• July 9, 2021

Can We Stop Corporations from Hiding Their Profits Overseas

On June 5th, representatives of the Group of Seven, an organization comprising most of the wealthiest countries in the world, posed for a portrait on the steps of a neoclassical mansion on the west side of London. The group had just reached a historic agreement on taxation: Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the U.K., and the United States committed to implementing a global minimum corporate tax of at least fifteen per cent, which is a step toward reducing the ability of corporations to shirk taxes by transferring portions of their businesses to foreign countries with lower tax rates. It’s an important element of the Biden Administration’s effort to reduce the tax burden on the salaries of working people and to increase taxes on capital—money made from stock ownership and other investments—which would raise revenue to fund infrastructure and social-safety-net programs. For the U.S. Treasury Secretary, Janet Yellen, who stood for the portrait in a bright white jacket, the agreement represented a diplomatic victory. Later, the European Union Economy Commissioner, Paolo Gentiloni, gave Yellen credit for playing a decisive role in the negotiations that led to the agreement, saying, “Multilateralism is back” and “Yellen was crucial.”

The discussion around reducing tax avoidance by corporations and the wealthy has taken on a more urgent tone in the past ten or so years; concerns about rising inequality, coupled with revelations about offshore tax havens and the ability of wealthy individuals and some of the largest companies, such as Amazon, to avoid paying any federal income taxes in certain years, have generated outrage. When I spoke with Yellen a few days after the G-7 agreement was reached, she said that the stagnating wages and other economic losses experienced by middle- and lower-income workers since the nineteen-eighties are related to the reduction of corporate taxation. “It has also robbed the government of revenue,” she said. “If you look at public investment in infrastructure, in public education, in worker training, really, in our safety net; if you think about things like child care, paid leave, we’re not investing enough in any of those things.”

judi slot online, daftar situs judi slot online terpercaya, game slot online, situs judi slot online, daftar situs judi slot online terpercaya 2020, situs slot online terbaik, casino slot online 888, situs slot online indonesia, nama nama situs judi slot online, situs slot online, online slot, daftar slot online, link slot online, slot game online indonesia, slot online indonesia, game slot online indonesia, slot online, slot jackpot online, judi online slot, judi slot online indonesia, judi mesin slot online, judi slot online android, slot judi online, agen slot online, games slot online, situs judi online slot, permainan slot online, bandar judi slot online, slot 88 online, agen judi slot online, judi slot online terpercaya, main slot online, game judi slot online, link judi slot online, bermain slot online, slot online 2021, daftar situs judi slot online, slot online casino

A global minimum corporate tax would eliminate, or at least reduce, incentives for companies based in one country to move parts of their operations to other countries with lower tax rates, a phenomenon that Yellen describes as a “race to the bottom.” One of the best-known examples of this scheme involves Apple, which, for years, shifted profits to subsidiaries based in Ireland. In 2017, the company had, according to one estimate, more than a hundred and twenty-eight billion dollars in profits, at least, sitting offshore, beyond the reach of U.S. tax authorities. According to another estimate, about forty per cent of the profits earned in 2017 by multinational companies around the world was funnelled into tax havens. A global minimum corporate tax would aim to change that. “The idea is, if you have to pay fifteen per cent no matter where you declare your income, there’s no reason to put your income in a zero-tax jurisdiction,” Ruth Mason, a law professor at the University of Virginia, told me. “If you’re a country that already has one, you want the other countries to have them too. The U.S. has been trying to get other countries to adopt one since the sixties.”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *