Markus Andrews

A “historic” agreement by G7 leaders that aims to force internet giants to pay more tax sets the bar far too low, campaigners have warned.Finance ministers from the group of seven wealthy nations struck a deal to establish a minimum global corporation tax of at least 15 per cent to prevent tax dodging by multinationals that book profits in low-rate countries as part of talks in London on Saturday.But critics said the deal was neither historic nor fair, and will do little to fix the race to the bottom, which results in global revenue losses of at least $240bn (£169bn) each year.Oxfam said the 15 per cent rate would benefit rich countries and increase inequality in the post-pandemic world.Gabriela Bucher, the executive director of Oxfam International, said: “It’s absurd for the G7 to claim it is ‘overhauling’ a broken global tax system by setting up a global minimum corporate tax rate that is similar to the soft rates charged by tax havens like Ireland, Switzerland and Singapore. They are setting the bar so low that companies can just step over it.”The IPPR think tank said the deal could raise £7.9bn for the UK, but the 15 per cent rate foregoes almost half the potential tax revenue of the 25 per cent initially proposed by the US president, Joe Biden. That rate could have raised £14.7bn for the UK – enough to fund the rebuilding of the NHS and care system, it said.“With the UK corporation tax rate set to rise in 2023, the UK government should be demonstrating leadership and aiming for a global minimum rate of 21 per cent or higher with the ultimate goal of around 25 per cent,” George Dibb, head of the IPPR Centre for Economic Justice, said.George Turner, the director of investigative think tank TaxWatch, said the agreement appears to be a “great deal” for the United States, but he struggled to see much benefit for the UK.“It [the deal] will mean we collect some more tax from UK based multinationals that use tax havens. But it will do little to raise more from the likes of Google, Facebook, Microsoft, etc,” he said.Labour also criticised the 15 per cent figure, accusing the government of “actively watering down” hopes for a more ambitious pact.“That would have brought £131m extra a week to Britain for our NHS and other public services, while also stopping our high streets being aggressively undercut,” Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor, said.Writing for The Independent, shadow foreign secretary Lisa Nandy said: “The government’s lack of ambition means the agreement reached, well short of the original figure proposed by President Biden, will see the UK miss out on an additional £131m extra a week.”The Independent Commission for the Reform of International Corporate Taxation (Icrict) has called for a global minimum corporate tax rate of 25 per cent.“A global minimum tax rate of 15 per cent is far too low to end the damaging race to the bottom on corporate tax and properly clamp down on tax havens,” Jose Antonio Ocampo, a professor at Columbia University and chair of the Icrict, said.“Once a global floor is agreed, G7 and G20 countries must beyond this global minimum and unilaterally commit to introducing a much higher minimum at 21 per cent or above.”Prof Ocampo also said it was “imperative” that additional revenue generated by a global minimum tax is shared equitably between the home countries of multinational companies, such as the United States, and developing countries.The deal agreed at the meeting of the G7 finance ministers would mean multinationals will be forced to pay a corporation tax rate of at least 15 per cent, and 20 per cent of the profits of around 100 of the biggest firms – potentially including Google, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft – will be reallocated to the countries where sales have taken place.The proposals will now be discussed in further detail at the G20 finance ministers meeting, which includes China, Russia and India, in Venice in July. More

Priti Patel has blamed social media companies for helping to promote dangerous crossings of the English Channel to migrants hoping to reach the UK.Videos hosted on TikTok, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter are used by people-smugglers to promote their trade, according to the Home Office.Ms Patel has now written to the companies demanding they act more quickly to remove the videos.It comes after almost 600 people were intercepted as they tried to cross the channel in just three days this week, despite the home secretary’s repeated promises to make the route “unviable”.Ms Patel said: “Posts which promote and even glamourise these lethal crossings are totally unacceptable. They encourage others to leave a safe European country and put theirs and their family’s life at risk and are even used by people smugglers to promote their deadly business.“What these posts don’t mention are the people who have died trying to make this crossing, or those forced to spend 13 hours in unseaworthy boats in freezing waters.“Working with the National Crime Agency, social media companies have made progress in removing these horrendous posts, but they must quickly and proactively remove posts related to illegal crossings before more men, women and children die.”It emerged this weekend that the Home Office was investigating an incident in which migrants attempting to cross the English Channel were reportedly picked up in French waters by the UK Border Force and taken to Dover.The move was orchestrated between senior crew members of HMC Valiant and French patrol ship Athos last Saturday, The Daily Mail reported.Enver Solomon, chief executive of the Refugee Council, said: “This government’s approach to tackling Channel crossings isn’t working and is destined to fail.“The reality is that when fleeing war, terror and persecution, ordinary people are forced to take extraordinary steps to seek safety in another country.“Instead of relying solely on an enforcement approach to stop the crossings, this government needs to expand safe routes so that people don’t have to risk their lives taking dangerous journeys at the mercy of criminals and people smugglers.“Creating safe and regular routes to the UK – through an expanded resettlement programme, humanitarian visas and reforming the restrictive family reunion rules – is the way to effectively address the issue.”Ministers were accused just weeks ago of lacking both “compassion and competence” in their attempts to deal with the Channel issue. Meanwhile, European countries have queued up to reject bilateral deals with the UK to return asylum seekers.Additional reporting by Press Association More

Boris Johnson will bow to international pressure to share some of the UK’s vast vaccine stockpile with poorer countries, ending months of stonewalling.Details will be announced ahead of the prime minister meeting world leaders – some of whom have made donations – at the G7 summit this week, No 10 said.The move comes after the World Health Organisation and other global bodies pleaded with wealthier nations to act, to prevent dangerous new Covid variants setting back progress to end the pandemic.Joe Biden has already announced that the US will send 25 million doses overseas, three-quarters through the Covax aid programme and the rest directly to most-in-need countries.Emmanuel Macron also said France would send 500,000 shots, with some already on their way to West Africa – making two leaders that Mr Johnson will meet face-to-face at the summit in Cornwall.In contrast, the UK has said only that it will donate some “surplus doses”, with no hint of how many will be released or when, given the domestic vaccination programme must be completed first.The UK has secured access to around 400 million jabs – far more than it is likely to need – but autumn booster shots are now planned and vaccinations of children are increasingly likely.Downing Street said the UK had “already pledged to share a significant majority of its surplus doses” with the Covax scheme, to which it is the largest donor.“Later this week, the prime minister will announce more details of the UK’s plans to support developing countries by sharing doses not needed by the UK,” a statement said.It is unclear how specific Mr Johnson will be, after a group of 100 MPs and peers urged him to commit to matching every dose bought for the UK with a foreign donation.The UK argues it has provided global leadership, by funding the Oxford-AstraZeneca vaccine and making it available at cost – rather than at a much higher price, with huge profits made.Almost 1 in 3 vaccines administered around the world have been the Oxford jab – 450 million out of 1.5 billion doses – although some countries prefer the Pfizer-BioNTech version.Mr Johnson will counter criticism by calling for “concrete commitments” from fellow G7 leaders to vaccinate “the entire world” by the end of 2022.“The world is looking to us to rise to the greatest challenge of the post-war era: defeating Covid and leading a global recovery driven by our shared values,” the prime minister said.“Vaccinating the world by the end of next year would be the single greatest feat in medical history.“I’m calling on my fellow G7 leaders to join us to end to this terrible pandemic and pledge will we never allow the devastation wreaked by coronavirus to happen again.” More

A watchdog designed to ensure the Australia trade deal does not undermine UK food and animal welfare rules will not be set up until months after it is signed, it has emerged. Liz Truss, the trade secretary, is accused of breaking a commitment to MPs and farmers by shelving scrutiny until the autumn – when it is feared it will be too late to make any changes.The formation of the Trade and Agriculture Commission (TAC) was conceded by the government last year, after protests that the rush to strike post-Brexit deals threatens to breach standards and hurt farmers.It was expected to be in place by the spring or early summer – as the Australia talks accelerated – to scrutinise the deal as it is being negotiated and assess the implications for shoppers, agriculture and the climate.Instead, the hunt for members has yet to even begin and The Independent has learnt the TAC will not be allowed to view the agreement until after a “legal scrub”, probably in the autumn.The delay has “alarmed” Tim Smith, the head of a temporary commission which was wound up in March, who has also criticised a refusal to involve the Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland governments in the talks.The watchdog badly needed to examine “both the mandate and the execution of the trade deals”, Mr Smith told MPs, in order to advise negotiators.“Looking at the impact of a free trade agreement at the point at which it is about to be, or has been, signed is not particularly helpful,” the former Food Standards Agency chief said.The criticism was echoed by Neil Parish, the Conservative chair of the Commons environment committee, who accused the government of “wasting time”.“Parliament cannot be unsighted on the principles of the deal, as it will be too late to make any amendments once the deal is put to the Commons,” he told The Independent.The National Farmers Union has warned “the clock is ticking”, adding: “As we are so close to finalising these deals, its critical the TAC is set up urgently so that it can prepare in good time for the vital job of scrutinising”.And Emily Thornberry, Labour’s shadow trade secretary, called for the looming agreement with Australia to be blocked until the government changed course.The deal – offering Canberra zero-tariff, zero-quota terms, despite farmers’ fears of ruin from cheap and lower-quality meat imports – is expected to be sealed immediately after next weekend’s G7 summit in Cornwall.“This is no longer just a case of Liz Truss avoiding the verdict of the Trade and Agriculture Commission on the sell-out offer she has made to Australia,” Ms Thornberry told The Independent.“She is actively subverting the statutory role that the commission has been given by parliament to inform scrutiny of such trade deals. That is an unacceptable breach of the commitments made.”Anger has been fuelled by Ms Truss’s failure to respond to March’s report by the temporary commission, with 22 recommendations on everything from animal welfare and labour standards to the climate crisis and food labelling.Mr Parish has demanded that Ms Truss explain the delay, adding: “It is essential we get a response from the government regarding the TAC’s report as soon as possible.”The Department for International Trade declined to respond to the criticisms, but it is understood to believe the TAC – enshrined in the Agriculture Act – does not need to start scrutiny until after the text of a deal has been agreed in order to comply with the law.When she announced it last November, Ms Truss described the commission as “an important part of our vision”.“It is about putting British farming at the heart of our trade agenda and ensuring the interests of farmers and consumers are promoted and advanced,” the trade secretary promised. More

G7 leaders have struck a “historic agreement” to force internet giants to pay more tax, including in the UK, Rishi Sunak has announced.The agreement will “make sure the right companies pay the right tax in the right places”, the chancellor pledged.The breakthrough – the result of a major push by US president Joe Biden – follows years of largely futile attempts to end massive tax avoidance by major tech firms.Now they will be forced to pay a corporation tax rate of at least 15 per cent, though the rate will be allowed to rise in future. Mr Biden originally proposed 21 per cent.More importantly, 20 per cent of the profits of around 100 of the biggest firms – likely to include Google, Facebook, Amazon and Microsoft – will be reallocated to the countries where sales have taken place.The move is designed to end “offshoring”, where companies set up legal entities in low-tax countries – regardless of where their revenues are actually earned.Mr Sunak said the agreement would tackle the problems of tax havens and tax-dodging digital companies, vowing: “We are going to level the playing field.”Speaking after a meeting of G7 finance ministers in London, he said the new measures would make the tax system “fit for the global digital age”, adding: “That’s a huge prize for British taxpayers.”The euphoria at the announcement is tempered by the fact that Mr Biden’s pitch of 21 per cent has been dropped. Only three developed countries – including Ireland – have corporation tax rates below 15 per cent.Also, only the G7 countries have currently reached agreement, ahead of a meeting of the larger G20 grouping which includes the likes of China and India.Labour criticised the 15 per cent figure, accusing the government of “actively watering down” hopes for a more ambitious pact.“That would have brought £131m extra a week to Britain for our NHS and other public services, while also stopping our high streets being aggressively undercut,” said Rachel Reeves, the shadow chancellor.Nevertheless, Mr Sunak hailed “a very proud moment” and praised fellow leaders’ “willingness to work together to seize this moment to reach a historic agreement that finally brings our global tax system into the 21st century”.He defended the decision not to push for 21 per cent, telling Sky News: “First of all, the agreement reached here today says at least 15 per cent.“And secondly, it is worth taking a step back. This is something that has been talked about for almost a decade.”The British public wanted to know that “there is a level-playing field”, in regard to “whether people are operating in tax havens, or whether large, particularly online businesses, are able to not pay tax in the right places”, said the chancellor.“That’s what this agreement gives us the ability to do, and it has been agreed among G7 colleagues, and once we broaden it out and implement it globally, it is a huge prize for British taxpayers.” More

A former LGBT+ adviser to government has urged ministers and public health bodies to produce data on the health impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the minority group.Issuing a plea for the collection of national statistics on incidence, hospitalisations and deaths during the crisis, professor Catherine Meads suggested the community had been “forgotten” about.The member of the recently disbanded group – set up to advise government on LGBT+ issues – told The Independent she was concerned about the lack of research, saying: “The analysis has not been done and it should have been done”.The professor of health at Anglia Ruskin University said that it was “difficult” to ascertain the health impact of the crisis on LGBT+ people – given the absence of available data – and called for routine monitoring alongside other protected characteristics, such as ethnicity and gender.A paper published earlier this year by the Centre for Disease Control, the United States’ health protection agency, also suggested information was lacking in the US, “hampering examination of Covid-19 associated disparities among sexual minority adults”.The CDC suggested some LGBT+ people have higher rates of self-reported underlying health conditions, such as diabetes, obesity and asthma, and are more likely to smoke. However, the CDC study added, “because data on sexual orientation are not collected in existing Covid-19 data systems, the effect of Covid-19 on sexual minority populations is unknown”.Last year, Conservative MP Crispin Blunt raised the “paucity of data around health outcomes for LGBT+ people, perhaps not least in respect of the intersectionality with BAME people in respect of Covid” during a Commons debate on the disparate impact of virus in the UK.

When Kemi Badenoch is saying in Hansard that there isn’t a problem, people just take it that there isn’t a problem. She’s saying there’s no data to show a problem. It’s because nobody has analysed the data. She’s conflating no problem with no dataCatherine Meads“The data deficit was identified in the [2018] LGBT action plan,” he added. “Will [the minister] recommit the government to securing the data, not least by ensuring that future public health surveys record data on protected characteristics?”In response, Kemi Badenoch, the equalities minister, said: “I just remind him that we are looking at those who have been most disproportionately affected and are most vulnerable.“Although we have not found that LGBT groups specifically have been disproportionately affected, we know that they are losing out where healthcare services have been unavailable because they have had to close to provide other services to deal with the pandemic”.Highlighting the minister’s comments, Professor Meads, who has been conducting research into LGBT+ health since 1992, added: “I think we’ve just been forgotten about.“When Kemi Badenoch is saying in Hansard that there isn’t a problem, people just take it that there isn’t a problem. She’s saying there’s no data to show a problem. It’s because nobody has analysed the data. She’s conflating no problem with no data.”“And I think there is a problem. I think from the LGBT perspective, we’ve suffered from this for years and years and years where people have assumed all sorts of things to do with the health of the LGBT population without checking the data out.”Asked what message she would send to the government, Professor Meads replied: “Can we please have some data?”Impacts of the pandemic on LGBT+ people have been explored by non-governmental groups, however, with a major survey published by the LGBT Foundation last year suggesting there was a severe decrease in mental health wellbeing.The organisation’s report, entitled Hidden Figures, also raised issues regarding a potential for increased risk factors associated with the virus, but said that due to a lack of routine monitoring the true health impact “will never be known”.Rob Cookson, deputy chief executive at the foundation, told The Independent that LGBT people “experience a broad range of health inequalities across their lifetimes and face increased risk-factor for the virus having serious health implications”.“This level of need was already well evidenced prior to the pandemic, but not enough has been done by the government and other public health bodies to understand and act on the needs of LGBT communities during the pandemic,” he added.A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Social Care said: “Covid-19 is a deadly virus that has affected the lives of everyone in the UK, with a disproportionate impact on certain groups of people, particularly those working in frontline and caring roles.“The government continually monitors this impact by reviewing and collecting a wide range of data to help inform our ongoing response to the pandemic.” More

The political party spending watchdog has confirmed there were “errors” on its part in recording donations to the Conservatives in the name of a company that had been dissolved.Labour chair Anneliese Dodds wrote to the Electoral Commission this week asking it to “urgently investigate” two donations made to Boris Johnson’s party that “do not appear to comply” with the law as the firms attributed were no longer active in the UK.But following a review, the commission said it had discovered that an “administrative error” was at fault in one instance.The Tories, the watchdog said, had however admitted inaccurate reporting in a second case raised by Labour.According to the Electoral Commission website, the Conservative Party accepted a donation of £10,000 from Stridewell Estates on November 20 2019.Ms Dodds said the Companies House website stated that Stridewell Estates was dissolved in November 2016 – more than three years before the donation.A commission spokesperson said: “Following questions last week on the permissibility of donations received by the Conservative Party, we have reviewed the data held and found that a number of donations were incorrectly identified on our database.“We published information that the Conservative Party had accepted a £10,000 donation from Stridewell Estates in November 2019 (reference CO545454), and a donation from Landcap Development Eversley Ltd in December 2019 (reference CO545455).“In both cases, these were errors on the part of the commission.“The party reported to us that it had accepted the donations from different companies, Kirklee Property Company 2 Limited and Landcap Limited respectively.“In both cases, the two companies shared an address, which is what prompted the administrative error.“We regret any confusion it has caused, and the impact it has had on transparency.”In her letter this week, Ms Dodds also raised concerns about a Tory donation of £6,000 from Unionist Buildings on 2 June 2017, which was accepted three days later despite the firm being dissolved in January that year.A further donation of £4,000 from Unionist Buildings was registered by Conservative MP Wendy Morton on 9 January 2020, almost three years after the company was officially dissolved, the senior opposition party figure said.The commission said it was awaiting further information on the Unionist Buildings donation after the Tories admitted there had been a mistake.“The Conservative Party has advised us that donations from Unionist Buildings Limited were inaccurately reported to us,” added the watchdog spokeswoman.“We remain in contact with them so that we can publish the correct information and provide transparency to voters.”The Political Parties, Elections and Referendums Act 2000 says company donors must be active in the UK, with party treasurers under obligation to check Companies House to see if the firm is in liquidation, dormant, about to be struck off, or if its accounts are overdue, before deciding whether to accept a donation within 30 days of receiving it. More

Businesses will have to commit to the UK’s 2050 net-zero target before they can bid for major government contracts, under new rules announced on World Environment Day.Firms will also have to publish “credible” carbon reduction plans setting out their existing greenhouse gas emissions such as fuel usage, power consumption and staff travel.The Cabinet Office said the measures would be put in place by September for contracts worth more than £5m, making the UK government the first in the world to require such commitments.It comes as the UK prepares to host the 2021 United Nations Climate Change Conference, also known as Cop26, in Glasgow in November.“The government spends more than £290bn on procurement every year, so it’s important we use this purchasing power to help transform our economy to net-zero,” said the minister for efficiency and transformation, Lord Agnew of Oulton, in a statement.“Requiring companies to report and commit to reducing their carbon emissions before bidding for public work is a key part of our world leading approach. These measures will help green our economy, while not overly burdening businesses.”Carbon emissions will be reported using an internationally-recognised standard which categorises them under three groups or “scopes”.Scope 1 includes direct emissions from activities controlled by the business, such as fuel combustion in furnaces and vehicles or chemical production.Scope 2 relates to indirect emissions from consumption of purchased electricity, heat, steam or cooling, while scope 3 includes other indirect emissions from business travel, employee commuting, transportation, distribution and waste disposal.While some large companies already report scope 1 and 2 emissions, the new rules will also require some scope 3 emissions to be included as well.Firms failing to meet the requirements will be excluded from bidding for contracts worth more than £5m per year.The government said that the £5m cut-off was designed to “not overly burden and potentially exclude small and medium sized enterprises (SMEs) from bidding for government work”.The measures were welcomed by the Confederation of British Industry (CBI), which represents 190,000 firms employing nearly 7 million people.Tom Thackray, director of infrastructure and energy at the CBI said: “As the world looks towards the UK and Cop26 for leadership on decarbonisation, business is already playing a vital role in driving progress towards a greener future.”The CBI has long supported using procurement policy to ensure government spending supports the UK’s environmental objectives and these changes will encourage more firms across the country to demonstrate their own commitment to net zero when bidding for government contracts.”Partnership between the public and private sectors can make the UK a global role-model, not only in delivering vital public services but working together to tackle climate change.”The Business Services Association, which contributed to drawing up the new rules, said it was “another important step on the road to net zero”. More