我们应该简化税收
Why we need to simplify our corporate tax system
As the leaders of the world’s largest economies descend on beautiful, blustery Lough Erne, their briefings will doubtless be packed with different ideas for international tax reform. Today’s rules are fiendishly complicated and everyone would benefit from a simpler, more transparent system. That is why we have been encouraging a broader debate at the level of the Group of Eight leading economies and the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.
随着世界几大经济体的领导人抵达美丽而喧嚣的恩尼斯基林(Lough Erne)，他们参加的情况介绍会肯定会充斥着关于国际税收改革的不同观点。如今的税收规则非常复杂，更简化、更透明的税收体系将会让每一个人受益。因此，我们一直鼓励在八国集团(G8)主要经济体和经合组织(OECD)层面上开展更加广泛的讨论。
For decades, governments globally – on both the right and the left – have aggressively courted foreign investment because of the enormous benefits in terms of future job creation and economic growth. The UK led the way in Europe in the 1980s, with generous manufacturing incentives for carmakers. Nissan, for example, was given land at heavily subsidised rates to build its assembly plant in Sunderland. Thirty years on, this Japanese company is a mainstay of the UK’s manufacturing base, as well as a beacon of “British” productivity and innovation.
几十年来，全球各国政府（不管是左翼还是右翼政府）都在积极招徕外国投资，因为投资可以在创造未来就业和推动经济增长方面发挥巨大作用。上世纪八十年代，英国在欧洲国家中率先针对汽车制造商提出了大量的制造激励措施。比如说，日产(Nissan)获得了价格特别优惠的土地，在桑德兰(Sunderland)兴建了汽车装配厂。30年之后，这家日本公司成为英国制造业的中流砥柱，也成为体现“不列颠”生产率和创新能力的标杆企业。
Just as manufacturing investment was seen as an essential ingredient for economic success 40 years ago, countries today place great weight on investment in technology. Recent research by the economist Enrico Moretti has found that, for each new high-technology job created in a city, five additional jobs subsequently develop outside of technology. Look at the innovation and creativity generated around the Tech City community in London’s Shoreditch district – Google is in the process of building a new London office nearby – and the long-term benefits of this approach are clear.
正如40年前，制造业投资被看做是经济成功的一项基本要素一样，现在各国也非常重视技术投资。经济学家恩里克•莫雷蒂(Enrico Moretti)最近的研究显示，一座城市每新增一个高技术就业岗位，技术领域之外就会相应增加另外五个岗位。看一看伦敦肖尔迪奇区(Shoreditch)科技城(Tech City)的创新态势和创造力，就能感受到技术投资的长期收益正在显现。谷歌(Google)正在科技城附近新建一个伦敦办事处。
It is why many European countries have created tax incentives specifically to encourage investment in research and development and intellectual “capital” – the ideas and innovation that are critical to many companies’ success in today’s information economy. In the UK, both the Labour party and the Conservatives have supported the idea of a so-called “patent box”, a tax incentive that was finally introduced in April and which halves corporation tax on profits from patented inventions to just 10 per cent. That is lower than Ireland’s headline rate of 12.5 per cent, and way less than Google’s overall global corporate tax rate of 19 per cent in 2012.
正因如此，很多欧洲国家制定了税收鼓励措施，就是为了扩大对研发和知识“资本”的投资。知识“资本”是指在如今信息经济时代对诸多公司的成功起到关键作用的理念和创新。在英国，工党和保守党都支持所谓的“专利盒”(patent box)政策——这是最终于4月份推出的税收鼓励政策，把专利发明收益应缴的公司税减半到10%。这要低于爱尔兰12.5%的基本税率，也远低于2012年谷歌19%的全球整体公司税率。
Just a quick read of the websites of different European governments shows how fiercely they compete for inward investment. As the British government explains: “We’re committed to creating the most competitive tax regime in the G20.” The Invest in France Agency boasts the “most generous research tax credit in Europe” and highlights that the French Treasury handed back nearly €7bn in tax credits in 2009 alone. While the Netherlands Foreign Investment Agency promotes Holland’s “highly competitive fiscal climate”.
快速浏览欧洲各国政府网站，就能看出争夺外来投资竞争之激烈。正如英国政府所解释的那样：“我们致力于创建二十国(G20)集团中最有竞争力的税收体制。” 法国政府投资部(Invest in France Agency)拥有“欧洲最慷慨的研发税收抵免政策”，并强调法国财政部仅2009年就返还了近70亿欧元的税额。荷兰外商投资局(Netherlands Foreign Investment Agency)则大力推介该国“极具竞争力的财政环境”。
Unsurprisingly, companies are responding to these different incentives. Of course it is tempting for governments to see their own tax breaks as “incentives for innovation” while complaining that other countries are creating tax “havens” or “sweeteners”. But these schemes all share a common goal: to attract inward investment and generate growth.
不出所料，公司对这些不同的鼓励措施做出了回应。毫无疑问，政府往往一面认为本国税收减免是“鼓励创新的措施”，一面抱怨其他国家在营造“避税港”或“税收优惠”。但这些措施都有一个共同的目标：吸引外资、推动增长。
It is also tempting for politicians to assume that their countries will benefit if and when the current structure changes. Today, corporation tax is levied on a company’s profits, not its revenues or where its customers are located. But if the rules being suggested for US companies – essentially that they should pay corporation tax where their sales are generated – were applied to European multinationals (of which there are many), it would mean more money for the US Treasury and less for domestic exchequers. In reality, it is probably only a significant increase in corporation tax rates globally that would make every country a “winner” – and the consequences would probably be less innovation, less growth and less job creation.
政治家往往也认为，调整当前税收结构对本国有好处。目前，公司税是基于一家公司的盈利而不是营收或者客户地理位置而征收的。但如果目前建议对美国公司实施的规则（即基于销售发生地来缴纳公司税）也适用于欧洲跨国公司（这类公司有很多），就意味着美国财政部获得更多税收，欧洲国家财政部的税收减少。实际上，或许只有在全球范围内大幅调高公司税才能让各国都成为“赢家”，而最终结果可能是：创新减弱、增长减慢以及就业岗位减少。
As the G8 leaders gather in Northern Ireland, some people are questioning the value of these high-level meetings. But the G8 and other international forums are precisely the places to decide on these kinds of highly complex, interconnected issues. And this week’s debate on tax will underline the fundamental point: that it is for governments to determine the rules. And when they do, companies will respond.
G8峰会在北爱尔兰召开之际，一些人却质疑这类高级别会议的价值所在。但G8峰会和其他国际论坛正是对高度复杂、互相联系的问题做出决定的平台。本周针对税收的讨论将突出一个基本点：决定规则的应该是政府。如果政府决定了规则，公司就会做出回应。
天之聪教育
2013-06-19
天之聪教育
261次
点赞(0)
收藏
登录
