"In the context of a 21st century global economy it is wholly inadequate. Debates that focus on it tend to be futile in throwing light on the core issues or resolving them, as has been the case in New Zealand ... as a classification, tax haven is an ambiguous label that is now only of historic relevance and is best not used as a basis for decision making without much deeper inquiry," he said.
What should be of more relief to Key, Woodhouse and the rest of us, is Shewan's view that New Zealand's international reputation has emerged relatively unscathed from the Panama Papers episode.
Although he believed local views of New Zealand's tax system likely dipped because of the tone of Panama Papers reportage, Shewan did not think New Zealand had slipped in the eyes of the world.
Shewan said New Zealand had a strong reputation within the OECD and elsewhere as a country "with integrity that is committed to clamping down on crime, money laundering, terrorist financing, the hiding of illicit funds, tax evasion and aggressive tax practices".
"The Panama Papers and associated debate concerning foreign trusts are unlikely to have any significant impact on that reputation, particularly if action is taken to tighten disclosure rules," he said.
Woodhouse yesterday afternoon confirmed the Government will make changes in light of Shewan's inquiry, which described the existing disclosure rules around foreign trusts as "inadequate" and "light-handed".
As a result of the changes, foreign-owned trusts based in New Zealand will be required to disclose more information when registering and file annual returns.
In 2013, Inland Revenue warned the rules around foreign trusts may need to be strengthened to "protect our international reputation".
At least this time round, the Government appears to be listening.