UAE passport ranked top in GCC

DUBAI: A global financial advisory firm Arton Capital, the global leader in residency and citizenship solutions, launched its latest edition of the passport Index — a ranking system to reveal the benefits of each passport from around the world.

The new generation of the passport Index compares passports from 199 countries including the 193 United Nations member countries as well as the Republic of China, Kosovo, Palestine and The Vatican.

Germany ranks the most powerful passport in the world, with a visa-free score of 157, followed by Sweden, Finland, Italy and Switzerland.

The United Arab Emirates’ passport ranks at the top of the most powerful in the GCC, 27th in the world and 60th on the individual ranking; mainly boosted from its Schengen visa waiver obtained in 2015.

The highest ranked European country with an available Citizenship by Investment programme is that of Malta, ranked 7th, followed by Cyprus (11th) and Bulgaria (14th).

The highest ranked non-European passport is that of South Korea, ranked 3rd, with a visa-free score of 155; followed by Singapore, Japan and Malaysia.

Passport Index positions countries based on the power of each passport, determined by the firm’s three-tier method which combines a ranking for “Visa-free” travel, together with “Visa on arrival” ratio, with the country’s score as attributed by United Nations Development Programme Human Development Index to take account of the jurisdiction’s international perception.

Essentially, the Index serves to understand and visualise the power of each passport on the holder’s identity, opportunity, mobility and overall quality of life.

The 2016 version of the Index allows users to explore a list of visa-free countries for each passport, or visa on arrival.

The highest ranked Caribbean country with an available Citizenship by Investment programme is Antigua and Barbuda, ranked 25th in the world and 2nd in the region, followed by St Kitts and Nevis (26th) and Saint Lucia (29th).

Passport Index’ Welcoming Rank showcases the most and least welcoming countries in the world, ranked solely on the number of countries they accept visa-free or with visa on arrival.

Dominica ranks the most welcoming country in the Caribbean and second in the world.

Although the world’s top 10 passports this year are all European, it is relatively difficult to obtain visa-free mobility to its member states.

According to the UN World Tourism Organisation, on average 76 per cent of the world’s population are required to obtain a visa prior to departure to Europe.

The highest ranked non-European passports are South Korea, ranked 12th, with a visa-free score of 155, followed by Singapore, ranked 14th.

The passport Index offers visitors the chance to discover their Global Mobility Score on their website, allowing users to compare different passports, side by side, and evaluate the total number of countries they can visit, visa-free.

Armand Arton, President of Arton Capital said: “Many people around the world consider their passports a barrier to their opportunities in life and choose to empower their identity and global footprint by obtaining a second citizenship through investment.

“In an age of increasing mobility, becoming a Global Citizen has never been more desirable. Investing in a second residency or citizenship is a liberating and empowering privilege, which comes with a responsibility to the world.”

Panama Papers: What next for Asia?

Karishma VaswaniAsia business correspondent

• 7 April 2016
 
• From the sectionBusiness

Jump media player

Media player help

Out of media player. Press enter to return or tab to continue.

Media captionSome of the biggest global offshore banking centres are in Asia

Panama Papers

• Panama tax leak reaction
• Q&A: Panama Papers
• Tax havens and the new politics
• Panama leaks spur global investigations

Tax has never been so sexy.

Chances are by now you know all the gory details - allegations in the Panama Papers that the super-rich and politically connected, and even some of their relatives, have moved hundreds of thousands of dollars from their own countries into offshore accounts in Panama, Hong Kong and Singapore, amongst other places.

A lot of the international spotlight has been centred on the practice of offshore banking.

Some of the biggest global offshore banking centres can be found in Asia - Singapore, Macao, Dubai and Hong Kong, for example, are amongst the top spots for the global super-rich looking to open an offshore account.

The practice in itself isn't illegal, but Asian capitals have been under pressure to share more information about who account holders are, and where the money comes from. So will the Panama Papers force more governments to become more transparent about tax?

Image copyrightGetty Images

Image captionThere is often a thin line between tax avoidance and tax evasion

Unlikely, says Andy Xie, an independent economist based in China and Hong Kong.

"In Asia it's about how to hide your wealth that often hasn't been legitimately acquired," says Mr Xie. "Political power and ill-gotten wealth go hand in hand here.

"How are you going to convince people to close these doors?"

Evasion v. avoidance

Now let's be clear - setting up an offshore account or an offshore company is perfectly legal.

But here's where it gets complicated. There is a difference between tax evasion and tax avoidance. And the devil is in the details.

Tax evasion, according to Paul Lau, tax partner with professional services firm PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC), is when "someone has income to report and then doesn't report it."

Image copyrightGetty Images

Image captionSingapore is one of a number of major financial centres in Asia

So if you have income in that offshore account, that you haven't declared to tax authorities back in your home country, and you are required to report that income to them - then that could be illegal.

But tax avoidance is something a bit more "nebulous", as Mr Lau puts it.

"Tax avoidance is taking advantage of certain tax provisions in a way that is not within the intent of the provision, to avoid paying tax."

So that means - if you've found a perfectly legal way to avoid paying taxes because of a provision in the tax system - well, then depending on the country, you may not be doing anything illegal at all.

Lots of hedges and provisos here, but that's sort of the point.

"The world is dotted with states and territories that make a speciality of providing services whose purpose is to facilitate ways to hide assets," says anti-corruption advocacy group Transparency International.

Image copyrightGetty Images

Image captionThe so-called Panama Papers were leaked from law firm Mossack Fonseca

Activists say it is time for these countries to reform the secret world of finance they operate and become more transparent.

"The enablers - the accountants, the lawyers, the business formation people - they're all involved," says Transparency International's Casey Kelso.

"They are all getting a great deal of money as a percentage of these profits from these transactions."

'Serious view'

But reforming these offshore banking centres won't be easy. This sort of business attracts billions of dollars for offshore banking centres every year, and it's not just from individuals. Massive profit-making corporations often set up shop in these centres to pay less tax as well.

Google, Apple, Microsoft, BHP Billiton and Rio Tinto - they're all household names - and all have admitted to being under audit by Australian tax authorities for using Singapore as a marketing and service hub.

They report hundreds of millions of dollars of income in Singapore, but pay lower tax on their money there than they would back in Australia, because of Singapore's lower tax rates.

The companies say they're not doing anything wrong, because Singapore is an important hub for them. But Australia says if money was earned from business done in Australia, tax should be paid there.

Image copyrightGetty Images

Image captionPeople have long sent money overseas to try to limit the taxes they have to pay

Both Singapore and Hong Kong have said they take a serious view of tax evasion and support international efforts to tackle cross-border transgressions.

The government here has been quick to point out its efforts to clamp down on any illegal activities.

"Singapore takes a serious view on tax evasion and will not tolerate its business and financial centre being used to facilitate tax related crimes," the Monetary Authority of Singapore said in a statement.

Singapore's Ministry of Finance added: "We are reviewing the information being reported in connection with the so-called Panama Papers and are doing the necessary checks.

"If there is evidence of wrongdoing by any individual or entity in Singapore, we will not hesitate to take firm action."

In fact, many Asian countries have committed to exchange more tax information by 2018 as part of the Automatic Exchange of Information initiative set up by the OECD. Singapore, Japan, Hong Kong and Australia have all signed up.

So if you're an Australian and you open a bank account in Singapore, by 2018 in theory, your government could know about it.

But critics say there's no incentive for countries who depend on offshore banking to do this. In fact, their business depends on keeping things secret.

"The livelihoods of these offshore financial centres depend on giving their clients confidentiality," says Mr Xie. "Otherwise why would people hide their money there?"

In the end, it's all about who goes first. Countries want a level playing field, because if one offshore banking centre starts opening itself to greater scrutiny, there's a very good chance their wealthy customers will flee, running to the next most secret place to park their cash.

And as we all know, where there's demand, there will always be a ready supply.

Panama Papers: Putin rejects corruption allegations

Russian TV

Image captionMr Putin praised long-time friend, the cellist Sergei Roldugin, named in the papers

President Putin has denied "any element of corruption" over the Panama Papers leaks, saying his opponents are trying to destabilise Russia.

Mr Putin was speaking for the first time since the leak of millions of confidential documents from the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca.

The papers revealed a number of offshore companies owned by close associates of Mr Putin.

They suggest the companies may have been used for money laundering.

Putin friend in 'money laundering ring'

Mr Putin, speaking live on TV, said Russia's Western opponents "are worried by the unity and solidarity of the Russian nation... and that is why they are attempting to rock us from within, to make us more obedient".

He said that because they could not find Mr Putin in the Panama papers "they've made an information product".

"They've found a few of my acquaintances and friends... and scraped up something from there and stuck it together."

Image copyrightAlamy

Image captionCellist Sergei Roldugin (left) is a close friend of Vladimir Putin's

The papers name Mr Putin's long-time friend and godfather to his daughter, the cellist Sergei Roldugin, as the owner of two offshore firms, International Media Overseas and Sonnette Overseas.

According to the papers, the firms were involved in a number of suspicious deals, including one in which International Media Overseas received a loan of $6m (£4.2m) in 2007, which was written off three months later for just $1.

Mr Roldugin has not yet publicly commented on the allegations.

Mr Putin did not go into the details of allegations against Mr Roldugin or other Russian offshore interests, but he praised his friend.

He said he was proud of people like Mr Roldugin who he said had spent nearly all the money he had earned on musical instruments and donating money to state institutions.

---

More on the Panama Papers

• Ten things we have learned
• Who's been caught in the scandal?
• Tax havens and the new politics
• BBC reporters on global reaction
• Major banks' denials
• How assets are hidden and taxes dodged

---

Several countries are investigating possible financial crimes by the rich and powerful following the Mossack Fonseca leak.

Iceland's prime minister stepped down earlier this week after it was revealed he owned an offshore company with his wife which he did not declare when he entered parliament. He denies any wrongdoing.

The mass leak revealed the extent to which Mossack Fonseca appeared to help some clients evade tax and avoid sanctions, although the firm has denied it has done anything wrong and says the information is being presented out of context.

Panama on Thursday said it was creating an international panel to help improve transparency in its offshore financial industry.

---

Panama Papers - tax havens of the rich and powerful exposed

• Eleven million documents held by the Panama-based law firm Mossack Fonseca have been passed to German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung, which then shared them with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. BBC Panorama and UK newspaper The Guardian are among 107 media organisations in 76 countries which have been analysing the documents. The BBC does not know the identity of the source
• They show how the company has helped clients launder money, dodge sanctions and evade tax
• Mossack Fonseca says it has operated beyond reproach for 40 years and never been accused or charged with criminal wrongdoing
• Tricks of the trade: How assets are hidden and taxes evaded
• Panama Papers: Full coverage; follow reaction on Twitter using #PanamaPapers; in the BBC News app, follow the tag "Panama Papers"
• Watch Panorama on the BBC iPlayer (UK viewers only)

Nasdaq Dubai welcomes Indonesia’s $2.5b sukuk

DUBAI: Nasdaq Dubai has welcomed the listing of two Sukuk issued by the government of Indonesia with a total value of $2.5 billion.

The total nominal value of Sukuk currently listed on Dubai’s exchanges has now reached $42.31 billion, strengthening its position as the largest centre globally for Islamic bond listings.

The listings support the growth of Dubai as the global capital of the Islamic Economy under the initiative launched by Vice President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai His Highness Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al Maktoum.

Bambang Bodjonegoro, the Indonesian Minister of Finance, said: “Our latest Sukuk issuances confirm Indonesia’s commitment to supporting the Islamic capital markets, and our choice of Nasdaq Dubai for listing provides us with close links to regional and international investors. We look forward to issuing further Sukuk in due course under our 2012 Trust Certificate Issuance Programme, providing further sources for government infrastructure development financing as well as new opportunities for investors around the world.”

Essa Kazim, Governor of Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) and Secretary General of Dubai Islamic Economy Development Centre (DIEDC), said, “These substantial listings confirm the international reach of Dubai’s Islamic capital markets as the emirate accelerates its expansion as the gobal capital of the Islamic Economy.

Our expanding relationship with Indonesia, the world’s most populous Muslim country, strengthens the development of the financial infrastructure of both countries for the benefit of their economies and citizens.”

The latest two Sukuk listings by the Indonesian government took place on March 31st, 2016.

They bring its total Sukuk listings on the exchange to 8.5 billion US dollars, following its listing last year of four Sukuk with a total nominal value of $6 billion.

Abdul Wahed Al Fahim, Chairman of Nasdaq Dubai, said, “The exchange welcomes Sukuk listings from around the world by sovereign issuers as well as multilateral organisations and private entities active in a wide range of industries.”

WAM

Jeff Shesol: Sanders’s Lessons From ‘Sanders’

Last fall, Senator Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) won an endorsement of sorts from across the Atlantic. Jeremy Corbyn, on the eve of his election as leader of Britain’s opposition Labour Party, expressed enthusiasm for an insurgency that looked a lot like his own. “We’re exchanging leaflets and badges and things like that,” Corbyn told the BBC.

The echoes were obvious to observers in both countries. Almost at the same instant, after decades on the back benches, two grey-haired leftists arose, rumpled and cranky, as avatars of the New Authenticity. Corbyn, at age 66, and Sanders, at 74, found that their shared brand of progressive populism struck a chord with millennial voters. In September, those voters swept Corbyn into the leader’s chair, over the shrill objections of the party establishment. On Mar. 26, their American cousins gave Sanders sweeping victories in three state caucuses, sustaining his campaign in the face of steep odds.

Yet, Corbyn is already a cautionary tale. The six months he has led his party have been a period of almost ceaseless internal struggle. The troubles have many causes, not all of which have a parallel in American politics – unlike Britain’s parliamentary system, for example, the United States has no party leaders as such.

But Corbyn’s trials should interest an American audience, especially Sanders’ supporters. What Corbyn is undertaking is, in important respects, a dry run of a Sanders nomination – even a Sanders presidency. The Labour leader is demonstrating just how hard it is for a protest politician to carry the mantle of national leadership.

Sanders and Corbyn have a similar style (or anti-style), make similarly class-based appeals and seek similar goals, principally a redistribution of wealth and power. But their connection runs deeper than that. The two men share an underlying premise about political power: that an electoral coalition can become a full-fledged movement, and that after the election, its energy can not only be sustained, but also increased.

Corbyn, to this end, promises a “new politics of engagement and involvement”; Sanders urges “revolution.” By either name, the notion is the same: A grass-roots movement will overpower what Sanders calls “the ruling class” and usher in an era not just of change, but transformation across the political and policy landscape.

Corbyn and Sanders aim to succeed where Organising for Action, the successor to President Barack Obama’s campaign organisation, has failed. The group has fallen well short of its ambition to imbue issues like climate change with election-like urgency and, in the process, turn campaign volunteers into a permanent pressure group.

In Britain, however, the enthusiasm that Corbyn stirred in young voters is already dissipating. Corbyn’s forces have launched an organisation named – a bit wishfully – Momentum, with the aim of keeping supporters energised as it battles politically moderate “Blairites” for control of the party machinery.

The group is off to a stumbling start. When its members were accused of harassing Labour members of Parliament who had voted for air strikes against the Syrian regime, Corbyn’s own deputy leader dismissed Momentum as “a bit of a rabble.” Other M.P.’s are calling for it to stop “acting as a party within a party” and, better still, to disband.

For all its ambitions, Momentum has done nothing to offset the exodus of moderates from the Labour Party. Two members of Corbyn’s shadow cabinet recently spent several weeks travelling across England, interviewing hundreds of voters. Most who had left Labour last fall to back the Tories, or even the right-wing UK Independence Party, were unrepentant.

The qualities that excited British millennials look like liabilities to the wider electorate. In focus groups, many Britons complained about Corbyn’s shabby appearance. One former Labour voter said that when Corbyn sits on the front bench in the House of Commons, “you think, ‘who let you in there?’ He looks totally out of place.” Another remarked that Corbyn looked more like a grocery checkout clerk than a potential prime minister.

None of this is helping Corbyn gain hold of a balky, divided and ever more defiant party. Like Sanders, Corbyn has spent most of his political life on the margins, where he commanded no faction, collected no chits. To an anti-political electorate, this has its appeal. But it is difficult to lead the party when you have never really been of the party – when you have, in fact, held it at arm’s length.

As Corbyn is making amply clear, the politics of personal conscience are a poor substitute for the skills of compromise and conciliation – the wellsprings of party loyalty. This has been in short supply.

Last week, the Times of London published a list – reportedly left in a pub by someone in Corbyn’s circle – ranking the loyalty of every Labour M.P. Most were found wanting. One member of the “hostile” group responded with a bitter lament about what Corbyn has wrought in the name of “authenticity”: “The ‘new politics’ embraces amateurism; it rejects professional politics as an article of faith and, accordingly, it places no importance on the basic disciplines required for political success.” Others talk of unseating Corbyn. “He’s got to go,” one M.P. texted a reporter, “he’s just got to go.”

Transatlantic analogies can be overdrawn. The political culture of Britain and that of the United States are different in innumerable ways. Still, it is likely that a President Sanders would face some of the same challenges that Corbyn is now confronting. Only half a year after taking the helm, Corbyn is a party leader who has no party behind him, a movement politician whose movement is packing up its placards until, perhaps, the next election.

This suggests why former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton is increasingly emphasising her insider credentials – her strong commitment to the Democratic Party and its members. At a rally on Saturday in Eau Claire, Wisconsin, Clinton noted that she has been “a proud Democrat all my adult life. … That’s kind of important if we’re selecting someone to be the Democratic nominee of the Democratic Party.”

Sanders, for his part, wears the party label only reluctantly: Last month, he said that he was running as a Democrat because independent candidates have a hard time getting media coverage. And unlike Clinton, he has thus far refused to raise money for other Democrats. Sanders is, as he must remain, an outsider – though he appears to recognise the difficulty of building and directing a mass movement.

In an interview last month with the Los Angeles Times editorial board, Sanders conceded that his “ambitious agenda” won’t go anywhere “unless millions of people become involved in the political process in a way that they don’t right now.” When an editor asked how he planned to achieve that, Sanders called it a “very good question. And if I had the definitive answer,” he added, “I would give it to you.”

If Sanders wants to be president – and more important, to succeed as president – he will need a better answer.

Reuters

Iraq’s food business growing quickly despite war

BAGHDAD: Iraqi businessman Zaid Nazo has always been sure of his nation’s deep passion for food and wasn’t afraid to dream big when he transformed his small Baghdad coffee shop in 1999 into a casual dining and takeaway restaurant. Today, the 41-year-old father of two has opened four branches and his chain is one of the most popular in Iraq.

Many Iraqi entrepreneurs are finding restaurants and eateries a safe business bet, despite the country’s slumping economy, prevailing violence and an ongoing war with the Daesh group.

The food business is growing quickly. There are 40 per cent more restaurants in Baghdad today than there were in 2013 - when security and economic conditions in the country were much better - according to Shakir Al Zamili, the chairman of Baghdad Investment Commission.

It’s unexpected when the city still faces almost daily bombings, large swaths of the country are under control of the extremist Daesh group and Prime Minister Haider Al Abadi is embroiled in a political crisis over stalled reforms and allegations of rampant corruption.

It’s also a testament to Iraqis’ determination to triumph over violence.

Nazo and his business partner, his close friend Marwan Rassam, established their first eatery — Saj Al Reef or “Country Bread” in Arabic — in the upscale Baghdad neighbourhood of Karrada 18 years ago.

Then in 2007, they opened a second branch in Arbil, the capital of the semi-autonomous Kurdistan region, and a third in 2009, in the nearby town of Sulaimaniyah.

This February, he opened a new place in Baghdad’s upmarket Mansour neighbourhood.

“I bet on the mentality of Iraqis,” he told The Associated Press. “The Iraqi people love to live ... and they make the most of every day because they don’t know what tomorrow will bring,” he added.

The food boom has seen new establishments open all around Baghdad, from city rooftops to the banks of the Tigris River. Local businessmen are pouring millions of dollars into buying or renting property, bringing in foreign chefs and staff, competing with one another for the fanciest design, best decoration and most attractive cuisine.

And though suicide and car bombings regularly target large gatherings - including restaurants - the boom has not slowed.

Associated Press