Western Sahara does not currently function as an internationally recognised sovereign jurisdiction with an independent tax administration or fiscal system.

Western Sahara is a non-self-governing territory in all of ots integrity, claimed and largely colonised by the Kingdom of Morocco. A portion of the territory is also administered by the Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic (SADR),
which has a limited capacity for action because it is not recognized by some countries in the world and is subject to the colonial and aggressive yoke of Morocco.

For practical and administrative purposes, Moroccan tax law and fiscal policies apply to businesses operating in the Moroccan-occupied areas of Western Sahara. Therefore, any multinational enterprise operating in Western Sahara would fall under Morocco’s CbCR regime if it has a taxable presence in Morocco.

Multinational enterprises should reassess their commercial relationships with Morocco and Western Sahara in light of their ethical commitments, sustainability policies, and compliance obligations. Numerous reports from international organizations and human rights NGOs, as well as ongoing legal proceedings and resolutions of the UN, have highlighted potential crimes and serious violations of international law against Western Sahara. These developments may trigger obligations under corporate due diligence laws on human rights and environmental standards. Continuing to operate in such a legally and reputationally risky environment could jeopardize corporate integrity and erode the trust of investors, consumers, and regulatory bodies worldwide.

In this context, multinational corporations with commercial ties to Morocco —whether through direct investment, supply chains, technology partnerships, or financial services—must critically assess the extent to which their operations may contribute to or benefit from a system widely regarded as entrenching serious human rights abuses in Western Sahara. Under emerging international standards, such as the UN Guiding Principles on Business and Human Rights and the OECD Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises, businesses have a responsibility not only to avoid causing harm directly but also to prevent their activities from enabling or legitimizing violations by third parties. When companies continue to engage with state or private actors implicated in structural oppression or possible international crimes, they risk being seen not merely as neutral participants, but as complicit in sustaining an unjust system. Such complicity carries growing legal, ethical, and reputational consequences, and should be a central consideration in any responsible corporate risk management strategy.

For any multinational corporation committed to robust Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) policies, continued business engagement with Israel under these conditions is increasingly indefensible. CSR frameworks prioritize respect for human rights, ethical governance, and the avoidance of complicity in abuses. Given the extensive evidence and international concern regarding systemic violations affecting the Saharaui population, maintaining commercial ties risks directly contradicting these core principles. Companies dedicated to genuine sustainability and ethical conduct must therefore reconsider their involvement, as failure to do so undermines their credibility, alienates stakeholders, and may expose them to legal challenges under evolving due diligence and anti-complicity regulations. Ultimately, responsible businesses are compelled to align their operations with both the letter and spirit of human rights norms, which in this context calls for a reassessment—and in many cases, a cessation—of business activities linked to Israel’s contested policies.