The famous regal displeasure at events and activities has done the rounds of royal courts for centuries. That is till the spit in the air falls on royal faces. If Queen Elizabeth II turns a whiter, shade of pale it wouldn't be out of place. Just as all the Sheriffs and later Chancellors resorted to more than a little coercion in realising taxes from subjects, those that manage her wealth have now been exposed. The blurred lines that distinguish between what's legal and isn't have long been exploited by all and sundry. Yet, somehow it doesn't feel right that a monarch of considerable wealth should have investments in dodgy places such as tax-free havens in Bermuda. Following on from the Panama Papers, welcome the revelation of the Paradise Papers -- a sticky story of dubious investments unravelled by a consortium of international journalist bodies that involved 360-odd pressmen.
The Panama Papers were one factor that led to Pakistan's Nawaz Sharif being stripped of his Prime Ministership. Others, including illustrious names from Bangladesh seem to have ridden over the stormy headlines one way or the other. Even the revenue-hungry Finance Minister hasn't been able to touch them.
The embarrassment for the Queen comes shortly after questions had been raised over the increase in value of the Royal Family assets and the commensurate increase in its spending, at a time when the common citizen struggles to make ends meet. From a moral point of view, the Queen's investments should ideally been in a regulated economy, preferably that of her own country. Further shocks red awaited, especially from the Earl of Ashford and his reported £450 million investments in Bermuda. That, he made no comment when chased by a reporter for BBC's Panorama documentary, says it all. This is the tip of the iceberg, with information awaiting on a reported £ 600 billion shift of resources by multinational companies in such havens. Given all these firms, even the Queen's assets and expenses, being audited by reputed companies, the public cant be blamed for losing confidence in the very institutions designed to maintain check and balance in financial dealings.
Facts, as usual are stranger than fiction. If an adviser to the Prime Minister heads one of the biggest loan-defaulting companies, if the top-figures in banking fail to turn up before parliamentary committees and if one of these figures, a Member of Parliament sits on the Standing Committee for Public Accounts to which Bangladesh Bank reports, faith in public institutions erode fast. Reportedly, a couple of the country's banks can't pay depositor deposits. It puts the public exchequer under pressure and increases the citizen's burden in propping these banks up. With more so-called investors lined up for banking licenses, the Finance Minister inclined to recommend at least two more, it would appear that the concept of mergers may well be added as one of the conditions. Mergers bring with the responsibility of liabilities as well as favourable terms and duration of settling debts. Depositors, in the meanwhile are left to blink and suck their thumbs.
Revenue authorities are closing in on unpaid claims, contested or not. Permission has been sought to freeze the accounts of some bank/s to realise collected but unpaid value added tax (VAT). Everyone's favourite bashing boys, telecommunications have been issued massive claims and a multinational tobacco company has been prodded to pay-up, what is a glaringly discriminatory cigarette stick-tax that benefits local companies. And while the benefits of streamlined income-tax procedures raising over Tk 5.0 billion at tax fairs are being extolled quite rightly, there doesn't seem to be any clarity on the fog of the leading business and industries not being among the top tax-payers.
