Last year we obtained a legal opinion from Farrer’s & Co which concluded that it was not possible to construe a director’s duty to maximise benefits to a company to include a positive duty to avoid tax. This opinion has helped to nail the urban myth (widely propagated by tax planners to their clients) that failure to engage actively in tax avoidance would constitute a breach of fiduciary duties.
Our attention has now been drawn to a blog by an influential U.S. lawyer noting the UK legal opinion and asking whether the same applies in the United States. The article addresses the issue of whether the business judgement rule, would inhibit directors from taking positive action to comply with prevailing tax rules or to not comply. He concludes that the BJR would do neither:
As I read the US cases, the answer is that the BJR would in fact protect either decision from judicial review.
Useful to have this view on the US position.
More here.
Related articles

UN tax convention hub – updates & resources

UN Framework Convention – Roundup of the Fifth Session of Negotiations
Notes on the UN tax convention draft protocol on dispute prevention and resolution
11 September 2026

The European Court of Justice strikes against transparency again. Our response should be to call for an end to corporate limited liability
Report of the Fifth Session of negotiations on the UN tax convention
4 September 2026
Submission to Workstream I on Co-Lead’s Zero Draft of UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (post-Fifth Session)
28 August 2026
Submission to Workstream II on Taxation of Income from Cross-Border Services (post-Fifth Session)
26 August 2026
Strengthening public resource mobilization through tax justice
25 August 2026
Submission to Workstream III on Dispute Prevention and Resolution (post-Fifth Session)
24 August 2026

From data to policy: Building Africa’s evidence ecosystem for better tax reform
