Rupini-ICMA

Good question. I think it is to do with ethics and finance, and how people use finance to help themselves, sometimes at the detriment of others. If politicians use shell companies to hide their dealings, then this of course effects their integrity, but it is also other non-political individuals that are implicated in this scandal. A good example is the US book writer (I can't remember her name right now!)

So to answer to answer your question, in many ways it is about both ethics in finance and the integrity of politicians, but it is not just limited to politicians! There is a need for more transparency no matter what, and the push should come from politicians. Only then can there be ethics in finance.

It shows us what many of us have suspected for a long time, although it is still surprising at the scale of such corruption. The benefit to the average person (hopefully) is that these people will no longer be able to hide behind complex and elitist structures, and there will always be someone there to catch them.

I would say, a really good starting point would be to read the Süddeutsche Zeitung - this is the newspaper that initially reported and coordinated the leak. They have a good one-pager explaining the full extent of the Panama Papers leak (and a video too).

Hello, the previous post was hidden as we didn't provide proof for my supervisor - we've now corrected this and linked to a Twitter post from the university where he teaches. I hope this is okay, please let me know if not. We hope to get a photo proof of him when he's available.

It should be possible to prevent the creation of shell companies that have illegal business transactions. It just boils down to the people who are knowingly creating them. This then relates to the whole ethics issue around finance - if you know it's bad, then why do it? Of course if regulation is stringent, it will give more incentive for people or companies to do the right thing. If the penalties were higher, and even perhaps the inclusion of jail sentences, then perhaps people may be deterred from creating illegal shell corporations.