Wednesday, February 04, 2026

INTERTAX: Special Issue on Zucman’s Billionaire Tax

 Managing The Powerful Aurelien


Sensible people are baffled as to why the United Kingdom has as its Prime Minister a man whose sole aim seems to be to destroy the country and impose a communist-style totalitarianism. John Ellwood speculates that he is an agent of the unseen powers that are destroying Europe, Canada and the Antipodes. He believes that during Starmer’s time in Czechoslovakia in 1986 he was conditioned to become the heartless autocrat we see today.

CzechoSlovakia Project Starmer: The making of a Marxist stooge




INTERTAX: Special Issue on Zucman’s Billionaire Tax


INTERTAX has released a special issue on Gabriel Zucman’s “billionaire tax” proposal (volume 54, issue 1). From U.S. institutions, contributors include Jayati Ghosh (U. Mass., Econ.), Dan Shaviro (NYU), and Matt Zwolinski (U. San Diego, Inst. L. & Phil.). Contributions, with abstracts, below the fold.

Ana Paula Dourado (EIC) & Alice Pirlot (Geneva Graduate Inst.), Editorial: The Zucman Tax, 54 INTERTAX 3 (2026) (introducing the debate)

Gabriel Zucman (Paris Sch. Econ.), Debate: The Billionaire Tax: A (Modest) Proposal for the 21st Century, 54 INTERTAX 7 (2026) (summarizing the proposal)

Huub Brouwer (Tilburg U.) & Ingrid Robeyns (Utrecht U.), Debate: The Normative Case for a Global Minimum Tax on Ultra-High-Net-Worth Individuals, 54 INTERTAX 9 (2026)



IRS Enforcement Leadership Changes

Bloomberg Law: IRS Leader Shake-Up Bleeds Criminal, Civil Enforcement Oversight

The line between tax auditors policing mere civil infractions versus serious tax crimes is blurring in the latest reorganization at the top of the IRS.


 David Elkins (Netanya), Embracing Tax Avoidance, 34 U. Fla. J.L. & Pub. Pol’y 327 (2024):

Avoidance is a major theme in tax law jurisprudence. Congress, the Treasury, and the courts have developed numerous doctrines to deny beneficial treatment when the taxpayer’s principal purpose or presumed principal purpose was the avoidance of taxation. Each attempt to shut down tax avoidance then becomes the opening salvo in the next round of engagement as tax planners devise means of circumventing the restrictions and new rules are developed to counter the latest avoidance maneuvers.

 

And so It Begins: AIs Now Talking With One Another Behind Our Backs


Meet the scourge of the mafia Leonardo Sciascia exposed Sicily’s rotten core


Slovakia PM's national security adviser resigns over Epstein links

Fico announced he had accepted Lajčák's departure in a message, describing the adviser as "an incredible source of experience in diplomacy and foreign policy"


Department of Justice Publishes 3.5 Million Responsive Pages in Compliance with the Epstein Files Transparency Act Department of Justice


Elon Musk Emailed Extensively With Jeffrey Epstein, Asking to Visit His Notorious Island Futurism


Stunning Epstein twist as Ghislaine Maxwell claims 29 friends cut ‘secret deals’ with DOJ Daily Mail 


Companies reap $22bn from Trump’s immigration crackdown Palantir and Deloitte among beneficiaries of spending by government agencies

 Palantir and Deloitte among beneficiaries of spending by government agencies


Trump administration contract with Paragon Solutions gives immigration agency access to one of the most powerful stealth cyberweapons

The powerful tools in ICE’s arsenal to track suspects — and protesters

https://archive.md/OHBgPBiometric trackers, cellphone location databases and drones are among the surveillance technologies that federal agents are tapping in their deportation campaign

🦋🐉 https://archive.md/OHBgP

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/interactive/2026/ice-surveillance-immigrants-protesters/

The billionaire boys fight the wealth tax Oligarch Watch


All the Lonely People: An Integrated Review and Research Agenda on Work and Loneliness. Julie M. McCarthy, Berrin Erdogan, Emily Campion. Journal of Management [Open Access]. Volume 52, Issue 1. https://doi.org/10.1177/01492063241313320

“Decades of studies spanning multiple disciplines have provided insight into the critical role of loneliness in work contexts. In spite of this extensive research, a comprehensive review of loneliness and work remains absent. 


To address this gap, we conducted a multidisciplinary review of relevant theory and research and identified 213 articles reporting on 233 empirical studies from management, organizational psychology, sociology, medicine, and other domains to uncover why people feel lonely, how different features of work can contribute to feelings of loneliness, and the implications of employee loneliness for organizational settings. This enabled a critical examination of the distinct conceptualizations and operationalizations of loneliness that have been advanced and the theories underpinning this scholarship. 

We developed a comprehensive conceptual model that integrates cognitive discrepancy theory, the affect theory of social exchange, and evolutionary theory. 


This model elucidates the core antecedents, mediators, outcomes, moderators, and interventions forming the nomological network of work related loneliness, including cross-level influences within teams and among leaders. Our review also identifies a number of promising areas for future inquiry to improve our understanding and measurement of loneliness, the process of experiencing and managing loneliness in the workplace, and potential interventions to reduce it. 


Finally, we provide tangible guidance for organizations and practitioners on how to address and mitigate employee loneliness. Ultimately, our review underscores the complex nature of loneliness and work and establishes a foundation for advancing both scholarly discourse and organizational practices in this critical domain.”

Government rejects bid to allow politicians to kill consulting deals

Tax heavyhitter Orme takes up top TPB role


Government rejects major reforms and gives ‘big four’ firms a reprieve

The Albanese government has given consultants a ‘massive reprieve’ by rejecting most Senate recommendations to overhaul consulting contracts after the PwC tax leaks scandal.

The Australian government has handed the big four consulting firms a massive reprieve in its official response to the Senate inquiry into the PwC tax leaksscandal.
The Albanese government released its response on the Friday afternoon before the Australia Day long weekend, and has chosen bureaucratic tinkering over the structural demolition many demanded, according to former KPMG partner turned whistleblower Brendan Lyon. 
Of the 12 recommendations from the Finance and Public Administration References Committee, the government has only fully agreed to three, preferring to agree “in principle” or “in part” to four. It disagreed or simply “noted” the remaining four. And merely “noted” the aggressive overhaul proposed by the Greens.
When the PwC tax leaks scandal first broke three years ago, it shocked the public and shone the spotlight on billions of taxpayer dollars the government was spending on consultants; particularly the so-called big four of PwC, KPMG, EY and Deloitte. 

..


Government rejects bid to allow politicians to kill consulting deals

 Edmund Tadros  Feb 2, 2026 


Labor has rejected a bipartisan proposal that would have allowed a parliamentary committee to cancel large consultancy contracts, saying the sweeping changes it has already made in the way that the public sector can engage professional services firms are working.

In a belated response to a Senate inquiry, which published its report 19 months ago, the Albanese government separately noted without comment dozens of recommendations made by the Greens, including that PwC and any firm run by its former chief executive, Luke Sayers, be banned from being awarded any contracts from the federal public service for five years.
Senator Deborah O’Neill questions former PwC chief executive Luke Sayers at a committee hearing in 2023. Alex Ellinghausen
The Senate inquiry was established in 2023, after the disclosure that a PwC partner had used confidential government tax proposals to further the interests of the firm and its clients. The committee was chaired by Liberal senator Richard Colbeck, but the questioning of firm executives was led by Labor senator Deborah O’Neill and Greens senator Barbara Pocock.
The inquiry was one of a number of investigations into a scandal that led to PwC selling its public sector consulting division for $1, the government reducing its use of the big four consultancies, an unprecedented crackdown on tax advisers, and reforms to government procurement.
The government response to the 12 bipartisan recommendations noted changes had already been made to increase contract transparency, to tighten the way consulting services are bought, and to oblige consultants to train public servants during projects they are working on. Almost 12,000 public servants received procurement training in the past four years.

Review committee would ‘create legal risk’

The government rejected a recommendation to create a parliamentary review committee for large consulting contracts because it would “create legal risk” by politicising purchasing decisions.
Colbeck, who has introduced a private member’s bill to establish such a committee, rejected the government’s description of its role.
“The purpose of the committee would be to provide parliamentary scrutiny of public spending on consulting firms and ensure value for money,” he said.
The government, in its response, said recommendations to review partnership laws governing the big consulting firms – Deloitte, EY, KPMG and PwC – and force professional bodies to report to parliament would be considered by a still-unpublished Treasury review of the sector.
The Treasury consultation, which closed to submissions in June 2024, is examining reform of the fragmented and light-touch regulation of accounting partnerships in Australia, whose auditing, tax advisory and insolvency services are of systemic importance to the economy.
The government response said PwC was responsible for a recommendation that the firm “promptly publish accurate and detailed information about the involvement of PwC partners and personnel” involved in the leaks.
Senator Pocock said it was “unsurprising but extremely disappointing that the government was offering only very small tweaks to procurement but won’t touch essential bold structural reform with a 12-foot pole”.
O’Neill welcomed the response but urged her “colleagues in government to remain extremely vigilant about the operations of these consulting firms and their relationship with government”.
Comment was sought from PwC and Sayers.

Final recommendations and government response

  1. 1PwC should publish details about all partners and personnel involved in the breach of confidential government information. Government response: This recommendation is for PwC to respond to.
  2. 2Service providers should be obliged to act in the public interest when working for the Commonwealth. Response: The government agrees in principle with the recommendation.
  3. 3The Finance Department to improve the training of officials undertaking procurement. Response: The government agrees with the recommendation.
  4. 4Contracts should factor in knowledge transfer from consultants to the Australian Public Service. Response: The government agrees with the recommendation.
  5. 5Service providers should be required to (a) act in the public interest and (b) incorporate elements from the accountants’ ethics code that align with public sector values. Response: The government agrees in principle with the recommendation.
  6. 6Finance should provide guidance on managing conflicts of interest. Response: The government agrees with the recommendation.
  7. 7Finance should develop a register of conflict-of-interest breaches by service providers. Response: The government notes the recommendation.
  8. 8Finance should enhance transparency and details on AusTender. Response: The government agrees in principle with the recommendation.
  9. 9The Australian Law Reform Commission should undertake a review of partnership law and recommend reforms. Response: The government notes the recommendation.
  10. 10The Commonwealth should force professional bodies to report annually to a parliamentary committee. Response: The government notes the recommendation.
  11. 11Parliament should legislate to establish a committee to review and approve consultancy and services worth $15 million or more. Response: The government does not agree with the recommendation.
  12. 12The finance minister should report to parliament twice a year on Commonwealth consulting contracts worth $2 million or more. Response: The government agrees in part with this recommendation.
Find out the inside scoop about Accenture, Deloitte, EY, KPMG, PwC and McKinsey. Sign up to our weekly Professional Life newsletter.
 leads our coverage of the professional services sector. He is based in our Sydney newsroom. Email Edmund at edmundtadros@afr.com.au

Trump’s TACO backdowns are no accident. It’s how he expands his power

 It was a dark and stormy Parisian night that he had accurately predicted. Too bad not many  had seen the forecast.


Strutting into a bizarre Oval Office appearance with rapper and vaccine conspiracy theorist Nicki Minaj last Thursday, Donald Trump backed down yet again, it seems, this time from his week-long Minnesota maelstrom. He went too far, government agents killed two demonstrators, protests erupted, and he pulled back, tail between his legs.

It’s the democratic process at work, right?

“Twice within a week, Trump is forced to tone down big second-term power grabs,” a headline on CNN said on Wednesday. It’s the latest in a weekly cycle of headlines declaring the same thing, like this from The New York Times at the start of the year: “Trump backs down on insurrection act as Democrats take the offensive”.

US President Donald Trump.AP

For some, this pattern proves that “Trump always chickens out” (TACO). But that implies a thoughtlessness. These cycles of aggression and retreat are intentional.


Trump approaches governing as a series of negotiating positions, like a corporate takeover. He begins with the most bombastic, extreme one, which forces his opponents to react. His ambit claim allows him to name a price first, forcing the conversation back onto his terms.

Every week or two during this presidency we’ve seen Trump pick out a topic – whether a new one or something that earned him applause on the campaign trail – that suits his idea of dominance as power.

Trump with rapper Nicki Minaj last week.AP

For 10 days the White House released relentless statements about its desire to take over Greenland, causing panic in Europe, only to end with a meaningless framework of a deal.

Earlier this term Trump allowed a 43-day US government shutdown, costing millions of Americans their pay cheques and much-needed food assistance.


In Chicago, Los Angeles, Portland, and now Minnesota, he has deployed ICE on the streets to trigger protests, which then let him test his authority by sending armed troops to suppress dissent.

Each round of tariffs usually begins with some ridiculous opening position, a number seemingly plucked from the upper reaches of his arithmetic imagination, only to find that number drastically reduced or vanished when confronted.

Last February he proposed a US takeover of the Gaza Strip so that he could turn it into a “Riviera of the Middle East”. Who knows if his Board of Peace will be as rapidly forgotten?

These aren’t mere distractions, as some describe them. Each time Donald Trump and his administration is pushing for a bit more power – over a foreign opponent, a group of people it’s domestically advantageous to label as the enemy, or the truth itself. Even as they find the limits of their authority, the next time these actions becomes a bit more “normal”. He is prodding to see how soft the underbelly of democratic norms really can be. 


If the Trump administration kidnaps the president of Venezuela and flashes some military hardware, the world is happy to settle for some oil grift as long as he doesn’t follow through with the worst of it. As far as tactics go, economic devastation and troops on the streets are powerful starts.

He does not concern himself with the effect of these tactics. He appears to regard the death of civilians on the streets not as a tragedy but an incidental cost of the negotiation. Just the cost of doing business.

We imagine that US presidents are operating with a grand strategy of global governance, that they at least take seriously the idea that their power is constrained by convention, if not constitution. The president has dispensed with that idea.

Trump was open about this strategy in The Art of the Deal, where he advises making a ridiculous first offer, which makes everything else seem acceptable. His treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, describes it as Trump giving “himself maximum negotiating leverage, and just when he achieved the maximum leverage, he’s willing to start talking”.


In Trump’s words, “sometimes it pays to get a little wild”.

In some ways, his lack of respect for the old ways offers a possibility for reimagining them for the 21st century. I often find myself frustratingly close to agreeing with him, or at least understanding the problem to which he is reacting – only to find that he’s taken the reaction too far or used it as an opportunity for grift.

The way that Trump uses the presidency is far narrower and deeper than the traditional game of American power. He is not interested in containing Chinese influence over the global economy or Russian aggression against its neighbours. He is trying to emulate the kind of control that those leaders have over their populations, which requires a process of winnowing away the constraints placed on the American leader.

The danger is not that he will seize absolute power in a day, but that, piece by piece, the country will agree that he already has it.

Cory Alpert is a PhD researcher at the University of Melbourne looking at the impact of AI on democracy. He previously served the Biden-Harris Administration for three years.

The Opinion newsletter is a weekly wrap of views that will challenge, champion and inform your own. Sign up here.

Cory AlpertCory Alpert is a PhD researcher at the University of Melbourne looking at the impact of AI on democracy. He previously served the Biden-Harris Administration for three years.