On this issue yet crucial there is much to do

What balance pull you from the first series of reviews of the Forum of the OECD on global tax transparency

A reasonably positive balance. The new system of "peer review" of the implementation by the members of the standards Forum international-OECD on transparency and exchange of information in the tax field is in place and works. It was a strong requirement of the G20 in London. It is satisfied. The system is robust and demanding, with ten specific evaluation criteria. A first phase deals with the tax regulations of the reviewed countries; a second on the effectiveness of the exchange of information between tax services. Thirty countries are under evaluation, 8 review reports are to be adopted by the Forum.

In the evaluation group that you preside, there are offshore places...

This will represent a wide variety of points of view. For all the countries and jurisdictions present at the Forum, fiscal sovereignty is a hard core of political sovereignty and they are very sensitive to the principle of fairness and equality of the assessment. It cannot be partial or superficial in our reports, it would be our credibility. This is why all of the countries that make up the Forum dedicated to fiscal transparency will undergo an initial evaluation in the next three years, or about 40 per year.

Control of tax havens is still as much news

Our strength is above all the will of the big countries to put an end to the opacity of the international financial circuits, which undermines confidence in the system well proven by the crisis. Across the country have taken a sustainable awareness that tax evasion and fraud undermine the revenues which are essential for the reduction of deficits. This theme is the case for all, including developing countries, that tax fraud deprives legitimate resources. The rest of full topical subject, as evidenced its continued inclusion in the agenda of the G20 or fiscal and financial measures, the most coordinated, taken a year against non-cooperative jurisdictions.

What bank secrecy

The fight against bank secrecy made very significant progress since the G20 in London. Number of internal laws of financial centers were amended to allow the lifting of banking secrecy for the benefit of the tax authorities of applicants countries. Others are announced from 2011. More in over countries undertake to waive raise the argument of the "domestic interest" to prevent access to banking information requested by a third country. The age Bush, marked by a general regression of fiscal transparency, is behind us.

Have you made progress on trusts

Non. On this issue, yet crucial, there is much to do. The objective to clearly identify the parties involved in the trusts, and including the beneficial owner of its assets, is not yet reached. The material is of the most complex. The circuits of the fraud and tax evasion as dirty money receive a proper international division of labour between places attractive taxation and/or opaque regulatory. I would support the proposal of several NGOs to establish national trusts, harmonised, comprehensive and updated records to update.

Is there an identity of views in the Forum

Unfortunately, between Anglo-Saxon countries governed by Common Law and civil law as our own countries there is a difference on how morality trusts and combat the abuse of certain forms of trust. We want to deepen the rules to make them explicit and without ambiguities. The Anglo-Saxon countries prefer to intervene when the problem arises. They are convinced that the existing resources under the Common Law and the standards are sufficient.