Still relevant on why the definition of illicit financial flows should include aggressive tax avoidance: it looks like the biggest part of the problem & the biggest fix to developing country revenue https://bit.ly/2NU03Lr @TaxJusticeNet
As @iaincampbell07 said the @alexcobham @petr_jansky estimates are much larger than others (here is the graph compared to @gabriel_zucman @LudvigWier @TTorslov ). As C&J note the IMF paper methodology its based on is mechanical & generates $ #s for countries without tax datapic.twitter.com/poJGhFgoBI
-
-
Thanks for v helpful comments. I agree illegal $ flows & aggressive tax avoidance (ATA) need different answers. And huge work to do on both. But if ATA is denying
$bns of state revenue, then it's a big deal. E.g. https://bit.ly/2wYd68p & https://bit.ly/2CFjd6V -
Yes. They are separate questions. (1)Should avoidance/BEPS be included under IFFs (i argue no. they are different things)? (2) how big is BEPS for developing countries? I don't think it makes sense to argue it should be in IFF because its 'biggest part of problem'
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
Where should ATA be placed on the illicit-illegal-legal frame, and wouldn't it be useful to keep it on the SDG agenda? So many SDG goals & indicators cover a broad range of policy areas.
-
Taxing MNCs effectively (incl. thru int'l. collaboration & treaties) is part of broad tax policy. SDG 17.1. makes more sense than under 16.4 w gun running, drug trafficking & money laundering. The proposed indicator
shows problem of smushing togetherhttps://www.cgdev.org/blog/proposed-sdg-indicator-illicit-financial-flows-risks-conflating-ordinary-business-dirty-money … - 1 more reply
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.