IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cbo/report/52419.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

International Comparisons of Corporate Income Tax Rates

Author

Listed:
  • Congressional Budget Office

Abstract

In this report, CBO examines corporate tax rates—the statutory rates, as well as average and effective marginal rates—and the factors that affect them for the United States and other G20 countries. In 2012, the U.S. top statutory corporate tax rate was 39.1 percent with state taxes included, making it the highest in the G20. The average and effective corporate tax rates in the United States were lower—at 29 percent (third in the G20) and 19 percent (fourth in the G20), respectively.

Suggested Citation

  • Congressional Budget Office, 2017. "International Comparisons of Corporate Income Tax Rates," Reports 52419, Congressional Budget Office.
    • Handle: RePEc:cbo:report:52419
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/52419-internationaltaxratecomp.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. Javier Garcia-Bernardo & Petr Janský & Thomas Tørsløv, 2021. "Multinational corporations and tax havens: evidence from country-by-country reporting," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 28(6), pages 1519-1561, December.
    2. Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo Lagarda & Yifan Ye, 2018. "Simulating U.S. Business Cash Flow Taxation in a 17-Region Global Model," Boston University - Department of Economics - The Institute for Economic Development Working Papers Series dp-312, Boston University - Department of Economics.
    3. Kaymak, Barış & Schott, Immo, 2019. "Loss-offset provisions in the corporate tax code and misallocation of capital," Journal of Monetary Economics, Elsevier, vol. 105(C), pages 1-20.
    4. J.M. Dixon & J. Nassios, 2018. "The Effectiveness of Investment Stimulus Policies in Australia," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-282, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    5. Jason Nassios & James Giesecke, 2022. "Inefficient at Any Level: A Comparative Efficiency Argument for Complete Elimination of Property Transfer Duties and Insurance Taxes," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-337, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    6. Seth G. Benzell & Laurence J. Kotlikoff & Guillermo LaGarda & Victor Yifan Ye, 2017. "Simulating Business Cash Flow Taxation," NBER Working Papers 23675, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    7. Jason Nassios & John Madden & James Giesecke & Janine Dixon & Nhi Tran & Peter Dixon & Maureen Rimmer & Philip Adams & John Freebairn, 2019. "The economic impact and efficiency of state and federal taxes in Australia," Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre Working Papers g-289, Victoria University, Centre of Policy Studies/IMPACT Centre.
    8. Dorian Carloni & Daniel Fried & Molly Saunders-Scott, 2019. "The Effect of Tax-Motivated Transfer Pricing on U.S. Aggregate Trade Statistics: Working Paper 2019-05," Working Papers 55284, Congressional Budget Office.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business
    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies

    NEP fields

    This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:

    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:cbo:report:52419. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cbogvus.html .

    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.