This article weaves together lots of weird and wonderful historical detail to depict the City as a malign and unstoppable force, but it's all bollocks. It's a pile of allusion and errors, written for an audience who will accept this stuff uncritically.

Some examples:

> The term “tax haven” is a bit of a misnomer, because such places aren’t just about tax. What they sell is escape: from the laws, rules and taxes of jurisdictions elsewhere, usually with secrecy as their prime offering.

There are no laws, rules, or taxes which apply everywhere else in the UK which don't apply in the City.

> A few examples illustrate the carve-out. Whenever the Queen

The queen is a purely ceremonial figure.

> The Remembrancer, whose position dates from the reign of Elizabeth I, is the City’s official lobbyist in parliament

That particular official is unique to the City, but other local authorities have their own lobbyists in parliament:

https://www.local.gov.uk/parliament

> The City Corporation is different from any other local authority. Here, hi-tech global finance melds into ancient rites and customs that underline its separateness and power with mystifying pomp. Among the City’s 108 livery companies, or trade associations

The livery companies don't play any role in the government of the City.

> They were astonished to find that the corporation was a big shareholder in the development - a public authority acting as a private company, outside its jurisdiction.

I can believe that this was something unique back in 2002, because that was before local authorities were granted the "general power of competence". But they got that in 2011, and now it's routine for them to make investments in all sorts of things.

https://www.local.gov.uk/sites/default/files/documents/gener...

> Unlike any other local authority, however, individual people are not the only voters: businesses can vote, too.

Nope. Businesses can appoint some of their employees as voters, and the voters can then vote. The businesses get to chose who is a voter, but votes are by secret ballot as usual, so they have no real influence on the actual voting. You can read the rules here:

https://www.cityoflondon.gov.uk/about-the-city/voting-electi...

> Political parties are not involved - candidates stand alone as independents - and this makes organised challenge to City consensus all but impossible.

It's not that political parties are banned or anything, just that they so far haven't managed to unseat independents. Mostly - Labour won five seats in the 2017 elections.

> This “missed time” is significant, Glasman says, because it means the City’s rights pre-date the construction of modern political Britain, and this has placed it outside parliament’s normal legislative remit.

The City has various rights and privileges that don't stem from legislation, because they're so old. But that doesn't mean they're outside parliament's legislative remit. If parliament passed an act changing something in the City, that thing would change. It's a similar situation to royal prerogative powers.

> So, the corporation has two main claims to being a tax haven: first, as a semi-alien entity, floating partly free from Britain (just as the Cayman Islands are), and second, as the hub of a global network of tax havens sucking up offshore trillions from around the world and sending it, or the business of handling it, to London.

Neither of which make it a tax haven in any sense at all.

> Not only that, but the Lord Mayor and colleagues promise to “take up cudgels on behalf of the City anywhere in the world on any subject which is of concern to the City”.

Yes, in much the same way as every local authority will work to advance the interests of its local businesses - including Cornwall:

https://www.cornwallti.com/about-us/

Honestly, this article is sensationalist nonsense.