 Hello. I have the very unenviable task of attempting to summarize what has happened since noon. Those of you who know me, my name is Heather Lowe. I am legal counsel and director of government affairs at Global Financial Integrity. Many of you will know that I am a very detail-oriented person. And so summarizing is sort of anathema to my approach to life. But I will do my best. I will tell you that I did a better job of summarizing the first half of this than the second half, of course, because I was just jotting down notes for the second half. I didn't have a chance to go back and fully summarize. However, I will attempt to do so. And I am certainly happy to talk to any of you in the cocktail reception afterwards about any of these issues as well. So Raymond really started us off today with talking about where the term illicit financial flows came from and how each of those words was very, very carefully chosen way back in 2006. He really talked about the critical support of the Ford Foundation in those early years to bring us to the point we are now at, that we are at now of international recognition of both the issue as a problem and the fact that we need to be working toward solutions. And he really focused on the fact that right now, our task is to shift toward curtailing and not just talking about the problem, but really, really focusing on those solutions. Professor Poghi then came up to the stand and gave us a really interesting philosophical discussion about the relationship between poverty and illicit financial flows. And we now understand that there is a very clear relationship between poverty and illicit financial flows. And he then brought in the concept of the impact of inequality on that equation and the importance of looking at that whole picture together. He really said that today we're in a position to avoid poverty and that that's what we should be focusing on, the avoidance or perhaps abolition of poverty, because we have the tools we need at the moment to do so. We understand what the problems are. We are able to figure out what the solution should be as a result. Dr. Poghi observed that this really doesn't take a political miracle. It takes political focus. And those are obviously two very different things. Les Meyers then came up to facilitate our first full panel. And that was on trade-based money laundering, which is essentially trade-miss-invoicing of things that are very clearly criminal funds. I think John Casara and Rob Suburski really grabbed everybody's attention with the examples that they use, showing you exactly what we're talking about when we're talking about trade-miss-invoicing. It's not things that are, well, on the line, it's very, very, very expensive Chinese toilet paper, right? Things that are just so obvious. Rob and John's passion for the subject is so evident. They truly recognize the economic and societal destruction that criminal trade-miss-invoicing creates. And that's all part of poverty, but it's also part of the fabric of our society. And that's also important to recognize whether that's a developed country or a developing country. Rob made a very clear case for both money and political attention being focused on trade-miss-invoicing, which really complimented Professor Poghi's call for very similar action. You get LaBelle. Every other sentence could have been an entire presentation. I kind of don't even know what to do with that. There was, everything was in there. Very impressive. So I'm going to attempt to do some summarization here. She really began with where we were right now with Addis Ababa and the declaration. One of the key sort of phrases in that is the commitment to redouble efforts to substantially reduce illicit financial flows with a view to eliminating them. That's a pretty good declaration, I think. She talked about a lot of the supporting initiatives in the Addis declaration as well, focusing on financial accountability and governance and corruption, but also the cooperation and transparency needed to achieve those things. She spoke about how we got to this point of the Addis declaration, beginning with Norway's leadership on these issues, the financial crisis and the part that that played in getting the developed countries to understand that, well, actually this is a problem that affects them as well. The United States Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act or FATCA as you may know it, really being a game changer in the recognition of tax evasion as a huge global problem and one that you actually can approach and try to solve, right? She talked about the OECD and the G20 and how they're working together to try and move forward on these issues in a way that is somewhat politically acceptable. I think that they're walking a line at the moment and we'll see where that goes. And she talked a lot about the early adoption of different forms of country by country reporting and transparency of beneficial ownership by the European Union, who I think are certainly the most advanced in these areas at the moment. I think that that recognition I think by society within the European Union, which was the result of the austerity measures that have been put in place in different countries is something that I'd like to see translated around the world. Journalists have had a big part in helping average citizens understand those links and I think the journalists in the room, we thank you for your efforts and ask you to continue. She also talked about beneficial ownership, transparency and trade misinvoicing as two of the really key things that we need to be getting on top of globally. Transparency International has been doing fantastic work on beneficial ownership transparency as have many of the other organizations in the Financial Transparency Coalition. And she also was the first person on this podium to bring up the idea that we really need to be working with developing nations hand in hand. I think goes to the comment from our Nigerian friend at the end of the discussion today. Let's see, she also said that a lot can be and needs to be achieved through the extractive industries, it's an area where there is a lot of corruption and movement of illicit money and would be a great place to start to sort of phase in these type of initiatives. I would throw the construction industry in there as well. Let's see, she also said that data is critical in this area and I think that our last panel certainly underscored that point pretty well. And I think her final point was possibly the most important to me and that is the Addis Declaration to achieve those goals requires the cooperation of civil society, leaders of industry and government together. It cannot be achieved alone and we really need to work on that cooperation that is very critical and we don't do enough of that. So I'll move on to Porter's panel, Porter McConnell's panel. Well she moderated the final panel on trade-based, on trade and balance of payment data and her distinguished panelists were Devkar, Anders Agarskov and Tamara Ratzin. They really dug into this topic, I think. Data people often think of as a very dry topic but I think our panelists did a great job of making it very engaging. So Devkar started out by talking about the fact without data we can only really make assertions about things and so data really is the underlying element that we need in order to both identify what the problems are but more importantly identify obviously the solutions. GFI talks about measurable illicit financial flows and he made that point very clearly which is very much less than the total of illicit financial flows based again on the data that's available to us. He said that it's difficult to determine where the money's going because we don't have that data as in we know where it's coming out of but we can't see really where it's going and we can only very, very basically estimate that at the moment and that is definitely some of the data that's missing. It's data, some of that is data that's collected and simply not made public and that's another part of this identifying where data exists that is not made public and where we need to be collecting more data which was a great question by Porter at the end. Let's see. Anders began by telling us that he has identified many murders at the World Bank or the economic equivalent thereof as the case may be and he began looking at trade data anomalies within World Bank projects and found actually quite a lot of them. He's really been thinking outside the box I would say with respect to illicit financial flows. He's thinking about what are the different avenues we can take to looking at these issues and addressing the individual cases as they arise and what that tells us about what is out there and what we need to do from a policy standpoint as a country or as a World Bank or globally. Some of the things that he found within the World Bank to be problems were that they can't sanction for tax evasion or trade misinvoicing and so that's a challenge. He's identifying these problems and he can't actually sanction for them. Likewise sanctioning for trade misinvoicing can be difficult on a country level too because of the way that we do or do not criminalize trade misinvoicing as a problem. So there's very much a World Bank position which mirrors the global position on that issue. He was also looking at other policy implications. Really identifying that both developing countries and non-developing countries share a lot of the same problems. He focused on needing to improve data analysis. Again the criminalization point and the need to really support law enforcement and customs around the world which echoed obviously the earlier trade-based money laundering panel as well. He also highlighted the importance of international cooperation and intelligence sharing. Intelligence sharing is something that we didn't hear a lot about today but it is also critical. We have a few people here from financial intelligence units and I know that they think that that is certainly critical but intelligence has to be collected before it can be shared and then it has to be shared in an effective and efficient manner and we are still I think globally falling down on that particular point. Anders highlighted the idea that we could probably be pulling tax evasion as an issue into the corporate social responsibility sphere which I think people are dallying with a bit at the moment. I think there is a little bit of pushback from some folks in the CSR world but hopefully we'll be able to marry that up in the foreseeable future. We will see. Another idea was the global tax identification numbers which actually is sort of underway in not specific to tax but specific to companies by the legal entity identifier project or LEI which would assign a global identification number similar to a barcode to companies around the world and that number would be used on invoices and on international financial transactions so that you could identify exactly which company was engaging in that particular trade. In addition, when registering for an LEI number, shortly the companies are going to have to provide both their immediate parent information as well as their ultimate parent information. All of this information is going to be or is entirely publicly available. There are no IP restrictions on it and so there's going to be a lot we can do with that data when that starts to be fully collected and I'm happy to talk to Anders more about that certainly. He also suggested we should be looking at the maritime bodies because they've been doing a lot of work in this area, something that I hadn't thought of and so I'd be interested in pursuing. Tamara spoke a lot about the collection and compilation of data that is clearly where her heart lies. I love the enthusiasm with which she spoke about this issue. She says the challenge is consistent methodology for compiling the actual statistics, right? Sort of what is a peach and what is a plum and what are you calling those things and are you actually accounting for them in the right way? She said the IMF manual requires capturing trade in both illegal and legal flows but an actual fact, compiling the information on illegal flows is incredibly difficult and they really struggle with that. In fact, she said we have to sort of become investigators in that area, which I think resounded with most people, Anders, I'm sure very much so. Let's see. She says really that there are no ideal data sources for identifying illicit financial flows and that the macro data sets certainly aren't the best because they're not as tailored to what you're looking to find. The problem is that they're kind of the only data sets available to the public. She'd rather that we use micro level economic data and that makes perfect sense but we actually have to have micro level economic data that's publicly available in order to do that analysis. So obviously there's a really big gap there that we could be working on. And finally, I liked the point that we need civil society organizations to push for more and better statistics. I think that that's certainly the case and I think that civil society organizations are starting to do that now and I think that we're gonna see a more coordinated approach on that in the next year or two. So the panelists were asked what data do you need? What's missing out there? And Dev said really trade in services info was critical for him in order to really round out that those estimates of illicit financial flows. And also he wanted to see clearly identified related party transactions where you could actually just check a box on an invoice so that you could identify what was a related party transaction. So you could do the analysis of trade misinvoicing between unrelated parties versus trade misinvoicing which is also known as abuse of transfer pricing between related parties. Tomorrow would like to see what's not collected. She knows what's collected. She can see a lot more than we can see but she knows that there is a lot that is not collected and until we get there we can't get that really precise estimate. I would say for my part I think we have enough to know that there is a problem and that we need to do something about it however. I think we're at that point. I think we can move on on that basis. It's always great to see, you know if you can get that more specific data so you can identify more specific issues but it certainly shouldn't stop us from moving forward at this point. I think the world has identified that illicit financial flows are a problem. We need to move on it at this point. So Anders would like to see action taken on the data which I would agree with and Anders was also asked at the end will country by country reporting in all sectors help? And he certainly said yes but he'd really like to see transparency in more innovative ways as well not just country by country reporting but for example publishing data about how much companies are paying in customs duties that's published in the newspaper in a country. I personally have heard the discussions about budgets being literally painted on walls in Indian villages as well as the list of people that are getting paid for a certain project that is happening in that village and the villagers look and say that person's dead and that person moved out four years ago. So that kind of transparency those really basic transparency elements and initiatives are critical. I will stop there because really that is the end and I will say that I hope to see you all tomorrow I think we're gonna be digging into some very specific case studies on different countries and the implications of the numbers and policy initiatives that have followed them and we'll be hearing from Jean Ross from the Ford Foundation tomorrow morning as well and that's fantastic because as we have all said they were really seminal in putting the funding out there to make illicit financial flows an issue that everybody recognizes now as critical for development. We also have a reception right now and that is in the fourth estate lounge which I'm told is to the right and I look forward to chatting with everybody at that reception and I'm sure all of our panelists will as well so thank you very much.