Between Scylla and Charybdis: Taxing Corporations or Shareholders (or Both)

Tax eJournal Pub Date : 2016-11-01 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.2788713
David M. Schizer
{"title":"Between Scylla and Charybdis: Taxing Corporations or Shareholders (or Both)","authors":"David M. Schizer","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.2788713","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The US taxes both corporations and shareholders on corporate profits. In principle, the U.S. could rely on only one of these taxes, as many commentators have suggested. Although choosing to tax the corporation or its owners may seem like taking money from one pocket or the other, this Essay emphasizes a key difference: corporate and shareholder taxes prompt different tax planning. Relying on one or the other mitigates some distortions and leaks, while exacerbating others. As a result, choosing which tax to impose is like navigating between Scylla and Charybdis.In response to these dualing distortions, this Essay recommends using both taxes. Some tax should be collected from corporations, and some from investors. The two rates should be coordinated, so they aggregate to the combined rate Congress wants, which ideally would be the rate for pass-through businesses. The main goal of this Essay is to defend the use of both taxes, and to analyze what the balance should be between them. Using both taxes has three advantages. First, if one of these partially overlapping instruments is avoided, the other still raises some revenue. Second, if the goal is to deter a planning strategy, cutting the rate to zero is an overreaction. If the rate is low enough, paying a tax is cheaper than avoiding it, since tax planning is not free. Third, if one tax is cut instead of repealed, the other can be correspondingly lower, and thus induces less planning.Even so, using two taxes poses challenges as well. First, although the taxes are supposed to backstop each other, they cannot do so when a planning strategy avoids both. Second, using two taxes is likely to increase administrative costs. Third, coordinating the two taxes to produce the right combined rate – ideally the rate for noncorporate businesses – is not easy.Once Congress chooses the combined rate on corporate profits, how should this burden be allocated between corporate and shareholder taxes? Since the corporate tax probably is more distortive, it should be cut significantly. The shareholder tax should be increased to make up the difference (or at least some of it).This Essay also cavasses reforms to shore up corporate and shareholder taxes, so the combined rate that actually is collected comes closer to the one on the books. While the focus is on incremental reform, this Essay’s central recommendation extends to more ambitious reforms as well. They also benefit from using two taxes, instead of one.","PeriodicalId":22313,"journal":{"name":"Tax eJournal","volume":"34 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.2788713","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

Abstract

The US taxes both corporations and shareholders on corporate profits. In principle, the U.S. could rely on only one of these taxes, as many commentators have suggested. Although choosing to tax the corporation or its owners may seem like taking money from one pocket or the other, this Essay emphasizes a key difference: corporate and shareholder taxes prompt different tax planning. Relying on one or the other mitigates some distortions and leaks, while exacerbating others. As a result, choosing which tax to impose is like navigating between Scylla and Charybdis.In response to these dualing distortions, this Essay recommends using both taxes. Some tax should be collected from corporations, and some from investors. The two rates should be coordinated, so they aggregate to the combined rate Congress wants, which ideally would be the rate for pass-through businesses. The main goal of this Essay is to defend the use of both taxes, and to analyze what the balance should be between them. Using both taxes has three advantages. First, if one of these partially overlapping instruments is avoided, the other still raises some revenue. Second, if the goal is to deter a planning strategy, cutting the rate to zero is an overreaction. If the rate is low enough, paying a tax is cheaper than avoiding it, since tax planning is not free. Third, if one tax is cut instead of repealed, the other can be correspondingly lower, and thus induces less planning.Even so, using two taxes poses challenges as well. First, although the taxes are supposed to backstop each other, they cannot do so when a planning strategy avoids both. Second, using two taxes is likely to increase administrative costs. Third, coordinating the two taxes to produce the right combined rate – ideally the rate for noncorporate businesses – is not easy.Once Congress chooses the combined rate on corporate profits, how should this burden be allocated between corporate and shareholder taxes? Since the corporate tax probably is more distortive, it should be cut significantly. The shareholder tax should be increased to make up the difference (or at least some of it).This Essay also cavasses reforms to shore up corporate and shareholder taxes, so the combined rate that actually is collected comes closer to the one on the books. While the focus is on incremental reform, this Essay’s central recommendation extends to more ambitious reforms as well. They also benefit from using two taxes, instead of one.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Scylla和Charybdis之间:对公司或股东征税(或两者)
美国对公司和股东都征收公司利润税。正如许多评论人士所言,原则上,美国只能依赖其中一种税收。虽然选择对公司或其所有者征税似乎像是从一个口袋或另一个口袋里拿钱,但本文强调了一个关键的区别:公司税和股东税促使不同的税收规划。依赖其中一种可以减轻一些扭曲和泄漏,同时也会加剧其他扭曲和泄漏。因此,选择征收哪一种税就像在锡拉和卡律布狄斯之间航行一样困难。为了应对这些双重扭曲,本文建议使用这两种税。应该向企业征收一些税,向投资者征收一些税。这两种税率应该协调一致,从而达到国会希望的综合税率,理想情况下,这一税率应该是针对直通型企业的。本文的主要目的是为这两种税的使用辩护,并分析两者之间的平衡。同时使用这两种税有三个好处。首先,如果避免了这些部分重叠的工具中的一个,另一个仍然会增加一些收入。其次,如果目标是阻止一项规划战略,那么将利率降至零是一种过度反应。如果税率足够低,纳税比避税更便宜,因为税收规划不是免费的。第三,如果一种税被削减而不是废除,另一种税就会相应降低,从而导致更少的计划。即便如此,使用两种税也会带来挑战。首先,尽管税收应该相互支持,但当规划策略避免两者时,它们就无法做到这一点。其次,采用两种税可能会增加行政成本。第三,协调两种税以产生合适的综合税率——理想情况下是非公司企业的税率——并不容易。一旦国会选择了公司利润的综合税率,那么这种负担应该如何在公司税和股东税之间分配呢?由于公司税可能更具扭曲性,应该大幅削减。应提高股东税以弥补(或至少部分弥补)差额。本文还对支持企业税和股东税的改革进行了抨击,因此实际征收的综合税率更接近账面上的税率。虽然重点是渐进式改革,但本文的核心建议也适用于更雄心勃勃的改革。他们还受益于使用两种税,而不是一种税。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
New Puzzles in International Tax Agreements Analysts’ GAAP earnings forecast quality Workplace Transformation and Its Tax Compliance Implications Consumption Taxes and Multinational Tax Planning in the Digital Age - Evidence from the European Service Sector Tax Avoidance and Equity Pricing: The Importance of Countries’ Legal Institutions and Disclosure Regulations
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1