Until
recently, Jersey did not normally enter tax treaties
as a matter of policy; for some time double taxation
agreements existed only with the United Kingdom and
Guernsey, and a limited agreement with France exempting
a resident of either country from tax in the other country
on profits from shipping and air transport.
However,
in response to the growing demands of the OECD and its
member governments for greater fiscal transparency,
Jersey has been keen to foster an image as a reputable
international finance centre and has begun to sign more
tax treaties, and agreements for the exchange of tax
information.
In
addition to the DTAs with the UK and Guernsey and the
limited agreement with France, Jersey has entered into
tax treaties with Malta, Denmark, Finland, Iceland,
Sweden, the Faroe Islands, Greenland, and Norway (the
latter seven countries being collectively known as the
'Nordic Group'). A treaty with Estonia awaits signature,
while negotiations towards a DTA with Belgium were described
as "well advanced" in April 2010.
Jersey
has signed 15 bilateral Tax and Information Exchange
Agreements, including with France, the UK, Germany,
Sweden, Norway, Iceland, Greenland, Finland, the Faroe
Islands, Denmark, the Netherlands, Ireland, Australia,
New zealand and the United States. Limited double taxation
avoidance agreements have also been concluded with some
of these countries. At
the time of writing all of these agreements were in
force, except the TIEAs with Ireland, Australia and
New Zealand, all of which are expected to become enforceable
some time in 2010.
Ahead
of the signing of the TIEA with the UK in March 2009,
Jersey’s Chief Minister, Terry Le Sueur said:
“We are particularly pleased to have Jersey recognised
by the UK as a member of the community of jurisdictions
committed to international co-operation and information
exchange on tax matters, and to have their assurance
that Jersey will be treated as such by the UK authorities.”
He
added: “Last year the OECD Secretary General referred
to the fact that Jersey has signed a number of Tax Information
Exchange Agreements, and called for clear political
recognition for those offshore financial centres that
have made this kind of progress. We hope to see this
reflected in the outcome of the G20 Summit in London
on April 2 and that there will greater pressure put
on those countries, including some OECD members, who
have not yet shared Jersey’s commitment to transparency
and co-operation.”
In
its progress report on the implementation of the internationally
agreed tax standard, issued in conjunction with the
G20 London Summit of April 2, the OECD listed Jersey
as a jurisdiction that has “substantially implemented”
said standard and thus the jurisdiction gained a place
on the Organization’s ‘white list’
of compliant jurisdictions.
Jersey Double Tax Treaties
The
UK and Guernsey treaties do not conform to the OECD
standard model treaty. Their main features are as
follows:
-
the
profits derived from an industrial or commercial enterprise
in one country will not be taxed in the other country
except to the extent that they are attributable to a permanent
establishment;
- profits of
shipping or air transport attributable to a resident of
either country are not taxed in the other country, regardless
of 1.
-
an
individual resident in only one of the two countries is
exempt from tax in the other country on personal, including
professional services performed in the other country on
behalf of a resident of his own country (but they must
be taxed in his own country)
- if despite
the above, tax is payable in both countries, the tax paid
in one country is allowed as a credit against tax due in
the other. However
as far as Jersey is concerned allowance for tax paid is
only up to 20% of the taxable income in the other country,
i.e the Jersey rate of tax is applied to, say, UK taxable
income rather than the amount actually levied by the UK
Inland Revenue. This
means that there is effectively only a partial double taxation
agreement between Jersey and the UK.
The
agreement with the United Kingdom specifically excludes dividends
and debenture interest from its provisions.
International
Business Companies (which are in any case being phased out)
are not entitled to the benefits of the UK double tax treaty.
In
December 2009, the Jersey authorities released guidance for
Jersey residents with UK pensions following the entry into
force on November 27, 2009, of a bilateral Tax Information
Exchange Agreement (TIEA) signed by the two governments in
March 2009.
Alongside
the signing of the TIEA, the two authorities agreed to amend
the 1952 Arrangement between Jersey and the United Kingdom
for the Avoidance of Double Taxation and the Prevention of
Fiscal Evasion with respect to Taxes on Income.
This
incorporates a major change to the tax treatment of pensions,
which means that Jersey residents will no longer be taxed
by the UK tax authorities on certain pensions that they receive
from the United Kingdom.
The
Island's Comptroller of Income Tax, Malcolm Campbell, commented
that:
“Following
the enactment in the UK of the Double Taxation Relief on International
Tax Enforcement (Jersey) Order 2009, Jersey residents in receipt
of a UK pension may apply to the UK Tax Authority, HM Revenue
and Customs (HMRC), to have, with effect from the April 6,
2010, their UK pension paid to them without the deduction
of UK tax”.
“This
arrangement could mean significant savings in terms of tax
paid for some Jersey residents, who could have been paying
40% tax to HMRC on their pension and who may in future be
subject to tax at 50%. The arrangement means that, subject
to a claim being made and accepted by HMRC, Jersey residents
will only be paying tax in Jersey, at a maximum rate of 20%,
on their UK pension.”
The
arrangement also affects residents of the United Kingdom who
have been paying Jersey tax on their Jersey pensions.
Under
the new regime, UK residents will be able to apply to the
Comptroller to stop Jersey tax being deducted from their Jersey
pensions, meaning that they will only pay tax in the United
Kingdom.
Jersey International
Agreements
It became clear
in May 2002 that Jersey, along with its fellow UK dependent
territories Guernsey and the Isle of Man, would agree to be
part of the EU's information-sharing regime, whereby financial
institutions are obliged to pass details of income on investments
by nationals of EU member states to their home tax administrations.
The EU began information-sharing in 2005, and after some hesitation,
Jersey decided to opt for a withholding tax on the Swiss model.
This withholding tax became effective from July 1, 2005 at
an initial rate of 15%, rising to 20% from July 1, 2008. Jersey's
Comptroller of Income Tax reported in mid-2006 that GBP13
million was collected in withholding tax revenues from bank
deposits in the first six months of the directive. For the
year 2007, Jersey paying agents retained and passed to the
Comptroller a total of GBP34.98 million of withholding tax.
This rose slightly to and GBP36.62m in 2008.
In
November, 2002, Jersey signed a Memorandum of Understanding
(MoU) with the Gulf state of Bahrain, designed to facilitate
cooperation between the two countries on issues such as applications
for licences from financial institutions, and the investigation
of irregularities.
In
October 2003, the Jersey Financial Services Commission announced
that Jersey had signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)
with the International Organisation of Securities Commissions
(IOSCO). The MoU is designed to combat securities and derivatives
violations. It obliges signatories to share information about
the illegal use of their securities and derivatives markets
with each other. In signing up to the MoU, Jersey joins another
24 members. However, according to the JFSC, the island is
one of the first offshore finance centres to join. "By signing
this memorandum with IOSCO, Jersey reinforces its status as
a leading international financial centre and gives international
investors greater confidence in the island," JFSC compliance
director, John Pallot explained.
In
2006, the JFSC signed Memoranda of Understanding with the
regulators in Dubai, Qatar, the Netherlands and the Cayman
Islands. These agreements have formalised arrangements for
cooperation and information sharing between the regulators
and facilitated the enforcement of, and compliance with, the
laws of their respective jurisdictions in a bid to help protect
investors and depositors and to promote the integrity of financial
services markets in the two jurisdictions.
The
Jersey Financial Services Commission and the Cyprus Securities
and Exchange Commission signed a memorandum of understanding
in February 2007 that will further co-operation between the
two regulatory bodies.
The
JFSC signed a Memorandum of Understanding in April 2007 with
two other authorities: the Office of the Superintendent of
Financial Institutions Canada (OSFI) and the Irish Financial
Services Regulatory Authority (IFSRA).
The
JFSC and the British Virgin Islands Financial Services Commission
signed a memorandum of understanding in August 2007.This establishes
a formal basis for co-operation, including the exchange of
information and investigative assistance.
In
October 2009, Jersey’s regulator, the Financial Services
Commission, signed a statement of cooperation with four United
States' financial regulators.
The
statement was signed by the JFSC’s Director General,
John Harris, and formalizes existing arrangements for cooperation
and information sharing between the respective agencies and
Jersey.
Jersey's
Chief Minister, Terry Le Sueur, said: “This agreement
recognizes that the commission and its counterparts in the
United States rely on the quality of each other’s regulatory
standards. It is the latest in a number of such agreements
between the commission and other regulators around the world,
and reflects the cooperation that already exists between Jersey
and the United States.”
“Jersey
signed a Tax Information Exchange Agreement with the US in
2002, and earlier this year I received a letter from the US
Treasury, setting out the importance the US Administration
attaches to this transparency agreement,” he continued.
"In
the letter, Mr Michael Mundaca, from the US Treasury Department,
stated that the US Administration believes it is important
to distinguish between those jurisdictions that are adopting
international standards for information exchange and those
that are not.”
“Close
co-operation with the US regulators during the current period
of change can only benefit an industry which prides itself
on meeting international standards,” Le Sueur concluded.
In
November 2009, the JFSC Polish Financial Supervision Authority
signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) that will further
regulatory cooperation between the two bodies.
The
MoU establishes an agreed mechanism under which the signatories
commit to using their statutory powers of cooperation to assist
each other.
John
Harris, Director General of the JFSC, said: “I am delighted
to sign this Memorandum of Understanding with the Polish Financial
Supervision Authority. The global financial crisis has highlighted
the need for close cooperation between regulators and this
Memorandum will assist in that regard by establishing a formal
framework for the exchange of regulatory information and the
provision of investigative assistance. Such collaboration
should help to protect investors and depositors and promote
the integrity of financial services markets in Jersey and
Poland.”
In
December 2009, JFSC signed a Memorandum of Understanding with
Belgian regulator, the Banking, Finance and Insurance Commission,
formally enhancing cooperation on regulatory matters.
BACK TO TOP
|