The US has been trying to get multinationals based in the US to pay taxes on revenue generated outside of the country for years. Now Europe is going after multinationals, as well.
The New York Times reports today that several European nations, particularly France and the UK, are pushing to collect taxes from US companies such as Amazon.com and Google that conduct their business primarily on the Internet. Though the companies are in compliance with EU tax laws, governments struggling to balance their budgets are taking a second look at tax codes.
The US has been fighting a similar battle on two fronts: state taxes and corporate income taxes. Some US states have been able to collect taxes from Internet sales when a shipper (such as Amazon.com) has a physical presence in the state. Corporate tax efforts have been less successful. International companies are in full compliance with US laws when they bank their revenue in foreign countries, and companies such as Amazon, Apple, Cisco, Google, and General Electric pay virtually no US taxes on that revenue. (See: It's Only a Holiday if You Actually Pay Taxes.)
Several remedies have been suggested by the US, including amnesty or one-time-only charges for companies that want to repatriate their cash. (See: Apple, Cisco, Google, Seek Tax Relief to Repatriate Cash.) Detractors reject the proposals, saying the revenue derived from such moves would have little or no effect on the nation's debt crisis. They are absolutely right. The US -- like many other nations -- is beyond a onetime fix. Closing tax loopholes has been a popular campaign promise in the US, but little progress has been made. Now it will be a race to see which government collects those international taxes first.
Clearly, the US fiscal cliff and the EU's debt crisis are fueling those efforts, and maybe it does take a global economic crisis to spur tax reform. But it shouldn't. Either the tax codes are equitable, or they're not. The furor over multinationals' revenue implies the tax laws are OK until somebody really needs the money. According to the NYT, companies like Google and Amazon.com "pay little or no taxes in Europe, despite generating billions of dollars in revenue on the Continent."
Business models such as the Internet do change tax implications, and tax codes should be updated accordingly. The Internet is still a relatively new business model, and it's understandable that it may take a while for tax codes to catch up. However, globalization isn't new. Tax loopholes should be identified and closed when questions first arise. "While some American corporate leaders have been lobbying in Washington for another tax holiday, lawmakers in Europe are moving to collect a greater share of multinationals' taxes," the NYT says.
Though it's tough to have a lot of sympathy for multinational corporations sitting on piles of cash, their revenue shouldn't be the spoils of an international tax war.
Has they proposed a federa linternet tax? I'm no expert in tax law, btw. I believe that, even if I'm benefiting from it, we should probably pay some taxes.
Starbucks will no doubt survive...but coffee is being attacked on a different front: local governments. A town in Massachusetts has banned styrofoam. Starbucks has the paper cups, but its competitors and Chinese take-out places don't...it is wreaking much havoc in the on-the-go industry. Thank goodness I am a home office worker since I can't legally drive before I have my coffee.
Douglas: Funny you should mention it--I was thinking the same thing about gas and oil. Unrest in the Middle East sent oil price up, and I'm trying to think of another industry where bad news is good news for the market. I suppose a bad flu season can send pharm stocks up...but it is all so counter-intuitive. In these cases, hurting the consumer helps investors. Really!?
And I agree, there will be more loopholes as soon as we close the existing ones and/or costs will go up.
@Barbara, you and I both know that if we close the corporate tax loopholes, the corporations will find some way to make-up for the lost revenues via passing the cost to the consumer. Oil and gas companies play with the prices at the pump no matter their real-time working expenditures. All we have to hear is that a refinery exploded and we know that within days or hours, the price at the pump will go up. That drives me nuts. Someone is calling the shots based upon knee jerk reactions with no actual cost analysis based upon actual, remedial action requirements.
Well do not think Barbara, that Starbucks will be trembling in their boots yet as the response so far is a bit of huffing and puffing and threats to boycott them and appeals that they could fund our library system.
As for a mass movement for people to boycott Amazon with Christmas coming up think that could be the most broken boycott in history Lol.
Things will build up to a head though, as as you point out national governments are desperate for more funds and it seems these companies are the only ones who have any!
I did not mention the spending perspective in my previous message but that is an important item to bring into the equation. If the government is not using the money wisely end efficiently, that is also very unfair to the general public. That would be like saying: "You pay me more so that I can waste it as I like", which is absolutely unacceptable.
@RJ: First, do not tax my coffee! Good point about lobbyists. It makes me crazy to see politicians "in the back pocket" of the big spenders. In many cases we see policians voting in favor of things they opposed during campaigns. We accept this as a matter of course, but we shouldn't.
Cryptoman: Overall, I agree with you, corporations should pay their fair share (whatever that is). Unfortunately, the real reason for debt is spending, and if I truly believed our tax revenue was being spent prudently, I'd rally to chase multinationals. In fact, a few years ago I did. But rather than getting creative with tax collection, governments should get creative with their spending and investment -- just like the rest of us. I know it is a complex task and in the US it divides the politicians sharply. But there have been so many instances where money is being wasted -- I'm talking billions -- that a massive tax overhaul is needed, not just offshore loopholes.
EBN Dialogue enables and encourages you to participate in live chats with notable leaders and luminaries. Not only editors and journalists, but the entire EBN community is able to comment and ask questions. Listed below are upcoming and archived chats.
Archived Dialogues
Thailand Stages a Comeback Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Euro-Crisis: What It Means for High-Tech Firms Join EBN Editor in Chief Bolaji Ojo and Contributing Editor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday, July 12, at 10:00 a.m. EDT for a Live Chat on high-tech and Europe's economic difficulties.
Microsoft Surface: Potential Winners & Losers What are the implications for the electronics industry supply chain of Microsoft Corp.'s decision to launch its own tablet PC? Join industry veteran and EE Times' systems and OEM expert Rick Merritt on Tuesday, July 3, at 12:00 pm EDT for a Live Chat on this subject.
Join EBN contributor Jennifer Baljko on Thursday August 23, 2012, at 11:00 a.m. EST for a live chat on how electronic manufacturers in Thailand have shored up their supply chain to reduce the impact of future natural disasters.
Peter Drucker famously said "Trying to predict the future is like trying to drive down a country road at night with no lights while looking out the back window." Yet in the razor's-edge world of electronics—with a lean supply chain and just-in-time demands—the need to know the future is vital.
While no one really can accurately predict the future, we can take guidance from another Drucker saying which is the best way to predict the future is to create it.
You've heard the saying "the No. 1 supply chain risk is your people." That hasn't always been the case. But today's complex global supply chain requires a new type of multitalented employee. It's one who understands, finance, marketing, economics, is savvy with technology, graceful with relationships and can think analytically.
Where are these people? Are universities properly preparing the next generation supply chain professionals? How do train your existing workforce for these new, demanding positions?
Brian Fuller, editor-in-chief of EBN, will lead a 60-minute Avnet Velocity panel discussion that will ask and answer these and other questions swirling around today's supply-chain talent challenges.
To save this item to your list of favorite EBN content so you can find it later in your Profile page, click the "Save It" button next to the item.
If you found this interesting or useful, please use the links to the services below to share it with other readers. You will need a free account with each service to share an item via that service.
Tweet This