DOCSLIB.ORG

Literaturverzeichnis

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Literaturverzeichnis Literaturverzeichnis Achilles, Charlotte: CFC‐Regeln und unfairer Steuerwettbewerb, eine Untersuchung anhand der deutschen und der französischen CFC‐Regeln, Frankfurt am Main, Lang, 2005 Adamczyk, Łukasz/Majdańska, Alicja: The Sources of EU Law Relevant for Direct Taxation, in: Lang, Michael et. al. [Hrsg.]: Introduction to European Tax Law on Direct Taxation, 4th ed., Wien, Linde, 2016, 95 Aigner, Hans‐Jörgen: Der Gleichheitsgrundsatz und die abkommensrechtliche Verteilung zwischen Ansässigkeits‐ und Quellenstaat, in: Gessner, Wolfgang/Lang, Michael/ Schuch, Josef/Staringer, Claus [Hrsg.]: Die Verteilung der Besteuerungsrechte zwischen Ansässigkeits‐ und Quellenstaat im Recht der Doppelbesteuerungsabkommen, Wien, Linde, 2005, 169 Anderson, George/Scheller, Henrik: Fiskalföderalismus – eine international vergleichende Einführung, Opladen (u.a.), Budrich, 2012 Arnold, Brian J./Dibout, Patrick: General Report, in: Arnold, Brian J. [Hrsg.]: Limits of the Use of Low Tax Regimes by Multinational Businesses: Current Measures and Emerging Trends, Cahiers de droit fiscal international, The Hague (u.a.), Kluwer, 2001, 21 Arruda Ferreira, Vanessa/Trindade Marinho, Anapaula: Tax Sparing and Matching Credit: From an Unclear Concept to an Uncertain Regime, Bulletin for International Taxation, 8/2013, Vol. 67, 397 Ault, Hugh J./Schön, Wolfgang/Shay, Stephen E.: Base Erosion and Profit Shifting: A Roadmap for Reform, Bulletin for International Taxation, Vol. 68, June‐July/2014, 275 Ault, Hugh: Tax Competition: What (If Anything) To Do About It? in: Kirchhof, Paul et. al. [Hrsg.]: Staaten und Steuern Festschrift Vogel, Heidelberg, Müller, 2000, 1117 Avi‐Yonah, Reuven S./Panayi, Chistiana HJI: Rethinking Treaty Shopping: Lessons for the European Union, in: Lang, Michael. et. al. [Hrsg.]: Tax Treaties, building bridges be‐ tween law and economics, Amsterdam, IBFD, 2010, 21 Avi‐Yonah, Reuven S.: Advanced introduction to international tax law, Cheltenham, Elgar, 2015 Avi‐Yonah, Reuven S.: Double Tax Treaties: An Introduction, in: Sauvant, Karl P./Sachs, Lisa [Hrsg.]: The effect of treaties on foreign direct investment – bilateral investment treaties, double taxation treaties, and investment flows, Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 2009, 99 Avi‐Yonah, Reuven Y.: Corporate Social Responsibility and Strategic Tax Behavior, in: Schön, Wolfgang [Hrsg.]: Tax and Corporate Governance, Berlin/Heidelberg, Springer, 2008, 183 Bacon, Kelyn: European Union Law of State Aid, 2nd ed., Oxford, Oxford Univ. Press, 2013 Bacon, Kelyn: State Aids and General Measures, YEL, 1997, 269 Baker, Philip: Conference on „EU Corporate Tax Reform: Progress and New Challenges“, Session on „Tax Treaty Policies of Member States“ – Discussion Paper, verfügbar unter: https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/docs/body/conf_rome_7draft _discussion_document.pdf (Stand: 1.4.2017) Bärenbrinker, Verena: Die Rechtsprechung der EU‐Gerichte auf dem Gebiet des Beihilfe‐ rechts im Jahr 2014, EWS, 1/2016, 6 Bärsch, Sven‐Eric/Spengel, Christoph: OECD/Germany, Hybrid Mismatch Arrangements: OECD Recommendations and German Practice, Bulletin For International Taxation, 10/2013, Vol. 67, 520 Bartosch, Andreas: Is There a Need for a Rule of Reason in European State Aid Law? Or how to arrive at a coherent concept of material selectivity?, CML Rev. Vol. 47, 2010, 729 Bartosch, Andreas: Materielle Selektivität und Europäische Beihilfekontrolle – Ein Diskussi‐ onsbeitrag zum derzeitigen Stand der Gemeinschaftsrechtsprechung, EuZW, 1/2010, 12 © Springer Fachmedien Wiesbaden GmbH, ein Teil von Springer Nature 2018 Š. Jozipović, Die Anwendung des EU-Beihilferechts auf das internationale Steuerrecht, PwC-Studien zum Unternehmens-und Internationalen Steuerrecht 9, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-22187-4 258 Literaturverzeichnis Bates, John/Berman, Daniel M./Gani, Raphaël/Gutmann, Daniel/Imamura, Takashi/ Klugman, Gideon/Rust, Alexander: Limitation on Benefits Articles in Income Tax Trea‐ ties: The Current State of Play, Intertax, 6,7/2013, Vol. 41, 395 Baumhoff, Hubertus/Liebchen, Daniel: Seminar G: Steuerfragen im Zusammenhang mit im‐ materiellen Wirtschaftsgütern, IStR, 2014, 711 Bauschatz, Peter: Steuerlicher Gestaltungsmissbrauch und Europarecht (II), Öffnung der Steuersysteme im Recht der direkten Steuern der EU‐Mitgliedstaaten und Abwehr grenzüberschreitender Gestaltungen durch Missbrauchsvorschriften anhand ausge‐ wählter Beispiele des deutschen Steuerrechts, IStR, 2002, 333 Bayer, Hermann‐Wilfried: Steuerlehre – Steuerverfassung, Steuergesetz, Steuergericht, Ber‐ lin, New York, de Gruyter, 1997 Bendlinger, Stefan: Die Betriebsstätte in der Praxis des internationalen Steuerrechts, 3. Auf‐ lage, Wien, LexisNexis, 2016 Bendlinger, Stefan: Steueroasen und Offshore‐Strukturen, Wien, Linde, 2013 Berrisch, Georg M.: Mehr Fragen als Antworten – Keine Klärung der „Bindungswirkung“ von beihilferechtlichen Eröffnungsentscheidungen der Kommission, EuZW, 7/2014, 253 Bethge, Herbert: Die Verfassungsrechtliche Problematik der Grundpflichten, JA, 1985, 249 Bieber, Roland/Epiney, Astrid/Haag, Marcel: Die Europäische Union – Europarecht und Po‐ litik, 12. Auflage, Baden‐Baden, Nomos, 2016 Birk, Dieter et. al. [Hrsg.]: Handbuch des Europäischen Steuer‐ und Abgabenrechts, Herne, Verl. Neue Wirtschaftsbriefe, 1995 Birkenmaier, Markus: Die Vorgaben der Beihilfevorschriften des EG‐Vertrages für die di‐ rekte Unternehmensbesteuerung – Unter Berücksichtigung der Anpassung der polni‐ schen Sonderwirtschaftszonen an den gemeinschaftlichen Besitzstand, Baden‐Baden, Nomos, 2007 Blair‐Stanek, Andrew: Intellectual Property Law Solutions to Tax Avoidance, 62 UCLA L. Rev. 2, 2015, 1 Blumenberg, Jens/Kring, Wulf: Europäisches Beihilferecht und Besteuerung, IFSt Schrift Nr. 473, Der Betrieb, 2011 Blümich/Heuermann, Bernd: Einkommensteuergesetz (EStG) 136. Auflage, München, Vah‐ len, 2016, Rn. 125 ff. Bodenheim, Dieter G.: Der Zweck der Steuer: Verfassungsrechtliche Untersuchung zur di‐ chotomischen Zweckformel fiskalisch‐nichtfiskalisch, Baden‐Baden, Nomos, 1979 Bodis, Andrei: § 3 EStG Begünstigte Auslandstätigkeiten verfassungs‐ und gemeinschafts‐ rechtswidrig?, Rdw, 2007, Artikel Nr.‐711, 692 Borrego, Vega/Alberto, Félix: Limitation on benefits clauses in double taxation conventions, The Hague, Kluwer, 2006 Brähler, Gernot: Internationales Steuerrecht – Grundlagen für Studium und Steuerprüfung, 8. Auflage, Wiesbaden, Springer, 2014 Bratton, William W./McCahery, Joseph A.: Tax coordination and tax competition in the Eu‐ ropean Union: evaluating the code of conduct on business taxation, CML Rev., 3/2001, 677 Brauner Yariv: What the BEPS?, Florida Tax Review, Vol. 16, 2/2014, 55 Breithecker, Volker/Klapdor, Ralf: Einführung in die Internationale Betriebswirtschaftliche Steuerlehre, 4. Aufl., Berlin, Erich Schmidt Verlag, 2016 Buendia Sierra, Jose Luis: State Aid and Tax Rulings: An Appropriate Way to Tackle Aggres‐ sive Tax Planning?, Tax Planning International European Tax Service, 12/2015, 9 Bullinger, Patrick: Änderung der Mutter‐Tochter‐Richtlinie ab 2005: Erweiterung des An‐ wendungsbereiches und verbleibende Probleme, IStR, 2004, 406 Cachia, Franklin: Analysing the European Commission Final Decisions on Apple, Starbucks, Amazon and Fiat Finance & Trade, EC Tax Review, 1/2017, Vol. 26, 23 Literaturverzeichnis 259 Calliess, Christian/Ruffert, Matthias [Hrsg.]: EUV/AEUV 5. Auflage, München, Beck, 2016 Cordewener, Axel: Asymmetrical Tax Burdens and EU State Aid Control, EC TAX Review, 6/2012, Vol. 21, 288 Cordewener, Axel: Europäische Grundfreiheiten und nationales Steuerrecht: „Konvergenz“ des Gemeinschaftsrechts und „Kohärenz“ der direkten Steuern in der Rechtsprechung des EuGH, Köln, Schmidt, 2002 Creed, Tanja: Steuergestaltung über Lizenz‐ bzw. Patentboxen – Ein Auslaufmodell?, GRUR‐Prax 2014, 346 Cruz, Julio Baquero/De La Torre, Fernando Castillo: A note on Preussen Elektra, 26 El Rev 5/2001 489 Darby, Joseph B./Lemaster, Kelsey: Double Irish more than doubles the tax saving: Hybrid structure reduces Irish, U.S. and worldwide taxation, Practical US/International Tax Strategies, 15.5.2007, Vol. 11, Nr. 9, 2 Daurer, Veronika/Krever, Richard: Choosing between the UN and OECD Tax Policy Models: An African Case Study, African Journal of International and Comparative Law, Feb. 2014, Vol. 22, No. 1, 1 Dauses, Manfred [Hrsg.]: Handbuch des EU‐Wirtschaftsrechts, 40 Ausg. 2016 De Broe, Luc: International Tax Planning & Prevention of Abuse Under Domestic Tax Law, Tax Treaties & Ec‐Law, Leuven, 2007, Verfügbar online: https://lirias.kuleuven.be/ bitstream/1979/897/2//doctoraat.pdf%20(rn.%20182%20%E2%80%93%20)%20318%20m aninnen (Stand: 1.4.2017) De Broe, Luc: The State Aid Review against Aggressive Tax Planning: ‘Always Look a Gift Horse in the Mouth’, EC Tax Review, Vol. 24, 6/2015, 290 De Neef, Geert: The Impact of EU State Aid Measures on National (Belgian) Tax Rulings, Tax Planning International European Tax Service, Vol. 18, 8/2016, 19 de Weerth, Jan: Neues zur „Selektivität“ im EU‐Beihilferecht, Der Betrieb, 6/2017, 275 De Wilde, Maarten: Tax competition in the European Union, is the CCCTB the solution?, Erasmus law review, May, 1/2014, 24 Dharmapala, Dhammika/Hines Jr., James R.: Which countries become tax havens?, Journal of Public Economics, Vol. 93, 9/2009, 1058 Diamond, Walter H./Diamond, Dorothy B.: Tax Havens of the World, New York, Bender, 2016 Dirix, Kim: Harmful Tax Competition: Six Belgian Tax Incentives under the Microscope, EC Tax Review, Vol. 22, 5/2013, 233 Ditz, Xaver: Aktuelles zur Betriebsstättendefinition
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download Article (PDF)
    5th International Conference on Accounting, Auditing, and Taxation (ICAAT 2016) TAX TRANSPARENCY – AN ANALYSIS OF THE LUXLEAKS FIRMS Johannes Manthey University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany Dirk Kiesewetter University of Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany Abstract This paper finds that the firms involved in the Luxembourg Leaks (‘LuxLeaks’) scandal are less transparent measured by the engagement in earnings management, analyst coverage, analyst accuracy, accounting standards and auditor choice. The analysis is based on the LuxLeaks sample and compared to a control group of large multinational companies. The panel dataset covers the years from 2001 to 2015 and comprises 19,109 observations. The LuxLeaks firms appear to engage in higher levels of discretionary earnings management measured by the variability of net income to cash flows from operations and the correlation between cash flows from operations and accruals. The LuxLeaks sample shows a lower analyst coverage, lower willingness to switch to IFRS and a lower Big4 auditor rate. The difference in difference design supports these findings regarding earnings management and the analyst coverage. The analysis concludes that the LuxLeaks firms are less transparent and infers a relation between corporate transparency and the engagement in tax avoidance. The paper aims to establish the relationship between tax avoidance and transparency in order to give guidance for future policy. The research highlights the complex causes and effects of tax management and supports a cost benefit analysis of future tax regulation. Keywords: Tax Avoidance, Transparency, Earnings Management JEL Classification: H20, H25, H26 1. Introduction The Luxembourg Leaks (’LuxLeaks’) scandal made public some of the tax strategies used by multinational companies.
    [Show full text]
  • European Parliament Resolution of 26 March 2019 on Financial Crimes, Tax Evasion and Tax Avoidance (2018/2121(INI)) (2021/C 108/02)
    C 108/8 EN Official Journal of the European Union 26.3.2021 Tuesday 26 March 2019 P8_TA(2019)0240 Report on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance European Parliament resolution of 26 March 2019 on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance (2018/2121(INI)) (2021/C 108/02) The European Parliament, — having regard to Articles 4 and 13 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU), — having regard to Articles 107, 108, 113, 115 and 116 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), — having regard to its decision of 1 March 2018 on setting up a special committee on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance (TAX3), and defining its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office (1), — having regard to its TAXE committee resolution of 25 November 2015 (2) and its TAX2 committee resolution of 6 July 2016 (3) on tax rulings and other measures similar in nature or effect, — having regard to its resolution of 16 December 2015 with recommendations to the Commission on bringing transparency, coordination and convergence to corporate tax policies in the Union (4), — having regard to the results of the Committee of Inquiry into money laundering, tax avoidance and tax evasion, which were submitted to the Council and the Commission on 13 December 2017 (5), — having regard to the Commission’s follow-up to each of the above-mentioned Parliament resolutions (6), — having regard to the numerous revelations by investigative journalists, such as the LuxLeaks, the Panama Papers, the Paradise Papers and, more recently, the cum-ex scandals, as well as the money laundering cases involving, in particular, banks in Denmark, Estonia, Germany, Latvia, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, — having regard to its resolution of 29 November 2018 on the cum-ex scandal: financial crime and loopholes in the current legal framework (7), (1) Decision of 1 March 2018 on setting up a special committee on financial crimes, tax evasion and tax avoidance (TAX3), and defining its responsibilities, numerical strength and term of office, Texts adopted, P8_TA(2018)0048.
    [Show full text]
  • Which Tax Havens Are the Most Central? Applying Social Network Analysis to Understand Firm Service Interactions
    Financial Geography Working Paper Series – ISSN 2515-0111 Which tax havens are the most Financial Working Geography Paper central? Applying social network analysis to understand firm service interactions Rory Crofts & Thomas Sigler School of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Queensland, [email protected], [email protected] November 2018 # 20 1 Financial Geography Working Paper Series – ISSN 2515-0111 Which tax havens are the most central? Applying social network analysis to understand firm service interactions Abstract Tax havens play an increasingly important role in the global financial system. Recent scholarship has focused on a number of interrelated aspects of tax havens, including the drivers of their formation, firm and industry based perspectives on taxation, corporate structures, and their geographical position within the global economy. This paper adopts a network-based approach to tax havens, focusing on the ‘interlocking’ services provided by local firms. It focuses specifically on how law firms in 15 global tax havens are networked through common tax-related legal services. The analysis suggests that there is a ‘rich club’ of jurisdictions whose tax-related services are broad and central to firm activity, namely in the European core of the Netherlands, Ireland and Luxembourg. Relating to the rich core are a number of cliques, including the ‘Bermuda Triangle’ of Bermuda, Cayman Island, and British Virgin Islands; the crown dependencies of Isle of Man, Jersey, and Guernsey; and Asian hubs of Singapore, Mauritius and Hong Kong. Ship registry hubs such as Panama, Liberia, and Cyprus were somewhat more peripheral to the network as specialization reduces the number of common services.
    [Show full text]
  • The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy
    The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy Alex Cobham, Petr Janský, and Markus Meinzer Abstract Both academic research and public policy debate around tax havens and offshore finance typically suffer from a lack of definitional consistency. Unsurprisingly then, there is little agreement about which jurisdictions ought to be considered as tax havens—or which policy measures would result in their not being so considered. In this article we explore and make operational an alternative concept, that of a secrecy jurisdiction and present the findings of the resulting Financial Secrecy Index (FSI). The FSI ranks countries and jurisdictions according to their contribution to opacity in global financial flows, revealing a quite different geography of financial secrecy from the image of small island tax havens that may still dominate popular perceptions and some of the literature on offshore finance. Some major (secrecy-supplying) economies now come into focus. Instead of a binary division between tax havens and others, the results show a secrecy spectrum, on which all jurisdictions can be situated, and that adjustment lfor the scale of business is necessary in order to compare impact propensity. This approach has the potential to support more precise and granular research findings and policy recommendations. JEL Codes: F36, F65 Working Paper 404 www.cgdev.org May 2015 The Financial Secrecy Index: Shedding New Light on the Geography of Secrecy Alex Cobham Tax Justice Network Petr Janský Institute of Economic Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University in Prague Markus Meinzer Tax Justice Network A version of this paper is published in Economic Geography (July 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Financial Transaction Tax: a Discussion Paper on Fiscal and Economic
    Financial transaction tax: A discussion paper on fiscal and economic implications June 2013 The political debate surrounding the financial transaction tax has become fixated on the simplistic common denominator: collecting money, penalising banks, assuaging the markets and establishing justice. These winsome and appealing demands currently enjoy broad support in Germany. With public approval at 82% according to the European Commission's Eurobarometer survey, positive sentiment is highest in Germany ahead of both France and Greece, where approval is at 75%. And so it appears that the political common denominator has been found! However, from a macroeconomic perspective the crux is whether it would ultimately be possible to satisfy regulatory and fiscal demands by introducing the financial transaction tax. Doubts are not unwarranted in this regard. Is the financial transaction tax capable of fulfilling the necessary functions of financing, distribution and steering? Although the specific embodiment of the financial transaction tax remains nebulous for the time being, if one takes a long-term, holistic view, the direct and indirect costs of introducing such a tax appear to outweigh the benefits. The following observations summarise the manifest flaws in the concept, as well as the financial and real economic ramifications of those flaws, which have not been given sufficient consideration. In June 2012, the German federal government and the opposition published a green paper, in which they promised "to assess the impact the tax would have on pension assets, retail investors and the real economy, and to avoid negative consequences".1 It is becoming clear that this promise is untenable. In fact, a financial transaction tax is incapable of sensibly and expediently fulfilling any of the three necessary functions of a tax: financing, distribution and steering.
    [Show full text]
  • Analysis Ofireland's Corporation Tax Roadmap
    Analysis of Ireland’s Corporation Tax Roadmap Introduction In 2017 the Department of Finance undertook an independent review of Ireland’s corporation tax code, authored by Mr Seamus Coffey. This was designed to complement the work being done at the OECD and EU level to establish new international tax standards. In facilitating this review, the Department of Finance conducted a public consultation seeking the views of the public and interested parties on the matters identified by the terms of reference of the review. The consultation ran from 21 February to 4 April 2017. Oxfam Ireland prepared a submission in relation to this. Mr Coffey delivered his review to the Minister for Finance and for Public Expenditure and Reform, Paschal Donohoe T.D., on 30 June 2017. The Review made 18 recommendations under the terms of reference. In the review, Mr Coffey noted that a number of the recommendations are very technical and complex and will require further consultation. In late 2017/early 2018 the Minister for Finance and Public Expenditure & Reform launched a public consultation on certain recommendations of the Coffey Review and on the implementation of the EU Anti-Tax Avoidance Directives (ATADs) that Ireland had signed up to (the Coffey/ATAD consultation). This consultation process asked for feedback on nine specific questions related to the above and also provided the opportunity to provide input on areas outside these 9 questions. Oxfam Ireland completed a second detailed submission in relation to this second consultation both on the 9 questions and on areas outside the nine questions. Ireland’s Corporation Tax Roadmap (hereafter referred to as ‘the Report’) is a result of this consultation process.
    [Show full text]
  • A Vision for the Development of the Luxembourg Financial Centre Contents
    LUXFIN A VISION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE LUXEMBOURG FINANCIAL CENTRE CONTENTS Foreword by Pierre Gramegna, Minister of Finance 2 Executive Summary 4 01 Luxembourg’s development as a leading financial centre 6 02 The Luxembourg and European financial services industries 16 03 Core growth ambitions for the Luxembourg financial centre 04 26 Luxembourg’s growth enablers 34 05 Growth plans and potential in each sector of the financial centre 41 2 FOREWORD Foreword Over the course of the last three decades, Luxembourg has been able to build a financial industry which is uniquely specialized in cross-border activities. This is a common feature throughout the entire range of services provided in Luxembourg, whether Pierre Gramegna, in investment funds, wealth management, capital market Minister of Finance operations or advisory services. Enabling investors to connect November 2015 with different markets has become our trade. The success of the Luxembourg financial industry has not only benefited Luxembourg but Europe more generally. Luxembourg’s leading position in the investment fund area is foremost a success story of a European investment product, the UCITS. The assets raised in the fund industry through Luxembourg are assets that benefit companies all over Europe as they are being reinvested in various countries and help finance economic activity. Luxembourg’s expertise plays the role of enabler of this investment. Luxembourg has grown economically with the completion of the Single Market of the European Union where goods, people, services and capital can move freely. This Single Market has spurred trade and thus ensured growth. It is imperative not only to preserve it but also to continue to work for its completion.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Information in an Age of Corporate Power
    14 09/2016 N°14 Democratic Information in an Age of Corporate Power Democratic Information in an Age of Corporate Power The Passerelle Collection The Passerelle Collection, realised in the framework of the Coredem initiative (Communauté des sites de ressources documentaires pour une démocratie mondiale– Community of Sites of Documentary Resources for a Global Democracy), aims at presenting current topics through analyses, propos- als and experiences based both on field work and research. Each issue is an attempt to weave together various contribu- tions on a specific issue by civil society organisations, media, trade unions, social movements, citizens, academics, etc. The publication of new issues of Passerelle is often associated to public conferences, «Coredem’s Wednesdays» which pursue a similar objective: creating space for dialogue, sharing and build- ing common ground between the promoters of social change. All issues are available online at: www.coredem.info Coredem, a Collective Initiative Coredem (Community of Sites of Documentary Resources for a Global Democracy) is a space for exchanging knowl- edge and practices by and for actors of social change. More than 30 activist organisations and networks share informa- tion and analysis online by pooling it thanks to the search engine Scrutari. Coredem is open to any organisation, net- work, social movement or media which consider that the experiences, proposals and analysis they set forth are building blocks for fairer, more sustainable and more responsible societies. Ritimo, the Publisher The organisation Ritimo is in charge of Coredem and of publishing the Passerelle Collection. Ritimo is a network for information and documentation on international solidarity and sustainable development.
    [Show full text]
  • Corporate Tax Secrecy and the State: the Apple Case in Ireland
    Corporate tax secrecy and the state: the Apple case in Ireland Debt and Development Coalition Ireland Policy Paper – October 2015 Corporate tax secrecy and the State: the case of Apple in Ireland ‘...any reduction of tax for Apple results in a loss of tax revenue that otherwise would have been available to Ireland’ EU Commission, September 2014, p. 141 In 2014, the European Commission (EC) announced that it was to conduct investigations into whether or not state aid had been granted through secretive tax dealings, in contravention of EU rules, to Apple in Ireland, Starbucks in the Netherlands, Fiat in Luxembourg, and Amazon in Luxembourg. Results are still pending. But the picture of widespread lose more revenue due to tax-dodging than they receive as corporate tax avoidance which is emerging from these development aid, as MNCs shop around for loopholes to investigations depicts a broken global tax system being used avoid tax.3 by highly-profitable multinational corporations (MNCs) to minimise the taxes they pay at the cost of public revenues In this context, the current situation in which Ireland has in the countries where they operate. In the case of Ireland’s secretive tax arrangements with MNCs, beyond the scrutiny tax arrangements with Apple, the EC’s preliminary findings of the Oireachtas or the public because of a blanket have already shown evidence of secretive tax deals between view of taxpayer confidentiality taken by the Revenue Revenue and Irish subsidiaries of Apple Inc, resulting in the Commissioners, is an affront to transparency, democratic loss of significant revenues for the public purse.
    [Show full text]
  • Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” Leandra Lederman Indiana University Maurer School of Law
    FALL 2020 NEW YORK UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF LAW “Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” Leandra Lederman Indiana University Maurer School of Law September 29, 2020 Via Zoom Time: 2:00 – 3:50 p.m. EST Week 6 SCHEDULE FOR FALL 2020 NYU TAX POLICY COLLOQUIUM (All sessions meet online on Tuesdays, from 2:00 to 3:50 pm EST) 1. Tuesday, August 25 – Steven Dean, NYU Law School. “A Constitutional Moment in Cross-Border Taxation.” 2. Tuesday, September 1 – Clinton Wallace, University of South Carolina School of Law. “Democratic Justice in Tax Policymaking.” 3. Tuesday, September 8 – Natasha Sarin, University of Pennsylvania Law School. “Understanding the Revenue Potential of Tax Compliance Investments.” 4. Tuesday, September 15 – Adam Kern, Princeton Politics Department and NYU Law School. “Illusions of Justice in International Taxation.” 5. Tuesday, September 22 – Henrik Kleven, Princeton Economics Department. “The EITC and the Extensive Margin: A Reappraisal.” 6. Tuesday, September 29 – Leandra Lederman, Indiana University Maurer School of Law. “Of Risks and Remedies: Best Practices in Tax Rulings Transparency.” 7. Tuesday, October 6 – Daniel Shaviro, NYU Law School. “What Are Minimum Taxes, and Why Might One Favor or Disfavor Them?” 8. Tuesday, October 13 – Steve Rosenthal, Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center. “Tax Implications of the Shifting Ownership of U.S. Stock.” 9. Tuesday, October 20 – Michelle Layser, University of Illinois College of Law. “How Place-Based Tax Incentives Can Reduce Economic Inequality.” 10. Tuesday, October 27 – Gabriel Zucman, University of California, Berkeley. “The Rise of Income and Wealth Inequality in America: Evidence from Distributional Macroeconomic Accounts.” 11.
    [Show full text]
  • Slovenia Ecotax Rates Green Budget Germany
    SLOVENIA ECOTAX RATES GREEN BUDGET GERMANY Environmental tax rates in Slovenia: Tax rate natio- Tax rate - Eu- Name Type General Tax-base Specific Tax-base nal currency ro Slovenia CO2 tax Tax Coal Black coal 7.50 SIT per kg 0.03 € per kg CO2 tax Tax Coal Brown coal 3.60 SIT per kg 0.02 € per kg CO2 tax Tax Coke Coke 8.10 SIT per kg 0.03 € per kg 9.10 SIT per 0.04 € per CO2 tax Tax Heavy fuel oil Heavy fuel oil litre litre 7.80 SIT per 0.03 € per CO2 tax Tax Light fuel oil Light fuel oil litre litre CO2 tax Tax Coal Lignite 3.00 SIT per kg 0.01 € per kg 5.70 SIT per CO2 tax Tax Natural gas Natural gas m3 0.02 € per m3 Waste management 10.00 SIT per 0.04 € per kg End-of-life vehicles - individual pro- kg of a new of a new ve- tax Tax ducts New vehicles vehicle hicle Other fuels for sta- 5.70 SIT per 0.02 € per Fuel excise tax Tax tionary purposes Gas oil for heating litre litre Gas oil for industrial Other fuels for sta- and commercial 35.40 SIT per 0.15 € per Fuel excise tax Tax tionary purposes purposes litre litre Gas oil, used as pro- 70.80 SIT per 0.30 € per Fuel excise tax Tax Diesel pellant litre litre Fuel excise tax Tax Heavy fuel oil Heavy fuel oil 3.00 SIT per kg 0.01 € per kg Other fuels for sta- 5.00 SIT per 0.02 € per Fuel excise tax Tax tionary purposes Kerosene for heating litre litre Kerosene for indus- Other fuels for sta- trial and commercial 31.30 SIT per 0.13 € per Fuel excise tax Tax tionary purposes purposes litre litre Kerosene, used as 62.60 SIT per 0.27 € per Fuel excise tax Tax Light fuel oil propellant litre
    [Show full text]
  • Finland Ecotax Revenues Green Budget Germany (Gbg)
    FINLAND ECOTAX REVENUES GREEN BUDGET GERMANY (GBG) Million Nat. Name Type Year Million $US Curr. Finland Charge on agricultural inputs Fee/Charge 1998 1.12 1 Charge on fishing licence Fee/Charge 1994 9.4 8.3 Charge on hunting licence Fee/Charge 1998 9.4 8.4 Charge on municipal waste collection / treatment Fee/Charge 1998 224.7 202 Charge on nuclear waste Fee/Charge 1998 1029.9 925.9 Chemicals registration fee Fee/Charge 2002 0.2 0.21 Excise on fuels Tax 1994 1878.8 1650.8 Excise on fuels Tax 1995 2662.7 1955.7 Excise on fuels Tax 1996 2767.5 2138.3 Excise on fuels Tax 1997 2679 2337.1001 Excise on fuels Tax 1998 2863.5 2574.3 Excise on fuels Tax 1999 2846.7 2651.5 Excise on fuels Tax 2000 2392.6001 2596 Excise on fuels Tax 2001 2374.2 2652 Excise on fuels Tax 2002 2597.5 2756 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1994 393.2 345.5 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1995 614.8 451.8 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1996 786 607.3 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1997 811.6 708.1 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1998 983.9 884.5 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 1999 1104.2 1028.5 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 2000 975.8 1059 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 2001 825.4 922 Excise on motor cars (Car tax) Tax 2002 964.2 1023 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1994 161.6 142 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1995 153 112.3 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1996 202.2 156.2 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1997 188.7 164.7 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1998 194.9 175.3 Motor vehicle tax (Diesel tax) Tax 1999 198.8 185.2 Motor
    [Show full text]