Two stories in this week's newspaper are likely to heighten concerns about the state of the Bermuda economy.

On Tuesday, an article in the Business section quoted executives of Bermuda-based insurance and reinsurance companies being quite explicit that changes to the US tax code that removed competitive advantages for Bermuda could well lead to the sector leaving the Island.

For a long time now it has been fashionable to say that those people who warned that the international business sector could easily leave the Island if things changed were merely scaremonging.

Now, perhaps for the first time, Bermuda is seeing senior executives warn of that very thing.

It's not scaremongering when officials of companies outline for the record just how and why they would leave the Island.

That is why it is absolutely critical that Bermuda has to continue to make its case to the White House and to legislators of the importance of the Bermuda reinsurance market.

Whether that needs a formal office in Washington, DC is neither here nor there – it may in fact be counterproductive. Giving legislators strong arguments based on facts is absolutely vital. Visits like this month's by Premier Dr. Ewart Brown and Finance Minister Paula Cox need to continue.

The Association of Bermuda Insurers and Reinsurers in particular is doing sterling work in this regard. But the case for Bermuda needs to be made again and again.

It is not an exaggeration to say that Bermuda desperately needs to retain the reinsurance sector, especially while tourism continues its free fall.

In this case, the reinsurers' major worry is that the US will pass tax legislation, but that does not mean that other factors could not cause companies to leave.

And it is why Bermuda needs to make international companies as welcome as possible. If the tax rationale is not as compelling as it once was, then other factors, including regulation (including the absolute necessity of getting off the OECD greylist), labour requirements (ensuring there is a local pool of expertise and getting rid of term limits if that is what is necessary) and high quality infrastructure which is also affordable become critical. And political stability matters too.

That is what is most worrying about the announcement on Tuesday that Accenture Ltd. is moving its domicile from Bermuda to Ireland.

Accenture was the enormously successful consulting arm of Arthur Andersen and was spun off from that company before it came to grief over Enron.

When it was spun off it chose Bermuda as its international domicile, and not only for tax reasons.

In truth its presence in Bermuda has been a mixed blessing. Because Accenture held a great many large contracts with local and national governments, its Bermuda headquarters often attracted unneeded political attention.

At the same time Accenture has never had a large physical presence and did not contribute a great deal to the Island in economic terms.

What is worrying is the growing exodus of companies from Bermuda. In all, they constitute billions of dollars in capital. Taken together, the economic impact for Bermuda is beginning to matter.

And there is no doubt that Bermuda is beginning to face "brand" problems.

"There are continued questions about companies incorporated in Bermuda," an Accenture spokesman told the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday.

That newspaper said the company was motivated by legislative proposals that could increase the company's taxes, negative publicity about companies incorporated in Bermuda, and by other factors such as the growing importance of the company's European business.

In these circumstances Bermuda now needs to show why it offers competitive advantages to international companies at the same time that it explains to the US that cracking down on Bermuda will do nothing to help US revenues or the US economy if companies simply move to Ireland or Switzerland.

Now more than ever Bermuda needs to show that it is a reputable, responsible and attractive domicile for international companies.