Good job to OECD for leading the way, as it often does, but these are mostly guidelines. The devil will, as usually, cavort in the details of each country's own implementation and related treaties. I don't have the time to go through all produced material, but if it results in actions similar to the European VAT-mess, they could end up being a lot of red tape for little gain.
There is also a real risk that some of these actions will be used as political capital to spend against the implementation of T^^IP treaties, which could be even more pernicious than a bit of tax evasion.
Of course, there will be the issue of forcing smaller countries to comply -- it took a decade of continuous brinkmanship to (sort-of) getting the likes of Cayman to accept the minimum amount of scrutiny; it's fair to expect larger changes to encounter more resistance.
It's 250bn around dozens of countries, i.e. a few billions here and there -- worth paying attention to, but not enough to sell all our rights for. I'd rather let them get away with a few billions than become (even more of) an indentured servant for Big Corp.
Because I'm sure these governments will spend the extra $250 billion/year so much more productively than the companies they're taking it from... (not.)
I'd rather it sit in a Caribbean bank than be spent killing people in foreign conflicts. Also, what's wrong with saving money? Not all money needs to be constantly spent.
The point is that it disperses throughout the economy anyways. Money doesn't magically disappear into nothingness when it is invested, as it seemed in the earlier comment. It eventually get's used by someone to buy something.
>The point is that it disperses throughout the economy anyways.
The point is that the wealth trickles up and is getting less and less dispersed. That ought to be obvious to anybody paying attention in the last 10 years.
Assuming that's true, and you want to social-engineer your populace into some sort of "equality" utopia, then I can see why you might think that to be a problem.
Unfortunately, we can disagree on that latter part as I believe in absolute individual freedom from violence and coercion. That definitely includes state engineering.
If that money sits there in U.S. dollars or any other central-bank issued paper money then "sitting" money is a non-issue. Central bank can increase money supply and direct it through government or banking system to holes digging efforts to keep current employment levels (aka monetary easing). The hard part is to unwind it when that money which was sitting there starts moving. Then we will probably see some inflation. Easing is easy, tightening hard.
Fascinating premise, utterly buried behind a paywall. Tried a different browser, tried 'Private Mode', nothing. Please update with a non-paywalled link.
I think HN should institute a policy that only links that are actually accessible can be posted. This is the web — and while it is perfectly fine to put things behind paywalls, one should not expect that people will link to them on open sites like HN.
Google the exact title and you will find it. There is no paywall when you enter from google.
This usually only works for me when I google English language newspaper articles, though. When I google articles in other languages, Google somehow allow the newspapers to apply their paywall.
There is also a real risk that some of these actions will be used as political capital to spend against the implementation of T^^IP treaties, which could be even more pernicious than a bit of tax evasion.
Of course, there will be the issue of forcing smaller countries to comply -- it took a decade of continuous brinkmanship to (sort-of) getting the likes of Cayman to accept the minimum amount of scrutiny; it's fair to expect larger changes to encounter more resistance.