The Cayman Islands government said it was considering legal action in an attempt to stop the UK making the overseas territory open up its company ownership registers to public scrutiny, a day after MPs agreed they should do so by the end of 2020.

Alden McLaughlin, the premier of the Cayman Islands, said the territory was keeping all options on the table including a legal challenge to the amendment and accused MPs of making a decision that was “reminiscent of the worst injustices of a bygone era of colonial despotism”.

The territory was joined by Bermuda, which questioned whether the newly passed legislation was constitutional. David Burt, the premier of Bermuda, said parliament’s action was a retrograde step after 50 years of “constitutionally sanctioned self-government”. He added that the island territory would take necessary steps to ensure its constitution was respected.

The UK bears the ultimate risk of potential liabilities from its overseas territories

• 
  
  Richard Murphy says:
  May 2 2018 at 5:31 pm
  Ah, the old defence of ‘you can’t nick me guv because everyone else is doing it’
  
  Sorry: it does not stack, and you know it
  
  And not have the Crown Dependencies been let off: they will be made to comply, not least because of EU law – and we have not left yet
  
  I suggest you stop moaning and go and work on a register
  Reply
  
  
  
  
  Johnson Fleming says:
  May 2 2018 at 5:37 pm
  There are some who say the required register already exists, and data is shared with tax authorities and law enforcement already and these organisations represent the public interest when government is accountable to electors.
  Clearly these people are wrong as you have said the existing registers are private and you are telling Mr Scott to “go and work on a register”.
  
  
  
  
  Richard Murphy says:
  May 2 2018 at 5:42 pm
  A public register is very clearly what I meant
  
  Pedantry is deeply unappealing. Has no one ever told you?
  
  
  
  
  Johnson Fleming says:
  May 2 2018 at 5:52 pm
  A public register would make the data available to criminals and others who have no reason to be interested. What I think will happen is that those with a genuine public interest reason to be able to access the data ( and they would have to comply with data protection requirements ) can apply through an approved agent to view it along with tax authorities and law enforcement.
  That way the requirement to make the data publically accessible would be satisfied.
  
  
  
  
  Richard Murphy says:
  May 2 2018 at 6:39 pm
  You mean I am a criminal?
  
  I have no agent I can apply through and I sure as heck want this
  
  As do most journalists I know
  
  You mean they’re criminals too?
  
  What law have we broken?
  
  
  
  
  Scott says:
  May 2 2018 at 6:34 pm
  Ah, the old defence of ‘you can’t nick me guv because everyone else is doing it’
  
  In this case the defense seems legit. This isn’t a case of people stealing cars. It’s government sanctioned activities. And the offshore industry providers will simply migrate to new jurisdictions, who will welcome them with open arms. Do you really think the US and other countries will give up the billions they make from their statuses as a tax haven because the UK cracked down on the BVI?
  
  And not have the Crown Dependencies been let off: they will be made to comply, not least because of EU law
  
  The same EU that sanctions the activities of Switzerland, Lichtenstein, Andorra, Cypress and Malta?
  
  Also, let’s say the UK goes through with this and eliminates all the secrecy across all its jurisdictions. What plans are in place to address the economic ramifications of this move in the OTs and CDs? How much of the UK budget is the government going to spend to offset the massive budgetary cuts those entities will have to implement to make up for the revenue they will lose due to this move? How eager do you think the UK public will be to spend hundreds of millions of pounds on them, in addition to the losses it will generate to the domestic financial services sector due to the move to increased transparency. Meanwhile, there will be no net benefit to society, as the industry will simply set up shop in friendlier jurisdictions – Hong Kong, the US, etc.
  
  Do you think that destroying the economies of the OTs is going to convince other countries that making the move toward more transparency is a great idea, especially when the US has been moving in the exact opposite direction for the past decade?
  
  
  
  
  Richard Murphysays:
  May 2 2018 at 6:37 pm
  I have been asked for years if I ever thought we’d crack a tax haven
  
  And I said yes
  
  And I was right
  
  And then I was told that the funds would flow to the next haven
  
  And I said, that’s OK, because we’ll crack that one next
  
  And do you know what? I’ll be right on that one too
  
  That’s my rather annoying track record on offshore issues