X hits on this document





54 / 65


very problematic and unwanted inter-state territorial argument.132 The traditional view

has been that the solution to the regulation of the multinational enterprise or private

investor is through bilateral or multi-governmental agreements setting forth general

guidelines. “However, such treaties seem far off. In the meantime, the United States is

forced to act unilaterally.133

This has led to several divergent views but the main principle is that United States

investigators in tax matters, which had an element of involvement with offshore financial

centers with strict bank secrecy laws, were empowered to either pursue the process

through domestic courts or through diplomatic means to obtain information from a

foreign state. Further, because United States investigators have preferred the approach of

the domestic courts over foreign tribunals in such matters this has developed into an ad

hoc a way of circumventing the involvement of the foreign courts.134 It follows from this

that the OECD’s adamant attitude with regard to exchange of information is a necessary

132 United States v Davis 767 F. 2d. 1025 Cayman Islands branch of Bank of Nova Scotia refusal to release certain bank records as bank employees would be subject to criminal penalty in contravention of bank secrecy laws

133 Domestic conflict of laws applying internationally. See RESTATMENT (SECOND) OF CONFLICT OF LAWS 10 (1971) extraterritorial Application of United States Laws: A conflict of Laws Approach 28 STAN L. REV. 1005

134 See Paikin, Problems Of Obtaining Evidence in Foreign States for Use in Federal Criminal Prosecutions 22 COLUM J. TRANSNAT’L 233, 243-263. United States investigators have asserted that domestic process is faster and less costly than using diplomatic measures such as letters rogatory or attempting to use a foreign judicial system or foreign counsel. See Crime and Secrecy

Document info
Document views221
Page views221
Page last viewedTue Jan 17 19:14:57 UTC 2017