葡萄牙知识产权盒子:设计投资激励的问题

A. Martins
{"title":"葡萄牙知识产权盒子:设计投资激励的问题","authors":"A. Martins","doi":"10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nPurpose\nThe purpose of this paper is to discuss tax and accounting issues related to the evolution of the intellectual property box in Portugal and present a preliminary view of its impact. In 2014, Portugal adopted an Intellectual Property (IP) box, exempting from corporate taxation half of the gross revenue obtained from selling IP rights. In 2016, the country adopted a new IP regime, in line with BEPS’ recommendations, with stricter rules for exempting income. The “modified nexus approach”, recommended by the OECD, was the cornerstone of legal changes. The research questions addressed in this paper are as follows: was the Portuguese IP box, set up in 2014, internationally competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate when compared to other EU countries? Could its legal design induce potential corporate tax avoidance? Does the new IP box framework reduce avoidance opportunities and does it increase tax and accounting complexity for companies and tax auditors?\n\n\nDesign/methodology/approach\nThe methodology used in this paper is based on the legal research method combined with a case study analysis of the IP box in Portugal. The economic motivation for legal changes, the interaction between the tax authorities and the policy makers in the wake of BEPS’ recommendations, and the economic crisis that Portugal faced, influenced legislative options. A multidisciplinary approach is required to analyse the IP box modifications, and the methodology follows this line of enquiry.\n\n\nFindings\nThe author concludes that the 2014 IP box was not competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate. However, it could be a potential tool for tax avoidance, mainly linked to transfer pricing strategies. Legal changes, introduced in 2016, by enacting stricter rules for granting tax benefits, fit a worldwide trend of restraining profit shifting opportunities linked to intangibles. The new framework clearly impacts tax and accounting complexity, for companies and tax auditors. Preliminary data, for 2014 and 2015, show a negligible impact of the IP box on corporate taxation.\n\n\nPractical implications\nThe “modified nexus approach” is not a definitive panacea for fighting tax avoidance. Multinationals may move resources (e.g. highly specialized persons) to entities that are developing IP, curtailing the restriction associated with acquiring services from related parties. Tax authorities may fight these schemes, but face a challenging task. The grandfathering option and new accounting choices related to expense allocation are delicate issues. Not all countries adopted BEPS’ recommendations at the same time, which may impact international profit shifting activities and increase tax authorities’ costs to control them. The paper also provides preliminary and exploratory evidence that IP boxes, per se, do not suddenly raise the R&D activity of firms.\n\n\nOriginality/value\nThe analysis highlights legal, accounting and economic issues in dealing with changes in investment incentives and can or may be a useful remainder for countries in the process of setting up, or amending, IP boxes.\n","PeriodicalId":42719,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2018-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Portuguese intellectual property box: issues in designing investment incentives\",\"authors\":\"A. Martins\",\"doi\":\"10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nPurpose\\nThe purpose of this paper is to discuss tax and accounting issues related to the evolution of the intellectual property box in Portugal and present a preliminary view of its impact. In 2014, Portugal adopted an Intellectual Property (IP) box, exempting from corporate taxation half of the gross revenue obtained from selling IP rights. In 2016, the country adopted a new IP regime, in line with BEPS’ recommendations, with stricter rules for exempting income. The “modified nexus approach”, recommended by the OECD, was the cornerstone of legal changes. The research questions addressed in this paper are as follows: was the Portuguese IP box, set up in 2014, internationally competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate when compared to other EU countries? Could its legal design induce potential corporate tax avoidance? Does the new IP box framework reduce avoidance opportunities and does it increase tax and accounting complexity for companies and tax auditors?\\n\\n\\nDesign/methodology/approach\\nThe methodology used in this paper is based on the legal research method combined with a case study analysis of the IP box in Portugal. The economic motivation for legal changes, the interaction between the tax authorities and the policy makers in the wake of BEPS’ recommendations, and the economic crisis that Portugal faced, influenced legislative options. A multidisciplinary approach is required to analyse the IP box modifications, and the methodology follows this line of enquiry.\\n\\n\\nFindings\\nThe author concludes that the 2014 IP box was not competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate. However, it could be a potential tool for tax avoidance, mainly linked to transfer pricing strategies. Legal changes, introduced in 2016, by enacting stricter rules for granting tax benefits, fit a worldwide trend of restraining profit shifting opportunities linked to intangibles. The new framework clearly impacts tax and accounting complexity, for companies and tax auditors. Preliminary data, for 2014 and 2015, show a negligible impact of the IP box on corporate taxation.\\n\\n\\nPractical implications\\nThe “modified nexus approach” is not a definitive panacea for fighting tax avoidance. Multinationals may move resources (e.g. highly specialized persons) to entities that are developing IP, curtailing the restriction associated with acquiring services from related parties. Tax authorities may fight these schemes, but face a challenging task. The grandfathering option and new accounting choices related to expense allocation are delicate issues. Not all countries adopted BEPS’ recommendations at the same time, which may impact international profit shifting activities and increase tax authorities’ costs to control them. The paper also provides preliminary and exploratory evidence that IP boxes, per se, do not suddenly raise the R&D activity of firms.\\n\\n\\nOriginality/value\\nThe analysis highlights legal, accounting and economic issues in dealing with changes in investment incentives and can or may be a useful remainder for countries in the process of setting up, or amending, IP boxes.\\n\",\"PeriodicalId\":42719,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2018-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of International Trade Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1108/JITLP-11-2017-0044","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: 1

摘要

本文的目的是讨论与葡萄牙知识产权盒子演变相关的税收和会计问题,并对其影响提出初步看法。2014年,葡萄牙采用了知识产权(IP)盒子,对出售知识产权获得的总收入的一半免征公司税。2016年,根据BEPS的建议,该国采用了新的知识产权制度,对收入豁免有更严格的规定。经合组织(OECD)推荐的“修改后的联系方式”(modified nexus approach)是法律变革的基石。本文研究的问题是:2014年设立的葡萄牙IP box与其他欧盟国家相比,在合格资产范围和税率方面是否具有国际竞争力?它的法律设计会导致潜在的企业避税吗?新的IP盒框架是否减少了避税机会,是否增加了公司和税务审计员的税收和会计复杂性?设计/方法/方法本文使用的方法是基于法律研究方法结合对葡萄牙IP盒子的案例研究分析。法律改革的经济动机、BEPS提出建议后税务当局与政策制定者之间的互动以及葡萄牙面临的经济危机影响了立法选择。需要一种多学科的方法来分析IP盒的修改,方法遵循这条查询线。结论2014年的IP box在符合条件的资产范围和税率方面不具有竞争力。然而,它可能是一个潜在的避税工具,主要与转让定价策略有关。2016年出台的法律改革,通过制定更严格的税收优惠规定,符合全球趋势,即限制与无形资产相关的利润转移机会。对于公司和税务审计员来说,新框架显然会影响税收和会计的复杂性。2014年和2015年的初步数据显示,知识产权盒子对企业税收的影响可以忽略不计。实际意义“改进的联系方式”并不是打击避税的绝对灵丹妙药。跨国公司可以将资源(例如高度专业化的人员)转移到正在开发知识产权的实体,从而减少与从关联方获取服务有关的限制。税务当局可能会打击这些计划,但面临着一项艰巨的任务。与费用分配相关的祖父选择和新的会计选择是微妙的问题。并非所有国家都同时采用BEPS的建议,这可能会影响国际利润转移活动,并增加税务机关控制这些活动的成本。本文还提供了初步和探索性的证据,证明知识产权盒子本身并不会突然提高企业的研发活动。该分析强调了处理投资激励变化的法律、会计和经济问题,可以或可能成为正在建立或修订知识产权盒子的国家的有用参考。
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
The Portuguese intellectual property box: issues in designing investment incentives
Purpose The purpose of this paper is to discuss tax and accounting issues related to the evolution of the intellectual property box in Portugal and present a preliminary view of its impact. In 2014, Portugal adopted an Intellectual Property (IP) box, exempting from corporate taxation half of the gross revenue obtained from selling IP rights. In 2016, the country adopted a new IP regime, in line with BEPS’ recommendations, with stricter rules for exempting income. The “modified nexus approach”, recommended by the OECD, was the cornerstone of legal changes. The research questions addressed in this paper are as follows: was the Portuguese IP box, set up in 2014, internationally competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate when compared to other EU countries? Could its legal design induce potential corporate tax avoidance? Does the new IP box framework reduce avoidance opportunities and does it increase tax and accounting complexity for companies and tax auditors? Design/methodology/approach The methodology used in this paper is based on the legal research method combined with a case study analysis of the IP box in Portugal. The economic motivation for legal changes, the interaction between the tax authorities and the policy makers in the wake of BEPS’ recommendations, and the economic crisis that Portugal faced, influenced legislative options. A multidisciplinary approach is required to analyse the IP box modifications, and the methodology follows this line of enquiry. Findings The author concludes that the 2014 IP box was not competitive in terms of the scope of qualifying assets and the tax rate. However, it could be a potential tool for tax avoidance, mainly linked to transfer pricing strategies. Legal changes, introduced in 2016, by enacting stricter rules for granting tax benefits, fit a worldwide trend of restraining profit shifting opportunities linked to intangibles. The new framework clearly impacts tax and accounting complexity, for companies and tax auditors. Preliminary data, for 2014 and 2015, show a negligible impact of the IP box on corporate taxation. Practical implications The “modified nexus approach” is not a definitive panacea for fighting tax avoidance. Multinationals may move resources (e.g. highly specialized persons) to entities that are developing IP, curtailing the restriction associated with acquiring services from related parties. Tax authorities may fight these schemes, but face a challenging task. The grandfathering option and new accounting choices related to expense allocation are delicate issues. Not all countries adopted BEPS’ recommendations at the same time, which may impact international profit shifting activities and increase tax authorities’ costs to control them. The paper also provides preliminary and exploratory evidence that IP boxes, per se, do not suddenly raise the R&D activity of firms. Originality/value The analysis highlights legal, accounting and economic issues in dealing with changes in investment incentives and can or may be a useful remainder for countries in the process of setting up, or amending, IP boxes.
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
11.10%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: The Journal of International Trade Law and Policy is a peer reviewed interdisciplinary journal with a focus upon the nexus of international economic policy and international economic law. It is receptive, but not limited, to the methods of economics, law, and the social sciences. As scholars tend to read individual articles of particular interest to them, rather than an entire issue, authors are not required to write with full accessibility to readers from all disciplines within the purview of the Journal. However, interdisciplinary communication should be fostered where possible. Thus economists can utilize quantitative methods (including econometrics and statistics), while legal scholars and political scientists can invoke specialized techniques and theories. Appendices are encouraged for more technical material. Submissions should contribute to understanding international economic policy and the institutional/legal architecture in which it is implemented. Submissions can be conceptual (theoretical) and/or empirical and/or doctrinal in content. Topics of interest to the Journal are expected to evolve over time but include: -All aspects of international trade law and policy -All aspects of international investment law and policy -All aspects of international development law and policy -All aspects of international financial law and policy -Relationship between economic policy and law and other societal concerns, including the human rights, environment, health, development, and national security
期刊最新文献
Revisiting Indonesia halal tourism policy in light of GATS Bilateral investment treaties and investors’ social accountability: the law and praxis in South Asia A shadowy negotiation involving dams and its fiscal and legal implications: a Portuguese case study Negotiations on food security at the WTO: a never-ending story? US technological statecraft towards China
×
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