British politicians are demanding decisive action against money laundering through UK territories as a crucial summit approaches this week. Labour’s Dame Margaret Hodge and Conservative MP Andrew Mitchell have voiced strong criticism over what they describe as ‘dither and delay’ in implementing transparent corporate ownership registers.
The summit, bringing together UK government officials and representatives from overseas territories including the British Virgin Islands and Cayman Islands, faces mounting pressure to address financial transparency concerns. These offshore centres, along with crown dependencies such as Jersey and the Isle of Man, stand accused of attempting to dilute measures designed to combat illicit financial flows.
The cross-party alliance, spearheaded by Hodge and Mitchell, has garnered support from dozens of MPs ahead of the joint ministerial council. Their primary contention centres on the promised introduction of public registers by December 2023, a commitment they claim remains unfulfilled.
A particular point of dispute involves register accessibility. Whilst some territories advocate for limited access restricted to those with ‘legitimate interests’, critics maintain that fully public registers are essential for effective oversight. The IFC Forum, representing offshore law firms, has reportedly engaged in lobbying efforts to promote this restricted access model.
Labour’s position, articulated by Stephen Doughty, Minister for Overseas Territories, emphasises that any legitimate interest filters must meet rigorous standards and serve only as an interim step towards complete public accessibility. This stance aligns with broader efforts to combat financial secrecy and its role in facilitating money laundering and sanctions evasion.
The Foreign Office maintains its commitment to pursuing fully public registers, though some territories, including the Cayman Islands, strongly contest allegations of facilitating illicit finance. As the summit approaches, the possibility of the UK government issuing an ‘order in council’ to mandate compliance looms large over the proceedings.
Post Disclaimer
The following content has been published by Stockmark.IT. All information utilised in the creation of this communication has been gathered from publicly available sources that we consider reliable. Nevertheless, we cannot guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this communication.
This communication is intended solely for informational purposes and should not be construed as an offer, recommendation, solicitation, inducement, or invitation by or on behalf of the Company or any affiliates to engage in any investment activities. The opinions and views expressed by the authors are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Company, its affiliates, or any other third party.
The services and products mentioned in this communication may not be suitable for all recipients, by continuing to read this website and its content you agree to the terms of this disclaimer.