This is england. We have strict libel / slander / defamation laws.
Saying that Google is avoiding tax is fine. Saying that Google is evading tax is not fine unless I can prove that they are.
Note that "tax avoidance" used to mean normal "tax planning" - using purely legal means to reduce your tax bill. Now it feels a bit different. Now it feels a bit sleazy, a bit of a grey area, a bit borderline. When people say "tax avoidance" it feels as if the steps taken are right on the borderline, or are loopholes that just haven't been closed yet.
Tax avoidance has evolved into a shell game of jurisdiction shopping and regulatory arbitrage.
In the USA, states got so fed up with companies assigning their trademark and copyrights to DE subsidiaries they could make tax-free royalty payments to that they started doing combined reporting to nullify the effect of those constructions. Even though companies had no offices, employees, or business in DE, they nonetheless were claiming that their very valuable IP was situated there.
The net effect is that it's easy to deduct royalty payments in a high tax state and have them appear in DE, a low-tax state.
Not to be undone by combined reporting, they've (companies) now expanded this approach to offshore destinations to keep the benefits of transfer pricing. GOOG does it. AAPL does it. MSFT does it.
Saying that Google is avoiding tax is fine. Saying that Google is evading tax is not fine unless I can prove that they are.
Note that "tax avoidance" used to mean normal "tax planning" - using purely legal means to reduce your tax bill. Now it feels a bit different. Now it feels a bit sleazy, a bit of a grey area, a bit borderline. When people say "tax avoidance" it feels as if the steps taken are right on the borderline, or are loopholes that just haven't been closed yet.