IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/jbecon/v86y2016i5d10.1007_s11573-015-0780-6.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?

Author

Listed:
  • Regina Ortmann

    () (Vienna University of Economics and Business)

  • Caren Sureth-Sloane

    () (Vienna University of Economics and Business
    University of Paderborn)

Abstract

Abstract In March 2011, the European Commission submitted a proposal for a Council Directive on an optional common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB). If this proposed CCCTB system comes into force, taxes calculated under the currently existing system of separate accounting might be replaced by a system of group consolidation and formulary apportionment. Then, multinational groups (MNGs) would face the decision as to whether to opt for the CCCTB system. Prior research focuses mainly on the differences in economic behaviour under both systems in general. By contrast, we study the conditions under which one or the other tax system is preferable from the perspective of an MNG, with a particular focus on loss-offsets. We identify four effects that determine the decision of an MNG: the tax-utilization of losses, the allocation of the tax base, the dividend and intragroup interest taxation. We find mixed results, e.g., that the CCCTB system proves advantageous for increasing loss/profit streams (e.g. from start-ups or R&D projects) of the individual group entities, whereas the system of separate accounting is beneficial for decreasing profit/loss streams (e.g. caused by a decrease in return from a mature product). The results of our analysis are helpful for MNGs facing the decision as to whether to opt for the CCCTB system and can also support legislators and politicians in the EU but also in other regions in their tax reform discussions.

Suggested Citation

  • Regina Ortmann & Caren Sureth-Sloane, 2016. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(5), pages 441-475, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:jbecon:v:86:y:2016:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-015-0780-6
    DOI: 10.1007/s11573-015-0780-6
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11573-015-0780-6
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Nadja Dwenger, 2008. "Tax Loss Offset Restrictions - Last Resort for the Treasury?: An Empirical Evaluation of Tax Loss Offset Restrictions Based on Micro Data," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 764, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    2. Cooper, Michael G. & Knittel, Matthew J, 2010. "The Implications of Tax Asymmetry for U.S. Corporations," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 63(1), pages 33-61, March.
    3. S¯ren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos-M¯ller & Guttorm Schjelderup, 2003. "Formula Apportionment and Transfer Pricing under Oligopolistic Competition," Journal of Public Economic Theory, Association for Public Economic Theory, vol. 5(2), pages 419-437, April.
    4. Leon Bettendorf & Michael P. Devereux & Albert van der Horst & Simon Loretz & Ruud A. de Mooij, 2010. "Corporate tax harmonization in the EU," Economic Policy, CEPR;CES;MSH, vol. 25, pages 537-590, July.
    5. 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.
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Alan J. Auerbach, 1986. "The Dynamic Effects of Tax Law Asymmetries," Review of Economic Studies, Oxford University Press, vol. 53(2), pages 205-225.
    9. Clemens Fuest & Thomas Hemmelgarn & Fred Ramb, 2007. "How would the introduction of an EU-wide formula apportionment affect the distribution and size of the corporate tax base? An analysis based on German multinationals," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(5), pages 605-626, October.
    10. Daniel Dreßler & Michael Overesch, 2013. "Investment impact of tax loss treatment—empirical insights from a panel of multinationals," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 20(3), pages 513-543, June.
    11. 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.
    12. Andreas Oestreicher & Reinald Koch, 2011. "The Revenue Consequences of Using a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base to Determine Taxable Income in the EU Member States," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 67(1), pages 64-102, March.
    13. Marcel Gérard & Savina Princen, 2012. "Investment and Financing Strategy of a Multinational Enterprise under Alternative Tax Designs," CESifo Working Paper Series 3838, CESifo Group Munich.
    14. European Commission, 2001. "Annex to Company Taxation in the Internal Market," Taxation Studies 0006, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    15. Rebekka Kager & Deborah Schanz & Rainer Niemann, 2011. "Estimation of Tax Values Based on IFRS Information: An Analysis of German DAX30 and Austrian ATX Listed Companies," Accounting in Europe, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 8(1), pages 89-123, June.
    16. Dahle, Claudia & Bäumer, Michaela, 2009. "Cross-border group-taxation and loss-offset in the EU: An analysis for CCCTB (Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base) and ETAS (European Tax Allocation System)," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 66, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    17. European Commission, 2001. "Company Taxation in the Internal Market," Taxation Studies 0005, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    18. Kiesewetter, Dirk & Steigenberger, Tobias & Stier, Matthias, 2014. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 175, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    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. Ortmann, Regina & Pummerer, Erich, 2015. "Formula apportionment or separate accounting? Tax-induced distortions of multinationals' locational investment decisions," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 198, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Loss-offset; CCCTB; Separate accounting; Investment decisions;

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H21 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Efficiency; Optimal Taxation

    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:spr:jbecon:v:86:y:2016:i:5:d:10.1007_s11573-015-0780-6. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Sonal Shukla) or (Rebekah McClure). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.