The basic argument is that using tax havens is very bad indeed, oh yes! The Govt owned development corporations use tax havens and this is very bad indeed, oh yes!
So they shouldn\’t use them, oh no!
Absolutely nowhere is there even the merest consideration of the alternative. That those Govt run investment funds (and of course they are the people who would know for of course the State knows everything which is why we should do what the State tells us) know that the taxation policies of the developing countries damage foreign investment in those developing countries which is why they dodge such damaging tax policies by using tax havens.
That is, and if you\’re a Statist it\’s difficult to argue against it, if State bodies are using tax havens because those State bodies, who know all, realise that it increases the effectiveness of their aid then tax havens are indede doing something useful. They\’re mitigating the bad effects of bad developing country tax policies.
ie, tax competition works.
But the true ghastliness is this:
Richard Murphy is a chartered accountant and
\”Graduate economist\” is usually taken to mean someone who did graduate courses in economics. Not someone who graduated in economics as their first degree.
And Richard\’s first degree was in accounting and economics at Southampton* and he\’s famously told us that he ignored all the economics after the first term because \”it wasn\’t right\”.
A touch of qualification inflation here perhaps?
* In the interests of disclosure I should point out that my own undergraduate (and only) degree was in accounting and economics at the LSE. But then I don\’t claim to be a graduate economist: indeed, I continually point out that I\’m no more than an interested amateur.