> companies are required by law to maximize their profits No, US court rulings say that mgmt. has "wide latitude" in how the company is managed. It's up to sha

> companies are required by law to maximize their profits No, US court rulings say that mgmt. has "wide latitude" in how the company is managed. It's up to shareholders and the board to step in if they disagree, but since they appointed mgmt., it's rare for major disagreements. Which makes sense in a capitalist country, as there is little central planning outside of certain industries like defense and banking (regulated.) (In both the US and UK, the govt. tells industry how many airplane or ship builders they want, and who has to merge. After WW2, this caused concentration in the airplane industry. My understanding is that Northrop was told to drop the F-20 (an upgrade on the F-5 and a challenger for the F-16) to focus on their bomber contract, and then still told to merge.) I'm not going to comment in detail about offshore tax structuring like Ireland except to say that it is an abuse of tax avoidance.