UK's Scientology's Tax Evasion and Money Laundering

[RogerB]

Fellas,

I forgot this point.

What is registered in the UK might be the S.A. entity registered as a foreign "corporation" to do business in the UK.

This sort of scenario is quite common.

Thus you in fact have the same entity registered to do business in two jurisdictions and so doing business. The trick and benefit of this to the COS in light of the avoidance of the Wollersheim settlement would be that the UK assets taken over by the Ozzie domiciled entity could be "moved" or otherwise not attached if the existence of the Ozzie charitable entity was unknown to the Wollersheim attorneys and is not included as a party to the judgment in favor of Wollersheim.

Foreign business entities registered to do business in a different jurisdiction is quite common. Indeed, when I set up "Ability Consultants, Inc" it was originally a Delaware Corp., then registered as a foreign (alien) corp to do business in the State of New York.

The key to this is to read the registration dox at Companies House and see what they say . . . . it will reveal the domicile of "incorporation" . . . such dox actually state where the business entity is incorporated and the fact that it is a foreign corp registered to do business in the jurisdiction (whose registration one is viewing the dox of) when this is the case.

Rog

[Dulloldfart]

I just checked Companies House online. COSRECI's company number is FC009154. I don't know if this link will work, but it's real easy to find yourself: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/0f...18/compdetails. Just Google Companies House.

It was registered 25/3/77, country of origin Australia. There are other details but I don't know how significant they are.

Paul

[RogerB]

I just checked Companies House online. COSRECI's company number is FC009154. I don't know if this link will work, but it's real easy to find yourself: http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/0f...18/compdetails. Just Google Companies House.

It was registered 25/3/77, country of origin Australia. There are other details but I don't know how significant they are.

Paul

OK, Paul. YOu have solved it. It's this line in red above: "It was registered 25/3/77, country of origin Australia."

What we have is a foreign corporation registered to do business in the UK . . . so, it's the S.A. COSRECI doing its thing in Egland.

The "Company #" beginning with "FC" designates "Foreign Corporation" from memory.

I'm headed off to the dentist now, so will have a crack at it later . . . but we really have the info we need to solve the riddle already.

Rog

[RogerB]

OK. I went to the link. It is the South Australian company registered to do business in the UK.

Judy Tampion, giving her address as St. Hill Manor was the "Presenter" of the application and the "place of business is given as 68 Tottenham Court Rd., (the London Org at the time).

I have a PDF of the entire registration if you guys are interested or in need of it. This info includes specifics of the corporate charter (by laws, constitution etc.) of the S.A. outfit as transferred for operation in the UK.

The document makes interesting reading as it gives who the members of the "college" are . . . and they are all churches or orgs in other locations (states of Oz and other countries) . . . this thing has been set up as an umbrella op.

"Student Members" do not have a vote in the affairs of the "College," only full members do (the member orgs).

The doc also provides that the "college" can from time to time demand from its "members" (the other orgs) payments and other monetary contributions as it sees fit . . . . etc

For those interested, it can be interesting reading.

This same charter is what Mate will find in Sth. Aust.

I can send this as an email attachment if anyone PMs me with or otherwise gives me a direct email address.

Rog

[Dulloldfart]

Hey Rog,

Great. Can you upload the pdf as an attachment here? Is it smaller than 975KB?

Paul

[RogerB]

Hey Rog,

Great. Can you upload the pdf as an attachment here? Is it smaller than 975KB?

Paul

It's 835 KB. Now you are testing my techie credentials to the limit and beyond

So it is possible to "attach" a PDF to this thread on ESMB . . . I'll have to look into how that's done . . . bear with me while I risk fusing my poor old brain trying to learn how that might be done

Rog

[RogerB]

Well, Paulie, I did the logical, and I think we might have it attached . . . let's see!


Edit added below:
Available also on line are the Annual Accounts (as presented to the government) which are an annual requirement for such a op as this (private partnerships and unincorporated businesses did not have to file such accounts when I was in the UK).

These accounts would of course be a smoke screen of what and how the actual monies are transferred etc., though they might give a clue of a string to be pulled by someone with investigative powers . . . . be nice to have subpoena powers and be able to do a full forensic accounting analysis of all actual banking and monetary transfers!

R

[Dulloldfart]

Thanks Rog. I read through it as best I could. I don't feel like transcribing it, but we know they aren't going to be following that constitution rigidly. In fact, they will hardly be following it at all, except by coincidence.

For example, they are supposed to be engaged in activities that further both the doctrine of Scientology (arguably they actually do do that), and the CREED of Scientology, which they most definitely do not. We often see mention on ESMB and elsewhere of how the CofS doesn't follow their own creed. Well, COSRECI are actually legally obliged to do so as it is a basic part of their constitution.

All the legal wording about annual general meetings and members can do this and so forth is just flim-flam, as Larry Brennan has covered so well in his write-ups on how corporate Scientology operates. The bare minimum paperwork will be filed to present the appearance of compliance, but we all know it's bullshit. The "members" are CofS entities like the Church of Scientology of Sweden. You think a representative from each goes to Australia every year for the AGM and "votes" on stuff? The set-up is more fake than even Diebold voting machines.

Note about halfway through the document is a point about not engaging in trade. Hah! Section 3H: "To ensure that the College does not engage in any activity which is susceptible of being construed as trade activity in Australia or in any other territory in which the College may from time to time have any form of direct or indirect presence."

It would be nice if someone who could type faster than me transcribed this. It is REALLY easy to see that they violate pretty much every single point of their constitution. Documenting it would be harder, and getting the authorities to do something about it harder still, but it is another line of attack for those interested.

Paul

[The Clam]

Its all just a conspiracy theory.

[RogerB]

Thanks Rog. I read through it as best I could. I don't feel like transcribing it, but we know they aren't going to be following that constitution rigidly. In fact, they will hardly be following it at all, except by coincidence.

For example, they are supposed to be engaged in activities that further both the doctrine of Scientology (arguably they actually do do that), and the CREED of Scientology, which they most definitely do not. We often see mention on ESMB and elsewhere of how the CofS doesn't follow their own creed. Well, COSRECI are actually legally obliged to do so as it is a basic part of their constitution.

All the legal wording about annual general meetings and members can do this and so forth is just flim-flam, as Larry Brennan has covered so well in his write-ups on how corporate Scientology operates. The bare minimum paperwork will be filed to present the appearance of compliance, but we all know it's bullshit. The "members" are CofS entities like the Church of Scientology of Sweden. You think a representative from each goes to Australia every year for the AGM and "votes" on stuff? The set-up is more fake than even Diebold voting machines.

Note about halfway through the document is a point about not engaging in trade. Hah! Section 3H: "To ensure that the College does not engage in any activity which is susceptible of being construed as trade activity in Australia or in any other territory in which the College may from time to time have any form of direct or indirect presence."

It would be nice if someone who could type faster than me transcribed this. It is REALLY easy to see that they violate pretty much every single point of their constitution. Documenting it would be harder, and getting the authorities to do something about it harder still, but it is another line of attack for those interested.

Paul

Yes, I am in accord with you here. Though you know, there may be grounds in some legal jurisdictions for civil suit to remove the officers for violation of the charter et al, and for Court Order to enforce the Org compliance with its Charter. Fact is, this document is a petard by which the baddies could be hoisted But . . . . . ??? then what? Do we really feel the org has a tech that does all of what it promises? Nope, not me. Though it would be good to have them restrained from criminal conduct.

It's a line of thought for pondering. Wouldst I would win the mega Lotto

Rog