Offshore bank

An offshore bank is a bank located outside the country of residence of the depositor, typically in a low tax jurisdiction (or tax haven) that provides financial and legal advantages.

These advantages typically include some or all of
- strong privacy (see also bank secrecy,a principle born with the 1934 SwissBanking)
- less restrictive legal regulation
- low or no taxation (i.e. tax havens)
- easy access to deposits (at least in terms of regulation)
- protection against local political or financial instability

While the term originates from the Channel Islands "offshore" from Britain, and most offshore banks are located in island nations to this day, the term is used figuratively to refer to such banks regardless of location (Switzerland, Luxembourg and Andorra in particular are landlocked).

Offshore banking has often been associated with the underground economy and organized crime, via tax evasion and money laundering; however, legally, offshore banking does not prevent assets from being subject to personal income tax on interest. Except for certain persons who meet fairly complex requirements, the personal income tax of many countries[2] makes no distinction between interest earned in local banks and those earned abroad. Persons subject to US income tax, for example, are required to declare on penalty of perjury, any offshore bank accounts—which may or may not be numbered bank accounts—they may have. Although offshore banks may decide not to report income to other tax authorities, and have no legal obligation to do so as they are protected by bank secrecy, this does not make the non-declaration of the income by the tax-payer or the evasion of the tax on that income legal. Following September 11, 2001, there have been many calls for more regulation on international finance, in particular concerning offshore banks, tax havens and clearing houses such as Clearstream, based in Luxembourg, being accused of being a crossroads for major illegal money flows.Defenders of offshore banking have criticised these attempts at regulation. They claim the process is prompted, not by security and financial concerns, but by the desire of domestic banks and tax agencies to access the money held in offshore accounts. They argue that offshore banking offers a competitive threat to the banking and taxation systems in developed countries, and that OECD countries are trying to stamp out competition.

Offshore banks provide access to politically and economically stable jurisdictions. This may be an advantage for those resident in areas where there is a risk of political turmoil who fear their assets may be frozen, seized or disappear (see the corralito for example, during the 2001 Argentine economic crisis). However, developed countries with regulated banking systems offer the same advantages in terms of stability. Some offshore banks may operate with a lower cost base and can provide higher interest rates than the legal rate in the home country due to lower overheads and a lack of government intervention. Advocates of offshore banking often characterise government regulation as a form of tax on domestic banks, reducing interest rates on deposits. Offshore finance is one of the few industries, along with tourism, that geographically remote island nations can competitively engage in. It can help developing countries source investment and create growth in their economies, and can help redistribute world finance from the developed to the developing world.

Interest is generally paid by offshore banks without tax deducted. This is an advantage to individuals who do not pay tax on worldwide income, or who do not pay tax until the tax return is agreed, or who feel that they can illegally evade tax by hiding the interest income.

Some offshore banks offer banking services that may not be available from domestic banks such as anonymous bank accounts, higher or lower rate loans based on risk and investment opportunities not available elsewhere. Offshore banking is often linked to other structures, such as offshore companies, trusts or foundations, which may have specific tax advantages for some individuals. Many advocates of offshore banking also assert that the creation of tax and banking competition is an advantage of the industry, arguing with Charles Tiebout that tax competition allows people to choose an appropriate balance of services and taxes. Critics of the industry, however, claim this competition as a disadvantage, arguing that it encourages a "race to the bottom" in which governments in developed countries are pressured to deregulate their own banking systems in an attempt to prevent the offshoring of capital.

Note: Offshore banking no longer always means "private".Most (maybe all) traditional jurisdictions are no longer suitable for asset protection, privacy and confidentiality. Well-known, traditional offshore havens, will now willingly divulge information upon request.

Disadvantages of offshore banking
Offshore banking has been associated with the underground economy and organized crime, through money laundering. Following September 11, 2001, offshore banks and tax havens, along with clearing houses, have been accused of helping various organized crime gangs, terrorist groups, and other state or non-state actors. The existence of offshore banking encourages tax evasion, by providing tax evaders with an attractive place to deposit their hidden income. Offshore jurisdictions are often remote, so physical access and access to information can be difficult. Yet in a world with global telecommunications this is rarely a problem for customers. Accounts can be set up online, by phone or by mail.

Developing countries can suffer due to the speed at which money can be transferred in and out of their economy as "hot money". This "Hot money" is aided by offshore accounts, and can increase problems in financial disturbance. Offshore banking is usually more accessible to those on higher incomes, because of the costs of establishing and maintaining offshore accounts. The tax burden in developed countries thus falls disproportionately on middle-income groups. Historically, tax cuts have tended to result in a higher proportion of the tax take being paid by high-income groups, as previously sheltered income is brought back into the mainstream economy. The Laffer curve demonstrates this tendency. From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia