Miliband, leader of the Labour Party, and according to some opinion polls, a possible future prime minister if his party secures sufficient seats at the May general election, gave an interview to the Guardian newspaper in which he attacked UK-linked financial centers. In the interview, Miliband said he would put Crown Dependencies on a “blacklist” if they failed to comply with his demands. Crown Dependencies include Guernsey, Jersey and the Isle of Man. British Overseas Dependencies include Bermuda, the Cayman Islands and British Virgin Islands.

“The government of Bermuda is `surprised and disappointed’ that the island has been included in the list of referenced territories which lack openness in such areas as ultimate beneficial ownership of companies,” the government of the jurisdiction said in a statement today.

The government said Bermuda has had a central registry , of the kind being introduced in the UK, since the 1940s. “While the UK is proposing to introduce a central beneficial ownership register, Bermuda, in fact, has actually had one which automatically updates itself since the 1940s and we continue to be an international leader in this area,” the statement continued.

“The government of Bermuda remains open to continuing dialogue with the UK government, the UK opposition, and all other interested parties, in sharing best practice across borders in areas of corporate transparency, and the fight against fraud and crime,” Michael Dunkley, premier of Bermuda, said. “We would also remind Mr Miliband of Bermuda's strategic economic contribution to the UK, which includes direct and indirect employment in the UK of 100,000 people, as well as our role as a global hub for the reinsurance and insurance industries, providing the critical underwriting required for damage arising from natural disasters and terrorist events,” he added.

“We have held a number of meetings with Labour's shadow team over the past two years, and those meetings have indicated a greater level of understanding of Guernsey's track record on tax transparency than is reflected in the comments by Mr Miliband,” Gavin St Pier, treasury and resources minister of Guernsey, said.

“Guernsey is one of the very few jurisdictions in the world that regulates trusts and corporate service providers in order to provide timely and robust beneficial ownership information. We would of course be pleased to share our extensive experience with the UK to enable it to improve its own standards in this area. We will also be very interested to hear how Labour plans to compel other countries to meet the same standards that Guernsey already meets,”he said.

Blacklist

The OECD has had a “blacklist” of jurisdictions that are deemed to be uncooperative over tax affairs for some time. Ironically, if a Miliband-led government sought to press for the revival and expansion of such an idea, it might put it at odds with governments such as those of the US, since in the latter case, states such as Delaware might arguably fall foul of any rules about full disclosure on beneficial ownership.

The argument that beneficial ownership details must be made fully available to the public remains controversial, because of concerns that legitimate financial privacy could be put at risk.

Defenders of offshore centers, such as the CATO Institute think tank in Washington DC, have argued that these centers put other governments under healthy pressure to keep their tax rates lower than would otherwise be the case without the competition they provide. Critics say that the opposite process occurs: wealthy people and corporations can avoid tax, thereby imposing higher burdens on the mass public which cannot take this route.

Jersey's government, via the Jersey Finance organization that represents the island's financial sector, said: “Jersey has captured beneficial ownership information on a corporate registry since 1999 and this information is available to law enforcement agencies. Its Financial Services Commission regularly undertakes rigorous on-site examinations of businesses to assess compliance. Given there is ready access and availability of beneficial ownership information to foreign fiscal and investigative authorities, the industry does not believe there is further benefit in pursuing a public register.”

“Furthermore, Jersey’s ability to capture ownership information of companies is far ahead of those available in other onshore and offshore jurisdictions including the UK, which is so far alone in calling for a public registry.

Indeed at the last meeting of G20 nations, one of the key findings on beneficial ownership was an endorsement of the current Financial Action Task Force approach which is to ensure that the true owners of value are known, that this information is readily available and that it can be exchanged between governments without undue difficulty,” it continued.

“We believe this is the prudent approach as a public registry will be of dubious value, will be bypassed by criminals and those who misuse companies to launder money and for tax evasion purposes, while data will be unreliable,” it added.