《大象旁边的税收政策:美国减税与就业法案后的营业税改革》

K. Mckenzie, M. Smart
{"title":"《大象旁边的税收政策:美国减税与就业法案后的营业税改革》","authors":"K. Mckenzie, M. Smart","doi":"10.2139/ssrn.3352718","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While there is considerable uncertainty regarding the US Tax Cut and Jobs Act’s (TCJA) economic and fiscal impacts, one thing is certain – the significant corporate tax competitiveness advantage that Canada enjoyed over the US for years has disappeared. This Commentary explores some major TCJA measures as they relate to corporations, examines their implications for Canadian business, evaluates Ottawa’s response in the Fall Economic Statement and discusses what is required going forward. The TCJA impact on real domestic investment in Canada is complicated, with competing effects. The TJCA will likely have a net negative effect on domestic and US foreign investment in Canada, moderated in the long-run by the international nature of capital markets. Still, concerns remain about income shifting due to the statutory rate reductions in the US. Our review of the academic literature suggests the US tax-rate cut will result in Canadian affiliates of US companies shifting homeward 8 percent to 28 percent of their profits – a back-of-the-envelope calculation for sure, but nonetheless suggesting a potential significant impact on Canadian corporate tax revenues. The TCJA represents a long overdue sea change in US corporate taxation and, on balance, will have a positive impact on investment and productivity in that country. However, the reform is not anchored in sound tax principles and introduces undesirable distortions. Ottawa, in its 2018 Fall Economic Statement, duplicated in part some aspects of the US reforms in accelerated depreciation for new capital expenditures. While we think that this short-run response is reasonable in light of the fiscal constraints facing the government and the uncertainty regarding the impact of the TCJA, we do not think that the work is done. The US reform provides an opportunity to make a bold move toward a corporate tax system in Canada that is grounded in sound tax policy principles, is less distortionary, promotes economic growth and prosperity, and restores Canada’s tax competitiveness on a worldwide basis. A structured, principled approach to tax reform in Canada is preferable than an ad hoc response to US developments, which may turn out to be fragile in light of the American political climate and the point in the business cycle. We advocate for a corporate tax system based on the taxation of economic “rents.” A simple example of such a regime is a cash-flow tax, which would involve the immediate write-off of all capital expenditures coupled with the elimination of the debt-interest deduction. The basic idea is to replace the corporate income tax with a rent tax that taxes only the above-normal return on investment and is, therefore, neutral with respect to business investment and financing decisions. A cash-flow tax would reduce the business cost of capital investment by roughly 20 percent – offering a much greater boost to capital investment than alternative and fractional reforms such as temporary accelerated depreciation or statutory tax rate cuts.","PeriodicalId":330166,"journal":{"name":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","volume":"14 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"11","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Tax Policy Next to the Elephant: Business Tax Reform in the Wake of the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act\",\"authors\":\"K. Mckenzie, M. Smart\",\"doi\":\"10.2139/ssrn.3352718\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"While there is considerable uncertainty regarding the US Tax Cut and Jobs Act’s (TCJA) economic and fiscal impacts, one thing is certain – the significant corporate tax competitiveness advantage that Canada enjoyed over the US for years has disappeared. This Commentary explores some major TCJA measures as they relate to corporations, examines their implications for Canadian business, evaluates Ottawa’s response in the Fall Economic Statement and discusses what is required going forward. The TCJA impact on real domestic investment in Canada is complicated, with competing effects. The TJCA will likely have a net negative effect on domestic and US foreign investment in Canada, moderated in the long-run by the international nature of capital markets. Still, concerns remain about income shifting due to the statutory rate reductions in the US. Our review of the academic literature suggests the US tax-rate cut will result in Canadian affiliates of US companies shifting homeward 8 percent to 28 percent of their profits – a back-of-the-envelope calculation for sure, but nonetheless suggesting a potential significant impact on Canadian corporate tax revenues. The TCJA represents a long overdue sea change in US corporate taxation and, on balance, will have a positive impact on investment and productivity in that country. However, the reform is not anchored in sound tax principles and introduces undesirable distortions. Ottawa, in its 2018 Fall Economic Statement, duplicated in part some aspects of the US reforms in accelerated depreciation for new capital expenditures. While we think that this short-run response is reasonable in light of the fiscal constraints facing the government and the uncertainty regarding the impact of the TCJA, we do not think that the work is done. The US reform provides an opportunity to make a bold move toward a corporate tax system in Canada that is grounded in sound tax policy principles, is less distortionary, promotes economic growth and prosperity, and restores Canada’s tax competitiveness on a worldwide basis. A structured, principled approach to tax reform in Canada is preferable than an ad hoc response to US developments, which may turn out to be fragile in light of the American political climate and the point in the business cycle. We advocate for a corporate tax system based on the taxation of economic “rents.” A simple example of such a regime is a cash-flow tax, which would involve the immediate write-off of all capital expenditures coupled with the elimination of the debt-interest deduction. The basic idea is to replace the corporate income tax with a rent tax that taxes only the above-normal return on investment and is, therefore, neutral with respect to business investment and financing decisions. A cash-flow tax would reduce the business cost of capital investment by roughly 20 percent – offering a much greater boost to capital investment than alternative and fractional reforms such as temporary accelerated depreciation or statutory tax rate cuts.\",\"PeriodicalId\":330166,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"volume\":\"14 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-03-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"11\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3352718\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Law & Society: Public Law - Tax eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3352718","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 11

摘要

尽管美国减税和就业法案(TCJA)对经济和财政的影响存在相当大的不确定性,但有一件事是肯定的——加拿大多年来对美国享有的显著的公司税竞争优势已经消失。这篇评论探讨了一些主要的TCJA措施,因为它们与公司有关,检查了它们对加拿大商业的影响,评估了渥太华在秋季经济声明中的反应,并讨论了下一步需要做些什么。TCJA对加拿大实际国内投资的影响是复杂的,存在相互矛盾的影响。TJCA可能会对加拿大国内和美国的外国投资产生净负面影响,长期来看,资本市场的国际性会缓和这种影响。尽管如此,人们仍然担心,由于美国的法定税率下调,收入会发生转移。我们对学术文献的回顾表明,美国减税将导致美国公司在加拿大的分支机构将其利润的8%至28%转移回国内——这是一个粗略的计算,但仍然表明对加拿大企业税收收入的潜在重大影响。TCJA代表着美国企业税姗姗来迟的巨变,总的来说,它将对美国的投资和生产率产生积极影响。然而,这一改革并未以健全的税收原则为基础,并引入了不受欢迎的扭曲。加拿大政府在其2018年秋季经济报告中,部分重复了美国在新资本支出加速折旧方面的改革。虽然我们认为,鉴于政府面临的财政限制和TCJA影响的不确定性,这种短期反应是合理的,但我们认为工作还没有完成。美国的改革提供了一个机会,可以大胆地向加拿大的公司税制度迈进,这种制度建立在健全的税收政策原则基础上,不那么扭曲,促进经济增长和繁荣,并恢复加拿大在全球范围内的税收竞争力。对加拿大的税收改革采取结构化的、有原则的方法,比对美国的事态发展做出临时回应更可取。鉴于美国的政治气候和商业周期的转折点,美国的税制改革可能会变得脆弱。我们提倡以经济“租金”为基础的公司税制度。这种制度的一个简单例子是现金流动税,它将涉及立即注销所有资本支出,同时取消债务利息扣除。其基本思想是用租金税取代企业所得税,租金税只对高于正常水平的投资回报征税,因此对企业投资和融资决策是中性的。现金流税将使资本投资的商业成本降低约20%,这对资本投资的提振作用远远大于临时性加速折旧或法定税率下调等其他零碎改革。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Tax Policy Next to the Elephant: Business Tax Reform in the Wake of the US Tax Cuts and Jobs Act
While there is considerable uncertainty regarding the US Tax Cut and Jobs Act’s (TCJA) economic and fiscal impacts, one thing is certain – the significant corporate tax competitiveness advantage that Canada enjoyed over the US for years has disappeared. This Commentary explores some major TCJA measures as they relate to corporations, examines their implications for Canadian business, evaluates Ottawa’s response in the Fall Economic Statement and discusses what is required going forward. The TCJA impact on real domestic investment in Canada is complicated, with competing effects. The TJCA will likely have a net negative effect on domestic and US foreign investment in Canada, moderated in the long-run by the international nature of capital markets. Still, concerns remain about income shifting due to the statutory rate reductions in the US. Our review of the academic literature suggests the US tax-rate cut will result in Canadian affiliates of US companies shifting homeward 8 percent to 28 percent of their profits – a back-of-the-envelope calculation for sure, but nonetheless suggesting a potential significant impact on Canadian corporate tax revenues. The TCJA represents a long overdue sea change in US corporate taxation and, on balance, will have a positive impact on investment and productivity in that country. However, the reform is not anchored in sound tax principles and introduces undesirable distortions. Ottawa, in its 2018 Fall Economic Statement, duplicated in part some aspects of the US reforms in accelerated depreciation for new capital expenditures. While we think that this short-run response is reasonable in light of the fiscal constraints facing the government and the uncertainty regarding the impact of the TCJA, we do not think that the work is done. The US reform provides an opportunity to make a bold move toward a corporate tax system in Canada that is grounded in sound tax policy principles, is less distortionary, promotes economic growth and prosperity, and restores Canada’s tax competitiveness on a worldwide basis. A structured, principled approach to tax reform in Canada is preferable than an ad hoc response to US developments, which may turn out to be fragile in light of the American political climate and the point in the business cycle. We advocate for a corporate tax system based on the taxation of economic “rents.” A simple example of such a regime is a cash-flow tax, which would involve the immediate write-off of all capital expenditures coupled with the elimination of the debt-interest deduction. The basic idea is to replace the corporate income tax with a rent tax that taxes only the above-normal return on investment and is, therefore, neutral with respect to business investment and financing decisions. A cash-flow tax would reduce the business cost of capital investment by roughly 20 percent – offering a much greater boost to capital investment than alternative and fractional reforms such as temporary accelerated depreciation or statutory tax rate cuts.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Misdirected Recipients of Tax Reform: Section 199A, its True Beneficiaries, and Application to Low- and Middle- Income Residents Consistent Taxation in a Cashless Society Is It Time to Eliminate Federal Corporate Income Taxes? Brief of Amici Curiae Former Government Officials in Support of Respondents, CIC Services, LLC v. Internal Revenue Service Allocating COVID-19 State Aid Equitably – The Case of Denmark
×
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