G20 leaders have ended their London summit

To help countries with troubled economies, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) will get extra resources worth up to $750bn.

There will also be sanctions against secretive tax havens and tougher global financial regulation.

And the G20 has committed about $250bn to boost global trade.

AFTER THE SUMMIT

• Have they done enough?
• Are tax havens being unfairly targetted?
• Was the summit an expensive junket, as some people suggest, as most issues were already decided before the meeting?
• Will the Caribbean get enough out of it?

The OECD is nothing but a tax cartel trying to bully developing countries that have the temerity to offer low tax alternatives to established businesses and entrepreneurs. It's long past time that tax havens stand up together and stop accepting this debate on the OECD's terms.
Steve Foerster
Salisbury, Dominica

They have made suggestions. No one is actually going to put any of it into action. All of them will spend their time in office looking to the other G20 member to make the first move.
I do not feel that there is any trust between them or any strong need to really band together to get us all through this crisis.
Time will tell.
June
Huddersfield, UK

Certainly the G20 meeting itself is symbolic. 4 hrs of meeting time won't solve the economic crises and you needn't meet to come to agreement.
The 750 billion IMF package was very disturbing given the savaging of third world economies by IMF loan conditions over the years.
All said, I think things will be better for the rich and powerful nations and worse for the developing ones - business as usual.
Loans and aid is not the solution for developing nations - rather direct investment, education and job creation.
I'm very skeptical. Sounds like pocket-filling for the IMF club.
C Young
Leamington Spa, UK

(A posting from the previous forum)
The whole issue of offshore tax havens which is pre-occupying Prime Minister Gordon Brown, is a red herring. Offshore tax havens have nothing to do with the current global financial meltdown, which was caused, as Brazilian President Lula said, by poor risk management by Anglo-Saxon financial regulators. Just listen to France's Sarkozy and Germany's Merkel who are making the same point.
In any case, the Caymans, Bermuda and the Turks and Caicos all come under the British government and it is not beyond the ability of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office to step in and remove this cancer, if that is what it is.
What is more important is that the developed world, which includes all the G20 nations, are net beneficiaries of direct and indirect funding from the developing world.
Capital flight is the obvious one, with more cash flowing from the developing world than foreign direct investment in to those countries - China apart. Also, the brain drain is the biggest form of indirect funding from poor nations to the rich in human history.
More college-educated men and women from what used to be called the third world move to live and work in OECD countries than opt to remain in their home countries.
This is not just a loss of the cost of education, but also of future taxation and, most of all, of future intellectual property rights. These young people are the brightest and best of their generation and it is a tremendous loss to their homelands.
Small nations need to extend the debate from the so-called loss of taxation in offshore tax havens to the wider issues.
It is bullying, nothing else, and they should tell the US and Britain to go away - only less politely.
Hal Austin, London