On the other hand, British Territory Cayman which was briefly blacklisted for the first time in February 202018 but removed from the list in October 2020 after it was deemed compliant with international tax rules, is responsible for the biggest share of countries’ tax losses (16.5 per cent of global tax losses, equal to over $70 billion a year). The Tax Justice Network argues that Cayman being deemed to be compliant with international tax rules despite being the world’s greatest enabler of global tax abuse is evidence that current international tax rules are not fit for purpose.
EU blacklisted jurisdictions cause less than 2% of global tax losses, EU member states cause 36%
Analysis of the jurisdictions on the EU tax haven blacklist found the cohort to be collectively responsible for just 1.72 per cent of global tax losses, costing countries over $7 billion in lost tax a year.16 In comparison, EU member states are responsible for 36 per cent of global tax losses, costing countries over $154 billion in lost tax every year.
Legality of the Threat or Use of Nuclear Weapons [1996] ICJ 2 is a landmark international law case, where the International Court of Justice gave an advisory opinion stating that there is no source of law, customary or treaty, that explicitly prohibits the possession or even use of nuclear weapons. The only requirement being that their use must be in conformity with the law on self-defence and principles of international humanitarian law.[1]
Home The source for global inequality data. Open access, high quality wealth and income inequality data developed by an international academic consortium.
"Key provisions of the proposals which are not acceptable from the point of view of important public interests include: a prohibition of requirements to hold data locally; a prohibition of otherwise regulating cross-border data transfers; a prohibition of requiring a local presence for goods/service providers in the country; and a prohibition of requiring open source software in government procurement contracts. It is also proposed that there be no border taxes on digital products.
Furthermore, it is being proposed to effectively give the WTO jurisdiction to adjudicate whether a national technology or data regulation was “reasonable,” “objective,” “transparent,” and “not more burdensome than necessary to ensure the quality of the service.” WTO’s adjudication processes have historically tended to favour commercial interests, and giving them a blanket supervision of technology/ data regulation may go against governments’ obligation to ensure that services are operated in the public interest and respect human rights and freedoms
In addition, discussions in WTO and in so-called free trade agreement (FTA) negotiations are neither transparent nor inclusive, thus resulting in decisions that do not take into account the interests of all concerned parties. The processes are overly influenced by big business interests."
By Leila Ueberschlag, October 27, 2016 at 9:51 am.
Since 2012, 15MpaRato, an organized citizen collective based in Barcelona, has been uncovering some of the largest corruption cases that are shaking Spanish politics since the 2008 financial crisis, and is a good example of fighting the impunity of financial corruption.
Apple was the recipient of illegal tax breaks from Ireland. That was the finding today of a European Union (EU) Commission investigation into the tech giant’s business and tax practices. The result? The company has been ordered to pay €13 billion ($14.5 billion U.S.), plus interest, to settle back taxes owed to Ireland.
Glenn Greenwald: illegality was never the crux of the scandal triggered by those NSA revelations. Instead, what was most shocking was what had been legalized: the secret construction of the largest system of suspicionless spying in human history. ... Panama Papere ... Some of these documents undoubtedly reveal criminality: either monies that were illegally obtained (and are being hidden for that reason) or assets being concealed in order to criminally evade tax debts. But the crux of this activity — placing assets offshore in order to avoid incurring tax liability — has been legalized.