To be clear, Murthy is not tax resident in India either. If she were she’d be subject to Indian tax on worldwide earnings.

They intentionally haven't done so, to benefit themselves and people like them.

I have had to pay a small fortune of tax to the Treasury this year, so it angers me when rich people can avoid it. However, the fault is with the law that allows this.
These people make the rules, so it is hardly a surprise that they leave loopholes that they can exploit themselves.

The problem with the outrage is that it is disproportionate and politically driven. I'm sure that any of us in her position would do the same, since it is legal.

There is far more tax being avoided by cash in hand business.
Why aren't the left bleating about that?

Do you mean PAYE tax payers as I can guarantee they are the only ones paying the correct tax and NI. Most self employed not only don't pay or declare the correct amount; they also go back for a rebate ffs. I don't care what this woman did. Maybe attention should be turned on these people doing tax avoidance.

Rich people employ expensive tax avoidance consultants to manage their affairs. It was ever thus, and I suspect we would all do the same, given the opportunity. Some then spend their wealth trying to help others (Gates and Soros), as they feel better able to direct it.

Where you live can change. I held residency in the Philippines for several years, but was domiciled for tax purposes here. I paid the local taxes, like VAT, CGT and land taxes, whilst there but income tax here.

I think the US system is completely wrong. I believe tax should be raised where the economic activity takes place and not where the owner of the business that creates that activity lives. Businesses like Google and Amazon need to pay much more into the local economies they profit from. If the USA then wants to tax their shareholders on dividends, or their wealth, that's up to them, but the daily activity should get taxed where it happens.

Ensuring that those who make the rules don't do so in a corrupt way can only be done via stringent oversight, freedom of information and investigative journalism in an environment of press freedom. Having parts of the media controlled by those who also stand to profit from corrupt practices isn't healthy, but so long as it all isn't we should be OK.

For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally.

Then change the law.

I'd be very happy to see the wealthy prevented from avoiding tax, but we must see the outrage about this example for what it is.