Slashdot Mirror


Massive Data Leak Reveals How the Ultra Rich Hide Their Wealth

bshell writes "According to the CBC, there was a massive leak of 'files containing information on over 120,000 offshore entities — including shell corporations and legal structures known as trusts — involving people in over 170 countries. The leak amounts to 260 gigabytes of data, or 162 times larger than the U.S. State Department cables published by WikiLeaks in 2010...In many cases, the leaked documents expose insider details of how agents would incorporate companies in Caribbean and South Pacific micro-states on behalf of wealthy clients, then assign front people called "nominees" to serve, on paper, as directors and shareholders for the corporations — disguising the companies' true owners.' Makes a good read and there are some good interactive components. Perhaps Slashdot readers can figure out how the source of the leak, the D.C.-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists got their hands on this data."

4 of 893 comments (clear)

  1. How the ICIJ got the data by bcore · · Score: 5, Informative

    Perhaps Slashdot readers can figure out how the source of the leak, the D.C.-based International Consortium of Investigative Journalists got their hands on this data.

    The story on the CBC national news last night suggested that it was snail-mailed anonymously on a portable hard drive to a DC based journalist. This doesn't explain where the data ultimately came from, but does explain how the ICIJ came to have it.

  2. Re:Sounds great! by turkeyfeathers · · Score: 4, Informative

    www.MtGOX.com

  3. 32 Trillion Dollars by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 5, Informative

    According to the report I just heard on the BBC World News, estimates place the total value of these hidden assets around $32 trillion.

    --
    "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
  4. Re:Classification? by Qzukk · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm sure that the US Government will find grounds to classify private banking documents.

    Probably under the "embarrassing to someone important" clause.

    --
    If I have been able to see further than others, it is because I bought a pair of binoculars.