The nation at the heart of the offshore tax haven scandal is Britain

Britain's relationship with its overseas territories means it could – if it wanted – easily tackle offshore global secrecy

• 
• • James Ball
  • guardian.co.uk, Friday 5 April 2013 18.00 BST

'The British Virgin Islands are perhaps rivalled only by Switzerland as a global capital for the offshore industry'. Photograph: James Marshall/Corbis

It's a tumultuous time for the offshore industry. For decades, there's been an uneasy equilibrium: opprobrium from campaigners, torpor from regulators, apathy from the wider public, and delight for the wealthy benefiting from the arrangements to cut their tax bill or avoid regulatory scrutiny.

Recently, though, the rhetoric and action have changed. In tougher economic times – for which the financial sector has copped a huge amount of the blame – the public is more aggrieved by tax avoidance arrangements than ever, while recent proposed offshore crackdowns have been cautiously welcomed by campaigners as having the potential to actually be effective.

The leaking of more than 2m offshore files to the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, and through them to the Guardian for our Offshore Secrets stories is just the latest in a series of unwelcome developments.

Amid this backdrop, and with ministers from George Osborne to Vince Cable willing to speak out strongly against offshoring and tax avoidance, it's easy to imagine the villains of the piece to be irresponsible foreign nations – happy to shelter the mega-rich in offshore secrecy, unconcerned about the tax avoided in other, larger countries.

If only the British government can prevail in these overseas battles, things will get better, it seems.
But such a stance ignores that one nation in particular has ties to offshore havens everywhere. It's a veritable nexus of offshore influence, related to havens in the Caribbean, and much closer to home. That nation is, of course, the United Kingdom.

The clue is quite often in the name. The British Virgin Islands are perhaps rivalled only by Switzerland as a global capital for the offshore industry, with more than 1m offshore companies registered on the Caribbean island (population 31,900). Plaques for registration agents, solicitors and more line almost every wall of the islands' tiny capital.

The islands are a British Overseas Territory: legally under the jurisdiction of the UK (and with a British governor), but in practice self-governed. Other havens with this UK imprimatur include the Cayman islands, Gibraltar, and the Turks and Caicos Islands.

Closer to home, the UK wields even more control over the crown dependencies: Jersey, Guernsey and the Isle of Man, whose role in legal tax avoidance techniques has been documented time and again for decades.
Even within the UK itself, little is done against tricks of the offshore trade that have been known for decades.

In 1999, Sark islander Philip Croshaw was struck off as a UK director for acting as a "nominee" – a sham director who hides a company's real controllers – for thousands of companies in the UK.

At the time, then-trade minister Kim Howells said: "The government today struck a fatal blow against the practice of so-called 'nominee directorships' … The trade in providing 'nominee director' services from the island of Sark has been a scandal … The courts have now effectively outlawed this abuse."

And yet today – 14 years later – more than 175,000 UK companies have had directors based in offshore havens, and the Guardian has identified 28 sham directors with tens of thousands of companies between them.

In short, a huge string of the world's foremost offshore havens have, at minimum, a strong and long-lasting symbolic relationship with the UK, and in practice are susceptible to significant influence and pressure from the UK government.

Even at home, offshore practices known and deplored by governments for more than a decade are still going strong. The temptation for campaigners and government alike is to look overseas for the villains in the offshore trade. The reality is more complex, and the trouble closer to home. The upside of this is it means that if Britain really wants to tackle global offshore secrecy, there's a lot it can do.

But so far, everywhere – on its home turf, in its dependencies, and in its overseas territories – the UK brand is on both sides of the fight. For Britain, the battle against offshore tax havens – if it wants to fight it – begins at home.

More than 175,000 UK companies have offshore directors

Figures raise concern about scale of offshore secrecy arrangements by British businesses

• James Ball
• The Guardian, Thursday 4 April 2013 16.18 BST

On Sark in the Channel islands there have been 24 current and former UK company directors for every resident. Photograph: Universalimagesgroup/UIG via Getty Images

More than 175,000 UK-registered companies have used directors giving addresses in offshore jurisdictions, the Guardian has established. This raises fresh concerns about the scale of Britain's involvement in offshore secrecy arrangements.

Data obtained from the corporate information service Duedil reveals 177,020 companies have listed directors in jurisdictions such as the Channel Islands, British Virgin Islands, Cyprus, Dubai and the Seychelles.

More than 60,000 of those companies are listed as currently active on Companies House, the official register of UK businesses.

Having directors in offshore jurisdictions does not indicate a company is doing anything illegal, or that a director is necessarily a sham.

British expats who retain directorships of their business would feature in this data, as do "personal services companies" based in the Isle of Man, which help self-employed people incorporate themselves as a limited company.

However, the figures do reveal the huge scale of company registration relative to some of the islands' tiny populations: 47,161 companies have listed directors from the Isle of Man – representing one British company for every 1.8 residents of the island.

The figure is even more stark for the secrecy haven of the British Virgin Islands, where there is one director listed for every 1.3 residents of the islands, for a total of 17,959 UK businesses, past and present.

On the tiny Channel Island of Sark, there have been 24 current and former UK company directors for every resident of the island.

Many of the key figures involved in the "Sark Lark", as it was known, emigrated when the island's controversial practices came under scrutiny a decade ago. Most of those companies are now defunct, with only around 209 active directorships.

A Guardian/ICIJ investigation, published last November, documented the activities of more than two dozen "sham directors" – Britons each listed as directors of hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of companies registered across the world, allowing the real people behind them to stay in the shadows.

These sham directors held directorships not only in offshore companies but also in more than 8,900 British-registered companies – meaning UK authorities were left in the dark as to who was really in charge of supposedly British businesses.

These new findings suggest the numbers of such less-than-genuine directors on British company registers may be much greater than the 28 so far identified.

The Offshore Secrets investigation identified groups of nominee directors working out of territories scattered across the world. Atlas Corporate Services operated from Dubai and the Seychelles with six sham directors purportedly controlling more than 5,400 international companies.

Another pair of British expats, Sarah and Edward Petre-Mears, appeared to have a global empire of more than 2,250 directorships between them – run, initially, from their home in Sark, and then from a collection of addresses on the tiny Caribbean island of Nevis.

Writing in the Guardian in the wake of the initial findings, and before the latest figures came to light, the business secretary, Vince Cable, warned against the practice of using sham directors based in offshore territories. "[We] must identify and stop the minority who sail too close to the wind in order to protect the UK's reputation as a trusted place to do business," he said. "Becoming a company director carries with it legal responsibilities which, if breached, can result in disqualification, fines and prison.

"Some people think that putting up a straw man as a director makes them immune from the consequences. This is not the case: if you are acting as a director, you are liable."