Tax Research UK

I have blogged, quite often of late, on the bullying abuse of the right wing blogosphere.

Now it’s public. Guido Fawkes – a man who has made more than the odd pop at me in his time – has sought to ‘out’ William Hague.

Now don’t get me wrong – I’ve no reason to support Hague (although I suspect he would be an amusing dinner party guest) but this treatment of him by those who are supposedly among his more natural supporters is telling.

First I suspect it is profoundly homophobic. I despise that.

Second it is straightforwardly nasty. Suppose such an affair had occurred? So what is the question? Would he be the first or last minister to lack such judgment? Of course not.

Third – yes – without doubt there is good question about whether Hague needed a third, inexperienced special adviser – but did the question need to be asked with innuendo attached? No, of course not.

So I don’t dispute questioning on the political issue. But as ever the right wing have gone way beyond that. They are playing the man in quite unseemly fashion.

Don’t tell me this isn’t old fashioned bullying of the lowest order – because that is exactly what it is.

And don’t tell me it isn’t aimed at the whole instrument of government which they so despise – because it is.

The sooner the press appreciate the corrosive impact of these people the better, because they seek to udnermine democracy itself.

Richard Murphy Blogging, Politics

August is supposedly the quiet month of the year. The month when in the UK at least there is no news. And when people shut up shop and go away – ignoring reality for as long as possible.

It’s been, with July, my traditional black spot for traffic in the year. The pattern worked in 2007, 2008 and 2009.

But not in 2010. August 2010 has seen this blogs highest ever traffic in a month – over 61,000 page views, and more than 27,000 additional RSS reads – excluding any risk of double counting. The result – more than 88,000 reads in the month – the highest ever.

Why is that? Coming as it does after three months which also saw exceptionally high recurring blog traffic only just, in each case, behind August for traffic volume, and each in turn well ahead of the traffic seen in the period up to the UK election I think it’s fair to ask what is happening out there to drive such significant traffic increase?

Could it be that Tony Blair is really quite wrong when he says:

‘The biggest danger was a view that people would want the state to come back into fashion ?’

Could it actually be people are looking for debate about that alternative?

I can only suggest for sure that the election has changed something. Certainly UK traffic, which was down to 50% of reads is now up at 65% of traffic – suggesting this is largely a domestic phenomena. But it is significant – whatever the cause.

Richard Murphy Blogging, Politics

Given the importance of the recent US law requiring country-by-country and project-by-project reporting by extractive companies listed on the SEC, Revenue Watch has translated it into multiple languages to facilitate awareness and replication in other countries.

Translations of the PWYP provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, Section 1504, are now available in French, Spanish, Arabic, Russian and Chinese, for download at the Resource Center links below.

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/en/official-document/us-pwyp-law-2010-sec-1504-dodd-frank-wall-street-reform-act

French:

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/sites/default/files/HR4173_Sec%201504_FR_0.pdf

Spanish:

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/sites/default/files/HR4173_Sec%201504_ESP.pdf

Russian:

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/sites/default/files/HR4173_Sec%201504_RUS.pdf

Arabic:

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/sites/default/files/HR4173_Sec%201504_ARA.pdf

Chinese:

http://resources.revenuewatch.org/sites/default/files/HR4173_Sec%201504_SCH.pdf

Richard Murphy Country-by-country

The Isle of Man Today web site carries the following back handed compliment today, the following being an edited (shortened) version of the story:

We have also written a story about a letter from a group who thinks the Isle of Man should ditch zero-10 company tax.

The group of 12 people – including a high profile charity worker – says that we’d be better off in the long run and have a better reputation if we re-introduced company taxes.

You might remember that a few weeks ago (August 10, to be precise) we ran a story based on a survey of corporate service providers and other finance sector interests. They predicted doom and gloom – ultimately lots of job losses and a big cut in tax take – if the Island lost zero-10.

We’re delighted we’ve got a response today.

Unfortunately, the group of 12 people who’ve written to us aren’t establishing themselves as a formal pressure group. That’s a shame because they could have help to fill an argument vacuum on this topic and widen the debate. We sometimes find it hard to find someone to put counter-arguments in political stories because there are few pressure groups and little in the way of formal party politics – which thrive on confrontation – in the Isle of Man.

But at least there’s someone here in the Isle of Man – and not just Richard Murphy, the UK blogger – making the argument.

Well, I’m delighted too. I don’t want to be the one-man political opposition in the Isle of Man and never set out to be so.

But I also note how very hard it is for their to be effective political opposition in places like the Isle of Man and the other Crown Dependencies. Any pretence that there is freedom of speech in such places is just that – a pretence. These islands are effectively occupied  by the financial services industry and they use their power – the very real power to make or break people’s chance to make a living – to ensure that opposition to their activities is silenced – or belittled to the fringes.

This is not accident. This is the ultimate expression of the neo-liberal contempt for government – that overlaps with that of anarcho-capitalism, as I noted here. That same contempt for government and the rule of law that it upholds is indeed inherent in the whole definition of secrecy jurisdictions: Secrecy jurisdictions are places that intentionally create regulation for the primary benefit and use of those not resident in their geographical domain that is designed to undermine the legislation or regulation of another jurisdiction. They do in addition create a deliberate, legally backed veil of secrecy that ensures that those from outside the jurisdiction making use of its regulation cannot be identified to be doing so.

The Isle of Man Today web site and the weekly Isle of Man Examiner newspaper can welcome twelve brave individuals standing up against their government – as I do too – but the reality is that if that paper really believes in freedom of speech, politics and proper government it would challenge the whole structure of secrecy on which the Isle of Man’s business model is predicated. But it doesn’t. As such it is complicit with the occupying force within the island that holds it in fear and to ransom.

That’s why a few of us – not just me by a long way – from outside the Isle of Man and other secrecy jurisdictions have had to challenge what happens in these dark corners of corruption that set out to undermine democracy, society as we know it, accountability and the rule of law and which are, in consequence the very enemy of society itself. We’ll know we’re winning when there is real democracy in these places. Maybe the twelve who have written are a start – and I wish them well without knowing who they are – but we have a long way to go. Until we get there they can rely on much external support – and not just from me.

Richard Murphy Guernsey, Isle of Man, Jersey, Secrecy jurisdictions

As the FT notes:

George Osborne is planning to cut staff numbers at the Treasury by about one-quarter and scale back his department’s role as he attempts to lead by example in the search for sweeping spending cuts across Whitehall.

The inherent logic must be that the next time we have a financial crisis we won’t need a government department to react. After all – who needs a Treasury when we have Goldman Sachs, PWC and KPMG all willing to pay for the privilege of doing the job?

Richard Murphy Conservatives

Christian Aid is launching a new phase of its Trace the Tax campaign for greater financial transparency by multinational companies.

The charity is asking supporters to help persuade four firms to back its call for accounting reforms which will help poor countries collect more of the tax billions which are rightfully theirs.

All four have assets and subsidiaries in developing countries. They are: Vodafone, Unilever, TUI Travel (which owns Thomson and First Choice) and Intercontinental Hotels Group (which owns Holiday Inn).

Helen Collinson, Campaigns Manager at Christian Aid said: ‘We are appealing to these companies to support our campaign for greater tax transparency, including the call for a new accounting standard to ensure companies report on their profits made and taxes paid in every country where they operate. It is really important to stress that we are not accusing these companies of tax dodging.

‘We want them to become leaders in their sectors and to encourage other multinational companies to support the campaign. By doing this, they will help shape global tax reporting and play their part in fighting global poverty.’

Ms Collinson added: ‘We believe that greater tax transparency will be good for business and we are hopeful that these companies will agree with us. Taxes pay for roads and infrastructure essential to commerce. They create a healthy and educated workforce. Taxes also help to make governments more accountable and countries more stable – all of which would benefit companies doing business in developing countries.’

Christian Aid is encouraging supporters to send messages to the four FTSE companies on postcards and by video, asking them to back the campaign.                    

International organisations such as the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) recognise that tax dodging is likely to cost developing countries more than the total that they receive in aid in each year. Christian Aid estimates that their annual loss may be as great as $160 billion.

Earlier this year, the charity contacted the CEOs of the FTSE 100 and asked them to complete a survey of their views about tax, development and country-by-country reporting - an accounting standard, which would require companies to be more open about their activities around the world.

The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) is the body with the power to introduce country-by-country reporting. It is funded by the Big Four accountancy firms – PricewaterhouseCoopers, KPMG, Deloitte and Ernst & Young – which have significant influence.

Christian Aid has chosen the FTSE Four because each one is audited by one of the Big Four accountants. As well as asking the four companies to publicly support country-by-country reporting, Christian Aid is calling on them to ask their auditor to support it too. 

Richard Murphy Country-by-country

Blair’s spoken about his new book to the Guardian. There’s much to despise. For example,as the Guardian notes:

Blair’s outspoken remarks about the financial crisis and the aftermath of the British general election of 2010 in his book’s postscript are likely to have a wide party political impact, especially his caution about any embrace of the view that "the state is back".

As Blair put it:

"The problem, I would say error, was in buying a package which combined deficit spending, heavy regulation, identifying banks as the malfeasants and jettisoning the reinvention of government in favour of the rehabilitation of government. The public understands the difference between the state being forced to intervene to stabilise the market and government back in fashion as a major actor in the economy."

And that in a nutshell summarises the sell out of New Labour.

It was neoliberal, through and through. It betrayed as a result the very core of what Labour did stand for and should stand for.

It was desperate – power at any cost. But that was wrong. Power comes with a responsibility to those who grant it – and New Labour failed in that duty.

Blair’s desperate – to hide his mistakes and the blood on his hands.

And  now he’s a banker. Never forget it. As sell outs go Blair’s is complete. This is not a Labour elder statement speaking. This is a full blown member of the banking community speaking. And of course he blames government for the crisis as a result – even though he ran the government – rather than the banks.

The corruption in the thinking that this represents is astonishing.

People know there was a failure of government under Blair. It was a failure to govern finance. A willingness to connive with it. A desire to be corrupted – to the core of the soul - by it in Blair’s case.

And yes people do want government back. They do want a non-neoliberal party, not a third neo-liberal party. And of course Blair does not want that. It would threaten all he aspired to – the crassness of the wealth that seduced him – if the hegemony of neoliberal politics in the UK was challenged.

And that’s exactly the job Labour has to now take on.

Will it?

Richard Murphy Labour, Politics