PRIVACY ORIENTED | From the age of BIG BROTHER – greetings!

Tax News, 11 November 2009

It has emerged that the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) has recognized Liechtenstein’s implementation of the agreed international tax cooperation standard, and has removed the jurisdiction from its “gray list”.

“The removal from the so-called ‘gray list’ is a milestone in the reorientation of the Liechtenstein location,” announced Liechtenstein’s Prime Minister Klaus Tschütscher. He added: “I took office to restore the reputation of our country with the steadfastness demanded by the situation. This is the only way we can do justice in the long term to the full potential of our businesses and service providers.”

Angel Gurría, Secretary-General of the OECD, welcomed the news: “Liechtenstein has demonstrated that it honors its commitments and is actively contributing to the international dialogue on tax cooperation.”

With its implementation of the OECD standard, Liechtenstein has completed the first phase of its reorientation. “With the new framework conditions, we have established a basis that opens up new long-term development and growth opportunities for our location. These opportunities must now be actively pursued,” Tschütscher emphasized.

Liechtenstein’s Prime Minister also announced a growth agenda for the coming weeks for the financial and business center. According to Tschütscher, the key points of this agenda include the implementation of a tax reform; an agreement policy focusing on double taxation agreements; a review of state expenditures; the modernization of Liechtenstein company law; the targeted development of competences within the national administration; and the creation of a legal framework for developing financial market segments with growth potential.

A comprehensive report in our Intelligence Report series, examining in depth the situation of offshore transparency and secrecy in a number of the most prominent jurisdictions, is available in the Lowtax Library at http://www.lowtaxlibrary.com/asp/subs_reports.asp and a description of the report can be seen at http://www.lowtaxlibrary.com/asp/description_report2.asp

Get out of the UK if you value your freedom!

Innocent people, including thousands of teenagers, will still have their DNA profile kept on a national database for up to six years, the Government will announce.

By Tom Whitehead, Home Affairs Editor (the Telegraph)
Published: 4:38PM GMT 10 Nov 2009

Ministers have ignored growing demands to radically reduce or scrap the proposed period the samples of people arrested but never charged or convicted of crimes are retained.

Instead, in one climbdown, those suspected of the most serious offences will see previous plans to hold their details for up to 12 years halved.

The Home Office is to publish revised proposals over the retention of innocent DNA after its original plans in May faced a fierce backlash from liberty groups and MPs.

They were drawn up in the wake of a European Court of Human Rights ruled last year that a blanket policy of retaining profiles of innocent people indefinitely was illegal.

The original proposals, contained in an amendment to the Policing and Crime Bill which is passing through Parliament, were dropped at the final moment in the face of growing criticism last month.

However, the revised plans mean no change for the majority of adults, even if only arrested for a minor offence, with their profiles still kept for up to six years.

But those who are suspected but not convicted of serious sex or violent offences will now be kept for six instead on 12 years.

The same applies to 16 and 17-year-olds.

It is understood the Home Office will propose separate rules for children under 16 who are arrested but not convicted.

It emerged last month that more than one in 10 people – 5.5 million people in England and Wales – now have their details stored on the DNA database.

It includes up to 850,000 DNA profiles, plus a similar number of fingerprints, of people never convicted of a crime and the Home Office has been accused of doing only the bare minimum to abide with the European ruling.

The original proposals had also faced claims that they were based on incomplete research.

Damian Green, the shadow immigration minister, demanded that his details be erased from the database when no charges were brought against him after his arrest over Whitehall leaks last year.

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said: “Alan Johnson just doesn’t seem to understand that there is a fundamental principle at stake here – that people are innocent until proven guilty.

“But the reality is that it’s now almost certainly too late for this Government to make any changes before the election and so it will fall to a future administration to do the right thing and end Labour’s draconian approach.”

Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, added: “It seems the Government still refuses to separate the innocent and the guilty and maintains a blanket approach to DNA retention.

“Nobody disputes the value of DNA and anyone arrested can have a sample taken and compared to crime scenes. But stockpiling the intimate profiles of millions of innocent people is an unnecessary recipe for error and abuse.”

Alex Deane, director of Big Brother Watch, added: “If the government thinks that because they are targeting teenagers they can get away with this sort of intrusion, they are wrong.”

A Home Office spokesperson said: “We will be announcing our proposals shortly.”

Good God, get out of Great Britain while you still can!

Every phone call, text message, email and website visit made by private citizens is to be stored for a year and will be available for monitoring by government bodies.

By Richard Edwards, Crime Correspondent (The Telegraph)
Published: 7:00AM GMT 10 Nov 2009

All telecoms companies and internet service providers will be required by law to keep a record of every customer’s personal communications, showing who they have contacted, when and where, as well as the websites they have visited.

Despite widespread opposition to the increasing amount of surveillance in Britain, 653 public bodies will be given access to the information, including police, local councils, the Financial Services Authority, the ambulance service, fire authorities and even prison governors.

They will not require the permission of a judge or a magistrate to obtain the information, but simply the authorisation of a senior police officer or the equivalent of a deputy head of department at a local authority.

Ministers had originally wanted to store the information on a single government-run database, but chose not to because of privacy concerns.

However the Government announced yesterday it was pressing ahead with privately held “Big Brother” databases that opposition leaders said amounted to “state-spying” and a form of “covert surveillance” on the public.

It is doing so despite its own consultation showing that it has little public support.

The Home Office admitted that only one third of respondents to its six-month consultation on the issue supported its proposals, with 50 per cent fearing that the scheme lacked sufficient safeguards to protect the highly personal data from abuse.

The new law will increase the amount of personal data that can be obtained by officials through the controversial Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act (RIPA), which is supposed to be used for fighting terrorism.

Although most private firms already hold details of every customer’s private calls and emails for their own business purposes, most only do so on an ad hoc basis and only for a period of several months.

The new rules, known as the Intercept Modernisation Programme, will not only force communications companies to keep their records for longer, but to expand the type of data they keep to include details of every website their customers visit, effectively registering every online click.

While public authorities will not be able to view the contents of these emails or phone calls, they can see the internet addresses, dates, times and identify recipients of calls.

Firms involved in storing the data, including Orange, BT and Vodafone, will be reimbursed at a cost to the taxpayer of £2 billion over 10 years.

Chris Grayling, the shadow home secretary, said he had fears about the abuse of the data. He said: “The big danger in all of this is ‘mission creep’. This government keeps on introducing new powers to tackle terrorism and organised crime which end up being used for completely different purposes. We have to stop that from happening”.

David Davis, the former shadow home secretary, added: “Whilst this is no doubt necessary in pursuing terrorist suspects, the proposals are so intrusive that they should be subject to legal approval, and should not be available except in pursuit of the most serious crimes.”

The Information Commissioner’s Office also opposed the moves.

“The Information Commissioner believes that the case has yet to be made for the collection and processing of additional communications data for the population as a whole being relevant and not excessive,” a spokesman said.

Chris Huhne, the Liberal Democrat home affairs spokesman, has criticised the amount the scheme will cost for what he said is effectively “state spying”.

He added yesterday: “It is simply not that easy to separate the bare details of a call from its content. What if a leading business person is ringing Alcoholics Anonymous?”

Ministers said that they still have to work with the communications industry to find the correct way of framing the proposal in law — meaning it will not come before Parliament until after the general election. But the Home Office yesterday insisted it would push the legislation through. Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, originally released a consultation paper in April.

Only 29 per cent of respondents supported the Government approach. Meanwhile the communications providers themselves questioned the cost of the scheme and whether it was even technically feasible.

John Yates, Britain’s head of anti-terrorism, has argued that the legislation is vital for his investigators.

David Hanson, the Home Office minister, said: “The consultation showed widespread recognition of the importance of communications data in protecting the public .. we will now work with communications service providers and others to develop these proposals, and aim to introduce necessary legislation as soon as possible.”