Leila Adim

Leila Adim, Department of Tax & Financial Law, Unversitat de Barcelona 

Leila Adim was born in Civitanova Marche (Italy) in 1986. She received her LL.B and LL.M from the University of Macerata (Italy) and studied International and European Law and in Toruñ (Poland). In 2011-2012 she worked as accountant and tax consultant in London (UK) and one year later she completed her postgraduate studies in International Tax Law and Forensic Accountability at the University of Barcelona (Spain). In 2013 and in 2014, Ms. Adim took part in two editions of the EUCOTAX Wintercourse at the University of Osnabrück (Germany) and at the University Paris 1 Panthéon Sorbonne (France). Nowadays she is a PhD candidate in the ambit of the Doctoral Programme in Law and Political Sciences of the University of Barcelona (Spain) and she is undertaking an interdisciplinary research on the informal economy and its interactions with tax issues. The PhD dissertation will be completed during the first semester of 2017. During her PhD studies, Ms. Adim was a lecturer at the University of Barcelona in the Master Programme of Tax Law and in the Postgraduate Programme in International Tax Law and she also presented at the GREY Conference on the Informal Economy held in Sofia (Bulgaria) in September 2016, at the Conference on Tax Justice and Shadow Economy in Europe which took place at the University of Barcelona in 2014 and in the BEPS, Tax Justice and the shadow economy, Tax Justice Network and Oxfam International Seminar on Transparency and Tax Abuse (University of Barcelona).

Paper Title: 

"Between benefit and abuse: Immigrant Investment Programmes"

Paper Summary: 

During the last 30 years many states have implemented Immigrant Investment Programmes (IIPs) in order to attract foreign capital and boost domestic economies. IIPs are based on a conditional exchange logic according to which the host country provides special resident permits - and, sometimes, preferential tax regimes - to immigrants making substantial investments within its borders.

Nevertheless, in a time in which states are increasingly sensitive to issues related to transparency, integrity and fairness among economic actors, the implementation of IIPs seems to contradict every effort aimed at countering abuses and reflecting on IIPs' overall impact looks particularly interesting.