KPMG International and Jericho, recently hosted a global webinar to delve into the findings of the newly launched Global Responsible Tax: Past, Present, Future report.

The publication features a rich collection of interviews with influential voices in taxation, sustainability and policy, providing an in-depth exploration of pivotal debates and innovations shaping responsible tax practices over the past decade and looking ahead at the decade to come.

The webcast brought together several authors featured in the publication to discuss their findings and explore actionable steps toward advancing responsible tax practices globally. Huge thanks go to our panelists: John Connors, Tax Counsel and Senior Advisor at Vodafone Group plc and Chair, International Chamber of Commerce Global Tax Commission; Ewan Livingston-Docwra, Head of Campaigns at The B Team; and Benita Mathew, Lecturer in AI and Fintech at the University of Surrey explores the intersection of AI and tax policy.

Expertly chaired by Grant Wardell-Johnson, Global Tax Policy Leader and Chair of the Global Tax Policy Leadership Group KPMG International, audience members were encouraged to share their views and help to shape the next chapter in this vital conversation.

This event provided a thought-provoking platform for business leaders, policymakers, and stakeholders to reflect on the intersection of taxation, accountability, and sustainability, inspiring meaningful dialogue for the future.

Thank you for joining us (if you did), and sorry you missed it (if you didn’t). It was a great conversation. Below, we’ve captured some of the best bits from the webinar and you can register to listen to the webinar on demand here.

Introduction from Grant Wardell-Johnson

Two thoughts come to mind to begin the conversation. The first is from one of my favorite parts of The Hobbit, where Thorin asks Gandalf, “Where have you been?” Gandalf replies, “Looking ahead.” Then Thorin asks, “And why did you come back in the nick of time?” Gandalf answers, “Looking behind.” That idea of looking ahead and looking behind is a critical lesson in life.

The second thought is about the Overton Window. Overton was a political scientist who described the concept of a "window of discourse" (a range of ideas that are acceptable to the mainstream at a given time). Recently, this window has rapidly expanded, with discussions about Greenland, Panama, and even the idea of Greenland becoming the 51st state of the U.S. Earlier this week, I saw The Importance of Being Earnest, which brought a lot of topics to the forefront, showing how the Overton Window can expand positively during certain periods.

With these introductory comments in mind, I’d like to ask the panel:

What do you see as the biggest positive and negative developments over the last 10 years?

John: Over the last decade, the shift towards transparency has been a significant positive. Many companies now openly share details of their tax contributions and global economic activities, explaining their roles in tax collection, defending their positions, and engaging with society. Although progress has been made, divisive narratives and mistrust of multinationals remain. It’s often easier to assign blame for economic or environmental challenges than to pursue equitable, sustainable solutions. As we move forward, this agenda must underpin further dialogue and progress.

Ewan: I agree with much of what John has said. Transparency has normalised and driven more honest discussions about tax, its reform, and rebuilding trust between companies and stakeholders—trust that initiatives like this aim to facilitate. Companies such as Vodafone have been instrumental in opening these debates.

However, a key challenge lies in achieving multilateral cooperation. The OECD has achieved notable successes in global tax agreements, but its traditional role is being increasingly questioned by developing nations advocating for greater UN involvement in tax governance. We may need to re-evaluate the structure of global tax governance to ensure it benefits all stakeholders. Cooperation remains a significant hurdle, not only in tax but across broader policy areas.

Benita: AI in tax administration offers promising benefits. In France, AI tools detected undeclared construction, raising €4 million, while Poland used machine learning to identify fraudulent VAT patterns, reducing its VAT gap.

Yet challenges remain, particularly in defining governance frameworks for AI. Beyond developing effective systems and controls to mitigate taxpayer risks, we must question whether investments in digital tools deliver measurable benefits and whether resources align with governance needs.

Ensuring governance keeps pace with technological advances is vital. Lessons from the BEPS agenda provide insights, highlighting the need for proportionate investment and robust frameworks in these international efforts.

Do you see the next ten years as a continuation of what we’ve seen in the past? How do you see the world evolving over the next decade, grounded in the path we’ve been on?

Ewan: We’re at an inflection point. Over the past decade, tax transparency and responsible taxation have become integral to sustainability, whether under ESG or other frameworks. Many battles have been fought and largely won, but the focus is now shifting to incentive reform.

Businesses are increasingly expected to address global challenges like climate change and ecosystem destruction, but systemic changes are necessary for meaningful impact. Tax remains one of the most powerful tools governments can use to create enabling environments and positive incentives.

Businesses must engage proactively in this dialogue, offering insights into the incentives they would respond to while being prepared to accept reforms to existing benefits. Without these systemic changes, the private sector’s capacity to contribute effectively will remain limited.

John: We can’t afford to lose momentum on transparency and the responsible tax agenda. While significant progress has been made, this remains a niche area. Many companies support the agenda but aren’t actively involved or public about it.

There are notable geographical and sectoral differences. ESG principles have seen less uptake in the U.S., and consumer-facing businesses are more engaged due to public pressure, unlike many B2B companies.

For Vodafone, transparency has delivered tangible benefits: building customer trust, providing clarity for investors, and attracting ethical shareholders. The goal now is to expand engagement, draw on past successes, and ensure the progress continues without slowing.

In AI, progress isn’t likely to follow a linear path of awareness or the development of ethical frameworks. Things are happening at an exponential pace as AI takes off. How do you see the interaction between time and the adoption of governance and ethical frameworks for AI?

Benita: Much of the learning around AI's shortcomings is occurring in a somewhat disorganized manner, but this presents an advantage: the challenges of AI in tax are largely consistent across jurisdictions.

When it comes to cooperation, solutions in the AI and tax space are often more straightforward, enabling shared learning and faster progress. The challenges of implementing internal controls to prevent negative taxpayer impacts are similar across functions and expertise levels, creating opportunities for countries to exchange insights and refine approaches without significant conflict.

However, a concern is the knowledge gap among tax practitioners, accountants, and officials regarding AI. Many lack an understanding of how AI works and its limitations, stemming from the historical separation of disciplines. Interdisciplinary collaboration has been limited, which poses a barrier to addressing these shared challenges.

For instance, chartered accountants, traditionally focused on conventional tax advisory, are struggling to keep pace as advisory practices evolve. Bridging this gap is essential. We need to rethink how tax practitioners are trained and what future accountants are taught. For AI to be used effectively, this transformation in education and practice must happen rapidly.

Are there areas where you think we’re sleepwalking into significant issues? What would you want to say to the world to wake up and address these challenges differently than we currently are?

John: A key challenge is the digitization of processes, not just in AI application but also in managing the vast amounts of data available to companies and tax administrations. Effectively managing and interpreting this data is essential.

Currently, there’s a disconnect: tax professionals focus on specific data outcomes, while data specialists explore broader opportunities. The question is whether data is being used to enhance accuracy and improve taxpayer experiences or to uncover new audit avenues for tax authorities.

This raises the broader issue of integrating systems with the core principles of taxation. Without addressing this integration soon, it will become unmanageable.

On the corporate tax front, the taxation of intangible assets and transfer pricing remains a significant challenge. Businesses and tax administrations need a clearer understanding of value chains. While industry input and best practices can help, this issue remains unresolved and requires more attention.

Ewan: Regarding carbon taxes and pricing schemes, many jurisdictions are developing their own systems, often with subtle but important differences. We risk creating numerous systems with good intentions that ultimately fail due to a lack of coordination.

This misalignment could undermine trust in carbon pricing and business alike, as disputes arise between jurisdictions over taxing rights. Without integrated systems, businesses may again find themselves caught in the middle.

What have you seen as the biggest drivers of changes in tax over the last 10 years?

Audience poll:

  • Increased requirements for tax transparency: 29%
  • Potential for reputational damage from stakeholders: 29%
  • Need for enhanced trust with revenue authorities: 14%
  • Changes to specific tax rates: 19%
  • Other: 10%

Ewan: These results align with common feedback from companies. The risk of reputational damage from perceived tax avoidance or aggressive tax planning remains a significant concern, especially for well-known, consumer-facing companies. Investors want assurance that their investments won't land a company in the headlines or at the center of activist campaigns.

John: Reputational risk is closely tied to regulatory and public pressure. While some businesses have embraced transparency, many remain reactive, waiting to see how things unfold—often driven by regulatory pressure.

Initiatives like tax strategy publication requirements and the Total Tax Contribution framework are encouraging greater transparency. My message to businesses is to get ahead of this agenda; waiting for political criticism isn’t sustainable. Proactively sharing tax contributions and profiles inspires trust, improves practices, and aligns the executive committee with better tax behavior.

Benita: A major challenge with using AI in tax administration is ensuring the accuracy and transparency of the data. Positive examples exist where tax administrations have made data accessible to taxpayers for verification and correction, building trust.

However, relying on external data sources, like social media scraping or government data not meant for tax purposes, can erode trust—especially when exposed by media investigations. Clear communication with taxpayers on AI usage and data sources is essential to maintain trust and address fairness concerns.

What do you see as the biggest drivers for change in tax in the next 10 years?

Audience polling:

  • Tax protectionism 24%
  • The Green Economy 16%
  • Addressing inequality 20%
  • Governance revenue 32%
  • Other 8%

John: The government's push for increased revenue is a key factor, as reflected in the poll. However, tax revenues are already at historic highs in places like the UK. The real issue lies in government spending. Governments need to be transparent about the required expenditure for public services and infrastructure and align taxation accordingly. Simply raising taxes won’t resonate with voters; more nuanced approaches considering environmental issues and technology investments are needed.

Ewan: Once a revenue stream is established, it’s hard to reform the tax system. Tax is a powerful tool for guiding businesses toward sustainable models, and I hope it will be used more effectively for that purpose.

Benita: In terms of AI in tax, we still lack a clear methodology for measuring its benefits. While there are clear monetary gains, such as recovering lost tax revenue, there are also hidden costs like time, expertise, and training. It’s essential to evaluate whether the benefits outweigh these costs, which underscores the need for international dialogue and sharing technological solutions to reduce inefficiencies.

What do you see as the biggest domains of tax change in the next 10 years?

Audience poll:

  • Corporate taxation - source and residence rules 34%
  • Personal taxation (including high-net-worth individuals) 21%
  • Consumption taxation 3%
  • Environmental taxation 31%
  • Other 10%

John: The UN has been pushing the agenda for source and residence-based taxation. While I think we will see some marginal adjustments in that area, I don’t foresee significant international changes, particularly in relation to services versus goods.

Environmental taxation, however, is where tax can be used to drive behavior and investment. The focus on green versus dirtier fuels presents an opportunity for change, particularly in Europe. I see this as the biggest driver for change in the coming years.

Ewan: It may take some time before environmental taxation becomes as prominent as corporate income tax. However, it is already happening. Even countries that do not have carbon taxes are looking into them, so we will likely see significant changes in environmental taxation, even if it doesn’t result in huge new revenue streams right away.

Benita: From an AI policymaking perspective, there have been examples of how AI has been used in policymaking. One example is the "AI Economist," which uses a two-level reinforcement learning model to balance productivity and equity. This can help tax policymakers understand the reactions of businesses and individuals to tax policy and determine the ideal tax rate. AI can also be used to identify potential loopholes in tax codes, as demonstrated in research from John Hopkins University. These AI applications can help influence better policy decisions.

For Further Information regarding the Global Responsible Tax Program, please contact: Becky Holloway, Programme Director at becky.holloway@jerichochambers.com