Catch by the hand

Rollback or not rollback - how to make a diagnosis?

Alexey Grachev, investment consultant, candidate of economic sciences

What is the attractiveness of offshore zones in the British Virgin Islands and in Panama?

Firstly, both the British Virgin Islands and Panama-the jurisdictions of the Caribbean, proximity to Cuba, Mexico, USA. Secondly, in both countries there is a system of English law. In both similar laws on the creation of the company. In both jurisdictions for organizations, there is a zero rate of taxation of profit. Finally, they are relatively cheap in terms of creating a company, their maintenance and so on. Seychelles, Gibraltar - is already more expensive. In the USA - Delaware. Further, in Europe, there are many jurisdictions with special tax regimes - Luxembourg, Liechtenstein, Ireland, but they, of course, are more expensive.

BVI - British Virgin Islands - Paradise on Earth

The price level is the security function of a particular offshore jurisdiction or something else?

This is in half between the greed of people who, respectively, live on these islands, and the level of service that they provide. Panama is such a good balance, meanwhile. BVI (British Virgin Islands) is a small island on which there is a very small aerosporte, a village plan of a town in which three large buildings belonging to law firms: they provide a service to create and administering organizations, provide a legal address, director, etc. But in principle, offshore can be a certain mosaic: the company is registered in one jurisdiction, the director - to another, the shareholder - in the third, the bank account - in the fourth, etc. And all this is a big, big business. However, recently, countries have begun to fight offshores - they want to force companies to pay taxes. He was, for example, in Cyprus Offshore - he is now completely integrated into the European Union and is no longer offshore jurisdiction. In addition to income tax, there is also VAT on Cyprus. And if it turns out that the transaction during the audit falls under VAT, then this is the personal criminal liability of the director (company). That is, the nuts are slowly twisted. And soon offshore as a mechanism will become available only to wealthy people: today these are people with a fortune of $ 1 million plus, after some time it will be $ 5 million plus, etc.

As for Russia, after the adoption of the laws on deofshorization, to have an offshore is extremely laid.

One of the schemes that was used in offshores, which, according to ICIJ, belonged to the cellist Roldugin, suggested issuing a loan of $ 6 million at a ridiculous percentage - 2% per annum, and then simply forgiveness of the debt for a fee of $ 1. How does this work?

Everything is very clear here. Look, there is a certain circle of persons who trust each other. They said to one: you will be the owner of the offshore. Namerek might not know that something was recorded on him: well-known people came to him, asked to sign the papers, he signed them. There is a case of Mukhtar Kabulovich Ablyazov, who unloaded about $ 6 billion from the State Bank of Kazakhstan to his structure: when he was asked to return the money, he explained that these were credit transactions. In the end, he was searched for a long time, arrested, issued to the authorities of Kazakhstan. What did he do? From one pocket he transferred money to another pocket through the loan system.

 ** Offshore will only be available to wealthy people: today these are people with a fortune of $ 1 million plus, after some time it will be $ 5 million plus **

And how did the Kazakh banker intend to legalize and spend such tremendous money - $ 6 billion?

He gave them to his structure, which invested money in a set of investment projects in Russia. And he expected that after some time he would beat off the money and return. And so many Russian banks do. Take the last example - Zastroprombank, where depositors' money was transferred to friendly projects. The bank had a floor without a number where people sat and documents under such agreements stopped in colossal quantities.

What does it mean, a floor without a room?

Imagine: a building, 15 floors, but there is one floor, which is without a number. You press the button, turn the key, and the elevator brings you to this special floor, where people are sitting, who are formally not affiliated, strangers, but work for shareholders, stop documents just for this kind of transactions. Here in this bank the first people of the country kept their money: our Olympians, the Orthodox Church, the wife of Shoigu, Kozak and all, everything, that’s all. What do you think, in VEB daughters who were engaged in Olympic construction, there is a conceptual situation?

The loan of one offshore - the other for a couple of hundred million dollars under 2% per annum without any support - is this legally?

This is just a mechanism for pumping money from one organization to another. It is very, very difficult to prove that this is a criminal transaction. Because the rationale will be very simple: two structures that are completely independent of each other have concluded contracts on commercial conditions. The first question: to whom they should prove that this is not a market? Did they use their money, but some borrowed funds? The second question is, and what, in fact, is the assumption that the transaction is framed on non -and -case conditions? Here they call one director to the court. He says: yes, I met with the director of another organization, we agreed with him. There is freedom of the contract. Who is the side that will dispute this deal, who is an interested person? Is this, state money, taxpayer money, or is it credit money, creditors' money, or shareholders will dispute this? Who is the interested party?

That is, it is a form of transferring money.

Absolutely true.

The Cyprus (then) daughter of the State VTB opens the offshore of Sandalwood Continental Credit for $ 650 million and, according to the documents, there was no security for this loan.

I am sure that such a deal in the bank’s portfolio is not the only one, I am sure that it has passed all corporate procedures, and there are all the necessary justifications that indicate that, providing a credit line, the bank’s managers pursued the goal of benefiting the Russian state.

From an interview with a banker:

How much is this private practice - providing a loan without security?

It also depends on the size of the loan. If the loan is more than 25% of the capital of the bank, then the decision of the Supervisory Board is required. If the loan is less than this amount, then the authorized body makes the decision on the loan. VTB may have this either the president of the bank, or the Bank of the Bank, or some people who have appropriate powers. The central bank cannot come and say: you cannot issue this loan. This is not the function of the Central Bank. What the Central Bank can do, it can come, look at this loan and say: you formed (reserved) 1% under this loan, because you think that this is a first -class borrower, but in fact we believe that it is not first -class and you should create a reserve 50% of the loan size. ” This is the Central Bank has the right to do. The Central Bank can, in principle, limit the bank’s credit operations, but you can imagine that only one person can prohibit VTB in the country.

And to instruct VTB to issue an unsecured loan who can in the country?

According to my ideas, also one, a maximum of one and a half people.

From an interview with the financier:

A deal with a musician on a consultation of $ 30 million is a direct rollback. If a person gives a loan, and then forgives him for the dollar, what could be the meaning of this transaction? Why give a loan if I want to roll you up for state contracts $ 200 million? Why can't I just transfer $ 200 million to you? Because any bank will require the basis of payment. The easiest option is to transfer a loan of $ 200 million. It does not raise questions from anyone, such transactions go thousands every day. But then the question arises, will you return this loan or not? But the bank does not control this. Firstly, a loan can be with a long deferral of payment, and secondly, you can return the money to another bank, but how to transfer a loan into your property? Again, the simplest is to forgive the debt. But in many countries this is a gift transaction that is easily canceled under the law. So, you need to pay some conditional amount, for example, $ 1. And in this case, the transaction is already made indistinguishable if its criminal background is not proved. But the criminal background can be proved only in Russia. Or with a serious investigation.

Can such an investigation be conducted outside of Russia?

It is possible that in the West this story will now begin to investigate. Especially if the transactions were made in dollars - in this case they went through correspondence accounts in US banks, which they would say: you used our banking system for laundering and we will investigate this. If you say that this is not washing, then documents on the commercial background of these transactions will require. And then the real problem will begin, because you will have to make documents, which is not so simple. You will come, say, to the English court, you will bring the documents you made yesterday, and the judge will ask you: where were these documents before? Where were they fixed? The simplest system on which many are caught: documents are made in Word, and Word does an endlessly: and by these updates you can determine when these documents were made. If the deal was in the euro, they will see which of the European countries it passed. And what else could they make a deal - either in dollars or in euros. Well, not in the yuan ...