More Anti-SimplificatIon: How PTI and GILTI Override the Section 245A Exemption and the U.S. Territorial Tax System

IF 0.9 Q2 LAW EJournal of Tax Research Pub Date : 2019-08-01 DOI:10.2139/ssrn.3484899
Christine J. Davis
{"title":"More Anti-SimplificatIon: How PTI and GILTI Override the Section 245A Exemption and the U.S. Territorial Tax System","authors":"Christine J. Davis","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3484899","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Prior to the 2017 tax reform (TCJA), previously taxed income (PTI) was a necessary part of Subpart F, and ensured that U.S. shareholders, who paid tax currently on their controlled foreign corporation’s (CFC’s) Subpart F income, were not taxed again on the same earnings when distributed as dividends. Section 959 served this function by excluding distributions of PTI from the U.S. shareholder’s gross income. PTI implemented the policy goals of preventing double taxation of the same earnings and ensuring that credit for PTI occurred at the earliest time possible. When the TCJA enacted a territorial tax exemption system utilizing the section 245A deduction, the actual distribution of earnings from a CFC to its corporate U.S. shareholder was no longer a taxable event. It seemed that PTI would no longer be necessary. Yet PTI in conjunction with the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) are a powerful combination, which now dominate the United States international tax system. The PTI ordering rules have the effect of allowing the section 245A deduction only after all previously taxed earnings have been allocated. For multinational corporations with significant amounts of GILTI and other PTI, this effect potentially eliminates the availability of the section 245A deduction and, therefore, the exemption system established by the TCJA. This paper demonstrates how the post-TCJA laws may function to override the U.S. exemption tax system. Thus, instead of a move toward a territorial tax system, the TCJA may be characterized as a move toward a pure residence-based, worldwide tax system without deferral.","PeriodicalId":54058,"journal":{"name":"EJournal of Tax Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.9000,"publicationDate":"2019-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"EJournal of Tax Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3484899","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Prior to the 2017 tax reform (TCJA), previously taxed income (PTI) was a necessary part of Subpart F, and ensured that U.S. shareholders, who paid tax currently on their controlled foreign corporation’s (CFC’s) Subpart F income, were not taxed again on the same earnings when distributed as dividends. Section 959 served this function by excluding distributions of PTI from the U.S. shareholder’s gross income. PTI implemented the policy goals of preventing double taxation of the same earnings and ensuring that credit for PTI occurred at the earliest time possible. When the TCJA enacted a territorial tax exemption system utilizing the section 245A deduction, the actual distribution of earnings from a CFC to its corporate U.S. shareholder was no longer a taxable event. It seemed that PTI would no longer be necessary. Yet PTI in conjunction with the global intangible low-taxed income (GILTI) are a powerful combination, which now dominate the United States international tax system. The PTI ordering rules have the effect of allowing the section 245A deduction only after all previously taxed earnings have been allocated. For multinational corporations with significant amounts of GILTI and other PTI, this effect potentially eliminates the availability of the section 245A deduction and, therefore, the exemption system established by the TCJA. This paper demonstrates how the post-TCJA laws may function to override the U.S. exemption tax system. Thus, instead of a move toward a territorial tax system, the TCJA may be characterized as a move toward a pure residence-based, worldwide tax system without deferral.
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
更多反简化:PTI和GILTI如何推翻245A节豁免和美国地税制度
在2017年税收改革(TCJA)之前,先前纳税的收入(PTI)是F子部分的必要部分,并确保目前对其控制的外国公司(CFC) F子部分收入纳税的美国股东在作为股息分配时不会对相同的收益再次征税。第959条通过从美国股东的总收入中排除PTI的分配来履行这一职能。PTI实施的政策目标是防止对相同收入的双重征税,并确保尽早为PTI提供信贷。当TCJA制定了利用第245A条扣除的地域免税制度时,CFC的收益实际分配给其美国公司股东不再是应纳税事件。PTI似乎不再需要了。然而,PTI与全球无形低税收入(GILTI)是一个强大的组合,现在主导着美国的国际税收体系。PTI排序规则的效果是,只有在所有先前纳税的收入已经分配之后,才允许第245A节的扣除。对于拥有大量GILTI和其他PTI的跨国公司,这种影响可能会消除第245A条扣除的可用性,从而消除TCJA建立的豁免制度。本文展示了后tcja法律如何发挥作用,以推翻美国的免税制度。因此,TCJA的特点可能是朝着完全以居民为基础的、无延迟的全球税收制度迈进,而不是朝着地域性税收制度迈进。
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
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Democracy Avoidance in Tax Lawmaking Recent Administrative and Judicial Developments in IRS Appeals Policy Forum: Promoting Tax Compliance by Regulating the Digital Economy - Quebec's Uber Initiative Supporting Small Businesses in Place Thinking Like a Source State in a Digital Economy
×
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