International business and public policy research have examined the techniques that multinational enterprises (MNEs) use to shift revenues to subsidiaries in offshore financial centres (OFCs) in order to minimize tax liability and arbitrage for their advantage. While study of such tax arbitrage strategies has looked to geographical locations and legal dimensions to better understand these strategies, it has ignored the structural and organizational relationship between MNEs and their subsidiaries. We define two distinct types of OFC-based corporate entities based on their location among and apparent control over other MNE affiliates: ‘stand-alone’ OFCs at the end of a chain of MNE subsidiaries; and ‘in-betweener’ OFCs with equity control over further entities and hence apparent flexibility to redirect profits to other MNE subsidiaries further down the chain. We hypothesize that when MNEs have in-betweener OFCs controlling a substantial share of overall MNE profits, this indicates greater MNE interest in aggressive tax planning (ATP). We then evaluate empirical support for our claims based on an ‘equity mapping’ approach identifying stand-alone and in-betweener OFCs in 100 of the largest MNEs operating globally. This study demonstrates that a key factor determining tax arbitrage is not the amount of value registered on OFC subsidiaries’ balance sheets, but rather the portion of the group’s operating revenues and net income controlled by OFC subsidiaries. National taxing authorities could benefit from tracking in-betweener OFC locations and behaviour to counter ATP strategies, decrease sovereign arbitrage, and increase MNE tax revenue.
In this article, we discuss the way offshore financial centres are used by the multi-subsidiary, multi-jurisdictional group structure known as the ‘multinational enterprise’ to arbitrage between social geographies of political jurisdictions. We define arbitrage as the use of corporate legal entities located in diverse jurisdictions to arbitrate a third country's rules and regulations. Using a new method to categorize firm-level data from Van Dijk’s Orbis, we operationalize the notion of arbitrage to systematically detail and compare the structural sequencing choices firms are making, likely in part for reasons of arbitrage. We base our techniques on legal theory of the firm, acknowledging the underpinning of social technologies of law and accounting by which business enterprises are constructed and maintained. We conclude that two specific types of entities, ‘standalones’ versus ‘in-betweeners’, are qualitatively different from others in the activities they perform. We also highlight the existence of liability structures, or ‘fuses’, which typically take the form of a split ownership arrangement. Ultimately, we demonstrate that the position of a firm’s subsidiary within the overall network ecology of that firm is as important as its jurisdictional registration location.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.