scholarly journals Corporate Tax Reform and “Value Creation”: Towards Unfettered Diagonal Re-allocation across the Global Inequality Chain

Author(s):  
David Quentin

Abstract Discussion of corporate tax reform loosely uses concepts like “value creation” and “economic substance” as a basis for systematic departures from the tax outcomes that would otherwise eventuate from computational artifacts based on price, but in fact mainstream economics does not have a theory of value creation as distinct from computational artifacts based on price. Corporate tax reform discourse is therefore an unacknowledged exercise in heterodox value theory. This article deploys global value chain theory to question a key assumption in that exercise; the assumption that while intra-group pricing may be modified or ignored for the purposes of reallocating the corporate tax base between jurisdictions for corporate tax purposes, prices arrived at between entities not under common control are sacrosanct. The article proceeds to deploy an expanded version of the global value chain analytic, the “global inequality chain”, to (i) investigate this question using a schematic illustrative case study based around Amazon’s UK/Luxembourg structuring, and (ii) to develop the beginnings of a concept of “unitary taxation by formulary apportionment of the entire value chain”, which would enable unfettered “diagonal” re-allocations across the space which the global inequality chain describes.

2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 73-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Havice ◽  
John Pickles

In the spirit of Ibert et al.’s ‘Geographies of Dissociation: Value Creation, “Dark” Places, and “Missing” Links’, we briefly suggest several ways in which ‘Geographies of Dissociation’ itself elides certain crucial issues in the cultural economies of value. The first relates to the need to develop more fully and concretely the relational spatialities of globally networked production. The second follows from this by suggesting that, in order to consolidate its argument of lacunae and elisions, the article overlooks or downplays crucial elements in the work of global value chain research, cultural studies and broader cultural-economic geography, and value theory that have—in their own ways—developed complex analyses of the spatial articulations of governance, ownership, branding, and the production of value. We conclude by returning to Marx’s value theory of labor (not to be confused with Ricardian labor theory of value) to suggest that a more direct question about what drives systems of cultural valuation in the context of networked production might enable the authors to advance the development of a dissociative geography.


2018 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-29
Author(s):  
Inka Gersch

Abstract The fundamental restructuring processes of agri-food networks in developing and emerging markets have intensified the debate on how to improve the integration of smallholders into so called modern value chains. In this context, the company-driven contract farming model and the member-based model of producer organizations are discussed by practitioners and in the scholarly literature as alternatives to traditional market systems. This study compares the models’ abilities to address economic challenges of highly fragmented and small-scale dominated agriculture on a household as well as on an aggregate level. It analyzes empirical data from the Indian floriculture sector with the global value chain approach. The study reveals that the smallholders perceive both contract farming and producer organization to be beneficial for their households’ economic risk situation, while only the producer organization has a positive effect on the households’ income. The contract farming benefits production and value chain efficiency, whereas the producer organization does not show an impact in these respects. We thus observe that the contract farming model increases value creation in the overall chain, but it does not raise the producer’s value capture; while the producer organization model does not heighten value creation in the overall chain, but it lifts the producers’ value capture. The organization’s individual capabilities determine how each model addresses the economic challenges. Overall, the author argues that contract farming and producer organizations are supplementing, not competitive, strategies and should be applied in combination.


2007 ◽  
Vol 35 (3) ◽  
pp. 440-459 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gilbert E. Metcalf

Significance Corporate tax may be one area where it could be possible to find some common ground between the otherwise gridlocked Republican Congress and the Democratic White House. President Barack Obama has proposed a one-time repatriation tax on cash held overseas by companies to be followed by a full-spectrum tax code overhaul. Impacts Lobbyists may support a repatriation amnesty, but will obstruct any initiative that raises effective tax rates. European Commission independence from member states may see the EU lead on corporate tax investigations. Australia will move slowly on corporate tax reform if the coalition government remains distracted by leadership disputes.


Significance On July 15, the House of Representatives passed a short-term funding measure, against the wishes of many in the Senate. US infrastructure is facing a fiscal crunch. Taxes on gasoline have traditionally supported highway appropriations. However, eroding purchasing power and greater fuel efficiency means that about 30% of highway funding must be found from other sources, difficult in the current Congress. The present round of appropriations expires on July 31. Impacts A corporate tax might provide a long-term resolution, but the pursuit of it would come at the cost of seeking more modest solutions. These would provide stability for a year or two, necessary for projects of long duration. If corporate tax reform is not completed before the end of 2015, it will probably not get done in a presidential election year. If Congress were to rely on the prospect of these taxes for the HTF, it might find itself in a similar position in a few months.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document