States that tax GILTI increase filing complexity, drive up the cost of tax compliance, and introduce unnecessary economic uncertainty and legal risk. 21 states and DC continue to tax GILTI despite these challenges.
The aim of patent boxes is generally to encourage and attract local research and development (R&D) and to incentivize businesses to locate IP in the country. However, patent boxes can introduce another level of complexity to a tax system, and some recent research questions whether patent boxes are actually effective in driving innovation.
Puerto Rico, a US territory with a limited ability to set its own tax policies, will be the first part of the US to be substantially affected by Pillar Two, the global tax agreement that seeks to establish a 15 percent minimum tax rate on corporate income.
The global landscape of international corporate taxation is undergoing significant transformations as jurisdictions grapple with the difficulty of defining and apportioning corporate income for the purposes of tax.
Consistent principles ought to apply across the tax code. In the case of intangible drilling costs, companies should be able to claim full deductions for the costs they incur.
Patent box regimes (also referred to as intellectual property, or IP, regimes) provide lower effective tax rates on income derived from IP. Most commonly, eligible types of IP are patents and software copyrights. Currently, 13 of the 27 EU member states have a patent box regime.
Congress should prioritize evaluation of recent international tax trends and the model rules and adjust U.S. rules in a way that supports investment and innovation and moves towards simplicity.
Although the dispersion of our supply chains throughout the world has been scrutinized in recent years, both inbound and outbound foreign direct investment are critical to sustaining supply chain resiliency and reducing economic risks for both firms and investors.
Patent box regimes (also referred to as intellectual property, or IP, regimes) provide lower effective tax rates on income derived from IP. Most commonly, eligible types of IP are patents and software copyrights. Currently, 14 of the 27 EU member states have a patent box regime.
Intellectual property is a key driver in the current economy. Among other things, intellectual property includes patents for life-saving drugs and vaccines and software that runs applications on phones and computers.
New data show that the recent policy changes that have been implemented by the U.S., Ireland, and dozens of other countries are having an impact. The question for policymakers is whether they will take the time to understand these impacts before jumping to the next project to change international tax rules yet again.
The tax treatment of intangible assets has come into the spotlight recently with the Biden administration proposing to undo a policy adopted in 2017 to encourage intellectual property (IP) to be located in the U.S.
As with every change in tax policy, there are trade-offs. The Modified Nexus Approach adds an additional layer of complexity to the already complex issue of taxing IP income. Linking tax breaks for IP income to its associated R&D activity has changed the game and will likely result in some businesses restructuring and relocating their IP assets and R&D activity. Effective tax rates on IP income will likely play an important role in determining optimal locations, giving measures such as R&D credits more importance. Whether this new approach to IP taxation will impact profit shifting and which countries will be the winners and losers is yet to be seen.