You can add location information to your Tweets, such as your city or precise location, from the web and via third-party applications. You always have the option to delete your Tweet location history. Learn more
So you could say "62% of global FDI flows into the real economy are facilitated by international financial centres" ! This makes more sense than reporting it as a percentage of measured FDI which the research says is not meaningful.
Of course this is what you would say if you were a PR for the financial centres (which I am not). But the point is between the underlying research & the PRs wanting to use it to advocate for 'IFCs are bad!' or 'IFCs are good!' there is a missing middle of appetite for analysis
The big Q is to what extent does putting investment through these financial centres usefully facilitate investment in the real economy (by providing legal systems, tax neutral spots for combining capital from different places, enabling international biz to run smoothly) ...
...or to what extent is it motivated by profit shifting? The Danish trio's research as far as we know doesn't shed further light on this question. So you can colour their numbers in with your existing perceptions.
But if you are the @IMFNews or the @FT or the various funders of the @TAInitiative I would hope you would do better. Because the answer to the question really matters, and the attraction of the easy headlines corrupts your mission.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
