[_peeley]

It always irks me when organizations/governments/businesses use the word "lost" in this context, like when people say Spotify/Netflix have "lost" $Xm to digital content piracy. It's not like they once had your money, and no longer do (i.e., they actually lost it) - it's little more than presupposing that your money _belongs_ to them, and any violation of these expectations is tantamount to crime.

If I take the liberty of assuming you'll give me $5 for whatever reason (or in the case of taxation, I threaten to take $5 and assume you'll comply), and you do not do so, is it fair to say that I've "lost" that $5?

[WalterGR]

it's little more than presupposing that your money _belongs_ to them, and any violation of these expectations is tantamount to crime.

From the article: "...$312bn of the total sum was the result of cross-border corporate tax abuse by multinational corporations and $171bn offshore tax evasion by wealthy individuals."

Depending on how "tax abuse" and "tax evasion" are defined, the article may be referring to something that's literally a crime.

[Dracophoenix]

"Tax abuse" and "tax avoidance" are weasely phrases. And no one should accept claims of tax evasion without impartial evidence. Quotes and statistics from a political campaign with an agenda don't qualify.