Taxation of multinational banks : using formulary apportionment to reflect economic reality (Part 2)

As stated in Part 1 of this article, formulary appointment does not attempt to undertake a transactional division of a highly integrated multinational entity; rather, it allocates income to the jurisdictions based on economically justifiable formula. This article argues that the unitary taxation model is superior to the current arms-lenght model for the taxation of multinational banks despite significant implementation, complicance and enforcement issues. Part one of the article gave some background on the taxation of multinational banks, followed by a discussion of their uniqueness, and the theoretical benefits of the unitary tax model for multinational banking. Part 2 below covers the practical implications of accepting formulary apportionment as an 'optimal' regime for taxing multinational banks.

The taxation of multinational banking income : is the traditional rationale correct?

This article argues that multinational banks have characteristics which are unique and distinguishable from traditional multinational entities. The first distinguishing feature is the unique nature of the services and consequent products supplied by multinational banks, which are aimed at meeting client global demand. The second distinguishing feature is the non-traditional organisational structure that is adopted. This structure, also designed to meet client global demand, introduces issues previously not recognised in the traditional taxation system, which is designed for the structure of traditional multinational entities. The unique differences between traditional multinational entities and multinational banks means there may be the need for a distinct international tax regime. It is argued that there are “outmoded economic assumptions” upon which the present tax laws relating to multinational banks are based. An examination of the unique nature of multinational banks leads to the conclusion that the appropriate tax treatment of these banks is different from the appropriate tax treatment of multinational entities generally.

Principles of taxation law 2008

Covers the fundamental principles of the Australian tax system, providing students with guidance on reading and using tax resources such as legislation, case law and Australian Taxation Office rulings -- Back cover.

Principles of taxation law [2nd Ed.]

"With its clear and concise explanations of taxation law concepts, Principles of Taxation Law 2009 is the ideal text for students studying this complex subject. It covers all major topics underpinning the Australian tax system, including income, deductions, capital gains, tax accounting, international issues, fringe benefits, tax administration, goods and services tax and, in this new edition, offsets and superannuation. Importantly, the book commences with a special chapter on how to study tax law and succeed in taxation law exams."--Publisher description.

Principles of taxation law 2011 [4th ed.]

Taxation law can be an incredibly complex subject to absorb, particularly when time is limited. Written specifically for students, Principles of Taxation Law 2011 brings much needed clarity to this area of law -- Back cover.

The taxation of international maritime leasing profits : has the commissioners ship come in?

In light of McDermott Industries (AUST) Pty Ltd v Commissioner of Taxation, and Draft Taxation Ruling TR 2006/D8, this article considers the current Australian taxation position of profits arising from the cross-border leasing of vessels in the maritime industry. It focuses on the tax treaties to which Australia is a party, in particular the application of the business profits provisions of those treaties, and the deemed existence of a permanent establishment where substantial equipment, owned by a fiscal non-resident, is used within Australian waters.

Judicial and legislative considerations in the taxation of compensation receipts : an international comparison

In 1995, the Federal Commissioner of Taxation released Taxation Ruling TR 95/35 in an attempt to comprehensively address the appropriate capital gains tax treatment of a receipt of compensation, awarded either by the courts or via a settlement. The ruling was in response to the numerous, somewhat contradictory, court decisions of the early 1990s. Despite the release of TR 95/35, there still appears to be a lack of consensus as to the appropriate treatment of such awards. It has been suggested that the only way a taxpayer can, with any certainty, determine their liability is to obtain a private binding ruling, a far from satisfactory situation. In an attempt to clarify what the capital gains tax consequences of a compensation receipt should be, this article examines the Australian position and explores the comparative jurisprudence of the United Kingdom and Canada to ascertain whether the Australian attitude is consistent with these international jurisdictions. This article concludes that while the jurisdictions, through differing approaches, achieve a similar result, there is still a need to address the uncertainties that remain.

Unitary taxation : The case for global formulary apportionment

Unitary taxation is the taxation of the worldwide income of a multinational enterprise (MNE) and is normally based on a formulary apportionment method, which allocates income to the relevant jurisdictions based on a percentage of the MNE's world-wide profits. The unitary taxation model has several advantages over the existing arm's length model: 1. Where MNEs are highly integrated, unitary taxation has greater consistency with economic reality. 2. Greater certainty is provided to taxpayers. 3. Unitary taxation conforms to the aim of efficient operations within the MNE. 4. The aim of unitary taxation, to find an equitable split of profits between the jurisdictions, should ultimately be the overall aim of any tax regime. The advantages and disadvantages associated with the adoption of a unitary taxation model through the implementation of a formulary apportionment approach to the taxation of MNEs are examined.

An examination of recent taxation amendments, corporate law reforms and Queensland legislative reforms affecting nonprofit organisations

There is a tax amendment bill which will be debated. The Government has promised to outline its plan for the reform of the taxation system sometime this year. The plans appear to go beyond the mere introduction of some sort of goods and services tax to reform of the whole taxation system including fiscal relations with the States. Not for profit organisations will find their taxation environment will change. Governments are reluctant to permit exemptions to a GST style arrangements. GST trade offs such as reduced income tax rates and abolishing indirect taxes are useless to nonprofit organisations, as many are already exempt from such imposts. Administrative changes to tax collections may also have an impact. If the government decides to make an individual PAYE taxpayer return optional in exchange for no or standard deductions, this may have an effect on fundraising. The FBT and salary packaging schemes that not for profit organisations use will be under intense scrutiny. A regionalisation of the ATO along the successful model of the ASC would see discrete areas such as not for profit exemptions being centralised in one regional office for the whole of Australia. For example the Tasmanian ASC Office has the responsibility for much work in respect of corporate charities and not for profit companies.

Taxation of multinational banks : using formulary apportionment to reflect economic reality

The taxation of multinational banks is currently governed by general principles of international tax. However, there are characteristics exclusive to multinational banks that may warrant consideration of a separate taxing regime, as the current system does not produce a result that accurately reflects the economic source of the income or the location of the economic activity. The suggested alternative is unitary taxation using global formulary apportionment.

Nonprofit organisations and value added (GST) taxation

The subject of this paper is the changes in the taxation of non-profit organisations which seem to be more or less inherent in the value added taxes. The Australian federal Coalition's proposed goods and services tax will be part of the discussion.

"Money pouring out of its ears" : on the taxation of really profitable nonprofit organisations in Australia

Under current law Australia appears to be a tax haven for certain non-governmental institutions. Millions of ordinary business income may go untaxed and the deductibility for donations is unlimited - both are very generous tax measures in an international context. The basic problems of most Australian nonprofit organisations are not taxation; they are just that: nonprofit. Anybody interested in the non-governmental sector should be willing to face the question: What is an equitable tax treatment? The short-term tactic of ducking the question may not be the best or most beneficial long term strategy.

Case study of Queensland state taxation

1. Like the Commonwealth Tax regime, state taxation legislation has now ballooned in size from the good old days when life and tax were relatively simple issues. 2. This case study of Queensland state taxation will examine the following taxes affecting churches and charities in this state: (a) Stamp Duty (b) Land Tax; and (c) Local Authority Rates 3. Each type of tax will be considered in turn. A brief legislative history of the statutory instruments governing these taxes will be given with a closer examination of the present schemes. Relevant judicial pronouncements will be considered and some open discussion of real life examples. 4. It is submitted that the regular donors to our worthy charities and the dedicated weekly churchgoers would have absolutely no idea: (a) that indirectly the value of their donations and weekly offerings are increasingly being eroded by the imposts of Government not only in terms of the amounts of those imposts but the enormous administrative burden of coping with the legislation; (b) of the complexity of the taxation legislation affecting their churches and charities; or (c) that their churches and charities are even paying taxes.