Determinants of tax haven utilization: evidence from Australian firms

This paper examines the major determinants of tax haven utilization based on a sample of 200 publicly listed Australian firms, over the 2006–2010 period (1,000 firm‐years). Our regression results show that variables relating to transfer pricing, intangible assets, an interaction term between transfer pricing and intangible assets, withholding taxes, performance‐based management remuneration and multinationality are positively associated with tax haven utilization. We also find that corporate governance structures are negatively associated with tax haven utilization. The magnitude and significance of the regression coefficients indicate that transfer pricing, withholding taxes, intangible assets, an interaction term between transfer pricing and intangible assets, corporate governance and multinationality are the most important drivers of tax haven utilization.     

企业所得税反避税:意义、措施与任务

反避税是我国企业所得税管理的一项重要任务,它涉及维护国家的税收权益,创造公平竞争的税收环境。从各国的情况看,反避税措施主要包括完善税收法规、针对某种避税形式制定特别反避税条款以及制定一般反避税规则。当前我国反避税主要应不断完善税法并加强反避税的队伍建设。此外,抑制国际避税应是我国今后反避税的重心。     

现行企业境外所得税抵免制度评析

2008年,《企业所得税法》及其实施条例分别以专门的条款确立了中国企业境外所得税抵免制度的框架。本文通过与《企业所得税法》实施前原内资企业所得税和外资企业所得税制度下的企业境外所得税抵免规定对比,概括了境外所得税抵免制度的主要特征,并从四个方面分析了现行境外所得税抵免制度的局限。     

美国税收情报交换的经验与借鉴

税收情报交换是国际税收征管合作的重要形式之一,对经济全球化背景下打击跨国偷、逃税具有积极的意义。本文详细介绍了美国税收情报交换的机构设置、人员职责以及操作程序,并提出了学习借鉴美国经验以改进我国情报交换工作的建议。     

《企业所得税法》"特别纳税调整"亮点解读

《中华人民共和国企业所得税法》在"特别纳税调整"一章规定了一些新的反避税条款。本文对其中的一些"亮点",如反避税一般性规定、提供关联交易相关资料、受控外国企业、限制资本弱化、纳税调整加收利息等进行了解读,有助于征纳双方更好地掌握税法。     

我国税收情报交换中存在的主要问题及建议

税收情报交换是目前跨国税收征管合作中最重要和最有效的手段之一,对发现和查处跨国偷避税行为具有不可替代的作用。本文首先介绍了我国税收情报交换工作的特点,然后对存在的问题提出了有针对性的解决方法。     

税收优惠政策筹划的技术分析--以企业所得税为例

运用税收优惠政策进行税收筹划的基本要求就是,在掌握政策精神和了解自身情况的基础上,对各种税收优惠政策进行比较和选择,其中最重要的是对国家税收优惠政策的把握.不但要把握现有的税收优惠政策,还要把握税收优惠政策的变动趋势,后者尤为重要.本文主要论述如何掌握企业所得税税收优惠政策并进行筹划.     

新企业所得税法中的几个征管问题

《中华人民共和国企业所得税法》(以下简称"新企业所得税法")将于2008年1月1日起施行。为确保新企业所得税法顺利实施,需要制定一部切实可行的实施条例,需要做好新旧税法的衔接工作,还需要进一步理顺现行的税收征管体制。在实施条例出台之前,本文对新企业所得税法中涉及的若干税收征管问题,如境外所得税收抵免、反避税管理、总分机构汇总计算纳税、母子公司合并纳税以及税收征管体制改革等进行了探讨。     

借鉴国外经验完善我国外国税收抵免制度

本文从消除国际双重征税的方法、外国税收抵免的条件、外国税收抵免的限额等角度对中美外国税收抵免制度进行了详细比较,并指出了我国外国税收抵免制度存在的缺陷,认为应借鉴国外经验对我国的外国税收抵免制度加以完善。     

企业境外所得税收抵免政策解析

税收管辖权的重叠必然导致国际间重复课税。抵免法是各国推荐的消除重复课税的方法。本文在介绍国际税收抵免相关概念和原理的基础上,就我国企业境外所得税收抵免有关问题进行了分析解读,并比较了新旧政策的主要变化。     

企业境外所得税收抵免相关问题分析

本文从现行我国企业境外所得税收抵免相关税收政策的执行情况入手,梳理出现行税收政策亟需解决的问题,并借鉴部分国家的经验,提出了进一步完善我国企业境外所得税收抵免相关税收政策的思路和建议。     

企业境外所得税收抵免制度研究

我国现行企业境外所得税收抵免制度主要包括国内税制和对外税收协定两个部分,目前还存在一些问题:分国限额抵免不利于企业走出去,对境内、境外所得进行成本费用分摊操作性差,亏损弥补的限制抑制了企业境外投资动力,返程投资居民企业国内税收无法抵免,允许间接抵免的企业层级过少,对税收饶让的限制加重了走出去企业的税收负担,超限额抵免结转限制造成税收抵免不足等。本文针对这些问题,提出了相应的改进建议。     

商业战略选择、产权安排与企业避税行为

商业战略会通过影响一个公司对风险的态度进而影响公司的避税行为,从上述理论出发,文章研究了商业战略和避税行为之间的关系,发现与采用探索者战略的企业相比,采用防御者战略的企业避税行为更消极,也意味着防御者认为激进税收筹划带来的成本和不确定性超过了节税的收益。同时研究还发现,由于产权安排导致的避税激励差异,上述战略对于避税行为的影响主要存在于国有企业。     

Did PCAOB rules on ethics,independence, and tax services influence financial reporting for income taxes?

The PCAOB Rules on Ethics, Independence, and Tax Services prohibited accounting firms from providing aggressive tax-position transactions to their audit clients. We exploit this setting to examine whether the scrutiny of the PCAOB affects companies’ financial reporting for income tax accounts. We find robust evidence that the overall quality of the income tax accrual increased after companies significantly reduced auditor-provided tax service (APTS) fees in response to the regulation. We show that this improvement is a function of companies’ pre-regulation tax aggressiveness. In addition, we find evidence that after the fee reductions, tax-aggressive companies increased financial statement reserves for uncertain income tax positions without changing tax-aggressive decisions. Overall, our findings are consistent with an improvement in the financial reporting for income taxes under regulatory scrutiny which is more pronounced for companies that were tax aggressive in the pre-regulation period.     

欧盟税收情报交换制度及启示

欧盟建立的税收情报交换法律制度基本上和OECD税收协定范本保持一致,而且更加细化和具可操作性。其特点是建立了丰富的情报交换方式,并实现了税收情报交换的电子化。它对在我国内地与香港、澳门地区间构建完善的税收情报交换制度提供了参考。     

What is the After‐Tax Price of R&D? An Interstate Comparison*

As of 2005, 31 US states offered corporate income tax credits on research and development (R&D) expenses in order to encourage more in‐state innovation activities. Empirical questions about the efficacy of such tax breaks at the state level persist, in part because the complexity of the tax laws means that simple credit‐rate comparisons across states do not fully capture the differential variation in effective after‐tax price incentives firms face in choosing where to locate R&D activities. We are unaware of any research analysing and comparing the effective prices of R&D faced by firms, across all US states and utilising micro‐level data. Using data extracted from detailed reading of individual firms' 10‐K and S‐1 filings and of state‐level tax credit rules, we estimate the effective after‐tax price of basic and qualified research expenditure each firm would have faced in each of the 50 states had they been located there. Our methodology simulates the effective tax price of each firm's marginal dollar of research expenditure, assuming the firm chose to move all of its R&D operations to each of the 49 other states. Through Monte Carlo techniques, we consider the sensitivity of our interstate comparative results to several modelling assumptions. We find significant variation in after‐tax R&D prices across states with quite different R&D tax laws. Prices range from $0.176 to $0.520 on a marginal dollar of R&D in Virginia and Washington State, respectively. We also find that the interstate variability is generally more important – indeed, much wider than we had anticipated before investigating state‐by‐state regulations – than the inter‐firm variability within states.     

Corporate tax avoidance: is tax transparency the solution?

Corporate tax avoidance has been a matter of considerable public attention, particularly since the 2008 global financial crisis. The nature of calls for tax reform and increased regulation, advocated most prominently by tax activists and NGOs, has revolved around transparency as a possible corrective to unacceptable tax avoidance, although there is no consensus as to what the term tax avoidance encompasses and when it becomes unacceptable. We examine two responses to calls for increased transparency about the tax affairs of multinational entities: firstly, country by country reporting that provides information to tax authorities, and secondly the UK requirement for publication of tax strategies, whereby large companies put information into the public domain. We find considerable misunderstanding about the benefits of transparency in this setting. By failing to consider the limits of transparency initiatives there is a risk of dysfunctional consequences, for example additional costs in providing and processing additional information, the prospect of increased disputes as new information generates new misinterpretations and uncertainty in determining the final tax position. There is a risk that greater disclosure will not effectively address concerns about unacceptable corporate tax avoidance.     

An examination of the political salience of corporate tax avoidance: A case study of the Tax Justice Network

Corporate tax avoidance (CTA) has become a high profile issue despite being a complex area of accounting practice. One reason for this has been the civil society campaign opposing tax avoidance. The paper provides a case study of one key civil society actor: the Tax Justice Network (TJN). Existing accounting analysis offers little to explain how some accounting issues acquire political attention and media coverage. To address this, the concept of political salience is introduced into accounting analysis – understood as the creation of focal points in campaigns – to consider how the TJN contributed to the political profile of CTA.