Global Tax 50 2015: Will Morris
International Tax Review is part of the Delinian Group, Delinian Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX, Registered in England & Wales, Company number 00954730
Copyright © Delinian Limited and its affiliated companies 2024

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

Global Tax 50 2015: Will Morris

Global tax policy director, GE; chairman, BIAC Tax and Fiscal Affairs Committee

Will Morris

Will Morris was also in the Global Tax 50 2014, 2013, and 2012

Will Morris is becoming a regular in the Global Tax 50, with this entry representing his fourth appearance. 'Boring, boring ITR', we hear you cry. But it is hard to change the record when Morris is such an obvious leading light in terms of representing the views of businesses on tax policy developments. Many in the industry would welcome more business figures following Morris' example and taking a more proactive approach to engaging in discussion of corporate tax issues, rather than staying beneath the parapets and working purely reactively. This is changing, and businesses have engaged with calls for submissions on potential reforms, but truly visible characters like Morris who regularly share their views are still in relatively short supply.

Away from his in-house responsibilities, Morris' role as chairman of the BIAC Tax and Fiscal Affairs Committee has meant a heavy involvement in the OECD's BEPS processes. This made 2015 a busy year for Morris, with the final BEPS recommendations being released in October. Here he speaks to Joelle Jefferis about the continuing need to keep the business community united and why the release of final recommendations is far from the end of the road on BEPS.

International Tax Review: What was your proudest achievement of 2015?

Will Morris: My proudest achievement of last year, which was the achievement for the year before as well, is managing to keep the business community pretty much together and engaged. I think I've said this before and it sounds a bit sappy, but I am absolutely staggered at how many people put so much time into writing comments and to coming to Paris to engage with the process. This isn't a lot of peoples' day job and the amount of effort that the business community put in to trying to understand firstly, where the OECD was coming from, but secondly, from where other people in business might have slightly different needs and concerns, and how they can accommodate those; I think has been remarkable.

I don't think anybody thought when this process started that not only would the OECD be able to produce what they produced, but also that the business community would in any way at all be able to present a united front and produce such detailed comments. That's been great and it's not my achievement, it's been the whole business community.

ITR: How did you achieve this level of unity?

WM: This was achieved through a lot of meetings, a lot of calls and a lot of drafts. We did some of our venting in private before we got out in public; it's important that people have their say and, to a certain extent, express their anger if that's how they're feeling. Then there's need to move beyond that and to see how we can come up with something that is constructive.

ITR: Were you able to create something constructive for the business community with BEPS?

WM: There are some areas where people think that BIAC in general, and myself in particular, have been far too soft on the OECD. But BEPS was coming, and when the G20 and a group of other countries committed to targeting, as they see it, tax abuse, I think we had to engage with that.

We had to show that we are prepared to be constructive because this was a case where the rules were going to get made either with us or without us. I'd rather that the rules got made with us and that we had a stake in the process. I think that willingness to constructively engage during this difficult first phase is going to be important moving forward, as we come to look at the issues like implementation and the role that business can play in helping to monitor implementation, to prevent overlaps, discontinuities, and hopefully some cases of unilateral action. I think it's stood us in good stead. I know some people would have liked us to have adopted a harder-edged approach but I don't think that would have got business to a helpful place.

ITR: What is the focus for you in 2016?

WM: There are a number of areas in BEPS where, despite the fact that high level consensus has been reached, I don't think there has been agreement in detail, and therefore those details need to be filled out. One of the most obvious ones is in permanent establishment (PE). A lot of the work for 2016 is going to be to continue to look at the recommendations and, not to refine them in a policy sense, but to expand out their meaning and to provide more detail.

The focus then is continuing to build out the detail of the recommendations, it's paying very close attention to implementation, and engaging at the national level with national governments to try and ensure consistency, and its watching what will actually happen on the ground with the tax authorities and how they use BEPS.

ITR: Will it be possible to keep business voices united through the implementation phase?

WM: The concern I have is that this is a football game and we're only at this point coming on at the second half. There is a fatigue for a lot of people and in certain companies there are cost pressures. It is going to be difficult for some people to maintain their focus on BEPS. But it's really important that they do, because this is where the rubber hits the road, and if this is the point where you take your eye off the ball there is the danger that there is going to be inconsistent implementation and then we're going to be in even more trouble than previously. So I really do hope that businesses remain engaged, even if a lot of that engagement is on a national level and I hope they'll stay in touch with BIAC and let us know what is going on.

The Global Tax 50 2015

View the full list and introduction

The top 10 • Ranked in order of influence

1. Margrethe Vestager

2. Pascal Saint-Amans

3. Wang Jun

4. Arun Jaitley

5. Marissa Mayer

6. Will Morris

7. Ian Read

8. Pierre Moscovici

9. Donato Raponi

10. Global Alliance for Tax Justice

The remaining 40 • In alphabetic order

Brigitte Alepin

Andrus Ansip

Tamara Ashford

Mohammed Amine Baina

Piet Battiau

Elise Bean

Monica Bhatia

David Bradbury

Winnie Byanyima

Mauricio Cardenas

Allison Christians

Rita de la Feria

Marlies de Ruiter

Judith Freedman

Meg Hillier

Vanessa Houlder

Kim Jacinto-Henares

Eva Joly

Chris Jordan

Jean-Claude Juncker

Alain Lamassoure

Juliane Kokott

Armando Lara Yaffar

Liao Tizhong

Paige Marvel

Angela Merkel

Zach Mider

Richard Murphy

George Osborne

Achim Pross

Akhilesh Ranjan

Alan Robertson

Paul Ryan

Tove Maria Ryding

Magdalena Sepulveda Carmona

Lee Sheppard

Parthasarathi Shome

Robert Stack

Mike Williams

Ya-wen Yang

more across site & bottom lb ros

More from across our site

Experts from TP tech provider Aibidia also warned ITR that companies ignoring pillar two is a ‘huge issue’ and a ‘red flag’
Hanno Berger was originally handed an eight-year sentence over an estimated $11 billion tax fraud; while in other news, France calls for minimum tax on the super-rich
Amount B is meant to increase simplicity and reduce uncertainty, but US TP specialists claim it may lead to controversy
Tax Foundation economist Alan Cole also signalled that pillar two has a 'considerable chance' of failing
The Labour Party is working hard to convince business that it will bring stability to tax policy if it wins the next UK general election. But it will be impossible to avoid creating winners and losers
Burrowes had initially been parachuted into the role last summer to navigate the fallout from the firm’s tax leaks scandal
Barbara Voskamp is bullish on hiring local talent to boost DLA Piper’s Singapore practice, and argues that ‘big four’ accountants suffer from a stifled creativity
Chris Jordan also said that nations have a duty to scrutinise the partnership structures of major firms, while, in other news, a number of tax teams expanded their benches
KPMG has exclusive access to the tool for three years in the UK, giving it an edge over ‘big four’ rivals
But the US tax agency’s advice is consistent with OECD guidance and shouldn’t surprise anyone, other experts tell ITR
Gift this article