header-logo header-logo

Home Login E-newsletter About us
17 November 2017 / Nicholas Griffin KC
Issue: 7770 / Categories: Features , Fraud , Bribery , Profession , Commercial
printer mail-detail

No safe havens? Pt 2

© Copyright LexisNexis 2026. All Rights Reserved.
nlj_7770_griffin

Corporate facilitation of tax evasion: the new frontier. The second & final part of an exclusive analysis by QEB Hollis Whiteman Chambers

  • What do the new criminal offences mean in practice?
  • What are the Government’s parallel civil and other criminal anti-evasion measures?
  • The future for corporate responsibility for economic crime & the direction of travel for economic crime more generally.

In our first article we discussed the scope and impact of the Criminal Finances Act 2017 (CFA 2017)—a major plank of the Government’s attempts to tackle tax evasion—and its failure to prevent offences (see ‘No safe havens? Pt 1’, NLJ , 10 November 2017, p 10). Of particular concern is whether the wide extraterritorial effect of CFA 2017 places unmanageably onerous obligations on multinational organisations to foresee and prevent tax evasion risks on a global scale, given that the sanctions for failure are now criminal as well as regulatory in nature. Here, we consider what the new criminal offences mean in practice, and how they sit

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Read All
Sponsored by
London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

London Solicitors Litigation Association—John McElroy

Fieldfisher partner appointed president as LSLA marks milestone year

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Kingsley Napley—Kirsty Churm & Olivia Stiles

Firm promotes two lawyers to partnership across employment and family

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Foot Anstey—five promotions

Firm promotes five lawyers to partnership across key growth areas

NEWS
Read All
NLJ this week: Divorce ‘nuclear weapon’ freezes assets but entangles outsiders
Freezing orders in divorce proceedings can unexpectedly ensnare third parties and disrupt businesses. In NLJ this week, Lucy James of Trowers & Hamlins explains how these orders—dubbed a ‘nuclear weapon’—preserve assets but can extend far beyond spouses to companies and business partners 
NLJ this week: What counts as ‘rent’? Court says labour alone won’t do
A Court of Appeal ruling has clarified that ‘rent’ must be monetary—excluding tenants paid in labour from statutory protection. In this week's NLJ, James Naylor explains Garraway v Phillips, where a tenant worked two days a week instead of paying rent
Your magistrates’ court needs you!
Thousands more magistrates are to be recruited, under a major shake-up to speed up and expand the hiring process
NLJ this week: Freed but failed—justice system leaves the innocent empty-handed
Three men wrongly imprisoned for a combined 77 years have been released—yet received ‘not a penny’ in compensation, exposing deep flaws in the justice system. Writing in NLJ this week, Dr Jon Robins reports on Justin Plummer, Oliver Campbell and Peter Sullivan, whose convictions collapsed amid discredited forensics, ‘oppressive’ police interviews and unreliable ‘cell confessions’
NLJ this week: Clarity on whistleblowing, settlements and tribunal limits
A quiet month for employment cases still delivers key legal clarifications. In his latest Employment Law Brief for NLJ, Ian Smith reports that whistleblowing protection remains intact even where disclosures are partly self-serving, provided the worker reasonably believes they serve the ‘public interest’ 
Copyright © 2026 LexisNexis
back-to-top-scroll