IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/mhr/finarc/urnsici0015-2218(201103)671_64trcoua_2.0.tx_2-e.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Revenue Consequences of Using a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base to Determine Taxable Income in the EU Member States

Author

Listed:
  • Andreas Oestreicher
  • Reinald Koch

Abstract

This paper provides an assessment of the revenue consequences that would result from implementation of a common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB). We find that the total tax revenue of the EU member states is reduced by 4.56% under a compulsory CCCTB and by 4.65% under an optional CCCTB. The revenue effect for the individual member states is particularly dependent on the nominal tax rate. According to our findings, the Czech Republic, Italy, Latvia, Poland, and Slovakia would profit from a compulsory CCCTB, whereas Ireland and the Netherlands would stand to suffer the greatest losses.

Suggested Citation

  • Andreas Oestreicher & Reinald Koch, 2011. "The Revenue Consequences of Using a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base to Determine Taxable Income in the EU Member States," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 67(1), pages 64-102, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:mhr:finarc:urn:sici:0015-2218(201103)67:1_64:trcoua_2.0.tx_2-e
    DOI: 10.1628/001522108X574191
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/en/article/the-revenue-consequences-of-using-a-common-consolidated-corporate-tax-base-to-determine-taxable-income-in-the-eu-member-states-101628001522111x574191
    Download Restriction: Fulltext access is included for subscribers to the printed version.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1628/001522108X574191?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Coughlin, Peter & Nitzan, Shmuel, 1981. "Electoral outcomes with probabilistic voting and Nash social welfare maxima," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 15(1), pages 113-121, February.
    2. Georges Casamatta & Helmuth Cremer & Pierre Pestieau, 2006. "Is there a Political Support for the Double Burden on Prolonged Activity?," Economics of Governance, Springer, vol. 7(2), pages 143-154, May.
    3. Diamond, P. A., 1975. "A many-person Ramsey tax rule," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 4(4), pages 335-342, November.
    4. Auerbach, Alan J., 1985. "The theory of excess burden and optimal taxation," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 2, pages 61-127, Elsevier.
    5. W. J. Corlett & D. C. Hague, 1953. "Complementarity and the Excess Burden of Taxation," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 21(1), pages 21-30.
    6. canegrati, emanuele, 2006. "The Single-Mindedness Theory: Micro-foundation and Applications to Social Security Systems," MPRA Paper 1223, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    7. Klaus Beckmann & Elisabeth Lackner-Frey, 2002. "How Leviathan Taxes," Constitutional Political Economy, Springer, vol. 13(3), pages 265-273, September.
    8. Brennan,Geoffrey & Buchanan,James M., 2006. "The Power to Tax," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521027922, September.
    9. Peter Coughlin, 1982. "Pareto optimality of policy proposals with probabilistic voting," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 39(3), pages 427-433, January.
    10. Carbonell-Nicolau, Oriol & Ok, Efe A., 2007. "Voting over income taxation," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 134(1), pages 249-286, May.
    11. Ansolabehere, Stephen & Snyder, James M, Jr, 2000. "Valence Politics and Equilibrium in Spatial Election Models," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 103(3-4), pages 327-336, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Evers, Maria Theresia & Finke, Katharina & Köstler, Melanie & Meier, Ina & Scheffler, Wolfram & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Gemeinsame Körperschaftsteuer-Bemessungsgrundlage in der EU: Konkretisierung der Gewinnermittlungsprinzipien und Weiterentwicklungen," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-112, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Regina Ortmann & Erich Pummerer, 2023. "Distortional effects of separate accounting and formula apportionment on factor allocation," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 93(8), pages 1277-1307, October.
    3. Ortmann, Regina & Sureth, Caren, 2014. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 165, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    4. Wolfgang Schön & Dennis Klein & Markus Kerber & Martin Ruf & Tanja Kroh & Katharina Finke & Christoph Spengel & Andreas Oestreicher, 2015. "EU-Aktionsplan zur Unternehmensbesteuerung: Ein Weg zu größerer Fairness und Effizienz in der Steuerpolitik?," ifo Schnelldienst, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 68(15), pages 03-21, August.
    5. Dirk Kiesewetter & Tobias Steigenberger & Matthias Stier, 2018. "Can formula apportionment really prevent multinational enterprises from profit shifting? The role of asset valuation, intragroup debt, and leases," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 88(9), pages 1029-1060, December.
    6. Regina Ortmann & Caren Sureth-Sloane, 2016. "Can the CCCTB alleviate tax discrimination against loss-making European multinational groups?," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 86(5), pages 441-475, July.
    7. Simon Loretz & Margit Schratzenstaller-Altzinger, 2019. "Der EU-Vorschlag zur Harmonisierung der Körperschaftsteuer. Auswirkungen für Österreich," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), pages 61-71, January.
    8. Ortmann, Regina & Pummerer, Erich, 2015. "Formula apportionment or separate accounting? Tax-induced distortions of multinationals' locational investment decisions," arqus Discussion Papers in Quantitative Tax Research 198, arqus - Arbeitskreis Quantitative Steuerlehre.
    9. Anna Leszczyłowska, 2016. "Provisions for Future Liabilities and Effective Corporate Income Tax Rate," Gospodarka Narodowa. The Polish Journal of Economics, Warsaw School of Economics, issue 3, pages 57-72.
    10. Shafik Hebous, 2014. "Money at the Docks of Tax Havens: A Guide," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 70(3), pages 458-485, September.
    11. Wifo, 2019. "WIFO-Monatsberichte, Heft 1/2019," WIFO Monatsberichte (monthly reports), WIFO, vol. 92(1), January.
    12. Hulya Celebi & Sabina Hodžić, 2017. "The Impact of Corporate Income Tax on R&D of Multinational Entities: An Impact Analysis of Separate Taxation and CCCTB," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2017(3), pages 17-31.
    13. Annelies Roggeman & Isabelle Verleyen & Philippe Van Cauwenberge & Carine Coppens, 2014. "Impact of a Common Corporate Tax Base on the effective tax burden in Belgium," Journal of Business Economics and Management, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 15(3), pages 530-543, June.
    14. Jochen Hundsdoerfer & Julia Wagner, 2020. "How accurately does the CCCTB apportionment formula allocate profits? An evaluation of the European Commission proposal," Journal of Business Economics, Springer, vol. 90(4), pages 495-536, May.
    15. Spengel, Christoph & Ortmann-Babel, Martina & Zinn, Benedikt & Matenaer, Sebastian, 2012. "A common corporate tax base for Europe: An impact assessment of the draft council directive on a CC(C)TB," ZEW Discussion Papers 12-039, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    16. Anna Leszczyłowska, 2015. "Deductibility of Provisions under the CCCTB Proposal and Its Effects on Companies: The Case of Poland," European Financial and Accounting Journal, Prague University of Economics and Business, vol. 2015(4), pages 19-31.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Emanuele, Canegrati, 2007. "A Contribution to the Positive Theory of Direct Taxation," MPRA Paper 6117, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    2. Jenny de Freitas, 2009. "A probabilistic voting model of progressive taxation with incentive effects," Hacienda Pública Española / Review of Public Economics, IEF, vol. 190(3), pages 9-26, September.
    3. Claudio Agostini, "undated". "Tax Interdependence in the U.S. States," ILADES-UAH Working Papers inv151, Universidad Alberto Hurtado/School of Economics and Business.
    4. Auerbach, Alan J. & Hines, James Jr., 2002. "Taxation and economic efficiency," Handbook of Public Economics, in: A. J. Auerbach & M. Feldstein (ed.), Handbook of Public Economics, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 21, pages 1347-1421, Elsevier.
    5. C. Benassi & E. Randon, 2015. "Optimal Commodity Taxation and Income Distribution," Working Papers wp1001, Dipartimento Scienze Economiche, Universita' di Bologna.
    6. Odd E. Nygård & John T. Revesz, 2015. "Optimal indirect taxation and the uniformity debate: A review of theoretical results and empirical contributions," Discussion Papers 809, Statistics Norway, Research Department.
    7. Gemmell, Norman, 2021. "Economic Lessons for Tax Policy Advisers," Working Paper Series 21109, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    8. Gemmell, Norman, 2021. "Economic Lessons for Tax Policy Advisers," Working Paper Series 9463, Victoria University of Wellington, Chair in Public Finance.
    9. Hummel, Albert Jan & Ziesemer, Vinzenz, 2023. "Food subsidies in general equilibrium," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 222(C).
    10. Stiglitz, Joseph E., 2018. "Pareto efficient taxation and expenditures: Pre- and re-distribution," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 162(C), pages 101-119.
    11. Robin Boadway & Kevin Spiritus, 2021. "Optimal Taxation of Normal and Excess Returns to Risky Assets," Tinbergen Institute Discussion Papers 21-025/VI, Tinbergen Institute.
    12. Stanley L. Winer, 2016. "The Political Economy of Taxation: Power, Structure, Redistribution," Carleton Economic Papers 16-15, Carleton University, Department of Economics.
    13. A. Lans Bovenberg & Frederick van der Ploeg, 2002. "Environmental Policy, Public Finance and the Labour Market in a Second-Best World," Chapters, in: Lawrence H. Goulder (ed.), Environmental Policy Making in Economies with Prior Tax Distortions, chapter 6, pages 112-153, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    14. Stanley L. Winer & Walter Hettich, 2002. "The Political Economy of Taxation: Positive and Normative Analysis when Collective Choice Matters," Carleton Economic Papers 02-11, Carleton University, Department of Economics, revised 2004.
    15. Tanner, Thomas Cole, 1994. "The spatial theory of elections: an analysis of voters' predictive dimensions and recovery of the underlying issue space," ISU General Staff Papers 1994010108000018174, Iowa State University, Department of Economics.
    16. Homburg, Stefan, 2010. "Allgemeine Steuerlehre: Kapitel 1. Grundbegriffe der Steuerlehre," EconStor Books, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, number 92547.
    17. Malte Braack & Christian Henning & Johannes Ziesmer, 2024. "Pure strategy Nash equilibria for bargaining models of collective choice," International Journal of Game Theory, Springer;Game Theory Society, vol. 53(2), pages 373-421, June.
    18. Borger, Bruno De, 2011. "Optimal congestion taxes in a time allocation model," Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Elsevier, vol. 45(1), pages 79-95, January.
    19. John Ledyard, 1984. "The pure theory of large two-candidate elections," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 44(1), pages 7-41, January.
    20. Gebhard Kirchgässner, 2000. "Probabilistic Voting and Equilibrium: An Impossibility Result," Public Choice, Springer, vol. 103(1), pages 35-48, April.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    international company taxation; tax revenue; common consolidated corporate tax base; European Union;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • H32 - Public Economics - - Fiscal Policies and Behavior of Economic Agents - - - Firm

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:mhr:finarc:urn:sici:0015-2218(201103)67:1_64:trcoua_2.0.tx_2-e. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Thomas Wolpert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mohrsiebeck.com/fa .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.