More than four years ago, as part of my efforts to promote and protect tax competition, fiscal sovereignty, and financial privacy, I narrated this video explaining the economic benefits of so-called tax havens.
Pay close attention at the 1:07 mark.
Yes, you heard right. A former bureaucrat from the European Bank for Reconstruction and Development actually called for the forcible annexation of low-tax jurisdictions, writing in the Financial Times that, “Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man should simply be absorbed lock, stock and barrel into the UK…Andorra, Monaco and Liechtenstein should be given the choice of ending bank secrecy or facing annexation.”
He wasn’t quite so belligerent about Switzerland, perhaps because all able-bodied male citizens have fully automatic assault weapons in their homes. But he did urge financial protectionism against the land of chocolate, yodeling, and watches.
What a bizarre attitude. It’s apparently okay for certain countries to persecute – or even kill – ethnic minorities, religious minorities, political dissidents, homosexuals, and other segments of their populations. Very rarely do people like Mr. Buiter call for annexation or sanctions against such loathsome regimes.
But if a nation has low taxes and a strong human rights policy on financial privacy, then cry havoc and let slip the dogs of war.
It turns out Buiter isn’t the only one to have strange militaristic impulses.
Here are excerpts from an article posted at The Street, written by a statist who says that “tax havens” don’t have enough military force to resist high-tax nations.
There is a relatively easy answer to the financial troubles of Europe, America and Asia. The answer lies in so-called “tax havens.” A consensus is emerging among the world’s major taxing powers that tax evasion may not be a good thing.
…Jurisdictions specializing in the financial secrecy needed to avoid taxes exist in or near every major financial power. There’s Switzerland in Europe, the Cayman Islands off the U.S., Hong Kong in China, Bahrain in the Middle East and Jersey between the U.K. and France. But none has the military force to maintain secrecy against concerted outside pressure. The question has always been whether the pressure would be applied, and there is now some reason for hope.
The title is particularly revealing. She must be the fiscal version of a neo-con, urging that high-tax nations should “Invade the Cayman Islands!”
Not Iran. Not Syria. Not Cuba. Not North Korea.
You see, those nations are all guilty of causing misery and instability, but such behaviors apparently are far less important than the imagined dangers posed by a prosperous multi-racial society with a competitive tax regime.
I assume Ms. Blankenhorn doesn’t actually want to practice gunboat diplomacy against the Cayman Islands, but her attitude is quite revealing. Like other statists, I gather she despises low-tax jurisdictions because they attract jobs and investment from high-tax nations.
In the spirit of problem solving, here’s a suggestion for Blankenhorn, Buiter, and the rest of the fiscal chicken hawks. If you really want to undermine the so-called tax havens, propose a simple and fair flat tax.
But don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen. The reason they want to squash tax havens is precisely because they want bad tax policy in America and other “onshore” nations.
[…] While I think Mr. Buiter’s article in Project Syndicate was very reasonable, I’ve had good reason to criticize some of his past […]
[…] the left’s hostility to tax competition had reached such a crazy level that some of them were even urging military action against low-tax […]
[…] Balko suggested that this is insanity. I agree, but as Dan Mitchell explains, it’s being bruited about by people who should know far, far […]
[…] though I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised since some people are so crazy that they have even urged military action against these low-tax […]
[…] though I guess I shouldn’t be too surprised since some people are so crazy that they have even urged military action against these low-tax […]
[…] Willem Buiter of Citi (the same guy who endorsed military attacks on low-tax jurisdictions) supports the elimination of […]
[…] Bloomberg reports that the Willem Buiter of Citi (the same guy who endorsed military attacks on low-tax jurisdictions) supports the elimination of […]
[…] After all, leftists want us to believe tax havens are rogue regimes that should be eliminated. Some of them even want military intervention against these low-tax jurisdictions! […]
[…] that causes statists to become even more irrational than they usually are. Some of them actually advocate military action against these peaceful jurisdictions! I’m wondering if this is their way of compensating for […]
[…] After all, leftists want us to believe tax havens are rogue regimes that should be eliminated. Some of them even want military intervention against these low-tax jurisdictions! […]
[…] After all, leftists want us to believe tax havens are rogue regimes that should be eliminated. Some of them even want military intervention against these low-tax jurisdictions! […]
[…] greedy politicians, so he scores a goal against the statists. But, unlike our President and some others who are even more radical, I don’t think he was trying to advance the left-wing narrative that tax competition is bad […]
[…] https://danieljmitchell.wordpress.com/2012/11/09/how-do-you-turn-a-leftists-into-a-warmonger/ […]
Eeughhh!!! Creepy… I hope those poor islanders are ready.
Interesting. Ms. Blankenhorn enjoys the freedom to write about what she believes in. Yet she denies independent countries the freedom to carry out what they believe in. So she’s highly confused – does she or does she not understand the meaning of freedom?
ps. Dan, please always give the official’s name right up front – I believe such a policy is called “name and shame”? She certainly ought to be ashamed…
Low tax nations with nukes are somewhere in the human cultural evolution (or should I say natural selection) path. They have not apperared yet, but they will. The totalitarian threats of “pan-world fairness” will only hasten their creation. Cultures, will be naturally and inevitably selected by the Rahn Curve, the indomitable evolutional advantage of high growth. Enough mandatory collective revenue for nukes, but not enough for redistribution and dreams of collective national economy management. Evolution (or natural selection — whichever term you prefer) has a way to eventually gravitate towards whichever cultural model is conducive to the highest motivation, innovation efficiency, and thus highest sustained growth rates, ie. highest growth trendlines.
Few people grasp the truly anhillating multiplicative power of a high growth environment. The manual digger, can perhaps double his productivity by operating the shovel sixteen hours a day rather than eight. But the bulldozzer operator is the one that can multiply that by a factor of fifty times. And the buldozzer inventor is the one that can multiply it by a factor of fifty thousand. One bulldozzer inventor quitting the workforce — or simply taking early retirement, or a long sabbatical, or throttling down his career to a lesser rat race — could be equivalent to the productivity loss of tenths of thousands of manual diggers. It is these differences, of not simply percentages but entire orders of magnitude, that give capitalism its strength. What you see in America (or used to see) is the power of the bulldozzer inventor. That is the power that allows the Maxican immigrant gardenrer to have a trickle down standard of living five times the world average. But apparently the maxican gardener bamboozled by the suppliers of mandatory collectivism (politicians) has crossed the redistribution desire threshold and is now burning his American furniture to keep warm – he is lowering the competitiveness of American bulldozzer inventors below the competitiveness of bulldozzer inventors elsewhere in the world – he is in essence diging his own grave, together with his “occupy” friends – he will lower his standard of living to that of the AVERAGE world gardener (I’m an immigrant myself so please no lecturing on the political incorrectness of speaking in these terms – besides I’m using it as a perhaps innacurate stereotype to get my point across).
The bulldozzer inventors will gravitate towards those jurisdictions that allow them to keep the fruits of their unique talent and labor. Possesing a fifty thousand productivity power multiplier, good luck competing with them, good luck subduing them by force should you be foolish enough to attempt it.
Many bulldozzer inventors have already quit, or seeing the lower effort-reward curves never even bothered rising to such exceptionalism, living instead good and happy lives of relative obscurity. Many of these formidable innovating human resources, after achieving modest gains, and faced with a fifty percent tax on each additional dollar they earn (e.g. if they live in California or Europe), a death tax, and exit taxes, have already retreated to relative obscurity enjoying less pecuniary but untaxable joys of life. Many more will choose that path under the advancing class-warfare attitudes. Meanwhile, equally disastrously, an increasing number of shovel diggers will be encouraged to remain shovel diggers since they will be promised at least partial insulation from the consequences of mediocrity – enough insulation to choose to remain relatively happy mediocre shovel diggers. America, welcome to European dynamics. If the western world wants to maintain its four to six times average world standard of living, it cannot afford to flatten its effort-reaward curves and pigeonwhole the innovation of free enterprise into collective national economic management. The three billion souls of the emerging world who have finally and belatedly found some at least partial freedom, have neither the patience nor the desire to see how the western world’s experiment with mandatory collectivism turns out. The west will be absorbed into worldwide mediocrity in short order.
———————————-
Or maybe (to reurn to the post’s theme) I’m all wrong. Maybe the human-bee model turns out to be most efficient, some human society of altered humans where all bulldozzer inventors enthousiastically leave their homes and families every morning to go work AND do high value work for distant others (though I suspect that the very genetic engineering of humans — which has so far been anathema to liberals, but who knows it is generally more up their alley of central manipulation.. — will likely have to provide this new human species, but that is another story). Or perhaps there can be competing verieties of societies, though I suspect this is verbotten for advocates of mandatory collectivism (either from the left or the right) as Mrs Blankerhorn and Mr Buiter demonstrate.
But I’m optimistic that natural selection and evolution will continue to apply to cultures just as much as it applies to species. The future belongs to those jurisdictions who let indiviuals keep the fruits of their labor. These will be countries populated by mobile global citizens who can do high value work for anyone from everywhere. These will be countries populated by widely travelling individuals who will regularly see and be keenly aware of how much more prosperous their country is compared to the world average. They will then be happy to live on 100k per year (or whatever the inflated equivalent in the future is) and let those more competent earning multiple times their own income also keep the fruits of their labor, seing how much luckier they are compared to a world average living on 10k (or whatever the inflated equivalent is at the time).
Liechtenstein is in no danger: it can be easily absorbed into Switzerland.
Do tax havens still accept money from US citizens? I understand that most non-US banks don’t anymore.
Which is ironic, since tax havens ultimately rely on the Pax Americana for their security… though I somewhat doubt that Obama would go to war to protect a tax haven.
Reblogged this on Attack the System.
So he has a “target list”, it just happens to be countries this time. And for all we know, he will just use drones and air power to do the invading, sorry the kinetic operation. Seen that before from other Lefties.
The article title requires revision to correct pluralization.
I would be willing to lead the force taking the Caymans, provided the cruise ship we use for troop transport has an adequate bar.