I didn't know 'transfer pricing' existed until I met a transfer pricing specialist at my banking job.
Yet I still don't understand what they do.
And to be honest, even after reading The Great Multinational Tax Rort I still don't understand much about transfer pricing; other than the fact that their existence is based on helping multinational companies in paying less or no tax by transferring profits to other subsidiaries.
To be fair to Feil, this review is purely dependent on my mood and my key interest at the moment is Finance. So if Feil somehow comes across this post I hope he doesn't take anything personally.
One thing I wanted to mention was that Feil strongly expresses his opinion throughout the book, which I found a bit heavy to take in. I think I am more used to the type of books that make me think and make decisions for myself, rather than the author telling me how to think. But anyhow, with Feil's thorough explanations on his opinions (considering he had a background in transfer pricing himself he's probably right in everything) I found the book very insightful.
Below are the quotes I noted down to have a look at in the future:
The total number of tax havens isn't known, but it is estimated they are holding between $21 and $70 trillion on behalf of high-wealth individuals. in his 2015 book, The Hidden Wealth of Nations, the economist Gabriel Zucman calculated that 8 per cent of the financial wealth of households, or &7.6 trillion, is held in tax havens, and that the money hidden in those havens causes a loss to global tax revenues of US$200 billion a year - including $35 billion in the US and $78 billion a year - including $35 billion in the US and $78 billion in Europe. (p.g. ix)
The multinationals' light-bulb moment was to recognise that subsidiaries did not need to make a profit in every national market. In fact, foreign governments would want to collect taxes on any such profits. The multinationals' solution was to impose charges on their subsidiaries for royalties, manufacturing knowhow, and technical service fees. There were no taxes on charges for intangible services. (p.g. 2)
The almost meaningless expression 'transfer pricing' is used to describe the pricing mechanisms that multinationals employ to charge their subsidiaries in overseas markets for the subsidiaries' purchases of goods and services, intellectual property, interest on loans, and much else. These charges, usually excessive, are imposed where the parties to the transaction are related by common ownership: that is, where it is a parent-subsidiary relationship. (p.g. 2)
Forbes magazine estimated that the total global trade in derivatives is $US700 trillion. That is 10 times the global national income of $US70 trillion. (p.g 19)
Base erosion and profit shifting (BEPS)
The term 'base' refers to a company situated in a low-tax or non-tax country (that is, a tax haven) that is used to shelter income and reduce taxes in the taxpayer's home country. Base companies carry on certain activities on behalf of related companies in high-tax countries (for example, management services), or are used to channel certain income, such as dividends, interest, royalties, and fees. (p.g. 238)
To give a prominent example, Australia Post is a partner with a foreign multinational in what is possibly the largest BEPS strategy in Australia at present. That strategy is in relation to internet-based purchasing of foreign consumer goods. the overseas suppliers of these good are often affiliates of major multinationals (especially in the clothing, footwear, cosmetics, toiletry, and fragrance industries). Internet purchasing now constitutes 15 percent of the Australian retail market, making it the largest consumer goods market in the country.
Australia Post distributes imported, individual retail purchases, and its business was considerably enhanced by the Australian GST-free threshold of $1,000 for goods bought over the internet. The dominant overseas door-to-door delivery service in Australia is provided by the ex-German post office, DHL.
Australia Post is a willing, subordinate partner of DHL. If the DHL couriers don't find people at home to receive a deivery (and they often don't), customers must pick up the parcel at the post office. (p.g. 37-8)
Meanwhile, Qantas has moved its maintenance activities to Singapore. This represents the erosion of a major activity of this Australian industry icon (which began in the 1920s) that obviously is a much more strategically and financialy important function than back-office and regional management functions. The question in the Australian people's minds is whether future maintenance will perpetuate Qantas' proud boast that it has never had a major air accident since it began operations in the 1920s. (p.g. 43)
Even now, many customers only visit these stores to check out colours, sizes and styles, and then buy the garment, shoes, cosmetics, or perfumes on the internet. The internet shopfronts don't pay tax or provide the working conditions that the major retailers provide. They have no permanent establishment in Australia, so they are not taxable. (p.g. 44)
For years, the country's GST-free internet threshold of $1,000 for a single transaction ensured that for 99.9 per cent of imports bought over the internet, there was no duty or GST payable. As an importing business, you could have a hundred $800 transactions a day at Australian ports. The $1,000 figure was by far the highest internet threshold in the world, with the only exceptions being the revenue-duty items of alcohol and tobacco. The threshold had been maintained since the introduction of the GST, but in 2015 the mounting loss of tax revenue finally led the Commonwealth and the states to agree to reduce the threshold massively. The new law takes effect on 1 July 2017, at the same time as the so-called Netflix Tax comes into effect, finally applying the GST to foreign companies selling digital goods and services into Australia. (p.g. 44-5)
Treaties and havens
According to Oxfam's April 2016 report, US multinationals such as Apple, Walmart, and General Electric have stashed $US1.4 trillion in tax havens. Overall, the use of tax havens allowed the 50 largest US firms to reduce their effective tax rate on $4 trillion of profits from the US headline rate of 35 per cent to an average of 26.5 per cent between 2008 and 2014. (p.g.51)
As we have seen, tax havens rely upon secrecy and a complete refusal to disclose their clients' holdings to tax authorities in other countries. They are not competitive with banks operating in the global market. They mind other peoples' money. They don't pay interest on it. They have no legal obligation to respond to the queries of foreign tax authorities. And the latter have no jurisdiction in the countries or islands where the havens are located. (p.g. 59)
Liechtenstein, Bermuda, the Channel Islands, Switzerlands, and Delaware are examples of major havens that will not be closed down without a struggle, as they are aided and abetted by major nations. (p.g. 59)
They (havens) live off the differential between the tax rate in the country where their clients generate taxable income and the environment in the tax haven where they pay no tax but do pay a service charge. (p.g. 59)
Estimates of the funds held in tax havens range between $US20 and $US30 trillion. Such huge numbers often seem meaningless, so perhaps the best way of understanding their immensity is by comparing them to time measurements. A year is 365 days; a century is 36,5000 days; a thousand years is 365,000 days; a billion years is a thousand times a million years; and a trillion is a thousand times a billion years. The annual income of the Australian economy is a bit over $1 trillion. So, the funds in tax havens are equal to the national income of around 30 Australias. (p.g. 100)
A partial list of tax havens (p.g. 222)
Austria
Barbados
Belgium
Bermuda
British Virgin Islands
China
Costa Rica
Fiji
Hong Kong
Ireland
Lebanon
Liberia
London
Luxembourg
Macau
Malaysia
Monaco
Netherlands
Samoa
Singapore
Uruguay
Zug, Switzerland
Transfer-pricing strategies
There is a major difference in both theory and practice between tax avoidance and tax evasion. Avoidance using the provisions of income-tax legislation is legal. Evasion is not.
Transfer pricing comes under the heading of tax avoidance rather than evasion. (p.g. 105)
Apple's total revenue in Australia in 2014, 2015, and 2016 was about $23 billion. Most of the revenue for sales was booked offshore, especially in Singapore. That country does not tax income earned in other countries. The income earned in Australia resulted in tax payments in Australia of $80.4 million in 2014 and $85 million in 2016. A billion is a thousand million, so about $80 million is about 3 per cent of $23 million. That is obviously only a fraction of the company tax rate in Australia. It's also just a fraction of the average Australian worker's tax rate.
Four examples of haven uses (p.g. 107-8)
1. Google's six-step strategy
Steps:
Google pays a major fee to an intellectual-property licensee company in Ireland for advertising costs in Europe (which may or may not have been incurred). That fee is taxable at 12.5 per cent.
The Irish licensee company buys the intellectual-property licence from a Netherlands licensor company that collects a royalty payment for the intellectual property.
The Irish licensee company gets a tax deduction.
Another entity in the Netherlands is taxable on the royalty payment
The Netherlands company pays a royalty (an accounting deduction), is not a tax resident of Ireland, and has no interest in the Irish holding company.
The Irish company is managed in Bermuda.
(The Irish government discontinued the so-called 'double Irish strategy' during the 2014 OECD initiative on transfer pricing.)
2. Amazon owns Amazon EU Sari, which is a Luxembourg resident company.
Amazon sells to its subsidiary, Amazon UK, which has a Berkshire office
Amazon also stocks books from UK publishers and distributors, which it sells direct to customers
Contracts and funds pass directly between Amazon EU Sarl and the customer
Amazon has no permanent establishment
3. Apple's offshore distribution structure:
Apple Holding Company receives dividends from Apple Sales International Ireland
That income comes from foreign-based company sales made by offshore distribution subsidiaries that receive income from customers
The manufacturer is Chinese, and deals directly with Apple Sales International in Ireland
(This strategy may also be terminated as a consequence of the change in the Irish government's policy)
4. Starbucks is a US-based parent that uses royalty payments, internal loans, and goods pricing. It owns two Dutch subsidiaries that, in turn, are paid royalties by Swiss and Dutch companies.
Transfer-pricing methodologies (p.g. 113-4)
The comparable uncontrolled price (CUP)
This method requires determining what would be the arm's-length price for a transaction between unrelated seller and purchasers.
The transactional net margin method (TNMM)
In this method, a company is chosen from among thousands of companies precisely because its financial data gives an outcome that serves the interest of the multinational - that is, it delivers the lowest-tax outcome.
In fact, the resale-minus and cost-plus methodologies are seldom used. The choice in the past 25 years has been between CUP and TNMM. Even then, virtually no multinational has used CUPs.
130121
Comments