Weitere Artikel dieser Ausgabe durch Wischen aufrufen
In 2014, 12 European countries are operating Intellectual Property (IP) Box regimes that provide substantially reduced rates of corporate tax for income derived from important forms of intellectual property. We describe the key features of the policies and incorporate them into forward-looking measures of the cost of capital and the effective average tax rate. We show that the treatment of expenses relating to IP income is particularly important in determining the effective tax burden. A key finding is that regimes that allow expenses to be deducted at the ordinary corporate income tax rate, as opposed to the lower IP Box tax rate, may result in negative effective average tax rates and can thereby provide a subsidy to unprofitable projects. We discuss the ways in which IP Boxes are likely to affect firms’ decisions and relate this to possible policy aims. While some regimes attempt to link the tax benefit to real activities, others have designed a policy targeted at the income streams associated with intellectual property. A key concern is the role that IP Boxes may play in increased tax competition between European countries.
Barrios, S., Huizinga, H., Laeven, L., & Nicodème, G. (2012). International taxation and multinational firm location decisions. Journal of Public Economics, 96(11), 946–958. CrossRef
Bellingwout, J., L. Evers, J. Heckemeyer and C. Spengel (2012), Taxation of Headquarter Services in Europe, Amsterdam and Mannheim.
Bloom, N., Griffith, R., & van Reenen, J. (2002). Do R&D tax credits work? Evidence from a panel of countries 1979–1997. Journal of Public Economics, 85(1), 1–31. CrossRef
Bucovetsky, S., & Haufler, A. (2007). Preferential tax regimes with asymmetric countries. National Tax Journal, 60(4), 269–304. CrossRef
Cameron, G. (1996). On the measurement of real R&D: Divisia price indices for UK business enterprise R&D. Research Evaluation, 6(4), 215–219. CrossRef
Corrado, C., Hulten, C., & Sichel, D. (2005). Measuring capital and technology: An expanded framework. In C. Corrado, J. Haltiwanger, & D. Sichel (Eds.), Measuring capital in the new economy, National Bureau of Economic Research studies in income and wealth (Vol. 65, pp. 11–45). Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press.
Corrado, C., Hulten, C., & Sichel, D. (2006). The contribution of intangible investments to US economic growth: A sources-of-growth analysis. NBER Working Paper, No. 11948.
Council of the European Union (1999), Report from: Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) to ECOFIN Council, Doc. SN 4901/99, 29 November 1999.
Council of the European Union (2007), Report from the Code of Conduct Group (Business taxation) to ECOFIN Council, Doc. 15545/07 FISC 157, 21 November 2007.
Council of the European Union (2008), Report from the Code of Conduct Group (Business taxation) to the ECOFIN Council, Doc. 16084/1/08 REV 1, 26 November 2008.
Council of the European Union (2013a), Report from: Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) to ECOFIN, Doc. 11465/13 FISC 134, 21 June 2013.
Council of the European Union (2013b), Report from: Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation) to ECOFIN, Doc. 166565/13 FISC 226, 29 November 2013.
Council of the European Union (2013c), Press release 3281st Council meeting Economic and Financial Affairs, Brussels, 10 December 2013, Doc. 17556/13 PRESSE 559 PR CO 66.
Desai, M. A., Foley, C. F., & Hines, J. R. (2006). The demand for tax haven operations. Journal of Public Economics, 90(4), 513–531. CrossRef
Devereux, M. P., & Griffith, R. (1999). The taxation of discrete investment choices (Rev. 2). IFS Working Paper Series, No. W98/16.
Devereux, M. P., & Griffith, R. (2003). Evaluating tax policy for location decisions. International Tax and Public Finance, 10(3), 107–126. CrossRef
Dischinger, M., & Riedel, N. (2011). Corporate taxes and the location of intangible assets within multinational firms. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 691–707. CrossRef
Dougherty, S. M., Inklaar, R., McGuckin, R. H., & van Ark, B. (2007). International comparisons of R&D expenditure—does an R&D PPP make a difference? In E. R. Berndt & C. R. Hulten (Eds.), Hard-to-measure goods and services: Essays in honor of Zvi Griliches (pp. 291–322). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Elschner, C., Ernst, C., Licht, G., & Spengel, C. (2009). What the design of an R&D tax incentive tells about its effectiveness: A simulation of R&D tax incentives in the European Union. Journal of Technology Transfer, 36(4), 233–256.
Ernst, C., Richter, K., & Riedel, N. (2013). Corporate taxation and the quality of research and development, ZEW Discussion Paper, No. 13–010, Mannheim.
European Commission (1997), Conclusions of the ECOFIN Council meeting, Official Journal of the European Commission, 98/C 2/01.
European Commission (2013), Room Document No. 2 prepared for the Code of Conduct Group (Business Taxation), 22 October 2013, Tax Notes International, Doc. 2013–24148.
Evers, L, C. Spengel and H. Miller (2013), Intellectual Property Box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations, ZEW Discussion Paper, No. 13–07, Mannheim.
Fuest, C., Spengel, C., Finke, K., Heckemeyer, J. H., & Nusser, H. (2013). Profit shifting and “Aggressive” tax planning by multinational firms: Issues and options for reform. World Tax Journal, 4(3), 307–324.
Griffith, R., Harrison, R., & Van Reenen, J. (2006). How special is the special relationship? Using the impact of US R&D spillovers on UK firms as a test of technology sourcing. American Economic Review, 96(5), 1859–1875. CrossRef
Griffith, R., & Miller, H. (2010). Support for Research and innovation. In R. C. Chote, J. Emmerson, & J. Shaw (Eds.), The IFS green budget. London: IFS Commentary 112.
Griffith, R., & Miller, H. (2011). Corporate taxes and intellectual property. In M. C. Brewer & H. Miller (Eds.), The IFS green budget. London: IFS Commentary 117.
Griffith, R., Miller, H., & O’Connell, M. (2014). Ownership of intellectual property and corporate taxation. Journal of Public Economics, 112(1), 12–23.
Grubert, H. (2003). Intangible income, intercompany transactions, income shifting, and the choice of location. National Tax Journal Part 2, 56(1), 221–242. CrossRef
Grubert, H., & Mutti, J. (2009). The effect of taxes on royalties and the migration of intangible assets abroad. In M. Reinsdorf & M. Slaughter (Eds.), International trade in services and intangibles in the era of globalization (pp. 111–137). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Guellec, D., & Van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, B. (2001). R&D and productivity growth: A panel analysis of 16 OECD countries (Vol. 33). Paris: OECD Economic Studies. CrossRef
Hall, R. E., & Jorgensen, D. W. (1967). Tax policy and investment behaviour. American Economic Review, 59(4), 391–414.
Hall, B., & van Reenen, J. (2000). How effective are fiscal incentives for R&D? A review of the evidence. Research Policy, 29(4–5), 449–469. CrossRef
Harris, D. (1993). The impact of U.S. tax law revision on multinational corporations’ capital location and income shifting decisions. Journal of Accounting Research, 31(3), 111–140. CrossRef
Hines, J. (1999). Lessons from behavioural responses to taxation. National Tax Journal, 52(3), 305–322.
HMRC (2011), The Patent Box: Response to consultation, December 2011.
HMRC (2012), The Patent Box: Technical Note and Guide to the Finance Bill 2012 clauses.
Hong, Q., & Smart, M. (2010). In praise of tax havens: International tax planning and foreign direct investment. European Economic Review, 54(1), 82–95. CrossRef
Huibregtse, S., Peeters, M., Verdoner, L., & Carey, S. (2011). IP companies and substance: No-fly zones? Transfer pricing international journal, 12(5), 4–15.
Huizinga, H., & Laeven, L. (2008). International profit shifting within multinationals: A multi-country perspective. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5–6), 1164–1182. CrossRef
Hulten, C. (2013), Stimulating Economic Growth through Knowledge-Based Investment, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2013/02, OECD Publishing.
Jacobs, O. H., Endres, D., & Spengel, C. (2011). Internationale unternehmensbesteuerung (7th ed.). Munich: Beck.
Jaffe, A., Trajtenberg, M., & Henderson, R. (1993). Geographic localization of knowledge spillovers as evidenced by patent citations. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 108(4), 577–598. CrossRef
Janeba, E., & Peters, W. (1999). Tax evasion, tax competition and the gains from non-discrimination: The case of interest taxation in Europe. Economic Journal, 109(1), 93–101. CrossRef
Janeba, E., & Smart, M. (2003). Is targeted tax competition less harmful than its remedies? International Tax Public Finance, 10(4), 259–280. CrossRef
Jorgenson, D. W. (1963). Capital theory and investment behaviour. American Economic Review, 53(2), 247–259.
Karkinsky, T., & Riedel, N. (2012). Corporate taxation and the choice of patent location within multinational firms. Journal of International Economics, 88(1), 176–185. CrossRef
Keen, M. (2001). Preferential regimes can make tax competition less harmful. National Tax Journal, 54(4), 757–762. CrossRef
Keller, W. (2002). Geographic localization of international technology diffusion. American Economic Review, 92(1), 120–142. CrossRef
Kiekebeld, B. J. (2004). Harmful tax competition in the European Union: Code of conduct, countermeasures and EU law. Deventer: Kluwer law.
King, M. A., & Fullerton, D. (1984). The taxation of income from capital. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. CrossRef
Klemm, A. (2010). Causes, benefits, and risks of business tax incentives. International Tax and Public Finance, 17(3), 315–336.
Lester, J., Patry, A., & Adéa, D. (2007). An international comparison of marginal effective tax rates on investment in R&D by large firms. Canadian Department of Finance Working Paper.
Lipsey, R. (2010). Measuring the location of production in a world of intangible productive assets, FDI, and intrafirm trade. Review of Income and Wealth, 56(s1), S99–S110. CrossRef
McKenzie, K. J. (2008). Measuring tax incentives for R&D. International Tax and Public Finance, 15(5), 563–581. CrossRef
Mirrlees, S., Besley, T., Blundell, R., Bond, S., Chote, R., Gammie, M., et al. (2011). Tax by design: The Mirrlees review. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Mors, M. (2007). Der Steuerwettbewerb in der EU: Erfahrungen mit dem Verhaltenskodex zurUnternehmensbesteuerung. In C. Kellermann & J. Zitzler (Eds.), Steuern im europäischen Wettbewerb (pp. 66–75). Berlin: Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung.
OECD (2008). The internationalisation of business R&D. Evidence: impacts and implications. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (2010). Transfer pricing guidelines for multinational enterprises and tax administrations. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (2012). Discussion draft. Revision of the special considerations for intangibles in chapter vi of the oecd transfer pricing guidelines and related provisions. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (2013a). Action plan on base erosion and profit shifting. Paris: OECD Publishing.
OECD (2013b). Supporting investment in knowledge capital, growth and innovation. Paris: OECD Publishing.
Parson, M. and N. Phillips (2007). An Evaluation of the Federal Tax Credit for Scientific Research and Experimental Development, Department of Finance Canada Working Paper, No. 2007–08.
Russo, R. (Ed.). (2007). Fundamentals of international tax planning. Amsterdam: IBFD.
Schreiber, U., Spengel, C., & Lammersen, L. (2002). Measuring the impact of taxation on investment and financing decisions. Schmalenbach Business Review, 54(1), 2–23.
Soong Johnston, S. and D.D. Stewart (2013). Germany on Patent Box Regimes: Put a Lid on It. Tax Notes International, July 29 2013, 395–398.
Spengel, C., C. Elschner, D. Endres, A. Bartholmeß, Daniel Dreßler, L. Evers, M.-T. Evers, K. Finke, J. Heckemeyer, K. Richter and U. Scheuering (2012). Effective Tax Levels using the Devereux/Griffith Methodology, Project for the EU Commission TAXUD/2008/CC/099 Final, Report 2012, Mannheim.
Spengel, C., & Zöllkau, Y. (Eds.) (2012). Common Corporate Tax Base (CC(C)TB) and determination of taxable income: An international comparison. Heidelberg: Springer.
Sporken, E., & Gommers, E. (2006). Transfer Pricing Implications of the Proposed Patent Box, International Transfer Pricing Journal, vol. 13(5), pp. 266–270.
Stewart, D. D. (2013). Report: U.K. Patent Box Violates Code of Conduct. Tax Notes International, October 21 2013, 214–215.
Verlinden, I., & Smits, A. (2009). Mastering the Intellectual Property Life Cycle. A global perspective on the tax-efficient management of IP rights (2nd ed.). Strongs Ave: Verlinden.
Warda, J. (2001), Measuring the Value of R&D Tax Treatment in OECD Countries, OECD STI, Review, No. 27, OECD.
Warda, J. (2006). Tax Treatment of Business Investments in Intellectual Assets: An International Comparison, OECD Science, Technology and Industry Working Papers, No. 2006/04.
Wilson, J. D. (1999). Theories of tax competition. National Tax Journal, 52(3), 269–304.
Wilson, J. D. (2006). Tax competition with and without preferential treatment of a highly-mobile tax base. In J. Alm, J. Martinez-Vasquez, & M. Rider (Eds.), The challenge of tax reform in a global economy (pp. 195–206). NewYork: Springer.
- Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations
- Springer US
Neuer Inhalt/© Stellmach, Neuer Inhalt/© Maturus, Pluta Logo/© Pluta, Frankfurt School