This is just my opinion below. However we should not mix far offshore i.e Caribbean and atols in south pacific with people that bank outside their home country in non-banana republics which is also technically considered offshore.
People that use offshore banks fall into two categories now. Criminals and those that want to reduce tax liabilities. Most people don't recognize they are committing a crime until they are sat in front of a judge. In 2018
asset protection is a category that can no longer apply to offshore accounts as with
CRS/
FATCA once your assets are known they can be confiscated. Those after simplicity in using offshore banks can no longer claim this, as setting up an
offshore company and an account is not as easy as setting up an onshore company i.e a UK limited company or an Estonian company with an account. You are actually having to put in effort to get it to work and last longer than a few months 2018.
The main reason I feel governments support the work of the
OECD is to fight against organized crime, money laundering and
tax evasion. Ultimately it means more tax revenue for them as governments are all broke. However it will not solve their financial situation in the slightest but its good to pretend to the public the reason they have poor health care is because Mr Jones down the road does not pay his taxes while at the same time firing of barrages of missiles in middle east that cost $800k each. The amount of money lost to tax evasion however is significant. Terrorist financing is just the boogie man excuse used to clamp down and shock the public into cooperation i.e if you look at terror attacks around Europe they did not need a lot of money to buy kitchen knives and hammers.
Panama papers was not such a big deal after the shock factor. Aside from the headline names that appeared on the paper most clients were actually using legal offshore structures. The ultra wealthy have good advisors so those that have above $20m don'tt make same offshore mistakes as those below.