CIG discusses EU concerns with financial sector
Premier Alden McLaughlin and Financial Services Minister Tara Rivers
(CNS): Financial Services Minister Tara Rivers and Premier Alden McLaughlin have met with members of the Cayman Islands’ financial services industry associations to discuss the commitments government made to the European Union to keep it off of the latest blacklist, though no details have been revealed to the public. In a press release Friday, officials said that issues of concern about the ring-fencing of exempted companies, accounting and regulatory reporting obligations and sufficient economic substance for relevant businesses were discussed with the sector last year and that the ministry met with EU officials last week.
Minister Rivers said the meeting with local stakeholders, held Saturday, 3 March, in the Government Administration Building, was “part of the government’s plan of engagement, which encompasses dialogue with international bodies and discussions with our local stakeholders, to achieve the best outcome for the jurisdiction.”
She added that the Cayman government’s communication with the EU on Cayman’s tax regime was ongoing, and that the latest meeting with the EU Commission took place on 6 March.
As part of last year’s screening process by the European Union Code of Conduct Group for Business Taxation (EU COCG), the Cayman Islands was identified as a jurisdiction which had committed to addressing concerns relating to economic substance but there has been no indication since then what that actually means in practice.
According to the release, Minister Rivers told those present at the meeting about several new developments that the EU COCG had recently communicated to the ministry.
The release said that further details were also given of the commitments made by the Cayman Islands Government to address the EU’s concerns relating to economic substance by December 2018. These commitments were initially discussed with industry in November last year.
“The ministry’s proposed timeline for meeting the commitments made to the EU was outlined, and further details provided on the concerns to be addressed,” the release said without providing any details.
Category: Business, Financial Services
Did they remember to take an abacus?
Come on, anyone with a modicum of sense knows that these nouveau politicians are only serious about the effect of crypto on the new world economy of which they hope Cayman will be a leading member.
AI is said to be the creator of crypto and then you link that up wth dart trying to buy the entire island, I would say that wwe have a conspiracy on our hands. Seriously, is this the legacy that Helen Kilpatrick wanted to leave us with?
I would suggest that we all be a little more introspective the next time we see a US Coast Guard pull up on our shores.
When you couple these pertinet facts with the deficit in the pension schemes, I would certainly hazard a guess and say that civil unrest is highly likely.
Well, Cayman, this is what you voted for. You can only blame yourselves.
What a load of incoherent nonsense.
Holland (EU) is notorious for it holding company regime. The Dutch ‘substance’ requirements are not far off what is already in place for many companies in Cayman. https://www.burenlegal.com/en/news/new-dutch-substance-requirements-published
This may even lead to more functions being performed in Cayman (like they used to be) e.g. local fund administration, more local directors and even CEC (place of business) may benefit.
I am sure this may chase away some business but it seems like this is not a massive hurdle and perhaps the gained business and local jobs outweigh the potential loss of business (if it will be lost at all).
Well one way to discuss is to just lock shop. CIG seem to make commitments on behalf of the Financial Business but have not included them for advise or on these discussions. Then it’s like come back and throw the signed deal to the Banks and other business and say, “comply or else” and here is another tax you got to pay.
Scotia Bank could be the start.
(Wait a minute here. So the main Branch of Scotia supposed to close and move to Camana Bay? Building purchase opportunities right next to Kirk Freeport. ?
I smell a deal going on here. Cayman daddy Trump or as we call him Uncle Dart where are you.?) Nahhh must just be a coincidence again.)
With all the restrictions and hoops and loops it’s time to just put the money under the pillow. Easier to open an account in the USA than in this place.
CIG need to tell the EU to XXXX off. How much business and revenue is generated via the EU? This is ridiculous because no matter what the Cayman Islands does or implements will never be enough for the unelected socialist buerocrats of the EU.
The UK voted to leave the EU for many valid reasons Cayman needs to look out for its best interests because there will always be more hoops to jump thru due to EU members failed domestic tax codes and legislation.
In my company, we have a lot of business through the EU, and it is not as easy to escape as you think it is. You think the US is any better? If we don’t have the EU, the US will be seeking to control our financial industry. They already are trying with fatca and competing domiciles for captive and other business. Sad thing is, we need them both…
@11:11 Spot On!! Agree with you 100%.
Ya damn right 8_35
CIG will discuss anything but crime it seems! WAKE UP you overpaid eediats!
The hurdle for economic substance should be set by the relevant onshore tax authority, not by the Cayman Islands, or any other tax neutral jurisdiction. Why would a tiny island territory, with no corporate tax regime, or tax enforcement infrastructure, be put in the business of refereeing compliance with dynamic international foreign tax codes? If there is a problem with foreign gov’t tax code, it’s of that country’s creation, and the obligation and influence to fix it, is on them, not us. There are minds and management rules in many of these countries already. All we should be expected to do, just like the big G7 countries, is honor our CRS obligations and share the info they request to help them catch and prosecute their tax citizens.
If Cayman choses to have a special regime to market to foreign businesses with no connection to it via the concept of an exempt company then in the modern world it is entirely appropriate for it to be required to ensure that the businesses registered in Cayman for convenience comply with relevant international requirements.
It is unreasonable to expect tax-neutral jurisdictions to play the role of, and/or replace paid extraterritorial tax enforcement officials, as qualified experts on dynamic tax law and regulations worldwide. Especially when, in the modern world, those foreign experts will already have channels to access this data.