BLACKLISTS have been a feature of tax diplomacy ever since an internationally co-ordinated assault on tax havens began in the late 1990s. One of the first lists, produced by a global anti-money-laundering body, included, among others, Panama. The Central American country rattled the only sabre it had—its canal—and was promptly taken off the list after some Western governments squealed that their companies might lose engineering contracts.
Politicised though blacklisting may be, it is no less popular today. Pressure to name and shame is high in a time of post-crisis austerity. The latest such list, published in June by the European Union (EU), points the finger at 30 countries it views as “non-co-operative” on tax.
The targets (see table) have cried foul. Far from being exhaustively researched, the list is an aggregation of national lists: it includes any country blacklisted by ten or more EU members. Not only does that strike many as arbitrary, but the criteria for inclusion differ from EU state to state: some consider a low tax rate alone sufficient grounds, others require secrecy and opacity too. The most avid...
from The Economist: Finance and economics http://ift.tt/1HXUjEZ
No comments:
Post a Comment