I'm at the OECD today. No doubt BEPS will be on my agenda. But so is tax evasion.
A lot of effort has been and will be put into tackling tax evasion, and rightly so. But in my estimate tax avoidance cost the UK £19.1 billion in 2013/14 whilst tax evasion cost £73.4 billion, and of the latter no more than £4.3 billion was specifically offshore.
The issues the OECD has tackled to date are vital. But if we are to really have effective domestic tax systems around the world then we need to tackle tax evasion and much of the world is reluctant to do just that for fear of alienating domestic voters.
There is a robust argument to be made that if the OECD believes that supporting markets is a part of its mandate then it has to also now take on how to address domestic tax evasion and the creation of the information systems - including accounting that meets taxation needs - that are required to beat it.
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!
“But in my estimate tax avoidance cost the UK £19.1 billion in 2013/14 whilst tax evasion cost £73.4 billion”
It certainly is an estimate. A quick word search showed you used the word ‘estimate’ or variations of it 185 times. You also assumed 19 times and to back up your estimates and assumptions you referenced your own work (which itself relies on many estimates and assumptions) no less than 30 times.
I suspect you could have come up with any number you wanted or were asked to.
I’m sure you will in later works.
As a professional person I have a duty to make clear what is being offered
All accounts, all national account information data and just about every single item of economic data is an estimate
What is your gripe with making that clear?