HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » Latest Breaking News (Forum) » The huge 'Panama Papers' ...

Sun May 8, 2016, 03:36 AM

The huge 'Panama Papers' data dump is about to drop

Source: Business Insider

The huge 'Panama Papers' data dump is about to drop

Lianna Brinded
May 8, 2016, 5:08 PM

The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists is publishing a huge database about how some of the world’s wealthiest and most powerful people hide their cash — dubbed the “Panama Papers.”

On Monday May 9, anyone in the world will be able to have scour through a database of 200,000 companies, trusts, foundations, and funds incorporated in 21 tax havens to see where the world’s richest people squirrel away their wealth in order to pay as little tax as possible.

The findings of the so-called Panama Papers investigation were unveiled at the beginning of April. Over 11 million documents held by the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca had been leaked to the German newspaper Suddeutsche Zeitung. The paper shared the information with the ICIJ, which is made up of 107 media organisations in 78 countries. The global news outlets examined 28,000 pages of documents, also revealing the full scale of the tax breaks won by 340 companies.

The details of the investigation have already claimed the scalp of Spain’s acting industry minister Jose Manuel Soria and Icelandic Prime Minister Sigmundur David Gunnlaugsson — each of whom stepped down because of activities exposed by the Panama Papers documents.


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com.au/panama-papers-database-list-mossack-fonseca-companies-and-individuals-tax-details-live-2016-5

15 replies, 2613 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread

Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun May 8, 2016, 03:39 AM

1. K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun May 8, 2016, 04:08 AM

2. Law firm warns against ‘Panama Papers’ being released online

Nepal | May 08, 2016
The Himalayan Times

Law firm warns against ‘Panama Papers’ being released online

Published: May 08, 2016 2:00

The law firm at the heart of the Panama Papers scandal said on Friday it has issued a cease-and-desist letter to a journalists’ collective urging it not to release online a trove of documents plundered from its computer servers.

Mossack Fonseca issued the letter to the US-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ) stressing the information was stolen and its release would breach attorney-client privilege.

The ICIJ has announced it will next Monday put online many — but not all — of the 11.5 million documents it obtained from a German newspaper, Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which received them from an anonymous source.

Reports done on the records since early April have revealed how the world’s wealthy, many politicians, and a few criminals used Mossack Fonseca to set up offshore entities to stash their assets.

More:
http://thehimalayantimes.com/business/law-firm-warns-panama-papers-released-online/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Reply #2)

Sun May 8, 2016, 05:40 AM

3. I don't think those attorneys understand how the attorney-client privilege works.

I may be wrong, but I don't think third parties have an obligation to enforce or respect the attorney-client privilege.

And the attorney-client privilege as I understand it does not protect violations of the law such as violations of tax laws.

Am I wrong on this? Is there some aspect of this that I am not understanding?

The attorney who provided the documents may be violating attorney-client privilege, but the press that publishes the results?

I suspect that the attorney or other person who obtained this information and made it public knows the risks he/she was taking.

Anybody want to comment on what I am saying. It's late. Is there something I am not considering?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #3)

Sun May 8, 2016, 08:30 AM

6. Technically it is not attorney-client privilege that's involved here

 

That privilege is a rule of evidence that allows a client to prevent their attorney from testifying about the content of confidential communications made to the attorney as part of their legal representation.

Broader rules of ethical conduct by attorneys are what prohibit more general public disclosure of client confidential information. The journalists in this case are not violating those rules themselves, but they may be abetting such a violation.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun May 8, 2016, 08:07 AM

4. I hope this isn't "Fitsmas" all over again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to corkhead (Reply #4)

Sun May 8, 2016, 09:35 AM

7. It serves as confimation

of what many people have known for a long time: that the economic structure serves to enrich an elite class of human society, at the expense of everyone else.

Many people want a smoking gun, with which to indict their political enemies, and are missing the over-arching issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to corkhead (Reply #4)

Mon May 9, 2016, 12:21 AM

11. Maybe not in the same respect

since 'Fitzmas' never wound up happening as expected, but the database appears to be an actual thing as of tomorrow, barring some last minute maneuver by the lawyers. The Fitzmasy thing though is likely going to be that nobody outside of political news junkies will take notice. Most will treat it with zombie-eyed indifference.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun May 8, 2016, 08:14 AM

5. Looking Forward To The Search For Interesting Organizations - Oh - Like The Clinton Foundation

eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to cantbeserious (Reply #5)

Sun May 8, 2016, 11:26 PM

9. Yep

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Sun May 8, 2016, 08:25 PM

8. Looking forward to it! nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon May 9, 2016, 12:06 AM

10. One has to wonder how badly the Clintons will be affected. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon May 9, 2016, 12:45 AM

12. Panama Papers names going public

Panama Papers names going public

Journalist group plans to publish identities of people behind more than 200,000 offshore accounts

By Zach Dubinsky, CBC News Posted: May 08, 2016 5:00 AM ET| Last Updated: May 08, 2016 2:29 PM ET

They hoped to keep their business private, but some of the world's richest citizens will instead have their finances opened to prying eyes.

Confidential details of more than 200,000 offshore accounts in the Panama Papers — including the names of at least 625 Canadians — will be revealed Monday, in the hope that public scrutiny of the material will generate hundreds of tips about possible corruption and tax dodging.

The new information, to be released online at 2 p.m. ET in a searchable database, will list:

■The name of anyone listed as a director or shareholder of an offshore company in the huge Panama Papers leak.
■The names and addresses of more than 200,000 offshore companies, though in most cases, the ultimate owner is still shrouded in secrecy.
■The identities of dozens of intermediary agencies that helped set up and run those accounts in tandem with Mossack Fonseca, the Panamanian law firm from which the records were leaked.

More:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/business/panama-papers-icij-database-names-public-1.3572138

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon May 9, 2016, 03:29 AM

13. ICIJ's release of the Panama Papers won't include personal data, emails, bank records

ICIJ's release of the Panama Papers won't include personal data, emails, bank records

Date May 9, 2016 - 3:53PM

Nassim Khadem
Deputy Editor BusinessDay

The biggest release of more than 200,000 secret offshore entities that are part of the Panama Papers investigation will be unveiled on Tuesday.

The data, to be released by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists – the same organisation that brought us the Lux Leaks, Swiss Leaks and Offshore Leaks – names hundreds of wealthy clients of Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca.

While merely appearing on the list does not necessarily indicate improper conduct or tax avoidance, The Australian Financial Review reports ​Chinese billionaires dominate the top ranks of the firm's Australian clients.

. . .

We can expect to see more Australian rich listers outed, but the ICIJ has said it will hold back some information.

More:
http://www.smh.com.au/business/the-economy/icijs-release-of-the-panama-papers-wont-include-personal-data-emails-bank-records-20160509-gopqrm.html#ixzz488pbtQaS

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon May 9, 2016, 09:51 AM

14. You know that whistling sound that happens just before a bomb hits...nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Judi Lynn (Original post)

Mon May 9, 2016, 11:44 AM

15. It will be interesting, but we have Delaware. Why would any rich person

be into this? Guess we'll find out soon enough. And yes, I am looking forward to it, as a person of small means...i.e. Peasant.

I hope Bernie takes this and runs with it. He's been disappointing as to his reluctance to go for the jugular. Mr. Nice Guy doesn't cut it in a cut-throat national election. My guess is that he doesn't want it that badly...to go against his instrincts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread