----- Original Message ----- From: "Michael Perelman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
She is in France, I am pretty sure. The article is important for much more than the Russians scandal, because it offers a glimpse into the difficulty of controlling international capital. I wish more people on the list would look at it and give me their reaction. =============== Britain is haven for money laundering, says report Charlotte Moore Saturday October 30, 2004 The Guardian Britain's failure to regulate front and shell companies is making it a haven for money laundering, a scathing report said yesterday. The report, from the anti-corruption group Transparency International, said it was "both regrettable and unacceptable" that while British offshore jurisdictions had been forced to introduce regulation, the UK itself had yet to do so. It is estimated that between �25bn and �40bn of dirty money is laundered in the UK each year. Because the City is an international centre of expertise for setting up companies and trusts, it is a magnet for criminals wishing to move funds around the world. Laurence Cockcroft, chairman of the pressure group, said: "Progress has been made in the UK in fighting money laundering ... but money laundering remains a problem of massive proportions and every effective measure must be found to stem its flow." Marcus Killick, the author of the report and chairman of Gibraltar's financial services commission, called for a new regulator of people who set up companies and trusts but said it did not have to be the Financial Services Authority. "A new authority could be developed to regulate these bodies which could be merged with the FSA later," said Mr Killick. The FSA was facing tough challenges at present as it took over regulation of mortgage providers and insurance brokers, and did not need yet more responsibilities, he added. Although the report recognised that the large majority of trusts and companies are perfectly legitimate, criminals use company and trust shells to make money laundering activities untraceable. "I have a beef about corporate directors. I cannot see how in a post-Enron, Sarbanes-Oxley environment, company directors are also allowed to be a company themselves. It does not add transparency, in fact it it makes it more difficult to see who really owns the company," said Mr Killick. Transparency International said it was not calling for a radical legal reform but for the adoption of principles similar to money laundering rules covering financial institutions. Mr Killick said: "Rather than monkeying around with trust, let's focus instead on the providers of such services." For example, powers of inspection, sanctions and tests that providers are "fit and proper", as used by offshore jurisdictions, should be adopted by the UK.
