Alex we've been here before but the UN says that there is no agreed definition and no resolution on this specific point https://developmentfinance.un.org/illicit-financial-flows …pic.twitter.com/GiXNzRnkQG
-
Please don't misrepresent this. We're inviting comment, critique, contribution on draft chapters. Naturally these express views. (In the past, we have also expressed views.) We are deliberately seeking contributions from many competing views in many areas. These are very welcome.
I am glad this project is taking place, and clearly part of the point of such discussions is that views can change. In June you (TJN/GATJ) said that there could be no legitimate question over whether the agreed SDG goal on IFFs included tax avoidance - is that still the position?
-
-
On the narrow point: I am yet to see any compelling evidence against the well-documented case that multinational tax avoidance was understood as part of IFF, in the process of agreeing the SDG target. But still open to new evidence, of course.
-
Thanks for clarifying Alex. There is important difference I think between "we are open to new evidence and analysis on this point" and "No amount of (re)interpretation or (re)definition can raise any legitimate question over this point"
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
Agree value in joint discussions. But are book's parameters capable of flexing/amending, eg misalignment seems only there to incorporate avoidance/BEPS stuff -corruption/criminality/etc are 100% "misaligned"!
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
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.