The OECD's Harmful Tax Competition Initiative and the Tax Havens: From Bombshell to Damp Squib

2008 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 1850128 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T. Kudrle

The OECD's Harmful Tax Competition of 1998 departed in both tone and substance from almost anything the organization had published before. The roots of the associated project lie mainly in EU concerns that certain forms of intra-union competition were eroding both the corporate and personal income tax bases of member states. But it appeared impossible to deal with those problems unless policies were also changed in the 40 or so jurisdictions know as “tax havens.” HTC threatened sanctions against the tax havens if they failed to collect and share information upon request about individuals and corporations attempting to evade or avoid income taxes. HTC also set criteria for the legitimacy of claims about corporate location. A firm could claim location in a tax haven only if it had “substantial” activity there. The report created a furor among the tax havens, which complained loudly that they were facing a new form of colonial control by being held accountable for standards they had no role in setting. Over the next several years the corporate element of the project disappeared, and the style of the OECD's approach shifted from confrontation to cooperation. HTC was strongly supported by the Clinton Administration, and summaries of the project's development often stress how much change came with the election of George W. Bush. A careful look at OECD reports, however, reveals that much of the shift in direction occurred before the outcome of the U.S. election in 2000 had been determined. The revised focus on bank secrecy did yield results. Virtually all of the tax havens had acceded to the revised OECD demands for transparency and information exchange by 2004. This article looks at the data on tax haven liabilities to gauge the impact of the project on tax evasion. It employs the ARIMA technique to investigate both tax haven activity as a whole and the particularly important case of the Cayman Islands. No significant impact can be found probably because investment in the havens remains very easy to disguise and very difficult to detect. This suggests that an effective attack on personal income evasion will require more than the OECD demanded. Automatic information-sharing on the ownership based on an internationally consistent set of identifying numbers over a range of financial instruments holds greater promise for a significant decline in the use of the havens for tax evasion.

Author(s):  
Klaus Beckmann

SummaryIn the present paper, I analyse the competitive behaviour of benevolent governments in the presence of (capital) income tax evasion when information exchange is not possible. My approach is to introduce a cost of evasion function into an otherwise standard tax competition model and to explore three variants of the basic tax competition cum evasion game.Two distinct justifications for tax harmonisation emerge. First, harmonisation of taxation at the source can be supported with the usual spill-over argument that is at the core of the tax competition literature. This kind of argument does not apply to the harmonisation of residence-based taxes, however. Second, in a strategic situation where a tax haven facilitates tax evasion by citizens of the rest of the world, countries may find it to their advantage to coordinate their residence-based tax policies as well.


2018 ◽  
Vol 26 (4) ◽  
pp. 465-495
Author(s):  
Cheol-Won Yang ◽  
Hong-Jong Cho

The Foreign Financial Accounts Reporting was introduced for the purpose of preventing tax evasion and illegal acts through foreign financial accounts of Koreans. On December 27, 2010, it was newly established in “The Law for the Coordination of International Tax Affairs” and received its first report in June 2011, the following year. The system was further strengthened after three revisions. The first amendment was enforced from January 2012 after it took place on December 31, 2011. Thereafter, revisions and enforcement proceeded simultaneously in January 2013 and January 2014. This paper evaluates the performance of the system for four years from 2011 to 2014. In addition, we examined the effect of institutional implementation and changes on tax haven investors through empirical analysis using Korean stock market data. Assuming that Koreans disguised as foreigners participate in Korean stock trading through an anonymity of tax haven, this system will work to shrink the flow of capital from tax haven investors to other countries. Panel regression analysis using capital flows by country found that the transaction activity of tax havens decreased as compared to other countries after introducing and strengthening the acts.


2020 ◽  
pp. 91-106
Author(s):  
Luis Andrés Crespo Berti ◽  

The investigation questions transparency (legitimacy) on the one hand and tax evasion (illegality) at tax haven on the other, so this paper the highlights importance of tax havens, either to the detriment of economies suffering from significant capital flight or to the benefit of jurisdictions declared as paradises, whose economy had been favored by the inflow of capital and investment Foreign. Tax havens are mechanisms of defense of wealthy taxpayers who seek to escape with their wealth from state taxes with progressive tax systems for the financing of social protection, education, and security of their population. Much of the study had to be based on the analysis of the information collected to clarify its importance with the support of neutrosophic numbers for the determination of fuzzy sets for a better understanding of the phenomenon under study inserted in tax havens. Besides, the heuristic evaluation methodology was used, as a form of financial investment with neutrosophic representation, since it allowed the search for qualitative results that helped to emphasize investment problems in those States, territories or jurisdictions that do not have taxation, profits, or apply it at very low rates, with serious limitations in the exchange of information (bank secrecy) and a marked absence of transparency. As the main conclusion, it was argued that governments should continue their transparency campaigns to prevent the continued use of money of public origin as a consequence of illegal acts, without affecting the sovereignty of each country.


Author(s):  
Petr Janský ◽  
Andres Knobel ◽  
Markus Meinzer ◽  
Tereza Palanská ◽  
Miroslav Palanský

The EU faces large amounts of financial secrecy supplied to it by secrecy jurisdictions. In this chapter, we use the Bilateral Financial Secrecy Index to quantify which jurisdictions supply most secrecy to EU Member States. The chapter assesses the progress of two recent EU policy efforts to tackle financial secrecy: automatic exchange of country-by-country reporting (CbCR) data and black and grey list of non-cooperative jurisdictions. It is found that 34 per cent of the financial secrecy faced by the EU is supplied by other Member States, whose a priori exclusion from the blacklisting exercise reveals its fundamental flaw. Further 13 per cent is supplied by the EU’s dependencies, mainly the UK’s Cayman Islands, Bermuda, and Guernsey. The jurisdictions that supply the most secrecy not covered by automatic information exchange of CbCR data are the British Virgin Islands, United States, and Curacao. Finally the chapter discusses policy recommendations that stem from our analysis.


2010 ◽  
Vol 24 (4) ◽  
pp. 103-126 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R Hines

In movies and novels, tax havens are often settings for shady international deals; in practice, they are rather less flashy. Tax havens, also known as “offshore financial centers” or “international financial centers,” are countries and territories that offer low tax rates and favorable regulatory policies to foreign investors. For example, tax havens typically tax inbound investment at zero or very low rates and further encourage investment with telecommunications and transportation facilities, other business infrastructure, favorable legal environments, and limited bureaucratic hurdles to starting new firms. Tax havens are small; most are islands; all but a few have populations below one million; and they have above-average incomes. The United States and other higher-tax countries frequently express concerns over how tax havens may affect their economies. Do they erode domestic tax collections; attract economic activity away from higher-tax countries; facilitate criminal activities; or reduce the transparency of financial accounts and so impede the smooth operation and regulation of legal and financial systems around the world. Do they contribute to excessive international tax competition? These concerns are plausible, albeit often founded on anecdotal rather than systematic evidence. Yet tax haven policies may also benefit other economies and even facilitate the effective operation of the tax systems of other countries. This paper evaluates evidence of the economic effects of tax havens.


2009 ◽  
Vol 9 (3) ◽  
pp. 1850175 ◽  
Author(s):  
Robert T. Kudrle

States around the world appear more determined than ever to end tax haven abuse. The new U.S. administration, for example, is taking action against both major tax haven problems: corporation income tax avoidance and personal income tax evasion. Some progress may be made. This essay argues, however, that only radically new policy will likely suffice either to shore up corporate tax revenues or to sharply diminish evasion. Global formula apportionment is needed if the corporate income tax is to be preserved, and only a combination of automatic information sharing among governments and source withholding can stamp out evasion. As in most areas of international economic policy, U.S. leadership is essential.


Author(s):  
Stanislav Aleksandrovich Grinyakin

Today, in the context of crisis, many managers of large corporations seek to protect their financial investments by their legalization and further withdrawal into the offshore zone. In the recent decade in many countries the problems of combating economic crimes related to money laundering are solved at the national level. The article highlights the need to improve legislation and strengthen activities in this direction.The authors consider different possible schemes of money laundering, participating of credit and financial institutions in such schemes being a unifying factor. Lack of governmental controls over legality of financial transactions, absence of precise criteria resulted in working out the Multilateral agreement of Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) on cooperation between the competent authorities on the problems of automatic information exchange, which is the part of OECD Standard about automatic exchange of financial information. Adoption of OESD Standard by Russia leads to increased complexity and insecurity of operations of certain credit and financial organizations, but will make the procedure of provision of account information more transparent eliminating possibility to dodge taxes by money laundering for businesses.


2017 ◽  
Vol 8 (2) ◽  
pp. 289-299
Author(s):  
Bushra Fadhil Khudhair Al-taie ◽  
Hakeem Hammood Flayyih ◽  
Hassnain Raghib Talab ◽  
Noor Abbas Hussein

Abstract The aim of this study is to investigate the role of tax haven on tax revenue development and its reflection on public revenue in Iraq between 2004 and 2014. A review of tax haven literature revealed that there are different types of tax havens, categorizations, characteristics, effects of tax havens, socio-economic consequence and reaction to tax haven that requires analysis. An empirical analysis is done in the public revenue of Iraq from 2004 to 2014. Descriptive statistics and evidentiary are employed as the analysis techniques. It is revealed that the importance of structure analysis of public revenues is connected with tax haven because the basic foundation for the State budget. Also, the growth rates of tax revenue for the period beyond the year 2003 which saw the Iraq regime change and more open to the world and draws from a socialist economy to a market economy, as well as the effect of the tax was havens with the direct tax income withholding tax, as well as the impact of tax revenue in the Public State revenues. Withthe analytical nature of the study reported in this paper, there is still an opportunity for further work on larger populations to confirm the generalizability of the findings.


Author(s):  
Lukas Hakelberg

This chapter shows that the Clinton administration promoted an international campaign against underregulated financial centers. It did so because it was concerned about the impact of tax havens on the perceived fairness of the US tax system, international financial stability, and the US sanctions regime. The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), however, made the strategic mistake to tackle tax evasion by individuals and tax avoidance by multinationals in a single project, creating opposition from business associations in the United States and elsewhere. Instead of credibly linking noncompliance with OECD recommendations to economic sanctions, the Clinton administration thus accepted the severe dilution of the harmful tax competition initiative's anti-avoidance elements even before the Bush administration took office in 2001. A nested comparison of two unilateral tax initiatives moreover reveals that the Clinton administration generally failed to pass regulations curbing tax avoidance but succeeded in passing regulations against tax evasion.


2017 ◽  
Vol 23 (3) ◽  
pp. 519-542 ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Kemme ◽  
Bhavik Parikh ◽  
Tanja Steigner

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document