PM sidesteps issue of whether he benefited in past from assets revealed in Panama Papers, saying he has no offshore trusts, funds or shares

This article is more than 4 years old

This article is more than 4 years old

David Cameron has ducked a question about whether his family stands to benefit from offshore assets linked to his late father, after his tax affairs came under scrutiny following the Panama Papers data leak.



The prime minister gave a carefully worded reply saying he had no offshore trusts, funds or shares, after giving a speech about the EU in Birmingham.

Dowing Street later revealed that his wife, Samantha, benefits from shares related to her father’s land, but insisted that neither she nor the Camerons’ children currently benefit from Blairmore, an offshore investment fund set up by the prime minister’s late father.

Cameron’s first direct intervention into the controversy came in response to a question posed by Sky News.

The Sky journalist asked the prime minister to reassure people that he and his family had not in the past, and would not in future benefit from Blairmore, the offshore fund set up by his father, Ian, from the Bahamas and which was named in the Panama Papers.

What David Cameron did and didn't say about his father's offshore trust Read more

“In terms of my own financial affairs, I own no shares. I have a salary as prime minister and I have some savings, which I get some interest from, and I have a house, which we used to live in, which we now let out while we are living in Downing Street and that’s all I have,” the prime minister said in Birmingham.

“I own no shares, no offshore trusts, no offshore funds, nothing like that. And, so that, I think, is a very clear description.”

The statement did not directly answer the reporter’s question, which had referred to any past and future benefits.

Downing Street later issued a further statement saying that Cameron’s wife and children also “do not benefit” from offshore funds. Again, the statement referred to the present, and did not say whether they could stand to benefit from any remaining family ties to Blairmore in future.



Blairmore has been registered with HM Revenue and Customs since its inception in the early 1980s and has filed detailed tax returns every year. It has not paid any UK tax since it was established.

A No 10 spokesperson said: “To be clear, the prime minister, his wife and their children do not benefit from any offshore funds. The prime minister owns no shares.

“As has been previously reported, Mrs Cameron owns a small number of shares connected to her father’s land, which she declares on her tax return.”

Earlier, Jeremy Corbyn had called for Cameron to explain to the country “exactly what’s been going on” with his family’s financial affairs. The Labour leader also said he wanted an independent investigation into the tax haven revelations.



Answering Sky’s question, Cameron suggested that HM Revenue & Customs should remain in charge of investigating any information that comes out of the Panama Papers.

“The investigation we need, first of all, is for HMRC, our tax authority, to use all the information that is coming out of Panama to make sure that everything is done; to make sure that companies and individuals are paying their taxes properly,” he said.

“In many ways what is coming out of Panama is what we are introducing in our own country, which is a register of beneficial ownership, so everyone can see who owns what company.”

What David Cameron did and didn't say about his father's offshore trust Read more

The prime minister gave the speech at an office of PwC, the accountancy firm, which was last year accused by MPs on the House of Commons public accounts committee of promoting tax avoidance “on an industrial scale”.

Downing Street had initially insisted on Monday that the financial affairs of Ian Cameron, which were detailed in the Panama leak, were a private matter.

Corbyn told reporters: “Well, it’s a private matter insofar as it’s a privately held interest. But it’s not a private matter if tax is not being paid. So an investigation must take place, an independent investigation, unprejudiced, to decide whether or not tax has been paid.

“I think the prime minister, in his own interest, should tell us exactly what’s been going on.”