Just read KPMG's Corporate Tax Rate Survey.

How does Loughlin Hickey equate:

"it appears to be economically and socially desirable for countries to strive for lower corporate income taxes."

I understand that the argument of reducing corporate income tax MAY increase inward investment and therefore MAY improve economic growth.

But, surely inward investment is a loss of investment and economic growth from another country(s)? Therefore, tumbling corporate tax rates cannot be socially desirable, especially as indirect taxation may be enacted (as in Jersey etc) or increased, and social security contributions may increase as in countries with flat taxes due to the decline of personal and corporate income taxes and the desire to provide social protection?

This is all before we even contemplate our enemy tax avoidance and evasion.

NB: This contribution is form Chris Steel. Chris is treasurer of ATTAC Jersey. he sent this to me as a mail, but with his permission I reproduce it here as it is a good summary of a shoddy argument by Loughlin Hickey.