德国公司税的分割与CCCTB的公式化分布——关键比较

IF 0.5 Q4 ECONOMICS
Sandra Müller-Thomczik, L. Reiter
{"title":"德国公司税的分割与CCCTB的公式化分布——关键比较","authors":"Sandra Müller-Thomczik, L. Reiter","doi":"10.2478/ceej-2022-0016","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract The introduction of a formulaically apportioned common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) could represent a milestone in international taxation. No agreement has yet been reached, however. In contrast, Germany already has a long-standing system that apportions corporate taxes by splitting trade tax and corporate income tax. This conceptual study, presented at the European Accounting Association (EAA) Congress in Bergen in 2022, will examine whether the German method of splitting could lead to some lessons for an appropriate design for an international profit distribution formula. Methodologically, we use a two-step approach: First, we compare the designs, and then we juxtapose both on a factual level. Next, we ask what the objectives these mechanisms have; do they even coincide? If the goals are not comparable, one cannot indisputably serve as a model for the other. We determine that, even though there are partial deviations, a closer look reveals significant overlaps; however, the German implementation is far from consistent and prioritises practicability. This leads us to our main result: The German system makes a clear value decision towards practicability, although there is a different set of aims. For the implementation of formulaic EU profit sharing, the lesson to be learned is that practicability should play a central role in the design of the formula. This lesson is important and helpful to accompany and support the implementation process in the EU.","PeriodicalId":9951,"journal":{"name":"Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics","volume":"20 1","pages":"269 - 290"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Splitting of Corporate Taxes in Germany and Formulaic Distribution of a CCCTB – Critical Comparison\",\"authors\":\"Sandra Müller-Thomczik, L. Reiter\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/ceej-2022-0016\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract The introduction of a formulaically apportioned common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) could represent a milestone in international taxation. No agreement has yet been reached, however. In contrast, Germany already has a long-standing system that apportions corporate taxes by splitting trade tax and corporate income tax. This conceptual study, presented at the European Accounting Association (EAA) Congress in Bergen in 2022, will examine whether the German method of splitting could lead to some lessons for an appropriate design for an international profit distribution formula. Methodologically, we use a two-step approach: First, we compare the designs, and then we juxtapose both on a factual level. Next, we ask what the objectives these mechanisms have; do they even coincide? If the goals are not comparable, one cannot indisputably serve as a model for the other. We determine that, even though there are partial deviations, a closer look reveals significant overlaps; however, the German implementation is far from consistent and prioritises practicability. This leads us to our main result: The German system makes a clear value decision towards practicability, although there is a different set of aims. For the implementation of formulaic EU profit sharing, the lesson to be learned is that practicability should play a central role in the design of the formula. This lesson is important and helpful to accompany and support the implementation process in the EU.\",\"PeriodicalId\":9951,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics\",\"volume\":\"20 1\",\"pages\":\"269 - 290\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2022-0016\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"ECONOMICS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ceej-2022-0016","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

引入公式化分摊的共同合并企业税基(CCCTB)可能代表国际税收的一个里程碑。然而,双方尚未达成协议。相比之下,德国已经有了一个长期存在的制度,即通过分离贸易税和企业所得税来分配公司税。这项概念性研究将于2022年在卑尔根举行的欧洲会计协会(EAA)大会上提出,研究德国的分割方法是否可以为设计合适的国际利润分配公式提供一些经验教训。在方法上,我们采用两步方法:首先,我们比较设计,然后我们在事实层面上并置两者。接下来,我们要问这些机制的目标是什么;它们重合吗?如果两国的目标没有可比性,就不可能无可争议地成为另一个目标的典范。我们确定,即使存在部分偏差,仔细观察也会发现显著的重叠;然而,德国的实施远非一致,而是优先考虑实用性。这就引出了我们的主要结论:德国体系对实用性做出了明确的价值决策,尽管有不同的目标。要实施公式化的欧盟利润分享,我们应该吸取的教训是,在设计这个公式时,实用性应该发挥核心作用。这一教训对于陪伴和支持欧盟的实施进程非常重要和有益。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Splitting of Corporate Taxes in Germany and Formulaic Distribution of a CCCTB – Critical Comparison
Abstract The introduction of a formulaically apportioned common consolidated corporate tax base (CCCTB) could represent a milestone in international taxation. No agreement has yet been reached, however. In contrast, Germany already has a long-standing system that apportions corporate taxes by splitting trade tax and corporate income tax. This conceptual study, presented at the European Accounting Association (EAA) Congress in Bergen in 2022, will examine whether the German method of splitting could lead to some lessons for an appropriate design for an international profit distribution formula. Methodologically, we use a two-step approach: First, we compare the designs, and then we juxtapose both on a factual level. Next, we ask what the objectives these mechanisms have; do they even coincide? If the goals are not comparable, one cannot indisputably serve as a model for the other. We determine that, even though there are partial deviations, a closer look reveals significant overlaps; however, the German implementation is far from consistent and prioritises practicability. This leads us to our main result: The German system makes a clear value decision towards practicability, although there is a different set of aims. For the implementation of formulaic EU profit sharing, the lesson to be learned is that practicability should play a central role in the design of the formula. This lesson is important and helpful to accompany and support the implementation process in the EU.
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
0.60
自引率
0.00%
发文量
9
期刊介绍: The Central European Journal of Economic Modelling and Econometrics (CEJEME) is a quarterly international journal. It aims to publish articles focusing on mathematical or statistical models in economic sciences. Papers covering the application of existing econometric techniques to a wide variety of problems in economics, in particular in macroeconomics and finance are welcome. Advanced empirical studies devoted to modelling and forecasting of Central and Eastern European economies are of particular interest. Any rigorous methods of statistical inference can be used and articles representing Bayesian econometrics are decidedly within the range of the Journal''s interests.
×
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
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
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 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信