Liechtenstein defends its banks in German tax-evasion inquiry

VADUZ, Liechtenstein: It's not exactly the Mouse that Roared, but maybe the Mouse that Resisted.

After weathering days of criticism from Germany over a spectacular tax evasion case, this tiny Alpine principality is digging in for what experts say may a prolonged battle to defend its lucrative tradition of banking secrecy against what it views as attacks from a larger European country.

In a defiant news conference Tuesday, the crown prince of Liechtenstein, Alois, said his country would take legal steps to protect banking clients from German investigators, who have mounted a campaign to expose wealthy people suspected of sheltering money here to avoid paying taxes.

"We are a small country dependent on friendly neighborly relations," Prince Alois said in this normally sleepy capital. "But we are also a sovereign state and - we hope - do not live in an era when might makes right, rather than international law and international agreements."

Branded as an uncooperative tax haven by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, Liechtenstein tried to seize the moral high ground by focusing on the fact that Germany's intelligence service paid an unidentified informant for stolen banking data.

"Such actions would be legally unthinkable in Liechtenstein and many other nations," Prince Alois said. "Here, fiscal interests cannot be placed ahead of the rule of law."

The criticism of the German government's methods was echoed by lawyers in Germany, some of whom predicted that the courts would not admit data from a stolen computer disc as evidence in criminal trials. "Of course, we know that secret services pay for information," said Eberhard Kempf, a leading German defense attorney.

Liechtenstein, along with Monoco and Switzerland are the dedicated tax-free banking havens for the rich of Europe.
As soon as a few million are made, they immediatly buy property in one of these countries and declare that all future income be paid through those banks.
Pro-athletes, celebs, major business people.
Example: The F1 race car driver, Lewis Hamilton, who recently nailed his big payday contract and is endorsing products like crazy claimed “the paparazi was just too mean to him” so he was going to be relocating to Monoco.
And considering in many countries like England and Germany, over 50% of your income goes to taxes, I really can’t blame them.

I’m happy for everyone who manages to shelter their money from the long fingers of government even if it’s questionable like this. While taxes are necessary in some form to fund basic governmental functions, already today this monster has an expanse far beyond that which is healthy economically or even morally right for those working and paying for this system be it most of Europe or N. America. An example: taxes such as an inheritance or capital gains tax are de facto a second tax slapped on something already taxed once before and justified through some class warfare rhetoric. It makes absolutely no sense, it’s not morally or rationally justifiable and the “so called culprits” are usually not F1 race car drivers with millions; rather Schmidt who worked himself to death in a factory and wants to pass something on to his kids, with his friendly government asking for 1/3 of it after he already paid taxes on it to begin with. Some taxes should not be, and capital gains as well as inheritance taxes are two examples.

1. I agree with your argumentation about the taxation of capital gains or even the income from interest rates The taxation is wrong or immoral in my opinion given the fact that taxes had to be payed to build this capital.

2. I do not agree with people violating laws. Who am i or any other individual that i can decide whether i want to follow a certain law or not. Some strange people might think that they love children while they abuse them or perhaps some people do not like the high prices of gas or a new mobilephone. Why pay for it?

We live in a democracy with a rule of law. There are clear ways how to change laws and we can vote for lower taxes but we also have to accept if a majority of people votes in a different way that´s democracy. In a society a individual can not separate the laws he wants to follow from the ones he does not like because as said who knows which laws your neighbor does not like.

I hope these criminals will get a huge punishment and i know what i am talking about i worked several years for german banks in Luxemburg.

A last word about mr schumacher beckenbauer netzer... They should think for a while about the fact that they would not have earned this huge amount of money if they were poles from austrian or switzerland because of so many reasons.

There is a fine line between law and mob rule.

Without a concept of God, in a secular state, the law almost always becomes mob rule.

Documents with lots of stamps and long titles are not neccessarily good or right.

**** Who am i or any other individual that i can decide whether i want to follow a certain law or not

Hopefully a human being, someone that can reason and lives by some sort of moral code, able to see through the fog. Those who followed the orders and shoved people into ovens were only following orders after all! A higher authority does not suspend your ability to think or to know what is right from wrong, or at least so I hope.

If a law violates basic concepts, goes against certain “unalienable rights” you are a hero if you do not follow them. A family hiding a Jewish woman in 1944 is in violation of the law, they are also very right in doing so, even heroes in my book.

**** We live in a democracy with a rule of law. There are clear ways how to change laws and we can vote for lower taxes but we also have to accept if a majority of people votes in a different way that´s democracy.

In a democracy you have the right to not vote, you have the right to petition, picket, assemble, to passive resistance. It was passive resistance that largely accomplished the civil rights agenda of the 60s. Without passive resistance what attention would have been brought upon segregation? Where would Rosa Parks sit on that bus today?

Government is for the people and by the people, you have a right to voice your opinion, you have a right to protest what is stupid, and you are not a sheeple that needs guided by the great government hand that puts the diapers on you as a baby and fills in your grave at death.

***** In a society a individual can not separate the laws he wants to follow from the ones he does not like because as said who knows which laws your neighbor does not like.

Do you follow the speed limit all the time? It was illegal to re-import certain cars and then from one day to the next it was OK. Those people who did it before the magic date, they are criminals, but those after the date are OK?

You Germans always make things more complex than they are. In the words of Oliver Wendell Holmes, “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.” The rest is relativistic gibberish, the sort of stuff that is used to justify taking away guns, banning hate speech (Volksverhetzung), taxing people so they spend their money on more ecological or healthier products, or whatever other nonsense for the “collective good” is deemed by the mob as right that day.

Your argumentation would be right in a totalitaristic country but germany is a democracy and i believe in democratic institutions and rules although i do not agree with all the decisions.

We could have a long discussion about the german tax system and i would clearly support a lot of changes here. Because of my profession i know enough about the amount of money that leaves germany and the people who act like Mr Zumwinkel.

You can not compete with such small countries like Lichtenstein and their 0,01% taxation in the middle of europe. Lichtestein has 35.000 inhabitants and is smaller than my home county. Switzerland Lichtenstein and Luxemburg have a very rich and fine living payed by the rest of europe.
I can understand that they want to protect their system looking at their gdp per head but the problem remains. we have a country or better countries with a criminal business model but they are dependent on free capital transfer and open borders that´s why they all want to be part of Schengen.

In the end it is very easy germany and the EU should follow the US model or the OECD ideas. The uS has a agreement with Lichtenstein. The US tax authorities get informations from Lichtenstein if a US citizen brings his money to Lichtenstein. So beware big brother is already watching you. The US is much tougher here than germany. The OECD wants to tax money that is transfered to Lichtenstein and so on.

Lichtenstein is just the start of a longterm project. WE have the discussion about the taxation of income from interests rates or capital gains for such a long time in europe and the problems are always the small nations Monaco Lichtenstein Andora and Siwtzerland hiding behind these small partners.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.