CBI’S Richard Woolhouse calls for international cooperation to tackle tax avoidance

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

CBI’S Richard Woolhouse calls for international cooperation to tackle tax avoidance

woolhouse-richard-1-50.jpg

Richard Woolhouse, head of tax and fiscal policy at the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), tells International Tax Review why he thinks international cooperation is the best way to tackle highly abusive avoidance and why the rule of law not morality should determine what counts as a fair share of tax.

woolhouse-richard-1-150.jpg
International Tax Review: Google, Amazon and Starbucks have been criticised for not paying as much tax in the UK as the public and politicians believe they should. But is it the responsibility of companies to act within the spirit of the law, or is it the responsibility of governments to ensure companies pay the right amount of tax?

Richard Woolhouse: The majority of businesses pay the right amount of tax, and for the small minority which do not, times are getting tougher, and rightly so.

In some cases the tax system is lagging behind commercial reality, particularly around the taxation of the digital economy and transfer pricing. As the Prime Minister highlights, the UK needs to work together with other countries, including the G8, to change the rules where appropriate, so that they are fit for the global business age.

The amount of tax paid should always be determined by the rule of law and not public opinion.

ITR: Do you think corporations need to pay attention to their reputation when designing their tax policies?

RW: Tax and tax planning is now a board-level issue and companies are thinking about their reputation when it comes to tax matters.

ITR: Common arguments in defence of corporate tax avoidance are that it’s legal and it doesn’t take into account a company’s total tax contribution to society. Do you believe these are sufficient to placate the public and the media?

RW: The CBI is against highly abusive avoidance schemes which serve no commercial purpose other than the minimisation of tax.

It’s right that the broader discussion of businesses’ contribution to society includes a conversation about investment, jobs and skills, but this is absolutely not an excuse for abusive avoidance. At the same time, companies can do more to explain their tax affairs to the public.

ITR: What government measures do you think would be fair and effective to ensure companies pay the right amount of tax?

RW: Some of the recent high profile examples have arisen because of developments in the digital economy where it is often difficult to value particular business activities in a simple way.

In many cases, the tax system is lagging commercial reality and what is needed is multinational action coordinated by the OECD to update the rules on how business activities are taxed internationally. In particular, the current OECD project on transfer pricing and intangibles will lay down a much more robust framework.

ITR: Is it possible for governments to act alone to close unintended loopholes in international tax law, or is international cooperation the only option?

RW: Business nowadays is often borderless so international cooperation is much more effective.

ITR: There is a lot of disagreement over what a “fair share of tax” means. What is your personal view on this?

RW: The concept of morality is difficult because it is open to different interpretations. A truly effective tax system must be driven by rule of law, which needs to keep pace with how businesses operate.

ITR: Sainsbury’s Chief Executive Justin King said that companies wishing to trade in the UK should contribute back to society through corporation tax. Would you agree with his comments?

Multinational investors in the UK should be taxed on the profits relating to activities undertaken here. Looking at the data more than 90% of all UK corporation tax is paid by multinational corporations and this is split roughly 50:50 between inbounds and UK based companies.

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

HMRC expects advisers to meet ever-higher compliance criteria. After 24 consecutive qualified audit opinions, many will ask whether HMRC should hold itself to the same standards
The purchase of Marosa represents the second major tax tech consolidation this week, raising questions of a broader industry trend
Peru’s approach to TP is increasingly at odds with OECD-style profitability policies, exposing multinational groups to asymmetric tax adjustments
Hany Elnaggar examines how the region's legacy economic substance regimes and the OECD's pillar two framework are converging on the same underlying test
The deals for TP Accurate and Intra Pricing Solutions will enhance Alphatax’s ability to support clients with the full TP lifecycle, the tax tech provider claimed
The DS Advocates partner discusses career reinvention, tax disputes and why advisory and litigation experience should complement one another
Lindsay Clayton’s arrival at Baker McKenzie continues the firm’s storied pursuit of ex-US government lawyers, a strategy reinforced by robust World Tax rankings
Shared transaction semantics, governed data and reusable ERP design may prove the most significant benefits of the UK's move to Peppol
As pillar two reshapes global tax competition, the UK faces a crucial challenge: how to remain attractive to multinationals without sacrificing tax revenues
Pillar two may be raising less than expected, but professor René Matteotti says the regime is still changing multinational tax behaviour
Gift this article