[cal5k]

Sure - if you want zero innovation.

If you're a large enough entity operating in multiple jurisdictions around the world, you're exposed to such a byzantine labyrinth of laws and regulations that it's impossible not to be in violation of some rule or law, somewhere, at all times.

Regulators know this. They use discretion to decide when and how to enforce these rules. Some are seldom enforced, others enforced with reckless abandon depending on the administrator, market conditions, political winds, etc.

Every regulated financial institution, for example, and I mean every single one, will be fined for something if it is big enough and has been around long enough.

Basing fines on worldwide revenue is a ridiculous way to ensure absolutely no risk-taking happens, because innovation happens at the margin. Tomorrow's massive industry is today's grey area.

[ceejayoz]

The industry has spent decades moving revenue worldwide via complex financial engineering to avoid taxation. This is the end result of that innovation.

[malfist]

I can't believe that baising fines on the wealth of the criminal could possibly lead to zero innovation.

There's a difference between risk taking in doing something new and innovation and risk taking of riding the line of legal/illegal. I for one, would much prefer an environment where businesses were a little more afraid of breaking the law to exploit people/environments/other businesses/etc.