2008 Liechtenstein tax affair

[1] It is seen also as an attempt to put pressure on Liechtenstein, one of the remaining uncooperative tax havens, as identified by the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) on money laundering of the Paris-based Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, along with Andorra and Monaco, in 2007.

[10] Similarly a number of other individuals have been under investigation for months, and the appearance that the well-to-do have ways and means to evade the German tax laws has caused complaints about inequality.

[8] According to a report by the Süddeutsche Zeitung, Heinrich Kieber, a bank computer technician,[11] sold a CD with incriminating bank information to the Bundesnachrichtendienst (BND, English: Federal Intelligence Service), which handed the material over to the tax investigation office in Wuppertal.

[14] Kieber would later state that the secret services of several countries, including Germany, had provided him with a new identity and was protecting him.

[9][16] In the meantime revenue offices also noted a higher number of voluntary self-incriminations - this will avoid or reduce punitive damages - for possible tax evasions by people with financial assets in Liechtenstein.

[18] In July 2008 the U.S. Subcommittee determined that the offshore tax haven deprived $100 billion per year from the U.S. taxpayer.

[20][21] According to Helsingin Sanomat in Sept/Oct 2013 Lichtenstein tax havens accounts include funds of Casimir Ehrnrooth (see UPM, YIT, Jaakko Pöyry and Guggenheim Helsinki Plan) Bertel Paulig (coffee, spices) and a construction company owners in Turku.

According to the Supreme Administrative Court of Finland no other legal procedures are possible, than collecting the hidden tax and its 1% interest rate.

Fiscal authorities in Ireland,[26] Denmark,[27] Belgium, Finland, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden indicated interest.

[9][31] Merkel asked for help in the investigation and cooperation in prevention of tax evasion, pointing out that Liechtenstein provided the US Internal Revenue Service with some data but not the German Ministry of Finances.

[6] The head prosecutor of Liechtenstein Robert Wallner initiated an indictment "against unknown perpetrators for the violation of company secrets for a foreign country".

[34] Also, two lawyers in Berlin initiated lawsuits against the BND and the Federal government claiming among others "infidelity toward the taxpayer" and "spying of data".

[36] The government may consider a number of possible actions: Liechtenstein is about to join the Schengen Agreement which would eliminate its border controls towards Austria, and Germany's consent is required; Germany could impose fees on transfers of currency, place taxes on business activities of its citizens in Liechtenstein, and require them to prove that their activities there are legitimate.

Concerns have been voiced that the actions taken by BND were outside the agency's national security (and constitutional) remit, with attention also focusing on the wider ethical debate as to whether BND was justified in paying a €4m bribe to a bank official in a foreign country (with financing and approval from both the German chancellery and finance ministry).