IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/clh/resear/v8y2015i4.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The 2014 Global Tax Competitiveness Report: A Proposed Business Tax Reform Agenda

Author

Listed:
  • Duanjie Chen

    (The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary)

  • Jack Mintz

    (The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary)

Abstract

Canada is losing its edge in the competition for global capital. After a decade of remarkable progress in reducing the tax burden on business investment — moving from one of the least tax-competitive jurisdictions among its industrialized peers in 2000, to ranking in the middle of the pack by 2011 — Canada has slipped by largely standing still. As other countries in our peer group have continued to reform their business-tax regimes, they have surpassed Canada, which has slid from having the 19th-highest tax burden on investments by medium-sized and large corporations in 2012, to the 14th-highest among 34 OECD countries in 2014. Even more worrying is that Canada’s political currents are running the wrong way, with a few provinces having increased taxes on capital in recent years and a number of politicians today floating the possibility of even higher business taxes to help address budgetary strains. But the right approach to raising tax revenue and improving the economy is quite the opposite: lowering rates and broadening the tax base by making Canadian jurisdictions even more attractive to corporate investment. An important step towards that would be for federal and provincial governments to reduce targeted tax assistance and to level the tax field for all industries and sizes of businesses, ending the preferential treatment of favoured industries and small enterprises. In addition, those provinces that have yet to harmonize their sales tax with the federal GST should do so, or at least consider adopting a quasi-refund system that would relieve the provincial sales tax on capital inputs. Alberta, with no sales tax, could become more competitive by adopting an HST and using the proceeds to reduce personal and corporate taxes. Finally, Canada would do much better to mandate a uniform corporate tax rate, with an 11 per cent federal rate and a nine per cent average provincial rate. This would encourage capital investment and attract corporate profits to Canada, without a significant revenue cost to either the federal or provincial governments.

Suggested Citation

  • Duanjie Chen & Jack Mintz, 2015. "The 2014 Global Tax Competitiveness Report: A Proposed Business Tax Reform Agenda," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 8(4), February.
  • Handle: RePEc:clh:resear:v:8:y:2015:i:4
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.policyschool.ca/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/tax-competitiveness-chen-mintz.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Don Drummond & Evan Capeluck & Matthew Calver, 2015. "The Key Challenge for Canadian Public Policy: Generating Inclusive and Sustainable Economic Growth," CSLS Research Reports 2015-11, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.
    2. Maya Eden, 2019. "International Liquidity Rents," Review of Economic Dynamics, Elsevier for the Society for Economic Dynamics, vol. 31, pages 147-159, January.
    3. Kenneth J. McKenzie & Ergete Ferede, 2017. "Who Pays the Corporate Tax?: Insights from the Literature and Evidence for Canadian Provinces," SPP Research Papers, The School of Public Policy, University of Calgary, vol. 10(6), April.
    4. Djankov, Simeon, 2017. "Corporate tax cuts: examining the record in advanced economies," LSE Research Online Documents on Economics 118975, London School of Economics and Political Science, LSE Library.
    5. Jasmin Thomas, 2016. "Explaining Industry Differences in IT Investment Per Worker Between Canada and the United States, 2002-2013," CSLS Research Reports 2016-01, Centre for the Study of Living Standards.

    More about this item

    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:clh:resear:v:8:y:2015:i:4. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: Bev Dahlby (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/spcalca.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.