We can argue about what's "fair" all day, but "inexpensive" is more objective: some taxes hamper more economic activity than others. A $1 tax on a stock trade will reduce exactly $1 of economic activity. It's so expensive, it's basically pointless. A land value tax, on the other land, is almost free. (And in some cases, negative!)
Most taxes fall somewhere between these two extremes, but corporate income taxes are one of the most expensive, which is why economists aren't big fans of them.
Countries like Ireland and the Netherlands are nothing more than tax avoidance puppets of a few big companies. And the sad thing is that their governments think it's good what they do while it's a downwards spiral instead.
Of course, Irish citizens could vote to withdraw from the EU and set their own tax that way, but that's not likely - they generally accept that the benefits of participating in the EU are worth giving up a little sovereignty.
Why is there not a focus on countries such as Bermuda here? They are the "tax havens" who make this possible in the first place.
There is. Two wrongs don't make a right. The topic at hand is Ireland.
> Other countries are perfectly entitled to do similarly, as Netherlands does.
If every country acted the same way, there would not be a single functioning nation on earth. Their benefits only exist because other countries are losing out, which makes them parasites.
Holy hyperbole, Batman.
No, it would just mean that there would be a homogeneous corporate tax system, which is what people seem to always argue for.
'Parasites' is also a ridiculous description.