Ya i dont really have a frame of reference though for what % of overall activity is actually illicit, which in turn is a subset of "tax avoidance" (not all of which is illegal) and which would be distinct from more mundane concerns which have nothing to do with tax avoidance or "minimization" strategies.
And all I know is the real world is most often more boring than the headlines...
Ya i need more expert help on this, Sellycat (who doesnt post any more here) was saying most of this would be "legal", but really we have three categories:Describe "more mundane concerns". I admit I don't know much about this stuff but I'm curious what reasons other than Tax avoidance offshore accounts there are.
A) legal and ethical B) legal but not ethical and C) illegal and unethical
And there is room to disagree on what is "ethical" or not, but note that I'm assuming here obvious stuff: if your intent is to conceal/hide/escape taxation and/or regulation, thats unethical.
The NYT article I linked had this passage:
In an article published on Monday evening, McClatchy, another news organization working with the I.C.I.J., identified more American citizens for whom Mossack Fonseca registered offshore companies. The people named didn’t include any politicians or other well-known figures. “Some appear to be American retirees purchasing real estate in places like Costa Rica and Panama,”Which sounds like something from A)
But what % is that category overall? 10%? 30%? 50%?
I have no clue, need someone with more relevant experience to chime in - I imagine quantitative analysis on these lines is being developed as we speak... Look forward to anything you or anyone else might find on the topic to share!