How to take your tax transparency to the next level

Companies can provide public information about their tax practices in several ways. Many companies publish a tax policy, for example. However, recent studies suggest there is significant room for improvement; public tax policies often say little about a company’s actual approach to tax planning, and how tax matters are governed, implemented and monitored. A credible tax policy needs to reflect how tax is genuinely managed in the business, going beyond general principles.  

Drawing on GRI 207, recent research findings and practical experience, this Insight sets out our recommendations on how a company can sharpen its tax policy to turn it into a real governance tool and credible part of a corporate sustainability agenda. This information is relevant for companies that already have, or are considering adopting, a public tax policy or want to improve their general tax transparency.  

This Insight draws on Simon Österlin’s article “Vad säger en skattepolicy om ett företags inställning till skatt?”, published in Skattenytt 2026, p. 443. 

Top takeaways

• A tax policy built only on generic principles – such as a commitment to pay the right amount of tax and to avoid engaging in aggressive tax planning – offers limited value on its own. These statements are now assumed as a baseline, not a differentiator.
• A vague tax policy carries its own reputational risk. In the same way companies have been criticised for greenwashing other sustainability claims, a tax policy that overstates or glosses over actual practice risks being seen as misleading rather than as a genuine account of a company’s approach. Increased transparency does not, however, mean that a company needs to disclose commercially sensitive information.
• Implementation is the biggest gap. Most companies describe their tax principles reasonably well but say little about who owns the policy, how it is embedded in the business, or how compliance is monitored.

Why this matters 

Stakeholders increasingly expect companies to communicate openly about their tax practices so that they can understand and assess a company’s approach to tax. Legislation is also being enacted with a focus on tax transparency, such as public country-by-country reporting. Tax transparency is a strategic question for management and the board, not the tax function alone. A public tax policy is a statement of how tax risks are governed, and weaknesses in the policy can point to gaps in risk management and unclear ownership. A policy that does not hold up to scrutiny may also undermine the credibility of a company’s other external commitments, including within its wider sustainability reporting.  

There are several ways for a company to communicate its tax principles. However, for the past decade or so it has been common practice for companies to establish and publish a tax policy. Initially, simply having a public tax policy may have been sufficient to align with expectations but that is no longer the case. Many public tax policies look strikingly similar – often fairly short, and built around generic principles on how a company approaches its tax strategy, without saying much about how the company actually works with tax in practical terms. 

What the studies suggest 

International organisations, such as the Global Reporting Initiative (GRI), provide guidelines and frameworks for responsible tax principles. Such guidance covers how to act responsibly in relation to tax, including on the public disclosure of tax practices. However, several recent studies point to the same conclusion: there is a considerable gap between the type of tax information that companies disclose and the type of tax information that these organisations recommend to be disclosed. Studies show that many companies do have a public tax policy but it does not generally meet the requirements set by GRI (the reporting standard for tax transparency, GRI 207).  

One study by the European Business Tax Forum found that companies tend to do reasonably well on foundational principles and less well on the specifics of governance, risk management and stakeholder engagement. In another study by GRI, certain key recommendations are provided to companies on how to improve their tax transparency. In general, these focus on the need for companies to be more specific about details on their approach to tax, who is responsible for the tax policy, how it is implemented in the company and how the tax strategy is connected to the company’s wider sustainability agenda. Taken together, these studies point to the same underlying conclusion: it is not the absence of principles that undermines a tax policy’s credibility, but the absence of a clear account of how those principles are actually applied, owned and monitored. 

How to improve 

A public tax policy does not require a company to disclose its entire tax strategy. It does, however, need to have enough substance to function as a standalone document that says something real about how the company approaches tax. Recognised guidance – such as GRI 207 – need not be applied in full to take a tax policy to the next level but doing so can be a practical safeguard against accusations of cherry-picking: describing only the areas where the company looks good while staying silent on the rest. Companies that take the time to make their tax policy specific and tailored to their own operations will be better placed to demonstrate a credible, well-governed approach to tax, and to avoid the reputational risks that have followed loosely substantiated sustainability claims elsewhere. This is not only a question of tax transparency; it is about establishing a real governance tool that can shape a company’s wider sustainability agenda.  

Based on the studies and guidance discussed above, we have a number of recommendations that capture what distinguishes a credible tax policy from a generic one: 

• Make the tax planning stance concrete. Move beyond abstract commitments by giving examples of positions the company will and will not take.  

• Connect tax to the wider business and sustainability strategy. Explain how the company’s tax risk appetite relates to its overall risk profile, and how the company’s tax conduct connects to its broader responsibility agenda or specific sustainability targets. 

• Clarify ownership and implementation. Set out who holds overall responsibility for the policy, how often it is reviewed, whether elements are delegated to specific functions or individuals, and how implementation is achieved in practice – ideally flowing from board level down through the organisation. 

• Broaden stakeholder engagement beyond tax authorities. Consider also addressing the use of tax advisers, expectations on suppliers or customers, and any political engagement on tax legislation. 

If you have questions about how to review or strengthen your company’s tax policy or general tax transparency, please feel free to contact us.