You are totally right OldFort. People in the Bahamas are what Econs call narrow framers. They ascribe losses to only what they can see and cannot ascribe gain to unknowns that they cannot imagine.

For those of you who doubt what OldFort says, google the term "Double Irish Sandwich". Google uses it. All of the major tech companies use it. It is high time we were on the receiving end of a double Irish sandwich.

Agree. BISX is a joke and an embarrassment.

Cayman Islands approves work permits in 10 days. Edit -- 10 working days which is 14 calendar days.

Nope. If you had a broader worldview, you would have realised that the financial services sector changed dramatically when a tsunami of several things happened. The first was September 11th, the World Trade Center. Bin Laden was financed in the legal banking system. The second was the John Doe subpoena to the Swiss Banks to name the American customers. The third was FATCA. The fourth was the institution of rigid aml/kyc (Anti Money Laundering / Know Your Customer) revamp. And then the blacklistings by the OECD and FATF was the straw that broke the camel's back. When BNP (French private bank) sold their book of business in the Bahamas, the buyers had to shed over a thousand customers in order to maintain their licences according to the laws of their home countries, because of in the past we accepted dodgy customers without proper aml/kyc. You can't do business anymore in the world without both parties undergoing the vetting. The world has changed, and we didn't change with it.

Can you please explain how small operations are bad? I was always under the impression that SMB's are the bellwether drivers of the economy. They are the first to recover after an economic recession; they are the first to employ in recoveries; they are over 45% of the non-farm GDP, in a diversified economy; they are the majority employer; they have the largest growth potential (say hello Bahamas Striping); they are the only sector disrupters; they are the only gender equalizers in a small economy; they can provide higher incomes than employment; etc etc etc.

I know an oil guy (commodity trader/arb I think) who moved to Nassau. Brought his executive assistant (and family) with him, 4 work permits in all. Lived like that for four years. After 8 years he employs 3 other Bahamians who he trained up as apprentices plus a receptionist. Doesn't do one iota of business in the Bahamas. Contributes over a million in economic offset in the local economy (higher percentage per employee per revenue than large FDI operations) and still ships profits offshore. I don't see anything wrong with a small Caribbean operation. PS - it's not for the sun. It's for tax purposes.

I am still reading occasionally, but I am a nobody like the rest of us. And I happen to be home for a little bit to settle matters.

As a nobody, I do not understand what you are getting at in your second paragraph. 'Splain Ricky.

Either Ingraham is very naive or he is ignorant of the facts, or he is out to lunch. As a financial services practitioner who saw an absolutely huge flight of capital from the Bahamas in the wealth management sector, I can categorically state that Papa is blowing smoke out of his rectum on this one.

Vibrant and dynamic, my azz.

BTC is dead man walking.

Amen !

What Pinder says is a crock. All that the OECD and FATF and FATCA want, is tax transparency on the citizens of OECD countries operating in the Bahamas.

It is a crock of shiite to tie it to sovereignty. If we transparently, willingly and openly shared tax information on ex-pat residents with their home country tax agencies, we wouldn't have declining financial services.

Most Bahamians who oppose this bill, do not have the worldview enlightenment to appreciate how it will help the Bahamas. This includes the personalities listed in the article - Sumner, Roberts, et al.

1) The businesses that are targeted in the bill will be selling goods, services and intellectual property outside the Bahamas.

2) They will not compete domestically with Bahamian businesses. They are not a threat to Bahamian businesses.

3) Bahamian businesses cannot operate or compete in the same niches that these businesses will occupy.

4) These businesses will outstrip the profitability of all Bahamian businesses except the webshops and perhaps even those -- all the while making money in an honourable way, instead of being societal leeches like the webshops.

5) These businesses will employ Bahamians at higher salaries than Bahamian businesses.

6) These businesses will bootstrap Bahamian businesses into new markets either by making them pivot into unfamiliar but more profitable areas to service the new businesses or they will open windows of opportunities that are currently unavailable because knowledge-based businesses are not here now.

7) These businesses will create new forms of higher paying jobs.

8) The current Bahamian consumer business area is over-exploited now, and no reasonable businessman wants to invest capital in a tired, declining market of 350,000 consumers (the current Bahamian scene) but rather wants to sell to the world.

It reminds me of a conversation that was reported to me by a colleague who once visited the Bahamas. He was traveling with his wife, and as the taxi was passing by a homeless, shirtless man with a rusty cutlass, chopping coconuts near a dumpster on Shirley Street, the wife said "What a miserable place this is" and the taxi driver turned to her and said "Yes, but it is our miserable place, and we are proud of it." I een proud of a miserable place. I want the best possible for this country, and this bill is a step in the right direction.