Determining the Upper Bound of the Scoping Criteria for Amount B in the OECD/G20 Two-Pillar Solution: A Policy Guide for Developing Jurisdictions
By Chetan Rao, Ruchika Sharma, and Dr. Vijit Patel
Amount B, a component of the OECD/G20 Two-Pillar Solution, has been designed to simplify transfer pricing for baseline distribution activities. With the aim of developing a practical policy guide for developing jurisdictions to fine tune the quantitative scoping criterion under Amount B, i.e., “annual operating expense to annual net revenue” ratio, this paper critically analyses various aspects of this criterion. The upper bound of this ratio is purported to help jurisdictions in identifying baseline distributors. It is currently set as a flexible range from 20% to 30%, with the choice available to each adopting jurisdiction deciding the exact point in the range for implementation of Amount B within its jurisdiction. Given the lack of any data-backed rationale in the Amount B report for development of this range, the authors suggest that the upper bound range might have been politically negotiated. For this very reason, developing countries need to tread carefully while setting the upper-bound and consider both its tax as well as policy implications. Through an empirical analysis of independent distributors in India, the paper highlights the link between the upper bound, functionality, and profitability, illustrating how these metrics impact developing countries with lower asset and expense intensities. The findings suggest that setting the upper bound at the higher end of the range could unintentionally bring above-baseline distributors into scope, thus foregoing long-term taxing rights for developing jurisdictions. Through this analysis, the paper offers practical insights and recommendations for jurisdictions, especially developing ones, for setting this upper bound to protect their taxing rights and minimize risks of misclassification of above-baseline distributors as baseline.
The Implications of Treaty Restrictions of Taxing Rights on Services, Especially for Developing Countries
By Faith Amaro, Veronica Grondona, Sol Picciotto
Taxation of cross-border services has been identified as a high priority issue in the United Nations (UN) negotiations to establish a new global framework for tax. This paper analyses the defects of international tax rules as applied to services, and their exploitation by multinational enterprises (MNEs), focusing on the impact on developing countries. Services have become increasingly important for economic development, but international tax rules favouring delivery by non-residents act as a disincentive to the growth of local services providers, particularly disadvantaging developing countries which are mainly hosts to MNEs. We analyse the restrictions on source taxation of services in tax treaties, particularly those based on the model of the Organisation of Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), and show that their spread has been accompanied by a widening deficit in services trade of developing countries, while the weakening of their attempts to protect their tax base through withholding taxes has resulted in increasing losses of tax revenue. The paper combines detailed qualitative analyses of tax treaties with quantitative estimates of their effects on trade and tax revenues for services of five developing countries: Argentina, Brazil, Colombia, Kenya and Nigeria. Our analysis suggests that a new approach is needed for taxation of services, breaking with the residence-source dichotomy, and adopting formulary apportionment. This could be based on the standards agreed in the Two Pillar Solution of the OECD/Group of Twenty (G20) project on base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) and developed now through the UN.
Review: Taxation and Inequality in Latin America: New Perspectives on Political Economy and Tax Regimes (2023)
By Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The volume Taxation and Inequality in Latin America: New Perspectives on Political Economy and Tax Regimes is an insightful collection of articles about the patterns of inequality in Latin America and detailing the nature of tax avoidance and evasion in the region, with lessons from political attempts to bring about progressive reforms and tax considerations for policymakers about the future of the region’s development.
A Toss Up? Comparing Tax Revenues from the Amount A and Digital Service Tax Regimes for Developing Countries
By Vladimir Starkov and Alexis Jin
In this paper, we attempt to estimate the tax revenues to be gained by the Member States of ATAF, WATAF, AU and the South Centre under the Amount A and an alternative stylized DST taxation regime. Our research demonstrates that the comparative revenue effects of the Amount A and DST taxation regimes largely depend on (a) the mix of relevant domestic economic activities at market jurisdictions (i.e., revenues sourced to the country as a market jurisdiction under Amount A and the level of revenues from automated digital services generated in the country), (b) design details of the DST regime such as the DST tax rate and the nature of activities to be taxed and (c) the relief from double taxation, if any, countries will grant to domestic and foreign taxpayers under DST. This paper contains analysis relying on sources of information available to private sector researchers and it does not involve review of any information that individual taxpayers provided to tax authorities.
The Design of a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation
By Sol Picciotto
The creation of a UN-led framework for international tax cooperation is an opportunity for an institutional and conceptual reset, to re-establish a global perspective that has been disrupted by the assumption of an increasingly dominant role in international tax by the OECD. The OECD’s expansive proselytisation of its approach, aiming to encourage foreign investment by restricting taxation of income at source where it derives, has paradoxically taken place in counterpoint with growing concerns about the evident dysfunctionality of that approach. The current process should learn from the past to design a global framework fit for the future, by embodying the aims and general principles that have come to be recognised especially in the recent period as essential guideposts for effective international tax reform.
G-24 South Centre Call For Papers: Comparing tax revenues to be generated from United Nations and OECD Subject To Tax Rule (STTR)
Deadline – 1 July 2024
The G-24 and the South Centre have launched this Call For Papers providing funding for studies which can produce country level comparative revenue estimates of the UN and OECD STTR on the 65 combined Member States of the South Centre (available here) and the G-24 (available here). The data should clearly provide how much revenue each Member State will get if they opt for the UN STTR vs the OECD STTR. The objective is to help Member States of both intergovernmental organizations make informed decisions on adopting the version of the STTR which is more beneficial to them.
Member States of the G-24 and the South Centre are advised to wait till the publication of the results of this study before taking a decision on whether or not to sign the OECD STTR MLI.
2023 ANNUAL REPORT ON THE ACTIVITIES CARRIED OUT BY THE SOUTH CENTRE TAX INITIATIVE
The South Centre’s interventions have had a significant impact in helping developing countries bring about major reforms to the international tax system in 2023. Key achievements include the passage of the historic resolution in the United Nations General Assembly for the initiation of a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation, the successful end of a twenty year long negotiation in the UN Tax Committee for taxing computer software, the passage of an enhanced version of the Subject to Tax Rule in the UN Tax Committee for ending non-taxation in tax treaties, country level revenue estimates on the OECD digital tax solution vs Digital Services Taxes for the 85 combined Member States of the South Centre and the African Union, and extensive in-country capacity building for several South Centre Member States for taxing the digital economy and tax treaty negotiations.
THE ROLE OF NET WEALTH TAXES IN PROMOTING EQUALITY AND FINANCING THE SDGS
South Centre Statement to ECOSOC Special Meeting on International Cooperation in Tax Matters
18th March 2024
The South Centre, an intergovernmental think tank of developing countries with 55 Member States from Asia, Africa and Latin America and the Caribbean, is pleased to share its views on the role of net wealth taxes in promoting equality and financing the SDGs.
PROMOTING INCLUSIVE AND EFFECTIVE TAX COOPERATION AT THE UN
South Centre Statement to ECOSOC Special Meeting on International Cooperation in Tax Matters
18th March 2024
The South Centre, an intergovernmental think tank of developing countries with 55 Member States from Asia, Africa and Latin America, congratulates the Chair and Members of the Bureau on their appointment to the all-important ad hoc committee to elaborate the Terms of Reference (ToR) for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation (“UN Tax Convention”). The Ad Hoc Committee has a genuinely historic mandate as it has to design the architecture of the long-standing demand of the developing world for a UN Tax Body…
South Centre Inputs on “Terms of Reference for a UN Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation”
15 March 2024
The South Centre provided its inputs to the work of the United Nations’ Ad Hoc Committee to draft Terms of Reference for a United Nations Framework Convention on International Tax Cooperation. The Chair of the Ad Hoc Committee invited stakeholders to provide inputs to inform the work to be undertaken by the Committee.
The Terms of Reference are the foundation of the architecture of the Convention, which has the potential to fundamentally reform the international tax system to make it fairer for developing countries.
The Ad Hoc Committee was constituted consequent upon the historic resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 22nd December 2023. The United Nations Framework Convention aims to strengthen international tax cooperation and make it fully inclusive and more effective.
A Decade of the Indian Advance Pricing Agreement Programme: Achievements and Challenges
By Priyanka Mashelkar and Apoorv Tiwari
India’s Advance Pricing Agreement (APA) programme was introduced in 2012 with the objective of reducing transfer pricing disputes and providing certainty to taxpayers on their international transactions. In the last decade or so, the programme has proven to be a successful dispute mitigation and resolution mechanism. The authors use data and statistics from a recently released report by the Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) in India to highlight the success of the programme, while also acknowledging the challenges ahead, especially as taxpayers’ expectations from the programme continue to rise.
Status of Permanent Establishments under GloBE Rules
By Kuldeep Sharma
The objective of this Research Paper is to comprehensively identify and analyse all Permanent Establishment (PE) related provisions under the global minimum tax of the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which is implemented through the Global Anti Base Erosion (GloBE) Model Rules. The analysis has led to the conclusion that PEs hold a significant position and facilitate application of GloBE Rules.
The GloBE Rules have introduced certain new facets involving application of PE provisions when there is no tax treaty; no Corporate Income Tax (CIT) in the source state, and have brought in the concept of stateless PEs. These newly-introduced facets have widened the scope of PEs to enable application of the GloBE Rules in specific situations which would otherwise have remained outside the ambit of taxation.
The paper concludes with an observation that the OECD’s Inclusive Framework is drafting the provisions of Amount A in a manner that results in consistency with GloBE Rules. Likewise, acceptance of “deemed PE” for GloBE rules should be extended to Amount A as well. By doing so, a tax nexus would be provided in source jurisdictions, which will allow profits attributable to Multinational Enterprises (MNEs) in a digitalized economy (without physical presence) getting taxed under domestic rules of these source (market) jurisdictions. This would have been a much simpler solution and would have eliminated the complexity of Amount A rules to a large extent, as we see today.
