Putin Says Panama Papers Part of US Plot to Weaken Russia (go.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Russia President Vladimir Putin says he has no links to offshore accounts unveiled in the Panama Papers. Moreover, Putin believes that these leaks are part of Western efforts to weaken Russia. As ABC News reports, Putin criticised Western media for involving his name in offshore business even though his name didn't feature in any of the leaked documents. Speaking in St Petersburg, Putin added that it certainly seems like a US-led disinformation campaign waged against Russia. Putin also defended a cellist friend who was named as the alleged owner of an offshore company, noting that his friend is a philanthropist.People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers. As Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports, most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers. The media house interviewed 30 people on the street, of which it found only 1 person thought it was wrong. (video).

Comments

in Soviet russia...

[Anonymous Coward]

Panama papers leak you!

Re:in Soviet russia...

[MightyMartian]

I'm always amused, mind you, why autocrats always view themselves as effectively the "state", so that when some allegation is made against them, suddenly, it's all about destabilizing the "state".

As it is, Putin's presence in the Panama Papers, so far as I understand it, is notable by his absence. Just about everyone around him is multi-zillionaires, but Putin is not to be found. The same goes for the Chinese Premier, an apparently very poor man with lots of rich relatives.

Re:in Soviet russia...

[lgw]

Shouldn't you be deleting a Wikipedia article right now?

Polls

[Princeofcups]

"People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers. As Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty reports, most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers. The media house interviewed 30 people on the street, of which it found only 1 person thought it was wrong. (video)."

Does not follow. You mean to say: only one person was willing to speak out against it. Polls have little to do with what people think. They only tell you what they are willing to admit.

Re:Polls

[BarbaraHudson]

Russians aren't stupid just because they're drunk. They know that talking to foreign reporters (or pretty much any reporter) can get very, very career-limiting.

Re:Polls

[smooth wombat]

It's a known fact in Russia one does not speak out openly or things will happen to you. Bad things. Just ask Boris Nemtsov.

Oh wait, you can't. Putin ordered his assassination in a pathetic attempt to silence the work he and others had done showing the systemic corruption in Russia.

Go ask the Tartars of Crimea who have their homes invaded by Russian police searching for anything that is against the official party line or that references Tartar culture. Since Russian's invasion of Crimea this is a daily occurrence, not to mention any Tartar newspaper radio service being shut down.

Just the other day Putin ordered the creation of a "national guard", over 400K strong with tanks and artillery to be used, he claims, to fight terrorism. The reality is with conditions worsening in Russia due to sanctions over its invasion of Ukraine and plunging oil prices, with elections in the fall Putin is planning to use this national guard to suppress any vocal opposition to his hand chosen candidates. In other words, if you speak out against Heir Putin, the national guard can and will shoot you on sight, no other order necessary.

Re:Polls

[nickol]

I live in Russia and I can confirm that most Russians are sure that most Russians haven't heard of -- or don't care about -- the Panama Papers.

To be fair

[The-Ixian]

I live in the US and I barely care about the Panama Papers either.

Actually... the first thing I think of when I see "Panama Papers" is David Lee Roth for some reason...

Re: To be fair

[Anonymous Coward]

Tax evasion is sort of a big deal there with all the commies and so on.

Much of what is documented in the Panama Papers is tax avoidance, not tax evasion.

In fact, this is the big story here, just how much tax avoidance has been made legal by western governments at the request of the rich and powerful.

Re: To be fair

[Archangel Michael]

The wealthy will always avoid paying taxes. Taxes are for us little people, always have been. Useful idiots like Bernie always talk about the 1% to distract the tax increases being passed along to everyone else. Taxes are regressive. All of them.

Re: To be fair

[MightyMartian]

And yet the US has lead the way in shutting down probably the most infamous haven; the Swiss banks. It was the US who put the most pressure on Switzerland to reform banking practices and start abiding some reasonable standards of transparency. In fact, I'd say the popularity of other tax havens in the intervening years is because Switzerland is no longer so friendly to those seeking to hide their cash.

The reality here is that the one government who could do a lot to reduce avoidance and out and out evasion and laundering is Britain. It's overseas dependencies are some of the most notorious tax havens, but every attempt to close loopholes has been met with resistance. Judging by the increasingly hot water David Cameron is in, I think we know why.

Re: To be fair

[MightyMartian]

As Simon Jenkins at the Guardian notes, while tax avoidance may be legal, the use of them, particularly by lawmakers, is just plain wrong. David Cameron, in particular, has stood against closing loopholes, and now it turns out that, because of his old man's dealings, he has been a beneficiary.

And this is the crux of the problem that the Panama Papers reveal. Yes, there is certainly a criminal element to all of this, in that these havens are used by people out and out evading taxes, and some criminals are using these havens to launder or hide their money (much as they used to do with their private Swiss bank accounts). But the real scandal here is that it is the very people who make the laws that create tax havens who are either directly making the laws (like Cameron) or have an extraordinary amount of influence over the laws being passed. These aren't just Joe and Jane Average using a few tax deductions or trusts to reduce their tax bill, these are some of he wealthiest people in the world, the kind of people that can put all sorts of pressure on lawmakers to make sure that their "avoidance" schemes stay legal.

The Panama Papers are an example of a worse kind of crime that evasion and money laundering. They are an example of the fundamental corruption of many even "liberal" political systems. In a way, this makes someone like Cameron no better than Putin, except Putin actually looks to be a lot smarter than the Prime Ministers of Britain and Iceland.

Re: To be fair

[Agent0013]

And yet the US has lead the way in shutting down probably the most infamous haven; the Swiss banks.

Yeah, I'm not so sure they are actually trying to fight this stuff. If they were then the three states that allow anonymous shell corporations would not be so popular. The US is rated third in the world for "Offshore" shell games.

The Tax Justice Network ranks the U.S. third in terms of the secrecy and scale of its offshore industry, behind Switzerland and Hong Kong but ahead of the Cayman Islands and Luxembourg.

Putin would make a helluva SJW

[Anonymous Coward]

"Legitimate criticism of my wrongdoing, backed up by objectively verifiable facts, is in fact harassment and will not be tolerated."

Just give him some neon hair, a side-shave and some problem glasses and have him write blogposts about how objects in C++ are oppressive toward womxn.

Charitable foundation

[rfengr]

Hell, in the USA you just need to establish a charitable foundation like the Clintons.

Re:Charitable foundation

[mi]

Or Mark Zuckerberg or the Koch Brothers or anyone else who has millions/billions and don't want to pay taxes on the money.

In countries, that do not tax wealth, only your actual income matters to your tax-bill. What you already have is irrelevant.

After all, I'm sure there's not a single Republican lawmaker who's upset at Bill Clinton for having such great economic success [...]

Whether other politicians are squeaky clean or not, you've got to admit, the Clinton Foundation racket is something special — not just for the scale, but also for the brazenness of it...

And out came the conspiracy theorists ...

[BarbaraHudson]

The conspiracy theorists are playing right along by saying there are no Americans mentioned in the Panama Papers so it must have been scrubbed, despite (1) hundreds of Americans being named in them, and (2) you don't have to go offshore to hide money. The US works just fine for hiding money.

Big surprise?

[wwalker]

Don't forget, Panama Papers is just a subset of data that was released. Heavily edited. Conveniently, not a single US politician mentioned in the released data. Also, Putin's name isn't there either, just his "childhood friend". Yet in all the newspapers it was reported that Putin was directly implicated. So, what else would you expect him to claim? Also, he actually wasn't the first to come to the same conclusion:
https://twitter.com/wikileaks/...

Get what you deserve

[im_thatoneguy]

People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers.

Yeah, I really don't care. The people of Russia clearly aren't terribly interested in a free press, an uncorrupt government or any semblance of a modern open democratic state. If that's what they want, that's what they get and I'm not going to get too worked up about their choices.

The Russian people don't need the Panama papers to see the obvious corruption and political nepotism. The Olympics should have provided more than enough proof and most people didn't care. If they don't care, I don't care.

Re:Get what you deserve

[Zontar_Thing_From_Ve]

People in Russia, sadly, don't seem to care much about Panama Papers.

Yeah, I really don't care. The people of Russia clearly aren't terribly interested in a free press, an uncorrupt government or any semblance of a modern open democratic state. If that's what they want, that's what they get and I'm not going to get too worked up about their choices.

You are correct. I can't tell you why it's that way though, but it's been that way for a long time. I posted on this earlier in the week. There are stories going back to the days of the Tsars where the Tsar would send out his minions to rough up or kill the peasants and the survivors would wail and say "If only the Tsar knew what was happening, he would save us!" when what happened was because he ordered it. Russians love to believe the guy at the top is wonderful and kind and it's really the people under him who are evil. This is why it's not difficult at all to find people in Russia who revere Stalin still, which to me is just a hair breadth's of difference from revering Hitler. I've read that Putin himself doesn't seem to own much of anything but his daughters, son-in-law and close friends have billions. So it allows him to provide enough plausible deniability that he's not corrupt and crooked for the public to buy it. They really don't care.

Re:No argument here

[BarbaraHudson]

The money lost to tax avoidance can give everyone an extra couple of grand a year in their pockets. It's not "free money" - it's returning your money, that was stolen from you because others refused to pay their fair share, from them, making restitution to you.

Think of what that extra money would do for the economy. For yourself.

Re:Follow the Money

[codeAlDente]

Yes, and zerohedge has also pointed out that this just eliminates competition for the Rothschilds.