Simple it is logical that many countries will be less...

Simple it is logical that many countries will be less unrealistic. So having it's jurisdiction and corporate headquarters as say UK or USA would mean that the green agenda and corporate taxes of all the different international entities are operated under their laws. BHP had a dual identity which was UK and Australia but in fact the UK shares traded at a discount because of franking credits and Australian valuation of these. BHP went back to a unification because of this but the model was different being the same company in different jurisdictions. This is 2 shares comprising the total value.

However you either owned a UK share or an Australian share in this scenario you own one international share and one Australian share. It's my view that the Australian government's super profits , new royalty taxes etc means that the largest threat to your assets are the sovereign risk that is increasing in Australia because the green agenda hates our three largest exports - cosl, O&G and even minerals.

In my opinion it is easier to operate in USA and UK or even maybe another country like ours say Canada.