13 research outputs found
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as the theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as the theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as the theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
A New Framework for Digital Taxation
The international tax regime has wide implications for business, trade, and the international political economy. Under current law, multinational enterprises do not pay their fair share of taxes to market countries where profits are generated because market countries are only allowed to tax companies with a physical presence there. Digital companies, like Google and Amazon, can operate entirely online, thereby avoiding market country taxes. Multinationals can also exploit existing tax rules by shifting their profits to low-tax jurisdictions, thereby avoiding taxes in the residence country where their headquarters are located. Recently, a global tax deal was reached to tackle these issues. Proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework and endorsed by nearly 140 countries, this global tax deal sets forth two Pillars that reform the outdated international tax regimes. Pillar One addresses digital taxation while Pillar Two addresses a global minimum tax. However, it is doubtful that the global tax deal will be successfully implemented, especially with respect to Pillar One. As the details of Pillar One have become increasingly complex and degraded by political compromises and carve-outs, it risks being a framework without substance. Also, countries are unlikely to repeal an established tax instrument, Digital Services Taxes (“DSTs”), which is an adamant requirement of the United States in adopting Pillar One. This Article offers the first comprehensive critique of the global tax deal and assesses its prospects and problems. It evaluates the U.S. responses to the proposed global deal and to DSTs. It presents the challenges, such as treaty overrides, that will occur if the United States implements Pillar One by executive agreement so as to bypass the treaty ratification. This Article suggests separating the two Pillars to preserve the global minimum tax. Regarding DSTs, the Article provides several empirical studies that demonstrate the harm retaliatory tariffs cause. Finally, it endorses the U.N. digital taxation proposal and proposes a new Data Excise Tax as a normative alternative
A New Framework for Digital Taxation
The international tax regime has wide implications for business, trade, and the international political economy. Under current law, multinational enterprises do not pay their fair share of taxes to market countries where profits are generated because market countries are only allowed to tax companies with a physical presence there. Digital companies, like Google and Amazon, can operate entirely online, thereby avoiding market country taxes. Multinationals can also exploit existing tax rules by shifting their profits to low-tax jurisdictions, thereby avoiding taxes in the residence country where their headquarters are located.
Recently, a global tax deal was reached to tackle these issues. Proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework and endorsed by nearly 140 countries, this global tax deal sets forth two Pillars that reform the outdated international tax regimes. Pillar One addresses digital taxation while Pillar Two addresses a global minimum tax. However, it is doubtful that the global tax deal will be successfully implemented, especially with respect to Pillar One. As the details of Pillar One have become increasingly complex and degraded by political compromises and carveouts, it risks being a framework without substance. Also, countries are unlikely to repeal an established tax instrument, Digital Services Taxes (“DSTs”), which is an adamant requirement of the United States in adopting Pillar One.
This Article offers the first comprehensive critique of the global tax deal and assesses its prospects and problems. It evaluates the U.S. response to the proposed global deal and to DSTs. It presents the challenges, such as treaty overrides, that will occur if the United States implements Pillar One by executive agreement so as to bypass the treaty ratification. This Article suggests separating the two Pillars to preserve the global minimum tax. Regarding DSTs, the Article provides several empirical studies that demonstrate the harm retaliatory tariffs cause. Finally, it endorses the U.N. digital taxation proposal and proposes a new Data Excise Tax as normative alternatives
A New Framework for Digital Taxation
The international tax regime has wide implications for business, trade, and the international political economy. Under current law, multinational enterprises do not pay their fair share of taxes to market countries where profits are generated because market countries are only allowed to tax companies with a physical presence there. Digital companies, like Google and Amazon, can operate entirely online, thereby avoiding market country taxes. Multinationals can also exploit existing tax rules by shifting their profits to low-tax jurisdictions, thereby avoiding taxes in the residence country where their headquarters are located.
Recently, a global tax deal was reached to tackle these issues. Proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework and endorsed by nearly 140 countries, this global tax deal sets forth two Pillars that reform the outdated international tax regimes. Pillar One addresses digital taxation while Pillar Two addresses a global minimum tax. However, it is doubtful that the global tax deal will be successfully implemented, especially with respect to Pillar One. As the details of Pillar One have become increasingly complex and degraded by political compromises and carve-outs, it risks being a framework without substance. Also, countries are unlikely to repeal an established tax instrument, Digital Services Taxes (“DSTs”), which is an adamant requirement of the United States in adopting Pillar One.
This Article offers the first comprehensive critique of the global tax deal and assesses its prospects and problems. It evaluates the U.S. responses to the proposed global deal and to DSTs. It presents the challenges, such as treaty overrides, that will occur if the United States implements Pillar One by executive agreement so as to bypass the treaty ratification. This Article suggests separating the two Pillars to preserve the global minimum tax. Regarding DSTs, the Article provides several empirical studies that demonstrate the harm retaliatory tariffs cause. Finally, it endorses the U.N. digital taxation proposal and proposes a new Data Excise Tax as a normative alternative
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as the theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
Tax Harmony: The Promise and Pitfalls of the Global Minimum Tax
The rise of globalization has become a double-edged sword for countries seeking to implement a beneficial tax policy. On one hand, there are increased opportunities for attracting foreign capital and the benefits that increased jobs and tax revenue brings to a society. However, there is also much more tax competition among countries to attract foreign capital and investment. As tax competition has grown, effective corporate tax rates have continued to be cut, creating a “race-to-the-bottom” issue.
In 2021, 137 countries forming the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS passed a major milestone in reforming international tax by successfully introducing the framework of a global minimum corporate tax, known as Pillar Two. It aims to set a floor for corporate tax rates with various corrective measures so that multinational enterprises’ income will be taxed once in either source country or residence country at a substantive tax rate. Hence, Pillar Two is the first implementation of the “single tax principle” at the global level. Because Pillar Two requires an unprecedented amount of coordination among countries, it is important to understand Pillar Two thoroughly so that countries can maneuver the challenges of implementation, while still enjoying the ultimate benefit that would come from this global tax harmony.
This Article analyzes the issues of tax competition and why most countries in the world have come to the conclusion that a global minimum tax is needed. This Article explains the single tax principle as theoretical underpinning of Pillar Two, breaks down the principles and policies that comprise Pillar Two, and anticipates what promise and pitfalls passage of the global minimum tax will bring. Because the basis of Pillar Two is a direct extension of the Global Intangible Low Tax Income (GILTI) and Base Erosion and Anti-Abuse Tax (BEAT) provisions of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, it is reasonable to anticipate that the global minimum tax will be considered a success if it is implemented by all the G20 countries
A New Framework for Digital Taxation
The international tax regime has wide implications for business, trade, and the international political economy. Under current law, multinational enterprises do not pay their fair share of taxes to market countries where profits are generated because market countries are only allowed to tax companies with a physical presence there. Digital companies, like Google and Amazon, can operate entirely online, thereby avoiding market country taxes. Multinationals can also exploit existing tax rules by shifting their profits to low-tax jurisdictions, thereby avoiding taxes in the residence country where their headquarters are located. Recently, a global tax deal was reached to tackle these issues. Proposed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework and endorsed by nearly 140 countries, this global tax deal sets forth two Pillars that reform the outdated international tax regimes. Pillar One addresses digital taxation while Pillar Two addresses a global minimum tax. However, it is doubtful that the global tax deal will be successfully implemented, especially with respect to Pillar One. As the details of Pillar One have become increasingly complex and degraded by political compromises and carve-outs, it risks being a framework without substance. Also, countries are unlikely to repeal an established tax instrument, Digital Services Taxes (“DSTs”), which is an adamant requirement of the United States in adopting Pillar One. This Article offers the first comprehensive critique of the global tax deal and assesses its prospects and problems. It evaluates the U.S. responses to the proposed global deal and to DSTs. It presents the challenges, such as treaty overrides, that will occur if the United States implements Pillar One by executive agreement so as to bypass the treaty ratification. This Article suggests separating the two Pillars to preserve the global minimum tax. Regarding DSTs, the Article provides several empirical studies that demonstrate the harm retaliatory tariffs cause. Finally, it endorses the U.N. digital taxation proposal and proposes a new Data Excise Tax as a normative alternative