People for the American Way, Public Citizen, Sierra Club, and Stand Up America.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Climate Researcher Threatened With Termination for Taking a Stand Against Flying
"I am prepared to pay this price, if it helps raising awareness among the public and the societal leadership on the desperate situation we are in," said Giancarlo Grimalda.
Oct 02, 2023
A climate researcher based in Kiel, Germany said Monday that he was prepared to lose his job at a globalization think tank, after his employer gave him an ultimatum and demanded he go against his climate-based objection to aviation travel in order to return to his place of work—a requirement at least one critic said was rooted in retaliation for the scientist's activism.
Gianluca Grimalda has been working on a field assignment in Papua New Guinea for the past six months, studying the relationship between globalization, climate change, and social cohesion for his employer, the Kiel Institute for the World Economy (IfW). He traveled to Papua New Guinea without the use of airplanes and has planned to get back to Germany the same way, boarding cargo ships, ferries, trains, and coaches to avoid 3.6 tonnes of carbon emissions.
Grimalda was originally scheduled to be finished with his work on September 10, but said in an essay on Monday that he received permission from the head of his department to remain in Papua New Guinea after wrapping up the project and noted that he is able to complete his work while traveling.
Nevertheless, on Friday the president of IfW informed Grimalda that he was required to be back in Kiel on Monday, which would require him to board a plane—a demand that he said ignores the climate impact of aviation travel and the effects already being felt by communities across the globe, including in Papua New Guinea.
"Traveling by plane would produce around four tons of carbon dioxide—the greenhouse gas responsible for global warming," wrote Grimalda. "In my outbound journey, I limited my emission to two tons by traveling over land and sea for 35 days over 16,0000 of the 22,000 kilometers. In my inbound journey I plan to cover the entire distance without catching a plane, which would limit carbon dioxide emissions to 400 kilograms—ten times less than traveling by plane."
By resolving to carry out his "slow-travel" plans instead of flying back to Kiel, Grimalda said he is risking his job.
"I know that most people would swallow the bitter pill, take a plane, and go ahead with their work—both as a professional and as an activist," wrote Grimalda. "With this job, I have enough economic stability and spare time to pursue environmental causes. Nevertheless, I believe that we have reached the point where instrumental rationality is no longer applicable. The most recent scientific evidence says that we have transgressed six out of nine planetary boundaries and that several ecosystems are close to collapse (or likely past their point of collapse) because of temperature rise—in turn caused by greenhouse gases emissions."
Grimalda acknowledged that his individual refusal to support the airline industry is no match for the continued emissions of the sector as well as fossil fuel giants, industrial farming, and other corporate actors.
"My decision not to catch a plane will mean close to nothing for the protection of the environment," he wrote. "'That plane will fly even if you have not boarded it,' many people have already told me. This is true, but giving less money to the aviation industry may mean fewer planes in the future. In any case, all the science I know, all the evidence I see, point to the fact that we are in [an] emergency. In [an] emergency, extraordinary actions should be taken. That is why, with enormous sadness, I have decided not to take a plane and face all the consequences this will lead to."
"I am prepared to pay this price, if it helps raising awareness among the public and the societal leadership on the desperate situation we are in," Grimalda added. "It is my act of love to the current and future generations, to the animal species under threat of extinction, to the idea of humanity that I instinctively and undeservedly abide by."
Grimalda and direct action group Scientist Rebellion went public with the researcher's dilemma on the same day the Institute for Policy Studies (IPS) in the U.S. released a report on private jet travel out of Laurence G. Hanscom Field near Boston, the largest private aviation field in New England.
Constrasting with Grimalda's commitment to reduce his support for carbon-intensive activities, IPS found that over 18 months, private jet owners and operators were responsible for an estimated 106,676 tons of carbon emissions, with half of those flights used for recreational or luxury travel. More than 40% of the flights were less than an hour long.
Climate groups in the area are currently pushing to ensure developers don't expand Hanscom in order to avoid even more planet-destroying emissions.
Grimalda told Scientist Rebellion that IfW has withheld his pay for the month of September without notice.
Julia Steinberger, a lead author of the latest report by the International Panel on Climate Change—which reiterated that "human activities, principally through emissions of greenhouse gasses, have unequivocally caused global warming" and warned that "approximately 3.3 to 3.6 billion people live in contexts that are highly vulnerable to climate change"—said it was "extraordinary that a research institute threatens to dismiss a researcher for doing his job too diligently and for avoiding flying during a climate emergency."
She added that she believes IfW aims to "retaliate for Gianluca's past participation in civil disobedience on climate change with Scientist Rebellion."
Grimalda has taken part in actions such as a blockade of the entrance of a biofuel refinery controlled by Eni, Italy's energy company.
The researcher expressed hope that his latest action "will sound yet another alarm bell to the ears of an inactive political leadership."
"As a scientist, I feel I have the moral responsibility to be proactive in sounding such alarms," Grimalda wrote. "It is true that thus far hundreds, if not thousands, of protests have all but gone unheard and have changed very little. Nevertheless, 'social tipping points' have existed for much progressive social change and things have changed rapidly for the good after a critical mass of support has been garnered."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Nobel Prize for mRNA Researchers Shows Power of Public Funding for Vaccines, Campaigners Say
"Public funding delivers incredible medical advances and that should be a priority for all countries, but pharmaceutical companies cannot be trusted to share technology with the world."
Oct 02, 2023
Scientists Katalin Karikó and Drew Weissman were awarded the Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine on Monday for research that paved the way for the messenger RNA vaccines against Covid-19—critical work that, as campaigners quickly pointed out, benefited from substantial U.S. government funding.
Dr. Mohga Kamal-Yanni, policy co-lead for the People's Vaccine Alliance, said in a statement that "this award challenges the claim that it was solely big pharmaceutical companies who saved the world from Covid-19."
"Just like the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine, Karikó and Weissman's groundbreaking work on mRNA vaccines received a huge amount of public funding," said Kamal-Yanni. "Pharmaceutical companies have refused to share mRNA technologies with developers and researchers in developing countries."
The Nobel Prize committee credited Karikó and Weissman with fundamentally changing "our understanding of how mRNA interacts with our immune system."
"The laureates contributed to the unprecedented rate of vaccine development during one of the greatest threats to human health in modern times," the committee said.
As The Washington Postsummarized, the pair "discovered how to chemically tweak messenger RNA, turning basic biology into a technology ready to change the world when the pandemic struck. Their discovery is incorporated into the coronavirus vaccines made by Moderna and Pfizer and its German partner, BioNTech, which have now been given billions of times."
But the Post and other major outlets covering Karikó and Weissman's Nobel prize-winning contributions did not emphasize—or even mention—that some of the scientists' work was funded by the National Institutes of Health. Karikó and Weissman patented their findings in 2006 and later licensed the patents to Moderna and BioNTech, Pfizer's coronavirus vaccine partner.
According to an analysis by Knowledge Ecology International (KEI), Weissman "appears as the principal investigator on a total of 42 projects funded by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) between 1998 and 2020, representing $18,323,060 in costs."
"Karikó was the principal investigator of four projects funded by the NIH between 2007 and 2011, totaling $1,234,462 in costs," KEI observed. "In other words, the United States government funded and has certain rights over at least some of the foundational Karikó and Weissman patents directed to mRNA discoveries."
"As governments discuss how to prepare for the next pandemic, they should learn from the story of mRNA."
Throughout the pandemic and into the present, vaccine makers such as Pfizer and Moderna have opposed global calls to share their vaccine recipes and technology with the world, fiercely clinging to their monopoly control over production and using that control to force governments into one-sided contracts favorable to the pharmaceutical industry—even though their vaccines were developed with massive public support.
A
study published in The BMJ earlier this year estimated that the U.S. government pumped nearly $32 billion into the development, production, and purchase of mRNA coronavirus vaccines.
The Biden administration, meanwhile, has declined to use its ownership of key patents or the leverage provided by public funding to force pharmaceutical companies to do everything they can to ensure the equitable distribution of lifesaving vaccine technology.
Kamal-Yanni of the People's Vaccine Alliance said Monday that "fortunately, Weissman is helping a WHO-backed mRNA program which aims to develop mRNA technology in lower-income countries, even while pharmaceutical companies refuse to share their know-how."
"As governments discuss how to prepare for the next pandemic, they should learn from the story of mRNA," said Kamal-Yanni. "Public funding delivers incredible medical advances and that should be a priority for all countries, but pharmaceutical companies cannot be trusted to share technology with the world."
Peter Maybarduk, director of the Access to Medicines program at Public Citizen, echoed that message, saying in a statement that "today's Nobel must ring as a call for equity and health justice, and a call to change a massively unjust pharmaceutical industry."
"Moderna, Pfizer, and BioNTech still largely control the available vaccines and in some countries have significantly increased their price, despite the billions in public funding on which the vaccines rely," said Maybarduk. "By supporting initiatives to share science and technology, and by funding vaccine infrastructure, governments can help blunt the effects of disease, and bring a coda of justice to a terribly unjust time."
This story has been updated to include a statement from Public Citizen.
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular
Independent, nonprofit journalism needs your help.
Please Pitch In
Today!
Today!