IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_6564.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Taxing Intellectual Property in the Global Economy: A Plea for Regulated and Internationally Coordinated Profit Splitting

Author

Listed:
  • Wolfram F. Richter

Abstract

Inter-country equity in the taxation of IP is a contentious issue. With its BEPS initiative, the OECD aims at taxing in accordance with value creation even though there are admitted difficulties in determining the actual place of value creation. The European Commission promotes the introduction of unitary taxation. The proposal’s drawback is that it lacks incentive compatibility in information exchange. Furthermore, it stipulates a cost-dependent apportionment of the common consolidated corporate tax base that incentivizes locating R&D in low-tax countries. Against this background, this paper makes a case for an internationally regulated split of the profit earned with imported IP.

Suggested Citation

  • Wolfram F. Richter, 2017. "Taxing Intellectual Property in the Global Economy: A Plea for Regulated and Internationally Coordinated Profit Splitting," CESifo Working Paper Series 6564, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_6564
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo1_wp6564.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Bräutigam, Rainer & Spengel, Christoph & Streif, Frank, 2015. "Decline of CFC rules and rise of IP boxes: How the ECJ affects tax competition and economic distortions in Europe," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-055, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    2. Karkinsky, Tom & Riedel, Nadine, 2012. "Corporate taxation and the choice of patent location within multinational firms," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(1), pages 176-185.
    3. Clemens Fuest, 2008. "The European Commission's proposal for a common consolidated corporate tax base," Oxford Review of Economic Policy, Oxford University Press and Oxford Review of Economic Policy Limited, vol. 24(4), pages 720-739, winter.
    4. Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Overesch, Michael, 2013. "Multinationals' profit response to tax differentials: Effect size and shifting channels," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-045, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Annette Alstadsæter & Salvador Barrios & Gaetan Nicodeme & Agnieszka Maria Skonieczna & Antonio Vezzani, 2018. "Patent boxes design, patents location, and local R&D," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 33(93), pages 131-177.
    6. Dietmar Wellisch, 2004. "Taxation under Formula Apportionment - Tax Competition, Tax Incidence, and the Choice of Apportionment Factors," FinanzArchiv: Public Finance Analysis, Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, vol. 60(1), pages 24-41, April.
    7. Lisa Evers & Helen Miller & Christoph Spengel, 2015. "Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(3), pages 502-530, June.
    8. Rüdiger Pethig & Andreas Wagener, 2007. "Profit tax competition and formula apportionment," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 14(6), pages 631-655, December.
    9. Gresik, Thomas A., 2010. "Formula apportionment vs. separate accounting: A private information perspective," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 133-149, January.
    10. Marshall Reinsdorf & Matthew J. Slaughter, 2009. "International Trade in Services and Intangibles in the Era of Globalization," NBER Books, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc, number rein09-1.
    11. John Mutti & Harry Grubert, 2009. "The Effect of Taxes on Royalties and the Migration of Intangible Assets Abroad," NBER Chapters, in: International Trade in Services and Intangibles in the Era of Globalization, pages 111-137, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    12. Altshuler, Rosanne & Grubert, Harry, 2010. "Formula Apportionment: Is It Better Than the Current System and Are There Better Alternatives?," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 63(4), pages 1145-1184, December.
    13. Dhammika Dharmapala, 2014. "What Do We Know about Base Erosion and Profit Shifting? A Review of the Empirical Literature," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 35, pages 421-448, December.
    14. Griffith, Rachel & Miller, Helen & O'Connell, Martin, 2014. "Ownership of intellectual property and corporate taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 12-23.
    15. Sebastian Beer & Jan Loeprick, 2015. "Profit shifting: drivers of transfer (mis)pricing and the potential of countermeasures," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(3), pages 426-451, June.
    16. Rachel Griffith & Helen Miller, 2014. "Taxable Corporate Profits," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 35, pages 535-557, December.
    17. Evers, Lisa & Spengel, Christoph, 2014. "Effective tax rates under IP tax planning," ZEW Discussion Papers 14-111, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Haufler, Andreas & Mardan, Mohammed, 2014. "Cross-border loss offset can fuel tax competition," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 106(C), pages 42-61.
    19. Fuest, Clemens & Spengel, Christoph & Finke, Katharina & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Nusser, Hannah, 2013. "Profit shifting and 'aggressive' tax planning by multinational firms: Issues and options for reform," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-078, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    20. Michael Devereux, 2004. "Debating Proposed Reforms of the Taxation of Corporate Income in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 71-89, January.
    21. Dudar, Olena & Spengel, Christoph & Voget, Johannes, 2015. "The impact of taxes on bilateral royalty flows," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-052, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    22. Grubert, Harry, 2003. "Intangible Income, Intercompany Transactions, Income Shifting, and the Choice of Location," National Tax Journal, National Tax Association;National Tax Journal, vol. 56(1), pages 221-242, March.
    23. Søren Bo Nielsen, 2014. "Transfer Pricing: Roles and Regimes," CESifo Working Paper Series 4694, CESifo.
    24. Thomas Eichner & Marco Runkel, 2008. "Why the European Union Should Adopt Formula Apportionment with a Sales Factor," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 110(3), pages 567-589, September.
    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. Wolfram F. Richter, 2018. "Taxing Direct Sales of Digital Services: A Plea for Regulated and Internationally Coordinated Profit Splitting," CESifo Working Paper Series 7017, CESifo.

    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. Richter, Wolfram F. & Breuer, Markus, 2016. "Pricing the Transfer of Intellectual Property: A Plea for Regulated and Internationally Coordinated Profit Splitting," VfS Annual Conference 2016 (Augsburg): Demographic Change 145621, Verein für Socialpolitik / German Economic Association.
    2. Wolfram F. Richter & Markus Breuer, 2015. "Pricing the Transfer of Intellectual Property as a Problem of Second-Best Tax Policy," CESifo Working Paper Series 5340, CESifo.
    3. Martina Baumann & Tobias Boehm & Bodo Knoll & Nadine Riedel, 2020. "Corporate Taxes, Patent Shifting, and Anti-avoidance Rules: Empirical Evidence," Public Finance Review, , vol. 48(4), pages 467-504, July.
    4. Pfeiffer, Olena & Spengel, Christoph, 2017. "Tax incentives for research and development and their use in tax planning," ZEW Discussion Papers 17-046, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    5. Pranvera Shehaj & Alfons J. Weichenrieder, 2024. "Corporate income tax, IP boxes and the location of R&D," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 31(1), pages 203-242, February.
    6. Gaessler, Fabian & Hall, Bronwyn H. & Harhoff, Dietmar, 2021. "Should there be lower taxes on patent income?," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(1).
    7. Salvador Barrios & Diego d'Andria, 2020. "Profit Shifting and Industrial Heterogeneity," CESifo Economic Studies, CESifo Group, vol. 66(2), pages 134-156.
    8. Bronwyn H. Hall, 2020. "Tax Policy for Innovation," NBER Chapters, in: Innovation and Public Policy, pages 151-188, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    9. Ulrich Schreiber, 2015. "Investitionseffekte des BEPS Aktionsplans der OECD," Schmalenbach Journal of Business Research, Springer, vol. 67(1), pages 102-127, February.
    10. Fuest, Clemens & Spengel, Christoph & Finke, Katharina & Heckemeyer, Jost H. & Nusser, Hannah, 2013. "Profit shifting and 'aggressive' tax planning by multinational firms: Issues and options for reform," ZEW Discussion Papers 13-078, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    11. Lisa Evers & Helen Miller & Christoph Spengel, 2015. "Intellectual property box regimes: effective tax rates and tax policy considerations," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 22(3), pages 502-530, June.
    12. Schwab, Thomas & Todtenhaupt, Maximilian, 2016. "Spillover from the haven: Cross-border externalities of patent box regimes within multinational firms," ZEW Discussion Papers 16-073, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    13. Sharma, Rishi R. & Slemrod, Joel & Stimmelmayr, Michael, 2023. "Tax losses and ex-ante offshore transfer of intellectual property," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 226(C).
    14. Annette Alstadsæter & Salvador Barrios & Gaetan Nicodeme & Agnieszka Maria Skonieczna & Antonio Vezzani, 2018. "Patent boxes design, patents location, and local R&D," Economic Policy, CEPR, CESifo, Sciences Po;CES;MSH, vol. 33(93), pages 131-177.
    15. Bodo Knoll & Nadine Riedel, 2015. "Transfer Pricing Laws," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 12(04), pages 22-26, January.
    16. Bodo Knoll & Nadine Riedel, 2015. "Transfer Pricing Laws," ifo DICE Report, ifo Institute - Leibniz Institute for Economic Research at the University of Munich, vol. 12(4), pages 22-26, 01.
    17. Mardan, Mohammed & Stimmelmayr, Michael, 2018. "Tax revenue losses through cross-border loss offset: An insurmountable hurdle for formula apportionment?," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 102(C), pages 188-210.
    18. Griffith, Rachel & Miller, Helen & O'Connell, Martin, 2014. "Ownership of intellectual property and corporate taxation," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 112(C), pages 12-23.
    19. Bradley, Sebastien & Robinson, Leslie & Ruf, Martin, 2021. "The impact of IP box regimes on the M&A market," Journal of Accounting and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 72(2).
    20. 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.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    intellectual property; tax competition; profit split; formulary apportionment; Shapley value;
    All these keywords.

    JEL classification:

    • H25 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - Business Taxes and Subsidies
    • O34 - Economic Development, Innovation, Technological Change, and Growth - - Innovation; Research and Development; Technological Change; Intellectual Property Rights - - - Intellectual Property and Intellectual Capital
    • M48 - Business Administration and Business Economics; Marketing; Accounting; Personnel Economics - - Accounting - - - Government Policy and Regulation
    • F23 - International Economics - - International Factor Movements and International Business - - - Multinational Firms; International Business

    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:ces:ceswps:_6564. 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: Klaus Wohlrabe (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cesifde.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.