15.01.2013 Views

CAPITALISM'S ACHILLES HEEL Dirty Money and How to

CAPITALISM'S ACHILLES HEEL Dirty Money and How to

CAPITALISM'S ACHILLES HEEL Dirty Money and How to

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Magnitudes <strong>and</strong> Misunderst<strong>and</strong>ings 163<br />

Applied <strong>to</strong> global GDP of approximately $32 trillion, this would indicate<br />

a range of roughly $640 billion <strong>to</strong> $1.6 trillion annually.<br />

IMF officials have declined <strong>to</strong> clarify whether Camdessus’s statement<br />

was limited <strong>to</strong> the worst of criminal <strong>and</strong> corrupt money or was also intended<br />

<strong>to</strong> include the commercially tax-evading component. This gets in<strong>to</strong> a definitional<br />

question that has affected commentary on these issues for years.<br />

“<strong>Dirty</strong> money” <strong>and</strong> “laundered money”: Are they the same thing?<br />

In my use of the terms, the answer is no. “Laundered money” is money<br />

that breaks anti–money laundering laws. For many countries this is limited<br />

<strong>to</strong> drug proceeds <strong>and</strong> terrorist financing <strong>and</strong> a few other categories. More on<br />

this later in the chapter. But seldom does anti–money laundering law include<br />

tax-evading funds, the commercial component I have written about<br />

extensively, as a major part of the dirty-money phenomenon. In other<br />

words, laundered money is narrowly defined as some of the criminal <strong>and</strong><br />

corrupt money. The designation cannot properly be applied <strong>to</strong> proceeds that<br />

are not specified in anti–money laundering legislation. “<strong>Dirty</strong> money” is the<br />

whole of illicit proceeds, a much larger sum. If it breaks one country’s laws<br />

in its origin, movement, or use, then it’s dirty money, regardless of whether<br />

it’s singled out as laundered in another country’s laws.<br />

With this clarification, let’s go back <strong>to</strong> the IMF’s figure of $640 billion<br />

<strong>to</strong> $1.6 trillion for laundered money. If this was not intended <strong>to</strong> include the<br />

commercial component, which is almost certainly the case, then the larger<br />

dirty-money figure would easily rise <strong>to</strong> the range of $1 trillion <strong>to</strong> $2 trillion<br />

annually. Furthermore, the context of Camdessus’s address implies that he<br />

was talking about cross-border flows, not what remains inside national jurisdictions.<br />

Thus, $1 <strong>to</strong> $2 trillion annually can be taken as a rough estimate of<br />

global dirty money.<br />

Do such numbers make sense? One way <strong>to</strong> get a feel for this is <strong>to</strong> examine<br />

offshore assets. Merrill Lynch/Cap Gemini Ernst & Young produces an<br />

annual World Wealth Report, based on high-net-worth individuals with liquid<br />

financial assets of $1 million or more. Data from 2002 <strong>and</strong> 2003 are<br />

shown in Table 4.1. From 1996 <strong>to</strong> 2001, offshore liquid holdings of high<br />

net-worth individuals rose from $5.5 trillion <strong>to</strong> the $8.5 trillion figure<br />

shown. This is a rate of increase of $600 billion per year.<br />

The data in this survey do not include offshore holdings of individuals<br />

with investible liquid assets below $1 million, <strong>and</strong> corporations, which reportedly<br />

pass more money through tax havens than individuals. 2 Nor does

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!