Transnational Corporations - Volume 25, Issue 2, 2018

International trade, investment and tax policies are inextricably linked. Tax is a key investment determinant influencing the attractiveness of a location or an economy for international investors, particularly those heavily engaged in international trade. Taxation, tax relief and other fiscal incentives are key policy tools to increase exports and attract investors. Investors, once established, add to economic activity and the tax base of host economies, and make direct and indirect fiscal contributions. And international investors and MNEs, by the nature of their international operations and intra-firm trade, have opportunities for tax arbitrage between jurisdictions and for tax avoidance.

An advance pricing agreement (APA) is a formal arrangement between a tax authority and a multinational enterprise (MNE) in which the parties jointly agree on the MNE’s transfer pricing methodology, estimated taxable income, and tax payments for a fixed period, thus reducing the likelihood of an income tax dispute. We argue that APAs, which were developed by governments to solve MNE-state problems in one realm (international taxation of related party transactions), have had unintended consequences for both parties due to the spillover impacts of APAs into other policy realms. We explore this argument in the European Union state aid cases where, in the context of competition policy, APAs can be viewed as hidden, discretionary policies that can be misused by lower-tier governments to attract or retain inward foreign direct investment by offering individual MNEs preferential tax treatment. Our paper contributes to this literature by analyzing the unintended consequences of APAs and recommending policy changes to reduce these negative spillovers.

In recent years, policy-makers have given paramount attention to “competitiveness”, working to ensure that domestic economies attract investment, jobs, and tax revenues. Toward this end, countries have steadily lowered corporate tax rates in an attempt to attract mobile international businesses. This paper discusses the desirability of this policy stance in light of data on the world’s biggest companies. Using Forbes lists of the top “Global 2000” companies over the period 2003–2017, the paper analyzes companies’ headquarters locations, focusing on economic, geographic, and policy determinants. The paper then relates these findings to larger policy questions.

The multilateral efforts, led by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), to address base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS) have attracted much attention from tax policy makers, practitioners and academics. In 2012, the OECD/G20 BEPS Project was launched to address BEPS through a range of international tax policy measures. A key part of the BEPS package was the Action 11 report, which considered the fiscal and economic impacts of BEPS and produced an empirical estimate of the global corporate income tax (CIT) revenue losses arising from BEPS of between 4 per cent and 10 per cent of global CIT revenues. This research note highlights some of the data-related and methodological challenges facing researchers attempting to estimate the fiscal impacts of BEPS, discusses some of the methodological approaches that have recently been applied to this end, and provides a preview of the forthcoming release of the first edition of the OECD Corporate Tax Statistics.

This paper explores the link between foreign direct investment (FDI) and the BEPS (base erosion and profit shifting) practices of multinationals (MNEs). It puts the spotlight on the outsize role of offshore investment hubs as major players in global corporate investment, a role that is largely due to MNEs’ tax planning, although other factors contribute. The paper shows that tax avoidance practices enabled by FDI through offshore hubs are responsible for significant leakage of development financing resources. In policy terms, these findings call for enhanced cooperation and synergies between international tax and investment policymaking.