ISAs are not tax avoidance
Super, OK. And we are given a precise definition:
If someone is doing precisely what the law intends and allows for and seeks to encourage then they are not tax avoiding.
When they are doing something that the law never intended to happen and get a tax advantage from it then they are tax avoiding.
So, EU law specifically insists that intra-European royalty payments are not to be taxed in the country of origin. Thus Starbucks, Amazon et al are not tax avoiding by doing so. Interest is a deductible expense, thus Boots is not tax avoiding by being capital light and debt heavy. Cadbury showed that Vodafone was obeying the lat# to he jot and tittle, it being the UK CFC laws which were the illegality. That’s not tax avoidance therefore. Facebook selling from Ireland into the UK is the very point of the Single Market.
The Senior Lecturer has just given us a definition of tax avoidance which wipes out near all his examples of tax avoidance.