插圖來源（左）：
https://profilebooks.com/work/moneyland/
插圖來源（右）：
Oliver Bullough
https://www.codastory.com/author/oliverbullough/
Contributing Editor
@OliverBullough
Contributing Editor Oliver Bullough is
an award-winning journalist and author who writes Coda’s Oligarchy newsletter,
and specializes in writing about financial crime. His journalism appears in the
Guardian, the New York Times, GQ magazine, BBC radio and elsewhere. His most
recent book is Butler to the World, which was longlisted for the 2022 FT
Business Book of the Year. He lives near Hay-on-Wye, and is currently working
on a new book about money laundering.
（推介原因：Oliver Bullough 是擅長調查報導的外國記者，專寫金融罪案，擁有英國和加拿大雙重國籍。他的文章和著作讓你明白金融罪案跟政治經濟、歷史文化和大國角力之間的複雜關係，讓讀者看見來龍去脈。這是 Oliver Bullough 的履歷和近作。）
Moneyland
(Paperback)
Why
Thieves And Crooks Now Rule The World And How To Take It Back
Oliver Bullough
https://profilebooks.com/work/moneyland/
From ruined towns on the edge of
Siberia, to Bond-villain lairs in Knightsbridge and Manhattan, something has
gone wrong with the workings of the world.
'You cannot understand power, wealth
and poverty without knowing about Moneyland.'
Simon Kuper, New Statesman
2019: democracy is eating itself, inequality is
skyrocketing, the system is breaking apart. Why? Because in 1962, some bankers
in London had an idea that changed the world. That idea was called 'offshore'. It meant that, for the first time,
thieves could dream big. They could take everything.
Join investigative journalist Oliver
Bullough on a journey into the hidden world of the new global kleptocrats.
See the poor countries where public
money is stolen and the rich ones where it is laundered and invested. Watch the
crooks at work and at play, and meet their respectable, white-collar enablers.
Learn how the new system works and begin to see how we can tackle it.
Publication date: 01/05/2019
£11.99
ISBN: 9781781257937
Imprint: Profile Books
Subject: Arts, Language &
Literature, Current Affairs, Politics & Economics
（推介原因：這是 Oliver
Bullough 的舊作，書名很正義，反映作者的政治立場。）
Butler to the World: The book the
oligarchs don't want you to read - how Britain became the servant of tycoons,
tax dodgers, kleptocrats and criminals
Oliver Bullough (Author)
Summary: How did Britain become the servant of
the world's most powerful and corrupt men? From
accepting multi-million pound tips from Russian oligarchs, to enabling
Gibraltar to become an offshore gambling haven, meet Butler Britain...
The Suez Crisis of 1956 was
Britain's twentieth-century nadir, the moment when the once superpower was
bullied into retreat. In the immortal words of former US Secretary of State
Dean Acheson, 'Britain has lost an empire and not yet found a role.' But
the funny thing was, Britain had already found a role. It even had the costume.
The leaders of the world just hadn't noticed it yet.
Butler to the World reveals how the UK took up its position
at the elbow of the worst people on Earth: the oligarchs, kleptocrats and
gangsters. We pride ourselves on values of fair play and the rule of law, but
few countries do more to frustrate global anti-corruption efforts. We are now a nation of Jeeveses,
snobbish enablers for rich halfwits of considerably less charm than Bertie
Wooster. It doesn't have to be that way.
（推介原因：Oliver
Bullough 的另一本著作，研究大英帝國如何淪為壞人的男管家，替外國貪官、寡頭富商或犯罪集團清洗黑錢及隱藏資產。）
《世界的男管家：英国如何失去一个帝国，又找到一个角色》
BUTLER TO THE WORLD: HOW BRITAIN LOST AN EMPIRE AND FOUND A ROLE
http://m.nurnberg.com.cn/book/m_book_show.aspx?id=50940&author_id=12034
图书类型：大众社科
作者：Oliver
Bullough
出 版 社：Profile
代理公司：ANA/Lauren
Li
页 数：320页
出版时间：2022年3月
代理地区：中国大陆、台湾
审读资料：电子稿
重要卖点：
继畅销书《金钱之地》（售出7万册）之后，这本书又成为热门且备受争议的话题之作。
本书揭示了导致英国脱欧的腐朽比人们通常理解的还要早得多：20世纪50年代末在伦敦金融城做出的决定，导致英国走上了成为寡头的玩物的道路。本书提出了一个鼓舞人心的愿景：如果我们决定放弃为全球超级富豪服务，英国会走向何方？
《星期日泰晤士报》（Sunday Times）畅销书《金钱之地》（Moneyland）的作者、腐败研究专家奥利弗·布洛夫（Oliver
Bullough）在他的新书中揭示了英国如何将自己打造成全球离岸经济中心、并为世界上最坏的人们提供服务的黑暗秘密，本书极具辩论性，令人大开眼界，是对《金钱之地》的追踪调查。
1956年的苏伊士运河危机是英国在20世纪最低潮的时刻，这个曾经的超级大国，被胁迫至撤退的境地。“英国已经失去了一个帝国，但还没找到一个角色。”美国前国务卿迪安·艾奇逊（Dean
Acheson）这样说。艾奇逊的这句话已经成为一句经典的语录：但它是错的。英国已经找到了一个角色。世界各国的领导人还没有注意到这一点。
《世界的男管家》（Butler to the World）揭示了英国如何成为离岸经济的中心，成为一个毫无道德的奴才和雇佣洗钱者的蜂巢，挫败了世界其他国家（尤其是美国）与全球腐败作斗争的所有努力。这本书充满争议，但它同时也充满了诙谐和启发性的比喻，与通俗小说中的管家相比，它展示出现代英国是怎样为富有的罪犯、而不是良善的英国人服务的。一旦你撕去那层幽默感，再来看看男管家的角色——即便是吉夫斯（Jeeves）（美国作家P.G.Wodehouse所著小说中人物， 现用来指理想的男仆）——都展现出一个相当令人沮丧的前景：聪明的人把他们的才能出租给有钱的傻瓜。这就是英国。但是这绝不是必然的。
目录
1. 男管家业务
2. 阳光、沙滩、运河
3. 务实的人
4. 炮弹休克
5. 坚如磐石
6. 苏格兰自助洗衣店
7. 一落千丈
8. 提供证据
9. “正义”
10. 结束了吗？
（推介原因：Butler to the World 的中文版）
Did a Putin ally evade sanctions to
pay private school fees?
Oliver Bullough
26 March 2025
https://www.codastory.com/oligarchy/did-a-putin-ally-evade-sanctions-to-pay-private-school-fees/
A striking characteristic of Russian
officials has long been how they combine passionate opposition to all the West
professes to stand for with a marked willingness to invest, live, educate their
children, party, and litigate in the West. And that brings us to Dmitry
Ovsyannikov (there’ll be more on the elaborate spelling of his name in a bit),
who was appointed governor of the city of Sevastopol by Vladimir Putin in 2016.
Sevastopol is the largest city on
the Crimean peninsula, and was stolen from Ukraine by Putin in 2014 on the
grounds that it had once belonged to Russia. “It was only when Crimea ended up as
part of a different country,” Putin told the State Duma over a decade ago as
justification for the annexation of Crimea, part 1 of the full-scale invasion
of Ukraine in 2022, “that Russia realised that it was not simply robbed, it was
plundered.” Most Western countries do not accept this logic, and have tried to
punish people involved, which is why Ovsyannikov was sanctioned by the European
Union, the United States, and the United Kingdom.
WESTWARD BOUND
Ovsyannikov left Crimea in 2019 for
a position in Moscow, but his political career came to an abrupt end after a
scandal at a regional airport. He then did that thing Russian officials do and
headed to Britain. In 2023, he moved into his brother’s house in London, where his
wife and children were already living and attending private school.
Private schools, however, have to be
paid for, and prosecutors say that arranging those payments was tantamount to
circumventing the UK’s sanctions, so he was charged along with his wife and
brother, and this month they went on trial. The alleged wrongdoing is fairly
small-scale, but it’s an important test case. We have a few weeks to wait for
an outcome, but there are some interesting points to draw out from it already.
The first is about spelling. If
you’re trying to avoid notice as a Russian (or a representative of any other
nation which uses a different alphabet to ours), it’s an entry-level stratagem
to play around with transliteration. It’s noticeable that in the court
documents, he uses a different version of his name — Dmitrii Ovsiannikov – to that favoured
by the Kremlin in the good old days, which is a switch between two common
transliteration systems. His brother, meanwhile, spells his surname Owsjanikow,
which uses yet another. I’m hoping there’s a third sibling, who’s gone all
pre-revolutionary with Ovsiannikoff.
The second is about his citizenship.
Ovsyannikov left Russia for Turkey in August 2022, which many Russians did
after Putin invaded Ukraine, though admittedly most of them had not been senior
officials in the occupying administration. He then applied for a British
passport, which he obtained early the next year.
Apparently Ovsyannikov’s father was
born in Bradford, in the north of England, in 1950. How did a Yorkshire lad
hook up with a Soviet lady at the height of the Cold War? Did their eyes meet
over a discussion of production quotas? If there are any authors of “socialist
realist romance” among my readers, this could be your time to shine.
Ovsyannikov himself is 48, so he must have been born in 1976 or 1977.
The third and most important thing
about his case is whether he should still have been subject to sanctions at
all. The
U.K. may have continued to sanction Ovsyannikov, but in 2023 he challenged his
EU designation and was removed from the bloc’s sanctions list on the grounds
that he was no longer in a position of power or responsibility in Russia. Some
may think that’s a weak reason, but I am inclined to think sanctions lists
should be adapted if people have ceased the offending behaviour. Sanctions are
a foreign policy tool, not a law enforcement instrument, and if the aim of the
policy has been achieved, they should be cancelled.
There are lots of oligarchs and
officials who would be willing to do quite a lot to get off the sanctions list,
much of which would severely inconvenience Putin. It may feel icky, but I think
our governments should be open to such deals. The point of all this is to
undermine the Kremlin after all.
（推介原因：Oliver Bullough 的文章，主題是俄羅斯寡頭富商在移居西方國家過程中所採取的手段。由於政治體制相同，俄羅斯富商和中國富商的作風非常相似。這篇文章有參考價值，全文轉發。）
Oligarchs take cover, in the West and in
Russia
Oliver Bullough
23 August 2023
https://www.codastory.com/newsletters/oligarchs-take-cover/
Excerpt: OLIGARCHS UNDER ATTACK IN
THE WEST… It is good news for the Western coalition seeking to strangle the
Russian economy, that a judge upheld the U.K. sanctions imposed on Eugene
Shvidler. Shvidler, a billionaire who has held senior positions in oil company
Sibneft and metals giant Evraz, was designated by the U.K. last year because of
his close relationship to Roman Abramovich (艾巴莫域治) . Had Shvidler won, it could have
unleashed a torrent of similar appeals, at a time when the anti-Kremlin
coalition needs as much help as it can get.
The judgment is careful and thorough and
worth reading in full. (Although some observers may question the wisdom of the
judge’s statement that “this is an area where the Courts have to defer to the
judgment” of the foreign minister, considering that the minister in question in
early 2022 was Liz Truss, who later that year became the most disastrous prime
minister in British history.)
A U.S. and U.K. citizen, Shvidler was
the first sanctioned individual to bring a legal challenge against his
designation. Had he been successful, it would have been a major threat to the
ability of the U.K. to run its post-Brexit sanctions regime and thus to the
integrity of the West’s attempted blockade of the Russian economy. Shvidler’s lawyers at Peters &
Peters intend to appeal though it’s hard to see much grounds for them to be
optimistic, since they seem to be mainly asking for sympathy.
“The impact of this on him and his
family is extreme and far-reaching,” said Michael O’Kane, one of Shvidler’s lawyers.
“If this judgment stands, it will make it virtually impossible for any person
sanctioned by the Foreign Secretary to bring a successful court challenge.”
It is easy to sympathize a little with the plight of Shvidler’s family: two of
his children lost their places at British private schools at important stages
in their education and had to move to the United States, which means they
rarely see their British-based mother, who lacks U.S. citizenship, and who is
now herself struggling to obtain legal or banking services in the U.K.
However, the difficulties that Shvidler
himself faces, though no doubt distressing for him, go straight past being
first world problems to become a whole new hashtag of its own. Here, summed up,
are his oligarch problems:
“He can no longer access financial
institutions he has used for many years; his registered agents in the British
Virgin Islands have given notice of their intention to resign; his two private
aircraft have been grounded, and he has been unable to pay the expenses
necessary to ensure his private yacht is safe and seaworthy,” the judgment
notes. Shvidler has also “had difficulty maintaining and insuring his
properties in the UK,” forcing him “to make redundant a number of members of
his household staff.”
How bad do you feel for Shvidler on a
scale of 0 to not-very-sympathetic?
（推介原因：這一篇寫被西方世界制裁的富商生活出現怎樣的變化，中國和香港的富商應該引以為鑑。那位富商的中文譯名：葉夫根尼·馬爾科維奇·什維德勒，又名：尤金·什維德勒，是一位在前蘇聯出生的億萬富豪、石油寡頭，持有美國、英國雙重國籍，跟曾經是英超球隊車路士 (Chelsea) 班主的艾巴莫域治關係密切。）
It’s the criminal economy, stupid
Oliver Bullough
19 March 2025
https://www.codastory.com/oligarchy/its-the-criminal-economy-stupid/
Excerpt: For the first time since comparable
records began, there are fewer companies on the UK’s corporate registry. It’s a
sign that anti-fraud reforms are beginning to show the first signs of a
provisional impact. Companies House, as
Britain’s corporate registry is known, has historically been dreadful – a
“fraud fiesta”, in the words of the Dark Money Files podcast. Registering
British companies was for years cheap, easy, and completely unverified, meaning
they were the money launderers’ getaway vehicles of choice.
A WELCOME FALL
After Russia’s full-scale invasion
of Ukraine, and subsequent public concern about kleptocratic wealth
infiltrating the UK, the government pledged to improve Companies House,
including by giving it powers to check information, and obliging corporate
directors to provide proof of identification. These are baby steps, but they’re
already having results: “the companies register shrank during the period
October to December 2024, for the first time since quarterly reporting began in
the period April to June 2012”.
There were 5,408,707 companies on
the register at the end of 2024, which was 19,879 fewer than at the end of
September. That was a decline of 0.37 percent, so not a huge deal, though that
did not deter some people. “COMPANY NUMBERS CRASH IN BUDGET FALLOUT,” shrieked
the tiresome rightwing blog Guido Fawkes, which attempted to claim the falling
numbers were because recent tax rises were scaring entrepreneurs away from
starting businesses.
There is a strange belief
among supposedly pro-business people that the easier it is to create a company,
the more economic growth you will get. This is true, up to a point. But after
that point, companies are so easy to obtain that they’re registered for the
purposes of fraud, money laundering and corruption rather than honest
enterprise, which will obviously impede rather than encourage business.
So it is good that Companies
House is finally trying to keep the more obvious malefactors from hiding their identities
behind what anti-money laundering expert Graham Barrow calls burner companies. “None
of these companies that were got rid of,” he told me, “were contributing
anything.”
（推介原因：Oliver Bullough 的另一篇文章。英國的經驗顯示：成立新公司的手續太過簡單方便只會吸引騙徒，然後開設一大堆用完即棄的空殼公司作犯罪用途。換言之，新註冊公司數字上升未必是好事。）
Of the corrupt, for the corrupt, by the corrupt
Oliver Bullough
5 March 2025
https://www.codastory.com/oligarchy/of-the-corrupt-for-the-corrupt-by-the-corrupt/
Excerpt: An early definition of kleptocracy, given by
Singaporean journalist-turned-politician Sinnathamby Rajaratnam in a speech in
1968, was that it is a "a society of the corrupt, for the corrupt, by the
corrupt". It’s a neat formulation, with its echo of Abraham Lincoln’s
most famous line from the Gettysburg Address. And I’m curious about how exactly
a society can change from Lincoln’s dream to Rajaratnam’s nightmare.
The first bit to go is the last part of the phrase – “by the
corrupt” – because winning elections is the easiest thing for crooks to achieve
in a society with well-established institutions. It’s the other stuff that
gives the crooks trouble. Once corrupt people are in government, the middle
part of the phrase – “for the corrupt” – does not necessarily follow. If
the institutions remain run by honest people, kleptocracy not only may not take
root, but the corrupt politicians may be pushed out of office by the next
election.
HOW KLEPTOCRACY TAKES ROOT
So something I’ve been keeping an eye on since Donald
Trump’s inauguration is how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) treats
Justin Sun（孫宇晨）. In
case you don’t remember him, Sun is a Chinese crypto billionaire who spent $6.2
million on a banana, then ate it.
In March 2023, the SEC charged Sun and eight celebrities (including Lindsay Lohan, which I was disappointed by, being a fan
of both Mean Girls and The Parent Trap) with fraudulently promoting crypto
tokens. “Sun paid celebrities with millions of social media followers to tout
the unregistered offerings, while specifically directing that they not
disclose their compensation,” said Gurbir Grewal, head of the SEC’s
enforcement division at the time. “This is the very conduct that the federal
securities laws were designed to protect against.”
Six of the celebrities agreed to pay up to settle the charges at
the first opportunity, another did a few months later. But Sun was in no hurry,
which may have been a sensible policy. Last week, lawyers for Sun and the
SEC wrote to the Manhattan judge overseeing the case asking that it be put on
hold, saying they’ll come back with a status report in two months’ time.
Now, this may all be procedural and above board, but it also may not be.
By September 2024, Trump began to talk about a new crypto
company he was launching called World Liberty Financial. It had the admittedly clever tagline: “Be DeFiant” (DeFi of course
meaning decentralized finance, the term for digital peer-to-peer transactions).
But Trump’s venture struggled to hit its fund-raising
target until it found a cornerstone investor: Justin Sun, who put in $75
million.
“This guy,” said World Liberty co-founder Zak Folkman at a forum in
Hong Kong last month, with a gesture towards Sun, who was sitting beside him,
“saw that regardless of the outcome, this project is a monumental move forward
for the entire crypto community.” It is not yet clear what if anything, besides
fundraising, World Liberty actually does, but at the same event, Folkman – who
once set up a company called ‘Date Hotter Girls LLC’ – said its success came
despite there being “no special treatment to anybody who purchased the token."
Hmmm, about that. Now, it’s clearly not true that the Trump
White House is going easy on crypto just because Sun gave Liberty Financial $75
million. The SEC has already dropped a case against Coinbase, and last
summer Trump was already telling a crypto conference that “when we see the
attacks on crypto, it's a part of a much larger pattern that's being carried
out by the same left-wing fascists who weaponize government against any threat
to their power.”
Since his inauguration, Trump has issued an Executive Order
promising to make the United States the “crypto capital of the planet.” Pausing
the investigation into Sun could just be part of a general reluctance to
enforce regulations or crackdown on crypto. And the cryptocurrency Sun founded
was not named as part of the national crypto reserve mooted by Trump.
But the Sun case didn’t ever really have anything to do with crypto
as such anyway, and the SEC was always careful to make clear it was charging
him for the way he marketed his token, not for the fact of it. “We’re neutral
about the technologies at issue, we’re anything but neutral when it comes to
investor protection,” said Grewal.
So, from the point of view of people who don’t want the United
States to tilt further towards Rajaratnam’s definition of a kleptocracy, it would be nice if the SEC maintained its case against Sun
or else made very very very very clear that any decision to drop the case was
in no way connected to the fact that he gave the US president’s company a
nine-figure sum. It would also be nice if the Trump White House was
prepared to promise action against some of the more egregious crypto frauds,
but not many people are holding their breaths.
PROTECTING THE PRIVACY OF KLEPTOCRATS
On an unrelated note, it appears that Sun also shares the Trump
White House’s, er, particular approach to which kinds of free speech should
actually be free. Sun, reportedly, put pressure on a crypto trade publication
to take down an article critical of his stunt with the banana. Spending six
million dollars on a banana should, apparently, be above reproach.
（推介原因：Oliver Bullough 的另一篇文章，提到「買蕉者」孫宇晨跟特朗普之間的金錢往來，以及孫宇晨被美國監管機構起訴的詳情。）
Why China’s e-yuan is a shield
against Western sanctions
Oliver Bullough
30 August 2023
https://www.codastory.com/newsletters/chinas-e-yuan/
Excerpt: CBDC: IT’S A FOUR LETTER WORD
Along with cryptocurrencies, central bank digital currencies
(CBDCs) have always seemed to me like a solution in search of a problem. We
already have digital payment systems that work perfectly well, so what exactly
is the point of the Federal Reserve, the Bank of England or the European
Central Bank recreating them with software systems of their own? Central banks
have said that they’re keen on maintaining the security of the financial
system, as well as ensuring that everyone has access to a payment mechanism,
but it does all seem a little vague (judge for yourself here, or here, or
here).
So, thanks to the Financial Times for this fascinating piece
looking at the issue from the perspective of Beijing, which is well advanced in
its quest to create a fully digital yuan. “The aim is not to depose the dollar
but to chip away at its dominance — and, crucially, to create enough space for
China’s economic survival if the U.S. one day targets it with the type of
sanctions it has imposed on Russia.”
Finally, CBDCs make sense to me. Duh.
Before February 2022, the Kremlin thought that the Russian Central
Bank’s giant war chest of foreign exchange reserves would insulate its economy
from any Western sanctions if it launched a full-scale invasion of Ukraine.
Western countries’ decision to freeze those reserves came as a nasty surprise,
which has only been made nastier by suggestions that Russian reserves be
invested and that the income generated be used to support Ukraine. (Question to
knowledgeable readers: Why was more than half of the frozen 300 billion euros
in Belgium of all places?)
China’s foreign reserves dwarf those owned by Russia — they were
worth $3.2 trillion in July, according to official statistics; $4 trillion if
you include Hong Kong; and $6 trillion if you include “hidden money”. So the
prospect of them being frozen by Western sanctions is an alarming one for
Chinese policymakers. And that’s why the “e-yuan” is so potentially powerful,
since it would form the backbone of an independent payment system entirely
outside the control of Western governments, and thus immune to sanctions.
Aha, sanctions again.
（推介原因：這篇寫中國人民銀行推動央行數碼貨幣 (Central Bank Digital Currency, CBDC) 的動機，認為中國央行是吸收了俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭之後被西方世界實施金融制裁的教訓，試圖建立一套獨立的支付系統。）
相關的文章：
英倫黑錢
2022 年 3 月 1 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2022/03/blog-post.html
節錄：英國傳媒的看法：中國人很可能繼俄羅斯人之後，利用英國的金融中心地位洗黑錢。英國的政府部門已經準備收緊移民政策及加強相關的反洗黑錢法規。今日的西方世界視俄羅斯和中國為敵人，有這種想法，不難理解（提示：英國和美國因應俄羅斯入侵烏克蘭，準備在金融層面對俄羅斯實施制裁）。如果屬實，那些來自俄羅斯和中國的黑錢，稍後是否又要轉移到另一個地方（傳統的避稅天堂還是網上的虛擬世界）？即是（洗黑錢的）老鼠繼續逃避御貓（監管機構）的追捕？貓捉老鼠（提示：Tom & Jerry），沒完沒了，就是這樣。
離岸中心（二）
2009 年 1 月 4 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.hk/2009/01/blog-post_04.html
節錄：近年俄羅斯黑幫被英語傳媒冠名 The Communist
Mafia（共產黨式黑手黨），他們在西方的影視作品中往往被描寫為十惡不赦的壞蛋。他們的影響力開始滲入國際體壇，例如：俄羅斯富豪、英超球隊車路士 (Chelsea) 的班主艾巴莫域治 (Roman
Abramovich)，他的財產據說就來自賤價收購國有資產。有評論認為，俄羅斯黑幫既擁有全球網絡，又掌握了國防技術，威脅程度比正牌恐怖份子更大，論實力絕不遜於恐怖大亨拉登 (Osama Bin
Laden)。
離岸中心（三）
2009 年 1 月 11 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.hk/2009/01/blog-post_11.html
節錄：透過英國或者歐洲的金融體系匿藏和調動資產的，當然不止前蘇聯的共產黨官僚，還有來自世界各地的貪官和政客，他們都懂得利用西方的銀行系統，在海外建立小金庫，為自己及家人舖定後路。而香港作為國際金融體系的一份子，又跟大英帝國有深厚淵源，在資金的流轉過程中，也扮演了一定的角色。近期的例子，有泰國前總理他信 (Thaksin
Shinawatra) ，還有「台灣之恥」陳水扁一家。
Kleptocracy（盜賊統治）
2021 年 8 月 20 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/08/kleptocracy.html
節錄：盜賊統治 (Kleptocracy) 跟洗黑錢活動關係密切，有如連體嬰，或錢幣的兩面。Kleptocrats 是指貪污腐敗的當權者（竊國者），這個詞經常在英語傳媒對於洗黑錢活動的調查報導中出現。金錢無國界，竊國者透過離岸公司及複雜的股權結構，把不義之財轉移至對資產提供較佳保障的西方國家，然後隱藏起來。竊國者要保護自己的權力以及家族利益，必定會全力摧毀本國的法治及設法打壓公民社會，同一時間卻享受著西方國家所提供的法律保障，卑鄙無恥，對不對？
Pandora Papers
2021 年 10 月 4 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/10/pandora-papers.html
ICIJ links for
readers interested in offshore finance:
諜影
2016 年 4 月 22 日
http://xiaoshousha.blogspot.hk/2016/04/blog-post_22.html
節錄：根據 Washington Post
的報導，負責分析文件的國際調查記者聯盟 (The International Consortium of
Investigative Journalists, ICIJ) 背後的美國公共誠信中心 (Center for
Public Integrity)，金主是國際大鱷索羅斯 (George Soros)。他較早前表示會「沽空亞洲貨幣」，令偉大祖國非常緊張，官媒輪流開炮。索羅斯戰績彪炳，利用在金融市場賺來的錢，資助共產黨的對頭人。中國和俄羅斯的領導人首當其衝，被爆陰毒，理所當然。
隱身術
2019 年 9 月 27 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2019/09/blog-post_27.html
節錄：早於 2018 年初中美貿易戰爆發之前，紅色資本的海外併購活動已經遇到困難。西方國家基於國家安全考慮，對中資說不（提示：倫敦交易所），又或者設置障礙。中資的回應方式，是動用港人、台商、南洋華僑甚至親共洋人(Panda Hugger) 當人頭或 Frontman，讓大股東可以退居幕後。
從查冊中學會的事
2021 年 4 月 14 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/04/blog-post.html
節錄：見識過這些事情，你會明白現有的監管制度存在很多的漏洞，在香港打工和做生意非常不容易。即使是透過查冊找到某人的名字和完整的身份證編號，還是距離真相很遠。如果把查冊的結果進一步收窄至身份證的頭三位或四位數字，以及禁止某個行業的人（傳媒＋記者）查冊，即是透明度開倒車，結果只會是方便壞人，令企業管治水平下降，也會影響正常商業活動（例如：物業買賣＋收購合併）。難怪國際傳媒和外國人社群負評如潮：
姓甚名誰（二）
2010 年 11 月 12 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2010/11/blog-post_12.html
節錄：內地人一旦有機會離開中國大陸，移居海外（香港、澳門、新加坡或者西方國家），通常都會第一時間改名，改掉容易被辨認出是大陸人身份的中英文名字。他們相信，此舉可以避免被歧視，有助開展新生活。香港的律師都說，近年來自內地人的改名生意顯著上升。比較常見的，是把兩個字的中文姓名改成三個字，又或者把採用漢語拼音（pinyin）的英文名字改成廣東話拼音。以下幾種情況，是常見的做法。
數碼貨幣 (Part 1)
2020 年 10 月 7 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/10/part-1.html
節錄：中美關係惡化又同時牽動了中共內部的派系鬥爭，令局內人覺得危在旦夕，有急切需要尋找新的走資渠道，安排後路及安頓家人。同一時間，疫症蔓延令經濟活動或停頓或半停擺，很多人無法出門，被迫長時間留在家中，透過互聯網跟外面的世界保持聯繫。在這種情況下，不受監管的加密貨幣
(Cryptocurrency) 正好符合大陸貪官的走資需求。
數碼貨幣 (Part 2)
2020 年 10 月 7 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/10/part-2.html
節錄：如果美國率先推出數碼貨幣 (Digital Currency)，並且得到廣泛的接納和應用，也許會開創出一個超越國家主權的全球性金融體系，讓各國的央行不再是唯一的權威。在中美關係惡化的背景下，中國央行與其被動地回應，被（國際社會）邊緣化，倒不如採取主動，爭取成為設定行業標準的先行者 (First Mover)，順便把法定貨幣（人民幣）數碼化（提示：化粧＋喬裝＋黃子華），一來保住中國央行的地位，二來保障國家主權及金融安全，三來讓中國可以繼續進行對外貿易（即：對抗美元霸權或繞過貿易制裁），一舉數得。
數碼貨幣 (Part 3)
2020 年 10 月 22 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2020/10/part-3.html
節錄： 另一個常見用途是用來繞過美國的貿易制裁，那是伊朗和北韓的做法。好處是讓受到國際社會孤立的政權可以（透過進行對外貿易或犯罪活動）賺取收入，繼續生存以及發展武器自保。對，獨裁者也要想辦法賺錢，然後把剝削老百姓所得的錢轉移（洗黑錢），以便在海外建立小金庫，萬一他日被推翻，老婆、情婦和兒孫也有錢用（提示：螞蟻搬家）。至於中國發展數碼人民幣（英語傳媒叫 Digital Yuan）是否也有類似的考慮（繞過美國的貿易制裁），偉大祖國是否跟伊朗和北韓學習（又或者互相抄襲），還是已經被國際社會歸入同一個類別 (Category)，這些大逆不道的殺頭問題，自己想。
數碼貨幣 (Part 4)
2021 年 7 月 3 日
https://xiaoshousha.blogspot.com/2021/07/blog-post.html
節錄：中央銀行的當前急務包括：1. 跟科技發展競賽，盡快建立一套可行的監管制度，過程中可能需要修改舊的監管制度及改變背後的思維方式。2. 繼續在現實和虛擬世界中跟壞人鬥智鬥力，保護不熟悉新科技的小市民，才能證明自己的生存價值。3. 御貓抓捕壞人（老鼠）之餘，也要避免扼殺了金融創新的空間，同時還要發展央行數碼貨幣 (Central Bank
Digital Currency, CBDC)，以免自己的國家落後於競爭對手，日後被別人所設計的遊戲規則所困。
文章
沒有留言:
發佈留言