Just wanted to quickly highlight a recent asset protection article in the Economist. In talking about the value of asset protection, the article says the following:
The best protection for assets of all kinds is anonymity. They should be kept in offshore companies and trusts, in multiple jurisdictions with unclear ownership and minimal reporting requirements. Unfortunately, politicians are making these arrangements increasingly difficult to maintain. The G8 Summit in June is likely to see a new push to limit shell companies, and force existing ones to reveal their beneficial ownership. Mirkwood, with the help of its public-relations subsidiary, Schmoez and DeSeeve, is taking every opportunity to remind decision-makers of the importance of privacy to the high-net-worth individuals who support so many of them. Later this year we will hold a fund-raising dinner for a politician from Delaware, home to 917,000 people and 945,000 obviously legitimate but gloriously impenetrable companies.
Secrecy is your friend. Sadly, Luxembourg and Switzerland, once paragons of discretion, have buckled under pressure from the United States and European Union, but it is still possible to conduct transactions away from prying eyes. We continue to offer advice to clients, with an emphasis on emerging-economy jurisdictions such as Dubai, Shanghai and Mumbai, and to use helpful judicial systems to ward off intrusive journalists. Britain has some vicious and unscrupulous lawyers who can spot a libel in any sentence (even this one).
You can read the rest of the article here.