Is Your Off-shore Money Safe ?

[LaoPo]

MASSIVE TAX EVASION SCANDAL IN GERMANY

The Liechtenstein Connection

With one bigwig already toppled for tax evasion and hundreds more likely waiting their turn, all roads lead to the tiny principality of Liechtenstein. According to SPIEGEL sources, Germany's largest post-war economic scandal started with a single intelligence source.

German investigators have their hands on LGT Bank data that may implicate hundreds of wealthy Germans of being involved in tax evasion.

It is rapidly becoming one of the largest economic scandals ever in Germany's post-World War II history. As many as 900 wealthy Germans -- many of them well-known -- might be involved. Berlin may have been shorted up to 4 billion euros in taxes. And the accusatory finger is pointing increasingly at what many feel is rampant greed among of many of Germany's top earners -- and at a handful of banks and foundations in the tiny principality of Liechtenstein that help the affluent hide their assets.

The first to fall was Deutsche Post CEO Klaus Zumwinkel. He resigned on Friday after raids on his home and office by officials looking for evidence of massive tax invasion. But with officials planning to launch up to 125 additional tax evasion investigations next week, it is likely that Zumwinkel will soon have to share headline space.

The growing investigation has its roots in information handed to tax investigators by Germany's foreign intelligence agency, the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND). Last week, the BND insisted it had been little more than a messenger, but according to SPIEGEL sources, its involvement is more reminiscent of a Tom Clancy novel than of a run-of-the-mill operation.

In 2006, a man approached the BND offering agents a DVD full of information detailing foreign investments and following capital flows from Germany into those investments. In addition, the source claimed to have particulars pertaining to a number of accounts held by the LGT Group, a bank managed by the principality of Liechtenstein. But he was charging a hefty price for the DVD.

BND agents moved slowly. Their source, whose identity has not been made public, offered up samples from his data for German officials to test. And they were satisfied with the information's trustworthiness. In the end, the source was wired 5 million euros for the data disk, and he also requested personal protection out of fear for his life. The payment was made with the knowledge of German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück.

While hundreds of its customers may be compromised by the information now in the hands of eager German investigators, the bank is doing its best to assure its clients that the DVD contained details stolen from LGT Trust Ltd, a part of the LTD Group located in Vaduz, Liechtenstein six years ago. That case was closed in 2003 after the perpetrator was convicted. The data, the bank says, was "illegally passed on." The bank claims that "there is no indication that customer information has been stolen since 2002."

But according to SPIEGEL sources, German investigators are in possession of bank data on Liechtenstein-based tax evasion that goes all the way through the end of 2005. They also have account information from the Liechtensteinische Landesbank (LLB) which may reveal tax evasion. The LLB announced at the beginning of the week that it too had been the victim of a major data theft. According to SPIEGEL sources, that data too is still in circulation.

Regardless of how the data landed on the desks of German tax investigators, the growing scandal has caused outrage across the country and in the capital. German Chancellor Angela Merkel on Friday once again reminded German economic leaders that they carry a huge responsibility. "Responsible behavior from companies is an elementary prerequisite for a functioning socially-responsible market economy," she said. Minister of the Economy Michael Glos, a conservative like Merkel, told the Sunday tabloid Bild am Sonntag that German managers have to "become aware that they are role models for society." Otherwise, he said, "faith in our market economy will be lost."

Others were a bit more pointed. Interior Minister Wolfgang Schäuble, from Merkel's Christian Democrats, told SPIEGEL "I have zero understanding for this kind of greed. Uncontrolled capitalism, greed and massive losses on speculative investments -- that is a combination that makes people furious." Steinbrück, the Social Democratic Finance Minister, told the online version of the weekly Die Zeit: "It is the elites who are threatening to cause the system to collapse."

On Monday, the SPD plans to pass a resolution looking at whether prison sentences for tax evasion should be lengthened. The party accuses elites in Germany of ignoring the responsibility they have for the common good. "The money that perpetrators keep from the community short-changes education, security and infrastructure," the draft document reads.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/busine...,535768,00.html

LaoPo

[cclub75]

Yes that's an incredible news.

More incredible is that the german secret services paid for this CD, which was obviously stolen from the Bank.

It's amazing. And the dirty german politicians are saying that it's just fine.

Anyway. It's a good way to remember that Germany is nothing less (like the rest of Europe) than a socialist state, where the tax burden is too heavy. Therefore, to try to escape this institutionalized theft, is perfectly healthy and natural.

The mistake those people made... was to believe that Lichenstein was "safe".

This is why your title is a little bit misleading LaoPo...

Off shore is not Lichenstein. Off shore is Asia. Singapore for instance. And over there, you can be sure that :

-western secret services

-western frustrated employees willing to sale private datas

-western hysterical medias about "tax evasion"

-western dirty socialist politicians and statists

... and other goodies, are not, not, not welcome. At all.

[LaoPo]

Yes that's an incredible news.

More incredible is that the german secret services paid for this CD, which was obviously stolen from the Bank.

It's amazing. And the dirty german politicians are saying that it's just fine.

Anyway. It's a good way to remember that Germany is nothing less (like the rest of Europe) than a socialist state, where the tax burden is too heavy. Therefore, to try to escape this institutionalized theft, is perfectly healthy and natural.

The mistake those people made... was to believe that Lichenstein was "safe".

This is why your title is a little bit misleading LaoPo...

Off shore is not Lichenstein. Off shore is Asia. Singapore for instance. And over there, you can be sure that :

-western secret services

-western frustrated employees willing to sale private datas

-western hysterical medias about "tax evasion"

-western dirty socialist politicians and statists

... and other goodies, are not, not, not welcome. At all.

I didn't invent the word 'offshore' cclub75

"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)."

I am so sorry but you're mistaken to think that Singapore (for instance) is 'safe'. It's not I can assure you.

I personally know about a 'case' where a particular EU

[lannarebirth]

About 15 years ago I made inquiries about an account in Liechtenstein. At that time they wanted about 60k $USD to set an account up. When I regained my senses I opted for Switzerland.

I remeber once, another time I was in Liechtenstein. I was sitting at an outdoor table in a street cafe. There was a signboard out front like you find at restaurants that display the daily specials. This signboard had real estate from around the globe listed on it. 30,000 acre tracts iof farmland, shopping malls, etc. There's a lot of money there.

[cclub75]

I didn't invent the word 'offshore' cclub75

"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)."

I am so sorry but you're mistaken to think that Singapore (for instance) is 'safe'. It's not I can assure you.

I personally know about a 'case' where a particular EU

Of course I didn't assume that you confused Lichenstein with an... island.

I was using the expression "off shore" more in the "tax free, safe haven" meaning.

Lichenstein is surrounded (obviously ) by the UE. Like Switzerland. The Swiss have negociated to keep (?) bank secrecy, but against a tax on interests earned (to be paid to the country of origin of depositors).

My point : those tiny european countries won't be able to resist longer to the socialist hysteria of UE.

As for Singapore, HK, I continue to think that it's much more safer. And China too. And Vietnam too. Nothing better than a good old asian communist country.

Edited February 18, 2008 by cclub75

[LaoPo]

Note: something went wrong and it seems I can't change my message above anymore; sorry for that.

I didn't invent the word 'offshore' cclub75 wink.gif

"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)."

From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Offshore_bank

I am so sorry but you're naive to think that offshore banks (in Singapore for instance) are 'safe'. They're not I can assure you.

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

The only thing they have to do is (and they did) to supply the Jurisdiction Authorities from said 'offshore' countries with -false- information connected to crime and/or drug related crimes EVEN if that's not the case at all.

Said offshore banks/countries consider tax-evasion as a non-crime related issue but most countries do. The only way to get info from said banks/countries is supply the same with false information, which they do -with pleasure-. dry.gif

The above mentioned countries (and their banks) are scared-to-death if their (good?) names are mentioned in relation to crime; that's why they will follow the advice of their own counterpart-prosecutor upon request from the foreign one and order the banks to supply the info.

Real secret accounts....? Of course, as long as you believe your offshore bank....

LaoPo

Edited February 18, 2008 by LaoPo

[Maestro]

When I read about the German government having paid 5 million euro for the stolen bank data my first thought was that this will tempt employees in many other banks in tax havens to steal confidential data from their employers and sell it to the governments of the countries where the bank customers have their tax domicile. With 5 million euro in your kitty you can retire in luxury, using only the income from your investment.

Incidentally, in the Liechtenstein case the thief got caught and jailed but others, to whom he apparently passed on the data discs, now made money out of it. First, the thief and subsequent possessors of the stolen data extorted money from the bank where he stole the data and the bank did in fact pay them substantial sums. In other words, the thief and his buddies cashed in twice.

--

Maestro

[zzdocxx]

Tax invasion, wow.

[cclub75]

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

Sure... But as you said, it was a big case. IRS certainly can't initiate procedures with criminal prosecutors for small time tax-escapers like us, right ?

Anyway. I stick to my belief.

In Germany for instance, they just hit a computer key to get your full fiscal and banking life.

In Singapore, they would have first to know that you have an account over there.

That makes the difference.

It's the needle into the hay principle.

Edited February 18, 2008 by cclub75

[cmsally]

I wonder if the guy who got paid 5m for the data will go and open an offshore acct. somewhere.

[Naam]

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

In Singapore, they would have first to know that you have an account over there.

That makes the difference.

It's the needle into the hay principle.

in some cases they would first have to know that you established a trust in Singapore. then they would have to know the name and jurisdiction of the corporation which is held by the trust and then they would have to know what corporation is held by the corporation which is held by the trust

[LivinLOS]

When I read about the German government having paid 5 million euro for the stolen bank data my first thought was that this will tempt employees in many other banks in tax havens to steal confidential data from their employers and sell it to the governments of the countries where the bank customers have their tax domicile. With 5 million euro in your kitty you can retire in luxury, using only the income from your investment.

Incidentally, in the Liechtenstein case the thief got caught and jailed but others, to whom he apparently passed on the data discs, now made money out of it. First, the thief and subsequent possessors of the stolen data extorted money from the bank where he stole the data and the bank did in fact pay them substantial sums. In other words, the thief and his buddies cashed in twice.

--

Maestro

From one of the snippets of news I heard that... The data theft occurred in 2002 (or therabouts) and the current data the police have dates right up to 2005 so that negates the possibility that it was the 2002 data theft alone. I would indicate a second data theft or mole. BBC even hinted that German secret service may have put a mole into the bank for exactly this, however if that was the case why the 5 mil EUR payment.

[LaoPo]

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

In Singapore, they would have first to know that you have an account over there.

That makes the difference.

It's the needle into the hay principle.

in some cases they would first have to know that you established a trust in Singapore. then they would have to know the name and jurisdiction of the corporation which is held by the trust and then they would have to know what corporation is held by the corporation which is held by the trust

Even people with trusts* do make phone calls, write messages on a computer, keep certain papers at their home, tell others about their assets and/or can't keep their mouth shut because they want to show off....

If 'they're' after you, they'll find you, no matter where you are. A lot of people still think that good old banks like HSBC and UBS, for instance, won't cooperate with their local justice departments and send/supply the required info....dream on.

* there were trusts in Guernsey, Switzerland, HK, S'pore in the above mentioned case in my message; don't know about Brunei. I said the info was supplied in a 'big' case, but it depends what someone considers to be 'big'. For some, 'big' is small, for others 'big' is not so big or, contrary, very big.

In other words: a few million is a lot of money for some, for others, it's not.

For your local taxman, every hundred thousand counts, not because it's a lot of money but because it's fun to nail you

LaoPo

[Heng]

It's best not to use your home country passport when opening/maintaining accounts. Duh.

[Naam]

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

In Singapore, they would have first to know that you have an account over there.

That makes the difference.

It's the needle into the hay principle.

in some cases they would first have to know that you established a trust in Singapore. then they would have to know the name and jurisdiction of the corporation which is held by the trust and then they would have to know what corporation is held by the corporation which is held by the trust

Even people with trusts* do make phone calls, write messages on a computer, keep certain papers at their home, tell others about their assets and/or can't keep their mouth shut because they want to show off....

LaoPo

trusts which have beneficiaries who live in a tax free environment, e.g. Thailand, Emirates, Singapore or other countries which do not levy tax from income derived from assets belonging to natural persons are safe no matter what rumours are spread by the media. the CEO of Deutsche Postbank who was caught made the huge mistake that the trust listed him and his wife as beneficiaries although as residents of Germany both were taxable on their worldwide income. the data (among others) were stolen and sold. bad planning = bad luck!

[LaoPo]

I personally know about a big 'case' where the tax people (via a criminal prosecutor) from a particular EU country asked-and-got detailed info from (hold your breath...)

Hong Kong - Singapore - Guernsey, Switzerland and even Brunei banks....

In Singapore, they would have first to know that you have an account over there.

That makes the difference.

It's the needle into the hay principle.

in some cases they would first have to know that you established a trust in Singapore. then they would have to know the name and jurisdiction of the corporation which is held by the trust and then they would have to know what corporation is held by the corporation which is held by the trust

Even people with trusts* do make phone calls, write messages on a computer, keep certain papers at their home, tell others about their assets and/or can't keep their mouth shut because they want to show off....

LaoPo

trusts which have beneficiaries who live in a tax free environment, e.g. Thailand, Emirates, Singapore or other countries which do not levy tax from income derived from assets belonging to natural persons are safe no matter what rumours are spread by the media.

A lot of EU citizens living abroad, decide at a certain point in their senior life, mostly due to health problems, to return to their home country.

It depends on the local/country taxman+tax rules if he wishes to know where your money comes from, if you decide to take it with you, and also whether there are children or not and where they live (tax free?) who might inherit in the future.

There are quite a few 'expats' who think they've 'arranged' their offshore accounts into detail and into their own 'secret garden' but forget about a situation that something nasty happens like death/fatal accident/mental incapability etc. or even 'forget' to mention other beneficiaries other than themselves in case they die. That's nice for the banks. Swiss banks know all about it...!

All-in-all it depends and every single situation is different but the taxman never forgets; the bearpit in Germany and Liechtenstein just opened. The pressure from Germany will be immense.....To be continued...

And, Heng: most people don't have more than 1 passport/ID, the vast majority of world citizens don't. You are an exception from a minority. Good for you

LaoPo

[Naam]

A lot of EU citizens living abroad, decide at a certain point in their senior life, mostly due to health problems, to return to their home country. It depends on the local/country taxman+tax rules if he wishes to know where your money comes from, if you decide to take it with you, and also whether there are children or not and where they live (tax free?) who might inherit in the future.

nobody in his right mind takes his money from "offshore" to "home". what is usually done that a "black" portfolio is kept and "white" one is established from which income is transferred and taxes are duly paid.

the taxman has no right to demand information about beneficiaries who do not live within his jurisdiction be it to levy income, inheritance or any other tax.

addendum: it is however no problem nor will it cause any problems if any amount of assets are repatriated to one's home country provided the owner(s)/beneficiaries where living legally in another jurisdiction and without tax liabilities towards the home country. unfortunately this does not apply to U.S. citizens who are taxed on their worldwide income no matter where they reside.

Edited February 20, 2008 by Naam

[Heng]

And, Heng: most people don't have more than 1 passport/ID, the vast majority of world citizens don't. You are an exception from a minority. Good for you

LaoPo

The vast majority of world citizens are missing out on a lot of things...

There are literally dozens of countries where citizenship and passports are available for a price/minimal investment. There are all kinds of options for citizenship by marriage as well. You simply need to either legally change (for that country) your name or simply spell the English translation for your passport differently from your home country (say your Taiwanese passport is spelled "Lao Po".... just make sure your Vanuatu passport is spelled "Lhow Phoe." As far as DBS/UOB/OCBC are concerned, you're just a Vanuatu citizen keeping some funds offshore to earn a few extra % points.

I've run into more than a few Thais on day trips to Singapore doing the same thing. They present their Thai passports, not their US/UK/German or whatever passports.

True, you won't be invisible to a concerted effort to find you (this is advice for the better to do who wish to avoid taxation... not for fugitives/drug lords/etc.), but you'll likely avoid any kind of broad sweep/search.

Edited February 20, 2008 by Heng

[Naam]

And, Heng: most people don't have more than 1 passport/ID, the vast majority of world citizens don't. You are an exception from a minority. Good for you

LaoPo

There are literally dozens of countries where citizenship and passports are available for a price/minimal investment.

most of theses passports are not good for travelling without a visa. if you try to open an account in Singapore with an exotic passport the bank will refuse if you don't have an entry stamp from SG immigration in your passport. that applies of course for other countries too. moreover to open an account a utility bill (not older than one month, preferably a phone bill) is required as proof of domicile.

a side note: taxmen worldwide consider bin-Laden et al as a gift from heaven as it enables them to cross legal boundaries which they couldn't cross before!

[Heng]

Those who wish to get an exotic passport will obviously want to look into which countries (tax havens) they'll be able to travel to visa free of course.

Yeah, I had to provide a utility bill as well. So basically for anyone residing in Thailand who wishes to stay off their home country radar, just get a Thai passport. Really easy to change the English spelling of your name here as well (and as most know, you can simply change the billing name of just about any utility here to match whatever you want... all they care about is if you pay your bills on time). Sorted.

Edited February 20, 2008 by Heng

[LaoPo]

UK in Liechtenstein tax data deal

The UK's tax authority has confirmed that it has paid an informant for data regarding British citizens who have accounts in tax haven Liechtenstein.

HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) confirmed the move after a Sunday Times report, but would not say how much it had paid the informant.

HMRC said it was seeking "to protect the UK exchequer from those who seek to hide behind secrecy laws".

Separately Germany is involved in its own probe over Liechtenstein accounts.

The Sunday Times newspaper claimed the amount paid to the informant was £100,000 - but that figure was not confirmed.

HMRC said it had made the move in a bid to protect the UK against those trying to "deprive the UK of tax revenues to which it is entitled".

Meanwhile, Germany has launched a probe into tax evasion using data also from an anonymous informant, who was reportedly paid 5m euros (£3.7m; $7.4m).

In response, the country's head - Prince Alois von und zu Liechtenstein - has argued that Germany's move is illegal.

Liechtenstein is now conducting its own investigation on the subject.

The Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development lists Liechtenstein as one of only three states remaining on its blacklist of "uncooperative tax havens".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/7261830.stm

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

U.K. authorities have Liechtenstein tax data: report

By William L. Watts, MarketWatch

Last update: 6:58 a.m. EST Feb. 25, 2008

LONDON (MarketWatch) -- German high-fliers aren't the only ones quaking in their designer boots over the notion authorities may have detailed knowledge of their financial holdings in the once airtight tax haven of Liechtenstein.

U.K. tax collectors, after initially turning up their nose at an informant's offer to sell them confidential data from a Liechtenstein bank, have now paid up and have information on about 100 wealthy British subjects with money hidden away in the tiny Alpine principality, the Financial Times reported Monday.

The data are expected to result in the collection of at least 100 million pounds ($196.68 million) in unpaid taxes, the paper reported.

British authorities were said to have been offered the list as early as two years ago, the FT reported. But they were persuaded to pay the informant around 100,000 pounds only after Berlin tax officials launched in recent weeks a high-profile crackdown on Germans with money said to be stowed away in Liechtenstein, the report said.

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin, D-Mich., last week said he would investigate whether American citizens have hidden assets at the bank.

The German probe has already seen Deutsche Post CEO Klaus Zumwinkel pushed out of his job. Zumwinkel resigned earlier this month after prosecutors charged that he had evaded around one million euros ($1.482 million) in taxes. See archived First Take.

Germany's secret service is thought to have paid 4.2 million euros in January 2006 for a list of 750 Germans with money stowed in a Liechtenstein bank. The informant is thought to be a former employee of LGT Group, Liechtenstein's largest bank, reports say.

Meanwhile, the German crackdown has strained relations between Germany and Liechtenstein, while stirring a wider debate on the role of tax havens.

From: Marketwatch/DowJones

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Liechtenstein tax scandal makes waves across Europe

Excerpts:

"Germany's Handelsblatt daily also reported that Finland, Sweden and Norway* have expressed interest in the list of clients.

Handelsblatt quoted a source close to the investigation as saying that investors from other nations featured on the list.

"When one secretly copies data onto a disc, one does not have time to sort the names by nationality," the source said.

Liechtenstein's LGT Bank voiced indignation at how the "stolen information" was being shared around European capitals.

"Apparently, the stolen data material has also been illegally disclosed, directly or indirectly, to other authorities," the bank said in a statement.

"LGT regards such methods as being extremely offensive," it added.

The data concerns about 1,400 client relationships, with the largest number -- about 600 -- resident in Germany, the bank said.

"The generalisation put forward in some cases that all the clients affected are tax offenders is to be utterly refuted," it added.

LGT alleged that the person who had informed the German authorities was a former employee, Liechtenstein citizen Heinrich Kieber.

Kieber worked for the bank since 1999, first as an external employee of an IT company and from April 2001 to November 2002 as a direct employee.

LGT Group alleged that Kieber was the subject of an international arrest warrant issued in 1997 by Spanish authorities over a real estate fraud case. He was sentenced in Liechtenstein to a fine of 600,000 Swiss francs (550,000 dollars, 371,000 euros) in October 2001.

Kieber left Liechtenstein in November 2002, but before quitting the country he stole client data from LGT Group and copied it onto four DVDs, the bank alleged.

The case has sparked keen interest in Liechtenstein's larger neighbour Switzerland, with some bankers fearing the country's own fabled banking secrecy laws will come under renewed scrutiny.

"Pressure on Switzerland is growing and the country is once again in the sights" of the international community, Jan-Egbert Sturm, a director of economic research at the University of Zurich, told AFP last week.

Swiss laws oblige banks to provide information in criminal investigations and to report any signs of money laundering, but effectively prohibit them from giving information to domestic or foreign tax authorities.

The Swiss Bankers' Association has itself been embroiled in the media storm surrounding the Liechtenstein affair after its head, Pierre Mirabaud, apologised for comparing the methods of the German authorities to the Gestapo.

German chancellor Angela Merkel has threatened to isolate Liechtenstein, a country of 35,000 people nestled between Switzerland and Austria, by refusing to ratify its accession to Europe's Schengen passport-free travel zone.

Source: Yahoo! news

* as well as other countries in the EU, like The Netherlands.

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

Germany wants EU tax haven debate

Monday, 3 March 2008, 12:34 GMT

Germany is calling for a Europe-wide debate on tax havens after hundreds of wealthy Germans were said to have used a Liechtenstein bank to evade taxes.

But a spokeswoman denied reports that Berlin wanted EU ministers to agree to specific plans at a meeting on Tuesday.

A number of countries have launched raids on suspected tax dodgers in response to the German revelations.

The European Commission says it will speed up plans to change EU rules on taxing savings if asked to do so.

Liechtenstein is not alone in providing a high level of secrecy in its status as a tax haven for wealthy Europeans. Andorra and Monaco may also be targeted by EU ministers.

German Finance Minister Peer Steinbrueck said last week that Berlin would take its own measures if there was no progress at a European level.

In a newspaper interview at the weekend, Liechtenstein's Prime Minister Otmar Hasler said the tiny Alpine state was ready to work for a "reasonable compromise" on banking secrecy.

A small demonstration by anti-globalisation activists in the capital, Vaduz, on Saturday was outnumbered by hundreds of residents who shouted at them to go home.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7274770.stm

LaoPo

[LaoPo]

To whom it may concern...

http://88.80.13.160/wiki/Wikileaks

A website which "On Feb 14 Wikileaks was unconstitutionally censored!..." in the US:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/21/opinion/...tml?ref=opinion

It has an interesting link to LOS as well (if it can be opened in LOS...?)

LaoPo