I could not help but be amused by this juxtaposition in The Times this morning:
I presume KPMG did not ask to be associated with this feature from Mark Littlewood of the Institute of Economic Affairs, but as the biggest tax havens operator amongst the Big 4 accountants I doubt they object.
Littlewood is spouting his usual nonsense as far as I can see. The IEA has been promoting tax havens throughout its existence. After all, it survives and thrives on secrecy, having never disclosed its funders.
And it exists to promote inequality.
Whilst its respect for the rule of tax law is not great. Just read Richard Teather's book on tax havens for them published in about 2005 as evidence of that: it got as close to endorsing the merits of tax evasion as a mechanism for undermining the democratic choices of government as I suspect it dared go.
And now in post-Brexit Westminster, where the Institute of Economic Affairs is closer to the heart of government than it has ever been here is its director suggesting the UK embrace the idea of being a tax haven.
So let's summarise what that means. It firstly requires that the transparency necessary for the proper operation of markets be denied. Littlewood is, then, arguing against proper markets.
And he is arguing that the UK should seek to be the depository for the proceeds of crime and corruption.
Whilst he is arguing that the UK should engage in economic warfare with the world's democracies to undermine the tax that they have the legitimate right to collect.
And he is arguing, as already noted, for the increase in inequality in society that tax havens promote and which is so harmful to markets and society at large.
This is what embracing a tax haven means. And what is worrying is that there will be those who will listen to him.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
“And he is arguing that the UK should seek to be the depository for the proceeds of crime and corruption”
I thought we were already fairly well ahead in that game?
It is one of the areas that I highlighted when writing to MPs during the BREXIT standoff period. We really have been duped.
People have been musing about Boris’s lack of visibility recently.
I reckon Dominic has sent him off for elocution lessons so he can talk fluent pantomime piratese.
Oooh, arrr me hearties we be going to be sailin’ the seven seas looking for gold and booty.
…….and Tom, the cabin boy said…… nothing.
So if the mendacious fatberg is Cap’n Pugwash would that make Cummings – Master Bates? 🙂 (or perhaps he has been & gone – who knows).
Leaving the open question as to who fills the role of Seaman Staines.
Apologies I appreciate that this is a family blog – but it is impossible to take the current set of grotesques in gov’ seriously.
Blistering barnacles! This is one of those long-lived urban legends that presumably will only die out with the generation that watched Captain Pugwash.
It was “Master _Mate_” and “_Tom_ the Cabin Boy”. There was no Seaman Staines.
The Guardian paid the show’s creator damages for libel after repeating this scurrilous falsehood in the 1990s. https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/captain-pugwash-double-meanings/
Thank you
I’m guessing that this is part of a stupid ‘transition period’ testing of the water. They should know full well that the EU will be looking to squish that idea. I imagine that they will be throwing quite a few stupid ideas out there in the weeks ahead whilst fishing for a response.
An intelligent negotiator would keep their cards close to their chest if they were honestly trying to secure a good deal. I think that this mob generally have already given up on a good deal knowing that they no longer have the bargaining power to get one.
They are planning for their own failure, for an attempt to blame it on Europe and looking at contingencies beyond that. I could be overthinking it but I doubt it.