"Disclosure laws in Panama are a non-starter. There is no public will for them, quite the opposite, actually." "I don't see what difference it makes."
That doesn't surprise me when you're talking about a country where bribes and under-the-table payments are a way of life and accepted in the society. That's the way business is conducted there, but you don't see a fundemental problem with that?
In the case of owning shares in a Panamanian company I'm comforted to know the President of the country owns those shares too, but I don't think it's politically correct one bit. IMO Politicans ARE SUPPOSED to be impartial when it comes to making money in shares of companies they are voting laws through for, especially while they're still in office. I think that's called a conflict of interest, isn't it? Simply put, IMO no politican in any country should be able to trade or own shares in companies they have some influence upon. When they leave office they can buy all they want.