Suchergebnisse

The international financial and political crisis named Panama Papers (2016) provided a rather good material for information studies, particularly for digital diplomatics. First, the comments, in some languages, allow to analyze how media and newspapers use the words information, data, document, file and record, each with its own culture: some papers are directly written with the own words of the journalist, others are translations, showing notably the differences between English and French professional and common vocabulary. Second, it was also an opportunity to check the place of email in those cases of disclosure of sensitive data in the "society of information". The point is that the fragility of the digital files themselves (format, preservation) is not the worse for information and records management; the risk is more linked to the fragility of the international network and the ability of search engines to reach these records, wherever they may be stored.

Publication of the so-called "Panama Papers" focused public interest on how certain politicians, celebrities, and other elites may have used elaborate corporate structures and offshore tax havens to conceal their beneficial ownership of companies and obscure their personal assets. Rather than taking the Panama Papers as an indication of the need for more and stricter disclosure and reporting rules, this paper advocates an alternative approach. We need to start by acknowledging that many companies are currently experiencing "disclosure and reporting fatigue", in which the constant demand for "more" and "better" transparency and reporting is having the unintended effect of promoting indifference or evasiveness. The practice of disclosure and reporting is widely perceived as an obligation to be fulfilled and not as an opportunity to add value to a firm. This is confirmed by the findings of an empirical study conducted by the authors of this paper that examines how disclosure rules operate in practice across various jurisdictions. The key takeaway of the study is that—even in jurisdictions that have a robust disclosure regime—the majority of firms engage in "grudging" or "boilerplate" compliance, in which ownership and control structures are not adequately revealed in an accessible way and, perhaps more importantly, the impact of these ownership and control structures on the governance of a company is obscured. In this paper the authors advocate an approach based on the current communication strategy of a minority of firms in their sample—firms that engage in what the authors characterize as "open communication." These firms present information on control structures—and their effect on governance—in a direct, accessible, and highly personalized manner. Such firms seem to recognize the commercial and other strategic benefits to be gained from open communication. The paper explores the implications of such an approach for both business and regulators.

The study has investigated the role of news channels in portraying Panama Papers in Pakistan. More specifically, it has examined the public perceptions towards coverage of Panama Papers by Pakistani TV channels. A sample size of 400 respondents was drawn from political science, media and communication students, who watch TV channels for collection of data through a questionnaire. Findings revealed that Panama Papers is the most debated topic in Pakistani media. The results showed that Pakistan media has mainly concentrated on the former Prime Minister Muhammad Nawaz Sharif and his family while reporting Panama issue. Findings also revealed that Pakistani media has been successful in changing the mindset of the people on this issue.

The article discusses the implications of Panama Papers on the 2017 general election in Malta. ; peer-reviewed

Abstract The Panama Papers is a collection of 11.5 million leaked records that contain information for more than 214,488 offshore entities. This collection is growing rapidly as more leaked records become available online. In this paper, we present a work in progress on a web browser plugin that detects company names from the Panama Papers and alerts the user by means of unobtrusive visual cues. We matched a random sample of company names from the Public Works and Government Services Canada registry against the Panama Papers using three different string matching techniques. Monge-Elkan is found to provide the best matching results but at increased computational cost. Levenshtein-based approach is found to provide the best tradeoff between matching and computational cost, while Jacquard index like approach is found to be less sensitive to slight textual change.

Four years after the Panama Papers scandal, tax avoidance remains an urgent moral-political problem. Moving beyond both the academic and policy mainstream, I advocate the "democratization of tax enforcement," by which I mean systematic efforts to make tax avoiders accountable to the judgment of ordinary citizens. Both individual oligarchs and multinational corporations have access to sophisticated tax avoidance strategies that impose significant fiscal costs on democracies and exacerbate preexisting distributive and political inequalities. Yet much contemporary tax sheltering occurs within the letter of the law, rendering criminal sanctions ineffective. In response, I argue for the creation of Citizen Tax Juries, deliberative minipublics empowered to scrutinize tax avoiders, demand accountability, and facilitate concrete reforms. This proposal thus responds to the wider aspiration, within contemporary democratic theory, to secure more popular control over essential economic processes.

Four years after the Panama Papers scandal, tax avoidance remains an urgent moral-political problem. Moving beyond both the academic and policy mainstream, I advocate the "democratization of tax enforcement," by which I mean systematic efforts to make tax avoiders accountable to the judgment of ordinary citizens. Both individual oligarchs and multinational corporations have access to sophisticated tax avoidance strategies that impose significant fiscal costs on democracies and exacerbate preexisting distributive and political inequalities. Yet much contemporary tax sheltering occurs within the letter of the law, rendering criminal sanctions ineffective. In response, I argue for the creation of Citizen Tax Juries, deliberative minipublics empowered to scrutinize tax avoiders, demand accountability, and facilitate concrete reforms. This proposal thus responds to the wider aspiration, within contemporary democratic theory, to secure more popular control over essential economic processes.

Four years after the Panama Papers scandal, tax avoidance remains an urgent moral-political problem. Moving beyond both the academic and policy mainstream, I advocate the "democratization of tax enforcement," by which I mean systematic efforts to make tax avoiders accountable to the judgment of ordinary citizens. Both individual oligarchs and multinational corporations have access to sophisticated tax avoidance strategies that impose significant fiscal costs on democracies and exacerbate preexisting distributive and political inequalities. Yet much contemporary tax sheltering occurs within the letter of the law, rendering criminal sanctions ineffective. In response, I argue for the creation of Citizen Tax Juries, deliberative minipublics empowered to scrutinize tax avoiders, demand accountability, and facilitate concrete reforms. This proposal thus responds to the wider aspiration, within contemporary democratic theory, to secure more popular control over essential economic processes.

The Panama Papers comprise one of the most recent influential leaks containing detailed information on intermediary companies (such as law firms), offshore entities and company officers, and serve as a valuable source of insight into the operations of (approximately) 214,000 shell companies incorporated in tax havens around the globe over the past half century. Entities and relations in the papers can be used to construct a network that permits, in principle, a systematic and scientific study at scale using techniques developed in the computational social science and network science communities. In this paper, we propose such a study by attempting to quantify and profile the importance of entities. In particular, our research explores whether intermediaries are significantly more influential than offshore entities, and whether different centrality measures lead to varying, or even incompatible, conclusions. Some findings yield conclusions that resemble Simpson's paradox. We also explore the role that jurisdictions play in determining entity importance.

Using the Panama Papers, we show that the beginning of media reporting on expropriations and property confiscations in a country increases the probability that offshore entities are incorporated by agents from the same country in the same month. This result is robust to the use of country-year fixed effects and the exclusion of tax havens. Further analysis shows that the effect is driven by countries with non-corrupt and effective governments, which supports the notion that offshore entities are incorporated when reasonably well-intended and well-functioning governments become more serious about fighting organized crime by confiscating proceeds of crime.