Write an article based on this summary:

– Last month, Emerald White's four pit bulls got into a neighbor's yard and killed that Texas family's 10-year-old beagle. "Everyone was telling me to sue her, but I decided not to because it won't bring Bailey back," says Steve Baker, the beagle's owner. So imagine his surprise when he and his wife, Tiffany, were served with a $1 million lawsuit from White on Wednesday. In the lawsuit, White says that when she went into the Bakers' Texas City yard to get her dogs during the Oct. 27 incident, she was "unexpectedly and viciously attacked" and "seriously injured." She also accuses the Bakers of not keeping their dog in a secure enclosure, the Galveston County Daily News reports. White's dogs got into the Bakers' yard through a hole in the shared fence between their yards. But in an interview earlier this month, Baker told the Daily News that each homeowner is responsible for the fence slats that face his or her home, and that "I had replaced all the slats that were my responsibility. I had even replaced a few of [the neighbors']." Baker also now says that before Bailey was killed he tried to speak with the neighbors about fence repairs but got no response. In a report shortly after the attack, the Bakers' daughter told Click2Houston that their neighbor had repaired the fence after the attack. White's dogs were ultimately declared dangerous by the city; they are now required to be in a secure enclosure with a mechanical locking device.

TEXAS CITY — For 13-year-old Brittany Baker, it’s hard to imagine life without her beagle, Bailey. As far back as Brittany can remember, Bailey had been a beloved member of her family.

 But all of that changed Thursday when four pit bulls escaped from their yard in the 2900 block of Ninth Street North and slipped through a hole in her family’s back fence, attacking and killing the Baker’s 10-year-old dog.

 “Ten is pretty old for beagles,” said Steve Baker, Brittany’s dad. “She was just a little old lady.”

 Brittany had just arrived home from school when she heard the yelping, screaming and barking from her backyard, she said.

 The yelping was coming from Bailey, the screaming from the dogs’ owner and the barking from the four other dogs, she said.

 What she saw when she opened the back door was the four dogs ganging up on Bailey.

 “I saw them chase her and pounce on top of her,” Brittany said. “The woman yelled for me to call 911.”

 The dogs came from the house the Bakers share a fence with, Steve Baker said.

 “They busted through, attacked my dog and shook her like a rag doll and chewed on her until she bled out,” Steve Baker said.

 Within minutes, Texas City police and animal control officers were in the Bakers’ backyard as the pit bull owner hustled to get her four dogs back on her property.

 “They spend about 45 minutes trying to get the dogs,” Steve Baker said.

 The dogs pushed on and loosened slats in the fence.

 Steve Baker said each homeowner is responsible for the slats facing his house, a pattern that alternates about every six feet.

 “I had replaced all the slats that were my responsibility,” Steve Baker said. “I had even replaced a few of his.”

 Although his family has lived at this house for just a few months, Steve Baker said he had spoken with his neighbor before Thursday’s incident. The neighbor said he was going to replace his portion of the fence, he said.

 The Daily News attempted to contact the homeowners but was unsuccessful.

 Texas City police say this is the first time they’ve had issues with these four dogs.

 “We have a city ordinance against dangerous dogs,” Cpl. Randall Johnston said.

 Because the city has that ordinance, police will be seeking a dangerous dog declaration on each of the four dogs, he said.

 None of the four dogs has that declaration.

 The dangerous dog ordinance requires the owners to obtain a secure enclosure that is at least six feet high. The enclosure must be built so the top of the fence can’t be reached by the dogs.

 “It also must have a mechanical locking device,” Johnston said.

 Each of the dogs must be registered annually as a dangerous dog with the city, and the homeowners must post a sign in their yard alerting residents of their dangerous dogs.

 “The owners must also have a $100,000 liability on the dogs,” Johnston said.

 In Texas City, there are actually very few dogs that are registered as dangerous dogs, Johnston said.

 However, at this point, the Bakers think the best outcome of this tragedy will be raising awareness.

 “The damages are really limited,” Steve Baker said. “It’s not like I want to put any real pain on them for this. A dog’s value to a family is priceless — you can’t replace that.”

 The Bakers say they are pleased with how the city and police have responded to their family’s tragedy, but Steve Baker believes there should be more aggressive laws for aggressive animals.

 “The lady in the house tried to prevent this attack with everything she could,” Steve Baker said. “She was trying to break it up, but what it comes down to is she couldn’t control them.”

 Over the summer, League City officials toughened that city's dangerous dog ordinance.

 Under the new rules there, a dog declared dangerous dogs must-have a microchip tag implanted, wear a fluorescent orange collar that identifies the animal as dangerous and up-to-date photos of the animal would be on file with the city’s animal control.

 Any dog declared dangerous also would be held at League City's animal shelter until a court hearing is held to determine the dog’s future.

 League City's ordinance was adopted soon after a two-year-old girl was attacked by a pit bull that belonged to her mother's boyfriend. ||||| VERY SAD STORY TONIGHT FROM TEXAS CITY. THIS FAMILY PET WAS ATTACKED IN ITS NEIGHBORHOOD BY OTHER DOGS. AND WAS KILLED. THE MOST TRAGIC PART, A 13-YEAR-OLD GIRL WHO HAD GROWN UP WITH THIS DOG SAW THE WHOLE THING HAPPEN. SAMANTHA PTASHKIN NOW WITH THE STORY ALL NEW AT 6. Reporter: THIS IS BAILEY, A TEN-YEAR-OLD BEAGLE, A BIG PART OF 13-YEAR-OLD BRITTANY BAKER'S LIFE. I'VE HAD HER SINCE I WAS THREE. SO I DON'T REMEMBER NOT HAVING HER. Reporter: SO IMAGINE DEVASTATION WHEN BRITTANY WENT INTO HER BACKYARD. I SAW TWO PIT BULLS COMING FROM THIS HOLE RUNNING AND MY DOG WAS RUNNING FROM HERE. Reporter: THEN SAW WHAT WAS ONCE HER PRECIOUS PUP LIFELESS ON THE GROUND. IT JUST LOOKED LIKE SHE WASN'T -- SHE DIDN'T HAVE THE LIFE IN HER ANYMORE. Reporter: POLICE SAY FOUR DOGS FROM NEXT DOOR, THREE PIT BULLS AND A MIXED BREED, HAD SLIPPED THROUGH A HOLE IN THE FENCE, THEN ATTACKED BAILEY. IT WAS CHAOTIC. THERE WAS A LOT OF BARKING. Reporter: WHEN ANIMAL CONTROL ARRIVED, THEY EVENTUALLY GOT THE DOGS UNDER CONTROL AND BACK ON THEIR SIDE OF THE FENCE. BUT BY A CITY ORDINANCE, THE DOGS ARE NOW CONSIDERED DANGEROUS, WHICH MEANS THE OWNERS HAVE TO FOLLOW CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS SUCH AS POSTING A SIGN LIKE THIS ON THEIR FENCE. ONE OF THE THINGS IS THE DOG HAS TO REMAIN INSIDE AN ENCLOSURE. THE OWNER OBTAIN $100,000 LIABILITY INSURANCE POLICY. Reporter: BRITTANY DOESN'T HOLD A GRUDGE AGAINST HER NEIGHBORS. SHE SAYS THEY'VE SINCE BOARDED UP THE HOLE IN THE FENCE. ME AND MY MOM HEARD THEM FIXING IT I THINK SATURDAY. Reporter: BUT SHE'S NOW HESITANT TO GO IN HER YARD. A BIT SCARED OF THE DOGS ON THE OTHER SIDE. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO THINK ABOUT IT OR COME OUT HERE. Reporter: SHE KNOWS NOTHING WILL BRING BAILEY BACK. REPORTING FROM TEXAS CITY, SAMANTHA PTASHKIN, KPRC "LOCAL 2". ANIMAL CONTROL TOOK CUSTODY OF TWO OF THE DOGS, BUT THEIR OWNERS HAVE SINCE PICKED THE DOGS UP. THE CITY SAYS THE OWNER NOW HAS 15 DAYS TO APPEAL THE

 TEXAS CITY, Texas -

 Four Texas City dogs are now considered dangerous after police say they attacked and killed a dog next door.

 It happened last week in the 2900 block of Ninth Street North in Texas City.

 Brittany Baker, 13, says she came from school to find four dogs, three pit bulls and a mixed breed, attacking her beagle named Bailey. "It just looked like she didn't have the life in her anymore," Brittany said.

 Police say the dogs got into her backyard through a hole in the fence. "There was barking and it was very chaotic," said Cpl. Randall Johnston of the Texas City Police Department.

 Eventually officers were able to get the dogs out of Brittany's yard, but it was too late for Bailey. "It's weird coming out here," said Brittany about her backyard. Until her interview with Local 2, she said, she had not been in her yard since the attack.

 She said the owner of the dogs next door has since repaired the hole in the fence they share and she does not hold a grudge.

 Texas City has a dangerous dog ordinance, which says a dog is deemed dangerous if: it inflicts severe injury or death to a person, kills a domestic animal without provocation while off the owner's property, or chases or approaches a person on the street in a menacing fashion.

 Johnston says all four dogs have been deemed dangerous under the ordinance.

 Once a dog is deemed dangerous and if its owner decides to keep it, he or she must abide by several regulations. Those include: keeping the dog in an enclosed space, micro-chipping and tagging the dog, posting a sign on his or her premises warning there is a vicious animal on the property and showing the city animal control department a certificate of public liability insurance in the amount of $100,000.

 The owner has 15 days to appeal the decision. Defenses include the following: if the animal was protecting or defending a person, the animal was injured and responding to pain, the animal was protecting her puppies, itself or its kennel mates, or the animal killed was at the time teasing, tormenting, abusing or assaulting the animal. ||||| TEXAS CITY — A woman whose four pit bulls attacked and killed a family’s 10-year-old beagle in October is now suing the deceased dog’s owner for up to $1 million in damages, according to court documents.

 “I couldn’t believe it,” said Steve Baker, Bailey’s owner. “Everyone was telling me to sue her, but I decided not to because it won’t bring Bailey back.”

 Justice had already been served since the tragedy, he said.

 “The police took the action I wanted and declared those dogs dangerous and awareness was raised; so I decided to let it go,” Baker said. “Now they’re suing me for $1 million — I just can’t believe it.”

 Getting served with a lawsuit was a complete shock, he said.

 Baker and his wife were served Wednesday with the lawsuit, filed in the 405th District Court, at their home, the same place where their dog was “shaken like a rag doll” by their neighbor’s four pitbulls Oct. 27.

 According to court documents, Baker’s neighbor and the plaintiff in the case, Emerald White, claims she was “seriously injured” after she was “unexpectedly and viciously attacked” when she entered the Baker’s backyard to retrieve her dogs, which had entered through a hole in the mutual fence separating the two properties.

 Multiple calls made by The Daily News to White’s attorney, Paul LaValle, were not returned Friday.

 Court documents state that White said she suffered “multiple serious bite and scratch-type injuries requiring ongoing medical treatment.” She also alleges feeling “conscious pain and suffering and now suffers also from fear anxiety and trepidation” as a result of the “unprovoked attack.”

 Baker said his dog, Bailey, had been nothing but a loyal companion to his family who had been around his two daughters since they were babies.

 White also alleges in the lawsuit that the Bakers failed to confine and restrict Bailey in a secure enclosure.

 Not long before the incident, Baker had worked to replace parts of the fence to be more secure and safe for his dog and family.

 Baker said that before the incident, he had spoken with his neighbor about repairing his part of the fence, but never had any response.

 Since the incident, White’s four dogs have been declared dangerous dogs by the city of Texas City. The dangerous dog ordinance requires the owners to obtain a secure enclosure that is at least 6 feet high with a mechanical locking device.

 Each of the dogs must be registered with the city annually as a dangerous dog. The owners must post a sign in their yard alerting residents of their dangerous dogs and the owners must also have a $100,000 liability on the dogs, police have said.

 Contact reporter Shannon Daughtry at 409-683-5337 or shannon.daughtry@galvnews.com. |||||


– A jaguar bite to the neck left a three-year-old boy in critical condition—but he's now "stable and ... expected to improve," the Arkansas Children's Hospital says. The boy was visiting a zoo in Little Rock, Ark., when he fell into the jaguar display, USA Today reports. Hearing calls for help, a zookeeper hurried to the spot to see an animal biting the boy's neck, she told police. Now the boy, whose name hasn't been released, is being treated for injuries to his skull and scalp, police say. The wounds aren't life-threatening, hospital staff say, per THV11. "Zoo staff are trained to use fire extinguishers to safely overwhelm potentially dangerous animals if an incident like this were to occur," an officer says. That's what they did "while other zoo staff lowered a ladder into the exhibit," he notes. "A zoo staffer then climbed into the exhibit and retrieved the child, who was conscious and responding." The boy's father also threw things at the animals, and one such throw prompted the biting animal to let the child go, per the police report.

Expand this summary.

Jaguar exhibit at LR Zoo (Photo: THV11) Story Highlights A 3-year-old reportedly fell into jaguar exhibit at LR Zoo.

 One zoo staffer is said to have held the cats back with a fire extinguisher while another got the boy out.

 The boy's condition is unknown at this time.

 LITTLE ROCK, Ark. (KTHV) – THV11 has some good news to share after a 3-year-old fell into the cat exhibit at Little Rock Zoo.

 The Arkansas Children's Hospital released a statement Saturday morning, saying that the child is "stable and is expected to improve."

 On Friday, the 3-year-old child was being treated for extensive scalp lacerations, a depressed skull fracture, and minor puncture wounds. Lt. Sidney Allen with the Little Rock Police Department told THV11 that whether the puncture wounds came from the fall or one of the animals in the exhibit was not known, but doctors did say that the wounds were not life-threatening.

 More details have come out about the incident earlier Friday at the Little Rock Zoo.

 According to the police report, the child fell approximately 15-16 feet into a cat exhibit at the Little Rock Zoo late Friday morning. A primate zoo keeper made the initial call to emergency services after hearing people screaming for help; she told police that she ran over to the exhibit and saw one of the jaguars with its mouth around the little boy's neck.

 LISTEN: 911 call reporting child falling into LR Zoo cat exhibit (http://on.kthv.com/1xzO1Zy)

 The father and grandfather told police that they both saw the child's feet go over the railing out of their peripheral vision, according to the report. The father ran to get help and returned to throw items at the cats to keep them at bay—one ran off and didn't return while other circled back and reportedly bit the child on the back of the neck. The report indicated that the father threw something else at the cat and got it to release.

 Shortly afterward, more zoo workers arrived. The report shows that one worker arrived with a fire extinguisher to keep the animals away while another climbed into the exhibit with a ladder to get the child out. According to Captain Weaver with the Little Rock Fire Department, the little boy was reportedly out of the enclosure by the time the fire department arrived.

 John Swanson with MEMS said an ambulance was posted in the zoo area, so they were able to respond to the scene in two minutes and transport the child to the hospital in three minutes.

 Like this topic? You may also like these photo galleries: Replay

 Autoplay Show Thumbnails Show Captions Last SlideNext Slide

 "Yesterday a child was transported to Arkansas Children's Hospital for treatment of injuries sustained in a fall at the Little Rock Zoo. The child's condition has been upgraded to stable and is expected to improve," said director of communications for Arkansas Children's Hospital Dan McFadden. "We respect the wishes of the child's guardian who asked that the child's name and any additional information not be shared at this time. Thank you for respecting the privacy of this family."

 Children's Hospital asked THV not to come to the hospital after the zoo incident. We are respecting that request for both them %26 the family. — Shayla Teater (@thvshayla) October 10, 2014

 Little Rock Zoo spokesperson Susan Altrui released this complete statement from the City of Little Rock that stated:

 A child fell into the jaguar exhibit at the Little Rock Zoo and has sustained injuries. At around 10:45 a.m. Zoo staff arrived at the jaguar exhibit and found that a toddler had fallen into the enclosure. Zoo staff responding at the jaguar exhibit immediately called for help over the radio and were assisted by other staff with a fire extinguisher to keep the cats away from the child. Zoo staff are trained to use fire extinguishers to safely overwhelm potentially dangerous animals if an incident like this were to occur. Zoo staff were able to successfully keep the cats back while other Zoo staff lowered a ladder into the exhibit. A Zoo staffer then climbed into the exhibit and retrieved the child who was conscious and responding. The child was then handed to the child's father and both were taken by golf cart to the Zoo's back gate entrance where the child was placed in an ambulance and taken to a nearby hospital.

 City manager Bruce Moore said, "Our thoughts and prayers are with the child and the family. The safety of our citizens is of paramount value and our staff followed training procedures on rescuing the child and were able to respond quickly and efficiently and work with emergency personnel. A full investigation into the incident is being conducted."

 The Little Rock Zoo was renewed for accreditation with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA). Accreditation is granted every five years by AZA. According to the zoo, they were accredited in 2001, 2006, and tabled for accreditation in 2011 over financial stability of the zoo.

 Rob Vernon with the AZA said the Little Rock Zoo was last accredited and inspected in the summer of 2012 for five more years. He said inspection details are confidential. AZA inspects zoos twice a year.

 Tanya Espinosa with the USDA told THV 11 they conduct inspections of the zoo twice a year as well and since October 2013 they haven't found any violations.

 The Little Rock Zoo remained open Friday.

 Read or Share this story: http://on.kthv.com/1vX8Tuz ||||| Skip Ad Ad Loading... x Embed x Share A three-year-old is being treated for non life-threatening injuries after falling into a jaguar enclosure at the Little Rock Zoo. VPC

 The jaguar exhibit at Little Rock Zoo in Arkansas after a 3-year-old fell Oct. 10, 2014, into the enclosure. (Photo: KTHV-TV, Little Rock, Ark.)

 LITTLE ROCK, Ark. — A 3-year-old is in critical condition Friday after falling about 15 feet into the jaguar exhibit at the Little Rock Zoo, zoo officials said.

 The incident happened at about 10:45 a.m. CT, and zoo staff who responded to calls for help kept the cats away from the boy with a fire extinguisher, zoo spokeswoman Susan Altrui said.

 But a zookeeper in the primate area who made the initial call to emergency services told police that she ran over to the exhibit after hearing people screaming for help and saw one of the jaguars with its mouth around the boy's neck, according to the police report.

 The toddler is being treated for extensive scalp lacerations, a skull fracture and minor puncture wounds, said Lt. Sidney Allen of the Little Rock Police Department. It is unclear whether the puncture wounds came as a result of the fall or a bite.

 Doctors at Arkansas Children's Hospital said the wounds are not life threatening.

 "Zoo staff are trained to use fire extinguishers to safely overwhelm potentially dangerous animals if an incident like this were to occur," Altrui said in a statement. "Zoo staff were able to successfully keep the cats back while other zoo staff lowered a ladder into the exhibit. A zoo staffer then climbed into the exhibit and retrieved the child who was conscious and responding."

 The child, who is not being identified at the family's request, was handed back to his father, and both were taken by golf cart to the zoo's back gate where an ambulance was waiting, Altrui said.

 The father and grandfather told police that they both saw the child's feet go over the railing out of their peripheral vision, according to the police report. The father ran to get help and returned to throw items at the cats to keep them at bay.

 One jaguar ran off and didn't return while other circled back and reportedly bit the child on the back of the neck, the police report said. The report also indicated that the father threw something else at the cat and that made the animal release the boy.

 An ambulance already was posted in the zoo area, said John Swanson of Metropolitan Emergency Medical Services. So crews were able to respond to the scene in 2 minutes and transport the child to the hospital in 3 minutes.

 "The safety of our citizens is of paramount value," City Manager Bruce Moore said. "And our staff followed training procedures on rescuing the child and were able to respond quickly and efficiently and work with emergency personnel."

 The Little Rock Zoo is accredited through 2016 with the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, according to a list on the organization's website.

 The zoo was accredited in 2001 and 2006 but its application was tabled in 2011 because of the zoo's finances. Rob Vernon of the association, which has 229 accredited zoos and aquariums as members, said the zoo was inspected and accredited again in 2012.

 The U.S. Department of Agriculture inspects zoos twice a year and haven't found any violations since October 2013, spokeswoman Tanya Espinoza said.

 An investigation into the incident is being conducted, Moore said.

 Contributing: Shayla Teater, KTHV-TV, Little Rock

 Read or Share this story: http://usat.ly/1xzrlJ1 |||||


Write a summary based on this article:

Photo by Getty Images / RB modified by author

 Elvis has officially left the building. Well, Elvis Juice has, anyway. Earlier this week,

 ever-iconoclastic craft brewers BrewDog lost their legal fight against Elvis Presley's estate, all over a beer that they'd named after the King.

 In 2015, the Scottish brewers launched a grapefruit-infused IPA that they named 'Elvis Juice,' and it quickly became a top seller. (It's not clear how the beer got its name; late-period Elvis wasn't testing the seams of his jumpsuits because he enjoyed a citrus-heavy diet, but whatever). Shortly after its release, attorneys for the Elvis Presley estate sent BrewDog a copyright infringement notice over the use of the name Elvis.

 BrewDog co-founders James Watt and Martin Dickie responded by legally changing their names to Elvis to show that Presley wasn't the only Elvis out there. ("We would like to recommend that Presley's Estate diverts its attention to another potential source of quick remuneration: a brewery that calls itself 'The King' of beer," Dickie said at the time.) Weirdly enough, that tactic didn't work.

 READ MORE: Why These Craft Brewers Legally Changed Their Names to Elvis

 The Presley Estate balked at BrewDog's attempts to register 'Elvis' and 'Elvis Juice' as trademarks in the United Kingdom and, after a hearing, the Intellectual Property Office agreed.

 "Put simply, and notwithstanding that Mr Presley died nearly 40 years ago, he was/is such an iconic figure, that I would be very surprised if many people, including those at the younger end of the average consumer age spectrum, had not heard of him," hearing officer Oliver Morris said in a statement. "On the basis that Elvis is a relatively uncommon name, and given that Mr Presley is the most famous of Elvises, I consider that most average consumers, on seeing the name Elvis alone, are likely to conceptualise that on the basis of Elvis Presley."

 BrewDog now owes the estate £1,500 ($1,934) in court costs and will either have to change the beer's name or ask if the Presley estate will grant them "official permission" to use it. (Fat chance there, fellas.)

 It seems like BrewDog would understand the value of protecting its trademarks, since it has threatened lawsuits over some of its own branding. BrewDog owns the trademark for the word 'punk' in relation to beer, as it makes a Punk IPA, and has a longstanding crowdfunding campaign called "Equity for Punks." In March, when a music promoter in Leeds, England announced plans to open a pub called Daft Punk, BrewDog's own attorney sent a strongly worded letter discouraging him from doing so.

 "Our client is very concerned that provision of food and drink services under the mark Draft Punk would give rise to a likelihood of confusion in the marketplace, including a likelihood of association with our client's earlier mark Punk," BrewDog's attorney wrote, according to The Guardian. (The plan for the bar was eventually scrapped.)

 That same week, BrewDog's attorney challenged a brother and sister in Birmingham, England who wanted to name their own newly opened pub Lone Wolf, because BrewDog launched a range of spirits called Lone Wolf. Watt eventually spoke out, calling the dispute the result of "trigger happy" attorneys, but the pub renamed itself The Wolf anyway.

 So maybe BrewDog understands what Team Elvis is trying to do. MUNCHIES has reached out to BrewDog for comment on the matter but has not yet received a response. ||||| Get daily updates directly to your inbox + Subscribe Thank you for subscribing! Could not subscribe, try again later Invalid Email

 Scottish brewers BrewDog have lost a legal battle with the estate of Elvis Presley over the name of one of their beers.

 The firm launched their grapefruit and blood orange Elvis Juice IPA in 2015 and they say it has become one of the company’s best-selling products.

 However, they were contacted by lawyers from The King’s estate who demanded they change the name. In response, James Watt and Martin Dickie, founders of BrewDog, changed their names by deed poll to Elvis in a bid to prove the name was not exclusive.

 Elvis, who died in 1977, had his name and likeness trademarked by Elvis Presley Enterprises, who earn millions of dollars through a licensing programme that grants the right to manufacture and sell Elvis merchandise worldwide.

 They objected after BrewDog applied to register “Elvis Juice” and “Brewdog Elvis Juice” as trademarks.

 The Elvis estate said people could mistakenly believe the beer was endorsed by them.

 (Image: Getty)

 Now the UK Intellectual Property Office have found in favour of the Elvis estate after a hearing. Trademark hearing officer Oliver Morris ruled: “I consider most average consumers, on seeing the name Elvis alone, are likely to conceptualise that on the basis of Elvis Presley.”

 BrewDog, who are based in Ellon, Aberdeenshire, have been ordered to pay the Elvis estate’s £1500 costs in the case. |||||

– A Scottish brewer has lost its battle to give a bestselling beer the same first name as one of the most popular musicians in history. Last week, the UK Intellectual Property Office ruled that BrewDog must change the name of its grapefruit-infused Elvis Juice IPA after attorneys for Elvis Presley Enterprises objected to the brewer applying to register "Elvis Juice" and "Brewdog Elvis Juice" as trademarks, the Daily Record reports. The Scottish brewers launched the IPA in 2015 and it quickly became a bestseller. Not long after, however, attorneys for the Presley estate sent them a copyright infringement notice. In response, BrewDog co-founders James Watt and Martin Dickie legally changed their first names to "Elvis" in October 2016. "There isn't just one single person in the world called Elvis, so we added two more to make a point," Watt told Munchies at the time. Despite those efforts, hearing officer Oliver Morris ruled last week against the brewers, saying, "On the basis that Elvis is a relatively uncommon name, and given that Mr. Presley is the most famous of Elvises, I consider that most average consumers, on seeing the name Elvis alone, are likely to conceptualize that on the basis of Elvis Presley." In addition to losing the name of one of its most popular products, BrewDog must also pay the Presley estate $1,934 in court costs. (Read: Priscilla Presley on why she left Elvis.)


Write an article based on this summary:

– 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.

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) |||||


Image copyright Reuters Image caption A North Korean soldier on the bank of the Yalu River (2014)

 A former soldier says life as a woman in the world's fourth-largest army was so tough that most soon stopped menstruating. And rape, she says, was a fact of life for many of those she served with.

 For almost 10 years Lee So Yeon slept on the bottom bunk bed, in a room she shared with more than two dozen women. Every woman was given a small set of drawers in which to store their uniforms. On top of those drawers each kept two framed photographs. One was of North Korea's founder Kim Il-sung. The second was of his now deceased heir, Kim Jong-il.

 It was more than a decade ago that she left, but she retains vivid memories of the smell of the concrete barracks.

 "We sweat quite a bit.

 "The mattress we sleep on, it's made of the rice hull. So all the body odour seeps into the mattress. It's not made of cotton. Because it's rice hull, all the odour from sweat and other smells are there. It's not pleasant."

 One of the reasons for this was the state of the washing facilities.

 "As a woman, one of the toughest things is that we can't shower properly," says Lee So Yeon.

 "Because there is no hot water. They connect a hose to the mountain stream and have water directly from the hose.

 "We would get frogs and snakes through the hose."

 Image copyright Shutterstock

 The daughter of a university professor, So Yeon, now 41, grew up in the north of the country. Many male members of her family had been soldiers, and when famine devastated the country in the 1990s she volunteered - motivated by the thought of a guaranteed meal each day. Thousands of other young women did the same.

 "The famine resulted in a particularly vulnerable time for women in North Korea," says Jieun Baek, author of North Korea's Hidden Revolution. "More women had to enter the labour force and more were subject to mistreatment, particularly harassment and sexual violence."

 Trusting defectors

 Juliette Morillot and Jieun Baek say Lee So Yeon's testimony accords with other accounts they have heard, but warn that defectors have to be treated with caution.

 "There is such a high demand for knowledge from North Korea," says Baek. "It almost incentivises people to tell exaggerated tales to the media, especially if that comes with nice pay cheque. A lot of defectors who don't want to be in the media are very critical of 'career defectors'. It's worth keeping this in mind."

 Information from official North Korean sources, on the other hand, is liable to be pure propaganda.

 Lee So Yeon was not paid for her interview with the BBC.

 To begin with, buoyed by a sense of patriotism and collective endeavour, the 17-year-old Lee So Yeon enjoyed her life in the army. She was impressed with her allocated hairdryer, although infrequent electricity meant she had little use for it.

 Daily routines for men and women were roughly the same. Women tended to have slightly shorter physical training regimes - but they were also required to perform daily chores such as cleaning, and cooking that male soldiers were exempted from.

 "North Korea is a traditional male-dominated society and traditional gender roles remain," says Juliette Morillot, author of North Korea in 100 questions, published in French. "Women are still seen ttukong unjeongsu, which literally translates as 'cooking pot lid drivers', and means that they should 'stay in the kitchen where they belong'."

 Media playback is unsupported on your device Media caption The hardships of life as a female soldier in the North Korean army, as recalled by recruit Lee So Yeon

 The hard training and dwindling food rations took their toll on the bodies of Lee So Yeon and her fellow recruits.

 "After six months to a year of service, we wouldn't menstruate any more because of malnutrition and the stressful environment," she says.

 "The female soldiers were saying that they are glad that they are not having periods. They were saying that they were glad because the situation is so bad if they were having periods too that would have been worse."

 Who defects?

 Roughly 70% of North Korean defectors are female - a fact some link to higher levels of unemployment among women

 More than half are in their 20s or 30s, in part because it is easier for younger people to swim rivers and weather an arduous journey

 So Yeon says that the army failed to make provision for menstruation, during her time in the military, and that she and other female colleagues often had no choice but to reuse sanitary pads.

 "Women to this day still use the traditional white cotton pads," says Juliette Morillot. "They have to be washed every night when out of men's sight, so women get up early and wash them."

 And having just returned from a field visit where she spoke to several female soldiers, Morillot confirms that they often do miss their periods.

 "One of the girls I spoke with, who was 20, told me she trained so much that she had skipped her periods for two years," she says.

 Image copyright Sipa Press/REX/Shutterstock

 Though Lee So Yeon joined the army voluntarily, in 2015 it was announced that all women in North Korea must do seven years' military service from the age of 18.

 At the same time North Korea's government took the unusual step of saying it would distribute a premium female sanitary brand called Daedong in most female units.

 "This may have been a way to atone for conditions of the past," says Jieun Baek. "That statement may have been to overcorrect for this well-known phenomenon that conditions for women used to be bad. It may have been a way to boost morale and get more women to think, 'Wow, we will be taken care of.'"

 A premium cosmetic brand Pyongyang Products was also recently distributed to several female aviation units, following a call by Kim Jong-un in 2016 for North Korean beauty products to compete with global brands like Lancome, Chanel and Christian Dior.

 Despite this, female soldiers stationed in the countryside don't always have access to private toilets, with some telling Morillot they often have to relieve themselves in front of men, making them feel especially vulnerable.

 Military service in North Korea

 North Korean women must serve a minimum of seven years in the military, and men are required to serve 10 - this is the longest mandatory service in the world

 It's estimated that about 40% of women aged between 18 and 25 are in uniform - a number that is expected to grow, as military service became compulsory for women only two years ago

 The government says about 15% of the country's budget is spent on the military, but think tanks say the figure could be up to 40%

 Gifted students with special skills - for example in sports and music - may be excused military service

 Sexual harassment, say both Baek and Morillot, is rife.

 Morillot says that when she broached the subject of rape in the army with serving female soldiers, "most women said it happens to others". None said they had experienced it personally.

 Lee So Yeon also says that she was not raped during her time in the army between 1992 and 2001, but that many of her comrades were.

 "The company commander would stay in his room at the unit after hours and rape the female soldiers under his command. This would happen over and over without an end."

 North Korea's military says that it takes sexual abuse seriously, with a jail sentence of up to seven years for men found guilty of rape.

 "But most of the time nobody is willing to testify. So men often go unpunished," says Juliette Morillot.

 Image copyright Reuters

 She adds that silence about sexual abuse in the army is rooted in the "patriarchal attitudes of North Korean society" - the same attitudes that ensure that women in the army do most of the chores.

 Women from poor backgrounds recruited into construction brigades, and housed in informal small barracks or huts, are especially insecure, she says.

 "Domestic violence is still widely accepted, and not reported, so it is the same in the army. But I should really stress the fact that you have the same kind of culture (of harassment) in the South Korean army."

 Lee So Yeon, who served as a sergeant in a signals unit close to the South Korean border, finally left the army at the age of 28. She was relieved to have the chance to spend more time with her family, but also felt she wasn't equipped for life outside the military and struggled financially.

 It was in 2008 that she decided to escape to South Korea.

 At the first attempt she was caught at the border with China and sent to a prison camp for a year.

 On her second attempt, shortly after leaving prison, she swam the Tumen river and crossed into China. There, at the border, she had a rendezvous with a broker, who arranged for her to move through China to South Korea.

 Listen to BBC Outlook A Woman Inside North Korea's Army ||||| NATIONAL

 (연합)

 Female soldiers in North Korea are subjected to rape and severe human rights violations while authorities turn a blind eye, a North Korean defector revealed.New Korea Women’s Union representative Lee So-yeon, 41, recently held a conference in Seoul for the event of International Women’s Day and testified to the appalling women’s rights in the North, saying that sexual abuse is endemic and “there is no concept of dignity for women.”Lee, a former soldier of the North Korean regime, said in the conference that raping low-ranking female soldiers is a frequent occurrence in the North Korean military.“Out of 120 soldiers in my unit, there were only 20 men, but they were all high-ranking officers. I was in the 1st squad, but a couple of squad leaders in the 2nd squad raped every single one of the low-ranking female soldiers,” Lee testified.Others attending the event also testified to the appalling state of women‘s rights in the North.Especially due to the dire economic situation, more and more North Korea women are slipping through the Chinese border for work, with also more being caught and facing severe consequences.Once captured in the North, the women are sent to prison camps, where sexual assault and rape are believed to be widespread. And for those who return pregnant, forced abortions have become state policy.“The Chinese consider them to be illegal immigrants and repatriate them to North Korea where they are imprisoned for having crossed the border without the permission of the authorities,” David Hawk, author of “The Hidden Gulag” (2012) told the United Press International in 2015.“That‘s a nonpolitical offense that’s being criminalized. Thousands of women are in penitentiaries for crossing into China,” Hawk said.One defector, Kim Eun-mi, who worked as a railway attendant, said in the conference, “women crew members often fell victim to sexual assault and rape, which was common in trains carrying soldiers, especially in the evening when lights were turned off.”Kim also mentioned that she worked under a squalid condition where female crew had to “reuse sanitary pads that were already solidified (with blood).”Choi Su-hyang, a former nurse in the North Korean Army, left the country for the South in 2014. She pointed out that 30 to 40 percent of the North‘s military personnel are women, who are often raped and assaulted by superior officers.Adding to the sexual assault, she added, most military soldiers, both males and females, suffer from malnutrition, and are at high risk of contracting diseases like hepatitis and tuberculosis.The women’s human rights group on that day lashed out at the North Korean regime, saying the abnormal state should stop infringing on women’s rights.By Bak Se-hwan (sh@heraldcorp.com) |||||

Write a summary.

– Lee So Yeon volunteered to join the North Korea army in 1992, lured in part, she says, by the promise of a daily meal. While cautioning that stories of defectors like Lee have to be taken with a grain of salt, the BBC presents an interview with the now 41-year-old about a military experience that she describes as brutal on the body. Lee says she was 17 when she enlisted, and she was initially energized by the experience. That quickly gave way. "After six months to a year of service, we wouldn't menstruate anymore because of malnutrition and the stressful environment," she says. The training was tough—essentially equivalent to what the men underwent, just slightly shorter—and they had to do domestic chores that the men didn't. Conditions were far from comfortable, she says: The women slept on mattresses made of rice hull that soaked up their body odor as they slept and sweated, making for an unpleasant smell. Showers were icy cold and compliments of a hose that pulled water from a mountain stream: "We would get frogs and snakes through the hose." She says rape was common (a statement she gave more detail about in this 2016 interview with the Korea Herald), though it's not something she experienced, and that access to sanitary pads for those who needed them was extremely limited. Lee got out in 2001 and successfully fled to South Korea about eight years later. The BBC notes that military service became compulsory for women in 2015; they must now serve from ages 18 to 25. (The most recent defector has regained consciousness in the hospital.)