IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ces/ceswps/_667.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Formula Apportionment in the European Union: A Dream Come True or the EU’s Worst Nightmare?

Author

Listed:
  • Joann Weiner

Abstract

The European Commission recently endorsed a future company tax policy that would allow companies to consolidate their tax bases and apportion the income across the EU using an allocation mechanism. This policy would replace the separate accounting method with formula apportionment of EU group profits as the main method of taxing multinational companies in the European Union. However, many details of the approaches remain to be presented, and these details may turn what appears to be a simple solution into an extremely complex one. This paper explores some technical details that arise in adopting formula apportionment in the European Union.

Suggested Citation

  • Joann Weiner, 2002. "Formula Apportionment in the European Union: A Dream Come True or the EU’s Worst Nightmare?," CESifo Working Paper Series 667, CESifo.
    • Handle: RePEc:ces:ceswps:_667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.cesifo.org/DocDL/cesifo_wp667.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Joeri Gorter & Ruud de Mooij, 2001. "Capital income taxation in Europe; trends and trade-offs," CPB Special Publication 30, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Frank Windmeijer & Eric de Laat & Rudy Douven & Esther Mot, 2006. "Pharmaceutical promotion and GP prescription behaviour," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 15(1), pages 5-18, January.
    3. Mintz, Jack & Weiner, Joann Martens, 2003. "Exploring Formula Allocation for the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 695-711, November.
    4. Søren Bo Nielsen & Pascalis Raimondos-Møller & Guttorm Schjelderup, "undated". "Tax Spillovers under Separate Accounting and Formula Apportionment," EPRU Working Paper Series 01-07, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    5. European Commission, 2001. "Company Taxation in the Internal Market," Taxation Studies 0005, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission.
    6. Joeri Gorter & Ruud de Mooij, 2001. "Capital income taxation in Europe; trends and trade-offs," CPB Special Publication 30.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    7. Mintz, Jack & Smart, Michael, 2004. "Income shifting, investment, and tax competition: theory and evidence from provincial taxation in Canada," Journal of Public Economics, Elsevier, vol. 88(6), pages 1149-1168, 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. Albert van der Horst & Leon Bettendorf & Hugo Rojas-Romagosa, 2007. "Will corporate tax consolidation improve efficiency in the EU?," CPB Document 141, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    2. Marcel Gérard & Joann Martens Weiner, 2006. "Comment la compensation internationale des pertes et la répartition proportionnelle des revenus imposables peuvent affecter les choix des multinationales et la concurrence fiscale," Economie & Prévision, La Documentation Française, vol. 0(2), pages 65-77.
    3. 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.
    4. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    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. Marcel Gérard & Joann Weiner, 2003. "Cross-Border Loss Offset and Formulary Apportionment: How do they affect multijurisdictional firm investment spending and interjurisdictional tax competition ?," CESifo Working Paper Series 1004, CESifo.
    7. Marcel Gerard, 2006. "Reforming the taxation of Multijurisdictional Enterprises in Europe, "Coopetition" in a Bottom-up Federation," Working Papers 2006-10, University of Kentucky, Institute for Federalism and Intergovernmental Relations.
    8. Gaëtan Nicodème, 2006. "Corporate tax competition and coordination in the European Union: What do we know? Where do we stand?," European Economy - Economic Papers 2008 - 2015 250, Directorate General Economic and Financial Affairs (DG ECFIN), European Commission.
    9. Michael P. Devereux & Simon Loretz, 2008. "The Effects of EU Formula Apportionment on Corporate Tax Revenues," Fiscal Studies, Institute for Fiscal Studies, vol. 29(1), pages 1-33, March.
    10. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2003. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," EPRU Working Paper Series 03-08, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    11. Clemens Fuest & Bernd Huber, 2003. "Zur Koordinierung der Unternehmensbesteuerung in Europa," Vierteljahrshefte zur Wirtschaftsforschung / Quarterly Journal of Economic Research, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research, vol. 72(3), pages 378-390.
    12. Jan Thomas Martini & Rainer Niemann & Dirk Simons, 2007. "Transfer Pricing or Formula Apportionment? Tax-Induced Distortions of Multinationals’ Investment and Production Decisions," CESifo Working Paper Series 2020, CESifo.
    13. Marcel Gérard, 2005. "Multijurisdictional Firms and Governments’ Strategies under Alternative Tax Designs," CESifo Working Paper Series 1527, CESifo.
    14. Peter Sørensen, 2004. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 91-115, January.

    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. Zodrow, George R, 2003. "Tax Competition and Tax Coordination in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 651-671, November.
    2. 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.
    3. Nadja Dwenger & Viktor Steiner, 2008. "Effective Profit Taxation and the Elasticity of the Corporate Income Tax Base: Evidence from German Corporate Tax Return Data," Discussion Papers of DIW Berlin 829, DIW Berlin, German Institute for Economic Research.
    4. Dietrich, Maik, 2009. "Entscheidungswirkungen einer europaweit harmonisierten Konzernbesteuerung [Impacts of European Group Taxation]," MPRA Paper 59870, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    5. Peter Birch Sørensen, 2003. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," EPRU Working Paper Series 03-08, Economic Policy Research Unit (EPRU), University of Copenhagen. Department of Economics.
    6. Budryte, Alge, 2005. "Corporate income taxation in Lithuania in the context of the EU," Research in International Business and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 19(2), pages 200-228, June.
    7. Leon Bettendorf & Joeri Gorter & Albert van der Horst, 2006. "Who benefits from tax competition in the European Union?," CPB Document 125, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    8. Marja Appelman & S. Onderstal & Joeri Gorter & Mark Lijesen & Richard Venniker, 2003. "Equal rules or equal opportunities? Demystifying level playing field," CPB Document 34, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    9. George R. Zodrow, 2019. "Capital Mobility and Capital Tax Competition," World Scientific Book Chapters, in: George R Zodrow (ed.), TAXATION IN THEORY AND PRACTICE Selected Essays of George R. Zodrow, chapter 18, pages 543-570, World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd..
    10. Peter Sørensen, 2004. "Company Tax Reform in the European Union," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 11(1), pages 91-115, January.
    11. Sijbren Cnossen, 2002. "Tax Policy in the European Union: A Review of Issues and Options," CESifo Working Paper Series 758, CESifo.
    12. de Mooij, Ruud A & Ederveen, Sjef, 2003. "Taxation and Foreign Direct Investment: A Synthesis of Empirical Research," International Tax and Public Finance, Springer;International Institute of Public Finance, vol. 10(6), pages 673-693, November.
    13. Ana Agundez-Garcia, 2006. "The Delineation and Apportionment of an EU Consolidated Tax Base for Multi-jurisdictional Corporate Income Taxation: a Review of Issues and Options," Taxation Papers 9, Directorate General Taxation and Customs Union, European Commission, revised Oct 2006.
    14. Sven Stöwhase, 2005. "Asymmetric Capital Tax Competition with Profit Shifting," Journal of Economics, Springer, vol. 85(2), pages 175-196, August.
    15. Marja Appelman & Joeri Gorter & Mark Lijesen & Richard Venniker & S. Onderstal, 2003. "Equal rules or equal opportunities? Demystifying level playing field," CPB Document 34.rdf, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    16. Streif, Frank, 2015. "Tax competition in Europe: Europe in competition with other world regions?," ZEW Discussion Papers 15-082, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    17. repec:diw:diwwpp:dp1303 is not listed on IDEAS
    18. 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.
    19. Hines Jr., James R., 2010. "Income misattribution under formula apportionment," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 54(1), pages 108-120, January.
    20. 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.
    21. Libman, Alexander, 2005. "Взаимодействие Государственных И Частных Структур В Интеграционных Группировах: Теоретические Подходы И Опыт Снг [Interaction of Public and Private Actors in Regional Integration Groups - Theoretic," MPRA Paper 17044, University Library of Munich, Germany.

    More about this item

    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:_667. 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.