社论:对债务国的利息征税作为DEBRA的替代方案

Pub Date : 2023-02-01 DOI:10.54648/ecta2023010
E. Kemmeren
{"title":"社论:对债务国的利息征税作为DEBRA的替代方案","authors":"E. Kemmeren","doi":"10.54648/ecta2023010","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Basically, a company can be financed by debt or equity. The general national tax systems are that interest, the compensation paid for funds put at disposal by means of a loan, are deductible and that the compensation for funds put at disposal by means of equity is not. In this context, the question often arises of whether this different treatment is justified. Or should they be treated (more) the same? The European Commission has proposed a directive to tackle to debt-equity bias by introducing a notional allowance on equity, on the one hand, and a new limitation on interest deduction, on the other hand (DEBRA). This editorial raises the questions of whether the tax treatment of the remuneration paid on loans (interest) by companies and the remuneration on their equity (profits) as proposed in DEBRA is sufficiently based on principles to contribute to a sustainable tax system with regard to company financing, and if not, what an alternative would be that better complies with those principles. The author concludes that DEBRA is another stopgap for flaws in the current tax systems, which has the potential to further distort the capital markets. He suggests an alternative system based on the principle of origin to remove the debt-equity bias.\ndebt-equity bias, capital markets, tax neutrality, ability-to-pay, direct benefit principle, principle of origin, territorial principle, territoriality principle, taxation of interest, distortion of competition, sustainability","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2023-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Editorial: Taxing Interest in the Debtor State as an Alternative to DEBRA\",\"authors\":\"E. Kemmeren\",\"doi\":\"10.54648/ecta2023010\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Basically, a company can be financed by debt or equity. The general national tax systems are that interest, the compensation paid for funds put at disposal by means of a loan, are deductible and that the compensation for funds put at disposal by means of equity is not. In this context, the question often arises of whether this different treatment is justified. Or should they be treated (more) the same? The European Commission has proposed a directive to tackle to debt-equity bias by introducing a notional allowance on equity, on the one hand, and a new limitation on interest deduction, on the other hand (DEBRA). This editorial raises the questions of whether the tax treatment of the remuneration paid on loans (interest) by companies and the remuneration on their equity (profits) as proposed in DEBRA is sufficiently based on principles to contribute to a sustainable tax system with regard to company financing, and if not, what an alternative would be that better complies with those principles. The author concludes that DEBRA is another stopgap for flaws in the current tax systems, which has the potential to further distort the capital markets. He suggests an alternative system based on the principle of origin to remove the debt-equity bias.\\ndebt-equity bias, capital markets, tax neutrality, ability-to-pay, direct benefit principle, principle of origin, territorial principle, territoriality principle, taxation of interest, distortion of competition, sustainability\",\"PeriodicalId\":0,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2023010\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54648/ecta2023010","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

基本上,一家公司可以通过债务或股权融资。一般的国家税收制度是,利息,即通过贷款处置的资金所支付的补偿,可以扣除,而通过股权处置的资金的补偿则不能扣除。在这种情况下,经常会出现这样一个问题,即这种不同的待遇是否合理。还是应该对他们一视同仁?欧盟委员会提出了一项指令,一方面通过引入名义权益津贴,另一方面通过对利息扣除的新限制来解决债务权益偏见(DEBRA)。这篇社论提出了一个问题,即DEBRA中提出的对公司贷款(利息)报酬和股权(利润)报酬的税收处理是否充分基于原则,有助于建立一个可持续的公司融资税收制度,如果没有,还有什么更符合这些原则的替代方案。作者得出结论,DEBRA是当前税收制度缺陷的又一个权宜之计,有可能进一步扭曲资本市场。他提出了一种基于原产地原则的替代制度,以消除债务-股权偏见。债务-股权偏差、资本市场、税收中性、支付能力、直接利益原则、原产地原则、领土原则、属地原则、利益税、扭曲竞争、可持续性
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
Editorial: Taxing Interest in the Debtor State as an Alternative to DEBRA
Basically, a company can be financed by debt or equity. The general national tax systems are that interest, the compensation paid for funds put at disposal by means of a loan, are deductible and that the compensation for funds put at disposal by means of equity is not. In this context, the question often arises of whether this different treatment is justified. Or should they be treated (more) the same? The European Commission has proposed a directive to tackle to debt-equity bias by introducing a notional allowance on equity, on the one hand, and a new limitation on interest deduction, on the other hand (DEBRA). This editorial raises the questions of whether the tax treatment of the remuneration paid on loans (interest) by companies and the remuneration on their equity (profits) as proposed in DEBRA is sufficiently based on principles to contribute to a sustainable tax system with regard to company financing, and if not, what an alternative would be that better complies with those principles. The author concludes that DEBRA is another stopgap for flaws in the current tax systems, which has the potential to further distort the capital markets. He suggests an alternative system based on the principle of origin to remove the debt-equity bias. debt-equity bias, capital markets, tax neutrality, ability-to-pay, direct benefit principle, principle of origin, territorial principle, territoriality principle, taxation of interest, distortion of competition, sustainability
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
×
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