What's BEPS got to do with it? Exploring the effectiveness of thin capitalisation rules

Kayis-Kumar, Ann (2016): What's BEPS got to do with it? Exploring the effectiveness of thin capitalisation rules. Published in: eJournal of Tax Research , Vol. 2, No. 14 (16 December 2016): pp. 359-386.

Abstract

In October 2015, the OECD made a best practice recommendation in Action 4 of its BEPS project, suggesting a Fixed Ratio Rule in place of thin capitalisation rules. This review was almost 3 decades in the making, with the most recent OECD report on thin capitalisation rules published in 1986, which omitted guidance on how these rules could best be designed.

Thin capitalisation rules’ strong emphasis on revenue base protection has resulted in their exponentially increasing popularity internationally since the 1960s. However, there is a growing body of literature critiquing the effectiveness of thin capitalisation rules. Accordingly, this paper approaches the issue of thin capitalisation from a novel perspective by conceptualising the cross-border debt bias as the ‘disease’ and thin capitalisation as merely the ‘symptom’. Grounded in the tax principle of efficiency, the overarching question guiding this paper is whether, given the opportunity to start over, the tax-induced cross-border debt bias would be better addressed by retaining thin capitalisation rules in their current form or whether an alternative reform would be more suited to dealing with this ‘disease’.

The optimisation model developed in this paper shows that the OECD’s Fixed Ratio Rule is more effective than the current regime of thin capitalisation rules at protecting the tax revenue base from the most tax-aggressive multinational enterprises (MNEs). However, the model also indicates that it is ultimately more effective to align the tax treatment of intercompany funding to eliminate the ‘underlying disease’ (the tax incentive for thin capitalisation), rather than adopting rules that mitigate the ‘symptom’ (such as the OECD’s Fixed Ratio Rule).

This research presents a unique contribution to the literature by simulating complex cross-border intercompany tax planning strategies. This facilitates a formal analysis of one of the most significant challenges presented by the mobility and fungibility of capital; namely, anticipating how an MNE structures its internal affairs in a tax-optimal manner given the current tax regime and suggesting tax administrative responses to BEPS accordingly.

• Item Type: MPRA Paper
• Language: English
• Keywords: Corporate Taxes; BEPS; Tax Competition; Mathematical Programming; Optimisation
• Subjects: C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics > C44 - Operations Research ; Statistical Decision Theory; C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C4 - Econometric and Statistical Methods: Special Topics > C49 - Other; H - Public Economics > H2 - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue > H26 - Tax Evasion and Avoidance; K - Law and Economics > K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law; K - Law and Economics > K3 - Other Substantive Areas of Law > K34 - Tax Law

References

Australian Government, Department of the Treasury, ‘OECD report supports Australian Government action on multinational tax avoidance’ (Media Release, 6 October 2015); available at: http://sjm.ministers.treasury.gov.au/media-release/003-2015/.

Avery Jones JF et al, ‘The Definitions of Dividends and Interest in the OECD Model: Something Lost in Translation?’ (2009) 1(1) World Tax Journal 5.

Avery Jones JF, Baker P, De Broe L, Ellis MJ, van Raad K, Le Gall JP, Goldberg SH, Blessing P, Lüdicke J, Maisto G, Miyatake T, Torrione H, Vann RJ, Ward DA, Nikolakakis A, Wiman B, ‘The Definitions of Dividends and Interest in the OECD Model: Something Lost in Translation?’ (2009) 1(1) World Tax Journal 5.

Balakrishnan K, Blouin J and Guay W, ‘Does Tax Aggressiveness Reduce Financial Reporting Transparency?’ (Working Paper, Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania, 20 September 2011).

Benshalom I, ‘Taxing the Financial Income of Multinational Enterprises by Employing a Hybrid Formulary and Arm’s Length Allocation Method’ (2009) 28 Virginia Tax Review 619.

Benshalom I, ‘The Quest to Tax Financial Income in a Global Economy: Emerging to an Allocation Phase’ (2008) 28 Virginia Tax Review 165.

Blessing PH, ‘The Debt-Equity Conundrum – A Prequel’ (2012) 66(4-5) Bulletin for International Taxation 198.

Blouin J, Huizinga H, Laeven L and G Nicodème, ‘Thin Capitalization Rules and Multinational Firm Capital Structure’ (IMF Working Paper WP/14/12, January 2014).

Brada J and Buus T, ‘Detection of Possible Tax-Evasive Transfer Pricing in Multinational Enterprises’ (2009) 4(2) European Financial and Accounting Journal 65.

Bucovetsky S and Haufler A, ‘Tax competition when firms choose their organizational form: Should tax loopholes for multinationals be closed?’ (Technical Report 1625, CESifo, 2005).

Buettner T, Overesch M, Schreiber U and Wamser G, ‘The Impact of Thin-Capitalization Rules on the Capital Structure of Multinational Firms’ (2012) 96 Journal of Public Economics 930.

Burnett C, ‘Intra-Group Debt at the Crossroads: Stand-Alone versus Worldwide Approach’ (2014) 6(1) World Tax Journal 40.

Buus T and Brada J, ‘VAT and Tax Credits: A Way to Eliminate Tax-Evasive Use of Transfer Prices?’ (2010) 5(1) European Financial and Accounting Journal 28.

Castillo E, Conejo AJ, Pedregal P, García R and Alguacil N, Building and Solving Mathematical Programming Models in Engineering and Science (New York, United States: John Wiley and Sons Ltd, 2001).

Chen PG, ‘Intercompany payments between multinational corporations and their affiliated companies in China’, in: Charles River Associates, “Insights: Transfer Pricing”.

Chittum R and Boland-Rudder B, ‘Investigations, protest, and call for election in Iceland as world responds to Panama Papers’ (The International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, 5 April 2015); available at: https://panamapapers.icij.org/blog/20160405-global-response.html.

De Mooij RA, ‘Tax Biases to Debt Finance: Assessing the Problem, Finding Solutions’ (IMF Staff Discussion Note SDN/11/11, 3 May 2011).

De Simone L and Stomberg B, ‘Do investors differentially value tax avoidance of income mobile firms?’ (Working Paper, University of Texas at Austin, June 2012).

Devereux M and Vella J, ‘Double trouble: why landmark OECD tax reform is doomed before it starts’ on The Conversation (5 October 2015), available at: https://theconversation.com/double-trouble-why-landmark-oecd-tax-reform-is-doomed-before-it-starts-48115.

Devereux MP and Griffith R ‘Evaluating Tax Policy for Location Decisions’ (2003) 10 International Tax and Public Finance 107.

Dunne J et al, ‘Limiting Base Erosion via Interest deductions - OECD finalises BEPS Action 4’ (MinterEllison Alert, 12 October 2015); available at: http://www.minterellison.com/publications/minterellison-alert-limiting-base-erosion-via-interest-deductions-oecd-finalises-beps-action-410122015/.

Frost T et al, Submission to the Treasury on Proposed Diverted Profits Tax Consultation Paper, Implementing a Diverted Profits Tax, 24 June 2016; available at: http://www.greenwoods.com.au/media/1794/dpt-submission.pdf.

Fullerton D, Which Effective Tax Rate? (NBER Working Paper No 1123, National Bureau of Economic Research, May 1983).

Grubert H and Slemrod J, ‘The effect of taxes on investment and income shifting to Puerto Rico’ (1998) 80 Review of Economics and Statistics 365.

Hanlon D, ‘Thin Capitalisation Legislation and the Australia/United States Double Tax Convention: Can They Work Together?’ (2000) 3(1) Journal of Australian Taxation 4.

Haufler A and Runkel M, ‘Firms’ financial choices and thin capitalization rules under corporate tax competition’ (2012) 56(6) European Economic Review 1087.

Haufler A and Schjelderup G, ‘Corporate Tax Systems and Cross-country Profit Shifting’ (2000) 52 Oxford Economic Papers 306.

Heckemeyer JH and Overesch M, ‘Multinationals’ Profit Response to Tax Differentials: Effect Size and Shifting Channels’ (ZEW Discussion Paper No. 13-045, July 2013).

Hong Q and Smart M, ‘In praise of tax havens: International tax planning and foreign direct investment’ (2010) 54(1) European Economic Review 82

Huizing H, Laeven L and Nicodème G, ‘Capital Structure and International Debt Shifting’ (Economic Paper No 263, European Economy, December 2006).

ICC Commission on Taxation and the ICC Committee on Customs and Trade Regulations, ‘Transfer pricing and customs value’ Policy Statement, Document No. 180/103-6-521, February 2012.

IMF Fiscal Affairs Department, ‘Debt Bias and Other Distortions: Crisis-related Issues in Tax Policy’ (International Monetary Fund Study, 12 June 2009).

Jacobs OH and Spengel C, ‘The Effective Average Tax Burden in the European Union and the USA: A Computer-based Calculation and Comparison with the Model of the European Tax Analyzer’ (ZEW Discussion Paper No 99-54, Centre for European Economic Research (ZEW) and University of Mannheim, September 1999).

Joseph A, ‘Discussion Paper on Arm’s Length Debt Test’ (2014) 21(3) International Transfer Pricing Journal 177.

Kayis-Kumar A, ‘International tax planning by multinationals: Simulating a tax-minimising intercompany response to the OECD’s recommendation on BEPS Action 4’ (2016) 31(2) Australian Tax Forum 363.

Kayis-Kumar A, ‘Taxing cross-border intercompany transactions: Are financing activities fungible?’ (2015) 30(3) Australian Tax Forum 627-661.

Kayis-Kumar A, ‘Thin capitalisation rules: A second-best solution to the cross-border debt bias?’ (2015) 30(2) Australian Tax Forum 299-355.

Mardan M, ‘Why Countries Differ in Thin Capitalization Rules: The Role of Financial Development’ (CESifo Working Paper Series No 5295, CESifo Group Munich, 2015).

Markle KS and Shackelford DA, ‘Cross-Country Comparisons of the Effects of Leverage, Intangible Assets, and Tax Havens on Corporate Income Taxes’ (2012) 65 Tax Law Review 415.

McDonnell A, Russell H, Sablok G, Burgess J, Stanton P, Bartram T, Boyle B, Manning K (2011) ‘A Profile of Human Resource Management in Multinational Enterprises Operating in Australia’, University of South Australia, University of Newcastle, Victoria University, La Trobe University and Curtin University; available at: http://www.unisa.edu.au/Global/business/centres /chrm/docs/projects/intrepid/Australia11_MNE_Report_Final.pdf.

Merlo V, Riedel N and Wamser G, ‘The Impact of Thin Capitalization Rules on the Location of Multinational Firms’ Foreign Affiliates’ (CESifo Working Paper Series No. 5449, CESifo Category 1: Public Finance, July 2015).

Meseguer P, Rossi F and Schiex T, ‘Chapter 9: Soft Constraints’, in: Rossi F, van Beek P and Walsh P, Handbook of Constraint Programming.

Mintz J and Smart M, ‘Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: Theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada’ (2004) 88 Journal of Public Economics 1149.

OECD, ‘BEPS Action 4: Interest deductions and other financial payments’ (Final Report, 5 October 2015).

OECD, ‘BEPS Action 4: Interest deductions and other financial payments’ (Public Discussion Draft, 18 December 2014).

OECD, Public Discussion Draft, BEPS Action 8, 9 and 10: Discussion draft on revisions to Chapter I of the Transfer Pricing Guidelines (including risk, recharacterisation and special measures), 1 December 2014 – 6 February 2015.

OECD, Thin capitalisation legislation a background paper for country tax administrations, draft paper, available at: http://www.oecd.org/ctp/tax-global/5.%20Thin_Capitalization_Background.pdf.

Overesch M and Wamser G, ‘Corporate tax planning and thin-capitalization rules: Evidence from a quasi-experiment’ (2010) 42 Applied Economics 563.

Raimondos-Moller P and Scharf K, ‘Transfer pricing rules and competing governments’ (2002) 54(2) Oxford Economic Papers 230.

Ring DM, ’Risk-Shifting Within a Multinational Corporation: The Incoherence of the U.S. Tax Regime’ (1997) 4(4) Boston College Law Review 667.

Ruf M and Schindler D, ‘Debt Shifting and Thin-Capitalization Rules – German Experience and Alternative Approaches’ (2015) 1 Nordic Tax Journal 17.

Ruf M and Schindler D, ‘Debt Shifting and Thin-Capitalization Rules – German Experience and Alternative Approaches’ (NHH Discussion Paper, RRR 06-2012, 13 December 2012).

Seto TP, ‘Four Principles of Optimal Tax System Design’ (Legal Studies Paper No 2008-36, Loyola Law School, March 2013).

Shaviro D, ‘10 Observations Concerning International Tax Policy’ [20 June 2016] Tax Notes 1.

Slemrod J and Wilson JD, ‘Tax competition with parasitic tax havens’ (Technical Report, University of Michigan 2006).

Sommer C, Separate Accounting Or Unitary Apportionment? The Fairy Tale of Arm's Length Pricing and General Equilibrium Analysis of Multinational Enterprise Behavior Under the Formulary Taxation Alternative (Lohmar: Köln, Reihe Steuer, Wirtschaft und Recht, 2011).

Sørensen PB, ‘Issues in the Theory of International Tax Coordination’ (Bank of Finland Discussion Papers No 4/90, 20 February 1990).

The Board of Taxation, The Australian Government, ‘Review of the thin capitalisation arm’s length debt test: A Report to the Assistant Treasurer’ (The Board of Taxation, December 2014).

Traversa E, ‘Interest Deductibility and the BEPS Action Plan: nihil novi sub sole?’ [2013] 5 British Tax Review 607.

Van Weeghel S, ‘OECD releases discussion draft on interest deductions in banking, insurance sectors’ [9 August 2016] PwC Tax Policy Bulletin 1.

Vann R, ‘The History of royalties in tax treaties 1921-61: why?’ in: Avery Jones JF, Harris P and Oliver D (eds), Comparative Perspectives on Revenue Law (Cambridge: CUP, 2008).

Vann RJ, ‘Corporate Tax Reform in Australia: Lucky Escape for Lucky Country?’ [2013] 1 British Tax Review 59.

Vasarhelyi MA and Moon D, ‘Optimizing tax allocation among countries in the multinational entity: a tale of many contingencies’ (Presentation delivered at the TTN Taxation Seminar New York 2011, Morgan Lewis Bockius LLP: New York, NY, 16 May 2011).

Wamser G, ‘The Impact of Thin-capitalization Rules on External Debt Usage - A Propensity Score Matching Approach’ (2014) 76(5) Oxford Bulletin of Economics & Statistics 764.

Weichenrieder AJ and Windischbauer H, ‘Thin-capitalization rules and company responses - experience from German legislation’ (CESifo Working Paper Series No. 2456, CESifo Group Munich, November 2008).