Aktien

Deutsche Bank: Strafzahlung an US-Justiz wegen Schweizer Bankkonten

FMW-Redaktion

Und die nächste Strafe für die Deutsche Bank. Wie das US-Justizministerium diese Woche veröffentlichte, hatte die Schweizer Tochter der Deutschen Bank von 2008-2013 in den USA steuerpflichtige Personen dabei unterstützt ihre Steuerpflicht zu umgehen, in dem anonyme Konten in der Schweiz eröffnet wurden. Absichtlich wurden keine Kontoauszüge zu den Kunden in die USA verschickt. Wohl relevant für die jetzige Strafe war, dass Deutsche Bank-Mitarbeiter Vermerke angefertigt hatten, auf denen notiert war explizit für diese Kunden keinen Versand der Kontoauszüge vorzunehmen, weil sie in den USA wohnen und das Konto nicht deklariert war (also der US-Steuer nicht bekannt).

Diese Strafzahlung über „nur“ 31 Mio US-Dollar betrifft 1.072 Konten von in den USA steuerpflichtigen Personen, die bei der Deutschen Bank Schweiz bis zu 7,65 Milliarden Dollar Einlagen hielten. Im Jahr 2001 schloss die Deutsche eine Vereinbarung mit der US-Steuerbehörde, dass ihre Schweizer Kunden, die US-Wertpapiere handeln wollen, bei der US-Steuer gemeldet werden müssen. Dies unterblieb laut US-Justiz aber ebenfalls.

Im Rahmen seines „Swiss Bank Program“ ermöglicht die US-Jusitz das „Ehrlich machen“ der Schweizer Banken um einer Strafverfolgung zu entgehen. Das nehmen immer mehr Banken wahr, und so ist die Schweizer Tochter der Deutschen Bank nur eine von vielen, die in letzter Zeit ihre Mithilfe hierbei offengelegt haben. Hier der wichtigste Teil der Bekanntmachung des US-Justizministeriums im Original:


„According to the terms of the non-prosecution agreement signed today, Deutsche Bank Suisse agrees to cooperate in any related criminal or civil proceedings, demonstrate its implementation of controls to stop misconduct involving undeclared U.S. accounts and pay a penalty in return for the department’s agreement not to prosecute this bank for tax-related criminal offenses.

Deutsche Bank Suisse is headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland, with additional offices in Zurich and Lugano, Switzerland and is part of the Deutsche Bank Group. From at least August 2008 through August 2013, Deutsche Bank Suisse enabled some U.S. taxpayers to evade their U.S. tax and filing obligations, resulting in the filing of false income tax returns with the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and allowing U.S. taxpayers to hide offshore assets from the IRS.

Deutsche Bank Suisse offered a variety of services and permitted some practices that it knew could and did assist U.S. taxpayers in concealing assets and income from the IRS. Deutsche Bank Suisse offered hold mail services, and notes written by Deutsche Bank Suisse employees on some hold mail forms explained that the client’s mail was not delivered or picked up because the client resided in the United States and his or her account was “not declared.” Deutsche Bank Suisse also provided U.S. beneficial owners with debit cards linked to accounts held at Deutsche Bank Suisse or credit cards whose balances the U.S. beneficial owners instructed Deutsche Bank Suisse to pay from accounts held at the bank. Use of these cards by U.S. taxpayers facilitated their access to or use of undeclared funds on deposit at Deutsche Bank Suisse. Deutsche Bank Suisse processed standing orders for checks in amounts less than $10,000 to be sent on a monthly basis into the United States, and in at least two instances those checks were issued to the U.S. beneficial owners from accounts held in the name of Liechtenstein foundations.

In 2001, Deutsche Bank Suisse entered into a Qualified Intermediary (QI) Agreement with the IRS. Under a QI Agreement, if an accountholder wished to trade in U.S. securities without being subjected to mandatory U.S. tax withholding, the accountholder’s bank was required to obtain the consent of the accountholder to disclose his or her identity to the IRS. However, after signing its QI Agreement, Deutsche Bank Suisse continued to service certain U.S. customers without disclosing their identity to the IRS and without regard for the impact of U.S. criminal law on that decision.

Prior to October 2008, Deutsche Bank Suisse’s position was that it could service a U.S. client without reporting the U.S. taxpayer’s interest in the account to the IRS so long as it prohibited the accountholder from trading in U.S. securities or the account was an account nominally structured in the name of a non-U.S. entity accompanied by an IRS Form W-8BEN or equivalent bank document. In the latter circumstances, U.S. clients, with the assistance of their external advisors, would create an entity, such as a Liechtenstein foundation, Panamanian corporation or British Virgin Islands corporation, and pay a fee to third parties to act as corporate directors. Those third parties, at the direction of the U.S. client, would then open a bank account at Deutsche Bank Suisse in the name of the entity or transfer funds from a pre- existing account from another bank. Deutsche Bank Suisse employees provided prospective U.S. clients with referrals to external advisors who could assist with the creation and management of such an entity. In some instances, Deutsche Bank Suisse made insufficient efforts to determine whether such an entity was valid for U.S. tax purposes.

Deutsche Bank Suisse maintained and serviced accounts beneficially owned by U.S. taxpayers that were held by entities created in countries such as Liechtenstein, Liberia, Panama and the British Virgin Islands, some of which were operated by the U.S. beneficial owners in violation of corporate governance provisions. In certain cases involving a non-U.S. entity, Deutsche Bank Suisse was aware that a U.S. client was the true beneficial owner of the account. Despite this, Deutsche Bank Suisse would sometimes obtain from the entity’s directors a Form W-8BEN or equivalent bank document that falsely declared that the beneficial owner was not a U.S. taxpayer. In some of these cases, Deutsche Bank Suisse permitted the accounts to trade in U.S. securities without reporting account earnings or transmitting withholding taxes to the IRS, as required by the QI Agreement.“



Quelle: US-Justizministerium



Kommentare lesen und schreiben, hier klicken

Lesen Sie auch

1 Kommentar

  1. Kann man die „Deutsche Bank“ – Widerling ihres Namens – nicht einfach schließen? Problem beseitigt.

Hinterlassen Sie eine Antwort

Ihre E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert.




ACHTUNG: Wenn Sie den Kommentar abschicken stimmen Sie der Speicherung Ihrer Daten zur Verwendung der Kommentarfunktion zu.
Weitere Information finden Sie in unserer Zur Datenschutzerklärung

Meist gelesen 7 Tage