Place of Effective Management and Permanent Establishment in cross-border digitalized transaction
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
According to the development of information, communication and technology, the modern society is turning into a digital economy system. Digitalization of products and services shortens distances between people and things. It opens up ample opportunities for innovation, investment and the creation of new digitalized business and jobs. However, such expansion of the digitalized economy and crossborder transactions is affecting the international tax system, because multinational enterprises are avoiding tax through the Internet and mobile communication network. Particularly, corporate tax, personal income tax, and value added tax are at issue. First, this study is to investigate controversies surrounding digitalized products and services with respect to a permanent establishment, especially when products and services are provided to foreign countries which do not have a permanent establishment in the relevant country. Generally, the customs authority can impose customs duty on products when they are imported from abroad. However, as for digitalized rights and services, it is possible to use the products and services without paying tax through the web server located in a foreign country, because the tax authority seldom investigates such deal. Furthermore, transactions made through the Internet are increasing, and the characteristics of transactions of digitalized contents are changeable and complicated in the modern society. Now, the traditional concept of permanent establishment cannot deal with these problems. Multinational corporations are trying to abuse the concept of the permanent establishment to avoid tax, because the government cannot impose tax on foreign companies which do not have a permanent establishment in the country. If they use the Internet server to supply the digitalized services and contents such as ebook, games, etc., many countries will take pains to classify the deals within their countries’ revenue power. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to suggest the countermeasures against multinational enterprises’ tax avoidance attempt rather than double taxation problems. A different attribution of taxing rights which may lead too low taxation is not per se an indicator of defects of the existing system. However, we should prevent the abuse of the defects by multinational enterprises. In order to address the problems of BEPS (Base Erosion and Profits Shifting), the OECD and G20 countries, working together on an equal footing, adopted a 15point Action Plan in 2013, and the EU published the Report of Commission Expert Group on Taxation of Digital Economy in 2014 to cope with these problems and suggested the solution to the tax challenges of the digital economy. It is important to examine closely how enterprises under the digital economy add value and make their profits in order to determine whether and to what extent it may be necessary to adopt the current rules in order to take into account the specific features of the digital industry and to prevent BEPS. This study will show the solutions to the problems which the present statutes cannot solve regarding the special issues and the available developments and review cases in the field of web server and cloud computing, etc. In order to overcome the deadlock of this situation on the permanent establishment principle, especially which was made for the attribution of taxing right to accomplish the principle that tax jurisdiction should generally be allocated between the source country and the residence country depending on the nature of the income, the new concepts of the rule are necessary such as significant presence of digital transaction and the place of effective management. Here, I would show the problems of permanent establishment on cross-border digitalized transactions through the cloud computing case and the possibility of applying the new concept, “Place of Effective Management.”
Abstract
According to the development of information, communication and technology, the modern society is turning into a digital economy system. Digitalization of products and services shortens distances between people and things. It opens up ample opportunities for innovation, investment and the creation of new digitalized business and jobs. However, such expansion of the digitalized economy and crossborder transactions is affecting the international tax system, because multinational enterprises are avoiding tax through the Internet and mobile communication network. Particularly, corporate tax, personal income tax, and value added tax are at issue. First, this study is to investigate controversies surrounding digitalized products and services with respect to a permanent establishment, especially when products and services are provided to foreign countries which do not have a permanent establishment in the relevant country. Generally, the customs authority can impose customs duty on products when they are imported from abroad. However, as for digitalized rights and services, it is possible to use the products and services without paying tax through the web server located in a foreign country, because the tax authority seldom investigates such deal. Furthermore, transactions made through the Internet are increasing, and the characteristics of transactions of digitalized contents are changeable and complicated in the modern society. Now, the traditional concept of permanent establishment cannot deal with these problems. Multinational corporations are trying to abuse the concept of the permanent establishment to avoid tax, because the government cannot impose tax on foreign companies which do not have a permanent establishment in the country. If they use the Internet server to supply the digitalized services and contents such as ebook, games, etc., many countries will take pains to classify the deals within their countries’ revenue power. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to suggest the countermeasures against multinational enterprises’ tax avoidance attempt rather than double taxation problems. A different attribution of taxing rights which may lead too low taxation is not per se an indicator of defects of the existing system. However, we should prevent the abuse of the defects by multinational enterprises. In order to address the problems of BEPS (Base Erosion and Profits Shifting), the OECD and G20 countries, working together on an equal footing, adopted a 15point Action Plan in 2013, and the EU published the Report of Commission Expert Group on Taxation of Digital Economy in 2014 to cope with these problems and suggested the solution to the tax challenges of the digital economy. It is important to examine closely how enterprises under the digital economy add value and make their profits in order to determine whether and to what extent it may be necessary to adopt the current rules in order to take into account the specific features of the digital industry and to prevent BEPS. This study will show the solutions to the problems which the present statutes cannot solve regarding the special issues and the available developments and review cases in the field of web server and cloud computing, etc. In order to overcome the deadlock of this situation on the permanent establishment principle, especially which was made for the attribution of taxing right to accomplish the principle that tax jurisdiction should generally be allocated between the source country and the residence country depending on the nature of the income, the new concepts of the rule are necessary such as significant presence of digital transaction and the place of effective management. Here, I would show the problems of permanent establishment on cross-border digitalized transactions through the cloud computing case and the possibility of applying the new concept, “Place of Effective Management.”
참고문헌 (22)
- OECD, "G20 BEPS Addressing the Tax Challenges of the Digital Economy, Action 1", OECD, 2014
- BEPS Action 7 : Preventing the artificial avoidance of Permanent Establishment status, "OECD", ~ (2015)
- OECD, "Commentaries on the Article of the Model Tax Convention on Income and on Capital, (Condensed version)", ~ (2010)
- Marc M. Levey, "US Taxation of Foreign Controlled Businesses", pp.2015, Thomson Reuters Tax and Accounting
- UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs, "UN model double taxation convention between developed and developing countries" (2011)
- Kapree Harrell, "Outline : A Primer on Tax Trieties" (2015), The American Bar Association
- Joel D. Kuntza, "US International Taxation Current" (2015), Thomson Reuters Tax and Accounting
- David E. Hardesty, "Electronic Commerce: Taxation & Planning Current" (2015), Thomson Reuters Tax and Accounting
- Luca Cerioni, "The ‘Place of Effective Management’ as a connecting factor for companies’ tax residence within the EU vs. the freedom of establishment. : the need for a rethinking?", German Law Journal (2012)
- Dobunsukbu, "Coproation Tax law" (2009), Chuokeizai
- Lee, Chanhee, "International Tax" (2015), Parkyoungsa
- SungJae Park, "Search of new PE concept through E-Commerce on Cross-border transaction", 2014 Economy Cooperation Workshop (2014), Korean Academic Society of Taxation
- 전병욱, "고정사업장 판정과 관련한 최근 국제동향의 분석- 한국 및 인도 판결 등을 중심으로 -", 조세학술논집, 27(2), pp.29~58 (2011), 한국국제조세협회[DOI]
- 서정록, "외국법인 종속대리인의 과세에 관한 연구 - 계약체결대리인의 사례를 중심으로", 세무회계연구, (31), pp.27~52 (2012), 한국세무회계학회[DOI]
- 권오현, "디지털 상품의 국가간 전자상거래에 대한 과세관할권 문제", 조세연구, 9(2), pp.177~216 (2009), 한국조세연구포럼
- Lee, KyoungKun, "A Study of the decision of PE in Digital Economy", 2015 Tax Law Associatio Autumn Workshop Treatise Book (2015), Tax Law Association
- 정승영, "클라우드 컴퓨팅(Cloud Computing)과국제조세 문제", 조세법연구, 21(2), pp.357~407 (2015), 한국세법학회[DOI]
- 오윤, "거주자의 국외원천소득과세 - 국제적 동향과 제도개선 -", 조세학술논집, 31(2), pp.181~214 (2015), 한국국제조세협회
- 박민, "법인세법상 ‘실질적 관리장소’의 판단기준", 조세학술논집, 29(1), pp.143~176 (2013), 한국국제조세협회[DOI]
- 양승경, "법인세법상 “실질적 관리장소” 개념의 개정방안에 대한 소고", 조세학술논집, 31(2), pp.47~100 (2015), 한국국제조세협회
- 윤덕병, "효율적인 소득세 전자상거래의 과세 방안", 전자상거래학회지, 10(2), pp.141~160 (2009), 한국전자상거래학회
- 이창, "법인세법상 내국법인 인정요건인 “실질적 관리장소” 판단기준 ‐ OECD 모델조약 제4조 제3항 주석서의 합리적 활용 ‐", 서울대학교 법학, 54(4), pp.215~260 (2013), 법학연구소
