Is Ireland about to become a fully-fledged tax haven?

indeed, you cannot rely on indigenous industry to remain. see GM, ford and crysler opening huge factories and moving production to mexico as soon as the NAFTA was signed. at least with FDI you don't kid yourself that they are here becuase they just love the irish becuase of our crazy sense of humour, our crack and my great great granpoppy was irish. we recognise that they are here as long as its profitable for them to be here. so we set about making it profitable for them to remain. FDI companies tend to have better pay and work conditions than indigenous companies (compare google with irish ferries!) so FDI are positive in terms of employee entitlements as irish companies are dragged kicking and screaming into the 20th never mind the 21st century.

zakalwe wrote:

smurfit kappa is a world leader.
ryanair is a world leader.
kerry group is a world leader.

given our meagre natural resources, we're not going to have heavy industries native to our country. and i'm sure finnish internet commentators are posting about the finnish overreliance on one company.

I agree and I don't mean heavy industry. I think we should be going into tidal and wind technologies though, and applying them. The problem of overreliance is a big one - if a big firm goes down in a boom, no problem, employees start up microbusinesses or find other jobs. If it goes down in a recession it is a major disaster.

The worker co-op model from Catalonia looked interesting - did you see that anarchist thread? Good co-ops were more robust in a recession that PLCs.

cactus flower wrote:

zakalwe wrote:

smurfit kappa is a world leader.
ryanair is a world leader.
kerry group is a world leader.

given our meagre natural resources, we're not going to have heavy industries native to our country. and i'm sure finnish internet commentators are posting about the finnish overreliance on one company.

I agree and I don't mean heavy industry. I think we should be going into tidal and wind technologies though, and applying them. The problem of overreliance is a big one - if a big firm goes down in a boom, no problem, employees start up microbusinesses or find other jobs. If it goes down in a recession it is a major disaster.

The worker co-op model from Catalonia looked interesting - did you see that anarchist thread? Good co-ops were more robust in a recession that PLCs.

didn't see that thread, is it here or one the other site?

i'm not sure whether tidal or wind tech has long term return possibilities, think its not a steady source of supply so won't be the mainstay of the grid. i would encourage investment but not with my own money!!!

i would counter your point with saying that there is an optimum balance between FDI companies, indigenous companies and micro-businesses. the problems inherent in micro-business is that of capital investment (lack of opportunities) and risk allocation. i think a mix of all is a healthy balance for the economy.

re the nokia example and fall of one big company, i think nokia isn't a great example due to the nature of the phone manufacturing business and the production model. i think a more apt example is watch making in switzerland, however watchs are an example of a market where the market encourages differentiation. people don't like that with phones where "compatability" and low price is key. (there's probably a thesis here somewhere if some MBA student wants!!!!)

zakalwe wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

zakalwe wrote:

smurfit kappa is a world leader.
ryanair is a world leader.
kerry group is a world leader.

given our meagre natural resources, we're not going to have heavy industries native to our country. and i'm sure finnish internet commentators are posting about the finnish overreliance on one company.

I agree and I don't mean heavy industry. I think we should be going into tidal and wind technologies though, and applying them. The problem of overreliance is a big one - if a big firm goes down in a boom, no problem, employees start up microbusinesses or find other jobs. If it goes down in a recession it is a major disaster.

The worker co-op model from Catalonia looked interesting - did you see that anarchist thread? Good co-ops were more robust in a recession that PLCs.

didn't see that thread, is it here or one the other site?

i'm not sure whether tidal or wind tech has long term return possibilities, think its not a steady source of supply so won't be the mainstay of the grid. i would encourage investment but not with my own money!!!

i would counter your point with saying that there is an optimum balance between FDI companies, indigenous companies and micro-businesses. the problems inherent in micro-business is that of capital investment (lack of opportunities) and risk allocation. i think a mix of all is a healthy balance for the economy.

re the nokia example and fall of one big company, i think nokia isn't a great example due to the nature of the phone manufacturing business and the production model. i think a more apt example is watch making in switzerland, however watchs are an example of a market where the market encourages differentiation. people don't like that with phones where "compatability" and low price is key. (there's probably a thesis here somewhere if some MBA student wants!!!!)

Here it is.

https://machinenation.forumakers.com/political-ideas-radical-politics-f22/anarchism-the-most-misrepresented-and-misunderstood-philosophy-t671.htm

zakalwe wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

zakalwe wrote:

smurfit kappa is a world leader.
ryanair is a world leader.
kerry group is a world leader.

given our meagre natural resources, we're not going to have heavy industries native to our country. and i'm sure finnish internet commentators are posting about the finnish overreliance on one company.

I agree and I don't mean heavy industry. I think we should be going into tidal and wind technologies though, and applying them. The problem of overreliance is a big one - if a big firm goes down in a boom, no problem, employees start up microbusinesses or find other jobs. If it goes down in a recession it is a major disaster.

The worker co-op model from Catalonia looked interesting - did you see that anarchist thread? Good co-ops were more robust in a recession that PLCs.

didn't see that thread, is it here or one the other site?

i'm not sure whether tidal or wind tech has long term return possibilities, think its not a steady source of supply so won't be the mainstay of the grid. i would encourage investment but not with my own money!!!

i would counter your point with saying that there is an optimum balance between FDI companies, indigenous companies and micro-businesses. the problems inherent in micro-business is that of capital investment (lack of opportunities) and risk allocation. i think a mix of all is a healthy balance for the economy.

re the nokia example and fall of one big company, i think nokia isn't a great example due to the nature of the phone manufacturing business and the production model. i think a more apt example is watch making in switzerland, however watchs are an example of a market where the market encourages differentiation. people don't like that with phones where "compatability" and low price is key. (there's probably a thesis here somewhere if some MBA student wants!!!!)

Ryanair is a regional airline, not a world leader. Kerry Group is a big company but is it a world leader? Ditto Smurfit. I am living in a country with several world leading companies (Nestlè, Novartis, ABB) in it with seemingly no natural advantages ie. no natural component forming part of their respective successes. I am looking at an entire industry where this country leads the world (watch-making) and I know that two companies here constitute 38% of the little-known but highly lucrative food-flavouring industry (the rest is in New Jersey). I admire how the Swiss organise their economy and their country and I think we could learn much from them. (I haven't mentioned banking deliberately)

Ireland is, admittedly, relatively new to this but what our government was doing in the last 11 years is utterly unforgivable. Allowing a massive bubble in real estate to absorb so much money to be transferred out of the country while ignoring the critical raising of standards and competitivness of our indigineous industry was criminal neglect. To find ourselves still dependent to the degree we are on FDI after the boom years is embarrassing at best and crassly incompetent at worst. To have invested virtually nothing in native industry was politically and economically inept.

Don't get me wrong. We should try to get FDI into the country. The Swiss do and are very successful at it. But they are not reliant on it and their big industries tend to re-invest in Switzerland. Novartis recently opened a new research facility and having looked all over Europe for a suitable location, decided to locate it in Kanton Zug, 35 miles south of Zurich.

I despair at the clumsy, ham-fisted way our politicians run our economy (or don't, as the case is) and it is all the more frustrating because we are not a nation of gobshites. For some reason, however, we tend to vote gobshites into public office.

quick point, but switz is beautifully positioned to export to germany, france, austria and italy. thats a pretty good advantage over ireland.

zakalwe wrote:

quick point, but switz is beautifully positioned to export to germany, france, austria and italy. thats a pretty good advantage over ireland.

Of course you are right about that. Then we have no foreign exchange risk to our EU export/import business. The Swiss do. Swings and roundabouts.

cactus flower wrote:

Ard Taoiseach, with our very high costs, poor access to high speed broadband and high shipping costs (now estimated at 9% of price) why would any FDI manufacturing outfit not shift to mainland Europe or back to the States? The "internationally traded service sector" is a lot of it finance, and in turmoil, but still holds a better long-term prospect: but only if the cost base is reduced and high speed broadband provided.

Because our non-wage costs are the lowest in the OECD, our education standards are world class, our people are very productive, the legal situation is very encouraging for headquarter operations, we have a cluster of high technology firms in medical devices, life sciences, chemicals, software and various financial services, the cost of moving would be too high and disruptive, we're in the €uro, we're English-speaking, the time difference is at its narrowest between Europe and the US and we have a political stability unrivalled in modern Europe.

We've got a hell of a lot of good things going for us and I see us sitting very pretty in this century as many other countries like Germany and Italy embrace their doom.

It seems that two companies are moving here. Henderson have confirmed the move while Charter Group are also donning the green jersey. Olé, Olé, Olé, Olé Oleeeeé! [repeat ad nauseam]

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

cactus flower wrote:

Ard Taoiseach, with our very high costs, poor access to high speed broadband and high shipping costs (now estimated at 9% of price) why would any FDI manufacturing outfit not shift to mainland Europe or back to the States? The "internationally traded service sector" is a lot of it finance, and in turmoil, but still holds a better long-term prospect: but only if the cost base is reduced and high speed broadband provided.

Because our non-wage costs are the lowest in the OECD, our education standards are world class, our people are very productive, the legal situation is very encouraging for headquarter operations, we have a cluster of high technology firms in medical devices, life sciences, chemicals, software and various financial services, the cost of moving would be too high and disruptive, we're in the €uro, we're English-speaking, the time difference is at its narrowest between Europe and the US and we have a political stability unrivalled in modern Europe.

We've got a hell of a lot of good things going for us and I see us sitting very pretty in this century as many other countries like Germany and Italy embrace their doom.

Hi Ard. We've been here before with the Germans. I don't think the worlds No 1 exporter is shortly to embrace its doom. Au contraire, my friend, I think exciting things are happening below the surface in Germany and, although these things take time in Germany, I am very positive about things there. Look at the WTO thread and you may begin to figure it out. I set out a stall, as it were regarding the future or lack of it for the WTO and I believe Germany may have the answer which Merkel may unwittingly stumble upon
Anyway, it's all good material for discussion.

Slim Buddha wrote:

Hi Ard. We've been here before with the Germans. I don't think the worlds No 1 exporter is shortly to embrace its doom. Au contraire, my friend, I think exciting things are happening below the surface in Germany and, although these things take time in Germany, I am very positive about things there. Look at the WTO thread and you may begin to figure it out. I set out a stall, as it were regarding the future or lack of it for the WTO and I believe Germany may have the answer which Merkel may unwittingly stumble upon
Anyway, it's all good material for discussion.

Yes, that might be true but I look at all that Rentenversicherung that has to be paid by less and less young workers, the detachment of the millions of Turks who aren't a full and proper contributor to the German nation, the population will drop by about 10 million over the next few decades, die Linken Partei are distracting people from the real solutions to the real problems in Germany and the German consumer remains eternally moribund. I fail to see much of a future in Germany. I see Ireland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, the Netherlands and Denmark as the stars of Europe's future. I see Germany slip-sliding away and Italy becoming possibly Europe's poorest country by 2050.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Hi Ard. We've been here before with the Germans. I don't think the worlds No 1 exporter is shortly to embrace its doom. Au contraire, my friend, I think exciting things are happening below the surface in Germany and, although these things take time in Germany, I am very positive about things there. Look at the WTO thread and you may begin to figure it out. I set out a stall, as it were regarding the future or lack of it for the WTO and I believe Germany may have the answer which Merkel may unwittingly stumble upon
Anyway, it's all good material for discussion.

Yes, that might be true but I look at all that Rentenversicherung that has to be paid by less and less young workers, the detachment of the millions of Turks who aren't a full and proper contributor to the German nation, the population will drop by about 10 million over the next few decades, die Linken Partei are distracting people from the real solutions to the real problems in Germany and the German consumer remains eternally moribund. I fail to see much of a future in Germany. I see Ireland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, the Netherlands and Denmark as the stars of Europe's future. I see Germany slip-sliding away and Italy becoming possibly Europe's poorest country by 2050.

The German government need to do the following:

Reform taxes. Give tax breaks to the Mittelstand to stimulate economic growth. Bring taxes in general down and eliminate bureaucracy through eGovernment solutions (you would not believe how outdated bureaucracy is there). Reform social security. Quit subsidising moribund industry.

They know this and the rise of Die Linke provides an excellent opportunity for the government to press ahead with this agenda. Because the alternative is unelectable. (Shades of Labour in the UK in 1983).

That's the short version.

Slim Buddha wrote:

The German government need to do the following:

Reform taxes. Give tax breaks to the Mittelstand to stimulate economic growth. Bring taxes in general down and eliminate bureaucracy through eGovernment solutions (you would not believe how outdated bureaucracy is there). Reform social security. Quit subsidising moribund industry.

They know this and the rise of Die Linke provides an excellent opportunity for the government to press ahead with this agenda. Because the alternative is unelectable. (Shades of Labour in the UK in 1983).

That's the short version.

And I would agree with your prescription. Generally lower taxes, generally easier bureaucratic burden, more competition and freer trade are the path towards real and substantial economic progress. I don't see them doing it though.

Slim Buddha wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Hi Ard. We've been here before with the Germans. I don't think the worlds No 1 exporter is shortly to embrace its doom. Au contraire, my friend, I think exciting things are happening below the surface in Germany and, although these things take time in Germany, I am very positive about things there. Look at the WTO thread and you may begin to figure it out. I set out a stall, as it were regarding the future or lack of it for the WTO and I believe Germany may have the answer which Merkel may unwittingly stumble upon
Anyway, it's all good material for discussion.

Yes, that might be true but I look at all that Rentenversicherung that has to be paid by less and less young workers, the detachment of the millions of Turks who aren't a full and proper contributor to the German nation, the population will drop by about 10 million over the next few decades, die Linken Partei are distracting people from the real solutions to the real problems in Germany and the German consumer remains eternally moribund. I fail to see much of a future in Germany. I see Ireland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, the Netherlands and Denmark as the stars of Europe's future. I see Germany slip-sliding away and Italy becoming possibly Europe's poorest country by 2050.

The German government need to do the following:

Reform taxes. Give tax breaks to the Mittelstand to stimulate economic growth. Bring taxes in general down and eliminate bureaucracy through eGovernment solutions (you would not believe how outdated bureaucracy is there). Reform social security. Quit subsidising moribund industry.

They know this and the rise of Die Linke provides an excellent opportunity for the government to press ahead with this agenda. Because the alternative is unelectable. (Shades of Labour in the UK in 1983).

That's the short version.

How does it fit in with the Keynesian approach - it sounds not far from the arguments for electing Margaret Thatcher. This is my query about Keynesianism: doesn't it tend to end in economic tears when international competition kicks in? I still don't understand how the Swedes have done it.

cactus flower wrote:

How does it fit in with the Keynesian approach - it sounds not far from the arguments for electing Margaret Thatcher. This is my query about Keynesianism: doesn't it tend to end in economic tears when international competition kicks in? I still don't understand how the Swedes have done it.

Whatever about its ideological provenance, it makes sense and Germany needs a good dose of liberalisations to get economic growth above 3% where it needs to be. Keynesianism is inflationary, creates an over-large public sector, reduces entrepreneurialism as the source of economic growth and can lead to very high taxes which reduces the attractiveness of work.

cactus flower wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Hi Ard. We've been here before with the Germans. I don't think the worlds No 1 exporter is shortly to embrace its doom. Au contraire, my friend, I think exciting things are happening below the surface in Germany and, although these things take time in Germany, I am very positive about things there. Look at the WTO thread and you may begin to figure it out. I set out a stall, as it were regarding the future or lack of it for the WTO and I believe Germany may have the answer which Merkel may unwittingly stumble upon
Anyway, it's all good material for discussion.

Yes, that might be true but I look at all that Rentenversicherung that has to be paid by less and less young workers, the detachment of the millions of Turks who aren't a full and proper contributor to the German nation, the population will drop by about 10 million over the next few decades, die Linken Partei are distracting people from the real solutions to the real problems in Germany and the German consumer remains eternally moribund. I fail to see much of a future in Germany. I see Ireland, Switzerland, Luxembourg, Finland, the Netherlands and Denmark as the stars of Europe's future. I see Germany slip-sliding away and Italy becoming possibly Europe's poorest country by 2050.

The German government need to do the following:

Reform taxes. Give tax breaks to the Mittelstand to stimulate economic growth. Bring taxes in general down and eliminate bureaucracy through eGovernment solutions (you would not believe how outdated bureaucracy is there). Reform social security. Quit subsidising moribund industry.

They know this and the rise of Die Linke provides an excellent opportunity for the government to press ahead with this agenda. Because the alternative is unelectable. (Shades of Labour in the UK in 1983).

That's the short version.

How does it fit in with the Keynesian approach - it sounds not far from the arguments for electing Margaret Thatcher. This is my query about Keynesianism: doesn't it tend to end in economic tears when international competition kicks in? I still don't understand how the Swedes have done it.

Taxes in Germany are ludicrously high. That is why I keep hearing Hochdeutsch all over Zürich. There are thousands of highly educated Germans working here and more join each day. Same in Basel, particularly in the many pharmaceutical companies there. "Beamten" (public servants) are utterly unsackable in Germany and that must end. Germany is very Keynesianist. Even that great conservative, Helmut Kohl said " We are not a Marktwirtschaft (market economy), we are a Sozialmarktwirtschaft (a social market economy). In other words, a mixed economy. I am not advocating a change of the architecture but a trimming of the fat and putting it on a clear fitness regimen. A strong German economy is of incalculable benefit to Europe.

Slim Buddha wrote:

Taxes in Germany are ludicrously high. That is why I keep hearing Hochdeutsch all over Zürich. There are thousands of highly educated Germans working here and more join each day. Same in Basel, particularly in the many pharmaceutical companies there. "Beamten" (public servants) are utterly unsackable in Germany and that must end. Germany is very Keynesianist. Even that great conservative, Helmut Kohl said " We are not a Marktwirtschaft (market economy), we are a Sozialmarktwirtschaft (a social market economy). In other words, a mixed economy. I am not advocating a change of the architecture but a trimming of the fat and putting it on a clear fitness regimen. A strong German economy is of incalculable benefit to Europe.

Genau, Slim Buddha. Germany does need a good dose of liberalisations and reforms to get the economy in gear. There are so many restrictions to Germany's true potential that should be abolished. Germany would have another wirtschaftwunder if what you say was made a reality.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

Taxes in Germany are ludicrously high. That is why I keep hearing Hochdeutsch all over Zürich. There are thousands of highly educated Germans working here and more join each day. Same in Basel, particularly in the many pharmaceutical companies there. "Beamten" (public servants) are utterly unsackable in Germany and that must end. Germany is very Keynesianist. Even that great conservative, Helmut Kohl said " We are not a Marktwirtschaft (market economy), we are a Sozialmarktwirtschaft (a social market economy). In other words, a mixed economy. I am not advocating a change of the architecture but a trimming of the fat and putting it on a clear fitness regimen. A strong German economy is of incalculable benefit to Europe.

Genau, Slim Buddha. Germany does need a good dose of liberalisations and reforms to get the economy in gear. There are so many restrictions to Germany's true potential that should be abolished. Germany would have another wirtschaftwunder if what you say was made a reality.

The damaging restrictions must go but sensible and effective regulation must remain in place. Industries benefit from sensible and effective regulation. I abhor neo-liberalism and regard it as economic cancer. So a strong robust mixed economy with incentives for labour to work, sensible effective regulation and a functioning safety-net tailored to those who need it with large penalties for its abuse is a possibility for Germany. Now is the time to put it into action and ensure that Germany remains the No. 1 exporter for a long time to come.

Slim Buddha wrote:

The damaging restrictions must go but sensible and effective regulation must remain in place. Industries benefit from sensible and effective regulation. I abhor neo-liberalism and regard it as economic cancer. So a strong robust mixed economy with incentives for labour to work, sensible effective regulation and a functioning safety-net tailored to those who need it with large penalties for its abuse is a possibility for Germany. Now is the time to put it into action and ensure that Germany remains the No. 1 exporter for a long time to come.

That sounds reasonable. We need to encourage work, reward risk-taking and welcome entrepreneurialism. That sounds possible in what you're proposing.

SBP Link

The Sunday Business Post has obtained information under the FI Act that both the US and UK governments are very concerned about Ireland's Corporate Tax arrangments and is firing warning shots. The recent announcement by four British firms that they propose to move to Ireland has made it a matter of urgency for the UK. The only allies that Ireland is likely to have in this are the Eastern European countries that have brought in low or zero corporate tax rates. As the US and UK are our main trading partners, their attitude and the potential sanctions they could exert are more serious than that of the EU.

Obama has made noises about this since the beginning of his campaign and is looking to bring the jobs back home to the US.

This is going to get hot.

Quote :

Documents obtained by The Sunday Business Post under the Freedom of Information Act show that representatives of the US Treasury Department held face-to-face discussions on the issue of tax with senior officials from the Irish Revenue Commissioners.

The meetings took place on the margins of a recent OECD meeting. The official discussions came after a stream of letters and e-mails between the US Treasury and the Revenue over the tax status of US multinationals operating in Ireland, and about a forthcoming renegotiation of the US Ireland double taxation agreement - a comprehensive treaty that sets out tax policies between the two countries.

Officials in the British Treasury are also extremely annoyed about British companies moving to Dublin to cut their tax rates and compliance costs, according to high-level government sources. It is expected that the matter will be discussed by politicians at future bilateral meetings.

Treasury officials have made informal contact with their counterparts in the Department of Finance to discuss the issue and to voice growing concern.

The Irish officials informed that the government had no intention of changing Irish taxation policy as a result of the recent moves.

The British Treasury is coming under increasing pressure to proceed with plans to exempt multinationals’ foreign profits from tax, following last week’s announcement by Charter, an engineering company, and Henderson Group, an investment manager, that they were switching their tax bases to Ireland.

The move brought to four the number of large British firms that announced moves to Ireland in the past five months.

The others are Shire, the pharmaceuticals company, and United Business Media. Officials Washington are examining the responses of dozens of US multinationals in Ireland in relation to their tax status.

The US government has asked the companies to provide details of their Irish tax status and their Irish corporate structure. It is part of a US Treasury examination of US firms routing profits through low-tax jurisdictions.

In the event of a fully-fledged tax haven taken to it's logical zero tax conclusion, how do we finance our public services again? Income tax? Carbon tax? Or do we just create more privatised services - schools, health, water etc?

Auditor #9 wrote:

In the event of a fully-fledged tax haven taken to it's logical zero tax conclusion, how do we finance our public services again? Income tax? Carbon tax? Or do we just create more privatised services - schools, health, water etc?

Well, even tax havens have an element of taxation on the companies who take advantage of the settlement. These companies, you see, hire people and consume goods and services in the tax haven. That generates income, VAT and PRSI tax revenue. That means that the government would still have resources necessary to fund public services.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Auditor #9 wrote:

In the event of a fully-fledged tax haven taken to it's logical zero tax conclusion, how do we finance our public services again? Income tax? Carbon tax? Or do we just create more privatised services - schools, health, water etc?

Well, even tax havens have an element of taxation on the companies who take advantage of the settlement. These companies, you see, hire people and consume goods and services in the tax haven. That generates income, VAT and PRSI tax revenue. That means that the government would still have resources necessary to fund public services.

If we assume that the tax haven status brings in companies for their own tax avoidence reasons to save on tax in their original domicilary, we would need a large number of such companies coming here to pay for proper public services. But if we pare public services to the minimum and privatise everything that can withstand privatisation, then maybe we don't need so many after all. I hope this is not what you are driving at, Ard.

Slim Buddha wrote:

If we assume that the tax haven status brings in companies for their own tax avoidence reasons to save on tax in their original domicilary, we would need a large number of such companies coming here to pay for proper public services. But if we pare public services to the minimum and privatise everything that can withstand privatisation, then maybe we don't need so many after all. I hope this is not what you are driving at, Ard.

I know a lot of brass plate operations come with tax haven status, but we do have very real industries in areas like banking, pharmaceuticals, electronic engineering, medical devices and so on. Corporation taxes are only a medium-sized source of government revenue anyway. PAYE and VAT are much more important tax headings.

Ard-Taoiseach wrote:

Slim Buddha wrote:

If we assume that the tax haven status brings in companies for their own tax avoidence reasons to save on tax in their original domicilary, we would need a large number of such companies coming here to pay for proper public services. But if we pare public services to the minimum and privatise everything that can withstand privatisation, then maybe we don't need so many after all. I hope this is not what you are driving at, Ard.

I know a lot of brass plate operations come with tax haven status, but we do have very real industries in areas like banking, pharmaceuticals, electronic engineering, medical devices and so on. Corporation taxes are only a medium-sized source of government revenue anyway. PAYE and VAT are much more important tax headings.

Is the reason for the low Corporation Tax take not that our Corporation Tax rates are so low, and there have been so many tax avoidance opportunities ?