Re: "Branch" line
And through justification of original purpose we can happily accept the removal of tax. Because it was designed as a way for the king to fund his lifestyle/wars by taking only from the rich
Taxes are now used to pay for necessities which make it possible to have a successful society: Roads, infrastructure, a functional justice system. The aim of the tax system is to fund all of these while hindering economic activity as least as possible. Declaring taxes in multiple countries is a bad idea for small businesses, because it would cost them a lot in accountants and return a pittance. Doing so for large companies would cost them a rounding error in accountants and have much higher returns.
Conflating the idea of stealing with nurture is both twisted but unfortunately popular (as it was with the various socialist paradises). To nurture success is to allow progress and not hinder (see above explanation). To generate wealth is to free the population (the people) to work, to earn, to spend freely (again the opposite to taking their money from them).
You need to invest to get returns. You need to pay salaries to have people work for you. You need to pay taxes to have a functioning country. You might claim that not investing, not paying salaries, and not paying taxes is the right thing to do in order to have more money, by simply spending less.
And that would be wrong.
As for a country that generates nothing it will struggle regardless of the tax level, although it would be very difficult (if not impossible) to get out of the situation with high tax levels.
What is exactly produced by Luxembourg and the Cayman Islands, do you think? Do you believe these places to be struggling?