There can be no doubt that the onshore authorities have the offshore world in their sights. As I've mentioned before, any number of initiatives are under way aimed at destroying the economies of those countries that are tax-efficient, orchestrated by those that are not.

A brief recap: Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have both vowed to inflict maximum damage on Bermuda and the other offshore communities if either is elected; the OECD continues to pump out its high-tax message, backed by sanctions on those with sensible tax systems; Britain and Germany have unleashed a suite of criminal activities aimed at catching tax evaders; and Ace and Paris Re have announced they will move onshore, as other Bermuda companies consider their options.

Now the mainstream media and others have joined the witch-hunt. In this column, from time to time, I'll report on the moves, which are (accidentally?) a form of institutional racism, to wipe Bermuda and the others off the financial map.

Two recent reports caught my eye.

In the first, a charity ironically called Christian Aid accused Bermuda and other low-tax jurisdictions of murdering millions of children. I kid you not.

In a report entitled "Death and Taxes: the True Toll of Tax-dodging", Christian Aid said that the extent of tax abuse "is so widespread and damaging that it is tantamount to a new slavery".

The director of Christian Aid, Dr. Daleep Mukarji, said: "We predict that illegal trade-related tax evasion alone will be responsible for the deaths of 5.6 million children under the age of five between 2000 and 2015. That's almost 1,000 a day." The true agenda of the report was made plain when it argued that there was not much difference between legal tax planning and tax avoidance, and criminal tax evasion. Tax avoidance is what all Bermuda people involuntarily practise by living in a country without income tax or corporation tax.

The report said that avoidance is part of a "sliding scale of legitimacy", in which ever more ingenious and complex methods are used to get around the rules and shelter corporate profits, notably through the use of tax havens, places where extreme secrecy in turn encourages a more general criminality.

Bermuda is not such a place, but never mind the facts. Christian Aid does not much care about the truth. The report said: "The inescapable fact is that there are only four reasons for banking offshore: to avoid tax, to evade tax, to function in secret, (and) to sidestep regulations controlling financial services or monopolistic practices. In each scenario, the pursuit of profit outweighs all other considerations, including good citizenship and social responsibility." In the one thing it managed to get right, the report criticised Bono, the well-known singer, for his tax-dodging activities, along with Phil Collins.

It can't possibly need saying, but I'll say it anyway: no one has any responsibility, legal or moral, to pay more tax than the law demands. No country has an obligation to tax its citizens beyond the level needed to fund its government's activities.

Tax avoidance, i.e. structuring one's affairs to legally minimise tax, is neither criminal nor immoral. Tax evasion, i.e. breaking the laws of the land, is a criminal offence, punishable by law.

Equating tax avoidance and evasion is like saying that cashing a cheque at the bank is like robbing the bank. Both result in the bank having less cash on hand, it's true, but they're not the same, are they?

* * *

This week, The Times of London, which was once a fine newspaper and is now a comic, weighed in on how beastly we all are for paying less tax than the Europeans do. In an article headlined "Is tax exile all it's cracked up to be?" the paper said: "Moving offshore is not all tax-dodging, blonde-winning, casino-busting fun. The wannabe tax exile must play off tropical climates and a no-questions-asked regulatory regime against often conservative local laws and cultural woes."

Bermuda was included in a section in the article on the Caribbean. Under "cons", i.e. the arguments against living here, the article said: "Hurricanes. Long way from the UK. Expensive property. Largely culture-free. One London-based banker says: 'On one of the British Virgin Islands, the highlight of the monthly social calendar is the Full Moon party when everyone goes to the beach, eats magic mushrooms and then goes skinny dipping.' Hilarious."

I have only two comments. First, how can being a "long way from the UK" be a con? And second: if anyone in Bermuda is having skinny dipping parties, they should be sent to jail if they don't invite me. crombie@northrock.bm.

* * *

Finally, on possibly a lighter note, here is a story that Private Eye, a satirical UK publication, reprinted from a source called India Uncut.

"I am shattered, and do not know what to do," Dwarika Prasad told the manager of the Central Bank of India in Patna, "because my entire life savings have been totally eaten. In 2005, I put banknotes and investment certificates worth hundreds of thousands of rupees into my safety desposit box, and thought they would keep me in my old age.

"But now I find they have been eaten by termites, and the bank is refusing to accept any liability. I was never warned about this problem, and now all I have is a boxful of termite dust and a few investment papers that are so badly munched they are unreadable."

Bank manager Y.P. Saha denied all responsibility for the loss, explaining that "the bank is only liable for damage to a safe box when the lock has been broken, which is not the case here. About a year ago, we started to receive complaints about termites in safe deposit boxes, so we sprayed some pesticide around the bank, and put up a notice warning about them.

"Mr. Prasad was not a regular visitor to the bank, so he did not see the notice, but we have no liability in this matter. His papers may have turned to dust, but the lock on his box is secure, so the bank is not answerable. That is the law, and that is that."