As Transfer Pricing Weekly have reported this morning, Ernst & Young objected to my live tweeting from the OECD earlier today.
I was commenting on a session on country-by-country reporting during which I had already spoken when EY raised their objection.
No doubt EY did not like my references to them - but given that they do have a public position opposing country-by-country reporting I think my comments were entirely fair.
What this really shows is the paranoia pervading big business and their advisers about the need for secrecy - something I oppose. What it also shows is that they are frightened of the consequences of the civil society demand for accountability - but seeking to silence it is not the way forward. And nor will we be silenced. The reform of international tax has arisen, at least in part, as a result if the demands of civil society and we are not giving up now.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
How can someone ask for Chatham House rules to apply at an event which is being broadcast live on the internet (I assume this session is part of the broadcast)?
It was broadcast
Maybe they objected to you calling them Ernst & Young instead of EY? 🙂
Could it be that EY have most to hide? They are simply too ridiculous for words..