DOCSLIB.ORG

Research Publications RP-16

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Research Publications RP-16 New York, N . Y . 10020 Printed in U.S.A, Table of Contents PACE L INTRODUCTION 5 IL . THE EUROPEAN ECONOMIC COMMUNITY - 7 Purpose, Or;anization and Tax Harmonization Objectives 7 Fiscal Harmonizatinn and Common Market Objectives 7 Why the Need to Harmonize Indirect Taxes 8 The Value-Added Tax : I „ 11 Border Tax Adjustments .12 III, `THE AMERICAN BALANCE-OF-PAYMENTS` SITUATION AN D BORDER TAXES 14 .,The Common European Value-Added Tax and Border Taxes 16 The Border,Adjustment:Problem 18 IV. THE U.S. COURSES OF`ACTION TO COMPENSATE FOR _ _EUROPEAN :BORDER TAXES .2 1 V. CONCLUSION , ,,,,,,,,,, 25 APPENDIX I - The E.E.C. Directives Introducing the Common Value-Added Tax l System ;. 6 .. APPENDIX II The Cerman Law on .Value-Added Taxes APPENDIX II I . The Value-Added. Tax 31 ; ;. :..List-of Tables .. '.. .. -~ ;-TABLE ;PAGE 1. Turnover and Value-Added Taxes in the Common Market, 1967 9 II. Border Tax Adjustment Rates in the Common Market, 1967 12 III. Taxation as a Percentage of Cross National Product in 1966 17 IV, Common Market Trade Balance with the United States 21 ,Introduction, , . T. V. A. no longer is used exclusively acteristics of each, while being distinc t with reference to the "Tennessee Valley - from both in that it includes in its tax Authority." In more recent times T.V.A. base services rendered in the production has often been used ,to designate the process. French tax system of "la taxe ..sur la „ In 1950 value-added taxation was pro - valeur; ajoutee: ;posed to Japan by the Shoup Mission under Professor Carl S . Shoup of Colum- The "value-added tax" has repeatedly I, biaUniversity. However, Japan failed to received special attention from leading adopt the proposed tax reform. The state and from economists through- of Michigan between .1953-1967, and out the world as well as 1n the United France since 1953, have had practical ; States. In recent years this tax system has experience` with value-added taxation. been considered as a possible alternative Whether or not value-added taxation to the present corporate tax system by seems unsuitable for the United States , U.S . Congressional committees, basal- as officials of the U .S. Treasury Depart- . -nessmen . and -tax economists. ment have repeatedly declared, it is vita l ;for Americans dealing in foreign market In the United States, excise taxes are s to know more about this new tax system the 'only indirect taxes applied on the ' . Federal level. In Europe, on the con- .,The European Economic Community, trary, national governments make exten- ,,one of the foremost trading partners of the U sive use of indirect taxes in the form of .S,, by decision of the Council of Ministers of the E general turnover taxes. By reason of the .E.C. has decided to ;adopt the value-added tax system as th existing international trade rules to be e :common indirect tax for the entire Euro explained later, countries relying heavily - . can Common Market on indirect taxes can gain competitive p ' . The date at which the common tax system is to be advantages to the detriment of those - come effective has been fixed at countries not sharing in this practice. January Generally levied upon the transfer of Western Germany, on January 1,196$, commodities, turnover taxes can be com- adopted a value-added tax system of its pared to sales taxes, Present day turn- own, thereby replacing its former cas - 'over taxes may be classed into two major Cade type turnover tax . This was an groups ; the multiple stage and the single important step, not only doing awa y stn+;e taxes. The value-added tax, which with the inconveniences and disadvan- represents a third form, has some char- tages of Germany's multi-stage turnover 1, Cascade type turnover taxes are applied each time a product changes hands ; it is a tax on tax insofar a s the tax base includes the tax paid on the previous turnover, 5 sales tax system, but also decisively mov - threats to the U.S . position with regard ing in the direction of the Common Mar- to its competitiveness in the Europea n ket tax harmonization . Germany thereby Common Market. "Border taxes", a term followed the proposal of the Neumark virtually unknown until very recently , Commission, a special commission o f play an increasing role in foreign eco- experts on tax harmonization, which ha d nomic policy of governments and th e .recommended a two-stage procedure for thinking of American businessmen . the harmonization of indirect taxes . Tax harmonization is well within th e The Netherlands will follow suit on logic of an economic union . The removal January 1, 1969, at which time they wil l of all barriers to the free flow of labor, also replace the existing turnover tax capital and goods is one of the condi- system by a national value-added tax . tions proposed by the Treaty of Rome , Italy, Belgium, and Luxembourg com- which is the legal basis on which the mitted themselves to join the other Cum - European Economic Community is-con- . mon Market member states in the adop- structed. #ion ,of the common .value-added tax by January 1, 1970. Section II discusses the development of the European Economic Community When this new tax law goes into effect, and the place tax harmonization has fiscal and tariff frontiers inside the Com- within such a union . Section III deals mon Market can be removed with the with the implication to foreign busines s ,adoption of a uniform value-added ta x of the changeover to the new tax . Sec- . rate. At the same time, however, in- tion IV considers some of the differen t creased border tax adjustments affecting courses of action open to the Unite d :international trade with the outsid e .States to offset the resulting , distortions world will emerge as a consequence o f oi' international tra-le . this change in European tax legislation . Exception is made for France, which wil l Appendix I presents a discussion of have to reduce its border t: x adjustment the E .E.C. Directives introducing the when the Common Market value-adde d common value-added tax system . The tax rates become effective . These bor- new German value-added tax law, its der tax adjustments, while favoring rates and mechanics, are presented in Common Market exports, will discour- Appendix II. Appendix III summarizes age imports from third countries. The some of the most noteworthy features resulting trade distortions are likely of the value-added tax. 6 - II. The: European _E 'd o Purpoae, Organization and sure fair competition and the harmoniza - Tax Harmonization Objectives tion of fiscal and monetary policies. The catastrophes of World War II The primary objective set forth in this :and the dilemmas of the post World War ;treaty is the creation of a single market Jl era motivated European statesmen -among the member ;countries of the charged with the establishment of peace ;European Economic Community, per- and with the reconstruction of their witting labor, capital, and all factors of economies, to revitalize old, and to make ;production to move about freely within new, proposals for the unification of :the Common Market area, while assur- Europe. Various attempts to unify the ing high levels of employment, stability European nations had resulted in the .of income, and ` sustained economic establishment of institutions such as the ' growth ;throughout theentire: ::area.1 Organization for. European Economic ,Cooperation in 1948, the Council of . ,Fiscal Harmonization and Europe in 1949, and the Coal and Ste I ,Common Market O b Objectives . ..Community in 1952. Finally in 1957 the Fiscal harmonizationand in partic - groundwork was laid for the establish- : Vlar tax `harmonization--is closely in- ment of the European Economic Com- -volved with the objectives outlined munity. above. The term "tax harmonization" ` came into the vocabulary of the tax econ - In March 1957, France, Western Ger . omist only recently. It denotes the mu - . .?,many, Belgium, the -Netherlands, Italy, tual adjustment of national tax system s = and Luxembourg agreed to sign the to achieve certain objectives which ar e Treaty of Rome. It is the legal ground- to the member countries. With work., for an organization that was to regard to fiscal policy, the Treaty of exceed byby far the scope of the earlier Rome establishes only a broad legal institutions. In the treaty, the member framework permitting interpretation of countries agreed not only to remove in- the needs and mechanics by which tax - ternal tariff and quota barriers but also harmonization can be achieved at a later to equalize external tariffs according to `date. Articles 95-99 reflect this `ap- an established time schedule. Besides roach,2 - providing for the establishment of a common external tariff, the Treaty of Articles 95-97 forbid the use of differ- Rome calls for common policies for agri- ential taxation or tax rebates as protect culture, social affairs, transport and tive devices against imports from other energy common rules that would en- member states. At the same time thes e 1 . Treaty of Rome . Treaty establishing the Europea n Economic Community and connected documents, Un. official translation . Art, 2 & 31 p, 17. Brussels, 2. Ibid., p. 87, 7 articles together with Articles 101 an d adapted to the extent that this is neces - 102 provide for the elimination of any sary to make them neutral from th e point of view of competition and thu s "disparity existing between the legisla- to bring tax systems into line with th e Uwe or administrative provisions of th e competition system of the Community.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Analysis of Tax Developments Worldwide
    www.pwc.com/its International Tax News Edition 78 August 2019 Welcome Keeping up with the constant flow of Featured articles international tax developments worldwide can be a real challenge for multinational companies. International Tax News is a monthly publication that offers updates and analysis on developments taking place around the world, authored by specialists in PwC’s global international tax network. We hope that you will find this publication helpful, and look forward to your comments. Bernard Moens Global Leader International Tax Services Network T: +1 703 362 7644 E: [email protected] In this issue Legislation Administrative Judicial EU/OECD Treaties Legislation Argentina Argentina approves tax regime for Among others, the following tax benefits knowledge-based activities apply to the extent that taxpayers comply with certain requirements: Law No. 27,506, published on June • 15% reduced corporate income tax rate 10, enacted a new regime promoting applicable to fiscal years beginning on or knowledge-based activities. The regime’s after January 1, 2020 main tax benefits include a reduced • executing tax stability agreements with federal corporate income tax rate of 15% and a tax authorities providing that the federal tax tax stability agreement. The new regime burden on income from Promoted Activities cannot increase until December 31, 2029 replaces the existing regime, which was • ability to claim withholding taxes, VAT limited to the software industry, and withholding exemptions, and reduction in will be effective from January 1, 2020 social security contributions through December 31, 2029. Multinational entities engaged in Promoted Activities should revisit their Argentinian operations in order to The new regime aims to encourage the creation, benefit from the new regime.
    [Show full text]
  • Engagement Guidance on Corporate Tax Responsibility Why and How to Engage with Your Investee Companies
    ENGAGEMENT GUIDANCE ON CORPORATE TAX RESPONSIBILITY WHY AND HOW TO ENGAGE WITH YOUR INVESTEE COMPANIES An investor initiative in partnership with UNEP Finance Initiative and UN Global Compact THE SIX PRINCIPLES We will incorporate ESG issues into investment analysis and 1 decision-making processes. We will be active owners and incorporate ESG issues into our 2 ownership policies and practices. We will seek appropriate disclosure on ESG issues by 3 the entities in which we invest. We will promote acceptance and implementation of the Principles 4 within the investment industry. We will work together to enhance our effectiveness in 5 implementing the Principles. We will each report on our activities and progress towards 6 implementing the Principles. CREDITS & ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Authors: Athanasia Karananou and Anastasia Guha, PRI Editor: Mark Kolmar, PRI Design: Alessandro Boaretto, PRI The PRI is grateful to the investor taskforce on corporate tax responsibility for their contributions to the guidance: ■ Harriet Parker, Investment Analyst, Alliance Trust Investments ■ Steven Bryce, Investment Analyst, Arisaig Partners (Asia) Pte Ltd ■ Francois Meloche, Extra Financial Risks Manager, Bâtirente ■ Adam Kanzer, Managing Director, Domini Social Investments LLC ■ Pauline Lejay, SRI Officer, ERAFP ■ Meryam Omi, Head of Sustainability, Legal & General Investment Management ■ Robert Wilson, Research Analyst, MFS Investment Management ■ Michelle de Cordova, Director, Corporate Engagement & Public Policy, NEI Investments ■ Rosa van den Beemt, ESG Analyst, NEI Investments ■ Kate Elliot, Ethical Researcher, Rathbone Brothers Plc ■ Matthias Müller, Senior SI Analyst, RobecoSAM ■ Rosl Veltmeijer, Head of Research, Triodos Investment Management We would like to warmly thank Sol Picciotto, Emeritus Professor, Lancaster University and Coordinator, BEPS Monitoring Group, and Katherine Ng, PRI, for their contribution to the guidance.
    [Show full text]
  • Pressures for the Harmonization of Income Taxation Between Canada and the United States
    This PDF is a selection from an out-of-print volume from the National Bureau of Economic Research Volume Title: Canada-U.S. Tax Comparisons Volume Author/Editor: John B. Shoven and John Whalley, editors Volume Publisher: University of Chicago Press Volume ISBN: 0-226-75483-9 Volume URL: http://www.nber.org/books/shov92-1 Conference Date: July 26-27, 1990 Publication Date: January 1992 Chapter Title: Pressures for the Harmonization of Income Taxation between Canada and the United States Chapter Author: Robin Boadway, Neil Bruce Chapter URL: http://www.nber.org/chapters/c7478 Chapter pages in book: (p. 25 - 74) 1 Pressures for the Harmonization of Income Taxation between Canada and the United States Robin Boadway and Neil Bruce 1.1 Introduction: The Question of Tax Harmonization The determination of tax policy is among the most sovereign functions of governments. The choices to be made include of the level of tax revenues to be collected (and hence the level of public sector spending), the economic activities to be taxed (the tax bases and the tax mix), the distribution of the tax burden over different groups and income classes in the country, and the distri- bution of the tax revenues to different levels of government in the country. From an economic point of view, there are a number of criteria that might be used in formulating tax policy. These include minimizing the burden on the population of raising the given amount of revenue, minimizing the administra- tive costs of the tax system both to the government and to the taxpayers, achieving the desired amount of income redistribution, increasing the stability and predictability of the revenue base, and using tax policy as an instrument of industrial and regional policy.
    [Show full text]
  • An Analysis of the Graded Property Tax Robert M
    TaxingTaxing Simply Simply District of Columbia Tax Revision Commission TaxingTaxing FairlyFairly Full Report District of Columbia Tax Revision Commission 1755 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 550 Washington, DC 20036 Tel: (202) 518-7275 Fax: (202) 466-7967 www.dctrc.org The Authors Robert M. Schwab Professor, Department of Economics University of Maryland College Park, Md. Amy Rehder Harris Graduate Assistant, Department of Economics University of Maryland College Park, Md. Authors’ Acknowledgments We thank Kim Coleman for providing us with the assessment data discussed in the section “The Incidence of a Graded Property Tax in the District of Columbia.” We also thank Joan Youngman and Rick Rybeck for their help with this project. CHAPTER G An Analysis of the Graded Property Tax Robert M. Schwab and Amy Rehder Harris Introduction In most jurisdictions, land and improvements are taxed at the same rate. The District of Columbia is no exception to this general rule. Consider two homes in the District, each valued at $100,000. Home A is a modest home on a large lot; suppose the land and structures are each worth $50,000. Home B is a more sub- stantial home on a smaller lot; in this case, suppose the land is valued at $20,000 and the improvements at $80,000. Under current District law, both homes would be taxed at a rate of 0.96 percent on the total value and thus, as Figure 1 shows, the owners of both homes would face property taxes of $960.1 But property can be taxed in many ways. Under a graded, or split-rate, tax, land is taxed more heavily than structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Competition and Tax Coordination in the European Union: a Survey
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Keuschnigg, Christian; Loretz, Simon; Winner, Hannes Working Paper Tax competition and tax coordination in the European Union: A survey Working Papers in Economics and Finance, No. 2014-04 Provided in Cooperation with: Department of Social Sciences and Economics, University of Salzburg Suggested Citation: Keuschnigg, Christian; Loretz, Simon; Winner, Hannes (2014) : Tax competition and tax coordination in the European Union: A survey, Working Papers in Economics and Finance, No. 2014-04, University of Salzburg, Department of Social Sciences and Economics, Salzburg This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/122170 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu TAX COMPETITION AND TAX COORDINATION IN THE EUROPEAN UNION: A SURVEY CHRISTIAN KEUSCHNIGG, SIMON LORETZ AND HANNES WINNER WORKING PAPER NO.
    [Show full text]
  • Canada Taxation of Foreign Passive Income (FAPI)
    INTERNATIONAL TAX POLICY FORUM / GEORGETOWN UNIVERSITY LAW CENTER Reform of International Tax: Canada, Japan, United Kingdom, and United States January 21, 2011 Gewirz Student Center, 12th floor 120 F Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20036 International Tax Policy Forum International Tax Policy Forum and Georgetown University Law Center Conference on: REFORM OF INTERNATIONAL TAX: CANADA, JAPAN, UNITED KINGDOM, AND UNITED STATES Table of Contents 1) Agenda ................................................................................................................................................... 1 2) Sponsoring Organizations a) About ITPF ....................................................................................................................................... 2 b) About Georgetown University Law Center ....................................................................................... 3 3) Taxation of International Income in Canada, Japan, UK, and US a) International Tax Rules in Canada, Japan, the UK and US (J. Mintz Presentation) ....................... 4 b) Canada i) S. Richardson, Presentation on Canadian international tax reform (Jan. 2011) ....................... 9 ii) N. Pantaleo, Presentation on Canada's taxation of foreign business income (Jan. 2011) ..... 12 iii) Advisory Panel on Canada’s System of International Taxation, Enhancing Canada’s International Tax Advantage, (Dec. 2008) [Executive Summary] ........................................... 16 c) UK i) M. Williams, Presentation on UK international tax
    [Show full text]
  • With Indirect Tax News
    InTouch with indirect tax news Caribbean Region – Alert pwc InTouch with indirect tax news Caribbean Region Alert In this issue: PricewaterhouseCoopers Caribbean Region is pleased I Antigua & Barbuda – Budgetary proposals legislated ............................3 to present the August 2010 I Aruba – BBO rate reduced......................................................................5 issue of InTouch, a bulletin I Barbados – Reforms to Barbados VAT ...................................................7 I Curaçao, Bonaire, St. Maarten, Saba, St. Eustatius...............................9 designed to keep our clients I Dominica ...............................................................................................10 up-to-date with regional I Grenada – VAT in Grenada effective February 1, 2010 .........................11 indirect taxation. I Jamaica – Increase in rate of GCT.......................................................12 I St. Kitts and Nevis – VAT proposed implementation ...........................14 I St. Lucia – Proposed introduction of VAT delayed...............................15 I Trinidad & Tobago ................................................................................16 I Contacts................................................................................................17 2 pwc Antigua & Barbuda Updates and developments An overview Rates 2009 saw the rate of Antigua and Barbuda Sales Antigua and Barbuda Sales Tax (“ABST”) is the The following rates of tax are applicable under the Tax (“ABST”) applicable
    [Show full text]
  • European Tax Harmonization and the Implications for U.S Tax Policy Tracy A
    Boston College International and Comparative Law Review Volume 19 | Issue 1 Article 3 12-1-1996 European Tax Harmonization and the Implications for U.S Tax Policy Tracy A. Kaye Follow this and additional works at: http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr Part of the Tax Law Commons Recommended Citation Tracy A. Kaye, European Tax Harmonization and the Implications for U.S Tax Policy, 19 B.C. Int'l & Comp. L. Rev. 109 (1996), http://lawdigitalcommons.bc.edu/iclr/vol19/iss1/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by the Law Journals at Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. It has been accepted for inclusion in Boston College International and Comparative Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ Boston College Law School. For more information, please contact [email protected]. European Tax Harmonization and the Implications for U.S. Tax Policy Tracy A. Kayi* I. EUROPEAN COMMUNITY TAX HARMONIZATION A. Introduction . .. 110 B. History of the European Economic Community . .......... 115 C. Formation of European Community Tax Legislation. .. 119 D. Enforcement of European Community Tax Legislation . ..... 125 E. Taxation in the Community . ......................... 129 II. DIRECT TAXATION ................................... 133 A. The Directives . .. 133 B. The Ruding Committee Report . ....................... 142 C. Future of Direct Tax Harmonization. .. 148 III. IMPLICATIONS OF EC DIRECT TAX HARMONIZATION ON U.S. TAX POLICY .................................... 150 A. Implications for Subpart F . .......................... 150 B. U.S. Tax Treaty Policy Implications . ................... 164 IV. CONCLUSION ....................................... 171 * Associate Professor of Law, Seton Hall University School of Law. B.S., University of Illinois, M.S.T., DePaul University, J.D., Georgetown University Law Center; formerly Tax Legislative Assistant to Senator John C.
    [Show full text]
  • Tax Competition, Tax Coordination and Tax Harmonization: the Effects of EMU
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Genser, Bernd; Haufler, Andreas Working Paper Tax competition, tax coordination and tax harmonization: The effects of EMU Diskussionsbeiträge - Serie II, No. 283 Provided in Cooperation with: Department of Economics, University of Konstanz Suggested Citation: Genser, Bernd; Haufler, Andreas (1995) : Tax competition, tax coordination and tax harmonization: The effects of EMU, Diskussionsbeiträge - Serie II, No. 283, Universität Konstanz, Sonderforschungsbereich 178 - Internationalisierung der Wirtschaft, Konstanz This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/101612 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend
    [Show full text]
  • More Than 50 Years of Trade Rule Discrimination on Taxation: How Trade with China Is Affected
    MORE THAN 50 YEARS OF TRADE RULE DISCRIMINATION ON TAXATION: HOW TRADE WITH CHINA IS AFFECTED Trade Lawyers Advisory Group Terence P. Stewart, Esq. Eric P. Salonen, Esq. Patrick J. McDonough, Esq. Stewart and Stewart August 2007 Copyright © 2007 by The Trade Lawyers Advisory Group LLC This project is funded by a grant from the U.S. Small Business Administration (SBA). SBA’s funding should not be construed as an endorsement of any products, opinions or services. All SBA-funded projects are extended to the public on a nondiscriminatory basis. MORE THAN 50 YEARS OF TRADE RULE DISCRIMINATION ON TAXATION: HOW TRADE WITH CHINA IS AFFECTED TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................. iv INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1 I. U.S. EXPORTERS AND PRODUCERS ARE COMPETITIVELY DISADVANTAGED BY THE DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT OF DIRECT AND INDIRECT TAXES IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE .............................................. 2 II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND TO THE DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT OF INDIRECT AND DIRECT TAXES IN INTERNATIONAL TRADE WITH RESPECT TO BORDER ADJUSTABILITY................................................................. 21 A. Border Adjustability of Taxes ................................................................. 21 B. 18th and 19th Century Examples of the Application of Border Tax Adjustments .........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Potential Retaliation Against the EU Digital Services Tax (DST)
    A Service of Leibniz-Informationszentrum econstor Wirtschaft Leibniz Information Centre Make Your Publications Visible. zbw for Economics Lee-Makiyama, Hosuk Research Report The cost of fiscal unilateralism: Potential retaliation against the EU Digital Services Tax (DST) ECIPE Occasional Paper, No. 05/2018 Provided in Cooperation with: European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE), Brussels Suggested Citation: Lee-Makiyama, Hosuk (2018) : The cost of fiscal unilateralism: Potential retaliation against the EU Digital Services Tax (DST), ECIPE Occasional Paper, No. 05/2018, European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE), Brussels This Version is available at: http://hdl.handle.net/10419/202461 Standard-Nutzungsbedingungen: Terms of use: Die Dokumente auf EconStor dürfen zu eigenen wissenschaftlichen Documents in EconStor may be saved and copied for your Zwecken und zum Privatgebrauch gespeichert und kopiert werden. personal and scholarly purposes. Sie dürfen die Dokumente nicht für öffentliche oder kommerzielle You are not to copy documents for public or commercial Zwecke vervielfältigen, öffentlich ausstellen, öffentlich zugänglich purposes, to exhibit the documents publicly, to make them machen, vertreiben oder anderweitig nutzen. publicly available on the internet, or to distribute or otherwise use the documents in public. Sofern die Verfasser die Dokumente unter Open-Content-Lizenzen (insbesondere CC-Lizenzen) zur Verfügung gestellt haben sollten, If the documents have been made available under an Open gelten abweichend von diesen Nutzungsbedingungen die in der dort Content Licence (especially Creative Commons Licences), you genannten Lizenz gewährten Nutzungsrechte. may exercise further usage rights as specified in the indicated licence. www.econstor.eu ECIPE OCCASIONAL PAPER • 05/2018 The Cost of Fiscal Unilateralism: Potential Retaliation Against the EU Digital Services Tax (DST) By Hosuk Lee-Makiyama Director of ECIPE The author gratefully acknowledges the able research assistance of Cristina Rujan ecipe occasional paper — no.
    [Show full text]
  • Latest CBO Report on Incomes and Taxes Shows That the Federal Fiscal System Is Very Progressive
    Latest CBO Report on Incomes and Taxes Shows that the Federal Fiscal System is Very Progressive FISCAL Scott A. Hodge FACT President No. 742 Jan. 2021 Key Findings • President Joe Biden has proposed an ambitious agenda that would make the federal fiscal system more progressive, and the huge budget deficits caused by the numerous COVID-19 relief packages could heighten the call for more tax revenues. What is needed are benchmark facts to guide these debates. • A recent study by the Congressional Budget Office fills this void with data showing that the current fiscal system—both taxes and direct spending benefits—is already very progressive and redistributive. • In 2017, the federal fiscal system lifted the incomes of households in the lowest quintile by 126 percent, in the second quintile by 46 percent, and in the middle quintile by 10 percent while reducing the incomes of households in the highest quintile by 23 percent and in the top 1 percent by 31 percent. • In 2017, households in the lowest quintile received $67.67 in direct federal benefits for every $1 of taxes paid vs. $1.60 for middle-quintile households, while households in the highest quintile received $0.15, and $0.02 for the top 1 percent. • In the aggregate, fiscal policy increased the incomes of households in the bottom three quintiles by more than $1 trillion in 2017 and reduced the incomes of households in the highest quintile by more than $1.7 trillion, The Tax Foundation is the nation’s of which $728 billion came from households in the top 1 percent.
    [Show full text]