International tax models towards multinational companies from the perspective of national welfare

• L. V. Polezharova Universidad del Zulia
• M. A. Goncharenko Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation
• A. V. Gryechishkin The Institute of Industrial Economics of NAS of Ukraine

DOI: https://doi.org/10.46925//rdluz.29.22

Resumen

The article is dedicated to the development of mathematical models to solve the real scientific task of supporting tax policies for counter-acting tax planning of multinational companies (MNCs) that are working in the field of production and engineering, forming the scheme international prosecutor, from the position of national welfare. Based on the analysis of the existing models of international taxes and on the peculiarities of the real mechanism of tax regulation of capital movement, new models have been developed with a balance orientation. The main points for this balance are: a) an approach aimed at determining the final results of international taxation from the perspective of national economies; b) Take as an example the gap between tax planning measures by multinationals and measures contrary to government tax planning. The approval of models with the case study of the multi-level structure in which, to counteract the tax planning of multinational companies, the Government uses rules of controlled transactions, demonstrated that due to the possibility of development of multinational companies in convenient and extraterritorial jurisdictions, for Government the final result of the application of these rules can be negative. Instead of additional income, you risk reducing the tax base and reducing budget income; And from the perspective of national welfare, this implies losing the income and capital of multinational companies. It is considered important that the rules for the taxation of multinational companies should not focus on taxes as such, but should encourage the maintenance of capital within the territory or facilitate the return of previously disinvested income.

Citas

Acuña, M. (2011). Crisis financiera internacional: rupturas y desafíos, Revista de la Universidad del Zulia, 2 (4), 39-58.

Bhat G. (2009). Transfer Pricing, Tax Havens and Global Governance, Discussion Paper 7, Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, Discussion Paper, Deutsches Institut für Entwicklungspolitik, Bonn.

Celestin L. C. (2000). The Formulary Approach to the Taxation of Transnational Corporation: A Realistic Alternative? University of Sydney. October 2000.

European Commission (2016). Press release. Commission proposes major corporate tax reform for the EU. Strasbourg. 25 October.

Feldstein M. (2017). The International Consequences of US Tax Reform // Project Syndicate, September 27.

Grubert H. (2003). The Tax Burden on Cross-Border Investment: Company Strategies and Country Responses. CESIFO. Working Paper No. 964. 35 pp.

Haufler A., Mardan M., Schindler D. (2014). An Economic Rationale for Controlled-Foreign-Corporation Rules. Norwegian School of Economics, NoCeT and CESifo, 25 pp.

Jorgenson D. (1963). Capital Theory and Investment Behaviour // American Economic Review, vol. 53, pp. 247-59.

Krasnov I. (2013). Transfer pricing and international practice of the taxation of multinational corporation // Upravlenie Jekonomicheskimi sistemami: jelektronnyj nauchnyj zhurnal, №5 (53), р.11. (in Russian).

National Tax Association (2019). Harry Grubert, In Memoriam. [online] Ntanet.org. Available at: https://www.ntanet.org/fpstory/2017/08/harry-grubert-in-memoriam/ [Accessed 31 Jan. 2019].

Novikov S.V. (2017). Government stimulation and regulation of Russian innovation producers export expansion. Modern Economy Success. 2017. № 3. P. 24 – 27.

OECD (2007). Tax Effects on Foreign Direct Investment. Recent Evidence and Policy Analysis // OECD Tax Policy Studies, No. 17. 187 pp

OECD (2010). OECD Transfer Pricing Guidelines for Multinational Enterprises and Tax Administration. 22 July, Paris, OECD publishing, 371 pp.

OECD (2013). Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting (Russian version). OECD Publishing, 109 pp. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264201262-ru

OECD (2014). BEPS Action 1: Address the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy. Public Discussion Draft. 24 March 2014 – 14 April 2014, 81 pp.

OECD. (2015) Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy, Action 1 - 2015 Final Report. OECD/G20 Base Erosion and Profit Shifting Project. OECD Publishing, Paris, 285 pp. DOI: 10.1787/9789264241046-en.

Polezharova L.V., Lipatova I.V. (2015). International Tax Planning Methodology and Best Practices of Russian Economy Deoffshorization // Asian Social Sciencе, Vol.11, No.19; pp. 316-328.

PWC, World Bank Group (2015). Paying Taxes 2016, 144 pр.

Sutyrin S.F., Pogorletskiy A.I. (1998). Taxes and tax planning in global economy. Saint-Petersburg.: Publishing house of V.A. Mikhaylov, Publishing house “Polius” [Izdatel”stvo V.A.Mikhailova, Izdatel”stvo Polius], 577 p. (in Russian)

United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (2017). World Investment Report 2017. Investment and the Digital Economy. Geneva, Switzerland. 237 pp.

Vernon R. (1998). In the Hurricane's Eye: The Troubled Prospects of Multinational Enterprises. Harvard University Press Cambridge, Massachusetts.

Vishnevskiy V., Grechishkin A. (2002). Effects of taxation scheme upon capital migration // World Economy and International Ralation [Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya], № 12, pp. 18-24. (in Russian)

Whalley J. (2001). Puzzles Over International Taxation of Cross Border Flows of Capital Incom // National Bureau of Economic Research: NBER Working Paper, № 8662. 23 pp.

World Trade Organization (2017). World Trade Statistical Review 2017. Geneva, Switzerland. 177 pp.