Among those ranged against HMRC are the big four accountancy firms, Deloitte, Ernst and Young, KPMG, and PwC, which earn £2 billion each year from their tax work in the UK. They employ nearly 9,000 people just to provide tax advice aimed at minimizing the tax paid. Between them they boast 250 transfer pricing specialists whereas HMRC has only 65 people working in this area. The firms declare that their focus is now on acceptable tax planning and not aggressive tax avoidance however they continue to sell complex tax avoidance schemes with as little as 50 per cent chance of succeeding if challenged in court. The large accountancy firms are in a powerful position in the tax world and have an unhealthily cosy relationship with government. They second staff to the Treasury to advise on formulating tax legislation. When those staff return to their firms, they have the very inside knowledge and insight to be able to identify loopholes in the new legislation and advise their clients on how to take advantage of them. This is a clear conflict of interest which should be banned in a code of conduct for tax advisers. The UK must also take the lead in demanding urgent reform of international tax law, so that companies have to pay a fair share of tax where they actually do business and make profits. Furthermore, the job of simplifying our tax code needs to be taken seriously; yet the Office of Tax Simplification has just 6 people working in it

Time to discuss anti-BEPS measures around digitalization In the course of the BEPS Report on Action 1, it was concluded that there was no instantaneous need for specific rules to address base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) made possible by the digitalization of enterprises and new digital businesses. At the same time, it was acknowledged that general measures may not suffice with the assessment of results to begin in 2020. While awaiting possible fundamental reforms of the tax framework, it is time to discuss anti-BEPS measures bearing in mind the peculiar features of the digital economy such as increased mobility, no need for physical presence, and dematerialization. The Book focuses on five key areas of interest:International Tax PolicyTax Treaty LawTransfer PricingIndirect Taxation IssuesEU Law “Taxation in a Global Digital Economy” analyses the issues and addresses the five key areas of interest from various viewpoints.

This book represents the first major analysis of Anglo-Australian youth justice and penality to be published and it makes significant theoretical and empirical contributions to the wider field of comparative criminology. By exploring trends in law, policy and practice over a forty-year period, the book critically surveys the ‘moving images’ of youth justice regimes and penal cultures, the principal drivers of reform, the core outcomes of such processes and the overall implications for theory building. It addresses a wide range of questions including: How has the temporal and spatial patterning of youth justice and penality evolved since the early 1980s to the present time? What impacts have legislative and policy reforms imposed upon processes of criminalisation, sentencing practices and the use of penal detention for children and young people? How do we comprehend both the diverse ways in which public representations of ‘young offenders’ are shaped, structured and disseminated and the varied, conflicting and contradictory effects of such representations? To what extent do international human rights standards influence law, policy and practice in the realms of youth justice and penality? To what extent are youth justice systems implicated in the production and reproduction of social injustices? How, and to what degree, are youth justice systems and penal cultures internationalised, nationalised, regionalised or localised? The book is essential reading for researchers, students and tutors in criminology, criminal justice, law, social policy, sociology and youth studies.