Connect with us

News

Illicit Financial Flows from Africa – Track It, Stop It, Get It

Published

on

Ibrahim  Lamorde,Chairman, Economic and Financial Crimes Commission
Kindly share this post

Illicit money outflows are draining Africa’s domestic resources, depriving it of crucial investment funds

The figures are staggering: between $1.2 trillion and $1.4 trillion has left Africa in illicit financial flows between 1980 and 2009 – roughly equal to Africa’s current gross domestic product, and surpassing by far the money it received from outside over the same period.

Illicit financial flows are money earned illegally and transferred for use elsewhere. The money is usually generated from criminal activities, corruption, tax evasion, bribes and transactions from cross-border smuggling.

The numbers tell only part of the story. It is a story that exposes how highly complex and deeply entrenched practices have flourished over the past decades with devastating impact, but barely made it into the news headlines.

“The illicit haemorrhage of resources from Africa is about four times Africa’s current external debt,” says a joint report by the African Development Bank (AfDB) and Global Financial Integrity, a US research and advocacy group.

The report, Illicit Financial Flows and the Problem of Net Resource Transfers from Africa: 1980-2009, found that cumulative illicit outflows from the continent over the 30-year period ranged from $1.2 trillion to $1.4 trillion.

The Guardian, a British daily, notes that even these estimates – large as they are – are likely to understate the problem, as they do not capture money lost through drug trafficking and smuggling.

Turning logic upside down “The traditional thinking has always been that the West is pouring money into Africa through foreign aid and other private-sector flows, without receiving much in return,” said Raymond Baker, president of Global Financial Integrity, in a statement released at the launch of the report earlier this year.

Mr. Baker said the report turns that logic upside down, adding that Africa has been a net creditor to the rest of the world for decades.
Professor Mthuli Ncube, chief economist and vice-president of the AfDB, agrees: “The African continent is resource-rich. With good resource husbandry, Africa could be in a position to finance much of its own development.”

The composition of these outflows also challenges the traditional thinking about illicit money.

According to estimates by Global Financial Integrity, corrupt activities such as bribery and embezzlement constitute only about 3% of illicit outflows; criminal activities such as drug trafficking and smuggling make up 30% to 35%; and commercial transactions by multinational companies make up a whopping 60% to 65%.

Contrary to popular belief, argues Professor Baker, money stolen by corrupt governments is insignificant compared to the other forms of illicit outflow.

The most common way illicit money is moved across borders is through international trade. Information scanty and scattered

A ten-member high-level panel chaired by former South African President Thabo Mbeki leads research by the UN Economic Commission for Africa (ECA) into illicit financial flows, assisted by ECA Executive Secretary Carlos Lopes as the vice-chair.

Other members of the panel include Professor Baker and Ambassador Segun Apata of Nigeria. The ECA blames illicit outflows for reducing Africa’s tax revenues, undermining trade and investment and worsening poverty.

Its report will be released in March 2014. Undoubtedly the panel faces a daunting task. Charles Goredema, a senior researcher at the South Africa-based Institute of Security Studies, cautions the panel on the challenges ahead.

Writing in the institute’s newsletter, ISS Today, Goredema warns the panel that it will find that in many African countries, data on illicit financial flows “is scanty, clouded in a mixed mass of information and scattered in disparate locations.”

He ranks tax collection agencies and mining departments among the bodies most reluctant to share data.

Goredema lists Transparency International, Global Financial Integrity, Christian Aid and the Tax Justice Network as some of the advocacy groups that have tried to quantify the scale of illicit financial flows.

The extent of such outflows remains a matter of speculation, he says, with the figures on Africa ranging between $50 billion and $80 billion per year.

Other estimates by the ECA put the figure at more than $800 billion between 1970 and 2008.

“The absence of unanimity on [the amount] is probably attributable to the fact that the terrain concerned is quite broad, and each organisation can only be exposed to a part of it at any given point in time,” Goredema writes, adding, “It is less important to achieve consensus on scale than it is to achieve it on the measures to be taken to stem illicit financial outflows from Africa.”

Underpricing trade deals Nonetheless, research and advocacy groups who have worked on illicit outflows see a direct link between these outflows and Africa’s attempts to mobilize internal resources.

Despite annual economic growth averaging 5% over the past decade – boosted in part by improved governance and sound national policies – Africa is still struggling to mobilize domestic resources for investments.

If anything, the boost in economic growth has caused a spike in the illicit outflows, says Ambassador Apata in an interview with Africa Renewal.

Overseas development aid, while helpful, has its limits, says the ECA. There are many channels to move illicit money.

These include over-invoicing or underpricing trade deals, transfer pricing and using offshore financial and banking centres and tax havens.

Transfer pricing occurs when multinationals decide how much profit to allocate to different parts of the same company operating in different countries, and then determine how much tax to pay to each government. About three-fifths of global trade is conducted within multinationals.

“Many developing countries have weak or incomplete transfer pricing regimes,” according to the Guardian, citing an issue paper authored by the Paris-based Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), a group of high-income economies.

The paper says poor countries have weak bargaining power. “Some [countries] have problems in enforcing their transfer pricing regimes due to gaps in the law, weak or no regulations and guidelines for companies,” says the OECD paper, adding that poor countries have limited technical expertise to assess the risks of transfer pricing and to negotiate changes with multinationals.

Offshore tax shelters According to the OECD paper, member countries are failing to identify company owners who benefit from money laundering.

It criticizes OECD members for not doing enough to crack down on illicit outflows. In order to prevent, uncover or prosecute money laundering, says the paper, authorities must be able to identify company owners.

The OECD advises its members to invest in anti-corruption and tax systems in poor countries, as this has high payoffs.

The bulk of illicit money today is channelled through international tax havens, says the Thabo Mbeki Foundation, an NGO set up by the former president to promote Africa’s renaissance.

The foundation accuses “secrecy jurisdictions” of running millions of disguised corporations and shell companies, i.e., companies that exist on paper only.

These jurisdictions also operate anonymous trust accounts and fake charitable foundations that specialize in money laundering and trade over-invoicing and underpricing.

“Developing countries lose three times more to tax havens than they receive in aid,” said Melanie Ward, speaking to the Guardian.

Ms. Ward is one of the spokespersons for the Enough Food for Everyone IF campaign, a coalition of charities calling for fairer food policies, and head of advocacy at ActionAid, an anti-poverty group.

The money lost, she says, should be spent on essential development of schools, hospitals and roads, and on tackling hunger, not siphoned into the offshore accounts of companies.

A 2007 joint report by the World Bank and UN Office on Drugs and Crime estimated that every $100 million returned to a developing country could fund up to 10 million insecticide-treated bed nets, up to 100 million ACT treatments for malaria, first-line HIV/AIDS treatment for 600,000 people for one year, 250,000 household water connections or 240 km of two-lane paved roads.

Support for new rules to rein in offshore tax shelters has come from an unlikely source – the leaders of eight of the world’s biggest economies, the Group of Eight (G8).

Having been stung by the 2008 global financial crisis, the G8 leaders at this year’s summit in Lough Erne, Northern Ireland, introduced – for the first time – rules to fight tax evasion.

The rules will now require multinationals to disclose the taxes they pay in countries in which they operate.

During the run-up to the G8 summit, advocacy groups campaigned to get rich countries to introduce laws on transparency in corporate taxes.

Among them was the Africa Progress Panel, chaired by former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan.

On the eve of the summit, it published its annual flagship report, Africa Progress Report 2013, strongly criticizing the current rules on corporate transparency. Unconscionable acts

“It is unconscionable that some companies, often supported by dishonest officials, are using unethical tax avoidance, transfer pricing and anonymous company ownership to maximize their profits while millions of Africans go without adequate nutrition, health and education,” Mr. Annan wrote in the foreword to the report.

Tax evasion, he said, has cut into African citizens’ fair share of profits from their abundant resources.

In the end, the G8 leaders adopted the Lough Erne Declaration, a 10-point statement calling for an overhaul of corporate transparency rules.

Among other things, the declaration urges authorities to automatically share tax information with other countries to fight tax evasion.

It states that poor countries should have the information and capacity to collect the taxes owed to them.

The declaration further calls on extractive companies to report payments to all governments, which should in turn publish them.

While the Financial Times embraced the declaration as “an advance” in corporate transparency, Sally Copley, another spokesperson for the IF campaign, says in a statement, “The public argument for a crackdown on tax dodging has been won, but the political battle remains.” Copley wants the G8 to impose strict laws on tax evasion.

For its part, Africa Progress Report 2013 calls for multilateral solutions to global problems because “tax evasion, illicit transfers of wealth and unfair pricing practices are sustained through global trading and financial systems.”

It urges African citizens to demand the highest standards of propriety and disclosure from their governments, and rich countries to demand the same standards from their companies.

Initiatives by institutions in Africa and the adoption of the Lough Erne Declaration raise hopes for strict rules against illicit financial flows from Africa.

“Seizing these opportunities will be difficult. Squandering them would be unforgivable and indefensible,” Mr. Annan warns in his foreword to the panel’s report.

Meanwhile, ECA’s slogan “Track it. Stop it. Get it” aptly captures what needs to be done about money flowing illicitly out of Africa.

 

 


Kindly share this post

Nigeria CommunicationsWeek believes that technology makes life more exciting and helps improve the lives of people around Nigeria and indeed the world. So since 2007, we have devoted our energy to independent reportage of technology and how they affect lives.

News

Trump Threatens More Strikes in Nigeria

Published

on

Kindly share this post

President Donald Trump has warned that the United States could carry out further military strikes in Nigeria if Christians continue to be killed, reigniting a sensitive debate over religious violence and foreign intervention in Africa’s most populous nation.

Trump Threatens More Strikes in Nigeria

President Donald Trump

Trump made the remarks in an interview with The New York Times, published on Thursday, while responding to questions about a US military strike carried out in Nigeria on Christmas Day.

At the time, the US military said the operation targeted Islamic State militants in north-west Nigeria and was conducted at the request of the Nigerian government.

Nigeria, however, described the operation as a joint counterterrorism effort, stressing that it was aimed at armed groups designated as terrorists and “had nothing to do with a particular religion”.

“I’d love to make it a one-time strike,” Trump was quoted as saying. “But if they continue to kill Christians, it will be a many-time strike.”

Pressed on comments by his own Africa adviser that extremist groups such as Islamic State and Boko Haram have killed more Muslims than Christians in Nigeria, Trump acknowledged that Muslims were also victims but insisted that Christians were being targeted disproportionately.

“I think that Muslims are being killed also in Nigeria. But it’s mostly Christians,” he said.

Trump has repeatedly raised alarms about the safety of Christians in Nigeria, beginning in late October when he warned that Christianity faced what he described as an “existential threat” in the country. He has accused Nigerian authorities of failing to adequately protect Christian communities and has openly threatened US military intervention if the violence continues.

Nigeria has firmly rejected claims of systematic persecution of Christians. The government maintains that the country’s security challenges are complex and largely driven by insurgency, banditry and criminal violence rather than religious targeting.

With a population of more than 230 million people, Nigeria is almost evenly divided between Christians, who are concentrated mainly in the south, and Muslims, who predominate in the north. Islamist insurgencies, particularly Boko Haram and its offshoots, have plagued parts of northern Nigeria for more than a decade, killing thousands and displacing millions.

Nigerian authorities have repeatedly pointed out that militant attacks have claimed the lives of both Muslims and Christians, arguing that framing the violence along religious lines oversimplifies the crisis and risks inflaming tensions.

Following Trump’s earlier threats, the Nigerian government said it was willing to continue cooperating with Washington in combating terrorism but rejected language suggesting that Christians alone were under threat.

The latest comments are likely to strain diplomatic relations further, as Nigeria balances its partnership with the United States against concerns over sovereignty, security cooperation and the portrayal of its internal conflicts on the global stage.


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

News

OpenAI Launches ChatGPT Health

Published

on

Kindly share this post

OpenAI maker of ChatGPT is rolling out a health-focused feature to the generative artificial intelligence (AI) tool that’s used by nearly a billion users.

Named ChatGPT Health, the new feature aims to provide users with health and wellness information. This, as health is one of the most common ways people use ChatGPT, according to OpenAI.

In a blog post, Microsoft-backed OpenAI says de-identified analysis of conversations show that over 230 million people globally ask health and wellness-related questions on ChatGPT every week.

ChatGPT Health will also “securely” connect medical records and wellness apps to ground conversations with a user’s own health information, making responses more relevant and useful.

“Designed in close collaboration with physicians, ChatGPT Health helps people take a more active role in understanding and managing their health and wellness – while supporting, not replacing, care from clinicians.”

According to OpenAI, health information is often scattered across portals, apps, wearables, PDFs, and medical notes making it hard to see the full picture, and people are left to navigate a complex healthcare system on their own.

“ChatGPT Health builds on these so responses are informed by your health information and context. You can now securely connect medical records and wellness apps – like Apple Health, Function, and MyFitnessPal – so ChatGPT can help you understand recent test results, prepare for appointments with your doctor, get advice on how to approach your diet and workout routine, or understand the trade-offs of different insurance options based on your healthcare patterns.”

According to the company, ChatGPT Health is designed to support, not replace, medical care, adding that it is not intended for diagnosis or treatment. “Instead, it helps you navigate everyday questions and understand patterns over time – not just moments of illness – so you can feel more informed and prepared for important medical conversations.

“To keep your health information protected and secure, Health operates as a separate space with enhanced privacy to protect sensitive data. Conversations in Health are not used to train our foundation models. If you start a health-related conversation in ChatGPT, we’ll suggest moving into Health for these additional protections.”

OpenAI adds that access to ChatGPT Health has started with a small group of early users to learn and continue refining the experience, adding that users with ChatGPT Free, Go, Plus, and Pro plans outside of the European Economic Area, Switzerland, and the UK are eligible.

“As we make improvements, we plan to expand access and make Health available to all users on web and iOS in the coming weeks.

“Medical record integrations and some apps are available in the US only, and connecting Apple Health requires iOS.”


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

News

Kaspersky Shares AI Cybersecurity Predictions for 2026

Published

on

Kindly share this post

Kaspersky experts outline how the rapid development of AI is reshaping the cybersecurity landscape in 2026, both for individual users and for businesses. Large language models (LLMs) are influencing defensive capabilities while simultaneously expanding opportunities for threat actors.

Deepfakes are becoming a mainstream technology, and awareness will continue to grow. Companies are increasingly discussing the risks of synthetic content and training employees to reduce the likelihood of falling victim to it. As the volume of deepfakes grows, so does the range of formats in which they appear.

At the same time, awareness is rising not only within organisations but also among regular users: end consumers encounter fake content more often and better understand the nature of such threats. As a result, deepfakes are becoming a stable element of the security agenda, requiring a systematic approach to training and internal policies.

Deepfake quality will improve through better audio and a lowering barrier to entry. The visual quality of deepfakes is already high, while realistic audio remains the main area for future growth.

At the same time, content generation tools are becoming easier to use: even non-experts can now create a mid-quality deepfake in just a few clicks. As a result, the average quality continues to rise, creation becomes accessible to a far broader audience, and these capabilities will inevitably continue to be leveraged by cybercriminals.

Online deepfakes will continue to evolve but remain tools for advanced users. Real-time face and voice swapping technologies are improving, but their setup still requires more advanced technical skills. Wide adoption is unlikely, yet the risks in targeted scenarios will grow: increasing realism and the ability to manipulate video through virtual cameras make such attacks more convincing.

Efforts to develop a reliable system for labelling AI-generated content will continue. There are still no unified criteria for reliably identifying synthetic content, and current labels are easy to bypass or remove, especially when working with open-source models. For this reason, new technical and regulatory initiatives aimed at addressing the problem are likely to emerge.

Open-weight models will approach top closed models in many cybersecurity-related tasks, which create more opportunities for misuse. Closed models still offer stricter control mechanisms and safeguards, limiting abuse.

However, open-source systems are rapidly catching up in functionality and circulate without comparable restrictions. This blurs the difference between proprietary models and open-source models both of which can be used efficiently for undesired or malicious purposes.

The line between legitimate and fraudulent AI-generated content will become increasingly blurred. AI can already produce well-crafted scam emails, convincing visual identities, and high-quality phishing pages.

At the same time, major brands are adopting synthetic materials in advertising, making AI-generated content look familiar and visually “normal.” As a result, distinguishing real from fake will become even more challenging, both for users and for automated detection systems.

AI will become a cross-chain tool in cyberattacks and be used across most stages of the kill chain. Threat actors already employ LLMs to write code, build infrastructure, and automate operational tasks.

Further advances will reinforce this trend: AI will increasingly support multiple stages of an attack, from preparation and communication to assembling malicious components, probing for vulnerabilities and deploying tools. Attackers will also work to hide signs of AI involvement, making such operations harder to analyse.

“While AI tools are being used in cyberattacks, they are also becoming a more common tool in security analysis and influence how SOC teams work. Agent-based systems will be able to continuously scan infrastructure, identify vulnerabilities, and gather contextual information for investigations, reducing the amount of manual routine work.

“As a result, specialists will shift from manually searching for data to making decisions based on already-prepared context. In parallel, security tools will transition to natural-language interfaces, enabling prompts instead of complex technical queries,” adds Vladislav Tushkanov, Research Development Group Manager at Kaspersky.

 


Kindly share this post
Continue Reading

Trending