text: Bernie Sanders has warned that the world is rapidly becoming an “international oligarchy” controlled by a tiny number of billionaires, highlighted by the revelations in the Paradise Papers. 
   
   In a statement to the Guardian in the wake of the massive leak of documents exposing the secrets of offshore investors, Sanders said that the enrichment of wealthy individuals and companies in tax havens was “the major issue of our time”. 
   
   He said the Paradise Papers opened the door on a “major problem not just for the US but for governments throughout the world”. 
   
   “The major issue of our time is the rapid movement toward international oligarchy in which a handful of billionaires own and control a significant part of the global economy. The Paradise Papers shows how these billionaires and multinational corporations get richer by hiding their wealth and profits and avoid paying their fair share of taxes,” the US senator from Vermont said. 
   
   Sanders, who came in a close second to Hillary Clinton in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination last year, pointed the finger of blame for the flourishing of offshore holdings on both Congress and the Trump administration. He told the Guardian that Republicans in Congress were responsible for providing “even more tax breaks to profitable corporations like Apple and Nike”. 
   
   The same tax breaks, he said, were being seized upon by super-wealthy members of Trump’s cabinet “who avoid billions in US taxes by shifting American jobs and profits to offshore tax havens. We need to close these loopholes and demand a fair and progressive tax system.” 
   
   Play Video 2:07 What are the Paradise Papers? – video 
   
   Sanders’ intervention in the debate sparked by the Paradise Papers marks the most prominent political response to the leak in their opening 24 hours. The investigation stems from the leak of some 13m files obtained by Süddeutsche Zeitung in Germany and shared with almost 100 news organisations around the world including the Guardian by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. 
   
   One of the most pointed disclosures in the Paradise Papers was that Wilbur Ross, Trump’s commerce secretary, has continued to do business with the son-in-law of the Russian president, Vladimir Putin, as well as a member of Putin’s inner circle who is under US sanctions. Ross, himself a billionaire, has retained since joining the Trump administration his investment in a shipping company, Navigator, that has a partnership with the Russian gas giant Sibur. 
   
   In turn Sibur is part-owned by Kirill Shamalov, the husband of Putin’s daughter. 
   
   Bernie Sanders attacks billionaires and firms exposed by Paradise Papers – live Read more 
   
   The emergence of Ross’s ongoing ties to business interests so close to the Russian president at a time of intense scrutiny of the relationship between the Trump administration and the Kremlin has incensed prominent Democrats involved in Ross’s confirmation to office. Richard Blumenthal, a Democrat who sits on the US Senate commerce committee, accused Ross of deceiving the public as well as lawmakers who had allowed the confirmation to go through having heard Ross promise to divest himself of any interests that carried potential conflict. 
   
   “If he fails to present a clear and compelling explanation, he ought to resign,” Blumenthal told MSNBC in an interview. 
   
   Senator Tammy Baldwin, a Democrat from Wisconsin, said: “In February, I opposed Mr. Ross’ nomination because there were a number of unanswered questions about his ownership stake in the Bank of Cyprus and his connections to Russian President Vladimir Putin, as well as his refusal to divest from a $1 billion co-investment made with the state-owned Chinese Investment Corporation. 
   
   “Despite assurances from the Commerce Department and the White House on the eve of his nomination, these questions remain unanswered over eight months later. These unanswered questions and recent revelations certainly warrant a Commerce Committee hearing and I think an Inspector General investigation is in order. We should get to the bottom of this.” 
   
   On Monday, Ross denied that he had done anything wrong in his handling of his investment in Navigator. In the course of a visit to London, he told UK media that “there is nothing wrong with it. The fact that it happens to be called a Russian company doesn’t mean there is any evil in it.” 
   
   Further responses to the Paradise Papers came from the Democratic leader in the US Senate Chuck Schumer, and the ranking Democratic member of the Senate finance committee, Ron Wyden. In a joint statement they accused Republicans in Congress leading the push towards a reform of the tax code of failing to close egregious loopholes revealed by the leaks. 
   
   As a result Republicans were rewarding, the duo said, “wealthy billionaires like secretary Wilbur Ross for dodging taxes, while punishing many in the middle class with new tax hikes. If you deduct medical expenses or student loan interest from your taxable income, the Republican plan comes after your wallet. But if you stash your billions in secret bank accounts overseas, their plan gives you the green light to keep doing what you’ve been doing.” 
   
   They added that the Paradise Papers were “proof positive that the Republican tax plan favours the wealthy and betrays the middle class in this country, who are the ones left carrying the financial burden of massive corporate tax avoidance”. ||||| Money paid for trainers in shops moves in and out of Europe, to Caribbean and even to entities not officially based anywhere 
   
   Everyone knows Nike. Most people probably own a pair of Nikes. 
   
   It is unquestionably one of the best-known brands in the world, making billions of dollars in profit from global trainer sales. With names such as Swoosh, Flight, Force, Tailwind and Pegasus, every shoe is crafted, and every launch anticipated and heavily marketed. 
   
   This is a company that stays one step ahead of its rivals. And one step ahead of the taxman, too. 
   
   Apple secretly moved parts of empire to Jersey after row over tax affairs Read more 
   
   Thanks to documents in the Paradise Papers, it has been possible to piece together the schemes and structures that have helped Nike over the past decade. It is a story involving grey areas and loopholes, tax havens and zero tax rates, and the movement of money and royalties from one jurisdiction to the next. 
   
   At the end of this journey is a limbo land beyond the reach of tax authorities. For the companies that know how to work the system, this is sensible and legal. For campaigners who insist the system is unfair, it is ridiculous. 
   
   Either way, it means money paid for trainers in cities such as London, Paris, Berlin and Madrid has ended up flowing in and out of Europe, on its way to the Caribbean, or to entities that are in effect stateless. And that is all apparently above board as far as tax authorities are concerned. 
   
   Nike did this with the help of smart lawyers, complex laws and compliant governments. Here, we break down exactly how. 
   
   Nike shoes are made in countries such as Vietnam and Indonesia. From there, they are shipped to the company’s futuristic, fortress-style warehouse in Belgium. The Laakdal “logistics” hub is a sneaker storeroom on a monumental scale. When shops need shoes, they come from here. 
   
   
   
   Facebook Twitter Pinterest Vietnamese workers put the finishing touches on trainers at a Nike factory on the outskirts of Ho Chi Minh City. Photograph: Richard Vogel/AP 
   
   Buy a pair of shoes in, say, London, and one would expect the cash to go to the company’s main British subsidiary, Nike UK Ltd. That would make sense, but that is not what happens. The money from sales of shoes flows out of the UK to the Netherlands. 
   
   
   
   That would make sense, but that is not what happens. The money from sales of shoes flows out of the UK to the Netherlands. The Netherlands is significant. In particular, two companies are at the heart of Nike’s Dutch operations. They pay some tax on the near $8bn (£6bn) of revenue they receive from Nike sales across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. 
   
   
   
   In particular, two companies are at the heart of Nike’s Dutch operations. They pay some tax on the near $8bn (£6bn) of revenue they receive from Nike sales across Europe, the Middle East and Africa. However, from 2005 until 2014, Nike was able to shift vast sums of money out of the Netherlands to Bermuda , which is an offshore tax haven with zero tax. Nike did this through a Bermudan subsidiary, Nike International Ltd, which held the company’s intellectual property rights for its sneaker brands – the crown jewels of the Nike empire. Even though this subsidiary did not appear to have any staff or offices in Bermuda, it charged large trademark royalty fees each year to Nike’s European HQ for selling its trainers. The fees allowed Nike to legally shift profits away from Europe to Nike International Ltd. 
   
   , which is an offshore tax haven with zero tax. Nike did this through a Bermudan subsidiary, Nike International Ltd, which held the company’s intellectual property rights for its sneaker brands – the crown jewels of the Nike empire. Even though this subsidiary did not appear to have any staff or offices in Bermuda, it charged large trademark royalty fees each year to Nike’s European HQ for selling its trainers. The fees allowed Nike to legally shift profits away from Europe to Nike International Ltd. In 2014, Nike had to think again. With the deal from the Netherlands due to expire, the company came up with a new plan, again with the agreement of Dutch authorities. This involved moving the company’s intellectual property from Nike International Ltd in Bermuda to yet another subsidiary, Nike Innovate CV. This entity is not based in Bermuda. It is not actually based anywhere. 
   
   How does it work? It is complex – and controversial. The “CV” model allows Nike Innovate to avoid paying local taxes in the Netherlands. Nike Innovate is not being taxed anywhere else, either. Nike is not the only multinational to use the CV model. Many of the US’s largest multinationals use similar subsidiaries. 
   
   A Nike Zoom trainer. Photograph: Nike 
   
   So, Nike Innovate CV is a treasure indeed. It is seemingly beyond the reach of Dutch tax authorities, and it is out of range for the US taxman, even though Nike is a US-registered company with headquarters in Portland, Oregon. Nike Innovate does not seem to have tax residency anywhere in the world. 
   
   
   
   It is seemingly beyond the reach of Dutch tax authorities, and it is out of range for the US taxman, even though Nike is a US-registered company with headquarters in Portland, Oregon. Nike Innovate does not seem to have tax residency anywhere in the world. The CV model, and the one that preceded it in Bermuda, appear to have helped Nike substantially reduce its global tax rate. In May, Nike’s offshore mountain of accumulated profits was worth more than $12bn. And its global tax rate has fallen from 34.9% in 2007 to 13.2% last year. 
   
   
   
   In May, Nike’s offshore mountain of accumulated profits was worth more than $12bn. And its global tax rate has fallen from 34.9% in 2007 to 13.2% last year. Nike was asked about these arrangements. It said: “Nike fully complies with tax regulations and we rigorously ensure our tax filings are fully aligned with how we run our business, the investments we make and the jobs we create. Nike’s European headquarters has been based in the Netherlands since 1999. It employs more than 2,500 people, who oversee Nike operations in over 75 countries.” 
   
   
   
   It said: “Nike fully complies with tax regulations and we rigorously ensure our tax filings are fully aligned with how we run our business, the investments we make and the jobs we create. Nike’s European headquarters has been based in the Netherlands since 1999. It employs more than 2,500 people, who oversee Nike operations in over 75 countries.” But Nike and other multinationals are under pressure. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development has been trying to shut down the Dutch CV model, known in the trade as as the “reverse hybrid mismatch”. And it will be phased out. Under the EU’s anti-tax-avoidance directive, Nike may have to find a new way of funnelling its money by 2021, or pay more tax than it does at the moment. 
   
   
   
   So far, Nike has stayed one step ahead. The race is on again. ||||| Paradise Papers reveal F1 champion’s advisers set up offshore structure that experts say may be open to legal challenge 
   
   The Formula One world champion, Lewis Hamilton, one of the world’s richest sportspeople, avoided paying European taxes on his private jet using an Isle of Man scheme that is to be investigated by HM Revenue and Customs. 
   
   The big four accountancy firm EY and Appleby, the law firm at the centre of the Paradise Papers leak, helped Hamilton and dozens of other clients set up seemingly artificial leasing businesses through which they rented their own jets from themselves. 
   
   
   
   Two law professors who reviewed the scheme described it as potentially “abusive”, saying it doesn’t appear to follow European rules. “No one seems to be enforcing the laws that exist,” said Rita de la Feria, chair of tax law at the University of Leeds. 
   
   After being challenged by the Guardian, the Isle of Man government has called in the British tax office, which will this month begin a review of 231 tax refunds issued to private jet owners since 2011, in a $1bn VAT giveaway. 
   
   
   
   Hamilton said he had instructed a senior lawyer to check his arrangements and was told they were lawful. He said his practice was to rely on professional advice, and he was not concerned with day-to-day management of his business. 
   
   
   
   Legitimate tax avoidance schemes are not illegal. There is no suggestion Hamilton was directly involved in creating the scheme used for his jet. He sought professional advice and followed it. 
   
   What experts say, however, is that the scheme created appears to be so artificial that it is open to challenge, that it allowed Hamilton to avoid tax that would otherwise have been due, and that the Manx government did not take the proper steps to collect the VAT owed. 
   
   
   
   Hamilton appears to have used shell companies in the British Virgin Islands (BVI), the Isle of Man and Guernsey to avoid the entire £3.3m VAT bill triggered when he imported his £16.5m red Bombardier aircraft into England from Canada in 2013. Hamilton set up another Isle of Man company to purchase a €1.7m motorhome that he uses at racetracks. No VAT appears to have been paid on that purchase either. Hamilton denies using shell companies, and says the Manx entities were part of his businesses. 
   
   The British racing driver, born and raised in Stevenage, takes numerous steps to shelter his £130m fortune. He is contracted to Mercedes, with whom he secured his fourth world championship last month, via a Guernsey company. He holds a Malta company for image rights, and has lived as a tax exile since 2007, first in Switzerland and now in Monaco. 
   
   How Isle of Man gives big refunds to super-rich on private jet imports Read more 
   
   Files leaked from Appleby suggest as much as £1.1m of the VAT he appears to have reclaimed on his jet should have been paid, along with hundreds of thousands due on the continuing costs of flying the jet. 
   
   
   
   The Paradise Papers data was obtained by the German newspaper Süddeutsche Zeitung and shared by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists in Washington with more than 90 media partners including the Guardian, the New York Times and the BBC. 
   
   It shows how Isle of Man customs hosted a private meeting with an EY adviser during which details of the structure were discussed, and agreed to fast-track the paperwork. 
   
   Facebook Twitter Pinterest Hamilton wins the world championship in Mexico, making him the only Briton with four drivers’ championships. Photograph: Mauger/LAT/Rex/Shutterstock 
   
   A fortnight after Hamilton’s advisers approached Appleby, the plane arrived in Europe, landing at Ronaldsway airport in the Isle of Man on 21 January 2013. Turnaround was so rapid that an Appleby officer joked by email that they were “moving forward with the pace of a grand prix!!!”. 
   
   When Hamilton landed in the Isle of Man at 6.40am on a rainy Monday, a customs officer was on out-of-hours standby – for a £60 fee – to stamp and sign the import form. 
   
   Hamilton was not the only passenger. Alongside him in the Challenger 605, painted an unmissable “candy apple” shade with matching red cabin lighting, was his pop star girlfriend, the former Pussycat Dolls singer and X Factor judge Nicole Scherzinger. 
   
   The couple, who have since broken up, had used the jet a few weeks earlier for a Christmas break with family in Oahu, Hawaii, and were returning to Europe. 
   
   Supervising proceedings at Ronaldsway was Brian Johnson, a director at Appleby’s aviation wing. Having masterminded the creation of the Isle of Man’s private aircraft registry in 2007, Johnson moved to the private sector, putting his air industry contacts to commercial use. When asked to confirm his involvement with the import, Johnson declined to comment. 
   
   
   
   His job was to ensure a crucial piece of paperwork was issued by Manx customs: the C88A import form. It shows that taxes have been accounted for. Without this, planes cannot circulate freely in and out of European airports. In countries such as France, they risk being impounded unless the owner can prove they have paid import VAT. 
   
   
   
   At 7.30am, Johnson sent a message from his BlackBerry: “Customs form delivered to aircraft. Clear to go.” 
   
   Meet the Isle of Man jet set: oligarchs, bankers and a murder suspect Read more 
   
   Having spent barely an hour on the tarmac, the plane was ready to leave for Stuttgart, where Hamilton was due to visit the Mercedes racing team he had just joined. 
   
   Shortly afterwards, the public learned Hamilton had joined the private jet set. In the first of many social media posts featuring the plane, which Hamilton christened #redjet on Twitter, he shared a picture of himself reclining in one of the plush leather seats. 
   
   His advisers were relieved that the media had not carried too many awkward details. “I thought the article is OK,” his accountant wrote in an email. “Not too much concentration on the VAT benefits and it mentions the availability for charter, which is helpful.” 
   
   Lewis Hamilton (@LewisHamilton) Landed in Abu Dhabi ✈. Looking forward to the race weekend ahead. #AbuDhabiGP @bombardierjets #redjet #ambassador pic.twitter.com/uNFI9tYoLi 
   
   Flight logs in the Appleby data show no sign that Hamilton’s plane ever returned to the Isle of Man. But it was and continues to be part of a Manx leasing business. 
   
   The business was set up for Hamilton by Appleby with advice from EY, using a formula that was offered to dozens of other super-rich clients. 
   
   How it worked 
   
   The advisers devised the structure and decided the price at which the jet should be leased between the various companies in the chain. Appleby staff set up a Manx company and provided a director, and EY arranged the VAT registration and secured approval for the scheme from customs. This arrangement is not unlawful. 
   
   
   
   The jet was owned by a BVI company called Stealth Aviation Ltd. At a cost of €140,000 a month, it leased the plane to a specially created Isle of Man company, Stealth (IOM) Ltd, incorporated in January 2013. 
   
   Stealth (IOM) leased the plane to a private jet operator in England, at a slightly higher price. This margin allowed the Isle of Man company to turn a profit and therefore claim to be “in business”. 
   
   Based at Farnborough, the jet operator is a genuine business that services and charters private jets. It was paid a fee to look after Hamilton’s plane, provide pilots and crew, and do repairs and maintenance. 
   
   The operator then signed further rental agreements with Hamilton directly, and with his Guernsey-based company BRV Ltd. Each company in the chain added its percentage to the costs. 
   
   The lease payments were flowing out of bank accounts belonging to Hamilton at one end and into bank accounts belonging to him at the other end. The profits made by the Isle of Man company belonged ultimately to its owner and only customer: Hamilton. 
   
   
   
   The data suggests the sole purpose of the leasing business was to allow Hamilton to rent his plane from himself. Invoices show the jet was not leased to anyone else, and there appears to have been no effort to market it to other customers. 
   
   Hamilton’s accountant wrote in an email: “The intention is … to charter the aircraft to third parties, however, it is not clear how much charter (if any) will be achieved – no advanced bookings to date.” 
   
   Creating a genuine leasing business was essential, however, to reclaim VAT at import. VAT is a European tax, applied in similar ways across all member states. The British and Manx governments, which claim to have exactly the same VAT rules and enforce them in the same way, set the rate at 20% of the purchase price of any goods and services sold. 
   
   Like a plumber who acquires a van, jet owners are entitled to reclaim VAT on the purchase and any running costs if they use their aircraft for business purposes. The idea is that those businesses will eventually, like the plumber, generate VAT income for the government by selling things to end consumers. So they get a tax break on the tools they need to carry out their trade. 
   
   EY and Appleby advised clients to demonstrate that their jets were being used for business in two ways: by creating a leasing structure and by using the plane for business travel. However, as with a plumber’s van, if a jet is used for private leisure activities, such as visiting family and friends or going on holiday, VAT must be paid, both on the import and any ongoing costs of flying the jet. 
   
   
   
   Hamilton does not deny that his plane was put to some private use. An article written soon after the purchase described the Challenger as Hamilton’s “£20m love plane”. 
   
   With Scherzinger based in Los Angeles and Hamilton in Monaco, the 500mph (800kph) jet would “ease the strain of his long-distance relationship”, friends were quoted as saying. 
   
   Facebook Twitter Pinterest Hamilton and Nicole Scherzinger, his girlfriend at the time the plane was brought to the Isle of Man. Photograph: Clive Mason/Getty Images 
   
   Charter contracts show Hamilton intended, at the date of import, to lease the jet for 80 hours a year under his own name, and for 160 hours a year using his Guernsey company BRV. If one-third of flights were going to be for personal use, his tax bill should have been £1.1m – one-third of the £3.3m due on the £16.5m purchase price. 
   
   
   
   His arrangement appear to raise the following red flags: 
   
   
   
   He appears to have received a 100% import VAT refund when experts say he should have paid tax in proportion to the amount of private use he intended to make. 
   
   
   
   He should have declared and paid VAT to any European governments whose airports he used for leisure flights. 
   
   
   
   The leasing business set up for his jet appears to be a letterbox company with no real economic purpose, and likely should not have been entitled to reclaim VAT from the Isle of Man. 
   
   Edoardo Traversa, a tax expert and law professor at Louvain University in Belgium, said: “The entire scheme seems abusive to me. Using a leasing scheme as such is not abusive. However, if you take other elements into consideration, such as the absence in motive of setting up those companies, the fact those companies do not seem to have any substance, all that is likely to lead the court to consider that the scheme is abusive.” 
   
   De la Feria, who also reviewed the files, said: “The only reason I can see for setting up these schemes is to hide private use and not pay VAT on it . If there was private use, this is clearcut avoidance.” 
   
   Lawyers for Hamilton said his advisers had made all necessary disclosures to customs and he had never hidden his private use of the jet. They say it was predominantly used for business and the leases reflected the commercial use to which he put the aircraft. They claim there were no tax advantages to using the Isle of Man as opposed to the UK or another EU member state for the import. 
   
   
   
   Both Appleby and EY declined to comment on individual clients and have said that there is nothing unlawful about their advice. 
   
   EY said: “All our advice, whether in planning or compliance, is based on our knowledge of tax law and providing transparency to tax authorities. EY does not offer mass market tax-planning schemes. We support efforts to ensure that tax systems remain robust and relevant to today’s ever-changing business world.” 
   
   When Hamilton flies in and out of Germany, Hungary, France and Britain, making use of taxpayer-funded runways, border agencies and air traffic control centres, much of his income is not being shared with those countries’ governments. 
   
   The papers also reveal details of how Hamilton channels his earnings through tax haven companies in Guernsey, Malta and the BVI. 
   
   In March 2015, data from the Malta companies registry shows he incorporated 44IP, named after his racing number, in that country. Official documents describe the company’s purpose as holding “image rights … trademarks, royalties, copyrights”. Its shares are held by Inday Rose Ltd, the BVI company that also ultimately owns his jet, and BRV. As well as renting the jet, BRV holds Hamilton’s contract with Mercedes, the data suggests. 
   
   The purpose of 44IP appears to be to channel income from sponsorship deals via Malta, which charges foreign shareholders a 5% corporation tax rate. 
   
   The jet is earning money for Hamilton. He has been featured standing next to it in advertising campaigns and regularly shares glossy photos and videos of his prized possession. Alongside valuable sponsorship deals with the cosmetics group L’Oréal and the speaker brand Bose, Hamilton has been paid to promote Bombardier. 
   
   Motorhome 
   
   In 2015, Hamilton’s advisers arranged the import of a €1.7m motorhome into Europe via the Isle of Man. It appears that no VAT was paid at import. The trailer, a contraption that expands at the press of a button to create extra space, manufactured by the German company Schuler, was to be painted a glossy red like his jet. 
   
   Facebook Twitter Pinterest A PR image depicting a Schuler motorhome. Photograph: Schuler 
   
   A Manx company, Stealth Transportation (IOM) Ltd, was incorporated in preparation for the transaction. Hamilton’s lawyers say the entity was not a shell company and his trailer, which includes office and treatment space, is used exclusively for business purposes. 
   
   • This article was amended on 7 November 2017 to correct a picture caption which referred to Hamilton winning the Mexico Grand Prix. Hamilton did not win that Grand Prix but his performance at that event secured him his fourth world championship. 
   
   ||||| Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Paradise Papers: Apple’s secret tax bolthole revealed 
   
   The world's most profitable firm has a secretive new structure that would enable it to continue avoiding billions in taxes, the Paradise Papers show. 
   
   They reveal how Apple sidestepped a 2013 crackdown on its controversial Irish tax practices by actively shopping around for a tax haven. 
   
   It then moved the firm holding most of its untaxed offshore cash, now $252bn, to the Channel Island of Jersey. 
   
   Apple said the new structure had not lowered its taxes. 
   
   It said it remained the world's largest taxpayer, paying about $35bn (£26bn) in corporation tax over the past three years, that it had followed the law and its changes "did not reduce our tax payments in any country". 
   
   In a further statement the company stressed that no operations or investments had been moved from Ireland. 
   
   The Paradise Papers is the name for a huge leak of financial documents that is throwing light on the world of offshore finance. 
   
   Paradise Papers - Tax secrets of the ultra-rich 
   
   Up until 2014, the tech company had been exploiting a loophole in tax laws in the US and the Republic of Ireland known as the "double Irish". 
   
   This allowed Apple to funnel all its sales outside of the Americas - currently about 55% of its revenue - through Irish subsidiaries that were effectively stateless for taxation purposes, and so incurred hardly any tax. 
   
   Instead of paying Irish corporation tax of 12.5%, or the US rate of 35%, Apple's avoidance structure helped it reduce its tax rate on profits outside of the US to the extent that its foreign tax payments rarely amounted to more than 5% of its foreign profits, and in some years dipped below 2%. 
   
   The European Commission calculated the rate of tax for one of Apple's Irish companies for one year had been just 0.005%. 
   
   Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Apple CEO Tim Cook in 2013: "We pay all the taxes we owe. Every single dollar" 
   
   Apple came under pressure in 2013 in the US Senate, when CEO Tim Cook was forced to defend its tax system. 
   
   Angry that the US was missing out on a huge amount of tax, then-Senator Carl Levin told him: "You shifted that golden goose to Ireland. You shifted it to three companies that do not pay taxes in Ireland. These are the crown jewels of Apple Inc. Folks, it's not right." 
   
   Mr Cook responded defiantly: "We pay all the taxes we owe, every single dollar. We do not depend on tax gimmicks... We do not stash money on some Caribbean island." 
   
   Apple's questionnaire 
   
   After the EU announced in 2013 that it was investigating Apple's Irish arrangement, the Irish government decided that firms incorporated there could no longer be stateless for tax purposes. 
   
   Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Panorama's Richard Bilton tries to speak to Appleby about Apple in Jersey 
   
   In order to keep its tax rates low, Apple needed to find an offshore financial centre that would serve as the tax residency for its Irish subsidiaries. 
   
   In March 2014, Apple's legal advisers sent a questionnaire to Appleby, a leading offshore finance law firm and source of much of the Paradise Papers leak. 
   
   It asked what benefits different offshore jurisdictions - the British Virgin Islands, Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Mauritius, the Isle of Man, Jersey and Guernsey - could offer Apple. 
   
   The document asked key questions such as was it possible to "obtain an official assurance of tax exemption" and could it be confirmed that an Irish company might "conduct management activities… without being subject to taxation in your jurisdiction". 
   
   They also asked whether a change of government was likely, what information would be visible to the public and how easy it would be to exit the jurisdiction. 
   
   Source document: Apple questionnaire (extract) 
   
   Leaked emails also make it clear that Apple wanted to keep the move secret. 
   
   One email sent between senior partners at Appleby says: "For those of you who are not aware, Apple [officials] are extremely sensitive concerning publicity. They also expect the work that is being done for them only to be discussed amongst personnel who need to know." 
   
   Apple chose Jersey, a UK Crown dependency that makes its own tax laws and which has a 0% corporate tax rate for foreign companies. 
   
   Paradise Papers documents show Apple's two key Irish subsidiaries, Apple Operations International (AOI), believed to hold most of Apple's massive $252bn overseas cash hoard, and Apple Sales International (ASI), were managed from Appleby's office in Jersey from the start of 2015 until early 2016. 
   
   This would have enabled Apple to continue avoiding billions in tax around the world. 
   
   Apple's 2017 accounts showed they made $44.7bn outside the US and paid just $1.65bn in taxes to foreign governments, a rate of around 3.7%. That is less than a sixth of the average rate of corporation tax in the world. 
   
   Apple and Ireland vs the EU 
   
   In August 2016, after a three-year investigation, the European Commission finds that Ireland gave an illegal tax benefit to Apple. 
   
   The EC says Apple must repay Ireland taxes for the period within its remit of investigation, 2003-2013, a total of €13bn (£11.6bn) plus interest of €1bn. 
   
   Ireland and Apple launch an appeal. 
   
   Apple's Tim Cook calls the EC ruling "total political crap", with "no reason for it in fact or in law". Ireland says the EU is encroaching on sovereign taxation. It fears multinationals will go elsewhere. 
   
   Ireland agrees to collect the €13bn, to be held in a managed escrow account pending the appeal verdict. 
   
   In October 2017, the EU says it will take Ireland to court as it has not yet collected the money. Ireland says it is complicated and it needs time. 
   
   Massive GDP spike 
   
   When the "double-Irish" loophole was shut down, Ireland also created new tax regulations that companies like Apple could take advantage of. 
   
   One of the companies that Apple moved to Jersey, ASI, had rights to some of Apple Inc's hugely valuable intellectual property. 
   
   If ASI sold the intellectual property back to an Irish company, the Irish company would be able to offset the enormous cost against any future profits. And since the IP holder, ASI, was registered in Jersey, the profits of the sale would not be taxed. 
   
   It appears Apple has done just that. There was an extraordinary 26% spike in Ireland's GDP in 2015 which media reports put down to intellectual property assets moving into Ireland. Intangible assets rose a massive €250bn in Ireland that year. 
   
   Ireland's department of finance denied that the new regulations had been brought in to benefit multinationals. 
   
   It said Ireland was "not unique in allowing companies to claim capital allowances on intangible assets" and had followed "the international norm". 
   
   Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption Investigative journalist Richard Brooks on Apple’s questionnaire and the Isle of Man’s response to it 
   
   Apple declined to answer questions about its two subsidiaries moving their tax residency to Jersey. 
   
   It also declined to comment when asked whether one of those companies had helped create a huge tax write-off by selling intellectual property. 
   
   Apple said: "When Ireland changed its tax laws in 2015, we complied by changing the residency of our Irish subsidiaries and we informed Ireland, the European Commission and the United States. 
   
   "The changes we made did not reduce our tax payments in any country. In fact, our payments to Ireland increased significantly and over the last three years we've paid $1.5bn in tax there." 
   
   Find out more about the words and phrases found in the Paradise Papers. 
   
   Your browser does not support this Lookup Your guide to financial jargon Enter your search term 
   
   The papers are a huge batch of leaked documents mostly from offshore law firm Appleby, along with corporate registries in 19 tax jurisdictions, which reveal the financial dealings of politicians, celebrities, corporate giants and business leaders. 
   
   The 13.4 million records were passed to German newspaper Sueddeutsche Zeitung and then shared with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ). Panorama has led research for the BBC as part of a global investigation involving nearly 100 other media organisations, including the Guardian, in 67 countries. The BBC does not know the identity of the source. 
   
   Paradise Papers: Full coverage; follow reaction on Twitter using #ParadisePapers; in the BBC News app, follow the tag "Paradise Papers" 
   
   Watch Panorama on the BBC iPlayer (UK viewers only)
target: – The financial secrets of many of the world's elites are trickling out thanks to the release of what are being called the Paradise Papers. The massive leak of internal documents from Bermuda-based law firm Appleby is spurring headlines like this one: "Lewis Hamilton avoided taxes on £17m jet using Isle of Man scheme." It has also led Bernie Sanders to warn of a "rapid movement toward international oligarchy." In a statement to the Guardian, he says the papers show "how these billionaires and multinational corporations get richer by hiding their wealth and profits and avoid paying their fair share of taxes." Two apparent examples, as revealed by some of the 13.4 million records being examined: Apple: The tech giant has employed a maneuver called the "double Irish" that allows the company to route its non-Americas revenue in a way that incurs very little tax. The EU in 2013 decided to probe this arrangement, and Ireland cracked down: It announced that firms incorporated there wouldn't be allowed to be stateless for tax purposes, as Apple's Irish subsidiaries were. The Paradise Papers leak reveals Apple found its state. Communications between Applelby and Apple show Apple asking about the benefits that might come from various options (think Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, the Isle of Man). It ended up going with Jersey, an island between England and France, reports the BBC, where foreign companies are taxed at a 0% rate. Nike: The Guardian reports the Paradise Papers spell out exactly how Nike has been able to reduce its tax burden, and says the Netherlands is key. From 2005 to 2014, the revenue from sales throughout Europe went there, and much of it then traveled to Bermuda via its Bermudan subsidiary, Nike International Ltd. That subsidiary was pretty much a shell: no office, no staff, but it possessed Nike's intellectual property rights, which let it impose big royalty fees of Nike's European headquarters, which created the funnel that legally allowed profits to move to the Bermuda subsidiary. Then things got even weirder with the creation of the subsidiary Nike Innovate CV which is based ... nowhere. The Guardian explains.