That's just complicating the ways in which things can work. The end result is N observation of reported losses. What % genuine. You're only being asked to choose one of 4 buckets.
-
If we make these adjustments it raises pre tax profit by 70% over the lifecycle of the mine (i.e. if OO base case represents what the company declared and the adjusted case represents the true ALP it means 60% of profits were being shifted) (6/)
BUT the pattern of years of loss and profit doesn’t look all that different. This time there are 26 loss years, and the project become profitable a year earlier. So the answer in this case is there is a 4% prevalence of loss years due to profit shifting.pic.twitter.com/s66Uv8vTpJ
-
-
Which is why I don’t think its all that useful a question – because it turns the answer that the Transfer Pricing Deity is 100% certain that the company is shifting 60% of its profits away into the statement that there is 4% chance that any given loss year is not a real loss year
-
(.... obviously these calculations will change if we change the commodity price for the OT model, or if we look at a different mine with different costs of production....) (/9)
- 10 more replies
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.