As someone who has worked at a Swiss bank: This might have applied a couple of decades ago. Especially in the last decade, Swiss banks introduced rules to overcome this problem with international customers. Smaller banks started to turn down US customers right away (like the one I worked at). It has become dangerous for bank employees and banks themselves to support criminals like you mention. There is zero tolerance for money laundering. While it is far from perfect, the financial sector has matured in that regard.
"Birkenfeld himself had provided a variety of “concierge” tax-evasion services: he once bought diamonds for an American client, then smuggled them into the U.S. inside a toothpaste tube.
"A 2014 U.S. Senate report describes a Credit Suisse banker travelling to America to meet a client for breakfast at a Mandarin Oriental hotel, and passing along an issue of Sports Illustrated in which account statements were concealed between the pages."
To my knowledge, these rules came from intense diplomatic pressure from the US, not from some internal realization that it wasn't ethical. I wouldn't be at all shocked if subtler approaches to dealing with tainted money have been adopted.
> it can be seen that bank deposits of Indians in Swiss banks have decreased from ` 23,373 crore in year 2006 to ` 9,295 crore in year 2010.
> the share of Indians in the total bank deposits of citizens
of all countries in Swiss banks has reduced from 0.29 per cent in 2006 to 0.13 per cent in 2010.
You think they not culpable for the past because money got move around? Or that they are not guilty because the numbers are not astronomical.
Why do you think India is bent on AEOI with the swiss. Just to spite them?
