The money laundering risk of Golden Passports
By Christina Poursanidou, Lawyer
Following the financial crisis of 2009, most
of the European countries in order to boost their weakened economies, have
introduced policies, which allow foreign investors to make large and passive
investments, in exchange of an easy (almost immediate) route to citizenship or
residence of the investors. Such schemes are definitely not a new trend, since
even from the 1980s UK and USA offered residence in exchange for sizable
investments. Usually these policies are defined as Citizenship by Investment
(CBI) or Residency by Investment (RBI), “Golden Visas” or “Golden
passports”. Undoubtedly, such policies have a positive impact on the
introducing country, but simultaneously could carry significant risk of
economic crime.
At that point, let’s discuss the intentions of the parties. On the one hand,
the country introducing a golden passport policy aims at its economic growth.
Basically, the country offers a passport in order to receive a huge investment
from wealthy foreigners. On the other hand, the intentions of the foreign
investors vary. According to the recent survey, EU Member States are
ranked in the top 30 most desirable citizenships around the world. The
reasons behind the decision to invest in any of the EU countries include
political stability and the legal system of these countries as well as tax
incentives. Although, the most important element, making the nationality of an EU
member state desirable by third country nationals are the rights provided by
the EU, such as the freedom of movement, live, work and study with no
restrictions in other 26 countries. Although increased foreign investments are
always welcome, there has been overwhelming evidence that golden passport
schemes have been more likely serving corrupt interests, rather than the common
good.
Schemes offering golden passports, if not handled with caution by the
authorities, have been proved vulnerable to a number of risks. Apart from the
“marketisation” of EU residency and the significant macroeconomic implications,
the CBI/RBI policies can help hide or facilitate financial crimes, including
bribery and corruption, tax crimes and money-laundering. Some elements leading
to that conclusion is the lack of transparency of the procedures,
insufficient measures to verify applicants’ background and the origins of the
invested funds, opaque governance structures and the involvement of
intermediaries. The successful applications for golden passports of
individuals, being accused for financial crimes, is the irrefutable proof of
the risk for EU security from CBI/RBI policies.
Based on the above concerns, the European Commission has urged member states to
ensure that applicants for “golden passports” and “golden visas” comply with EU
anti-money laundering rules and to apply enhanced customer due diligence
check. We can admit that the steps taken to fight the risk for AML from
golden passports are important. Although, the conflicting interests of the
introducing countries still remain the biggest obstacle to eliminate the risk
of such policies: Economic growth of a country vs the attempt to combat money
laundering within the EU.
Read
more articles by Christina Poursanidou here
Comments
Post a Comment