IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/zbw/zewdip/14112.html

Gemeinsame Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage in der EU: Konkretisierung der Gewinnermittlungsprinzipien und Weiterentwicklungen

Author

Listed:
  • Evers, Maria Theresia
  • Finke, Katharina
  • Köstler, Melanie
  • Meier, Ina
  • Scheffler, Wolfram
  • Spengel, Christoph

Abstract

Am 16. März 2011 hat die Europäische Kommission einen Richtlinienentwurf (RLE) für eine "Gemeinsame Konsolidierte Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage (GKKB)" vorgelegt. Die darin enthaltenen Normen zur harmonisierten Ermittlung der steuerlichen Bemessungsgrundlage weisen jedoch aufgrund der häufigen Verwendung unbestimmter Rechtsbegriffe noch zahlreiche Regelungslücken und offene Auslegungsfragen auf, die sich nicht problemlos durch den Verweis auf nationales Zivilrecht beheben lassen. Vor diesem Hintergrund besteht die zentrale Zielsetzung des Beitrags darin, mit einer modifizierten Einnahmeüberschussrechnung, welche die Periodisierung im Rahmen der steuerlichen Gewinnermittlung stärker als bisher an Zahlungsvorgänge knüpft, einen Vorschlag für eine Gemeinsame Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage (GKB) innerhalb der EU zu konkretisieren. Der Übergang hin zu einer stärker zahlungsorientierten Gewinnermittlung würde mehr Klarheit und Vereinheitlichung mit sich bringen. Eine quantitative Analyse der effektiven Steuerbelastung von Kapitalgesellschaften in allen 28 EU-Mitgliedstaaten zeigt zudem, dass die Gewinnermittlung sowohl nach GKKB-RLE als auch bei Zugrundelegung einzelner Regelungen einer modifizierten Einnahmeüberschussrechnung nur geringe materielle Belastungskonsequenzen nach sich zieht, sodass von einer hohen politökonomischen Umsetzbarkeit des Reformvorschlags auszugehen ist. Darüber hinaus verspricht eine GKB weitere, wichtige Vorteile bei der Besteuerung grenzüberschreitender Sachverhalte, etwa bei der grenzüberschreitenden Verlustverrechnung.

Suggested Citation

  • Evers, Maria Theresia & Finke, Katharina & Köstler, Melanie & Meier, Ina & Scheffler, Wolfram & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Gemeinsame Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage in der EU: Konkretisierung der Gewinnermittlungsprinzipien und Weiterentwicklungen," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-112, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:zewdip:14112
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/105812/1/813151333.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Haufler, Andreas & Schjelderup, Guttorm, 2000. "Corporate Tax Systems and Cross Country Profit Shifting," Oxford Economic Papers, Oxford University Press, vol. 52(2), pages 306-325, April.
    2. McLure, Charles E. Jr. & Zodrow, George R., 1998. "The Economic Case For Foreign Tax Credits for Cash Flow Taxes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association, vol. 51(n. 1), pages 1-22, March.
    3. Leon Bettendorf & Michael P. Devereux & Albert Van Der Horst & Simon Loretz & Ruud A. de Mooij, 2010. "Corporate tax harmonization in the EU [Taxing corporate income]," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 25(63), pages 537-590.
    4. Jacobs, Otto H. & Schreiber, Ulrich & Spengel, Christoph & Gutekunst, Gerd & Lammersen, Lothar, 2003. "Stellungnahme zum Steuervergünstigungsabbaugesetz und weiteren steuerlichen Maßnahmen," ZEW Dokumentationen 03-01, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Johannes Becker & Clemens Fuest & Christoph Spengel, 2006. "Konzernsteuerquote und Investitionsverhalten," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 58(6), pages 730-742, September.
    6. Oestreicher, Andreas & Spengel, Christoph, 2007. "Tax Harmonisation in Europe: The Determination of Corporate Taxable Income in the EU Member States," ZEW Discussion Papers 07-035, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    7. 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.
    8. Michael P. Devereux & Rachel Griffith, 1998. "The Taxation of Discrete Investment Choices," Keele Department of Economics Discussion Papers (1995-2001) 98/08, Department of Economics, Keele University.
    9. Clemens Fuest & Thomas Hemmegarn & 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 627-629, October.
    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. Homburg, Stefan & Bolik, Andreas, 2005. "Auswirkungen des Kirchhofschen EStGB insbesondere auf die Unternehmensbesteuerung," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 60(43), pages 2330-2335.
    12. McLure, Charles E. Jr. & Zodrow, George R., 1998. "The Economic Case for Foreign Tax Credits for Cash Flow Taxes," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 51(1), pages 1-22, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Ortmann, Regina & Sureth, Caren, 2014. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 165, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    2. 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.
    3. Simon Loretz & Margit Schratzenstaller-Altzinger, 2019. "Der EU-Vorschlag zur Harmonisierung der Körperschaftsteuer. Auswirkungen für Österreich," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), pages 61-71, January.
    4. Wifo, 2019. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 1/2019," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), January.
    5. Danuse NERUDOVA & Katerina KRCHNIVA, 2016. "Tax sharing under the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base: Measurement of the profit generating factors in the agriculture sector," Agricultural Economics, Czech Academy of Agricultural Sciences, vol. 62(8), pages 363-377.
    6. 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.
    7. Dąbroś Wojciech & Kudła Janusz, 2020. "The voting of EU members for common consolidated corporate tax base and the tax benefits," Central European Economic Journal, Sciendo, vol. 7(54), pages 56-71, January.
    8. 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.
    9. 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.
    10. Christian Keuschnigg & Martin Dietz, 2007. "A growth oriented dual income tax," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(2), pages 191-221, April.
    11. 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.
    12. George Zodrow, 2006. "Capital Mobility and Source-Based Taxation of Capital Income in Small Open Economies," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 13(2), pages 269-294, May.
    13. Anna Leszczyłowska, 2015. "Deductibility of Provisions under the CCCTB Proposal and Its Effects on Companies: The Case of Poland," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(4), pages 19-31.
    14. Răzvan V. BALABAN, 2021. "Case study: The impact on the Romanian State Budget in the case of EU adoption of the CCCTB Directive," Theoretical and Applied Economics, Asociatia Generala a Economistilor din Romania / Editura Economica, vol. 0(2(627), S), pages 135-154, Summer.
    15. Regina Ortmann & Erich Pummerer, 2023. "Distortional effects of separate accounting and formula apportionment on factor allocation," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(8), pages 1277-1307, October.
    16. Hines Jr., James R., 2010. "Income misattribution under formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 108-120, January.
    17. 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.
    18. Anna Leszczyłowska, 2016. "Provisions for Future Liabilities and Effective Corporate Income Tax Rate," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 57-72.
    19. 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.
    20. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2012. "How Would EU Corporate Tax Reform Affect US Investment in Europe?," NBER Chapters, in: Tax Policy and the Economy, Volume 26, pages 59-91, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • K34 - Law and Economics - - Other Substantive Areas of Law - - - Tax Law

    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:zbw:zewdip:14112. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zemande.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.