IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpb/docmnt/141.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Will corporate tax consolidation improve efficiency in the EU?

Author

Listed:
  • Albert van der Horst
  • Leon Bettendorf

    (CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis)

  • Hugo Rojas-Romagosa

Abstract

Consolidation of the tax base in the European Union is expected to curve compliance costs and reduce profit shifting. A number of proposals for consolidation from the European Commission are simulated with the applied general equilibrium model CORTAX. We show that the benefits from consolidation are offset by two weaknesses in the proposals for a common consolidated tax base. Formula apportionment, which is needed to allocate the consolidated taxable profits across jurisdictions, creates new tax planning possibilities for MNEs and allows them to benefit from existing tax rate differentials in the European Union. In addition, it triggers tax competition as member states may attract foreign investment by reducing their tax rates. The second distortion is an unlevel playing field, which is introduced if only part of the firms participate in the consolidation. The gains from consolidation can be fully grasped if it is obliged for all firms and if it is accompanied by a harmonisation of the tax rate.

Suggested Citation

  • Albert van der Horst & Leon Bettendorf & Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, 2007. "Will corporate tax consolidation improve efficiency in the EU?," CPB Document 141, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    • Handle: RePEc:cpb:docmnt:141
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cpb.nl/sites/default/files/publicaties/download/will-corporate-tax-consolidation-improve-efficiency-eu.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    2. Edmiston, Kelly D., 2002. "Strategic Apportionment of the State Corporate Income Tax: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 55(N. 2), pages 239-262, June.
    3. Leon Bettendorf & Joeri Gorter & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Who benefits from tax competition in the European Union?," CPB Document 125.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    4. Joann Weiner, 2002. "Formula Apportionment in the European Union: A Dream Come True or the EU’s Worst Nightmare?," CESifo Working Paper Series 667, CESifo.
    5. Gaëtan Nicodème, 2006. "Corporate tax competition and coordination in the European Union: What do we know? Where do we stand?," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 250, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    6. Rüdiger Pethig & Andreas Wagener, 2007. "Profit tax competition and formula apportionment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(6), pages 631-655, December.
    7. Leon Bettendorf & Joeri Gorter & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Who benefits from tax competition in the European Union?," CPB Document 125, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Walter Hellerstein & Charles E. McLure, Jr., 2004. "The European Commission's Report on Company Income Taxation: What the EU Can Learn from the Experience of the US States," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(2), pages 199-220, March.
    9. Goolsbee, Austan & Maydew, Edward L., 2000. "Coveting thy neighbor's manufacturing: the dilemma of state income apportionment," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 75(1), pages 125-143, January.
    10. Michael Devereux, 2004. "Debating Proposed Reforms of the Taxation of Corporate Income in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 71-89, January.
    11. Nicodeme, Gaetan, 2006. "Corporate Tax Competition and Coordination in the European Union: What do we know? Where do we stand?," MPRA Paper 107, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    12. European Commission, 2001. "Company Taxation in the Internal Market," Taxation Studies 0005, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    13. Klassen, Kenneth J. & Shackelford, Douglas A., 1998. "State and provincial corporate tax planning: income shifting and sales apportionment factor management," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 25(3), pages 385-406, June.
    14. Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2007. "Company tax reform with a water's edge," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 91(7-8), pages 1533-1554, August.
    15. Martin Finkenzeller & Christoph Spengel, 2004. "Measuring the Effective Levels of Company Taxation in the New Member States: A Quantitative Analysis," Taxation Papers 7, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Dec 2004.
    16. Mintz, Jack & Smart, Michael, 2004. "Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(6), pages 1149-1168, June.
    17. Kind, Hans Jarle & Midelfart, Karen Helene & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2005. "Corporate tax systems, multinational enterprises, and economic integration," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 65(2), pages 507-521, March.
    18. Joann Martens-Weiner, 2006. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," Springer Books, Springer, number 978-0-387-29487-2, June.
    19. Michael P. Devereux & Rachel Griffith & Alexander Klemm, 2002. "Corporate income tax reforms and international tax competition [‘Do domestic firms benefit from direct foreign investment? Evidence from Venezuela’]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 17(35), pages 449-495.
    20. Gordon, Roger H & Wilson, John Douglas, 1986. "An Examination of Multijurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation under Formula Apportionment," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 54(6), pages 1357-1373, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    2. Jorge Núñez Ferrer & Jacques Le Cacheux & Giacomo Benedetto & Mathieu Saunier & Fabien Candau & Claude Emonnot & Florence Lachet-Touya & Jorgen Mortensen & Aymeric Potteau & Igor Taranic, 2016. "Study on the potential and limitations of reforming the financing of the EU budget
      [Perspectives et limites pour réformer le financement du budget de l’UE]      ," Working Papers hal-01848029, HAL.
    3. Veronika Solilová & Danuše Nerudová, 2018. "Výnosový potenciál společného konsolidovaného korporátního základu daně v Evropské unii [Revenue Potential of the CCCTB in the European Union]," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2018(1), pages 78-98.
    4. Barrett, Alan & Barry, Frank & Van der Horst, Albert & Kearney, Ide & Lane, Philip R. & Nolan, Brian & O'Brien, Martin & Walsh, John R., 2007. "Budget Perspectives 2008," Research Series, Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), number BMI199 edited by Callan, Tim.
    5. Jorge Núñez Ferrer & Jacques Le Cacheux & Giacomo Benedetto & Mathieu Saunier & Fabien Candau & Claude Emonnot & Florence Lachet-Touya & Jorgen Mortensen & Aymeric Potteau & Igor Taranic, 2016. "Study on the potential and limitations of reforming the financing of the EU budget [Perspectives et limites pour réformer le financement du budget de l’UE]," Working Papers hal-01848029, HAL.
    6. Leon Bettendorf & Albert van der Horst & Ruud A. De Mooij, 2009. "Corporate Tax Policy and Unemployment in Europe: An Applied General Equilibrium Analysis," The World Economy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 32(9), pages 1319-1347, September.
    7. Daniela PÎRVU, 2013. "Twhy Ccctb Disadvantages Less Developed Countries Of The European Union," SEA - Practical Application of Science, Romanian Foundation for Business Intelligence, Editorial Department, issue 1, pages 317-332, June.
    8. Clemens Fuest, 2008. "The European Commission's proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 720-739, winter.
    9. Leon Bettendorf & Albert Van Der Horst & Ruud A. De Mooij & Hendrik Vrijburg, 2010. "Corporate Tax Consolidation and Enhanced Cooperation in the European Union," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 453-479, December.
    10. Danuše Nerudová & Veronika Solilová, 2015. "Kvantifikace dopadů zavedení společného konsolidovaného základu daně v Evropské unii do celkového základu daně korporací vykazovaného v České republice [Quantification of the Impact on the Total Co," Politická ekonomie, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(4), pages 456-473.
    11. Ruud Mooij & Michael Devereux, 2011. "An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT reforms in the EU," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 18(1), pages 93-120, February.
    12. Ruud de Mooij & Michael P. Devereux, 2008. "Alternative Systems of Business Tax in Europe: An applied analysis of ACE and CBIT Reforms," Taxation Studies 0023, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Dirk Kiesewetter & Tobias Steigenberger & Matthias Stier, 2018. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1029-1060, December.
    3. Ana Agundez-Garcia, 2006. "The Delineation and Apportionment of an EU Consolidated Tax Base for Multi-jurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation: a Review of Issues and Options," Taxation Papers 9, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Oct 2006.
    4. Marcel Gerard, 2006. "Reforming the taxation of Multijurisdictional Enterprises in Europe, "Coopetition" in a Bottom-up Federation," Working Papers 2006-10, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    5. Martini, Jan-Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2014. "Management incentives under formula apportionment: Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 168, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    6. Leon Bettendorf & Albert Van Der Horst & Ruud A. De Mooij & Hendrik Vrijburg, 2010. "Corporate Tax Consolidation and Enhanced Cooperation in the European Union," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 31(4), pages 453-479, December.
    7. Buettner, Thiess & Riedel, Nadine & Runkel, Marco, 2011. "Strategic Consolidation Under Formula Apportionment," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 64(2), pages 225-254, June.
    8. Marcel Gérard, 2005. "Multijurisdictional Firms and Governments’ Strategies under Alternative Tax Designs," CESifo Working Paper Series 1527, CESifo.
    9. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2014. "Management Incentives under Formula Apportionment - Tax-Induced Distortions of Effort and Compensation in a Principal-Agent Setting -," CESifo Working Paper Series 4908, CESifo.
    10. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    11. Sommer, Christoph, 2008. "Theorie der Besteuerung nach Formula Apportionment − Untersuchung auftretender ökonomischer Effekte anhand eines Allgemeinen Gleichgewichtsmodells," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 46, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    12. Hines Jr., James R., 2010. "Income misattribution under formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 108-120, January.
    13. Marcel Gérard, 2006. "Reforming the Taxation of Multijurisdictional Enterprises in Europe, a Tentative Appraisal," CESifo Working Paper Series 1795, CESifo.
    14. Wolfgang Eggert & Andreas Haufler, 2006. "Company-Tax Coordination cum Tax-Rate Competition in the European Union," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 62(4), pages 579-601, December.
    15. Becker, Johannes & Runkel, Marco, 2013. "Corporate tax regime and international allocation of ownership," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 43(1), pages 8-15.
    16. Simon Loretz & Margit Schratzenstaller, 2019. "Der EU-Vorschlag zur Harmonisierung der Körperschaftsteuer. Auswirkungen für Österreich," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), pages 61-71, January.
    17. Eichner, Thomas & Runkel, Marco, 2009. "Corporate income taxation of multinationals and unemployment," Regional Science and Urban Economics, Elsevier, vol. 39(5), pages 610-620, September.
    18. Martini, Jan Thomas & Niemann, Rainer & Simons, Dirk, 2016. "Tax-induced distortions of effort and compensation in a principal-agent setting," Journal of International Accounting, Auditing and Taxation, Elsevier, vol. 27(C), pages 26-39.
    19. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Julia Wagner, 2020. "How accurately does the CCCTB apportionment formula allocate profits? An evaluation of the European Commission proposal," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 495-536, May.
    20. N. N., 2019. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 1/2019," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), January.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • H87 - Public Economics - - Miscellaneous Issues - - - International Fiscal Issues; International Public Goods
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • F21 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - International Investment; Long-Term Capital Movements

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:cpb:docmnt:141. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cpbgvnl.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.