Survival of the Richest

Denmark
“I feel cheated on everyone's behalf.
We struggle with getting our national
budget to make ends meet.”
Lars Løkke Rasmussen
Danish Prime Minister 309
Overview
In Denmark the debate about tax havens and media coverage
of the trial of LuxLeaks whistleblower Antoine Deltour 310 as
well as the Panama Papers 311 has been very comprehensive.
It got a lot of political attention and generally the fight against
tax havens enjoys broad political support among all parties,
excluding one minor liberal party. 312
The Panama Papers once again exposed the role of the
banks in facilitating more or less legitimate or legal tax
dodging, and it has received attention in return. The scandal
of how the Danish Tax Authority had been subject to tax
fraud and paid out billions of Danish Kroner on false claims
was also widely covered by the media. 313 The Danish Tax
Authority has been challenged by a lack of resources and
cuts in its funding for several years in row. 314 However,
in August 2016 the Minister for Tax announced new
resources. 315
As mentioned below, Denmark has introduced a number of
new measures to combat tax dodging. However, attention to
the impact on developing countries and the issue of policy
coherence for development receives little attention from
media and politicians. This is unfortunate especially in times
of decreasing and reorienting official development assistance,
where policy coherence for development is urgently needed.
Transparency
Public country by country reporting
Like most other EU Member States, and in line with the legal
requirements of the EU, Denmark has introduced public
CBCR for the financial industry 316 as well as non-public
CBCR for multinational corporations which are based in the
Denmark and have a turnover of minimum €750 million. 317
The law on non-public CBCR was passed in 2015, before it
became an EU requirement (in 2016).
However, the Danish government does not support full public
country by country reporting for all large multinational
corporations. Instead, the government supports that very
large multinationals (with a turnover of minimum €750
million) report on their activities in the EU and in so-called
non-cooperative jurisdictions, but not in all countries. 318 As
mentioned in the chapter on 'Keeping country by country data
secret from developing countries', this is similar to what has
been proposed by the European Commission, but does not
constitute ‘real’ country by country reporting.
Ownership transparency
In March 2016, Denmark adopted a law introducing a fully
public register of beneficial owners. 319 The register will
cover companies and trusts, as well as a range of subtypes.
Accessing the register will be free of charge and does
not require users to register.
The Danish law does not define a beneficial owner in terms
of a certain percentage of shareholding, but applies a fairly
wide definition that encompasses any “natural person who
ultimately owns or controls, whether directly or indirectly, a
sufficient part of the equity, interests, or voting rights, or who
exercises control via other means”. 320 This definition can be
more difficult to circumvent than a strict percentage limit,
and is thus a positive step. However, more problematically,
the law allows for the board of management to be recognised
as the beneficial owner in situations where the real beneficial
owner cannot be identified. 321 This means that companies,
which are on paper “ownerless” can still exist in Denmark.
A different definition is used for ownership of a foundation: “A
beneficial owner in a foundation is considered to be the natural
person(s) who ultimately, directly or indirectly, control the
foundation or who have other ownership authority, including;
• The board of directors; and
• Particular beneficiaries, or where these are individuals
benefiting from the distribution of the foundation, persons not
yet known to the foundation, the class of persons in whose
main interest the foundation is established or operates. 322
If there are no beneficial owners, or in situations where a
beneficial owner cannot be identified, the Danish government
has decided that the board of management will be recognized
as the beneficial owner in the IT system. 323 This means that it
is also possible to have ownerless foundations in Denmark.
As the Danish register will be publicly available, European
citizens will also be able to access the register.
According to the 2015 Financial Secrecy Index, Denmark has the
third lowest level of financial secrecy out of all the 18 countries
included in this report (ranked at number 83 at the global level). 324
In other words, Denmark has very low levels of financial secrecy.
60 • Survival of the Richest