I have a friend, let’s call her Wilma. Last year, Wilma started a company that would, among other things, conduct international transactions. Starting a business, like buying a house, means your name appears on all sorts of mailing lists. Among the many solicitations Wilma received was a bulky envelope from Nicosia, Cyprus. The envelope was jammed with flyers offering unethical business services.
“Flags of Convenience,” screamed one flyer. A flag of convenience is a country, like Cyprus or Panama or Liberia, which will allow ship owners to register vessels with a minimum of regulations about safety and seaworthiness or fair employment practices or clarity of ownership – nagging little details like that.
Another brochure offered second passports, new American ID cards – whatever they are – green cards, college degrees by mail, diplomatic immunity and, for a price, royal titles. That’s just nibbling around the edges. Most of the shady services offered by our friends in Cyprus concern off-shore banks, tax havens and shell corporations in Panama or Austria.
If Wilma is establishing a business with international implications, she’ll need to hide some money overseas, right? What Uncle Sam doesn’t know won’t hurt him, right? When I look at the fistful of sleazy material Wilma passed along, should it make me think of Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda or Kenneth Lay and Enron?
When George W. Bush stood before Congress and vowed to wage war on terrorists and the governments that support them, he specifically did not mention the banks and money launderers that make international terrorism possible. Why not? All the religious fanatics in the world could not have brought about the September 11th attacks without a worldwide system of hidden financial transactions. On the other hand, all – not some, but all – Mr. Bush’s campaign contributors rely on the same shadow banking system that Mr. bin Laden does.
The New York Times reports Enron established 881 offshore corporations to launder money and avoid taxes. Many companies, the Times says, use offshore shenanigans, although few go to the lengths Enron did. Everyone does it, right? It’s only wrong when you get too greedy. Or is it? Enron certainly was greedy. The company paid no tax in four of the last five years, when its stock was flying oh so high. Thanks to the many loopholes in the U.S. corporate tax law, Enron got, in those years, $382 million from the federal government. It’s well known accountants in every corporation keep the books in a manner that sends as many dollars as possible to the bottom line. Everyone has a few offshore accounts, don’t they? When does a company cross the line from being competitive to being criminal?
The question everyone is Washington is asking is: Did Enron receive improper assistance from the Bush administration? Before we can answer that, we’ll have to define “improper assistance.” Where’s the line? Seventeen points in Dick Cheney’s secret energy plan directly benefited Enron, Bush-Cheney’s big contributor. Is that wrong? When does an administration cross the line from encouraging economic health to throwing in a fix? We don’t know the answer to that one, in part because Mr. Cheney is still sitting on his records.
How about the international community? Why does the World Trade Organization call worker safety and environmental protection laws “barriers to free trade” but turns a blind eye toward dirty dealers like Enron or ignore the rampant cronyism that is a hallmark of East Asian banking?
The problem is, we live in an unethical age. Business principles are so warped they are essentially non-existent. Anything goes, all is forgiven until – like Enron – you stop making a profit. Then the knives come out.
Everyone’s doing it, but as my mother used to say, just because everyone is doing it, doesn’t make it right.
Everyone’s Doing It
I have a friend, let’s call her Wilma. Last year, Wilma started a company that would, among other things, conduct international transactions. Starting a business, like buying a house, means your name appears on all sorts of mailing lists. Among the many solicitations Wilma received was a bulky envelope from Nicosia, Cyprus. The envelope was jammed with flyers offering unethical business services.
“Flags of Convenience,” screamed one flyer. A flag of convenience is a country, like Cyprus or Panama or Liberia, which will allow ship owners to register vessels with a minimum of regulations about safety and seaworthiness or fair employment practices or clarity of ownership – nagging little details like that.
Another brochure offered second passports, new American ID cards – whatever they are – green cards, college degrees by mail, diplomatic immunity and, for a price, royal titles. That’s just nibbling around the edges. Most of the shady services offered by our friends in Cyprus concern off-shore banks, tax havens and shell corporations in Panama or Austria.
If Wilma is establishing a business with international implications, she’ll need to hide some money overseas, right? What Uncle Sam doesn’t know won’t hurt him, right? When I look at the fistful of sleazy material Wilma passed along, should it make me think of Osama bin Laden and Al-Qaeda or Kenneth Lay and Enron?
When George W. Bush stood before Congress and vowed to wage war on terrorists and the governments that support them, he specifically did not mention the banks and money launderers that make international terrorism possible. Why not? All the religious fanatics in the world could not have brought about the September 11th attacks without a worldwide system of hidden financial transactions. On the other hand, all – not some, but all – Mr. Bush’s campaign contributors rely on the same shadow banking system that Mr. bin Laden does.
The New York Times reports Enron established 881 offshore corporations to launder money and avoid taxes. Many companies, the Times says, use offshore shenanigans, although few go to the lengths Enron did. Everyone does it, right? It’s only wrong when you get too greedy. Or is it? Enron certainly was greedy. The company paid no tax in four of the last five years, when its stock was flying oh so high. Thanks to the many loopholes in the U.S. corporate tax law, Enron got, in those years, $382 million from the federal government. It’s well known accountants in every corporation keep the books in a manner that sends as many dollars as possible to the bottom line. Everyone has a few offshore accounts, don’t they? When does a company cross the line from being competitive to being criminal?
The question everyone is Washington is asking is: Did Enron receive improper assistance from the Bush administration? Before we can answer that, we’ll have to define “improper assistance.” Where’s the line? Seventeen points in Dick Cheney’s secret energy plan directly benefited Enron, Bush-Cheney’s big contributor. Is that wrong? When does an administration cross the line from encouraging economic health to throwing in a fix? We don’t know the answer to that one, in part because Mr. Cheney is still sitting on his records.
How about the international community? Why does the World Trade Organization call worker safety and environmental protection laws “barriers to free trade” but turns a blind eye toward dirty dealers like Enron or ignore the rampant cronyism that is a hallmark of East Asian banking?
The problem is, we live in an unethical age. Business principles are so warped they are essentially non-existent. Anything goes, all is forgiven until – like Enron – you stop making a profit. Then the knives come out.
Everyone’s doing it, but as my mother used to say, just because everyone is doing it, doesn’t make it right.