Feb 152007
KPMG’s new report isn’t all bad (form my point of view). Take this for example on general anti-avoidance provisions, of which I am firmly in favour:
Similarly, while statutory general anti-avoidance rules are perhaps unlikely to be introduced retrospectively in most jurisdictions, their introduction for the future may nevertheless mean that expenditure incurred by a company in expectation of continuing tax savings is wasted; in addition, the structures put in place for this purpose may be difficult, or expensive, to dismantle.
That sounds like a clear endorsement of their effectiveness in stopping tax abuse to me. And if KPMG think that, let’s go for it I say.
2 Responses to “KPMG – arguing for a general anti-avoidance provision”
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
Richard
I tried to read this report, I really did. But in my view it has been written in dreadful academic language which does nothing to make the meaning clearer and takes twice as long to read as plain English, so I gave up. I would suggest the author follows the principles behind the tax law rewrite project for future papers.
Roger
You’re too kind to it
Richard