Oxfam are just amazing

Companies were able to lower their rates in part by stashing $1.6 trillion offshore and relying
on a massive network of 1751 subsidiaries in tax havens. This marks a $200 billion increase
in funds stashed offshore and 143 additional subsidiaries in tax havens disclosed by these
companies since Oxfam’s 2016 report.

So, the stashing is $200 billion a year.

Rigged tax rules cost Americans approximately $135 billion each year in corporate tax
dodging and sap an estimated $100 billion every year from poor countries.

$200 billon in stashing a year causes $235 billion of tax revenue losses each year.

They’re not even reading their own shit, are they?

21 thoughts on “Oxfam are just amazing”

  1. I don’t think they care.

    If you are making up a load of bullshit, which you know fellow travellers and newsdesk thickos will print without a second glance, why bother to be consistent?

  2. Hold on. I can see how an increase in one year of $200 B in offshore funds, giving a total of $1.6 T stashed over the years, could lead to tax losses of $235 B per year on the total $1.65 T: about 15% of the total stashed. Entirely possible, I think.

    Or am I missing something?

  3. It’s like a post I saw on Facebook yesterday, which said that Labour’s suggestion of increasing minimum wage to £10 would save £40bn of in-work welfare payments, on the basis that £10 is a decent wage and presumably if you’re getting a decent wage you don’t need benefits.

    On the one hand this is clearly rubbish, as the article said it would help £5.6m people, so they’ve be getting about £7k each from a £2.50/hr pay rise, which means that either they’re working incredibly long hours or there’s a flaw in the “If you’re getting £10 an hour you don’t need benefits” argument.

    On the other hand, it might be tempting to double down on Labour’s suggestion and say that yes, NMW is going up to £10 but that because Labour have said that it means in-work benefits won’t be needed any more they’re all being cut – and refer any complaints to J Corbyn 🙂

    Of course there’s also the question of who pays for this, but a £40bn shift in burden from taxpayer to business seems not to be a problem for some Labour supporters…

  4. “Or am I missing something?”

    Yes that profits only get taxed once. Once they’ve been taxed they become capital and can safely sit in a bank account in a tax haven and not be due any more taxes (other than on any interest of course).

    The £1.6tn is a stock of money shifted to tax havens, over a period of many years. And the £235bn is described as a flow (ie a loss per year). And a tax loss of £235bn every year would represent profits of several times that amount (depending on the tax rate in the country at hand of course), and that would in just a few years be many times the amount mentioned as actually being hidden in tax havens (1.6tn). Thus one (or indeed all) of the figures are nonsense.

  5. Could somebony tell me quite what the Oxford Committee for FAMINE RELIF is doing spending doners’ money writing reports on the U.S. tax base?

  6. @MC,

    “why bother to be consistent?”

    I would say that they are consistent, especially at spouting BS as you say. Instead of consistent, didn’t you mean accurate?

  7. They learnt from the best. Ritchie counts tax paid late in his tax gap thumb-up-the-arse figures as a loss every year.

  8. The US loses $135 billion. poor countries lose $100 billion, other rich countries gain $35 billion from tax paid on dividends.

  9. You can’t lose what you never had.

    U.S. companies keep a lot orf external earnings overseas. They are not ‘stashing’ it, whatever that means. Repatriating it will incur a huge tax. Keeping it overseas is more productive. This is Business 101 stuff.

    Trump et al have talked a repatriation holiday, or some kind of tax break to get the money home. It’s not about massive networks or tax havens. It’s business reacting to tax law. Following the law is legal. Following the law is not immoral.

    ‘Rigged tax rules cost Americans approximately $135 billion each year in corporate tax

    We have tax rules. Not ‘rigged tax rules.’ To understand ‘rigged,’ see the Democrat primary.

  10. Bloke in North Dorset

    Unless the tax rate is reduced to zero, which may be a good thing but won’t happen, not all those funds would be repatriated. Why pay tax on them if you are then going to send the money out of the country to invest in another overseas venture?

  11. Stupid question
    If US corporates are encouraged to repatriate money from overseas what is the result?
    General inflation or a stock market bubble?

  12. @ BiF: Probably a big round of share buy backs, the possibility of which is already priced into US stock markets. What happens with the capital so released is anyone’s guess. Presumably this call on cash deposits would hit European banks liquidity and they’d have to sell some assets…

  13. It would boost cash on hand for investors – including funds and pensions.
    If even 50% of it was brought back it would boost the US economy. But not available to boost our economy.

  14. Ironman, Oxfam are finding a way of spending the 50% of their income that they do not spend on famine relief

  15. So Much For Subtlety

    Diogenes – “Oxfam are finding a way of spending the 50% of their income that they do not spend on famine relief”

    Bureaucracies survive and perpetuate. The British set up an organisation to investigate the presumably fictional Thuggee crimes. It still exists in modern India.

    We have cured most famine. What else are they to do?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *