In this paper we use firm level data from a listed multinational to investigate how several designs for the Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB) formula could affect the allocation of the consolidated tax base. The design is relevant in the light of member states’ concern for protecting their tax revenues, as well as for the multinational companies’ tax minimizing possibilities. Moreover, it plays an important role in achieving an efficient and simple tax system. Simulating different apportionment formulas, the results show that including more factors and using more equal weights distributes the common tax base more equally, which could reduce the incentive to shift factors from high to low tax countries. The results also indicate that simplifying the factor definitions, leads to rather minor changes in the allocation. Using unpublished data, this study allows to investigate the consequences of different formulas in detail, which contributes to the current discussion on corporate tax harmonization in the EU.

The objective of this paper is to investigate whether auditor industry specialization is consistent across countries. If the specialized knowledge of auditors can be transferred from one country to another, we can expect that international audit firms show consistent patterns of industry specialization across countries. The literature uses two constructs to measure specialization: the market share of an auditor in a specific market, and a portfolio approach focusing on the major industries in the portfolio of clients of the auditor. Using both approaches on data relating to 28,352 European companies, we find that some European industries, and more specifically the chemical and the business services industries, show a high degree of consistency with respect to the market shares of the international audit firms. We also find evidence of specialization of individual audit firms in specific industry segments.

In March 2011, the European Commission launched a proposal for a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base (CCCTB). However, a Common Corporate Tax Base (CCTB), leaving consolidation and apportionment out of consideration, appears to be a more realistic proposition for corporate tax harmonization in Europe. Using the European Tax Analyzer (ETA), we simulate the impact of the CCTB on the effective tax burden in Belgium. The results show that the adoption of the CCTB increases the Belgian effective tax burden by 16%. This remarkable increase is mainly driven by the fact that national tax deductions are not allowed under CCTB. This study allows policymakers to gain insight into the size effects of certain corporate tax measures and contributes to the current discussion on corporate tax harmonization in Europe.

No abstract

Using confidential tax return data, we provide a unique research setting in which the Belgian notional interest deduction (NID) is replaced by the Allowance for Growth and Investment (AGI) as it is proposed by the European Commission. Our results show that the AGI would be a more viable option from a budgetary view. From a company view, however, introducing an AGI system would increase the probability of a higher effective tax rate (ETR). Especially large companies would be harmed as they would face a 7.6 percentage point higher probability of an ETR increase compared with SMEs. Furthermore, we find that there is a positive relationship between the equity ratio and the increased ETR, which is stronger for large firms compared to SMEs. This is in line with previous studies stating that large firms adjusted more aggressively to the NID by increasing their equity ratio more heavily than SMEs. However, large firms still face an ETR that is on average 10.4 percentage points lower compared with SMEs, indicating that the AGI is insufficient to undo the unequal level playing field between large and small companies. (JEL codes: H21, G32, H25, K34).