Corporate tax payments under formulary apportionment: Evidence from the financial reports of 50 major U.S. multinational firms

Under a formulary apportionment system of taxing multinational corporate income, U.S. tax liabilities would be based on the product of a multinational firm's worldwide income and the fraction of their real activities that occur in the United States – typically, an average of asset, payroll, and sales shares. This analysis utilizes financial reporting data for 50 large U.S. multinational firms to analyze how tax payments would change under a possible formulary system, updating Shackelford and Slemrod (1998). Our time period is 2005–2007 instead of 1989–1993. We find that tax payments under formulary apportionment would increase modestly overall but by a lower magnitude than found by Shackelford and Slemrod. Given the changes in the international tax environment since the earlier time period, this is a puzzling finding; we speculate regarding possible explanations.     

The European Commission's Report on Company Income Taxation: What the EU Can Learn from the Experience of the US States

The European Union Commission has proposed using consolidated base taxation and formulary apportionment to tax the EU-source income of multinational companies. This paper examines US state experience with a similar approach. Despite some positive lessons, especially the need to consolidate income of affiliated companies, lessons are mostly negative, especially regarding the choice of apportionment formula, the use of economic criteria to define the group whose income is to be consolidated, and complexity caused by lack of uniformity. US experience says nothing about using value added to apportion income—an approach that is conceptually attractive, but subject to transfer pricing problems.     

Statement of the Financial Economists Roundtable: Corporate Tax Reform

Corporate tax reform has been a controversial issue in the U.S. for several years, particularly as U.S. companies have accumulated cash in lower‐tax overseas subsidiaries, while some have used “inversions” to establish overseas corporate domiciles. Two features of U.S. corporate taxation stand out: 1. U.S. corporate income tax rates are the highest in the industrialized world. The federal rate is 35%; and, when combined with state taxes, it averages 39%, as compared to an OECD average of 24%. 2. U.S. corporations pay U.S. tax on their worldwide income, but can choose to avoid indefinitely corporate tax on foreign profits by not repatriating them. Neither feature is present in most other Western countries, where the norm is a “territorial” system that taxes companies only on their domestic profits. The Trump administration has proposed to cut U.S. corporate tax rates to 20%, thereby bringing them down to the OECD average, and to adopt a territorial tax regime like those found in most other Western nations. In this statement signed by 31 senior financial economists, the authors recommend cutting U.S. corporate tax rates, but retaining the current system of taxing the worldwide profits of U.S. companies (while giving them credit for taxes paid in overseas jurisdictions). Once U.S. rates drop to the international average, the economists point out, U.S. companies would have much less incentive under the worldwide system to use transfer pricing schemes to shift their profits to low‐tax jurisdictions than under the proposed territorial alternative. Indeed, under the current system, if the lower rates under consideration are enacted, the location of a company's business activity (including the firm's underlying intellectual property) would not affect its taxation. Along with lower corporate tax rates, the economists also recommend that Congress limit or remove the corporate option to defer the taxation of offshore profits and provide a schedule for repatriating off‐shore funds, using the inducement of the now lower rates as well as the possibility of a “tax holiday.”     

Relationship-Specific Investments and the Transfer Pricing Paradox

The revised Treasury Regulations interpreting Internal Revenue Code Section 482 allow the use of profit-based transfer pricing methods, as well as the older methods based on prices from comparable transactions between independent parties. This paper compares the effects of price-based and profit-based transfer pricing methods on the allocation of taxable income in a model in which organization structure affects the level of relationship-specific investments made by vertically integrated groups and comparable independent firms. Analysis of the model shows that the price-based methods systematically allocates more taxable income to foreign subsidiaries and less to domestic parents than does the profit-based method.     

Income Shifting and International Transfer Pricing: A Three-Country Example

There is a long held belief that international transfer pricing (ITP) is used by multinational enterprises (MNEs) to minimize global tax liability. On the one hand, this is a rational economic response to market imperfections created by national governments. An alternative view decries such actions as anti-competitive and an abuse of power. This article ex-amines the potential benefit to enterprises of ITP manipulation when a real world combination of fiscal rules are simultaneously applied in practice. The countervailing impact of different national rules appears to result in ITP having a minor significance on parent after-tax income. Differential rates cause minor benefits but the absence of a form of tax, such as withholding tax, can provide substantial opportunities to maximize global after-tax income through the choice of transfer price. ITP can therefore provide benefits when national jurisdictions do not have consistent forms of taxation. In all the scenarios explored, major variations are apparent in the after-tax income of subsidiaries operating under different combinations of fiscal regimes and ITP policies. The tension between head-quarter and subsidiary management may be most pronounced when a subsidiary is located in a jurisdiction not having a complete range of tax forms.     

Federal income tax laws that cause individuals’ marginal and statutory tax rates to differ

This article presents a “phaseouts table” as a tax educational tool. The table compiles and summarizes the phaseouts of and limitations on deductions, credits, exclusions from income, and allowed contributions for individual U.S. federal income taxpayers in 2013. Phaseouts can cause individual taxpayers’ marginal tax rate (MTR) to be higher than their statutory tax rate (STR) (i.e., “bracket” based on taxable income). For each phaseout, the table includes how the phaseout works, the adjusted gross income (AGI) range for the phaseout, and the related formula to compute MTR, given STR. The table is appropriate for any course that covers either U.S. federal income taxation of individuals or tax planning. (The phaseouts table is updated annually and is available upon request from the author.) The remainder of the article is a teaching resource, explaining how to compute the specific impact on MTR of each of several example phaseouts. Together, the phaseouts table and article enable U.S. tax instructors to assist students in learning about phaseouts in an integrated, comprehensive manner.     

An outcome-based assessment of international transfer pricing policy

Instead of concentrating on the selection of the optimal transfer pricing method, this paper focuses on the consequences of international transfer pricing for multinational entities. A sample of U.S.-based multinational firms is employed to determine if transfer pricing results in measurable financial outcomes. Results of the study indicate that firms employ international transfer pricing to meet a variety of objectives. The dollar value of international transfers and the foreign sales percentage are both significant explanatory variables for the financial outcomes of these objectives.     

Using Financial Accounting Data to Examine the Effect of Foreign Operations Located in Tax Havens and Other Countries on U.S. Multinational Firms' Tax Rates

This paper investigates the effect tax havens and other foreign jurisdictions have on the income tax rates of multinational firms based in the United States. We develop a new regression methodology using financial accounting data to estimate the average worldwide, federal, and foreign tax rates on worldwide, federal, and foreign pretax book income for a large sample of U.S. firms with and without tax haven operations. We find that on average U.S. firms that disclosed material operations in at least one tax haven country have a worldwide tax burden on worldwide income that is approximately 1.5 percentage points lower than firms without operations in at least one tax haven country. Our results also show that U.S. firms face a 4.4% current federal tax rate on foreign income whether or not they have tax haven operations. Finally, we find that U.S. firms with operations in some tax haven countries have higher federal tax rates on foreign income than other firms. This result suggests that in some cases, tax haven operations may increase U.S. tax collections at the expense of foreign country tax collections.     

How Much Do Taxes Discourage Incorporation?

The double taxation of corporate income should discourage firms from incorporating. We investigate the extent to which the aggregate allocation of assets and taxable income in the United States between corporate and noncorporate firms responds to the size of this tax distortion during the period 1959–1986. In theory, profitable firms should shift out of the corporate sector when the tax distortion is large, and conversely for firms with tax losses. Our empirical results provide strong support for these forecasts, and imply that the resulting excess burden equals 16 percent of business tax revenue.     

Transfer Pricing Practices and Regulatory Actions in the U.S. and U.K.: A Cross-Country Comparison and Analysis

With the continued globalization of world markets, transfer pricing has become one of the dominant sources of controversy in international taxation. Cross-country differences in transfer pricing practices and regulations present challenges to taxing authorities and multinational enterprises (MEs). In the last two decades, tax authorities in the United States (U.S.) and other countries have brought major court cases against MEs accused of underpayment of taxes through transfer pricing practices. This paper discusses transfer pricing practices, regulatory agencies, penalties related to violations, and proper documentation required in the U.S. and one of its major trading partners, the United Kingdom (U.K.). The paper also examines the acceptable valuation methods allowed as a surrogate for arm's-length transactions as established by the country's regulatory agency. Finally, the paper discusses the similarities and differences between the major court cases related to transfer pricing in the two countries.     

Corporate environments and international transfer pricing: an empirical study of China in a developing economy framework

This paper investigates the international transfer pricing methods adopted by multinational corporations (MNCs) in China and how their choices are affected by their specific corporate attributes in the context of the business environment in China. Empirical test results based on structured interviews indicate that MNCs having a local (Chinese) partner in management tend to adopt market-based transfer pricing methods. The influence of local partners on the choice of transfer pricing methods is modified by the impact of the source of foreign investment, as the analysis reveals that US-sourced MNCs are more likely to use cost-based pricing methods for international transfers. The influences of these two variables on the choice of transfer pricing methods are significant both directly and interactively. There is also some evidence that export-oriented enterprises are more likely to adopt cost-based transfer pricing than those aiming at China's domestic market. By providing empirical evidence on the impact of key corporate attributes on transfer pricing which have not been studied by prior research in the context of a developing economy, this research contributes to a more comprehensive understanding of transfer pricing in developing countries.     

The Revenue Consequences of Using Formula Apportionment to Calculate U.S. and Foreign-Source Income: A Firm-Level Analysis

This paper examines the 1989–1993 publicly available financial reports of 46 U.S.-based multinationals to estimate the revenue implications of implementing a U.S. federal formula apportionment system. Ignoring behavioral responses, we estimate shifting to an equal-weighted, three-factor formula would have increased their U.S. tax liabilities by 38 percent, with an 81 percent increase for oil and gas firms. We find the firms report a lower percentage of their worldwide profits as American profits than their American share of assets, sales, or payroll. The results may be attributed to more profitable foreign operations, tax-motivated income shifting, or measurement error.     

Cross-Jurisdictional Income Shifting by U.S. Multinationals: Evidence from International Bond Offerings

We examine whether tax incentives influence where U.S. multinationals locate their interest deductions worldwide. Our sample includes international bond offerings by U.S. multinationals during 1987–1997 denominated in the currencies of Australia, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, or the United Kingdom. Our results suggest that U.S. multinationals' debt location decisions take into account the effect of jurisdiction-specific tax-loss carryforwards and binding foreign tax credit limitations on the value of debt tax shields. Our results are also consistent with U.S. multinationals locating interest deductions in different tax jurisdictions as a mechanism to achieve tax-motivated income shifting.     

International Taxation and the Direction and Volume of Cross-Border M&As

We show that the parent-subsidiary structure of multinational firms created by cross-border mergers and acquisitions is affected by the prospect of international double taxation. Specifically, the likelihood of parent firm location in a country following a cross-border takeover is reduced by high international double taxation of foreign-source income. At the same time, countries with high international double taxation attract smaller numbers of parent firms. A unilateral elimination of worldwide taxation by the United States is simulated to increase the proportion of parent firms locating in the United States following cross-border mergers and acquisitions from 53% to 58%.     

Timing of Sale,Pricing, and Cost Information: Evidence from the Airline Industry*

This study examines the association between when an airline sells its passenger seats and the pricing method (marginal cost or full cost) it employs. Prior literature suggests that when firms are able to change prices during the selling period, the optimality of full cost pricing or marginal cost pricing depends on when demand information is revealed during the period between capacity commitment decisions and time of sale. Full cost‐based pricing is appropriate in determining capacity commitment and prices simultaneously, while marginal cost provides more relevant information for pricing when capacity has been committed. Using the price and cost data from a sample of four U.S. domestic airlines, we find that full cost explains price variations of first‐day sales robustly. The adjusted R² of the marginal cost pricing model is larger in the sample of sales two days prior to departure than in the sample of first‐day sales. In the analysis of the sample of sales two days prior to departure, we find that, based on the adjusted R² of the full cost pricing and marginal cost pricing models, the explanatory power of marginal cost pricing is relatively weaker than full cost pricing. Our results document the use of different cost information along the dynamic change of price and provide implications in understanding the role of cost information in setting prices.     

Capital Mobility and Source-Based Taxation of Capital Income in Small Open Economies

This paper examines the taxation of capital income in a small open economy that faces a highly elastic supply of internationally mobile capital and increasing tax competition. The analysis considers a wide variety of additional factors that affect the determination of capital income taxation policy, including the desire to tax economic rents earned by foreign and domestic firms, the desire to take advantage of any treasury transfer effects, the role played by transfer pricing and other financial accounting manipulations by foreign multinationals, the need for a backstop to the personal income tax and various political concerns. The paper evaluates several potential income and consumption-based tax reforms in this context. JEL Code: H21, H25, H87     

社会保障税税基的确定

社会保障税税基的确定是开征社会保障税需要解决的一个关键问题。为了体现社会保障税效率和公平兼顾的原则，个人纳税部分应设起征点和最高限征额，而企事业单位纳税部分不设。各地应将个人月平均工资低于当地月平均工资的一定比例（如50％）作为个人缴纳社会保障税的起征点；同时，要规定被保险人的最高纳税收入基数。起征点和最高限征额均应根据经济发展水平和物价指数的变化进行调整。企事业单位应以全部职工的工资总额作为税基。     

Taxation and skills investment in frictional labor markets

This paper examines the effects of wage taxation and corporate income taxation on training investment in frictional labor markets. Because of labor market frictions, the wage structure is compressed and workers do not capture the entire return from their skills. As a result, both firms and workers have incentives to support part of the costs of training investments. The analysis shows that when decisions to invest in training are made by firms and workers acting cooperatively, a wage tax increases the level of investment in skills whereas a corporate income tax decreases it. In this case, the introduction of a small wage tax unambiguously increases efficiency. The effects of both types of taxes on training are reversed when investment decisions are taken by firms alone. In any case, a corporate income tax is not neutral with respect to decisions to invest in skills even if the full cost of investment is deducted from taxable income in the period when it is incurred and the tax system provides full loss offset.     

Structuring a tax efficient international operation

International taxation is rapidly increasing in importance in the U.S. business environment. As a student preparing for a career in public accounting or industry, it is vital that you have familiarity with key international tax issues. In this case, you will participate in a detailed tax-planning exercise involving a multinational corporation that is restructuring its tax operations. In the process, you will be exposed to a wide-ranging array of real-world tax issues: tax theory, source of income, transfer pricing, foreign tax credits, the foreign earned income exclusion and Subpart F income. The case also incorporates questions designed to help you explore the financial accounting implications of tax planning. The case consists of three tax modules and each module emphasizes two to three specific tax issues. Two of the modules also contain a subset of tax-related financial accounting questions. To complete the case successfully, you will be required to understand basic international tax theory, to engage in the tax research process and to apply your theoretical knowledge in analyzing complex business scenarios.     

Changes to Income Trust Taxation in Canada: Investor Reaction and Dividend Clientele Theory

Abstract:  This paper explores the relationship between tax-induced dividend clientele theory and the recent changes to the taxation of income trusts in Canada. On October 31, 2006, the Canadian government announced the Tax Fairness Plan ( TFP ) calling for the elimination of the considerable tax advantage enjoyed by income trusts. Generally, distributions from income trusts are now taxed at rates comparable to those imposed on corporate dividends. We examine market reaction to the  TFP  to address three issues: first, whether the valuation effect of a dividend tax increase is consistent with the traditional or the new view of dividend taxation; secondly, whether the market reaction to tax increases has a differential impact on firm value that is related to the tax preferences of taxable, tax-exempt, and foreign investor tax clienteles; and thirdly, whether firms change their dividend policies in response to the preference of institutional investors (tax-based dividend policy effect) or whether institutional investors are sorting themselves across firms based on their dividend policies (investor sorting effect). Our results provide strong evidence as follows. First, the valuation effect in reaction to the  TFP  announcement is consistent with the traditional view of dividend taxation – i.e. that taxes on dividends reduce the net return to investors, increase the firm's cost of capital and lower the firm's ability to access capital markets, thereby discouraging investment and savings. Secondly, we saw that trusts with a larger percentage of their units held by tax-exempt, low-tax, and foreign investors had a higher decline in value when compared with trusts held mostly by ordinary taxable investors. These results support dividend tax clientele theory. Finally, we observed changes in institutional investor clienteles consistent with the investor sorting effect.