Global tax is complicated. A reprisal tariff regime would be way way way more complicated. The US doesn't want to be in a position where it's levying 50% tariffs on Guinness because Ireland's corporate tax rate is 12.5%. How do you know that tariff is fair and would the WTO even recognize uneven tax rates as a sanctionable offense?
This is a carrot vs stick approach.
That's exactly want this law is stopping. Companies will always try to reduce their tax burden which is why this initiative, a tax floor, is global. The law is an effective way of increasing the minimum tax - what you said doesn't really apply.
I think this is moreso the case of how economics works. Inflation is a one way street because deflation is so much worse. The Great Depression saw -7% deflation.
I straight up live in a different world from this comment and OP. That sounds like a door to door hour long errand run - max.
The fact that it kills so many is a marketing tool. It's viewed as the "strongest" high and the people who die just "didn't know their limit" unlike the user.
Death penalty litigation is always more expensive than just jail.
It's pretty funny- worth seeing. Definitely amps up the ridiculousness in a way that I don't remember Mean Girls being, but it's in the same ballpark. Honestly maybe closer to Superbad.
Even if it's nationalized we still want energy generation as low cost as possible so we can use the national budget for other things.
It's simply solved by the fact that I, as a human driver, can recognize now when a robo-taxi is driving and change my expectations of the car's behavior. Right now it's clearly evident what an autonomous car looks like and a reasonable person will have the expectation that they follow the letter of the law.
I interact with these vehicles on a daily basis in San Francisco and it would be weird if they weren't driving perfectly.
It's an estimate of premature deaths based on CO2 emissions.
"Pearce and Parncutt found the peer-reviewed literature on the human mortality costs of carbon emissions converged on the "1,000-ton rule," which is an estimate that one future premature death is caused every time approximately 1,000 tons of fossil carbon are burned.
"Energy numbers like megawatts mean something to energy engineers like me, but not to most people. Similarly, when climate scientists talk about parts per million of carbon dioxide, that doesn't mean anything to most people. A few degrees of average temperature rise are not intuitive either. Body count, however, is something we all understand," said Pearce, a Western Engineering and Ivey Business School professor.
"If you take the scientific consensus of the 1,000-ton rule seriously, and run the numbers, anthropogenic global warming equates to a billion premature dead bodies over the next century. Obviously, we have to act. And we have to act fast.""
It's embarrassing you're an accountant and yet indulge in conspiratorial thinking. I've worked in and audited small, medium and large companies. Public companies have the strictest controls around personal spending of company resources. All public companies have to comply with SOX. I've never seen a private company voluntarily comply with that standard.