Distributive justice and tax avoidance in emerging economies
A Rawlsian analysis of multinational structures, professional complicity and legal reform
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 17803025 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Kweku Adams (0000-0002-3737-954X, University of Bradford, corresponding author), Jay Cullen (Edge Hill University) |
| Year | 2026 |
| Pages | 1-24 |
| Publication date | 2026-04-13 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Critical Perspectives on International Business (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1742-2043 • E-ISSN: 1758-6062 |
| Publisher | Emerald Publishing Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1108/cpoib-11-2025-0252 |
| OpenAlex | W7153721995 |
| Language | EN |
| References cited | 56 |
Purpose This paper aims to examine how multinational enterprises minimise tax liabilities in emerging economies through lawful but engineered cross border structures. Using Rawlsian distributive justice, it assesses whether international tax rules and court responses protect the least advantaged by preventing tax base erosion that reduces funding for essential public services. It also examines how professional intermediaries enable complexity and shape the legitimacy of the international tax order. Design/methodology/approach Doctrinal analysis of judgments from India, Nigeria, Ghana and South Africa is combined with socio legal critique. The cases are mapped to four Rawls grounded assumptions on fairness, fragmentation, transparency and accountability. Findings The cases show repeatable avoidance mechanisms. In India, offshore restructuring treated a value shifting transfer as exempt. In Nigeria, layered group structures and joint venture operations complicated tax enforcement while harm litigation moved abroad. In Ghana, offshore routed payments reduced local scrutiny around public contracts. In South Africa, structured finance re-characterised interest as exempt dividends until challenged under anti avoidance rules. Across contexts, advisers and intermediaries supported opacity and individual accountability was limited. This increases pressure on low-income states with limited institutional capacity. Judicial reasoning shaped outcomes because purposive interpretation protected the tax base, whereas formalism accepted legal form and allowed base erosion that fails a Rawlsian fairness test. Research limitations/implications The focus on four jurisdictions limits generalisation but provides deep insight into ethical and legal asymmetries in global taxation. Practical implications Policymakers should adopt substance based anti-avoidance rules and enforce adviser duties, with promoter disclosure, sanctions and mutual assistance. Originality/value The study links Rawlsian justice to comparative case law and proposes UN reforms that target professional enablers of tax avoidance
Accountability · Base erosion and profit shifting · Distributive justice · Double taxation · Expropriation · Legitimacy · Multinational corporation · Tax avoidance · Tax law · Tax reform · Corporate Taxation and Avoidance · Taxation and Compliance Studies · Taxation and Legal Issues
The Hidden Wealth of Nations
Social Accountability and Corporate Greenwashing
A Theory of Justice
The dark side of professions
Two Accounts of International Tax Justice
Family ties and corporate tax avoidance
Corporate Social Responsibility
Understanding cross-border crime
The tax avoidance industry
Critical perspectives on “manufactured” risks arising from Eurocentric business practices in Africa
Modern Monetary Theory and the Changing Role of Tax in Society
World Poverty and Human Rights
The mutually reinforcing link between tax haven use and global inequality and injustice
Profit shifting and tax competition policy
Rethinking Territory
Abusive Tax Avoidance and Responsibilities of Tax Professionals
| Citation velocity | historical |
|---|---|
| Highly cited | No |