Dyson, the British manufacturer of a variety of electrical appliances such as vacuum cleaners, hair dryers, and a future electric car, announced its decision to relocate the company’s headquarters to Singapore in early 2019. The move does not imply a reduction in its activities in the country, as it will retain all of its English facilities at full capacity, but it means that the company will no longer be registered in Britain. The change also suggests a shift in the focus of Dyson’s operations from Europe to the Asian market. This case study intends to analyse available information and determine the reasons behind the decision using several theoretical perspectives. Official Reasons The goal of every company is to achieve stable growth regardless of the state of the market. The notion aligns with one of the reasons provided by Dyson, which is future-proofing by focusing on the Asian market (Higgins, 2019). The area has a massive population and is undergoing rapid economic development at the moment. A company such as Dyson, which produces non-essential but convenient goods, is going to encounter increased demand as the wealth of Asian nations grows and they begin to transition into developed countries. By contrast, Europe’s need for the firm’s products is mostly stable and unlikely to grow at a significant pace. As such, the existing facilities in Britain should be able to maintain a sufficient supply while the company develops elsewhere. Dyson has denied the existence of other motivations, maintaining that the growing importance of the Asian market is the primary motivator. According to Higgins (2019), its chief executive stated that while reasons such as the impending departure of Britain from the European Union and the difference in tax rates did not matter. However, it should be noted that James Dyson, the company’s founder and director, is in favour of Brexit and has used Singapore as an example of the success the UK could achieve (Higgins, 2019). While the political climate might not have influenced the decision to leave Britain, the businessman’s opinions may have helped the executives settle on the city-state as the destination. Investigation Perspectives Numerous economists have expressed the opinion that Dyson’s reasoning was not convincing and attempted to search for other motives behind the move. The first area of interest was in the refutations provided by the company, namely the political climate and taxation. While James Dyson is a proponent of Brexit, the move may be interpreted as an expression of the company’s lack of confidence in the country’s ability to sustain itself and its businesses. The damage in the relations with the European Union can also be compared with the situation in Singapore, which has established a free trade agreement with the bloc (Schaverien, 2019). As such, it is possible that Dyson did not want to deal with the complications that would result from the separation. Taxation is another concern that permits for two opposing views to be adopted. Doward (2019) notes that the company’s claim that the differences are irrelevant is superficially valid, as its operations pay taxes locally. There would be few immediate changes