Статья на тему Любая тема, связанная с бухгалтерским или управленческим учётом

Содержание:

CONTENTS
1. Original
article. 3
The row over
taxing tech firms heats up. 3
2. Summary. 5
3. Synopsis. 6
4. Glossary. 9
5. References. 10

Введение:

Заключение:

Фрагмент текста работы:

1. Original article

The row over taxing tech firms
heats up.

When g20 finance ministers meet on July 18th and 19th,
avoiding a new trade war will be high on the agenda. Cash-strapped governments
around the world are planning to whack taxes on online services. But America
regards these as a grab for its companies’ profits, and is considering
retaliation against ten digital-tax proposals. On July 10th it said it would
respond to France’s tax by hitting French handbags, lipstick and soap with
tariffs of 25%. Unless a truce is struck, the tariffs will go into effect in
January.

The root cause of the dispute is a flaw in the
international tax system. In order to avoid taxing businesses twice,
governments typically apply the corporate tax to firms that are legally
domiciled on their shores or have a local physical base, and link the amount
due to the location of their assets and production. But now many companies
provide online services and can shift intellectual property to low-tax regimes
with the click of a button. A system intended to stop profits being taxed too
much allows them to be taxed too little.

In 2017 40% of profits made by
multinational firms outside their home country were shifted to tax havens,
reckon Thomas Torslov, now at the Danish Ministry of Taxation, and Ludvig Wier and
Gabriel Zucman of the University of California, Berkeley. That meant more
than $200bn in forgone tax revenue, equivalent to 10% of global corporate-tax
receipts. This is a relatively small amount: by comparison, governments
worldwide have unleashed stimulus of $5.4trn in response to covid-19. But
it is symbolically important and rightly irks taxpayers, who must fill the
hole.

For several years now, the oecd, a club of rich countries, has convened
governments in the hope of plugging the tax leaks. The idea is that
the G20 meeting lays the groundwork so that the oecd’s summit, planned for October, yields results.

The talks cover two proposals, or
“pillars”, in oecd-speak. The first is meant to
direct more of the global-tax take towards places where the customers of
digital firms live. Corporate-tax liability will depend not on whether
companies are physically present in a country, but on whether they have a
“sustained and significant involvement” there. Pillar two establishes a global
minimum tax. The oecd reckons that the two
proposals could together raise corporate-tax revenue by up to 4%.

Pillar two has the greater chance
of being agreed—and would raise more revenue. The idea of a global minimum is
to blunt companies’ incentives to shift profits to low-tax jurisdictions. There
is still some haggling to be done. But some sort of agreement should be
possible, if only because governments can go it alone. The Americans, for
example, enacted a version in 2017, with a tax on global intangible low-taxed
income (gilti). Havens can offer all the perks they want, but
American companies still face a rate of at least 10.5% on gilti associated with their foreign affiliates.