Panama Papers May Inspire More Big Leaks, if Not Reform by Scott Shane.
Gabriel Zucman (Berkeley economist) spots the mis-direction inherent in the “Panama Papers” moniker.
…
In fact, some experts believe the “Panama” label is misleading, obscuring the central role of several states, including Delaware, Wyoming and Nevada, in registering companies with hidden ownership. Mossack Fonseca probably represents just 5 or 10 percent of the industry creating anonymous companies, said Mr. Zucman of Berkeley, so the disclosures have left the vast majority hidden.And no matter where shell companies may be registered, he said, much of the wealth they own is invested in the United States, in real estate, stocks and bonds. “The U.S. could find out who the true owners are,” Mr. Zucman said.
But the United States may illustrate the difficulty of moving from splashy revelations to serious change. States with a stake in the lucrative corporate registration business are likely to resist serious changes, and Congress appears unlikely to act anytime soon on comprehensive reform bills.
…
For all of the hooting about the “Panama Papers” consisting of 11.5 million documents, weighing in at 2.6 terabytes, a moment’s consideration carries the sobering realization, this is from a single law firm.
If you consider all the documents held by corporate law firms in the states mentioned by Zucman, plus a few others: Delaware, District of Columbia, Florida, Nevada, New York, Wyoming, the amount of data may exceed multiple zettabytes.
Shane generously remarks: “…and Congress appears unlikely to act anytime soon on comprehensive reform bills.”
Unlikely? Unlikely?
I assume you agree that the laws that enable the hiding of wealth are not accidental.
Don’t be distracted by reform side-shows, presented by the people responsible for the problem.
Let’s go big-leak hunting.
Yes?