If lower taxes were always better why have any taxes at all?
If lower taxes were always better why have any taxes at all?
Ireland can't win a race to the bottom, and it will have to have higher taxes if others will lower theirs.
So all other countries have to do is lower taxes to force Ireland to raise its own, and reach a new higher taxes equilibrium, that is beneficial to all countries.
Isn't that what others are arguing for?
I'm not sure how this is comparable.
Ireland's low tax works for Ireland because it has no competition, so it gets the "market" all to itself. If competition arrived, Ireland would have no option but to raise taxes to make it up for it - as it needs this funds. It would essentially force Ireland's hand on this issue.
On the OPEC side they have external and internal competition. Sometimes they can make it work because demand is higher than what external competition has to offer and what internal competition need, but if external competition has enough supply or internal competition need more than they are getting, it does not work anymore (and the price drops because of extra supply).
It seems like your proposal would establish a cartel-like structure related to corporate tax rates. I was trying to point out the inherent fragility of this type of arraignment, especially in the EU where there are many stressors between member countries.
I think the system will work only as far as you have power players that are able to punish everyone who gets out of line - by racing to the bottom and driving profits out as a punishment [1].
That's exactly what I think complaining countries should do. They're not getting any revenue now, so they are able to power play Ireland into fair taxation, and the system will be as stable as their possibility to do so. If you take into account that any country cheating will take revenue away from others (thus their reason for a high tax), they should always be able to counter, as they are now.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/1988/11/03/business/saudis-use-pain-...