I briefly read Ed Balls comments where I believe he name checked me and thoroughly endorsed all my opinions.
I skimmed his article because as a non tax expert there is little he can write that will be of any informative value to me. However, I garnered enough to accurately reflect his deeply held views here.
For starters on Starbucks, he said something about in a global market much of multinationals’ value lies in their brands. Exactly. Which is why it is completely inappropriate for Starbucks UK to pay for the use of a brand developed elsewhere.
He also said companies should be forced to publish a single figure that discloses their corporation tax. I have long campaigned to have companies include in their accounts a current tax figure AND some sort of reconciliation as to how that number differs from the expected tax, ie the profit before tax at the headline rate of tax.
Then, anybody with half a brain could easily make firm conclusions about what tax adjustments the company has made.
Also, we should introduce a concept I have developed known as “deferred tax”. This should be accounted for in some way, showing the effect of timing differences which arise for tax purposes on things like the different rate between capital allowances and depreciation.
Ed Balls has clearly appreciated these deficiencies that there currently are in published accounts.
Also, I’m pretty sure that when he says he wants to review the basis of how multinationals are taxed this is a thinly veiled endorsement of my GRAPIST bill.
I have waited for the Labour Party to endorse it, and I anticipate a manifesto pledge to this effect any day now.