8 years ago
3
'Emma receives absolutely no tax or monetary advantages from this ... only privacy"
The actress, currently taking a break from acting to campaign for feminism, is listed as a beneficiary of a company based in the British Virgin Islands. But Watson said the account was set up for the sole purpose of "protecting her anonymity and safety". A spokesman for the 26-year-old Harry Potter star said: "Emma receives absolutely no tax or monetary advantages from this offshore company whatsoever, only privacy."
Continue Reading
http://www.smh.com.au
Join the Discussion
Lol, I'm sorry but this is just too funny. When the first batch from the Panama Papers hit and I, and several others, tried to explain that there are perfectly valid- perfectly legal reasons to use offshore accounts, everyone was lining up with torches and pitchforks, raging about the "evil corporations" and the "tax-dodging 1%'ers". Now all of sudden someone they like uses an offshore account it's all: "Trash journalism" and "a complete witch hunt".
I'm still trying to figure out what sort of privacy "advantages" you receive by having your money held offshore. I mean, I know I'm just a peasant with a local bank account -- but I don't have people regularly checking my pathetic state of affairs.
Under UK law, anyone can can get private information about officers/shareholders of companies (Name, Address, and other contact info) from a Government office for simple processing fee (around $20 US last I heard). Now while that doesn't really mean much to you or I, to celebrities who have to deal with crazy fans stalking them, it can be a real issue, so privacy is certainly a valid reason to have offshore holdings.