search.noResults

search.searching

saml.title
dataCollection.invalidEmail
note.createNoteMessage

search.noResults

search.searching

orderForm.title

orderForm.productCode
orderForm.description
orderForm.quantity
orderForm.itemPrice
orderForm.price
orderForm.totalPrice
orderForm.deliveryDetails.billingAddress
orderForm.deliveryDetails.deliveryAddress
orderForm.noItems
REGIONS AMERICAS


BetterUSinfrastructure, but atwhatcost? I


JOE BIDEN’S TAX OVERHAUL STIRS DOUBTS OVER ITS IMPACT ON LOCAL FIRMS AND RESHORING. DANIELLE MYLES REPORTS


n March, US president Joe Biden announced to great fanfare a $2tn upgrade of the country’s crum-


bling infrastructure. The business tax hikes he has proposed to pay for the improvements have been met with somewhat less enthusiasm. The gov- ernment wants to increase the 21% corporate rate to 28%, making the US’s combined federal-state tax rate the highest in the OECD. The coun-


try’s multinationals already face the unique burden of paying taxes — a not insubstantial 10.5% — on foreign earnings. Mr Biden wants to double those contributions to 21%. These two changes,which are accompanied


by a bevy of other reforms, have drawn the ire of corporate America. Experts note that Mr Biden has tabled policies that no country has tried to enforce before.“We are in newterritory in terms of taxing the richest Americans and biggest companies,” says Gary Hufbauer, non- resident senior fellow at the Peterson Institute for International Economics. Taken as a whole, economists believe the ‘Made in America Tax Plan’ is misguided and will be accompanied by a litany of unintended consequences.


Layerednegative incentives The changes purportedly aim to make the US more competitive and targetmultinational cor- porations (MNCs) by eliminating incentives to offshore operations. But the Tax Foundation, a think tank based in Washington DC, estimates that a 28% corporate rate would cut the coun- try’s long-term economic output by 0.8% and eliminate 159,000 jobs. A higher headline rate is also tipped to hit local businesses more than those operating overseas. “Domestic business doesn’t have access to loopholes through the likes of international profit shifting. So, they would be the ones to suffer most — especially the profitable smaller andmedium-sized ones,”


YOUDON’TGOTO THEUS BECAUSE IT’SAFAVOURABLE TAX ENVIRONMENT


52


says Dame DeAnne Julius, a senior adviser to ChathamHouse. What could help level the playing field, she


notes, is doubling the levy imposed on MNCs’ overseas profits. The global intangible low- taxed income, fittingly known by the abbrevia- tion Gilti, was introduced in 2017 and aims to stop firms booking profits and shifting jobs to low-tax countries. Plans to lift the surcharge to 21%has helped reignite the OECD’s stalled pro- ject to set a global minimumcorporate tax rate (see page 38), but international agreement is not guaranteed and observers believe Mr Biden is risking much by going it alone. Mr Hufbauer, a former Treasury official,


says “makingMNCs with overseas production a villain is misplaced”, pointing to research showing they create more US jobs and invest more than their homebody counterparts. Daniel Bunn, the Tax Foundation’s vice presi- dent of global projects, argues the reforms col- lectively create barriers to MNC investment at home. “The tax wedge on that investment is going to be larger, both because of the tax on the foreign earnings and the higher domestic rate,” he says. “That is layered negative incen- tives on investment.”


Head-scratching reforms Contrary to successive US governments’ goal, many argue the reforms discourage reshoring. “If you can get a foreign rate of 21% and your domestic rate would be 28%, then maybe it makes sense to leave your stuff offshore and makenewinvestments overseas,” saysMrBunn. Some are also scratching their heads over the decision to abolish today’s 13.5% reduced rate for foreign income earned from intellectual property kept within the country. “It seems to me that the big incentive [was] to conduct research and development in the US, and license use of the patent or copyright abroad,” observes Mr Hufbauer. Another change that might backfire is the


crackdown on inversions — a deal structure whereby US firms redomicile by being acquired by small businesses in low-tax jurisdictions. Mr Hufbauer argues that raising hurdles to inver- sions encourages tech start-ups to move over- seas from the outset. “That effect would not be felt during the Biden administration, but I think the Apples, Googles and Facebooks of tomorrow, early in their life, would be advised by their accountants to consider setting up headquarters someplace else,” he says. However, others insist that America’s abun-


www.fDiIntelligence.com June/July 2021


Page 1  |  Page 2  |  Page 3  |  Page 4  |  Page 5  |  Page 6  |  Page 7  |  Page 8  |  Page 9  |  Page 10  |  Page 11  |  Page 12  |  Page 13  |  Page 14  |  Page 15  |  Page 16  |  Page 17  |  Page 18  |  Page 19  |  Page 20  |  Page 21  |  Page 22  |  Page 23  |  Page 24  |  Page 25  |  Page 26  |  Page 27  |  Page 28  |  Page 29  |  Page 30  |  Page 31  |  Page 32  |  Page 33  |  Page 34  |  Page 35  |  Page 36  |  Page 37  |  Page 38  |  Page 39  |  Page 40  |  Page 41  |  Page 42  |  Page 43  |  Page 44  |  Page 45  |  Page 46  |  Page 47  |  Page 48  |  Page 49  |  Page 50  |  Page 51  |  Page 52  |  Page 53  |  Page 54  |  Page 55  |  Page 56  |  Page 57  |  Page 58  |  Page 59  |  Page 60  |  Page 61  |  Page 62  |  Page 63  |  Page 64  |  Page 65  |  Page 66  |  Page 67  |  Page 68  |  Page 69  |  Page 70  |  Page 71  |  Page 72  |  Page 73  |  Page 74  |  Page 75  |  Page 76  |  Page 77  |  Page 78  |  Page 79  |  Page 80  |  Page 81  |  Page 82  |  Page 83  |  Page 84  |  Page 85  |  Page 86  |  Page 87  |  Page 88