全球公司税收系统需变革
Make corporate tax rules fair for all
来源：天和网
核心提示：英国的星巴克等一些跨国公司目前都因为避税而遭到质疑，现在是时候对国际税收采取新措施了。
It is time for a new approach to international tax. Multinationals ranging from General Electric in the US, Amazon in France and Starbucks in the UK are being attacked for tax avoidance. Separately, in recent hearings, UK members of parliament pilloried various companies for using tax havens, for “manipulating” their accounts to cut their tax bills and for engaging in “immoral” activity. MPs peppered their questions with phrases such as “it beggars belief” and “I don’t know what you take us for.”
天和网天和税政频道消息：现在是时候对国际税收系统采取新的措施了。美国的通用电气（General Electric ），法国的亚马逊（Amazon），以及英国的星巴克（Starbucks）等这些跨国公司目前都因为避税而被质疑。另外，在最近的听证会中，英国议会成员嘲笑这些公司使用避税天堂，通过操纵自己的账户来削减其税收账单并参与到不道德的活动当中。国会议员们用“令人难以置信”和“我不知道为什么会对我们进行税务攻击” 这些话为他们的问题添油加醋。
Most striking about these exchanges and reports is that – beyond asserting that they have not broken any laws – the companies seem unable to defend their actions. This is because they cannot.
最引人注目的是关于税收的交流和报告，这些跨国公司声称没有违反任何法律，但是他们似乎难以为自己的行为辩护。这是因为他们不能。
The international tax system in effect provides vast subsidies for multinationals, helping them outcompete local rivals on a factor – tax – that has nothing to do with economic productivity. They free-ride on tax-funded benefits – roads, educated workforces, reliable courts – provided by the countries where they do business, while others pay for those benefits. This distortion is inefficient and unproductive, and corrupts the very fabric of markets.
国际税收系统实际上为跨国公司提供了高额的补贴，帮助他们不会因为税收的因素而输给本地竞争对手，因为税收与经济生产力毫不相关。这些跨国公司坐享税收资助的好处，他们经商的那些国家为他们提供渠道、受过良好教育的劳力大军以及可靠的法院，而其他人为这些利益买单。这种扭曲十分低效，毫无生产力可言，破坏了市场的根本结构。
The world’s tax rules have not kept pace with profound changes in the global economy. Instead of treating multinationals as the integrated companies they are, the rules seek to disaggregate them into collections of separate entities. Broadly, this encourages companies to cut tax bills via two related types of hocus-pocus.
世界的税收规定已跟不上全球经济的巨大变化。这些规则不是将把跨国公司作为一体的公司，而是将这些公司分解成独立实体的集合。广泛地说，这一规定鼓励这些跨国公司通过两个相关类型的“戏法”削减他们的税务账单。
First, they locate holding companies and assets (such as the company’s brand or other intellectual property rights) in tax havens, then attribute large profits to those entities. Second, they engage in “transfer pricing”, where the parts of the multinational trade with each other across borders at prices designed to suit their tax objectives. These techniques can be combined so that, to put it crudely, a tax-haven entity might buy a widget or service cheap from another part of the multinational elsewhere, and sell it dear, realising untaxed profits offshore. The UK subsidiary buys it dear from the tax haven entity but then sells it on (to a UK retailer, say) at the same high price, realising no profits. Hey presto! A big tax bill disappears. Nobody, anywhere, produced a better widget or service.
首先，他们将控股公司和资产，比如公司的品牌或其他知识产权定位在避税天堂，然后将巨额利润归于这些公司实体。其次，他们从事“转化定价”，邻国间一部分的跨国贸易的价格服务于避税。然后将这些技术结合，这样一个避税天堂的实体可以从跨国的其他地方购买廉价的一个小部件或者服务来完成跨国贸易的另一部分，然后再把它卖掉，并获得免税的利益。比如，英国的子公司从免税天堂中的公司实体购买产品然后再以高价卖给一个英国零售商，这是毫无利润的。这样一个大的税务账单就消失了。世界任何一个地方没有任何一个人能够生产一个比它更好的小部件或服务。
Fortunately, a far better system is available: unitary tax. Instead of taxing multinationals according to the legal forms that their tax advisers conjure up, they are taxed according to the genuine economic substance of what they do and where they do it. Each company submits to the tax authorities of each country where it does business a “combined report” providing consolidated accounts for the whole global group, ignoring all internal transfers. The report specifies the group’s physical assets, workforce and sales and the overall profits are then divided up among jurisdictions according to a formula weighing these three factors. This system would benefit everyone, particularly developing countries.
幸运的是，一个更好的系统可以应用，就是单一税。单一税不是根据税务顾问确定的法律形式来对跨国企业征税，而是根据跨国公司从事的业务以及经营地点的经济实质来进行征税。每个公司向其经营地国家的税务机构提交一份联合报告，这份报告包含整个全球集团的合并账目，忽略所有的内部转移不计。然后根据公式权衡该集团的物理资产，劳动力和销售和整体利润这三个因素再进行瓜分辖区。这个系统将有利于每个国家和跨国企业，尤其有利于发展中国家。
Tax experts have long argued that this approach is better. It is proved, too: most US states already use it successfully for state taxes. The EU’s proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base goes a long way towards this, though its geographical focus should be expanded to require a worldwide combined report. It is possible to move towards unitary taxation without widespread international co-ordination, though that would certainly help.
长期以来税务专家一直认为这种方法是更好的。实践证明美国多数州已经成功的将它运用在各州的税收上面。欧盟一直提议建立一个共同统一的公司税基，而且已经在这上面走了很长一段路，尽管它的焦点应该放在将其扩大为一个世界性的联合报告。它有可能走向统一的税收，而无需进行广泛的国际协调，尽管这肯定会有所帮助。
The OECD, whose fiscal committee is the steward of the international tax system, has refused even to investigate this alternative, preferring to try and patch up the present system. India, Brazil and China are creating their own widely divergent rules, though all claim to comply with the OECD’s so-called consensus standard. The result is a system of ever-growing complexity, which will create increasing conflicts and expose multinationals to double taxation and rising public obloquy.
世界经济合作与发展组织（OECD）的财政委员会服务于国际税收系统，它拒绝对这一选择进行调查，反而更倾向于试图修缮目前的税收系统。印度、巴西和中国都在建立自己的税收系统，虽然这些国家都宣称其税收系统遵守世界经济合作与发展组织所谓的一致标准，但是其内容却大相径庭。其结果就是税收系统变得越来越复杂，冲突增加，暴露了跨国公司的双重征税问题，使公众谩骂升级。
George Osborne, the UK chancellor of the exchequer, and his German counterpart Wolfgang Schäuble have said they will engage with the OECD to tackle the problems in international tax. If the initiative ends up merely tinkering with the “arm’s-length” method, they will fail. Citizens should demand a new and serious approach.
英国财政大臣乔治•奥斯本（George Osborne）和德国财长沃尔夫冈•朔伊布勒（Wolfgang Schäuble）表示，他们将与世界经济合作与发展组织共同来解决国际税收的问题。如果这项计划最终只是以摆弄公平的方法结束，那么他们将会失败。公民需要的是一个新的和认真的办法。
译者：王玲玲
文章来源：
【原创稿件声明】此文由天和网原创，未经授权，任何媒体和个人不得全部或部分转载。如需转载，请与010-52880596联系；经许可后转载务必请注明出处，并添加源链接，违者本网必将依法追究法律责任。
PAGE
PAGE 2
