kmmpub@gmail.com
The G7 tax deal could be very damaging for developing countries if we don't make our voices heard quickly.
There are lots of headlines, but let's break this down. First, this isn't a global agreement. The goal is to eventually expand the net of this agreement to include other countries, tax havens like Ireland, Switzerland, the Bahamas or the Cayman Islands. That will take a while.
The biggest news has been a general agreement that no country will tax corporations less than 15 per cent.
But arguably the bigger change is the proposal to change tax rules so that multi-national companies will have to pay more of their corporation tax based on where they make most of their sales, rather than where they produce their goods or services.
This tax plan is politically opportunistic in the short term for rich countries that want to be seen to be sticking it to big tech like Google or Facebook, which are seen as paying too little tax in countries outside of the United States.
But if fully implemented, this will be a disaster for resource producing countries. In TT, for example, BP, Shell and their subsidiaries would have to pay more taxes in the countries where they book their gas sales: think Japan or South America, and less in the places where they produce their gas, ie TT.
The losses from this might be slightly offset by an increase in taxes from companies selling products to TT, but it will certainly by a significant net loss. It is easy to see how poorer developing countries, which are more likely to be dependent on resource extraction and exports will be disproportionately hit by this.
This new plan is both unfair and inefficient. If a company has the great majority of its producing operations in one country and is benefiting from that country's public services, isn't it fairer that that company should pay more corporation tax in that country?
Then there are there sheer number of complications. It would have to be truly multinational to work, involving changing legislation and accounting rules in dozens of countries, likely leading to mass confusion and disputes between businesses and revenue authorities. These are ripe conditions for more - not less - tax avoidance loopholes.
How, for example will companies, especially big tech, keep track of where their customers are on a continuous basis and how will this be reported to tax authorities in multiple countries?
If countries want to capture more tax from being lost to loopholes, there are still plenty of ways. Companies can, for example, change where they sign customer contracts or continue with transfer pricing across jurisdictions that offer indirect subsidies and incentives, regardless of broader global agreements.
The UK's Chartered Institute of Taxation among others have been talking about this for the last four years, but that seems to have gone on deaf ears.
What about the actual purpose of these taxes, to rein in internet companies? According to their annual reports, both Google and Facebook report effective t
