There doesn't seem to much in the article to suggest it doesn't trickle down, so the headline is rather sensationalist. They are saying that lots of it goes off-shore, but unspent wealth will not "trickle down" anyway (granted, there is perhaps more incentive to spend if the alternative is getting taxed, but the extent is unclear). These people are likely still spending quite a substantial amount back into the economy (and tax, although obviously nowhere near what they "should" be).

I do think there is general agreement that trickle down is not as effective as "advertised" but that doesn't mean zero effect.

It's also worth noting that the headline figures are total amount saved offshore across all countries, not the tax on that amount (or its returns) for a given country and its alternative internal tax structures.