It goes without saying that I’m always ready to defend tax havens when statists are seeking to undermine tax competition, financial privacy, and fiscal sovereignty.
So when the BBC asked if I would debate the topic, I said yes even though I’m in Paris (where supporting liberty is probably a capital crime).
I think the debate went well. Or, to be more precise, I was happy that I got to make my points.
I’ve been in debates on tax havens when I’m outnumbered 3-1, so a fair fight almost seems like a treat.
P.S. If you have a burning desire to watch me debate tax havens, you can see me cross swords with a bunch of different statists by clicking here.
P.P.S. Or if you like watching when I’m outnumbered, here’s my debate against three leftists on state-run TV.
International Liberty 
[…] media, but my philosophical objections haven’t prevented me from appearing on PBS, BBC, and France 24, so I figured it was okay to also appear on Russia […]
[…] read last month’s two-part series on the topic (here and here), you already know I’m a big defender of low-tax […]
[…] a fan of “Swiss bank accounts” and “foreign financial havens,” but I want them available for taxpayers, not politicians and government […]
[…] a fan of “Swiss bank accounts” and “foreign financial havens,” but I want them available for taxpayers, not politicians and government […]
[…] low-tax jurisdictions and the service providers in those jurisdictions. And I’ll defend them (here, here, here, here, and here) even if it means a bunch of international bureaucrats threaten to toss […]
[…] a recent interview with the BBC, I basically accused UK Prime Minister David Cameron of being a feckless and clueless demagogue who […]
Two points:
1. The US should get rid of taxes on investment and become a tax haven and investment magnet for the world.
2. The US government is buffering states from full tax competition. Inhabitants of Blue and Red states now share equally in supporting federal means-testing programs that are out of control. Better would be diminished federal support through a negative income tax that moves everyone up to the poverty line, but does not re-create current mal-incentives. Individual states would then determine how much more than poverty line support should be provided, with each state’s taxes reflecting the cost of support. Each state would act as an idea incubator and successful states could be emulated by others. Charities could fill in support for the truly needy in those states where state support is reduced.
Let tax competition expand!
For more see:
“a bunch of different statists”? Oh, boy, that was rich.
Tax havens should be bombed to teach money grubbers, crony capitalists, and oily think tank hacks the lesson that debating society tactics have thus far failed to impart?