Remember, Ritchie expects the companies to just eat these costs. While there may be some indirect benefits for investors, the main purpose of these proposals is to help NGOs badger governments. Governments, in the main, don\’t need country-by-country reporting because they have the ultimate sanction – \”give us the information we want or we won\’t let you trade here\”. There are even doubts as to whether country-by-country reporting would provide sufficient information for Ritchie and the NGOs to derive meaningful and accurate conclusions about the tax compliance of multinational firms.
So unless the NGOs feel like cutting a cheque (and they may have some difficulty explaining this in terms of their charitable objects), on what basis do they feel they have any right to demand that the pensions of ordinary working people be punished annually to the tune of hundreds of millions of pounds for their ridiculous vanity project?
That\’s a very good question.
If, as Ritchie agrees, country by country reporting is going to cost hundreds of millions of pounds a year, why isn\’t Ritchie offering to pay for it? He is the one demanding it, after all.
Surely we don\’t all have to suck up the costs for his obsessions?