This would be a pretty historic deal if made. I am not sure if this will be good or bad in the long run, and I could see a lot of benefits and probably more problems this will create. If more vulnerable countries don't commit, could it mean sanctioning or "cancel culturing" entire countries or companies who try to skirt or not play along with a commitment like this. Should the largest economies in the world set global tax rules that will inevitably effect tax rules and in the more vulnerable ones? This is no doubt being pushed by the US, and the Biden administration who have proposed a similar 15% minimum tax instead of a tax increase to push through the infrastructure bill.
I see this as a win for fairness, a win for governments (and so their people) and a win for the U.S. This seems to say (only going by your OP, at the moment; not the full, linked article) that instead of a corporation choosing some low-corporate tax haven, while doing business all around the world, they will be required to pay taxes in the countries in which they operate. How does this discriminate against, "vulnerable," countries?
This is correct, but I would not use the word discriminate. Some smaller vulnerable counties benefit from lower tax rates and even these loopholes, in some cases using those loopholes as incentive to gain a small bump in their own economies. If that is right or wrong is not my argument, but I think this would impact some "vulnerable" countries especially if the G20 nations want to play ball. Also consider the pressure a global tax bloc like this impose on others if they feel "cheated" by a smaller entity (which of course all these bloc groups do already).
