数字服务税的国际实践及应对思考

在当今不断发展变化的互联网商务环境中,科技进步和商业运作模式的发展使得公司不需要实体存在就可以与消费者之间产生经济联系。然而这种数字经济联系混淆了收入来源及谁拥有征税权的问题,破坏了原本的国际税收规则,故有必要建立新的国际税收原则平衡各国之间的税收利益。由于短时间内无法达成国际协议,部分税收利益受损国陆续开始征收数字服务税,致力于明确和解决税基侵蚀和利润转移问题。我国作为数字第二大国,有必要积极应对数字税问题。鉴于目前我国数字经济实情和数字税开征国在征收过程中存在的诸多争议,我国没有必要在短时间内将数字税作为新税种设立,而更应当提高在国际谈判中的参与度,完善现有税制,在国际税收谈判中尽可能把握主动权。     

数字经济下我国税制改革研究——来自新加坡的启示

随着数字经济在我国经济发展中比重增加,与其紧密相关的数字经济税收制度逐渐开始建立。然而,与数字经济税收改革先行国家相比,我国仍存在税收立法缺漏、征管方式滞后以及跨境数字征税规则失衡的困境,亟需推进数字经济下的税制改革。新加坡作为我国在东盟的最大贸易伙伴,其在数字经济税制改革中的经验做法,对我国数字税收制度完善具有参考意义。文章系统介绍了新加坡商品及服务税的改革措施,提出完善我国数字经济税收立法、税收征管和国际协同的建议,以更好地维持我国税收制度体系稳定并维护税收利益。     

域外商品与服务税视同应税交易规则解析与中国借鉴

《中华人民共和国增值税法(征求意见稿)》以及《增值税法(送审稿)》将视同应税交易明确限定为货物等用于集体福利或者个人消费和无偿赠送两大类型,相比于加拿大、新加坡、澳大利亚的商品与服务税视同交易规则及替代方案,体现出较大的趋同性.视同应税交易的建构核心在于贯彻增值税中性原则,包括保护纳税人抵扣权、促进课税待遇平等以及避免...     

数字税征管国际经验借鉴与启示

近年来,全球数字经济快速发展,为应对数字经济领域税收流失等问题,部分国际组织及经济体出台数字税方案。本文梳理了国际数字税政策出台情况和特点,总结了数字税征管存在的难题,在此基础上提出对策建议。     

全球数字服务税发展态势与应对策略研究

面对数字经济时代国际税收治理竞争格局加快重塑,中国作为数字经济生产大国、消费大国和输出大国,不能甘做全球数字经济税收权益争夺之战的旁观者,需从建立公平、合理、有效的国际税收新秩序高度,做好应对外部税收环境变化的思想准备和工作储备.立足长远大势把握当前形势,兼顾短期应对和中长期发展,不仅要积极参与数字税国际规则和标准制定,提前筹划应对单边数字税措施方案,还要不断完善国内数字经济税收征管法律法规,依托数字技术领先优势提升税收征管水平.     

数字服务税对企业的影响及我国的应对

数字经济背景下的国际税收规则改革是近年来税务研究的热点和难点,研究数字服务税对数字企业的影响,对于我国借鉴国际改革经验,建设数字税收治理体系具有重要意义。依次考察数字服务税对跨国数字企业定价策略、薪酬战略、盈利能力,以及相应地数字企业上调服务价格对价值链上其他企业和数字化转型企业交易成本、竞争力的影响可以发现,数字服务税具有较强的扭曲性,在降低数字企业利润水平的同时,也增加了相关企业的实际负担。有鉴于此,我国对开征数字服务税应持谨慎态度,在密切关注国际税改动态的同时,应加紧研究符合我国实际的数字税制,促进数字经济和税收的均衡发展。     

美国301调查:数字服务税实践动向及其对国际税收规则的冲击

经济数字化动摇了国际税收秩序的基石,加剧了税基侵蚀与利润转移给各国带来的损害,为应对挑战并在国际税收利益博弈中抢占先机,至今已有超过十个国家正在计划或已经开征数字服务税.美国作为全球数字经济产业的领先国,受数字服务税影响最大,为保护本国税收安全、维护税收利益,美国对开征数字服务税的多个国家启动"301调查".美国在调查报告中坚称,数字服务税不具有理论正当性,且缺乏规则合法性.数字服务税的性质模糊,数字服务税规则违反了国际税法视角下的资本输入中性原则、税收确定性原则、避免重复课税原则等,冲击了现行的国际税收制度,影响了国际税收秩序的稳定,自下而上地倒逼国际税收秩序重建.     

The bank switching behaviour of Singapore's graduates

This study developed a model of bank switching which contained six switching incidents. The study also investigated if certain demographic characteristics of Singapore's graduates could be used to distinguish those who have switched banks from their counterparts. The results showed that the types of incident that most often influenced bank switching were ‘inconvenience’, followed by ‘service failures’ and ‘pricing‘. About one-third of those who had switched did so because of a single incident. Banks, if they are to reduce switching by graduate customers, need to ensure that they are convenient, and that they minimise their service failures by providing an appropriate range of services which are delivered in a time-efficient manner and remain price competitive. The demographic characteristics that were subject to testing, namely gender, age, salary and racial group, showed no significant differences.     

新加坡银行监管机制研究

新加坡是世界上著名的国际金融中心,金融业十分发达。新加坡在金融自由化的过程中,新加坡金融管理局形成了一套有效的银行监管制度。在我国银行业加速走向开放的今天,研究新加坡的银行监管经验无疑可为我国目前的银行监管体制改革提供一些借鉴和参考。     

Purpose,profit and social pressure

We develop a model in which there are firms and employees who care about profit-sacrificing higher purpose (HP) and those who do not. Firms and employees search for each other in the labor market. Each firm chooses its HP investment. When there is no social pressure on firms to adopt a purpose, HP dissipates agency frictions, lowers wage costs, yet elicits higher employee effort in firms that intrinsically value the purpose. However, social pressure to invest in HP can distort the HP investments of all firms and reduce welfare by making all agents worse off. Applications of these results to banking are discussed.     

The Purpose of the Firm,Valuation, and the Management of Intangibles

This article provides a different way of thinking about, and responding to, four important issues that confront most public companies. First, in articulating the overarching corporate purpose, the author suggests a middle ground between shareholder value maximization and stakeholder theory that aims to achieve the end result of value maximization while taking a “holistic” view that meets most of the demands of stakeholder advocates. As described by the author, there are four critical steps for management and boards in creating such companies: (1) communicating a vision of the company and its purpose to employees as well as investors (and other key outsiders); (2) organizing to survive and prosper through efficiency and innovation; (3) working continuously to develop win‐win relationships with stakeholders and other companies; and (4) taking care of the environment and future generations. Second, in thinking about the corporate purpose and how to evaluate success in achieving it, managements and boards need a valuation model that provides a clear and insightful connection between long‐term corporate performance and market valuation, and how both might be expected to change as the firm matures. A strong case is presented for the life‐cycle valuation model, widely used by money management organizations, in which a company's projected cash flows reflect an expected “fade” in both economic returns on capital and reinvestment rates. The potential uses of this model are illustrated using lifecycle corporate performance data for 3M during the past 50 years. Third, in an effort to capture the value of innovation and investment in intangible assets, the author presents an alternative to the accounting approach of capitalizing and amortizing such assets that attempts to capture their expected future benefits by using more favorable forecasts of long‐term fade rates. Fourth, the author shows how incorporating Life‐cycle Reviews for each of a company's business units as part of its Integrated Reporting could improve management's resource allocation decisions, help build a shareholder base of long‐term investors, and provide management with the support and confidence to resist Wall Street's excessive emphasis on quarterly earnings.     

Restructuring and Firm Value: The Effects of Profitability and Restructuring Purpose

This study extends prior research on the information content of restructuring charges. We find that the relationship between restructuring activities and returns during the restructuring charge year is different for loss firms than for profit firms. Restructurings that are primarily intended to either eliminate personnel or exit a line of business are positively associated with returns of the loss firms, suggesting that investors view these activities as value-increasing. In contrast, common stock returns of profit firms exhibit a nonpositive association with restructuring charges. Overall, our results point to the role of the context and the content of the restructuring announcement in the market's assessment of the value relevance of restructuring charges reported in the financial statements.     

中国独立审计准则:制定、实施与发展

本文系统论述了我国独立审计准则的制定情况 ,具体包括准则制定背景、准则特点、准则的施行情况及其发展与完善。作者希望相对全面地提供我国独立审计准则的制定全貌与发展前景     

Session I: Corporate Purpose and Governance

In this first of five sessions of a recent Columbia Law School symposium devoted to discussion of his new book, Prosperity—and The Purpose of the Corporation, Oxford University's Colin Mayer begins by calling for a “radical reinterpretation” of the corporate mission. For all but the last 50 or so of its 2,000‐year history, the corporation has combined commercial activities with a public purpose. But since Milton Friedman's famous pronouncement in 1970 that the social goal of the corporation is to maximize its own profits, the gap between the social and private interests served by corporations appears to have grown ever wider, helping fuel the global outbreaks of populist protest and indictments of capitalism that fill today's media. In Mayer's reinterpretation, the boards of all companies will produce and publish statements of corporate purpose that envision some greater social good than maximizing shareholder value. To that end, he urges companies to make continuous investments of their financial capital and other resources in developing other forms of corporate capital—human, social, and natural—and to account for such investments in the same way they now account for their investments in physical capital. Although the author appears to prefer that such changes be mandatory, enacted through new legislation and enforced by regulators and the courts, his main efforts are directed at persuading the largest institutional owners of corporations—many of whom are already favorably predisposed to ESG—to support these corporate initiatives. Marty Lipton, after expressing enthusiasm about Mayer's proposals, suggests that mandating such changes is likely neither feasible nor desirable, but that attempts—like his own New Paradigm—to gain the acceptance and support of large shareholders is the most promising strategy. Ron Gilson, on the other hand, after voicing Lipton's skepticism about the enforceability of such statements of purpose, issues a number of warnings. One is about the political risks associated with ever more concentrated ownership of public companies in a world where populist distrust of all concentrations of wealth and power is clearly on the rise. But most troubling for the company themselves is the confusion such proposals could create for corporate boards whose responsibility is to limit two temptations facing corporate managements: short‐termism, or underinvestment in the corporate future to boost near‐term earnings (and presumably stock prices); and what Gilson calls hyperopia, or overinvestment designed to preserve growth (and management's jobs) at all costs.