BVI Defends Record Amid Dispute Over Corporate Ownership Registers

The British Virgin Islands (BVI) government has strongly rejected allegations that it is shielding financial criminals through its proposed corporate ownership disclosure system. In a statement issued Monday, Premier and Minister of Finance Hon. Dr. Natalio D. Wheatley denounced recent criticisms as “misinformed, misleading, and malicious attacks” that misrepresent the territory’s regulatory framework.

“These [allegations] have sought to portray the territory as a rogue state; an outlier happy to facilitate corruption with a total disregard for global standards, robust regulation, and the principles of transparency and collaboration. This portrayal could not be further from the truth,” Wheatley stated.

The statement follows mounting scrutiny from British lawmakers who argue that the BVI’s proposed beneficial ownership disclosure system could obstruct efforts to combat illicit financial activity. MPs Joe Powell and Andrew Mitchell have accused the territory of creating loopholes that would allow financial criminals to evade detection.

Under the current proposal, only individuals involved in legal or regulatory proceedings related to financial crime would be able to request ownership information. Company owners would also be notified of such requests and given five days to object before any details are released. Critics contend that this system could enable criminals to relocate assets before authorities act.

“This could expose journalists to legal or physical intimidation when investigating high-risk stories on drug cartels, kleptocrats, or human traffickers,” Powell and Mitchell wrote in a letter to Premier Wheatley.

The BVI government, however, maintains that it has a “proven track record” of upholding international financial regulations. Wheatley cited the territory’s compliance with the U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act (FATCA), the Common Reporting Standard, and the Base Erosion and Profit Shifting framework as evidence of its commitment to global financial integrity. Additionally, the BVI has negotiated more than 100 tax information exchange agreements and developed a beneficial ownership platform accessible to law enforcement and tax authorities worldwide.

“We have collectively built a financial services industry that we are proud of—one in which our network of registered agents is held to the highest regulatory standards by the Financial Services Commission,” Wheatley said, contrasting the BVI’s oversight mechanisms with the UK’s Companies House, which does not require verification of beneficial owners.

The dispute comes as the UK government weighs potential intervention. Foreign Secretary David Lammy has prioritised efforts to combat illicit finance, with transparency in corporate ownership featuring prominently in discussions with overseas territories. The UK Foreign Office has reportedly urged the BVI to revise its approach, and speculation is growing that the UK could resort to an “order in council”—a rare measure historically used to override overseas territories’ governance on issues such as the death penalty and human rights.

Transparency International and other anti-corruption organizations have also raised concerns that the BVI’s proposals could undermine global efforts to tackle financial crime. A Westminster Hall debate scheduled for Wednesday is expected to highlight the issue.

Despite the escalating tensions, Wheatley defended the BVI’s position, stating that the territory remains “actively engaged in global anti-corruption efforts” and works closely with agencies such as the UK’s National Crime Agency, HM Revenue & Customs, and the Serious Fraud Office.

“The coordinated attack on the jurisdiction serves to mislead the public and pressure the UK Government to take colonial measures against the territory,” Wheatley asserted. “Financial crime is a global issue and tackling it effectively not only requires regulation, transparency, and collaboration but also fairness and honesty among all stakeholders.”

The UK government has yet to issue a formal response to the BVI’s latest statement.

ADVERTISEMENT: