那些隐迹于纽约奢华公寓的全球富豪(2)

It is no more transparent inside. There are no door buzzers or mail slots with residents’ names. You are unlikely to bump into neighbors wandering the halls because only about a third of the owners live there at any one Time, according to people familiar with their comings and goings. The building’s annual holiday party is a lonely affair, they say.

而建筑内部一样不甚透明。当你走进时代华纳中心的共管公寓范围内，你会发现这里既没有门铃，也没有带有户主姓名的信箱。熟悉户主出入情况的人说，你不太可能在走廊里撞见闲逛的邻居，因为无论何时都只有大约三分之一的业主住在公寓里。他们说，大楼每年的节日聚会都冷冷清清。

“It’s a really closely guarded secret who is in that building,” said Al D’Elia, an architect who has worked there. “It’s just the way they treat you, what you have to do to get in the building.”

曾经在那里工作的建筑师阿尔·德埃利亚(Al D’Elia)说，“那栋大楼里究竟住了什么人，简直就是一个被严格保守的秘密，”曾经在那里工作的建筑师阿尔·德埃利亚(Al D’Elia)说，“从他们接待你的方式，进入大楼的手续就能看出来。”

The hallways are spare, but many apartments are loaded with the sort of amenities that have become standard in luxury real estate: panoramic views, stone bathtubs and custom everything — sound systems, millwork, lighting fixtures.

走廊里空空如也，但许多公寓里的设施则符合豪宅的标准配置：开阔的视野、石材浴缸，全部家当都是订做的——音响系统、木制门窗、照明装置。

Even the numbering of the floors was a bit of upwardly mobile sleight of hand, calibrated to enhance the perception of what the developer, the Related Companies, marketed as “Five Star Living.” So, the 80th-floor penthouses are actually on 53.

就连楼层的编号方式也别出心裁，强化了开发商Related Companies提出的“五星级居住环境”的营销概念。因此，标注为第80层的顶层公寓实际上是在53层。

The building’s layout and protocols facilitate anonymity. There are multiple entrances to its 192 condos — not just through the two towers’ main doors, but also through an adjacent parking garage and through the Time Warner Center shops. And while the building has a book listing the names of people associated with units, the owners do not have to be listed for them to get access to the building. They could walk in alongside someone whose name is in the book. Or, if they are cleared to visit, they could enter the complex through the shops or the hotel, and then take the secure elevators to the condos.

大楼的格局和规则也为业主隐藏身份信息提供了便利。这192套共管公寓有多个入口——不光是两栋大楼的大门，还可以通过一个附近的车库，以及时代华纳中心内的商铺进入。尽管物业有一本与各单元有关的人员名册，业主们没有把名字录进去同样可以进入楼内。他们可以和名字在手册上的人一起进入大楼，也可以通过商铺或酒店进入大楼，然后乘坐安全电梯进入公寓，只要一名业主说他们是访客就可以。

“An owner could be obscured from our view,” said David Spector, who helped manage the condos until 2011.

“业主完全可以避开我们的视线，”2011年之前参与管理这些公寓的戴维·斯佩克特(David Spector)说。

Over the decade since the Time Warner condos came on the market, high-end real estate sales in general have become increasingly opaque. In 2003, one-third of the units sold in Time Warner were purchased by shell companies. By 2014, that figure was over 80 percent.

在时代华纳中心的这些公寓挂牌销售以来的10年里，高端房地产销售整体上已经变得越来越不透明。2003年，时代华纳中心售出的所有单位中，超过三分之一被空壳公司所购买。到了2014年，这个比例超过了80%。

Across the United States in recent years, nearly half the residential purchases of over $5 million were made by shell companies rather than named people, according to data from First American Data Tree analyzed by The Times.

时报分析的First American Data Tree的数据显示，最近几年，在美国各地超过500万美元的住宅交易中，将近一半的买主是空壳公司，而不是实名的个人 。

Public records, dating back to at least the 1800s in New York, set real estate apart as more transparent than bank accounts or stock portfolios. “There’s a whole Jeffersonian rhetoric about land ownership,” said Hendrik Hartog, a professor of the history of American law at Princeton. “There was a goal to make land transparent, and it was justified by civic values and a whole range of moral judgments like not hiding ownership.”

一些可以至少追溯到19世纪的公开记录曾显示房地产交易比银行账户或股票投资更为透明。“对于土地所有制有着杰斐逊式的表述，”普林斯顿大学美国法律史教授亨德里克·哈托格(Hendrik Hartog)说，“目标是让土地透明，支撑这个目标的是公民价值，以及不应该隐瞒土地所有权这样的一系列道德判断。”

One type of corporate structure now commonly used in real estate transactions, limited liability companies, or L.L.C.s, did not even exist in the United States before the late 1970s. At first, they were primarily used by oil and gas traders in Wyoming to shield individual owners from liability — if, say, a well worker was hurt — and to avoid taxation of both the company and the investor.

有限责任公司是目前在房产交易中被普遍使用的一种公司结构，这种结构直到上世纪70年代之后才在美国出现。起初，使用这种公司结构的主要是怀俄明州的油气交易商，目的是让公司的所有者免除责任——比如在矿井工人受伤时——以及避免政府对公司和投资者征税。

Nothing in the genesis of limited liability companies suggested they would be used to purchase personal real estate, said Susan Pace Hamill, a University of Alabama professor who worked on L.L.C. policy while at the Internal Revenue Service in the 1990s. However, L.L.C.s are now commonly used in real estate for privacy, wealth transfer or shared ownership.

阿拉巴马大学(University of Alabama)教授苏珊·佩斯·哈米尔(Susan Pace Hamill)说，有限责任公司诞生伊始，并没有哪一点显示它将被用来购买个人房产。她上世纪90年代曾在美国国税局(Internal Revenue Service)研究过有限责任公司的政策。然而目前，有限责任公司在房地产领域被普遍用来保护隐私、转移财富或是分享所有权。

What becomes clear combing real estate records is that many Time Warner buyers have taken even greater steps, beyond using L.L.C.s, to keep their names out of sight. On many deeds, the line for the buyer’s signature is left blank, is illegible or is signed by a lawyer or other representative. Phone numbers are registered under lawyers’ names; the owner’s line on renovation permits is signed by Time Warner staff members; tax statements are addressed to the L.L.C.s.

在对房地产记录的梳理中，我们可以清晰地发现，除了使用有限责任公司进行交易，为了隐藏自己的身份，时代华纳中心的许多业主还动用了更多办法。在许多房契上，购买者的签名一栏都是空白的、难以辨认的，或者由律师及其他代表代签的。可能会透露业主真实信息的公开记录中则充满了虚假信息。电话号码是用律师的名字申请的；提交给纽约楼宇局(New York’s Department of Buildings)的维修表格上的业主信息是时代华纳的员工代签的；税务报表上的地址则写着有限责任公司的名字。

And because most of the sales are in cash, there are few mortgage statements, another public document that might identify an owner or trigger scrutiny.

由于多数交易是现金全款购买，几乎没有按揭贷款的单据。此类单据本来是另一种可能透露业主信息或引发严密审视的公开记录。

A spokeswoman for the Related Companies, Joanna Rose, said the developer had followed all federal and local laws in its sales at the Time Warner Center, adding, “With all of our sales, we know the identity of the purchasers.”

Related Companies的发言人乔安娜·罗斯(Joanna Rose)说，在时代华纳中心公寓的销售中，开发商遵守了所有联邦和地方法律。她补充说，“对于每一笔交易，我们都了解了购房者的身份信息。”

However, documents and interviews with a half-dozen people involved in the sales show that in many cases, the company did not know the actual source of the money behind the sales.

然而，对参与公寓销售的六名工作人员的采访以及一些文件显示，在许多时候，公司并不知道交易背后的真实的资金来源。

David J. Wine, the former vice chairman of the Related Companies, spoke bluntly of the lack of concern with buyers’ identities. “You pretty much go by financial capacity,” Mr. Wine said. “Can they afford it? They sign the contract, they put their money down with no contingency and they close. They have to show the money, and that is it. I don’t think you will find a single new developer where it’s different.”

Related Companies的前副董事长戴维·J·瓦恩(David J. Wine)直言不讳地表示，他们并不在乎购房者的身份 。“你主要是看他们的财务实力，”瓦恩说，“他们买得起吗？他们签了合同，交了钱，交易就完成了。他们必须证明自己有钱，这是最重要的。我不认为哪个开发商会有不同的做法。

Real estate agents say commitment to anonymity is essential. “One thing of being a high-end broker is we have to protect the privacy of our clients,” said Hall F. Willkie, president of Brown Harris Stevens. “If we didn’t, we wouldn’t have them as clients. We’re very much like private bankers in that sense.”

房地产中介称，隐私方面的承诺十分重要。“作为一名高端经纪商就意味着，我们必须保护客户的隐私，”Brown Harris Stevens公司的总裁哈尔·F·威尔基(Hall F. Willkie)说。“如果我们不这样做，我们就不能得到这些客户。从这个意义上讲，我们很像私人银行家。”

The shift to secrecy also reflects a fundamental change in the ownership structure of luxury real estate in New York. Many of Manhattan’s finest addresses were traditionally organized as co-ops in which residents were joint owners of the building. Co-op boards generally prefer full-time residents and often subject would-be buyers to excruciating scrutiny.

向保密做法的转变反映出纽约房地产所有权结构的根本性变化。曼哈顿许多最好的地段传统上一直以合作公寓的方式进行管理，在合作公寓，居民是建筑的共同所有者。合作公寓委员会一般倾向于长期的住户，有意购买合作公寓的买家需要接受严格的审查。

“Those co-ops wouldn’t accept billionaires, especially foreigners,” said Raphael De Niro, a broker at Douglas Elliman.

“这些合作公寓不接受亿万富豪，尤其是海外买家，”道格拉斯·埃利曼公司(Douglas Elliman)的经纪商拉斐尔·德尼罗(Raphael De Niro)说。

By contrast, Time Warner and most new luxury buildings are condos; residents own individual units and boards have less power to screen prospective buyers. In addition, at the Time Warner Center and many other buildings, if a condo board rejects a buyer, building rules say all the residents have to chip in to buy the unit, creating a disincentive for the board to be too picky.

相比之下，时代华纳和多数最新的豪华建筑是共管公寓；住户拥有独立的单位，委员会没有那么大的权力对潜在买家进行筛查。除此之外， 时代华纳中心和其他许多楼盘的规定是，如果公寓委员会拒绝一位买家， 所有住户需要凑钱买下这个单位， 因此委员会不会太挑剔。

“That’s the joy of the condos,” said Julie Maxey-Allison, an agent for Brown Harris Stevens. “That’s why the L.L.C.s buy them. It’s a way foreigners can do whatever they want here.”

“这就是共管公寓让人高兴的地方，”Brown Harris Stevens的房产中介朱莉·马克西-艾利森(Julie Maxey-Allison)说。“正是这个原因，一些有限责任公司会购买它们。这样的话，海外买家想怎么样都可以。”

In fact, interviews show, condo boards are not always aware of the individuals behind the shell companies.

事实上，一些采访显示，共管公寓委员会并不总是清楚空壳公司背后的具体个人是谁。

Seamus McMahon, a former Time Warner owner, said he had no idea units were sold to members of the Saudi royal family while he was on the board in 2006, including one connected to Princess Haifa bint Faisal, the daughter of a former Saudi king, and her husband, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, the former ambassador to the United States. A few years earlier, Princess Haifa had been in the news because of reports that some of her money had gone to a figure who aided the Sept. 11 hijackers. (The United States commission that investigated the attacks found no evidence that the money assisted the hijackers, either directly or indirectly.)

曾是时代华纳中心业主的谢默斯·麦克马洪(Seamus McMahon)表示，自己2006年担任委员期间，并不知道有公寓被卖给了沙特的王室成员，包括与沙特前国王之女海法·宾特·费萨尔公主(Haifa bint Faisal)及其夫、前沙特驻美国大使班达尔·本·苏丹王子(Bandar bin Sultan)有关联的一套。早前几年，因为有报道称，海法公主的部分资金流向了一个为9·11事件中的劫机者提供援助的人，她受到了新闻媒体的关注。（美国负责调查9·11袭击的委员会并未发现相关资金为劫机者提供了帮助的证据，不管是以直接还是间接的方式。）

Mr. McMahon said the Related Companies did not usually share details about buyers with board members and did not inform them of the Saudi sale. “They probably asked to keep it quiet,” he said, referring to the Saudis. “Related would have kept it quiet.”

麦克马洪说，Related Companies公司通常不会将买主的详细情况向委员们通报，也没有通知他们与沙特王室成员达成的那笔交易。“他们可能要求保密，”他指的是那对沙特王室夫妇。“Related Companies也会乐于保密的。”

Behind Door 74B

74B房间的内情

When the company with the complicated name of 25CC ST74B plunked down $15.65 million in 2010 for a condo in the Time Warner Center, there was no telling whose money was in play.

当名字复杂的25CC ST74B公司在2010年豪掷1565万美元，买下时代华纳中心的那套共管公寓时，没有出现和出资方有关的信息。

But in January 2013, the company accused a contractor of overbilling in a classic New York City renovation dispute. The lawsuit identified the apartment’s owner as “Vitaly Malkin, a Russian senator who is domiciled in Russia and generally is not present in New York.” Less than two weeks later, a new complaint was filed with a change: It now said the apartment was owned by a trust whose beneficiaries included Mr. Malkin’s son, Leonid, and that Mr. Malkin was neither a trustee nor a beneficiary of the trust.

但2013年1月，该公司控告一家承包商要价过高，这是纽约市一桩经典的翻修纠纷。在该案中，公寓的所有人被指是“定居在俄罗斯，通常都不在纽约的俄罗斯参议员维塔利·马尔金”。过了不到两周，当事人重新提起诉讼，此时一个细节发生了变化：起诉书称公寓的所有人是某信托基金，其受益人包括马尔金之子列昂尼德(Leonid)，马尔金既不是基金的受托人，也不是受益人。

In a deposition, a former employee of the contractor said that while he understood that the client was “the senator, the Russian oligarch,” he was not allowed to refer to the client by name. If he did use the family name, he said he was reprimanded and told “to make sure I just used 25CC.”

该承包商的一名前雇员在证词中表示，他明白客户是“那名俄罗斯寡头参议员”，但他不能提这名客户的姓名。他说，如果真的用了对方的姓氏，他会被训斥，并被告知“一定只能提25CC”。

In fact, Vitaly Malkin had been in public view for more than a decade, sometimes tied to controversy.

实际上，在十多年的时间里，维塔利·马尔金一直处于公众视野中，而且有时会牵扯争议。

Mr. Malkin, 62, made a fortune in metals and banking and was one of the wealthiest members of the Federation Council, Russia’s upper legislative house. He resigned from the Council in March 2013 after Aleksei Navalny, the Russian anticorruption activist, revealed that he had failed to disclose property he owned in Canada and that he had dual Israeli citizenship.

今年62岁的马尔金在金属产业和银行业发家，是俄罗斯议会上院联邦委员会(Federation Council)最富有的议员之一。2013年3月，俄罗斯博客作者、活动人士阿列克谢·纳瓦尔尼(Aleksei Navalny)指出，马尔金没有公开其在加拿大拥有房产，并持有俄罗斯和以色列双重国籍。之后，马尔金退出了联邦委员会。

But the case that has dogged Mr. Malkin involves a 1996 deal to restructure Angola’s $5 billion debt to Russia, an arrangement that has become a symbol of official plundering in Africa among anticorruption advocates.

但困扰马尔金的事件涉及1996年的一项协议，内容是对安哥拉欠俄罗斯的50亿美元债务进行重组。在反腐倡导人士当中，这一安排成了官方在非洲掠夺财富的象征。

The debt, incurred during Angola’s long civil war, was cut to $1.5 billion in a deal partly negotiated by Arcadi Gaydamak, a Russian-born businessman. But the debt payment was conveyed through an intermediary company in which Mr. Malkin had a share, according to documents from the Canadian government and Swiss investigators.

在该协议中，安哥拉在长期的内战期间欠下的这笔债务，被减免至15亿美元。协议在一定程度上是由生于俄罗斯的商人阿尔卡季·盖伊达马克(Arcadi Gaydamak)促成的。但加拿大政府和瑞士调查机构的文件显示，债务偿付是通过一家中介公司进行的，而马尔金持有该公司的股份。

When Angola paid the debt, Mr. Gaydamak received $130 million of the payment and Mr. Malkin received $48.8 million, the documents show. A portion also went to various Angolan officials, including President José Eduardo dos Santos, who received $36 million, according to a report by the advocacy group Corruption Watch.

文件显示，安哥拉偿还了这笔债务后，盖伊达马克从中得到了1.3亿美元，马尔金获得了4880万美元。倡导团体腐败观察(Corruption Watch)发布的一份报告显示，还有一部分流向了众多安哥拉官员，包括获得了3600万美元的安哥拉总统若泽·爱德华多·多斯桑托斯(José Eduardo dos Santos)。

Mr. dos Santos and Mr. Gaydamak did not respond to inquiries from The Times.

多斯桑托斯和盖伊达马克没有回应时报的询问。

“Everyone knew exactly what happened,” Rafael Marques, an Angolan journalist and activist, said of the payment to the president. “That money was for personal enrichment. They were kickbacks.”

“所有人都知道到底发生了什么，”安哥拉记者兼活动人士拉斐尔·马克斯(Rafael Marques)在谈论总统得到的那笔钱时说。“那笔钱被用于个人牟利。就是回扣。”

The episode became an issue for Mr. Malkin in 2007, when he tried to gain entry to Canada, where he had business interests. Two years earlier, a Canadian immigration official had deemed Mr. Malkin “inadmissible,” writing that he had “massively misrepresented” his net worth and how he obtained his assets, according to court documents obtained by The Times.

2007年，当马尔金申请加拿大的入境许可时，此事成了一个问题。马尔金在加拿大有商业利益。时报得到的法庭文件显示，早前两年，加拿大的一名移民官员认为马尔金属于“不得入境”的人员，并写道他“严重谎报”自己的净资产，以及是如何取得这些资产的。

When Mr. Malkin reapplied in 2007, among the issues was his role as Mr. Gaydamak’s banker in the Angola debt deal, the documents show. In addition to facing questions in the debt deal, Mr. Gaydamak was under investigation in France in connection with arms sales to the Angolan government. He was later sentenced to three years in a French prison for money laundering and tax fraud.

相关文件显示，马尔金2007年再次申请时，出问题的是他长期为盖伊达马克打理银行事务这件事。除了因为前述债务协议而受到质疑外，盖伊达马克还因为涉嫌参与面向安哥拉政府的武器销售，而受到法国的调查。后来，他因洗钱和税务欺诈而被判在法国一所监狱服刑三年。

Canadian immigration officials again declared Mr. Malkin inadmissible, this time because of what they called an “extended association with persons suspected to be involved in organized crime and money laundering.”

加拿大移民官员再次宣布马尔金不得入境，并表示这一次是因为马尔金“与涉嫌参与有组织犯罪和洗钱的人员有广泛联系”。