Advertisement

International Tax and Public Finance

, Volume 22, Issue 3, pp 426–451 | Cite as

Profit shifting: drivers of transfer (mis)pricing and the potential of countermeasures

  • Sebastian BeerEmail author
  • Jan Loeprick
Article

Abstract

In trying to explain the drivers of global profit shifting by multinational enterprises (MNEs), we investigate firm-specific determinants and their variation across major industries. Using the ORBIS database, we show that intangible asset endowment of subsidiaries and the supply-chain complexity of MNE groups explain aggregate profit-shifting trends. According to our estimates, subsidiaries with no intangibles react to an incremental increase of the tax rate by reducing reported profits by 0.76 %, while subsidiaries with above median intangible endowment decrease their profits by 1.2 %. This difference is significant at the 5 % level. We find an even more pronounced difference in the observed semi-elasticities comparing affiliates belonging to simple (\(-\)0.52) and more complex MNEs (\(-\)1.92), suggesting a significantly larger sensitivity to CIT rate changes of the latter group. Moreover, we incorporate country-specific transfer pricing mitigation measures (documentation requirements) into our analysis. We find significant mitigation effects, which vary depending on the drivers identified in our analysis. On average, estimated profit shifting among MNE subsidiaries in our sample is reduced by 52 % 2 years after the introduction of mandatory documentation requirements. We do, however, not find a significant effect on affiliates with high intangible endowments, whereas documentation reduces profit shifting of subsidiaries within complex MNE groups. Our analysis suggests that complexity poses less of a challenge to effective domestic enforcement than the appropriate pricing of intangible assets. These findings thus provide additional insights on profit-shifting risks and mitigation effects conditional on firm attributes, which may support the design of anti-avoidance approaches and help guide the allocation of scarce analytical and enforcement resources.

Keywords

Total Asset Intangible Asset Transfer Price Taxable Profit Documentation Requirement 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Notes

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank two anonymous reviewers, participants of the DIBT research seminar at the Vienna University of Economics and Business, participants of the annual doctoral meeting at the Centre for Business Taxation of the University of Oxford, as well as participants of the Investment Climate Department research workshop on business taxation at the World Bank for their helpful comments. The findings, interpretations, and conclusions expressed in this paper are entirely those of the authors and should not be attributed to the World Bank, its Executive Directors, or the countries which they represent. Financial support from the Austrian Science Fund (FWF: W 1235-G16) is gratefully acknowledged. All remaining errors and inaccuracies are, of course, our own.

References

  1. Andrews, D. & Serres, A.D. (2012). Intangible assets, resource allocation and growth: A framework for analysis. OECD Economics Department Working Paper 989, OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  2. Bartelsman, E. J., & Beetsma, R. M. W. J. (2003). Why pay more? corporate tax avoidance through transfer pricing in OECD countries. Journal of Public Economics, 87(9–10), 2225–2252.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Becker, J., & Riedel, N. (2012). Cross-border tax effects on affiliate investment: Evidence from european multinationals. European Economic Review, 56(3), 436–450.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Beuselinck, C., Deloof, M., Vanstraelen, A. (2009). Multinational income shifting, tax enforcement and firm value. Working Paper 12/27, University of Tilburg.Google Scholar
  5. Desai, M. A., Foley, C. F., & Hines, J. J. (2006). The demand for tax haven operations. Journal of Public Economics, 90(3), 513–531.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dischinger, M., & Riedel, N. (2010). The role of headquarters in multinational profit shifting strategies. Working Paper 1003, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.Google Scholar
  7. Dischinger, M., & Riedel, N. (2011). Corporate taxes and the location of intangible assets within multinational firms. Journal of Public Economics, 95(7–8), 691–707.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ghosh, A. (1958). Input–output approach in an allocation system. Economica, 25(97), 58–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Grubert, H. (2003). Intangible income, intercompany transactions, income shifting, and the choice of location. National Tax Journal, 56(1), 221–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heckemeyer, J., & Overesch, M. (August 2012). 2012. Profit shifting channels of multinational firms: A meta-study. Paper presented at IIPF Congress.Google Scholar
  11. Hines, J. R., & Rice, E. M. (1994). Fiscal paradise: Foreign tax havens and american business. The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 109(1), 149–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hirschman, A. O. (1958). The strategy of economic development. New Haven: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Huizinga, H., & Laeven, L. (2008). International profit shifting within multinationals: A multi-country perspective. Journal of Public Economics, 92(5–6), 1164–1182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Karkinsky, T., & Riedel, N. (2012). Corporate taxation and the choice of patent location within multinational firms. Journal of International Economics, 88(1), 176–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lenzen, M. (2003). Environmentally important paths, linkages and key sectors in the australian economy. Structural Change and Economic Dynamics, 14(1), 1–34.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Leontief, W. W. (1936). Quantitative input and output relations in the economic systems of the United States. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 18(3), 105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lohse, T., & Riedel. N. (2012). The impact of transfer pricing regulations on profit shifting within european multinationals. FZID Discussion Paper 61–2012, University of Hohenheim, Center for Research on Innovation and Services (FZID).Google Scholar
  18. Lohse, T., Riedel, N., Spengel, C. (2012). The increasing importance of transfer pricing regulations: A worldwide overview. Working Paper 1227, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.Google Scholar
  19. Maffini, G., & Mokkas, S. (2009). Profit shifting and measured productivity of multinational firms. Working Paper 0920, Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation.Google Scholar
  20. OECD. (2013). Addressing Base Erosion and Profit Shifting. Paris: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development.Google Scholar
  21. Rasmussen, P. (1956). Studies in Intersectoral Relations. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
  22. Ribeiro, S.P., Menghinello, S., Backer, K.D., (2010). The OECD ORBIS database: Responding to the need for firm-level micro-data in the OECD. OECD Statistics Working Paper 2010/1, OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. United Nations. (2013). Practical manual on transfer princing for developing countries. New York: United Nations.Google Scholar
  24. Weichenrieder, A. J. (2009). Profit shifting in the EU: Evidence from germany. International Tax and Public Finance, 16(3), 281–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. World Bank. (2014). forthcoming. World Bank: Transfer Pricing ToolKit.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Vienna University of Economics and BusinessViennaAustria
  2. 2.World BankWashington, DCUSA

Personalised recommendations