Towards understanding stakeholder salience transition and relational approach to ‘better’ corporate social responsibility: a case for a proposed model in practice

Management and business literature affirm the role played by stakeholders in corporate social responsibility (CSR) practices as crucial, but what constitutes a true business–society partnership remains relatively unexplored. This paper aims to improve scholarly and management understanding beyond the usual managers’ perceptions on salience attributes, to include how stakeholders can acquire missing attributes to inform a meaningful partnership. In doing this, a model is proposed which conceptualises CSR practices and outcomes within the frameworks of stakeholder salience via empowerment, sustainable corporate social performances and partnership quality. A holistic discussion leads to generation of propositions on stakeholder salience management, corporate social performance, corporate–community partnership systems and CSR practices, which have both academic and management implications.

Not all corporate tax avoiders will be snared by new rules

Hockey’s budget announcement of two major tax integrity measures was flagged before the budget was handed down, but even that came as no surprise. Integrity, or lack thereof, in our tax system is a hot topic and an easy target for a Treasurer looking to sell a federal budget. The first of the proposed changes is to our GST regime. No-one likes hearing that they will be paying more tax. But, the charging of GST on supplies of digital products and services in Australia by an off-shore supplier will at least make sense to the general public. With the inherent unfairness in the current system and a revenue raising prediction of A$350 million over the next four years, most are likely to accept the logic of such a measure. The second of the proposed changes are new laws to be included in Australia’s general anti-avoidance provision. New laws, which will apply from 1 January 2016, are aimed at multinational companies engaged in aggressive tax practices. The proposed anti-avoidance law is designed to stop multinationals that artificially avoid a taxable presence in Australia. It is difficult to see how this strategy of addressing specific behaviour through what is considered a general provision will work. And, it is these changes that are already causing confusion.

Thin capitalisation – the multinational tax avoidance strategy the budget forgot

We have already seen major amendments to Australia’s tax regime to tackle base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS). Several more significant measures were announced in the federal budget, most notably the diverted profits tax, aimed at multinationals which shift tax to a lower taxing jurisdiction. Yet to date, a very simple tax minimisation strategy has been largely ignored in the ongoing reforms and was ignored in the federal budget. Excessive debt loading is a problem that not been afforded the same attention as other aggressive tax planning strategies adopted by multinationals.