Hacker News Reader

I don't know what to tell you; the Cayman Islands for years has been ranked top of the list of tax havens and money laundering locations for years and years.

Those are just facts.

https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-n...

You both are right though. Cayman Islands is actually a trusted jurisdiction for parking cash for companies, part of the reason why a lot of hedge funds are based out of it. Same for BVI, the Channel Islands, etc. Those are jurisdictions enabled by US' own laws to park American money - they fully comply with American rules and if the rich are allowed to park their money, it's because US Law lets them to do so.

Now if someone or some corporation's hiding money in Dubai, Cyprus or Liechtenstein or one of those dozens of other dodgy tax havens, then you can bet your ass there's something shady behind the scenes. My neighbor for a while in Dubai was a wanted criminal in the UK.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cayman_Islands

> The nation's low tax rates have led to it being used as a tax haven for corporations; there are 100,000 companies registered in the Cayman Islands, more than the population itself. The Cayman Islands have come under criticism for allegations of money laundering and other financial crimes, including a 2016 statement by former US president Barack Obama that described a particular building which was the registered address of over 12,000 corporations as a "tax scam".

Our decision to have lower taxes, because we don’t need to raise more money, seems an odd thing to criticize us for.

Companies do not choose Cayman. They choose “not my home/operating country”, then as a well regulated and safe third party location many of them end up in Cayman. And you should be glad they do, because here they operate transparently and legally, and if it’s for tax benefits whatever tax loopholes exist in their home countries are closed they’ll have no choice but to richly comply. (BTW, In surveys the most frequent reason cited for being in cayman is regulatory neutrality, not tax mitigation.)

And if Obama has a problem with hundreds of companies sharing an address, I can’t wait until he finds out about Delaware. Or a post office!

> Our decision to have lower taxes, because we don’t need to raise more money, seems an odd thing to criticize us for.

I don't see where the Cayman Islands were criticized.

You might not like it, but the Caymans are absolutely known as a tax haven. You can’t really be arguing that people stash money in the Caymans “because of the transparency”…

“The Cayman Islands are considered a tax haven because the Caymans do not impose a corporate tax, making it an ideal place for multinational corporations to base subsidiary entities to shield some or all of their incomes from taxation. The Cayman Islands do not impose taxes on residents. They have no income tax, no property taxes, no capital gains taxes, no payroll taxes, and no withholding tax.”

https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/100215/why-cayman-i....

I think you two are using different definitions of "tax haven".

You're using it (and your source) as "low or minimal taxes" are levied against corporations and people in the Cayman islands.

The grandfather's definition is "a great place to hide your money so you don't have to pay the taxes you're supposed to pay".

I would normally define "tax haven" as the second.

Entities DO hide their money in tax havens to avoid paying taxes. They avoid paying taxes BECAUSE tax havens have low or no taxes. Those two definitions are defining two ends to the same thing. The caymans have low or minimal taxes. The caymans are also used by entities to hide their money so they don’t have to pay taxes. Entities are not incorporating in the Caymans for any reason other than avoiding taxes. And the actual definition of a tax haven specifically is “a country or independent area where taxes are levied at a low rate.”

True, but if you're looking to hide your money you want two things: 1) low taxes within the country and 2) low transparency as to who owns what in the country.

That's why Switzerland used to be a great place to hide your money decades ago - low taxes and numbered accounts where it was illegal to reveal the true identify of the account holder.

Based on DelaneyM's comment - Caymans has the 1st but not the 2nd.

it seems the topic is havening the money, not "hiding" it, so 2) isn't necessary

My point is that the ability of a company to put money offshore for tax benefits is on the home/operating country, not the offshore location.

Cayman invests a lot of energy in sensible and globally integrated financial regulations. We specialize on that as a country. So when companies are moving money around globally we often feature in that. But we can’t be held responsible for what those funds transfers are used for.

We can be transparent (and we are exceptionally so), we can be responsive to global financial crimes queries (we are that as well). But what are we supposed to do about another country’s laws?

the home country is the Cayman islands, the operating country may be different, and either way, the motivation and ability to use the Cayman Islands as a tax haven derives from both countries

> Cayman invests a lot of energy in sensible and globally integrated financial regulations. We specialize on that as a country.

the reason the Cayman islands may have made all those investments is because that is what is expected of a mature tax haven

> we can’t be held responsible for what those funds transfers are used for

> what are we supposed to do about another country’s laws?

I mean, if you don't want to be a tax haven, you could raise taxes to be less favorable to businesses, but I'm not saying you should do anything, because this conversation is descriptive, not prescriptive

Companies are not putting money in Cayman to hide it.

Some companies put money outside of their operating or home country to minimize taxes, but Cayman has no part of that besides being “not their operating country”.

And it’s actually less often the tax treatment of funds which brings companies to Cayman, and much more often the simpler regulations. Operating globally often means a geometric growth in financial complexity. Cayman is a neutral third country, which simplifies things tremendously. Think of us like a financial cache.

By the way, Cayman has pretty substantial taxes. We operate a thriving country with no national debt and a great social safety net.

We just charge them differently. There’s an effective 22% consumption tax (with carve-outs for basics), levied on all imports and increased on luxuries. We have 7% taxes on all property transfers (for both income and to minimize house flipping). We have a ton of fees on any government interaction which aligns regulatory burdens with income.

Cayman is factually a place that is very commonly regarded as a tax haven.

You appear to think that that near-ubiquitous reputation is because of some sort of misunderstanding?

Can you explain why you think the Cayman Islands does have that reputation? Is it the result of some sort of conspiracy? Angry people weaving tales to assail the reputation of the citizens of Cayman?

Many people misunderstand the difference between legal tax mitigation and tax avoidance.

If your country allows companies or individuals to not be taxed on assets they locate overseas somehow, that’s on your country, not on us. And it has nothing to do with the money being here. All we can do is ensure that money flows are transparent and legal, which we do.

We put a lot of effort into being the world’s safest and best neutral third party location, and sometimes companies which are orchestrating tax mitigation schemes put money here while doing so. But they’re not putting money in Cayman to hide it, they’re putting money here because if you need to put money somewhere here is the easiest place to put it.

> If your country allows companies or individuals to not be taxed on assets they locate overseas somehow, that’s on your country, not on us.

Who is blaming the Caymans? They Caymans is commonly used as a tax haven for US companies due to US laws. It's on the US to fix those laws. Correctly observing the Caymans is used as a tax haven does not imply the Caymans should change, and I'm not aware of anyone in the US calling for holding the Caymans responsible. I am aware of many calling for reform on the laws that make havening profits in a foreign country possible.

"Tax haven" does not mean illegal. The Cayman Islands are a well-known tax haven, just like Ireland, Singapore, and Jersey. It's top of the list when you Google "tax haven". It's number 2 on both the Hines and Zucman lists of tax havens and number 3 on the ITEP list. The Cayman Islands are also on the EU's Anti-Money Laundering blacklist for failure to prosecute money laundering cases.

> The reason most foreign investors use Caymanian intermediaries is actually just that transparency, particularly when they’re being scrutinized by foreign regulatory bodies and don’t want their money to disappear into a Delaware numbered company.

> It is, however, a particularly easy place to keep global funds in a law abiding and transparent way.

I don’t doubt that Cayman is strict for individuals like yourself opening bank accounts, but the regulations on companies are a different story. It’s a well-known tax haven on the global scene.

>"FTX very deliberately chose the Cayman Islands to stay out of the reach of stricter regulatory bodies."

FTX chose The Bahamas.

There’s tax mitigation and tax avoidance, and I feel like you’re conflating the two.

If your country allows a company to locate money somewhere else and not be taxed on it, that’s on your county, not on us. The best we can do is make sure it’s visible, which we do.

> As a Caymanian I’m doing to take exception to your non-sequitur about Cayman being a “well-known tax haven”.

The Cayman islands are a well-known tax haven. Sorry to say.

Economists, in journals, routinely refer to the Cayman islands as a tax haven. Just a few examples out of many thousands:

https://www.nber.org/system/files/chapters/c14730/c14730.pdf

https://eprints.lse.ac.uk/56125/1/__lse.ac.uk_storage_LIBRAR...

If you want to know more this is a thorough review of the Cayman islands and their role as a tax haven: https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/09692290.2016.12...

The main reason for having a subsidiary in the Cayman islands is to avoid paying taxes. In some cases this is legal tax avoidance, in others it is illegal. The ratio of the two is unclear because of secrecy laws.

One common way businesses legally avoid taxes (note that legal is not moral, many people think should be illegal) is through IP. They make money in country X, then their subsidiary in the Cayman islands has to be paid because it owns the patents involved, but that subsidiary is owned by the main company and sends that money back with zero taxes. In country X the profits look very small now because so much had to be paid in licensing fees.

Another way is through round-tripping money. Investing in the Cayman islands and then taking that money and investing it back into their country as a foreign investment.

There are countless other ways. The Cayman islands along with a few other tax havens play a nasty and selfish role in today's financial system that gives rich companies and rich people a massive advantage while hurting everyone else, while of course generously skimming something off the top for themselves.

> The Cayman islands along with a few other tax havens play a nasty and selfish role in today's financial system that gives rich companies and rich people a massive advantage while hurting everyone else.

This is where you demonstrate your ignorance and bias.

Yes, there are American laws which allow US companies to minimize their global tax burden, but those are on America, not Cayman. The best we can do is ensure the money is well documented and visible, which we do.

Cayman is used not because of tax friendliness, but because if you’re going to put money somewhere which isn’t a major economy Cayman is the easiest and safest place to do so. It’s a neutral third location.

It’s easy because we comply with every global financial interop and transparency regulation. It’s safe because we have a large and strong financial services industry with British law.

And Cayman does not “generously skim” for ourselves. We have pretty minimal fees and a local economy of professionals. The primary way we benefit is services and expertise, which is how we level up our country and a contribution to the global economy.

You can take all the exceptions you wish, but the truth is while its a great spot for certain legitimate above board financial vehicles, its also a tax haven. The two can in fact cohabitate, and in the case of the Caymans, do.

Caymans in particular has a decent level of transparency around trusts and the like, but its banking system still records the de-minimus KYC it can get away with (including uneven FATF compliance).

I thought it's a joke, but apparently not.

It can be both - transparent, and a tax heaven. And it's one of the most well-known. Sorry, but in at least 2 countries where I lived, if you hear Cayman, you immediately think "tax evasion".

I get that you're offended though - when you see the Swiss - that somehow managed to turn their most shady banking system into a national pride thing - and admired but others too !

It’s mostly Grisham’s fault from his 90’s book “The Firm”, IMO. Also, like much of the world, before global money laundering laws and regulations came into being there _was_ a lot of tax evasion happening here. But that hasn’t been the case for twenty years, we grew up.

That's interesting ! I would like to read a bit more about it - any pointers ?

Why exactly do you think people use the Caymans at all then? If it's as you claim the surely keeping the money domestic makes more sense? Of course the truth is more complicated, and you even skirt around it with "global funds", i.e. a way to operate without repatriating the money and paying taxes.

People use Cayman because it’s a neutral and safe jurisdiction for global funds which plays nicely in the global financial system.

If you keep money in the US, and the beneficial owner of that money is in Singapore/UAE/China/etc, then profits are taxed twice.

If you operate in USA but earn money globally, then you’re subject to at least double, but sometimes a polynomial combination, of reporting and filling obligations from combinations of jurisdictions.

Cayman is clean, simple, above-board, and safe. It’s like a global money cache.

> If you operate in USA but earn money globally, then you’re subject to at least double, but sometimes a polynomial combination, of reporting and filling obligations from combinations of jurisdictions.

Again, you literally state that it's for tax avoidance. Are you reading your own words?

>to the extent that it takes even a native Caymanian multiple weeks to open a local bank account

To a local, yes. To a wealthy local, and even more so a wealthy foreigner or foreign company, no.

I’m a wealthy local with a wealth management bank account. It took me 7 weeks and I had to file literal volumes of paperwork with help from an accountant to open a bank account when I moved home.

Outcomes matter.

This is some top tier gaslighting, man. You know as well as I do that people put money in the Cayman islands to dodge taxes. You're behaving like someone at the Cheesecake Factory being offended when someone says their food is high calorie.

Citations needed.

You just can’t hide money in Cayman. You can put money in Cayman, when you need to put money somewhere safe and neutral, but not hide it. Nobody dodges taxes by putting money in Cayman.

There are some ways to save on some countries’ taxes by putting money here, but that’s on those countries, not on Cayman.