2020
|
Ajdacic, L D; Heemskerk, E. M.; Garcia-Bernardo, J The Wealth Defence Industry: A large-scale study on accountancy firms as profit shifting facilitators Journal Article In: New Political Economy, pp. 1-17, 2020. @article{Ajdacic2019,
title = {The Wealth Defence Industry: A large-scale study on accountancy firms as profit shifting facilitators},
author = {L D Ajdacic and E. M. Heemskerk and J Garcia-Bernardo },
url = {https://doi.org/10.1080/13563467.2020.1816947
},
doi = {13563467.2020.1816947},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-09-21},
journal = {New Political Economy},
pages = {1-17},
abstract = {Corporations increasingly engage in innovative ‘tax planning strategies’ by shifting profits between jurisdictions. In response, states try to curtail such profit shifting activities while at the same time attempting to retain and attract multinational corporations. We aim to open up this dichotomy between states and corporations and argue that a wealth defence industry of professional service firms plays a crucial role as facilitators. We investigate the subsidiary structure of 27,000 MNCs and show that clients of the Big Four accountancy firms show systematically higher levels of aggressive tax planning strategies than clients of smaller accountancy firms. We specify this effect for three distinct strategies and also uncover marked differences across countries. As such we provide empirical evidence for the systematic involvement of auditors as facilitators in corporate wealth defence.},
keywords = {Globalization, multiplex corporate networks, offshore, offshore financial centres, wealth defence},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Corporations increasingly engage in innovative ‘tax planning strategies’ by shifting profits between jurisdictions. In response, states try to curtail such profit shifting activities while at the same time attempting to retain and attract multinational corporations. We aim to open up this dichotomy between states and corporations and argue that a wealth defence industry of professional service firms plays a crucial role as facilitators. We investigate the subsidiary structure of 27,000 MNCs and show that clients of the Big Four accountancy firms show systematically higher levels of aggressive tax planning strategies than clients of smaller accountancy firms. We specify this effect for three distinct strategies and also uncover marked differences across countries. As such we provide empirical evidence for the systematic involvement of auditors as facilitators in corporate wealth defence. |
Babic, M Why state capitalism isn’t primarily geopolitical Online International Politics and Society 2020. @online{Babic2020,
title = {Why state capitalism isn’t primarily geopolitical},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://www.ips-journal.eu/regions/global/article/show/why-state-capitalism-isnt-primarily-geopolitical-4022/},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-24},
organization = {International Politics and Society},
keywords = {geoeconomics, geopolitics, Globalization, state capitalism},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
|
Babic, M Let’s talk about the interregnum: Gramsci and the crisis of the Liberal World Order Journal Article In: International Affairs, vol. 96, no. 3, pp. 767-786, 2020. @article{Babic2019,
title = {Let’s talk about the interregnum: Gramsci and the crisis of the Liberal World Order},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://academic.oup.com/ia/advance-article/doi/10.1093/ia/iiz254/5712430},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiz254},
year = {2020},
date = {2020-01-21},
journal = {International Affairs},
volume = {96},
number = {3},
pages = {767-786},
abstract = {The liberal international order (LIO) is in crisis. Numerous publications, debates and events have made it time and again clear that we are in the midst of a grand transformation of world order. While most contributions focus either on what is slowly dying (the LIO) or what might come next (China, multipolarity, chaos?), there is less analytical engagement with what lies in between those two phases of world order. Under the assumption that this period could last years or even decades, a set of analytical tools to understand this interregnum is urgently needed. This paper proposes an analytical framework that builds on Gramscian crisis concepts that will help understanding the current crisis of the LIO in a more systematic way. It adds to a gap in the literature on changing world order by elaborating three Gramsci-inspired crisis characteristics - processuality, organicity and morbidity -
that sketch the current crisis landscape in a systematic way. Building on this framework, the paper suggests different empirical entry points to the study of the crisis of the LIO and calls for a research agenda that takes this crisis seriously as a distinct period of changing world orders.},
keywords = {crisis, Globalization, Gramsci, international political economy, International Politics, international relations, liberal world order},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
The liberal international order (LIO) is in crisis. Numerous publications, debates and events have made it time and again clear that we are in the midst of a grand transformation of world order. While most contributions focus either on what is slowly dying (the LIO) or what might come next (China, multipolarity, chaos?), there is less analytical engagement with what lies in between those two phases of world order. Under the assumption that this period could last years or even decades, a set of analytical tools to understand this interregnum is urgently needed. This paper proposes an analytical framework that builds on Gramscian crisis concepts that will help understanding the current crisis of the LIO in a more systematic way. It adds to a gap in the literature on changing world order by elaborating three Gramsci-inspired crisis characteristics - processuality, organicity and morbidity -
that sketch the current crisis landscape in a systematic way. Building on this framework, the paper suggests different empirical entry points to the study of the crisis of the LIO and calls for a research agenda that takes this crisis seriously as a distinct period of changing world orders. |
2019
|
Babic, M; Garcia-Bernardo, J; Heemskerk, E M The rise of transnational state capital: state-led foreign investment in the 21st century Journal Article In: Review of International Political Economy, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 433-475, 2019. @article{Babic2019db,
title = {The rise of transnational state capital: state-led foreign investment in the 21st century},
author = {M Babic and J Garcia-Bernardo and E M Heemskerk},
url = {https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09692290.2019.1665084},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1080/09692290.2019.1665084},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-10-07},
journal = {Review of International Political Economy},
volume = {27},
number = {3},
pages = {433-475},
abstract = {Cross-border state-led investment is a recently rising, but understudied phenomenon of the global political economy. Existing research employs an anecdotal and case-oriented perspective that does not engage in a systemic, large-scale analysis of this rise of transnational state investment and its consequences for the transformation of state power in 21st century capitalism. We take a first step at filling this gap and offer two original contributions: Conceptually, we operationalize transnational foreign state-led investment on the basis of weighted ownership ties. These state capital ties are created by states as investors in corporations around the world. Empirically, we demonstrate our approach by setting up and analyzing the largest dataset on transnational state capital up to date. We show which different outward strategies states as owners employ and classify states according to their relative positions within the global network of transnational state capital. Our results illustrate a crucial aspect of the ongoing transformation of state power and sovereignty within globalization and we demonstrate how a careful and data-driven approach is able to identify different pathways and dimensions of this transformation.},
keywords = {corporate power, foreign direct investment, Globalization, Ownership, state capitalism},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
Cross-border state-led investment is a recently rising, but understudied phenomenon of the global political economy. Existing research employs an anecdotal and case-oriented perspective that does not engage in a systemic, large-scale analysis of this rise of transnational state investment and its consequences for the transformation of state power in 21st century capitalism. We take a first step at filling this gap and offer two original contributions: Conceptually, we operationalize transnational foreign state-led investment on the basis of weighted ownership ties. These state capital ties are created by states as investors in corporations around the world. Empirically, we demonstrate our approach by setting up and analyzing the largest dataset on transnational state capital up to date. We show which different outward strategies states as owners employ and classify states according to their relative positions within the global network of transnational state capital. Our results illustrate a crucial aspect of the ongoing transformation of state power and sovereignty within globalization and we demonstrate how a careful and data-driven approach is able to identify different pathways and dimensions of this transformation. |
Babic, M Why Globalization was Not the End of State Power Online Global Policy Journal 2019. @online{Babic2019d,
title = {Why Globalization was Not the End of State Power},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://www.globalpolicyjournal.com/blog/11/09/2019/why-globalization-was-not-end-state-power},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-09-11},
organization = {Global Policy Journal},
abstract = {Milan Babic argues that states’ strategic adaptation to neoliberal globalization grants them new powers in international politics.},
keywords = {Globalization, International Politics, State Power},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
Milan Babic argues that states’ strategic adaptation to neoliberal globalization grants them new powers in international politics. |
Babic, M Reclaiming the commons through state ownership? Maybe not Online Open Democracy 2019. @online{Babic2019c,
title = {Reclaiming the commons through state ownership? Maybe not},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/oureconomy/reclaiming-commons-through-state-ownership-maybe-not/},
year = {2019},
date = {2019-07-30},
organization = {Open Democracy},
abstract = { Is state ownership really a viable alternative for a post-neoliberal, more inclusive and emancipatory global economy? While this is an open question, I lay out three arguments in the following that challenge this emancipatory promise - with the hope of stimulating a discussion about the nature of the role of state ownership in a globalized economy.},
keywords = {corporate power, corporations, Globalization, state capitalism, State ownership},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
Is state ownership really a viable alternative for a post-neoliberal, more inclusive and emancipatory global economy? While this is an open question, I lay out three arguments in the following that challenge this emancipatory promise - with the hope of stimulating a discussion about the nature of the role of state ownership in a globalized economy. |
2018
|
Babic, M Actors, Not Markets: Bringing Corporate Power Back in International Studies Journal Article In: International Studies Review, vol. 21, no. 1, pp. 175-176, 2018. @article{Babic2018,
title = {Actors, Not Markets: Bringing Corporate Power Back in International Studies},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://academic.oup.com/isr/advance-article/doi/10.1093/isr/viy059/5063604},
doi = {https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viy059},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-08-01},
journal = {International Studies Review},
volume = {21},
number = {1},
pages = {175-176},
keywords = {corporations, Globalization, power, states},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {article}
}
|
Babic, M; Heemskerk, E M; Fichtner, J Who is more powerful – states or corporations? Online The Conversation 2018. @online{statesorcorps,
title = {Who is more powerful – states or corporations?},
author = {M Babic and E M Heemskerk and J Fichtner},
url = {http://theconversation.com/who-is-more-powerful-states-or-corporations-99616},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-07-10},
organization = {The Conversation},
abstract = {Who holds the power in international politics? Most people would probably say it’s the largest states in the global system. The current landscape of international relations seems to affirm this intuition: new Russian geopolitics, “America First” and Chinese state-led global expansion, among others, seem to put state power back in charge after decades of globalisation.
Yet multinationals like Apple and Starbucks still wield phenomenal power. They oversee huge supply chains, sell products all over the world, and help mould international politics to their interests. In some respects, multinationals have governments at their beck and call – witness their consistent success at dodging tax payments. So when it comes to international politics, are states really calling the shots?},
keywords = {Globalization},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
Who holds the power in international politics? Most people would probably say it’s the largest states in the global system. The current landscape of international relations seems to affirm this intuition: new Russian geopolitics, “America First” and Chinese state-led global expansion, among others, seem to put state power back in charge after decades of globalisation.
Yet multinationals like Apple and Starbucks still wield phenomenal power. They oversee huge supply chains, sell products all over the world, and help mould international politics to their interests. In some respects, multinationals have governments at their beck and call – witness their consistent success at dodging tax payments. So when it comes to international politics, are states really calling the shots? |
Babic, M Why we need to talk about the state in globalization Online Medium.com 2018. @online{stateglobalization,
title = {Why we need to talk about the state in globalization},
author = {M Babic},
url = {https://medium.com/@mbabic_1/why-we-need-to-talk-about-the-state-in-globalization-b37234dd4268},
year = {2018},
date = {2018-03-04},
organization = {Medium.com},
abstract = {In current international studies, the idea of globalization is omni-present and probably the key background concept to most research efforts. The other side of this globalization-coin — namely the state — only recently got back on the agenda of scholars, but still lacks the broad recognition as a core category in understanding globalization. I first propose to engage more in discussions about state power in the global economy in order to broaden our understanding of current global transformations. Second, I suggest a categorization of the main ambiguities in thinking about state as a concept today. I end with the call to being open to these ambiguities in our efforts to understand state and corporate power in the 21st century.},
keywords = {Globalization},
pubstate = {published},
tppubtype = {online}
}
In current international studies, the idea of globalization is omni-present and probably the key background concept to most research efforts. The other side of this globalization-coin — namely the state — only recently got back on the agenda of scholars, but still lacks the broad recognition as a core category in understanding globalization. I first propose to engage more in discussions about state power in the global economy in order to broaden our understanding of current global transformations. Second, I suggest a categorization of the main ambiguities in thinking about state as a concept today. I end with the call to being open to these ambiguities in our efforts to understand state and corporate power in the 21st century. |