Taxing Tech Titans: Policy Options for the Global South | IGF 2023 WS #443
Event report
Speakers and Moderators
Speakers:
- Gayani Hurulle, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
- Abdul Muheet Chowdhary, Intergovernmental Organization, Intergovernmental Organization
- Jeff Paine, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
- Alison Gillwald, Civil Society, African Group
- Mathew Olusanya Gbonjubola, Government, African Group
- Victoria Hyde, Technical Community, Asia-Pacific Group
Moderators:
- Helani Galpaya, Civil Society, Asia-Pacific Group
Table of contents
Disclaimer: This is not an official record of the IGF session. The DiploAI system automatically generates these resources from the audiovisual recording. Resources are presented in their original format, as provided by the AI (e.g. including any spelling mistakes). The accuracy of these resources cannot be guaranteed. The official record of the session can be found on the IGF's official website.
Knowledge Graph of Debate
Session report
Victoria Hyde
The analysis explores various perspectives on international taxation and global tax rules. One significant aspect is the commendation of the OECD Amount A Multilateral Convention for its comprehensive and inclusive approach to international taxation. The framework minimises tax arbitrage opportunities, reduces the risk of double taxation, and promotes responsible tax practices for multinational corporations. It also addresses the unique challenges posed by the digital age.
However, an alternative viewpoint emphasises the importance of tailoring tax policies to suit the economic, political, and administrative landscapes of individual countries. This approach promotes revenue generation in developing countries, addresses issues of profit shifting, tax havens, and harmful tax practices, and supports a fair redistribution of taxing rights. It aligns with SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth and SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions.
Regarding Digital Services Tax (DST), it is noted that several countries in Europe, as well as Malaysia, India, and Pakistan in Asia, have implemented DST in the absence of a global solution. These taxes on imported digital services vary in scope and application. The lack of a unified approach to DST has led to potential market distortions and the risk of double taxation, highlighting the need for a global solution.
The inclusive framework is recognised as a significant step forward in establishing international tax rules. The OECD has sought input from various stakeholders, including countries, industries, trade associations, and non-governmental organisations. This collaborative approach aims to achieve global consensus for fair taxation rules, in line with SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities and SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
The analysis also acknowledges the validity of the delay in implementing the inclusive framework, considering its complexity and long-lasting impact. The goal is to avoid unintended consequences by incorporating stakeholders' perspectives through an extensive and intricate process.
Stakeholder engagement emerges as a crucial factor in developing and implementing tax arrangements. Victoria Hyde emphasises the importance of engaging with stakeholders, as their concerns can significantly impact the success and effectiveness of tax systems.
Furthermore, the support for globally agreed and consistent tax rules is reinforced. Standardised global tax rules can reduce complexity and uncertainty faced by multinational entities (M&Es) due to varying tax regulations. This facilitates more transparent and predictable tax governance, simplifies compliance for M&Es, and enables them to determine their tax obligations across multiple jurisdictions more easily. These benefits align with SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities and SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
The analysis concludes by addressing the risk of uncoordinated unilateral measures and retaliatory trade sanctions resulting from the absence of a global consensus-based solution. It highlights the need for a globally agreed approach to international taxation and tax rules to mitigate the potential for trade conflicts and ensure peaceful relations among nations.
Overall, the analysis highlights the multifaceted nature of international taxation and the complex considerations involved in establishing global tax rules. It emphasises the importance of inclusive and collaborative frameworks, stakeholder involvement, tailored tax policies, and globally agreed solutions to effectively address challenges and achieve desired outcomes in a fair and equitable manner.
Gayani Hurulle
Large multinational technology companies generate significant revenue from countries in the Global South, yet often operate outside the formal tax regulations of these countries. Over 60% of the world's population are now online, with the majority residing in the Global South. These countries accounted for around 30% of Meta's (formerly Facebook) revenue in 2022, with the remaining 70% coming from the US, Canada, and Europe.
To address this, several countries in South and Southeast Asia, including India, Pakistan, Nepal, Vietnam, and Malaysia, have implemented digital taxes. Tax rates range from 2% in India and Nepal to 10% in Pakistan. Different tax options are available, such as domestic measures like direct and indirect taxes, and treaty-based solutions like the UN's Article 12B and the OECD/G20's Inclusive Framework.
However, there are concerns about the OECD/G20 multilateral system. Countries that agree to the deemed 'first best solution' under the OECD/G20 amount A convention must limit the implementation of domestic measures until the end of 2024. The convention's implementation depends on the US signing it, adding further uncertainty.
Moreover, the deadline for OECD convention negotiations has been repeatedly postponed, reflecting the complexity of reaching an agreement among participating countries. In the meantime, some countries have implemented low national-level taxation policies and intend to maintain them until an OECD agreement is reached.
There is also uncertainty about whether tax payment cooperation will continue under the Mountie Convention. Gayani Hurulle questions whether companies' compliance with tax payments will change under the Mountie Convention, an alternative to the current tax system.
Despite these developments, tax officials in India and Nepal have reported a cooperative attitude from companies in paying taxes, adopting a light touch approach to taxation.
It is worth noting that it is not necessary for the Global South to sign up to the OECD agreement now. These countries have the option to wait and observe before deciding to join later.
In conclusion, the issue of taxing large multinational technology companies in the Global South is complex and multifaceted. While countries in the region have taken steps to implement digital taxes and explore various tax options, challenges and uncertainties persist regarding the OECD/G20 multilateral system and the implementation of tax regulations.
Mathew Olusanya Gbonjubola
Nigeria currently does not have a digital services tax in place. Instead, the country relies on a nexus rule, which connects businesses of non-resident persons to Nigeria for tax purposes. This means that if a non-resident business carries out transactions in Nigeria without a physical presence, the income or profits arising from those transactions can still be taxed in Nigeria.
The advancement of technology has made it possible for businesses to operate without a physical presence in Nigeria. Examples of such businesses include online businesses, international consulting firms, and telemedicine services. This technological progress has expanded the scope of taxation for countries like Nigeria, allowing them to tax businesses that exceed a certain threshold of transactions within their jurisdiction.
To ensure compliance with tax regulations, monitoring businesses and their transactions is made possible through financial institutions, as payments need to pass through the banking system. Additionally, companies are also given the option to self-declare their transactions, further enhancing transparency and accountability.
Nigeria's intention with its tax approach is not to harm businesses but to ensure that taxes are paid where transactions take place. The goal is to create a fair and level playing field where businesses contribute their fair share in the countries they operate in. This approach is similar to that taken by countries like India and Nepal. Nigeria has adopted simplification methods and tax rates that will not significantly affect the profitability of businesses.
Nigeria has actively participated in discussions with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) since 2014 regarding tax rules and regulations. However, Nigeria did not sign the OECD treaty in October 2021 due to concerns with several elements of the rules, particularly surrounding issues related to Ammon's aid. This decision by Nigeria highlights the country's commitment to carefully evaluate the potential impacts on its economy and ensure that any international tax agreements align with its specific needs and circumstances.
The case of Nigeria not signing the OECD treaty also serves as a cautionary note for developing countries in general. It emphasizes the importance of thoroughly scrutinizing the specific impacts on their revenue before signing any international tax treaties. Matthew Olusanya Gbonjubola shares a similar cautious stance, underlining the need for developing countries to fully understand and consider the implications on their revenue before committing to such agreements.
In conclusion, Nigeria currently relies on a nexus rule rather than a digital services tax to tax non-resident businesses. The advancements in technology have allowed businesses to operate in Nigeria without physical presence, and as a result, Nigeria has implemented measures to tax businesses that exceed a certain transaction threshold. Nigeria's approach aims to ensure taxes are paid where transactions occur, without significantly impacting business profitability. While Nigeria has actively engaged in discussions with the OECD, the decision to not sign the OECD treaty in 2021 highlights the country's commitment to carefully evaluate the potential impacts on its economy. This also serves as a reminder for developing countries to carefully consider the implications before signing international tax treaties.
Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
The debate revolves around tax collection and the implementation of digital service taxes. One argument presented is that countries do not necessarily need tax treaties to collect taxes; they can adopt domestic law measures to achieve this. It is highlighted that tax treaties do not grant taxing rights but rather restrict them. Additionally, even without a tax treaty, the residence jurisdiction can still provide unilateral relief. The argument emphasizes that tax is a fundamental aspect of sovereignty.
Another argument put forth is that the United Nations (UN) option of Article 12B provides higher revenue potential for developing countries compared to the solution proposed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The UN's Article 12B, particularly with its broad scope, is seen to provide developing countries with almost double or sometimes even triple the revenue compared to the OECD solution.
In terms of digital service taxes, the gross method is described as offering a treaty-based solution to eliminate double taxation. This method, which was developed by the United Nations, involves withholding a portion of each payment made for a digital service as a tax by the government. It is presented as a means to address the issue of double taxation effectively.
Interestingly, despite concerns that the introduction of digital service taxes would lead to companies exiting markets, this has not been observed in practice. Examples, such as Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, which have implemented a 5% digital service tax, demonstrate that company investments have not been significantly affected.
Moreover, the claim that companies would pass the cost of digital service taxes onto consumers is largely unsubstantiated. Little empirical evidence supports this notion, suggesting that the common threat of companies transferring costs to consumers is often not followed through.
One noteworthy observation is that multinational companies have attempted to prevent developing countries from implementing their own digital tax measures. This signifies the conflict of interest between multinational companies, which aim to minimize their tax liability, and developing countries seeking to collect taxes from these companies.
Another notable insight is that non-compliance with taxation in the digital economy can potentially be addressed through banks. For instance, Pakistan has implemented a process where banks are responsible for withholding taxes in the digital economy, ensuring greater compliance.
Furthermore, India has introduced an "equalisation levy" strategy, imposing a 6% tax on online advertising targeting companies like Facebook and Google. This strategy restricts payment to tech companies and forces them to file tax returns, enabling India to collect taxes from these firms regardless of their physical presence.
Finally, Abdul Muheet Chowdhary advises waiting for the ratification of the tax measures by the United States and other OECD countries before proceeding with further steps. This suggests the importance of ensuring international cooperation and agreement in tax matters.
In conclusion, the debate surrounding tax collection and digital service taxes is multifaceted. Arguments range from the necessity of tax treaties to domestic law measures, the revenue potential for developing countries through Article 12B, and the effectiveness of the gross method to eliminate double taxation. The lack of observed market exits and limited evidence supporting cost transfers to consumers challenge these concerns. Additionally, the actions of multinational companies, the role of banks in tax compliance, and the implementation of strategies like equalisation levies provide further insight into the complexity of the issue. Ultimately, international cooperation and ratification by key countries are deemed critical to progress in this domain.
Audience
The audience members, including Bagheesha from the Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech, Kosi from Benin's Ministry of Economy and Finance, and Kunle, are seeking a clear understanding of how digital tax calculations are performed for companies that operate remotely and do not charge for their services. They believe that it is crucial to establish a clear and detailed process to tax companies like Facebook that do not have a physical presence in certain countries but are extensively used by its people.
Bagheesha, a PhD scholar working with the Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech, shares their perspective on the matter. Their expertise in the field makes their comment valuable in gaining insights into the complexities of the issue. Kosi, a senior representative from Benin's Ministry of Economy and Finance, also highlights the need for this information for policy purposes. This indicates that governments and policymakers are grappling with the challenge of effectively taxing digital companies in the absence of a physical presence.
Furthermore, Kunle raises an important question regarding quantifying the amount that digital companies should pay. This aspect adds another layer of complexity to the discussion, as determining the appropriate tax amount for companies operating remotely can be challenging.
The sentiment of the audience is neutral, indicating that they are not taking a strong position on the issue. This is likely because they are seeking clarification and information rather than advocating for a particular stance.
In terms of related topics, the discussion encompasses Digital Tax, Internet Governance, Remote Working, and Social Media. These topics are closely connected as they all contribute to the broader conversation surrounding the digital economy and its impact on taxation.
The discussion also relates to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 9, 10, and 17. SDG 9 seeks to promote industry, innovation, and infrastructure, while SDG 10 focuses on reduced inequality. Moreover, SDG 17 emphasizes the importance of partnerships for achieving sustainable development goals. The linkage to these SDGs underscores the significance of addressing digital tax calculations and ensuring a fair and equitable system.
Overall, the audience seeks clarity on how to calculate digital tax for companies operating remotely. They believe that a detailed process is necessary to tax companies like Facebook, which have a significant user base in certain countries but lack a physical presence. The insights provided by Bagheesha, Kosi, and Kunle, along with the broader topics and SDG connections, highlight the multidimensional nature of this issue and the need for effective policies and partnerships to address it.
Alison Gillwald
The taxation of global digital services has become increasingly complex, with many countries relying on telecommunications operators as their primary tax base. However, a significant issue is that policies surrounding taxation are often developed in isolation, failing to consider the interconnectedness between various sectors such as trade, competition, and digital rights. This siloed approach neglects the potential impact of taxation policies on these sectors and can lead to unintended consequences.
One specific example of these unintended consequences is seen in Uganda, where taxes on social networking and mobile transactions have had negative long-term effects. These taxes have pushed people off networks and reduced the profitability of telecoms operators. This undermines initiatives such as the Digital Uganda program and highlights the need for a more comprehensive and balanced approach to taxation.
Countries are encouraged to consider signing up to the OECD's BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) program. By doing so, they would be able to tax multinational corporations regardless of whether they have a physical presence in the country. This is particularly relevant in the digital age where multinational corporations can generate significant profits without a physical presence. The implementation of a 15% taxation rate through BEPS could provide a significant revenue boost, even for countries with low internet penetration rates.
Outdated tax systems are identified as a key hindrance to potential revenues for states. These systems fail to adapt to the rapidly changing global landscape and often lack the streamlined and integrated approaches necessary for effective taxation. There is a clear need for tax systems to be updated and modernised to ensure governments can capture the appropriate levels of revenue.
Caution is advised when it comes to the potential negative impacts of trade agreements on revenue generation. The African continental free trade area, for example, may reduce intercontinental trade taxes, potentially impacting revenue streams for countries. It is crucial to carefully assess trade agreements and consider the impact they may have on taxation systems.
Alison Gillwald, a prominent advocate for fair taxation, argues for a universal and binding agreement for taxing tech companies. She emphasises the need for a level playing field in which tech companies, especially those without a national presence, are subject to fair and appropriate taxation. Gillwald notes that the current taxation of tech companies is subpar given their super profits and points out that the US is holding out on international taxation agreements. She believes that unless there is universal agreement and binding commitments, the situation will not improve.
Gillwald supports signing up for the OECD's initiatives but conditions her support on the potential for countries to exert pressure and increase taxation percentages. She suggests that a digital multinational corporation pullout may be necessary from the 15% tax, as it may only apply to giant monopolies rather than multinational corporations as a whole. This highlights the need for careful consideration and negotiation when participating in international tax agreements.
In conclusion, the taxation of global digital services presents complex challenges for governments. It is essential to move away from siloed policies and towards a more integrated and comprehensive approach. This includes considering the interconnectedness of taxation with sectors such as trade, competition, and digital rights. By signing up for initiatives like the OECD's BEPS program, countries can improve their ability to tax multinational corporations and generate crucial revenue. Updating outdated tax systems and carefully assessing the impact of trade agreements are also crucial steps in ensuring fair and effective taxation. Achieving a universally agreed and binding international taxation system for tech companies is a key goal, with collective action within the OECD having the potential to bring about significant change.
Moderator
The discussion centred around the urgent need for revenue in Southern countries due to the current economic challenges they are facing. Factors such as high inflation, the devaluation of local currencies, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increased need for revenue generation in these countries.
One of the main concerns raised during the discussion was the unfair distribution of tax revenue from big tech companies. It was noted that the majority of tax revenue goes to a few countries, such as the United States and China, while countries in the global south that generate content and users receive only a small portion of the revenue. This raises important questions about digital justice and the need for a more equitable distribution of tax revenue.
The audience strongly supported the idea of imposing taxes on big tech companies, with 75% in favor of such measures. This indicates a growing consensus that addressing the issue of taxing big tech is crucial for achieving goals related to decent work, economic growth, and reducing inequalities.
Various policy options for collecting tax revenue from big tech were discussed, including direct taxation measures like digital services taxes and indirect taxes like consumption taxes. While there have been global, regional, and national efforts to collect tax revenue from big tech, there is no clear consensus on the most effective approach at this point.
The discussion also highlighted the significant revenue generated by the global south for tech multinational companies. With over 60% of the world's population online, countries such as India, Indonesia, Brazil, and Nigeria contribute substantially to the revenue of tech companies like Facebook. However, many big tech companies often avoid formal tax nets in the countries where they operate, making it difficult to collect tax revenue.
Countries have multiple policy options for taxing the digital economy, including both direct and indirect measures. This includes introducing domestic law measures and implementing treaty-based taxation systems. However, each option comes with its own challenges, and there is ongoing debate on the most effective approach.
Concerns were raised about the drawbacks of certain approaches, such as the high transaction costs associated with local Digital Services Taxes (DSTs) for companies. Additionally, treaty-based options can reduce the risk of double taxation but come with challenges such as bilateral treaty negotiations and global and market-level revenue thresholds.
Stakeholder engagement and the need for a fair and transparent international formula for taxing the digital economy were emphasized. Global tax rules were seen as a way to provide consistent approaches to allocating profits, simplify compliance, and reduce complexity and uncertainty for multinational companies.
The moderator expressed support for reaching an OECD agreement on digital taxation but acknowledged the challenges and skepticism surrounding the process. The importance of signing up for the OECD agreement was discussed, as it would bring larger countries to the negotiation table and potentially make compliance easier for all countries involved.
The discussion also highlighted the need for clarity and further dialogue about the detailed elements of digital taxes, considering the diverse audience's varying levels of understanding and expertise.
Overall, the discussion underscored the complex nature of taxing big tech and the digital economy. It highlighted the need for fair and equitable distribution of tax revenue, the challenges in implementing effective tax measures, and the significance of stakeholder engagement and international cooperation in finding viable solutions.
Speakers
A
Audience
Speech speed
186 words per minute
Speech length
397 words
Speech time
128 secs
Arguments
The audience members are seeking a clear understanding of how digital tax calculations are done, particularly for companies that operate remotely and do not charge for their services.
Supporting facts:
- Comment from Bagheesha, a PhD scholar working with Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech.
- Comments from Kosi, a senior from Benin's Ministry of Economy and Finance.
- Comment from Kunle asking about quantifying what digital companies should pay
Topics: Digital Tax, Internet Governance, Remote Working
Report
The audience members, including Bagheesha from the Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech, Kosi from Benin's Ministry of Economy and Finance, and Kunle, are seeking a clear understanding of how digital tax calculations are performed for companies that operate remotely and do not charge for their services.
They believe that it is crucial to establish a clear and detailed process to tax companies like Facebook that do not have a physical presence in certain countries but are extensively used by its people. Bagheesha, a PhD scholar working with the Internet Governance Project at Georgia Tech, shares their perspective on the matter.
Their expertise in the field makes their comment valuable in gaining insights into the complexities of the issue. Kosi, a senior representative from Benin's Ministry of Economy and Finance, also highlights the need for this information for policy purposes. This indicates that governments and policymakers are grappling with the challenge of effectively taxing digital companies in the absence of a physical presence.
Furthermore, Kunle raises an important question regarding quantifying the amount that digital companies should pay. This aspect adds another layer of complexity to the discussion, as determining the appropriate tax amount for companies operating remotely can be challenging. The sentiment of the audience is neutral, indicating that they are not taking a strong position on the issue.
This is likely because they are seeking clarification and information rather than advocating for a particular stance. In terms of related topics, the discussion encompasses Digital Tax, Internet Governance, Remote Working, and Social Media. These topics are closely connected as they all contribute to the broader conversation surrounding the digital economy and its impact on taxation.
The discussion also relates to Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) 9, 10, and 17. SDG 9 seeks to promote industry, innovation, and infrastructure, while SDG 10 focuses on reduced inequality. Moreover, SDG 17 emphasizes the importance of partnerships for achieving sustainable development goals. The linkage to these SDGs underscores the significance of addressing digital tax calculations and ensuring a fair and equitable system.
Overall, the audience seeks clarity on how to calculate digital tax for companies operating remotely. They believe that a detailed process is necessary to tax companies like Facebook, which have a significant user base in certain countries but lack a physical presence.
The insights provided by Bagheesha, Kosi, and Kunle, along with the broader topics and SDG connections, highlight the multidimensional nature of this issue and the need for effective policies and partnerships to address it.
AM
Abdul Muheet Chowdhary
Speech speed
195 words per minute
Speech length
3118 words
Speech time
960 secs
Arguments
Countries don't need a treaty to collect taxes; they can introduce domestic law measures
Supporting facts:
- Tax treaties don't grant taxing rights, they restrict them.
- Even without a tax treaty, the residence jurisdiction can give unilateral relief
- Tax is a fundamental aspect of sovereignty
Topics: Tax collection, Digital Service Tax, Domestic Law
UN option of Article 12B is a better option for developing countries for tax collection
Supporting facts:
- Most developing countries don't have an extensive tax treaty network
- Article 12B provides higher revenue potential with a broad scope
Topics: Tax Collection, Developing Countries, Article 12B, UN Tax Proposal
The net method of Article 12B provides the least revenue and less than the OECD solution
Topics: Article 12B, OECD Solution, Tax Collection
The gross method provides a treaty-based solution to eliminate double taxation for digital service taxes.
Supporting facts:
- The gross method was developed by the United Nations.
- The gross method is a transaction-based tax.
- On every payment made for a digital service, some portion of that payment is withheld as a tax by the government.
Topics: Gross Method, Digital Service Tax, Double Taxation
The net method provides a simple formula to calculate net profits.
Supporting facts:
- The net method is a tax paid at the end of the year.
- It provides a formula to calculate profits based on global profitability rate, local revenue, and local tax rate.
- It is important because determining costs for digital services can be difficult.
Topics: Net Method, Net Profits, Digital Services
If Cambodia introduces a digital service tax, it would not lose anything but UK companies will face double taxation.
Supporting facts:
- In the hypothetical scenario, the Cambodia-UK tax agreement is not reached, leading to potential double taxation for UK companies.
Topics: Tax treaty, Compliance cost, Digital service tax, UK, Cambodia
The common threat of companies passing the cost on to consumers due to digital service taxes is mostly not followed through.
Supporting facts:
- There is little empirical evidence supporting this claim. Despite threats to transfer costs, companies rarely do so
Topics: Digital service tax, Consumer cost
The negotiation on the digital economy has been going on for more than 10 years and progress only started when countries began introducing national measures such as digital service taxes
Supporting facts:
- Negotiations have been going on since 2013
- Countries like UK, Italy, Spain, France and Austria started introducing digital service taxes
Topics: Digital Economy, Digital Service Taxes
The US has historically refused to share tax information on a multilateral basis and has not agreed to join major tax treaties
Supporting facts:
- The US has not signed up to exchange of information agreements
- They have not signed the BEPS multilateral instrument
Topics: Tax Evasion, International Treaties
Multinational companies have tried to stop developing countries from implementing their own digital tax measures
Supporting facts:
- Companies have motivated for low taxes on the digital economy to minimize their tax liability
Topics: Multinational Companies, Digital Tax Measures
Taxation in digital economy should be handled differently than traditional economy
Supporting facts:
- In digital economy, companies like Uber, Google, and Facebook don't come with money to set up a factory and hire local people.
- Jobs created in the digital economy, like Uber drivers, could also come from local companies.
- The argument that raising taxes causes investment to go away doesn't hold up in the digital economy.
Topics: Digital economy, Taxation
Countries can impose tax on online advertising payments to tech giants regardless of physical presence
Supporting facts:
- India introduced a 6% tax on online advertising targeting Facebook and Google
- The 'equalization levy' strategy restricts the payment to tech companies and forces them to file tax return
Topics: equalization levy, online advertising, taxation on digital businesses
Abdul Muheet Chowdhary believes the U.S. and other OECD countries should ratify amount first before taking the next steps
Topics: Ratification, U.S., OECD countries
Report
The debate revolves around tax collection and the implementation of digital service taxes. One argument presented is that countries do not necessarily need tax treaties to collect taxes; they can adopt domestic law measures to achieve this. It is highlighted that tax treaties do not grant taxing rights but rather restrict them.
Additionally, even without a tax treaty, the residence jurisdiction can still provide unilateral relief. The argument emphasizes that tax is a fundamental aspect of sovereignty. Another argument put forth is that the United Nations (UN) option of Article 12B provides higher revenue potential for developing countries compared to the solution proposed by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD).
The UN's Article 12B, particularly with its broad scope, is seen to provide developing countries with almost double or sometimes even triple the revenue compared to the OECD solution. In terms of digital service taxes, the gross method is described as offering a treaty-based solution to eliminate double taxation.
This method, which was developed by the United Nations, involves withholding a portion of each payment made for a digital service as a tax by the government. It is presented as a means to address the issue of double taxation effectively.
Interestingly, despite concerns that the introduction of digital service taxes would lead to companies exiting markets, this has not been observed in practice. Examples, such as Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania, which have implemented a 5% digital service tax, demonstrate that company investments have not been significantly affected.
Moreover, the claim that companies would pass the cost of digital service taxes onto consumers is largely unsubstantiated. Little empirical evidence supports this notion, suggesting that the common threat of companies transferring costs to consumers is often not followed through.
One noteworthy observation is that multinational companies have attempted to prevent developing countries from implementing their own digital tax measures. This signifies the conflict of interest between multinational companies, which aim to minimize their tax liability, and developing countries seeking to collect taxes from these companies.
Another notable insight is that non-compliance with taxation in the digital economy can potentially be addressed through banks. For instance, Pakistan has implemented a process where banks are responsible for withholding taxes in the digital economy, ensuring greater compliance. Furthermore, India has introduced an "equalisation levy" strategy, imposing a 6% tax on online advertising targeting companies like Facebook and Google.
This strategy restricts payment to tech companies and forces them to file tax returns, enabling India to collect taxes from these firms regardless of their physical presence. Finally, Abdul Muheet Chowdhary advises waiting for the ratification of the tax measures by the United States and other OECD countries before proceeding with further steps.
This suggests the importance of ensuring international cooperation and agreement in tax matters. In conclusion, the debate surrounding tax collection and digital service taxes is multifaceted. Arguments range from the necessity of tax treaties to domestic law measures, the revenue potential for developing countries through Article 12B, and the effectiveness of the gross method to eliminate double taxation.
The lack of observed market exits and limited evidence supporting cost transfers to consumers challenge these concerns. Additionally, the actions of multinational companies, the role of banks in tax compliance, and the implementation of strategies like equalisation levies provide further insight into the complexity of the issue.
Ultimately, international cooperation and ratification by key countries are deemed critical to progress in this domain.
AG
Alison Gillwald
Speech speed
181 words per minute
Speech length
2443 words
Speech time
810 secs
Arguments
Tax issues have become more complex with the intensification of global digital services
Supporting facts:
- Many countries primarily rely on telecommunication operators as their tax base
- Policies are often constructed in a siloed manner, neglecting the interplay between sectors such as trade, competition, and digital rights
Topics: Taxation, Digital services, Global markets
Social networking taxes have had negative long-term effects, pushing people off networks and reducing telecoms operators’ revenues
Supporting facts:
- In Uganda, 1% taxes on mobile transactions and social networks undermined the Digital Uganda program and reduced the profitability of telecoms operators
Topics: Taxation, Social networks, Telecommunications
Countries should consider signing up to the OECD's BEPS program
Supporting facts:
- This would allow them to tax multinational corporations regardless of whether they have a physical presence in the country
- 15% taxation through BEPS could be significant for countries even with low internet penetration rates
Topics: Taxation, International treaties, Global Strategy
Alison Gillwald argues for a universal, binding agreement for taxing tech companies, particularly those without national presence
Supporting facts:
- Gillwald suggests that the current taxation of tech companies is subpar given their super profits
- Gillwald notes that the US is holding out on international taxation agreements
Topics: Technology Companies, International Taxation
Alison Gillwald supports signing up for the OECD, but conditionally
Supporting facts:
- She believes that if enough countries sign up and exert pressure, taxation percentages could be pushed higher to align with corporeal taxation in their countries.
- She suggests that a digital multinational corporation pullout might be needed from the 15% tax, since it's not applicable to multinational corporations but only to big giant monopolies.
Topics: OECD, Corporate taxation
Report
The taxation of global digital services has become increasingly complex, with many countries relying on telecommunications operators as their primary tax base. However, a significant issue is that policies surrounding taxation are often developed in isolation, failing to consider the interconnectedness between various sectors such as trade, competition, and digital rights.
This siloed approach neglects the potential impact of taxation policies on these sectors and can lead to unintended consequences. One specific example of these unintended consequences is seen in Uganda, where taxes on social networking and mobile transactions have had negative long-term effects.
These taxes have pushed people off networks and reduced the profitability of telecoms operators. This undermines initiatives such as the Digital Uganda program and highlights the need for a more comprehensive and balanced approach to taxation. Countries are encouraged to consider signing up to the OECD's BEPS (Base Erosion and Profit Shifting) program.
By doing so, they would be able to tax multinational corporations regardless of whether they have a physical presence in the country. This is particularly relevant in the digital age where multinational corporations can generate significant profits without a physical presence.
The implementation of a 15% taxation rate through BEPS could provide a significant revenue boost, even for countries with low internet penetration rates. Outdated tax systems are identified as a key hindrance to potential revenues for states. These systems fail to adapt to the rapidly changing global landscape and often lack the streamlined and integrated approaches necessary for effective taxation.
There is a clear need for tax systems to be updated and modernised to ensure governments can capture the appropriate levels of revenue. Caution is advised when it comes to the potential negative impacts of trade agreements on revenue generation.
The African continental free trade area, for example, may reduce intercontinental trade taxes, potentially impacting revenue streams for countries. It is crucial to carefully assess trade agreements and consider the impact they may have on taxation systems. Alison Gillwald, a prominent advocate for fair taxation, argues for a universal and binding agreement for taxing tech companies.
She emphasises the need for a level playing field in which tech companies, especially those without a national presence, are subject to fair and appropriate taxation. Gillwald notes that the current taxation of tech companies is subpar given their super profits and points out that the US is holding out on international taxation agreements.
She believes that unless there is universal agreement and binding commitments, the situation will not improve. Gillwald supports signing up for the OECD's initiatives but conditions her support on the potential for countries to exert pressure and increase taxation percentages.
She suggests that a digital multinational corporation pullout may be necessary from the 15% tax, as it may only apply to giant monopolies rather than multinational corporations as a whole. This highlights the need for careful consideration and negotiation when participating in international tax agreements.
In conclusion, the taxation of global digital services presents complex challenges for governments. It is essential to move away from siloed policies and towards a more integrated and comprehensive approach. This includes considering the interconnectedness of taxation with sectors such as trade, competition, and digital rights.
By signing up for initiatives like the OECD's BEPS program, countries can improve their ability to tax multinational corporations and generate crucial revenue. Updating outdated tax systems and carefully assessing the impact of trade agreements are also crucial steps in ensuring fair and effective taxation.
Achieving a universally agreed and binding international taxation system for tech companies is a key goal, with collective action within the OECD having the potential to bring about significant change.
GH
Gayani Hurulle
Speech speed
169 words per minute
Speech length
2448 words
Speech time
870 secs
Arguments
Large technology multinational companies generate substantial revenue from countries in the Global South yet often sit outside of the formal tax regulations of these countries
Supporting facts:
- Over 60% of the world's population are now online with majority residing in the Global South
- Meta derived 70% of their revenue from the US, Canada and Europe in 2022, while the Global South accounted for about 30% which still is a sizable figure
Topics: Taxation, Tech Giants, Digital Economy
There are multiple options for taxing the digital economy, including domestic measures such as direct and indirect taxes, and treaty-based options such as the UN's Article 12B and the OECD/G20's Inclusive Framework
Supporting facts:
- Countries in the South and Southeast Asia like India, Pakistan, Nepal, Vietnam, and Malaysia have implemented digital taxes
- The tax rates vary from 2% in India and Nepal to 10% in Pakistan
- The UN's Article 12B and the OECD/G20's amount A involve different mechanisms and approaches for taxation
- Countries have until end of 2023 to sign up for the OECD/G20 multilateral convention
Topics: Taxation, Digital Economy, OECD, UN
The deadline for OECD convention negotiations keeps getting shifted
Supporting facts:
- Initial deadline was December last year
- Current deadline is December this year
Topics: OECD convention, taxation
Some countries have implemented low national level taxation policies and intended to maintain them until an OECD agreement is reached
Topics: OECD agreement, national level taxation policies
Companies have been cooperative with tax authorities in India and Nepal, adopting a light touch approach
Supporting facts:
- The tax officials in Nepal and India reported that companies had been willing to pay taxes so far
- In the respective forum some weeks ago, a light touch approach to taxation was discussed and adopted
Topics: Taxes, Corporate Cooperation, India, Nepal
Not necessary for Global South to sign up to the OECD now
Supporting facts:
- Only 30 countries and with 60% of the market share need to sign up
- Global South doesn't fall into that basket
Topics: OECD, Global South
Report
Large multinational technology companies generate significant revenue from countries in the Global South, yet often operate outside the formal tax regulations of these countries. Over 60% of the world's population are now online, with the majority residing in the Global South.
These countries accounted for around 30% of Meta's (formerly Facebook) revenue in 2022, with the remaining 70% coming from the US, Canada, and Europe. To address this, several countries in South and Southeast Asia, including India, Pakistan, Nepal, Vietnam, and Malaysia, have implemented digital taxes.
Tax rates range from 2% in India and Nepal to 10% in Pakistan. Different tax options are available, such as domestic measures like direct and indirect taxes, and treaty-based solutions like the UN's Article 12B and the OECD/G20's Inclusive Framework.
However, there are concerns about the OECD/G20 multilateral system. Countries that agree to the deemed 'first best solution' under the OECD/G20 amount A convention must limit the implementation of domestic measures until the end of 2024. The convention's implementation depends on the US signing it, adding further uncertainty.
Moreover, the deadline for OECD convention negotiations has been repeatedly postponed, reflecting the complexity of reaching an agreement among participating countries. In the meantime, some countries have implemented low national-level taxation policies and intend to maintain them until an OECD agreement is reached.
There is also uncertainty about whether tax payment cooperation will continue under the Mountie Convention. Gayani Hurulle questions whether companies' compliance with tax payments will change under the Mountie Convention, an alternative to the current tax system. Despite these developments, tax officials in India and Nepal have reported a cooperative attitude from companies in paying taxes, adopting a light touch approach to taxation.
It is worth noting that it is not necessary for the Global South to sign up to the OECD agreement now. These countries have the option to wait and observe before deciding to join later. In conclusion, the issue of taxing large multinational technology companies in the Global South is complex and multifaceted.
While countries in the region have taken steps to implement digital taxes and explore various tax options, challenges and uncertainties persist regarding the OECD/G20 multilateral system and the implementation of tax regulations.
MO
Mathew Olusanya Gbonjubola
Speech speed
131 words per minute
Speech length
1263 words
Speech time
580 secs
Arguments
Nigeria does not have a digital services tax, it has a nexus rule that connects businesses of non-resident persons to Nigeria for tax purposes
Supporting facts:
- Nigeria gives the opportunity to bring the income or the profits arising from transactions done without physical presence to tax in Nigeria
Topics: Digital tax, Nexus rule, Non-resident businesses
The advancement of technology makes it possible for businesses to operate without physical presence in Nigeria
Supporting facts:
- Examples include online businesses, international consulting, telemedicine
Topics: Technology Advancement, Remote businesses
With the option of significant economic presence, Nigeria taxes businesses that make transactions exceeding a certain threshold
Supporting facts:
- If a business's transactions in Nigeria exceed a particular threshold, that business is deemed to be operating in Nigeria and is taxable
Topics: Significant economic presence, Taxation
Monitoring businesses and their transactions is possible through financial institutions and self-declarations of businesses
Supporting facts:
- When a business makes a transaction, payment has to pass through a banking system, which can be monitored
- Companies can also self-declare their transactions
Topics: Business monitoring, Transaction monitoring
The intention of Nigeria is not to strangulate businesses, it is just to ensure that taxes are paid where business transactions are carried out
Supporting facts:
- Both India and Nepal took a similar approach
- Nigeria has adopted simplification methods and rates that will not significantly affect profitability
Topics: Taxes, Business
Nigeria has been part of the discussions with the OECD since 2014
Supporting facts:
- Nigeria has been part of the discussions since 2014, from the time of PEPS 2015 action points.
Topics: OECD Treaty, National Taxation Regime
Developing countries should be cautious before signing the OECD treaty, considering its potential impact on their revenue
Supporting facts:
- Matthew believes that the decision to sign the OECD treaty should be made after scrutinizing the specific impacts on the revenue of developing countries.
Topics: OECD treaty, Developing countries, Revenue, Economic Development
Report
Nigeria currently does not have a digital services tax in place. Instead, the country relies on a nexus rule, which connects businesses of non-resident persons to Nigeria for tax purposes. This means that if a non-resident business carries out transactions in Nigeria without a physical presence, the income or profits arising from those transactions can still be taxed in Nigeria.
The advancement of technology has made it possible for businesses to operate without a physical presence in Nigeria. Examples of such businesses include online businesses, international consulting firms, and telemedicine services. This technological progress has expanded the scope of taxation for countries like Nigeria, allowing them to tax businesses that exceed a certain threshold of transactions within their jurisdiction.
To ensure compliance with tax regulations, monitoring businesses and their transactions is made possible through financial institutions, as payments need to pass through the banking system. Additionally, companies are also given the option to self-declare their transactions, further enhancing transparency and accountability.
Nigeria's intention with its tax approach is not to harm businesses but to ensure that taxes are paid where transactions take place. The goal is to create a fair and level playing field where businesses contribute their fair share in the countries they operate in.
This approach is similar to that taken by countries like India and Nepal. Nigeria has adopted simplification methods and tax rates that will not significantly affect the profitability of businesses. Nigeria has actively participated in discussions with the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) since 2014 regarding tax rules and regulations.
However, Nigeria did not sign the OECD treaty in October 2021 due to concerns with several elements of the rules, particularly surrounding issues related to Ammon's aid. This decision by Nigeria highlights the country's commitment to carefully evaluate the potential impacts on its economy and ensure that any international tax agreements align with its specific needs and circumstances.
The case of Nigeria not signing the OECD treaty also serves as a cautionary note for developing countries in general. It emphasizes the importance of thoroughly scrutinizing the specific impacts on their revenue before signing any international tax treaties. Matthew Olusanya Gbonjubola shares a similar cautious stance, underlining the need for developing countries to fully understand and consider the implications on their revenue before committing to such agreements.
In conclusion, Nigeria currently relies on a nexus rule rather than a digital services tax to tax non-resident businesses. The advancements in technology have allowed businesses to operate in Nigeria without physical presence, and as a result, Nigeria has implemented measures to tax businesses that exceed a certain transaction threshold.
Nigeria's approach aims to ensure taxes are paid where transactions occur, without significantly impacting business profitability. While Nigeria has actively engaged in discussions with the OECD, the decision to not sign the OECD treaty in 2021 highlights the country's commitment to carefully evaluate the potential impacts on its economy.
This also serves as a reminder for developing countries to carefully consider the implications before signing international tax treaties.
M
Moderator
Speech speed
169 words per minute
Speech length
2640 words
Speech time
939 secs
Arguments
There is a need for revenue in Southern countries due to current economic challenges
Supporting facts:
- High inflation, high devaluation of local currencies, and the impact of COVID-19 have all increased the need for revenue in these countries.
Topics: Taxation, Economic Crisis, Global South
There is a conversation about digital justice as majority world or global south countries provide a lot of content and users but don't see a proportionate share of the tax revenue
Supporting facts:
- Most of the revenue from taxation goes to a handful of countries, including America and China, and little goes into the countries that generate content and users.
Topics: Digital Justice, Taxation, Big Tech
There are various options for collecting tax revenue from big tech, yet no clear winner at this point
Supporting facts:
- There have been many global, regional, and national level efforts to collect this tax revenue.
Topics: Taxation, Big Tech
The majority of the world's internet users live in the global south, generating substantial revenue for tech MNCs
Supporting facts:
- Over 60% of world's population are online
- Most users reside in countries like India, Indonesia, Brazil, Nigeria
- Tech companies such as Meta make a sizable amount from the global south
Topics: Internet Usage, Global South, Tech MNCs
Big Tech often lies outside formal tax nets of the countries it operates in
Supporting facts:
- Big Tech companies often do not have physical presence in the countries they operate
- This can impact government revenue and the competitive landscape
Topics: Tech taxes, Digital Economy, Government Revenue
Countries have multiple policy options for taxing the digital economy
Supporting facts:
- Options include direct taxation measures like digital services taxes and indirect taxes like consumption tax
- Countries like India, Pakistan, Nepal, Vietnam, and Malaysia have implemented these measures
Topics: Digital Taxation, Policy Options
One-year goal post keeps getting shifted in terms of financial regulations
Supporting facts:
- Countries have implemented low national level taxation policies until the OECD agreement is reached
Topics: OECD agreement, Local taxation, National level taxation
Countries are implementing their own DSTs and then signing up for the OECD
Supporting facts:
- India has implemented a national level DST
Topics: Digital Service Tax, OECD
UN proposal expects every country to bilaterally negotiate with other countries to be able to tax
Topics: UN Tax Proposal, Bilateral Tax Negotiations
Revenue potential from taxation is a significant concern for countries
Topics: Revenue Generation, Taxation
Article 12B provides two methods for taxation: gross and net method.
Topics: Taxation, Article 12B
Countries can introduce domestic law measures and start collecting taxes without needing a treaty.
Topics: Taxation, Domestic Law
Tax treaties do not grant taxing rights, but restrict them.
Topics: Taxation, Tax Treaty
Even without a tax treaty, the residence jurisdiction can always give unilateral relief to its taxpayer.
Topics: Tax Relief, Residence Jurisdiction
UN option under Article 12B provides better revenue potential for developing countries.
Topics: Revenue Generation, Developing Countries
Article 12B with a broad scope gives more revenue than the OECD solution.
Topics: OECD, Revenue Generation
Net method under Article 12B gives the least revenue.
Topics: Revenue Generation, Net Method
The gross method is a treaty-based solution to eliminate double taxation for digital service taxes. It is a transaction-based tax with portions withheld by the government on every payment for a digital service.
Supporting facts:
- The gross method was developed by the United Nations to combat the challenge of double taxation in the digital economy.
- This method requires a company to pay tax on each transaction, rather than a total annual taxation.
Topics: gross method, digital service taxes
The net method, unlike the gross method, is paid at the end of the year. It calculates the net profits through a simple formula applied on local revenues generated by a company.
Supporting facts:
- The net method is named so because it calculates net profits.
- This method has been developed to tackle the audit challenges in digital services where the business model is based on intangibles and algorithms.
Topics: net method, digital service taxes
Introducing a digital service tax outside of the income tax law in the Finance Act, prevents treaties from applying and might lead to double taxation faced by companies from countries that do not include Article 12B into their tax treaty with a certain country.
Supporting facts:
- Countries like India and Nepal have introduced a digital service tax outside of the income tax law in the Finance Act.
- If a certain country does not include Article 12B into their tax treaty with another country, it will lead to double taxation faced by the companies from the country not including Article 12B.
Topics: digital service tax, income tax law, Finance Act, double taxation, Article 12B, tax treaty
Abdul sees potential benefits in Cambodia introducing a digital service tax and believes that the cost of such action will predominantly fall on UK companies due to double taxation.
Supporting facts:
- Many countries, including Kenya, Uganda, and Tanzania have introduced digital service taxes, resulting in no empirical evidence of companies pulling out in response.
- These companies often operate on a cash-burning business model, aiming to out-compete their rivals rather than focusing solely on profitability.
Topics: digital service tax, double taxation, UK companies, Cambodia
Nigeria does not have a Digital Services Tax (DSC) but uses a nexus rule to tax non-resident businesses
Supporting facts:
- Nigeria implemented a nexus rule to bring income from transactions done without physical presence to tax in Nigeria
Topics: tax, non-resident businesses, nexus rule
Nigeria's tax approach involves using significant economic presence concept
Supporting facts:
- Based on the number of transactions in the country and if a certain threshold is exceeded, Nigeria considers the business as having significant economic presence and tax them accordingly
- The approach is non-discriminatory and not just limited to digital services but also includes other services such as management and technical services
Topics: tax, significant economic presence
Monitoring and implementation of Nigeria's tax approach is achievable through the banking system and self-declaration by businesses
Supporting facts:
- Transactions are made through financial institutions making it possible to monitor businesses
Topics: banking system, tax
There's skepticism around the tax plan, viewing it as a way for the big platforms to pay less taxes overall
Supporting facts:
- The numbers being talked about are quite low as a global taxation rate
Topics: OECD tax agreement, big tech companies, global taxation rate
The negotiation on the digital economy has been going on since 2013 with very little progress
Supporting facts:
- The digital economy is part of section one out of 15 actions under the base erosion and profit shifting project.
- The negotiations would have continued indefinitely if countries had not started implementing their own digital service taxes.
- Countries including the UK, Italy, Spain, France, and Austria introduced digital service taxes.
Topics: Digital Economy, OECD, Taxation
The US has been resistant to sharing tax information and is not expected to sign the agreement.
Supporting facts:
- The US hasn't agreed to share tax information on a multilateral basis.
- The US hasn't signed up to the exchange of information agreements.
- The US has a history of stalling on multilateral treaties and not signing them.
Topics: US Tax Policy, Digital Economy, OECD
Importance of stakeholder engagement for government and multinational companies.
Topics: Stakeholder Engagement, Global Tax Rules
Global tax rules can reduce complexity and uncertainty for multinational companies.
Supporting facts:
- Global tax rules can provide consistent approaches to allocating profits, facilitating more transparent and predictable tax governance, and simplifying compliance.
Topics: Multinational Companies, Global Tax Rules, Compliance
Big tech companies should be taxed fairly, even if they don't have a physical presence within a country
Supporting facts:
- The super profits these companies are making are not contributing adequately to taxes
Topics: tax, big tech companies
Calculating the costs and revenues of digital companies is a complex issue
Supporting facts:
- Digital companies generate revenue from advertising and subscription
- Their costs include marketing and allocation of the policy staff
Topics: Digital Taxes, Online advertising, Revenue calculation
Digital companies can be taxed by analyzing their advertising revenue and subscriptions in a particular country
Supporting facts:
- Their costs include infrastructure running if they have a country presence
- SMEs, Hotels, and other businesses often buy advertising space from platforms like Facebook
Topics: Digital Taxes, Online advertising, Facebook
National level taxation is essential to bring larger countries to the negotiation table
Supporting facts:
- India's equalization levy of 6% tax on online advertising targeted major online entities
Topics: Tax, National Taxation, OECD
Matthew proposes a threshold approach to exclude smaller entities from being heavily taxed
Topics: Tax, Entrepreneurship
Without a global consensus-based solution, the risk of uncoordinated unilateral measures and retaliatory trade sanctions is high
Topics: Global consensus, Unilateral measures, Trade sanctions
Alison Gillwald supports signing up for the OECD but with conditions
Supporting facts:
- She suggests putting pressure to force higher taxation percentages
- Digital multinational corporation pullout of the 15%
- This would align with corporate taxation in the countries
Topics: OECD, corporate taxation, multinational corporations
OECD might not be necessary for Global South countries to sign up immediately
Supporting facts:
- Only 30 countries with 60% of the market share need to sign up.
- Global South doesn't feature prominently in this basket of countries.
Topics: OECD, Global South, International Agreements
Report
The discussion centred around the urgent need for revenue in Southern countries due to the current economic challenges they are facing. Factors such as high inflation, the devaluation of local currencies, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic have led to an increased need for revenue generation in these countries.
One of the main concerns raised during the discussion was the unfair distribution of tax revenue from big tech companies. It was noted that the majority of tax revenue goes to a few countries, such as the United States and China, while countries in the global south that generate content and users receive only a small portion of the revenue.
This raises important questions about digital justice and the need for a more equitable distribution of tax revenue. The audience strongly supported the idea of imposing taxes on big tech companies, with 75% in favor of such measures. This indicates a growing consensus that addressing the issue of taxing big tech is crucial for achieving goals related to decent work, economic growth, and reducing inequalities.
Various policy options for collecting tax revenue from big tech were discussed, including direct taxation measures like digital services taxes and indirect taxes like consumption taxes. While there have been global, regional, and national efforts to collect tax revenue from big tech, there is no clear consensus on the most effective approach at this point.
The discussion also highlighted the significant revenue generated by the global south for tech multinational companies. With over 60% of the world's population online, countries such as India, Indonesia, Brazil, and Nigeria contribute substantially to the revenue of tech companies like Facebook.
However, many big tech companies often avoid formal tax nets in the countries where they operate, making it difficult to collect tax revenue. Countries have multiple policy options for taxing the digital economy, including both direct and indirect measures. This includes introducing domestic law measures and implementing treaty-based taxation systems.
However, each option comes with its own challenges, and there is ongoing debate on the most effective approach. Concerns were raised about the drawbacks of certain approaches, such as the high transaction costs associated with local Digital Services Taxes (DSTs) for companies.
Additionally, treaty-based options can reduce the risk of double taxation but come with challenges such as bilateral treaty negotiations and global and market-level revenue thresholds. Stakeholder engagement and the need for a fair and transparent international formula for taxing the digital economy were emphasized.
Global tax rules were seen as a way to provide consistent approaches to allocating profits, simplify compliance, and reduce complexity and uncertainty for multinational companies. The moderator expressed support for reaching an OECD agreement on digital taxation but acknowledged the challenges and skepticism surrounding the process.
The importance of signing up for the OECD agreement was discussed, as it would bring larger countries to the negotiation table and potentially make compliance easier for all countries involved. The discussion also highlighted the need for clarity and further dialogue about the detailed elements of digital taxes, considering the diverse audience's varying levels of understanding and expertise.
Overall, the discussion underscored the complex nature of taxing big tech and the digital economy. It highlighted the need for fair and equitable distribution of tax revenue, the challenges in implementing effective tax measures, and the significance of stakeholder engagement and international cooperation in finding viable solutions.
VH
Victoria Hyde
Speech speed
167 words per minute
Speech length
1095 words
Speech time
394 secs
Arguments
The OECD Amount A Multilateral Convention offers a comprehensive and inclusive approach to international taxation that holds substantial benefits for various stakeholders.
Supporting facts:
- The framework minimizes tax arbitrage opportunities and reduces the risk of double taxation.
- The framework promotes responsible tax practices from the multinational corporations.
- The framework addresses some of the unique challenges posed by the digital age.
Topics: OECD Amount A Multilateral Convention, international taxation
Currently various countries have experimented with Digital Services Tax (DST) in the absence of a global solution, leading to possible distortions in market behavior and potential double taxation.
Supporting facts:
- In Europe, several countries have passed DSTs.
- In Asia, Malaysia, India, Pakistan have introduced taxes on imported digital services.
- These DSTs vary in their scope and application.
Topics: Digital Services Tax, global solution, market behavior, double taxation
The inclusive framework is a complex mechanism that tries to gain global consensus for fair taxation rules
Supporting facts:
- The framework is a major step forward in international tax rules.
- The OECD has been working hard to get input from all stakeholders including countries, industries, trade associations, and NGOs
Topics: Global Taxation, OECD Initiative, Inclusive Framework
Victoria Hyde emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement
Supporting facts:
- Companies came to you with some concerns around the complexities of the arrangement that you have in Kenya.
Topics: Stakeholder engagement, corporate governance
The risk of uncoordinated unilateral measures and retaliatory trade sanctions is a serious concern without a global consensus-based solution
Topics: Global Consensus, Trade Sanctions, Unilateral Measures
Report
The analysis explores various perspectives on international taxation and global tax rules. One significant aspect is the commendation of the OECD Amount A Multilateral Convention for its comprehensive and inclusive approach to international taxation. The framework minimises tax arbitrage opportunities, reduces the risk of double taxation, and promotes responsible tax practices for multinational corporations.
It also addresses the unique challenges posed by the digital age. However, an alternative viewpoint emphasises the importance of tailoring tax policies to suit the economic, political, and administrative landscapes of individual countries. This approach promotes revenue generation in developing countries, addresses issues of profit shifting, tax havens, and harmful tax practices, and supports a fair redistribution of taxing rights.
It aligns with SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth and SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions. Regarding Digital Services Tax (DST), it is noted that several countries in Europe, as well as Malaysia, India, and Pakistan in Asia, have implemented DST in the absence of a global solution.
These taxes on imported digital services vary in scope and application. The lack of a unified approach to DST has led to potential market distortions and the risk of double taxation, highlighting the need for a global solution. The inclusive framework is recognised as a significant step forward in establishing international tax rules.
The OECD has sought input from various stakeholders, including countries, industries, trade associations, and non-governmental organisations. This collaborative approach aims to achieve global consensus for fair taxation rules, in line with SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities and SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
The analysis also acknowledges the validity of the delay in implementing the inclusive framework, considering its complexity and long-lasting impact. The goal is to avoid unintended consequences by incorporating stakeholders' perspectives through an extensive and intricate process. Stakeholder engagement emerges as a crucial factor in developing and implementing tax arrangements.
Victoria Hyde emphasises the importance of engaging with stakeholders, as their concerns can significantly impact the success and effectiveness of tax systems. Furthermore, the support for globally agreed and consistent tax rules is reinforced. Standardised global tax rules can reduce complexity and uncertainty faced by multinational entities (M&Es) due to varying tax regulations.
This facilitates more transparent and predictable tax governance, simplifies compliance for M&Es, and enables them to determine their tax obligations across multiple jurisdictions more easily. These benefits align with SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities and SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals.
The analysis concludes by addressing the risk of uncoordinated unilateral measures and retaliatory trade sanctions resulting from the absence of a global consensus-based solution. It highlights the need for a globally agreed approach to international taxation and tax rules to mitigate the potential for trade conflicts and ensure peaceful relations among nations.
Overall, the analysis highlights the multifaceted nature of international taxation and the complex considerations involved in establishing global tax rules. It emphasises the importance of inclusive and collaborative frameworks, stakeholder involvement, tailored tax policies, and globally agreed solutions to effectively address challenges and achieve desired outcomes in a fair and equitable manner.