welt.de
Germany's Slow Cum-Ex/Cum-Cum Recovery: Systemic Issues and Call for Reform
Former German prosecutor Brorhilker criticizes the slow recovery of billions of euros lost to Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum tax schemes due to insufficient inter-agency cooperation, lack of specialized expertise, and data stored abroad; she calls for a central authority to combat financial crime.
- What are the main obstacles hindering the effective prosecution of Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum tax schemes in Germany, and what is their impact on the recovery of stolen tax money?
- A former top German prosecutor, Brorhilker, criticized the slow progress in recovering billions of euros lost to Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum tax schemes. She highlights the difficulty in prosecuting these crimes due to banks' data being stored abroad, making investigations challenging and highlighting a lack of cooperation between German authorities. The state has recovered only a small fraction of the lost funds.
- What systemic changes are necessary in Germany to improve the prosecution of complex financial crimes, and what are the potential future implications if these changes are not implemented?
- The slow progress in recovering funds lost to Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum tax schemes suggests a need for significant reform in Germany's approach to financial crime. Brorhilker's call for a central authority and increased political commitment underscores the systemic challenges and potential for future losses if the current inefficiencies are not addressed. The risk of future similar crimes remains high due to a lack of effective deterrents.
- How does the lack of cooperation among German authorities and the insufficient expertise in prosecuting complex financial crimes contribute to the slow progress in the Cum-Ex/Cum-Cum cases?
- Brorhilker's criticism points to systemic issues in prosecuting financial crimes in Germany. The insufficient cooperation between various authorities, including the Bafin, tax authorities, and prosecutors, impedes effective investigation. The lack of specialized expertise and frequent staff rotations within the justice system also hinder the investigation of complex cases like Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative frames the issue primarily through Brorhilker's critical perspective, emphasizing the failures of the system and the lack of progress in recovering stolen tax revenue. The headline (if there was one, which is absent from the provided text) would likely reinforce this negative framing. The repeated use of phrases like "slow pace of investigations," "lack of progress," and "stolen tax revenue" strongly contributes to this negative tone.
Language Bias
The language used is generally factual but leans towards a critical and accusatory tone. Words and phrases such as "raubing" (robbing), "geschummelt" (cheated), and descriptions of the banks' actions as "illegal" and "criminal" are strongly loaded and contribute to a negative perception. More neutral alternatives might be: Instead of "raubing", use "costing the state significant sums"; instead of "geschummelt", use "engaged in potentially fraudulent practices"; instead of simply labeling actions as "illegal" and "criminal", use more precise legal terms where appropriate.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the criticisms of Brorhilker and the slow pace of investigations, potentially omitting perspectives from the banks or other involved parties that could offer alternative explanations or justifications for the delays and difficulties in prosecuting these complex financial crimes. The article also doesn't detail the specific efforts undertaken by authorities to combat these crimes, beyond mentioning the challenges and shortcomings. This creates an unbalanced portrayal of the situation.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a somewhat simplistic dichotomy between the easily investigated 'small cases' and the complex, difficult-to-resolve 'large cases' of Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum tax fraud. The reality is likely more nuanced, with a spectrum of cases varying in complexity, rather than just two distinct categories.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the significant tax fraud perpetrated through Cum-Ex and Cum-Cum schemes, costing billions of euros in lost tax revenue. This disproportionately impacts lower-income individuals and exacerbates wealth inequality as the burden of lost tax revenue falls on the general public while those involved in the schemes profit immensely. The slow pace of investigation and prosecution further entrenches this inequality by allowing the perpetrators to evade justice and retain their ill-gotten gains.