The OECD needs to embrace radical reform to its country-by-country reporting standard
The OECD published the 79 comments it received on its consultation on the future of its version of country-by-country reporting yesterday.
I should make a confession now. One of those submissions is by me. I also signed two others, from Eurodad and GRI, because overall they made points my submission did not. I offer no apology; after all, despite the right-wing claims, I created country-by-country reporting as we now know it.
Country by country reporting, as we now know it, is what the OECD is saying that country by country reporting is. ‘Cuz, logically enough, what CbyC is is what the peeps who define CbyC is.
And as it’s possible to note here, given the complaints by Snippa, the OECD isn’t defining CbyC the way Snippa thinks CbyC should be. Therefore, the CbyC we’ve got isn’t the one that Snippa created, is it? For if it was he’d not be complaining.
The points I made can be simply summarised. They are first that CBCR cannot work as the OECD hoped because they got the technical accounting wrong in their standard, requiring aggregation by jurisdiction rather than consolidation. Aggregation involves double counting. That is never a good idea. The OECD has to get the accounting right now or its version of CBCR will never work as planned.
The OECD’s CbyC ain’t Ritchie’s. So Ritchie didn’t create it, did he?