When you are trudging home in a torrential rainstorm due to a failure of public transport and your watch gives you the least useful advice ever
Here is your annual reminder that while foreign aid to Rwanda may look like good development value for money, the trade offs look much, much worse when you consider the regime's long term efforts to keep the DRC poor, conflict-ridden and unstable www.theguardian.com/world/2024/s...
Human Rights Watch alleges potential violation of international human rights law on many occasions this year
Lol, missed that this was a reply to Charles and thought I was discovering some massive beef between you two
Neither policy would solve the dirty money problem: that will require more substantive reform by Labour But these data are low hanging fruit, and would be another tool in the toolbox for those trying to understand where the risks are and how to fight them
This would give tax authorities in developing countries that struggle to adopt the CRS a sense of how much offshore wealth/income is in the UK, and to what extent their taxpayers are under-reporting their foreign income
Labour could adjust the legislation enabling the CRS to require banks to transmit information on non-CRS persons to HMRC, who could then publish it in aggregate, much in the same way that Australia already does www.ato.gov.au/about-ato/in...
Second: the UK should begin reporting on the aggregate financial holdings of foreigners Banks already have to track this information as part of their CRS obligations, even for non-CRS persons (the 'wider' approach)
Aggregate reporting would give everyone a better sense of where the risks are
One might argue that the suspicious activity reporting system is enough, why add another layer of reporting? It is pretty clear that banks don't catch *enough* cases of foreign corruption, and in many cases the reporting only happens after journalists have broken a story