You are here
Home ›Romney's millions in Cayman
(CNS Business): The news team of one of the major US network television stations has focused on presidential hopeful Mitt Romney’s offshore accounts in the Cayman Islands, which they say has enabled him to pay a low 15% on his earnings. The front runner for the Republican candidacy, Romney’s personal wealth, estimated at around $250 million, has come under increasing scrutiny as his GOP rivals, looking for attack material to lessen his lead in the nomination race, have made this a campaign issue. Homing in on this new point of contention between the candidates, ABC News has run a feature on Romney’s low taxes, sending a TV crew to Cayman, which they call “a notorious Caribbean tax haven”.
Romney’s financial success would seem to make him a poster child for the Republican party, which stands for low taxes for the rich, less government and trickle-down economics. However, his wealth and how he got it is now under the intense spotlight of US politics with his admission that he pays around 15% in taxes, far less than most Americans. Romney claims that over the last 10 years, his income has come overwhelmingly from investments made in the past, rather than ordinary income.
"I can tell you we follow the tax laws," he said recently. "And if there's an opportunity to save taxes, we like anybody else in this country will follow that opportunity."
ABC News, one of the three big network news broadcasts in the US, reported that Romney has used a “variety of techniques to help minimize the taxes” on his vast fortune. “He also has as much as $8 million invested in at least 12 funds listed on a Cayman Islands registry. Another investment, which Romney reports as being worth between $5 million and $25 million, shows up on securities records as having been domiciled in the Caymans.”
The news report said that Bain Capital, the private equity partnership Romney once ran, had set up "some 138 secretive offshore funds" in the Cayman Islands. “Romney campaign officials and those at Bain Capital tell ABC News that the purpose of setting up those accounts in the Cayman Islands is to help attract money from foreign investors, and that the accounts provide no tax advantage to American investors like Romney. Romney, the campaign said, has paid all US taxes on income derived from those investments.”
"His personal finances are a poster child of what's wrong with the American tax system," Washington lawyer Jack Blum told ABC News.
Rebecca J. Wilkins, a tax policy expert with Citizens for Tax Justice, said the federal government loses an estimated $100 billion a year because of tax havens. She said in the report that the "primary advantage to setting those funds up in an offshore jurisdiction like the Cayman Islands or Bermuda is it helps the investors avoid tax."
"It helps US investors avoid US tax," said Wilkins, "it helps foreign investors avoid taxes in their home country, so it's not illegal or improper to set those funds up in a foreign jurisdiction, but it makes it more attractive to investors because it helps them avoid paying taxes on that income."
In response to the ABC report, Romney Press Secretary Andrea Saul had issued a statement saying: “ABC is flat wrong. The Romney’s investments in funds established in the Cayman Islands are taxed in the very same way they would be if those funds were established in the United States. These are not tax havens and it is false to say so.”
This is not the first time the Cayman Islands has come up on the presidential campaign trail. During a debate in the last presidential race in 2008, then presidential candidate Barack Obama singled out Ugland House in the Cayman Islands, reportedly home to some 12,000 offshore corporations, as "either the biggest building or the biggest tax scam on record."
Comment Policy
The comments posted do not necessarily reflect the views of CNS or any individual staff member. All comments are posted subject to approval by CNS. Read more
Recent comments
- No problem with the result. 1 hour 22 min ago
- Good Decision 4 hours 57 min ago
- Let the rich stay in Caymana 15 hours 32 min ago
- One of the best suggestions 15 hours 35 min ago
- I agree that someone with the 15 hours 39 min ago
- My friend, you were making 17 hours 55 min ago
- I'll bet they found that it 18 hours 1 min ago
- Things that make you go hmmm, 18 hours 42 min ago
- Bo Miller for Mayor. 1 day 15 hours ago
- I'm sorry but those exactly 1 week 1 day ago
Latest Classifieds
- Scholarship Fundraiser
- Great Priced North Coast Sandy Beach Lot for Sale
- Original brand new apple iphone 5 64gb,32gb,16gb,Samsung Galaxy S3,S4
- Beautiful Cayaman Style Home
- for sale: samsung galaxy s4, apple iphone 5
- 2004 HONDA FIT
- 2004 HONDA FIT
- Walkers Rd condo for Rent - Poincianas
- Pups for sale
- SHORT TERM RENTAL
User login
Search This Site




Comments
Doh!!
Re. "You could use your "authority" position to correct the incorrect perceptions, but have no interest in doing so."
Very ignorant. The OffshoreAlert Conference, which is held annually, is all about OFCs, their products, services, differences between jurisdictions, etc. and is attended by many journalists from major news organizations, The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, Bloomberg, Reuters,etc.?
I have to ask
where is the disconnect?
If your conference is providing the "authority position" and correcting the incorrect perceptions as inferred above, then why do the same headlines come up year after year?
Is it the conference that is not providing the information in a clear enough format?
Is it the media from WSJ, NYT, Bloomberg, and Reuters who are slow learners?
Or is it that the conference and the media are indifferent and don't want to set the record straight on OFC's so that the carnival continues on year after year, preserving their purpose and mere existence?
...my guess is the third one. And the Carnival continues...
'Village Idiot' is spot on
I was replying to a posting that: "You could use your "authority" position to correct the incorrect perceptions, but have no interest in doing so. Prove me wrong. "
I then 'proved the poster wrong' by pointing out that I was indeed using my "authority position", for want of a better term, by staging The OffshoreAlert Conference every year to educate the public about OFCs.
It is ridiculous, nonsensical, idiotic, unintelligent, illogical, etc. to suggest, as you are now doing, that the mere holding of The OffshoreAlert Conference should bring a complete halt to foreign media coverage about OFCs that you don't like (not coverage that is inaccurate, I might add, but simply coverage that you don't agree with).
Nope I am okay with the
Nope I am okay with the coverage- if you read my post from earlier in this story, I state there is no such thing as bad publicity.
I stand by my claim that the media just enjoys a a juicy story in the US during election time. I have heard today (online) of Canadian media outlets specifically stating the Romney story as he is paying less tax than the average American, however it is in a legal format due to the tax rates on investments being lower in the US.
The story becomes a non story when delivered in that way- no speculation, no hype. Go figure.
and finally CNN covers the story
http://money.cnn.com/2012/01/24/news/economy/Mitt_Romney_offshore/?hpt=hp_t2
hark- CNN finally had someone do some investigative journalism to determine the answers on Romneys tax situation.
I don't believe it is Caymans duty to explain the US tax system to its media and residents- that should be the responsibility of the US media and with the help of conferences such as yours.
I think there is a lot of envy towards jurisdictions such as Cayman and Bermuda- that's just my opinion.
Counterintuitively perhaps,
Counterintuitively perhaps, but the Romney affair may actually be helpful to Cayman. Several major TV channels in the US are now very careful to say threethings. First, this is a US tax rate issue, not an offshore issue. Second, there is nothing illegal in what Romney has done. Third, it is not illegal to have an investment or account in the Cayman Islands. We should keep rerolling these statements. Tim Ridley
a little sensitive are we?
The real issue is not the Cayman Islands and our financial industry, but a political candidate that claims to have "created jobs", not having made "a lot of money" ($375,000.00 giving stupid speeches), being "unemployed", worrying about "pink slips", the list is endless...
Yes, he is paying his 15% tax rate, but still getting a greater return on investments here and paying a lower tax percentage than "his secretary".
there is no such thing as bad publicity
I still believe this adage. Consider it free advertising for the island. It all won't be perfect advertising, but it sure creates awareness at very low cost.
A little further on this topic- isn't because of the loopholes that countries have in their tax laws and investment policy that enables their citizens to participate and utilize such investment vehicles?
And isn't it the lobbyists hired by Corporate America who lobby the US government to keep the loopholes in place (and open) to enable such investment?
Assuming the answer to these two questions are yes, shouldn't the US media be chasing after the lobbyists of Corporate America and asking them the hard questions, and the government officials who are influenced by the lobbyists?
Perhaps someone can verify my understanding of the situation.
The US media is a joke, only
The US media is a joke, only interested in ratings and not indepth facts.
check out some Dem's such as Bill Clinton and report facts on everyone.
NOT WHAT YOU WANT TO BELIEVE,
BUT to get facts it involves long hours of work which seems to be a bad thing now a days.
The former Chairman of Cayman
The former Chairman of Cayman Finance has just given an in depth interview with the BBC World Service that should be broadcast on public radio channels in the United States which sets the record straight .But of course there is no guarantee they will broadcast all or any of it.
They would pulish selectively
They would pulish selectively - sections which could be take entirely out of context and would give the worst impression of The Cayman Islands.
Clearly a seasoned reporter,
Clearly a seasoned reporter, the fellow on the news featured a post office box as if that was a piece of evidence in his "tightly woven" case of malfeasance. Will someone please explain to this dimbulbs that all businesses have post office boxes as there is no home or business delivery of mail. Jeez, what a circus.
Missing the point
The Cayman Islands is domicile to many thousands of hedge funds and virtually none of them have a physicial presence or even employ a single person, which begs the questions: Why are they in Cayman? That is a valid point for any journalist to make.
The story has little to do
The story has little to do with that though David, and everything to do with Mick Romney Investing his money in international funds, shock horror. It almost appears that the journalist thinks the money should not be invested at all but given away, which seems to me like redistribution of wealth......very republican idea.
It also appears to want to link investing in Cayman with tax avoidance leading to his low rate of tax at 15%, such as the following quote:
he used “tax loopholes available only to the super rich”, which resulted in a 15% tax rate, much lower than most Americans.
But there is no loophole here, and nothing to do with Cayman, the current tax rate for long term capital gains and investment income in the US is 15%.
Any American can get this rate if they earn their income through investments rather than salary. As the Republicans support this method of taxation, and refuse to increase taxes on the rich, how can they "cry foul" if their potential electorial candidate uses these rules.
Not even sure why Cayman is even in the story, his "lower tax rate than his secretary" is solely a US tax inequality issue, everything else is just spin and bad jounalism
I'm not an expert on the
I'm not an expert on the local FS industry, but from what I've read there are a lot of possible answers to this question... Because most HFs don't actually have to have physical presence or employ people ANYWHERE. Because fund managers are able to regulate multiple funds and increase efficiencies and decrease administrative costs. Because they don't get taxed doubly and investors only have to pay on what they earn at their home country's rates. Because we have better HF managers. Because we have stronger laws to prevent fraud. Because it's easier and cheaper to set them up and be regulated. Because our regulators are better. Because why is it any of your damn business where they are domiciled if the investors are reporting their investments and paying appropriate taxes?
Where to begin?
Re. "Because we have better HF managers."
Most of the hedge fund managers are not in Cayman. They are managed from the US and other major countries. That was one of my points.
Re. "Because we have stronger laws to prevent fraud."
You're joking, right? I mean, really, how can anyone be so delusional. Pretty much the only time anyone is prosecuted for fraud in Cayman is when the perpetrator is foreign and the victims are locals. If you're a local defrauding foreigners, there is virtually zero chance of you being prosecuted.
Re. "Because our regulators are better."
Again, totally delusional. I stand to be corrected but I believe that most hedge funds are essentially unregulated in Cayman.
Re. "Because why is it any of your damn business where they are domiciled if the investors are reporting their investments and paying appropriate taxes?" reporting their investments and paying appropriate taxes"?
It's become easier in recent years because Cayman and other OFCs have been forced - against their will and certainly not voluntarily in the true meaning of that word - to pass transparency laws. Prior to that, Cayman used to openly promote itself as a centre for bank secrecy.
Like any qualified
Like any qualified sophisticated US investor (per SEC definition) he is lawfully allowed to invest in any offshore registered investment fund, be it Cayman, Ireland, BVI, Bermuda, etc (whose assets are most likely managed out of NYC or London). He is also allowed to set up a legal tax deferral wrapper via an insurance or annuity product, like any other American. There is no ripoff, or hidden money, or illegal offshore account to look for, nor is there any secrecy afforded to US Persons in any of these jurisdictions. People need to educate themselves.
A global investor. Then he is
A global investor. Then he is one American with sense and should be elected.
Way to Go Romney, don't let
Way to Go Romney, don't let those commies rob you blind over there.
Come on, Cayman Finance...
....this is the perfect opportunity for you to explain tax neutrality and our investment funds industry, which is doubtless what World Business is alluding to. It clearly needs the education.
Dinosaur journalists
Dinosaur journalists purpetuate these myths and contribute to the ongoing undue alarm. It is doubtful these pseudo-journalists/editorialists and self-ascribed "watchdogs" want to learn enough to contradict their own preset and widely-touted conclusions. We can sign any number of TIEAs, comply fully with FATCA, conform to the ever-changing OECD goalposts, and be the only nation on Earth to conclude the retroactive due diligence task, but Cayman's intriguing bad-boy portrayal (the John Grisham Effect) will never change until the international media hire people that are willing to do their homework and radically update global perception. But why would they?!? It is still intriguing and it sells. For the same reasons, XXX people like Marchant pretend to be sympathetic advocates, yet are in fact stoking the fire right under us with their other hand. With friends like these...
Keep burying those heads in the sand
US journalists are clearly entitled to question why someone running for president - a job that is funded by US taxpayers - is investing millions of dollars in offshore hedge funds that are probably managed in the US, audited in the US and most or all of whose assets are in the US and which do not have a physical presence or single employee in the Cayman Islands. Anyone who doesn't think this is open to debate or inquiry is delusional.
The stories I have read are not claiming that this is illegal but are raising questions of possible hypocrisy amd patriotism on the part of Romney. He is, after all, trying to become President of the USA, not Premier of the Cayman Islands.
None of the above implies any agreement on my part one way or the other. I'm simply stating that is is clearly a topic of legitimate interest to the media in the US.
last sentence says it all
"I'm simply stating that is is clearly a topic of legitimate interest to the media in the US."
Interest to the media is the key statment here.
It is all about headlines. Interest to the media in generating headlines, but really and truly do US taxpayers actually care? My guess is the media cares more than Joe Public.
You could use your "authority
You could use your "authority" position to correct the incorrect perceptions, but have no interest in doing so. Prove me wrong.
Maybe he invests in offshore
Maybe he invests in offshore funds because he can...wowzers, stop the press.
Add new comment