Published in the MTimes 21 September 2018
The Government’s cheerleaders had every
reason to cheer at the fact that Mauritius has moved up the rankings of the
Global Financial Centres Index (GCFI) - from 56th to 49th (though GCFI also
classified Mauritius among the “unpredictable centres”, which have a higher
variance of assessments, meaning less stable). That’s because lately the Global
Business Sector has been feeling the heat from all sides.
First, we had the case of Mauritius being
classified as a high-risk jurisdiction by a few global banks, namely Deutsche
Bank, Citi, Standard Chartered and JP Morgan. Mauritius was one among the 25
countries in the list of high risk jurisdictions compiled by these global banks
in India. Next, we had a dig from our dear African brothers that the Global
Business Companies (GBCs) are just doing ‘brassplate’ operations in Mauritius
and that many of them are “relatively financially secretive conduits” to
illicit financial flows.
This was followed by the Eastern
and Southern Africa Anti Money Laundering Group’s Mutual Evaluation(ESAAMLG)
Report (an exercise to assess whether the necessary laws, regulations or other
measures required under the essential criteria of the Financial Action Task
Force (FATF) Methodology are in force and effect, whether there has been a full
and proper implementation of all the necessary measures, and whether the Anti-Money
Laundering/Combating the Financing of Terrorism (AML/CFT) system as implemented
is effective – which report was quite damning for Mauritius. Equally worrying
was the fact that Mauritius is ranked 51th in the Global Real Estate
Transparency Index, and is considered as “semi-transparent”, i.e. with existing
risks of money laundering.
Moreover, the latest statistics on FDI from
the Department of Industrial Policy and Promotion, Ministry of Commerce and
Industry, Government of India, show that Singapore has, over each of the last
three quarters, channelled more FDI into India than Mauritius. As shown in the FDI Equity Flows into India Table, in
the last quarter ending June 18, Singapore not only provided more FDI than
Mauritius, but more than all other countries put together.
Table
1: FDI Equity Flows into India by Quarter (USD billion)
Oct – Dec 17
|
Jan –Mar 18
|
Apr – June 18
|
|
Mauritius
|
1.9
(17.2%)
|
2.6
(29.1%)
|
1.5
(11.7%)
|
Singapore
|
3.9
(37.0%)
|
3.0
(33.3%)
|
6.5
(51.1%)
|
Total (inc. others)
|
10.6
|
8.9
|
12.8
|
Last but not least were the legal
amendments to the Finance Act 2018 which will be affecting the prospects of the
financial sector. Many of the financial sector operators, including the Association
of Trust and Management Companies Mauritius, are quite worried about some of
these changes. For example, they consider too onerous (meeting both the Central
Management and Control (CM & C) and the Place of Effective Management (POEM)
tests for determining the tax residence of existing GBCs. There are also other
issues like the restriction on the use of the Authorised companies. The operators are of the
opinion that “the global business sector is currently facing a potential
existential calamity of seismic proportions as a result of the changes to the
tax regime brought about by the Finance Act 2018.” Dubai and Seychelles are
already taking advantage of the situation.
And as far as the OECD is concerned, we are
still not out of the woods. We will have to review the excluded treaties (to
which we have been reluctant to apply the principal purpose test) to bring them
up to the G20’s minimum agreed standards by the end of 2018. Another issue is
the discriminative tax rate where certain companies pay a maximum effective tax
rate of 3% while other companies are paying 15%. This is the kind of
preferential tax treatment that the OECD and the EU consider as a “harmful tax
practice” and brand the countries as tax havens.
We had hoped that these issues would have
been taken up at the two-day ‘Mauritius
International Financial Centre-Forward Looking’ conference, 19 - 20 September
2018 at Intercontinental Mauritius Resort, especially in the context of the
country’s abysmal failure to clear the Eastern and Southern Africa Anti Money
Laundering Group evaluation process, in respect of compliance with and
effectiveness of international anti money laundering standards. And, we are
sure the authorities will soon come forward with the appropriate financial
sector strategies and measures to counter the negative impact of international
pressures on the development of our financial business.
“The financial sector needs a meaningful blueprint not a damp squid."
“The financial sector needs a meaningful blueprint not a damp squid."