and with the system that is operating for say european corporations which are also taxed on a territoriality basis well mr travers you just said that this deferred to station regime was intended and in fact it was promoted by the american government but at the same time the previous american administration was very critical about it and i think that's the most ironic thing in all of that for me is that these kind of changes were implemented not by the obama administration which one would think ideologically would have been most predisposed to it but by the trumpet ministration your opinion was that ultimately an issue of political will corporate might have perhaps something else. i have to say i agree with you i'm completely confused about why a republican administration made a change that was essentially part of the democratic philosophy and which the democrats have been frustrated about trying to change for well over fifty years

i can only think that somewhere deep within what they call the deep state in the u.s. treasury there were left leaning. bureaucrats who implemented this change to a territoriality based system protect sation without anybody actually being aware of what was going on but it is i agree with you very hard to explain in terms of the the political positions of the two u.s. parties historically well mr travers i think we would agree that as a flayed mary many american political positions are extremely hard to explain from a rational point of view but we have to take a very short break here let's go back to the discussion in the few moments.

across europe municipalities are taking their water supply back from private companies to me to peep out the cells with simple song alone even some company elsewhere though they invited private companies to take over the utilities many bought a hell of. a lad from us you guys who got. pieces of us to quote them out. for you man but then left bill brought up locals are ready to stand up for the basic human right of access to water it's about water but it's also over much more than water it's about to hurt and the redistribution of. their date downwards if you want to.

the best out of the photos of. the concert was preparing to perform i had to actually prepare myself to die. you don't know so you did what i'm sorry you're sorry trust me. as most of. you know you just you know homo bought stuff sorry for her. scanty was. really good so don't see. so we'll see if you take. what traditionally if it was that you could with us there was just that yes more here can't be patient so i told appear to education a couple so kind of toilet b.s.

i mean here you. are. welcome back to worlds apart without any travers senior partner at an offshore law firm based in the cayman islands just before the break we were talking about the united states finally returning to the territorial principle of tech taxation and some would argue that the. americans want to take it even further there is another standing initiative aimed at the repatriation of taxes i'm talking about before an account tax compliance act which compels non the us financial institutions to report on the assets of both you as citizens and the us residents worldwide do you

think trump is likely to make it work and don't you think that perhaps these ten. tauriel principle. may be taking way too far with essentially b. extraterritorial nature of that act i think think there are actually two quite different things moving us corporations to a territoriality based system of taxation with regard to global trading activity is one thing. the foreign account has compliance act all factor is and i was directed at something quite different that was directed at ensuring that u.s. citizens who are also taxed on a citizenship basis. as were u.s. corporations pay taxes on overseas awnings and so what fatca did was ensure that u.s. citizens outside of the united states have to report all accounts that they

maintain outside the united states to charis it's not just about american citizens our residents reporting on those accounts i want to understand that but it's about making non-u.s. financial institutions essentially be responsible for implementing that reporting in turning the branches of foreign financial institutions essentially into subsidiaries of the i.r.s. don't you think that's a bridge too far now or go i agree with you i was describing what fact was intended to do what you just said is absolutely correct the way it is implemented is to to effectively make known u.s. banking organizations or u.s. banking organizations operating ever sees as effective tax collectors for fall for the i.r.s. and there is worse legislation that has now come out of europe called the comma reporting standard which does exactly the same thing as between about ninety countries now that are signed out to it and clued in incidentally russia which

requires those ninety countries to make automatic reporting to the home jurist. action of every investor who has an account in a signatory jurisdiction so for example if we have russian. citizens with accounts in the cayman islands we must ascertain the identity of their citizens and make reports on their trading profits in any cayman island to cal it to the russians or it is mrs harris i will tell you why the russians see well at least the majority of the russian people and that the some part of the russian government don't see much problem but that is because they believe that the main purpose of legislation is to provide a more intense information exchange between tax authorities well but to be fair ethically at least would make tax evasion which is a huge problem for this country a little bit more difficult especially as the new technology come on board the next bit of this process is it too naive to say just that big golden era of hiding

assets especially ill gotten assets which is the problem for russia for example is slowly but surely coming to an end i think i have absolutely right. i would say that it had come to an end in the cayman islands almost twenty years ago when we entered into the tax information exchange agreements for tax evasion which is what you're describing now. that was off the table for at least twenty years and they came at all it just was not possible to do it because of the ability of tax or thought has to make inquiry under the treaties a common reporting standard takes it to a new and higher level by requiring pro-active reporting with regard to those accounts of any known resident of the cayman islands back to the tax authorities in question so i think you're right it is true to say that not every country in the world is a signatory of the common reporting standard fatca operates in relation to the

united states only and is extraterritorial globally as a matter of u.s. law. the cohen reporting said operates differently by way of a multilateral treaty and i would say that you're absolutely right it makes it virtually impossible now to evade taxes by way of known disclosure in a criminal way by use of any offshore account now you know i have a few friends wealthy relatively wealthy individuals who complain. and that's what this is how they call themselves starting to feel like refugees around the world and i understand that's a preposterous suggestion but it does relate a certain degree of desperation at the inability to find a home not just for yourself but for your capital and sometimes the origin of that capital is quite questionable you've been very forthcoming in saying that the cayman islands and stressing the transparency of the cayman islands and i believe

it to the times just as network to verify your claims but i wonder if you believe there are still destinations in the world that may provide a drive to reach for the for the people who feel. not welcome in countries like yours for example i don't think i don't think that people who hide their money should be encouraged and i think it's going to be extremely difficult for them to do so but i do have the answer for them if you are a russian citizen and you want to avoid paying russian taxes then you must come and live in the cayman islands because russia also applies a territoriality based system of taxation and the problem is is for high net worth a high net worth individuals who want to live in london paris or new york and not pay the applicable taxes as a result of doing so that game i think is effectively overwrought right here much

as you say. so the answer therefore is that you actually need to take up residence in one of these indirect. taxation jurisdictions and in that way you will be able to protect your assets and not pay income corporation profits or capital gains tax but that is i think the only legitimate way of doing it now now i'm not sure you should distribute such a such device especially for free on the airwaves but anywhere you mention london and there is an interesting development in that regard in the u.k. we just passed an order allowing the authorities to freeze and recover property in excess of fifty thousand pounds if individuals are unable to explain how they acquired those assets and it strikes me as a brilliant idea making the government the ultimate beneficiary of the large scale money laundering scheme that has been going on in london for decades what do you make of it do you see the same light yes i mean i think i think the issue is this firstly it's clearly borne out of frustration. because the the problem the author

or his have is this that the way the international network works for lower enforcement on money laundering requires you to have a preliminary if an offense committed in that in the jurisdiction of the residence of the individual for example russia or or the hypothetical african state ruritania you have to have a predicate offense there for the international money laundering system to work and that's where that's where the system is broken down because even after panama papers panama was a jurisdiction where no transparency which was very popular with money or grows. even all depending on papers you find very very few criminal offenses now in the originating jurisdictions and until you have an offense in those jurisdictions the

international network of information gathering count can't operate and so what the . united kingdom legislation is down is reverse the burden of proof but you know if there isn't an additional thing even if there isn't an information about you committing some crime in your original country you can always claim to political prosecution and in fact a number of our russian bankers who stole money from the people on the very large scale doing exactly that in the united kingdom it would be interesting to see whether the authorities will be able to go after them but i want to ask you something did different because you're always on the defensive when it comes to people from the u.k. or the united states preaching transparency or you know a tax on avoidance but i think it's also fair to turn the tables around because it's not even controversial to say anymore that london and new york house become the largest offshore destinations i mean it's it's it's i guess a statement of fact that in this day and age what do you think the most motivates

the british authorities to pull the plug on it now to pass that low at this point of time did they finally find the courage to do that and that address the problem or is it just an opportune moment to fill the state coffers well i think you're absolutely right i mean no money launderer invests his proceeds in an offshore jurisdiction mr malkovich invested his seven billion dollars a lot of proceeds through new york missed a batch or the nigerian dictator bested his his four billion pounds in this in the city of london money orders need things to buy they need houses on the east side or in belgravia london says the ultimate destination for these proceeds is always being the on the shore capitals i think that that is all of a sudden a new age if you like you might call it political opportunism. by

it is. it has become politically very incorrect to be a jurisdiction like london and less so new york strength but like london where this kind of. cover a range meant is is is tacitly accepted by the or far it is and i think it's extremely difficult for the british or thought he has given the transparency they've insisted on interesting like the cayman islands they have a double standard not to apply the same level of transparency with regard to. places like london where these proceeds are actually loans the special interest in this it sure is because they don't seem to be losing much they're only gaining as i said i think if that scheme is implemented at the end of the day the british government will be the ultimate beneficiary of all those ill gotten assets because

it can claim it for itself. maybe maybe not i mean a government will claim it maybe the british government will have to hand those monies if the money laundering occurs for that if you need to cleanse ahmed rashid nation and that goes for years if not decades and there are also political issues involved so it's easier to keep it for yourself and for your budgets and that's where i think that's a really brilliant idea well it may it may it may well be as i say you know i'm not here to defend the way the system of international law enforcement works because we know it doesn't work that's quite clear you know when i started in the offshore world over forty years ago it was said there were two trillion dollars of black money circulating annually and there's still two trillion dollars of black money circulating annually so i'm not sure what advances are really being made. but i do think there are there are systems if money was lord out of nigeria if the british

government confiscates it in britain there are systems to ensure that money is paid over at the request of the nigerian or thought his it's not it's not just a smash and grab operation by the british government well let's hope for that and let's hope that the plan is to russia as well anyway mr travers we have to leave it there i really appreciate your being on the show and to our viewers please. keep the conversation going on out social media beaches as for me i hope to see you again same place same time here and i will depart. long. term. national governments in various locations still don't even understand what crypto

currency is how mining works what bitcoin does and that confusion in that learning curve that they haven't bothered to climb leads to a lot of missed policy choices messed up policy choices and it's because of a massive confusion out there so little is known about bitcoin except the currencies at all levels of government most levels of the consumer world and even within the crypto community itself. despite its turbulent history the soviet union has dominated international sport however little was known about the use of those champions from but. you know. when i'm sure. we would be if you are. this woodward workers who

lose the reserve for you if you were to the first some of you to limp it team of one nine hundred fifty two when included siege survivors concentration camp prisoners and frontline soldiers were fewer maybe a good thing to do with corruption because you might. is that an issue for the government because of worst misfortune for one full through shock or we have to get out of the business to which you think that we are going to get there that their actions your question will for through personal or for enthusiasm both of whom you do when you're at home still more simply between your work the workers rearming and the who feel.

airstrikes by the u.s. led coalition hit syrian pro-government forces fighting i still u.s. central command says the attack was carried out to defend an american backed security. it's the final day before the start of the winter olympics and dozens of russian athletes are still awaiting a ruling on whether they can compete in south korea but tensions over the games don't stop there as norway now faces doping allegations to. the u.k. campaign aimed at overturning breaks that received nearly half a million pounds from u.s. billionaire george soros.

a warm welcome you're watching r.t. international was me thinking. the u.s. led coalition has conducted air strikes against pro-government forces in syria have been conflicting reports on the number of casualties u.s. central command described it as a defensive move but russia's defense ministry said the unit was hit as it was carrying out an operation against an ice also. while carrying out an operation to locate and terminate an eyesore sleeper so near form oil refinery a unit of pro-government forces was suddenly shelled and then hit by airstrikes by the u.s. led coalition vis was overkill pure and simple if the numbers are true i would see a demonstration of she have brute force perhaps you know to send perhaps the send a message that nevertheless the united states says that it's it's in syria and it

will defend itself and it has the right to defend itself in this instance in defense of coalition and partner forces the coalition conducted strikes against attack and forces to repel the act of aggression against partners in the global coalition's defeat danish mission if the situation is like how they describe that they were indeed attacks while fighting isis to make up the right to self defense well if you take them at face value you could think so but the people they just killed were also fighting isis and recently they have been making much better progress against isis then the united states led coalition or their partner forces the the s.d.f. the syrian government has of course called all of this an act of aggression unwarranted and unjust but just for you information all of this happened in there is or near a rich oil field and refinery conical it's called it was liberated last

year by the u.s. led coalition very quickly and in fact the u.s. partner forces seem to have a knack for liberating areas with oil under them much quicker than they do those areas that don't have oil under them since since all the oil rich areas were taken in that as ordered by the s.d.f. progress against isis seems to have dropped to a snail's pace but you know regardless. here america has said that it is in syria only to fight isis today isis has been all but defeated in syria but you don't see the pentagon packing its bags our military policy in syria has not changed our priority remains to defeat of isis whether it's in iraq or in syria that is our intent to defeat isis and not do anything more than that the united states will maintain a military presence in syria focused on ensuring that isis cannot reemerge total

withdrawal of american personnel at this time would restore assad who continue his brutal treatment against his own people opposed to principle if you have a lack of a fundamental commitment to our agreements that is typical of the current u.s. diplomacy including the reasons why the americans stay in syria rex tillerson peter he stated that the only goal in syria was the defeat of isis or now they've got farmland bush's plans with more of the most with the mixed messages here is the pentagon staying general mattis said that the united states will stay in syria will fight in syria for as long as the united states wants to fight in syria i mean that's you know pretty direct now you see how this might sound strange go to syria i'm a vital and while there you start killing syrians in syria in self-defense. and

i discussed this with joshua landis director of the center and middle east studies at the university of oklahoma welcome to the program sir now washington are cited self-defense as a reason for the strike but why and how would an anti eisel force see another until i saw force as a threat well this is this is coming at the end of a long war the united states has taken about twenty eight percent syrian territory and over fifty percent of its oil. the tillerson is not just arab the united states not just there to fight isis although that has been the primary goal but two weeks ago. secretary of state tell us and others rolled out a number for other reasons for being in the syria inch included rolling back their line and forcing assad out of power and to do that they argued that they would hold on to these northern resources that would force russia to push

out assad if they wanted them back so this is leverage in order to roll back iran and get rid of assad aside yes i get it he wants that oil for himself there was a race only a few months ago who would get those fields and he's probing undoubtedly under the pretext of fighting isis the united states didn't thank you was the u.s. claims that brady is the demarcation line that they had called the russians and told them that they should back up and this. convoy went ahead anyway so the united states is trying to lay down the law here and not let anybody wrote and as we know the turks threatened in mendocino to take on the americans over there so the united states i think is very anxious that both syria and turkey will begin to push america out and try to push america out of northern syria because what he likes there and would have thought of as the reemerging being used as a reason or an excuse to stay in the country do you think syria could become

another afghanistan for america where clearly america said it's a very ambitious goals if it's serious about turning out assad and pushing back the iranians the americans are going to be in syria for a very long time to come if they want to help the kurds the p.y.t. and syrian defense forces set up in a. democratic government in the north of syria helping rebuild. america could be there for decades we don't know not what america's plans are right now they have set themselves new guns because when trump came in during his campaign he said that he was no longer going to get involved in regime change but just two weeks ago the united states we committed itself to regime change in syria and this is change the game was real and is correct of the center for middle east studies at the university of oklahoma thank you for your time over.

the start of the winter olympics in south korea is just one day away but the fate of dozens of russia's athletes still hangs in the balance forty seven sportsmen and women from russia have appealed to the court of arbitration for sport to overturn the i.o.c. its decision over alleged doping violations the ruling is due to be announced on friday well among those who've filed appeals are some of russia's most celebrated athletes for example six time olympic gold medalist victor on and thought she game's champion anton shapiro lin r.t.c. the trunk of reports from the olympic host city of toronto. for almost two and a half hours the court of arbitration for sport was listening to the russian side which have now left led by their lawyer so these people won't get another chance to give their arguments to the court and now it is all up to the cast members they

promised to announce some sort of decision by noon korean time on friday to go over to the bone we came here to defend the needs gasper listen to our arguments and the decision will be reached within twenty four hours so things won't be decided to were few hours before the opening ceremony which of course puts extra pressure on the russian athletes on wednesday the secretary general hinted that still their mind to be at delay now here we are looking at three scenarios either cas decides to do nothing about the international olympic committee's move not to invite the russian athletes who have never been caught for cheating and without specifying particular reasons for doing that or the court of arbitration for sport chooses to give the green light to the russians and in that case that would be a massive blow for the audio scene and that would in turn mean that the international olympic committee discriminated against the russians the third

scenario we heard about from an online leak that cannot be confirmed but reports are suggesting that there could be a split decision on the russian athletes i'm standing by here at the temporary home of the court of arbitration for sport and i'll give you any news as soon as it comes out showing their support for russian athletes and sports fans protect the light show on to a building opposite the well the anti doping agency headquarters in canada it's sad the only doping among russian and picked team is the support and love of russian people russians coming. but athletes whose participation in the games is not in question are now embroiled in controversy too after a documentary published a list of drugs that norway's team doctor had brought to pyong chan a remarkable amount of aslam medication was noted sixty.