On Paul Krugman, Chris states that "your gods have feet of clay", but there's another interpretation; "your gods are shilling for US corporate interests". You both wonder at Krugman getting it wrong, but I wonder if it is deliberately dishonesty in service of deflecting attention from the real sources of culpability, US laws & regulations and the US corporations that influence that regulation. When I hear "Democratic party mouthpiece", I can't help thinking Wall St investment bank mouthpiece.
It has struck me on more than one occasion that Ireland is constantly scapegoated in this matter. The term "Double Irish" is itself a propaganda masterstroke, managing to stick culpability onto to another country entirely. Sadly, the Irish actively if unwittingly participate, a recent example being Lisa Marlowe in the Irish Times of 11th June writing that in 2015 "The Irish govt ended the legal but highly contestable Double Irish..." Maybe we eagerly go along because our small nation mentality is so excited by any attention that we ditch clear thinking. This is innocent ignorance on our part, as opposed to the deliberate artifice of a Krugman, and we should to snap out of it, if only occasionally. A self-deprecating sense of humor can be a double edged-sword.
Anyway I have a sinking feeling that in 5 (or 10, or 15...) years time, long after Ireland's policy has been subsumed into whatever arrangements are brought into existence, we will still be faced with the fact that large US multinational corporations pay very little tax and the Krugmans of the world will be scapegoating away. You might say I'm being paranoid. But I might say you're being naïve. Do you really take Krugman at face value?
Thanks for your comment. I think the general point you make is that most of what is wrong with global corporate taxation is the fault of the US tax code, something that is subject to US corporate lobbying. Seamus Coffey makes this point forcefully in his writings and, a little while ago, on our podcast discussion with him. On that latter podcast you will hear him asking questions about the way in which the Double Irish was ended. More generally, he points out that it's a US corporate tax problem, not a global or Irish one. We only observe, for the most part, US corporations indulging in all these supposedly sharp practices.
We will have to agree to disagree about Krugman, at least with regard to your suggestion that he is a shill for US corporate interests. He has enough progressive credentials to dodge that one. Not every Dem can say that, I'd agree.
thanks for responding, just want to clarify it's that *some* of what is wrong is the fault of US tax code, and that we in Ireland should be more vocal in pointing this out, against what I feel is a disproportionate amount of scapegoating we are on the receiving end of. I listened to the excellent podcast with Seamus Coffey, and that's exactly the kind of reasoning about this matter we could do a bit more with. And sure let's agree to disagree on Krugman, I am not up to date with all his progressive credentials but still have my doubts about his motivations.
On Paul Krugman, Chris states that "your gods have feet of clay", but there's another interpretation; "your gods are shilling for US corporate interests". You both wonder at Krugman getting it wrong, but I wonder if it is deliberately dishonesty in service of deflecting attention from the real sources of culpability, US laws & regulations and the US corporations that influence that regulation. When I hear "Democratic party mouthpiece", I can't help thinking Wall St investment bank mouthpiece.
It has struck me on more than one occasion that Ireland is constantly scapegoated in this matter. The term "Double Irish" is itself a propaganda masterstroke, managing to stick culpability onto to another country entirely. Sadly, the Irish actively if unwittingly participate, a recent example being Lisa Marlowe in the Irish Times of 11th June writing that in 2015 "The Irish govt ended the legal but highly contestable Double Irish..." Maybe we eagerly go along because our small nation mentality is so excited by any attention that we ditch clear thinking. This is innocent ignorance on our part, as opposed to the deliberate artifice of a Krugman, and we should to snap out of it, if only occasionally. A self-deprecating sense of humor can be a double edged-sword.
Anyway I have a sinking feeling that in 5 (or 10, or 15...) years time, long after Ireland's policy has been subsumed into whatever arrangements are brought into existence, we will still be faced with the fact that large US multinational corporations pay very little tax and the Krugmans of the world will be scapegoating away. You might say I'm being paranoid. But I might say you're being naïve. Do you really take Krugman at face value?
Hi Colm,
Thanks for your comment. I think the general point you make is that most of what is wrong with global corporate taxation is the fault of the US tax code, something that is subject to US corporate lobbying. Seamus Coffey makes this point forcefully in his writings and, a little while ago, on our podcast discussion with him. On that latter podcast you will hear him asking questions about the way in which the Double Irish was ended. More generally, he points out that it's a US corporate tax problem, not a global or Irish one. We only observe, for the most part, US corporations indulging in all these supposedly sharp practices.
We will have to agree to disagree about Krugman, at least with regard to your suggestion that he is a shill for US corporate interests. He has enough progressive credentials to dodge that one. Not every Dem can say that, I'd agree.
Hi Jim & Chris,
thanks for responding, just want to clarify it's that *some* of what is wrong is the fault of US tax code, and that we in Ireland should be more vocal in pointing this out, against what I feel is a disproportionate amount of scapegoating we are on the receiving end of. I listened to the excellent podcast with Seamus Coffey, and that's exactly the kind of reasoning about this matter we could do a bit more with. And sure let's agree to disagree on Krugman, I am not up to date with all his progressive credentials but still have my doubts about his motivations.