The problem is that shareholders include everyday people who have money in mutual funds who invest that money in large cap corporations who depend on management of those corporations to maximize their shareholder value at the expense of all outside, non-investors. Including employees, governments etc. as long as it is legal and maximizes long term shareholder value.
It is a fundamental shift in finance theory that occurred about 25-30 years ago. Many people will argue that management should put the shareholders above all else. I think there is a somewhat muted, but real discussion happening in a lot of places that the currently accepted system may not be the best one, but for now, management has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.
It's a problem because it spreads out the blame on a lot of people. Management can point to the shareholders. The shareholders argue they each own just a small bit of the shares and aren't involved at all in the day to day business. It's a systemic fault.
Yes, I agree with you. But it is a current fact. I have no idea what the solution is, but when a system works conveniently for so many people it is unlikely to change.
The crazy thing is that people "blame evil corporations" while having almost 100% of their retirement invested in the corporations they dispise without even realizing it.
Unless you have no savings, you are likely a shareholder in a number of companies which are using transfer pricing to save on taxes.
You are much more likely an investor in a unit fund that itself holds shares. As a result you have no say over anything, and pretty much no alternative but to join one of these schemes.
The point is:
You invest in funds that invest in companies that use transfer pricing to minimize taxes.
You could say you don't want to be invested by not investing in mutual funds/ETFs etc.
But, almost every American with savings does invest and is the direct beneficiary of transfer pricing.
You and others could decide to allocate a portion of your capital gains back to the UK government as a gift, but I think that is "very, very unlikely".
[Also] One strategy could be to only choose small cap names, then you are unlikely to hear of any of the "evil" things the corporations you own are doing... Obviously that would create problems with risk in your portfolio.
It is a fundamental shift in finance theory that occurred about 25-30 years ago. Many people will argue that management should put the shareholders above all else. I think there is a somewhat muted, but real discussion happening in a lot of places that the currently accepted system may not be the best one, but for now, management has a fiduciary responsibility to shareholders.