Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%

Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.

The 'Panama Papers' and You<br><font size="-1"><b><i>Part Two of a Two-Part Article</b></i></font>

By Stanley S. Arkin and Robert C. Angelillo
February 01, 2017

Editor's Note: Last month, the authors began a discussion of the legal consequences of the release of the so-called “Panama Papers,” a trove of more than 11.5 million documents a whistleblower gave to a reporter at the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung (SZ) in Spring 2016. The documents detail how certain wealthy people — including foreign government leaders — hid assets in offsore entities created by Panamanian law firm Mossack Fonesca for clients allegedly seeking to avoid taxation in their home countries. Since the release of the Panama Papers, several consequences have ensued, including, as discussed last month, 1) the public disgrace and resignation of foreign public officials and 2) the commencement of tax avoidance investigations. Additionally, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York has opened an investigation into the finances of the reported 240 U.S. citizens identified in some way with the firm and its scheme. The subject of this inquiry has not been fully disclosed, but it may be that tax avoidance is just one of the subjects the government is interested in investigating. The authors conclude their analysis of the fallout accompanying the release of the Panama Papers herein.

Stage 3: Fallout: SEC Investigation

Is the Panama Papers story predominantly a foreign one, and we here in the United States have heard the last of it? Not necessarily.

This premium content is locked for Entertainment Law & Finance subscribers only

  • Stay current on the latest information, rulings, regulations, and trends
  • Includes practical, must-have information on copyrights, royalties, AI, and more
  • Tap into expert guidance from top entertainment lawyers and experts

For enterprise-wide or corporate acess, please contact Customer Service at [email protected] or 877-256-2473

Read These Next
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws Image

This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.

The Article 8 Opt In Image

The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.

Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin Image

With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.

Legal Possession: What Does It Mean? Image

Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.

The Stranger to the Deed Rule Image

In 1987, a unanimous Court of Appeals reaffirmed the vitality of the "stranger to the deed" rule, which holds that if a grantor executes a deed to a grantee purporting to create an easement in a third party, the easement is invalid. Daniello v. Wagner, decided by the Second Department on November 29th, makes it clear that not all grantors (or their lawyers) have received the Court of Appeals' message, suggesting that the rule needs re-examination.