@article{21415, abstract = {{This article comprehensively reviews Australia’s corporate income tax complexity as faced by multinational corporations (MNCs) and compares it to the average of the remaining OECD countries. Building on unique survey data, I find that the Australian tax code is considerably more complex than the OECD average, which is mainly due to overly complex anti-avoidance legislation, such as regulations on transfer pricing, general anti-avoidance or controlled foreign corporations (CFC). In contrast, Australia’s tax framework, which covers processes and features such as tax law enactment or tax audits, is close to the OECD average. A more detailed analysis yields further interesting insights. For example, excessive details in the tax code and the time between the announcement of a tax law change and its enactment turn out to be serious issues in Australia relative to the remaining OECD countries. }}, author = {{Hoppe, Thomas}}, journal = {{Australian Tax Forum}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{451--475}}, title = {{{Tax Complexity in Australia – a Survey-Based Comparison to the OECD Average}}}, volume = {{35}}, year = {{2020}}, } @article{21420, author = {{Mair, Christina and Scheffler, Wolfram and Senger, Isabell and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Steuer und Wirtschaft}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{317--329}}, title = {{{Auswirkungen der digitalen Flexibilisierung des Fertigungsortes auf die Verteilung der Besteuerungsrechte – Ergebnisse von Modellrechnungen zum 3D-Druck-Verfahren}}}, volume = {{97}}, year = {{2020}}, } @article{49871, author = {{Giese, Henning and Graßl, Benjamin and Holtmann, Svea and Krug, Philipp}}, journal = {{Deutsches Steuerrecht}}, number = {{16-16}}, pages = {{752--760}}, title = {{{Steuerliche Entlastungsmöglichkeiten für kleine und mittlere Unternehmen wegen der COVID-19-Pandemie}}}, volume = {{59}}, year = {{2020}}, } @article{21425, author = {{Kittl, Maximilian and Lorenz, Johannes}}, journal = {{Deutsches Steuerrecht}}, number = {{18}}, pages = {{897--903}}, title = {{{Was lange währt, wird endlich gut? Vorschau zur erwarteten Rechtsprechung des BFH zur grunderwerbsteuerlichen Konzernklausel}}}, volume = {{57}}, year = {{2019}}, } @inbook{21426, abstract = {{This chapter examines the drivers of corporate income tax complexity for multinational corporations in South Africa. Based on unique data from a global survey of tax consultants which was conducted in 2016 by Hoppe et al, novel insights can be provided into the complexity of the South African tax system. The data enable a comparison of South Africa with the global mean of tax complexity, as well as with its major trade and investment partners. It is further possible to distinguish between different areas of tax complexity, ie, tax code complexity (complexity inherent in the different regulations of the tax code) and tax framework complexity (complexity that arises from the features and processes of a tax system). Frequent changes in tax regulations, ambiguity and interpretation, as well as record-keeping, are found to be the most important complexity drivers in the tax code of South Africa. The analysis further highlights that anti-avoidance provisions, such as transfer pricing and controlled foreign corporation rules, are perceived as most complex. With respect to tax framework complexity, the poor disclosure of audit selection criteria, the lack of experience or technical skills of tax officers in the audit process and problems associated with tax refunds appear to be serious concerns. Even though South Africa’s overall tax system complexity does not seem to differ very much from other related countries, a closer look into the details reveals a number of future challenges.}}, author = {{Hoppe, Thomas and Safaei, Reyhaneh and Singleton, Amanda and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, booktitle = {{Tax Simplification - An African Perspective}}, editor = {{Evans, Chris and Franzsen, Riël and Stack, Elizabeth}}, isbn = {{978-1-920538-96-5}}, pages = {{267--293}}, publisher = {{Pretoria University Law Press}}, title = {{{Tax Complexity for Multinational Corporations in South Africa - Evidence from a Global Survey}}}, year = {{2019}}, } @techreport{12077, abstract = {{Die Komplexität von Steuersystemen gewinnt in der Debatte um den internationalen Steuerwettbewerb zunehmend an Bedeutung. Im vorliegenden Beitrag erfolgt, basierend auf den Daten, die dem Tax Complexity Index (www.taxcomplexity.org) zugrunde liegen, eine umfassende Gegenüberstellung der Komplexität der Steuersysteme von Deutschland und Öster-reich unter Berücksichtigung der Mittelwerte aller Länder. Die Steuergesetze weisen sowohl in Deutschland als auch in Österreich einen verhältnismäßig hohen Grad an Komplexität auf. Bei den steuerlichen Rahmenbedingungen fällt der Grad an Komplexität in beiden Ländern dagegen niedrig aus, wobei Österreich im Durchschnitt weniger komplex ist als Deutschland.}}, author = {{Hoppe, Thomas and Rechbauer, Martina and Sturm, Susann}}, title = {{{Steuerkomplexität im Vergleich zwischen Deutschland und Österreich – Eine Analyse des Status quo}}}, year = {{2019}}, } @techreport{14902, author = {{Mair, Christina and Scheffler, Wolfram and Senger, Isabell and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, title = {{{Analyse der Veränderung der zwischenstaatlichen Gewinnaufteilung bei Einführung einer standardisierten Gewinnverteilungsmethode am Beispiel des Einsatzes von 3D-Druckern}}}, volume = {{42}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{14904, abstract = {{Die Komplexität von Steuersystemen gewinnt in der Debatte um den internationalen Steuerwettbewerb zunehmend an Bedeutung. Im vorliegenden Beitrag erfolgt, basierend auf den Befragungsdaten, die dem Tax Complexity Index von Hoppe et al. (2019) zugrunde liegen, eine umfassende Gegenüberstellung der Komplexität der Steuersysteme von Deutschland und Österreich unter Berücksichtigung der Mittelwerte aller vom Index abgedeckten Länder. Die Steuergesetze weisen sowohl in Deutschland als auch in Österreich einen verhältnismäßig hohen Grad an Komplexität auf. Bei den steuerlichen Rahmenbedingungen fällt der Grad an Komplexität in beiden Ländern dagegen niedrig aus, wobei Österreich im Durchschnitt weniger komplex ist als Deutschland.}}, author = {{Hoppe, Thomas and Rechbauer, Martina and Sturm, Susann}}, journal = {{Steuer und Wirtschaft}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{397--412}}, title = {{{Steuerkomplexität im Vergleich zwischen Deutschland und Österreich - Eine Analyse des Status quo}}}, volume = {{96}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{4996, abstract = {{We analyze the impact of wealth taxes on investment timing decisions under uncertainty and irreversibility by employing a real options model of the Dixit/Pindyck type. Considering that wealth taxes have been (re-)introduced or are under discussion in many countries, investors need decision rules for tax systems with wealth taxation. We integrate different valuation methods for wealth tax purposes, distinguish between broadly and narrowly defined wealth taxes and vary the wealth tax rate to ascertain which wealth tax design is more or less likely to accelerate or delay investment. Our main findings are threefold. First, historical cost valuation reduces the distortive timing effects of wealth taxation compared to fair value accounting. Second, broadening the wealth tax base tends to accelerate investment during high interest rate periods and delay investment during low interest rate periods. Our results predict that wealth taxes with a broad tax base are likely to discourage risky investment in times of near-zero interest rates. These distortive wealth tax base effects, however, can be avoided by granting sufficiently high depreciation deductions for wealth tax purposes. Third, the investment timing effects of wealth tax rate variations are very sensitive to the riskiness of the underlying investment. Moreover, investment timing effects crucially depend upon the depreciation rate for wealth tax purposes. A tax legislator who aims to encourage risk taking should introduce generous depreciation deductions. Our study indicates that if a wealth tax is considered to be politically inevitable, possible harmful investment effects can be mitigated by choosing appropriate valuation methods and parameters.}}, author = {{Niemann, Rainer and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, issn = {{0044-2372}}, journal = {{Journal of Business Economics}}, number = {{4}}, pages = {{385--415}}, publisher = {{Springer Nature America, Inc}}, title = {{{Investment Timing Effects of Wealth Taxes under Uncertainty and Irreversibility}}}, doi = {{10.1007/s11573-018-0918-4}}, volume = {{89}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{17715, abstract = {{Der Beitrag stellt die teilweise überschießende Wirkung des Referentenentwurfs des Bundesministeriums der Finanzen zur Grunderwerbsteuer mit Blick auf börsennotierte Kapitalgesellschaften dar und schlägt eine Erweiterung des Referentenentwurfs vor, wobei börsennotierte Kapitalgesellschaften vom Anwendungsbereich der neuen Vorschrift ausgenommen werden sollen.}}, author = {{Arbeitskreis Steuern der Schmalenbach-Gesellschaft für Betriebswirtschaft, . and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, journal = {{Betriebs-Berater}}, number = {{25}}, pages = {{1438--1442}}, publisher = {{Deutscher Fachverlag GmbH }}, title = {{{Ein Lösungsvorschlag zur Vermeidung der überschießenden Wirkung der Grunderwerbsteuerreform bei börsennotierten Kapitalgesellschaften}}}, volume = {{74}}, year = {{2019}}, } @misc{14903, author = {{Asenkerschbaumer, Stefan and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, booktitle = {{Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung}}, number = {{209}}, pages = {{18}}, title = {{{Aus Daten müssen Informationen werden}}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{21427, abstract = {{Under the German Inheritance Tax and Gift Tax Act, the transfer of business assets can be exempted from taxation up to 100%. However, this exemption depends on the evolution of the company’s payroll, which is highly uncertain. We model the uncertain nature of payroll evolution using a Geometric Brownian motion. We obtain closed-form solutions for the expected effective exemption and for the expected effective tax rate. We find that the uncertainty effect is most pronounced for moderate negative and positive growth rates. Furthermore, higher uncertainty reduces the value of the effective tax exemption. Also, we find that the (partially progressive) German inheritance tax function by trend promotes standard exemption. The results enable tax planners to make an optimal choice between standard or full exemption and allow for calculating the expected tax burden.}}, author = {{Diller, Markus and Späth, Thomas and Lorenz, Johannes}}, journal = {{Journal of Business Economics}}, number = {{5}}, pages = {{599--626}}, title = {{{Inheritance Tax Planning with Uncertain Future Payroll Expenses: An Analytical Solution to the Optimal Choice between Full and Standard Exemption}}}, volume = {{89}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{21424, abstract = {{There are two ways for taxpayers to avoid paying taxes: legal tax optimization and illegal tax evasion. The government reacts by altering the law, and by conducting audits, respectively. These phenomena are modeled as a strategic interaction between all taxpayers: the more taxpayers optimize, the lower the optimization result as a consequence of the government tightening the tax law. The more taxpayers evade, the higher the risk of detection because of the tax agencies increasing the audit probability. It emerges that, in equilibrium, the population shares of optimizers and evaders are not interdependent; rather, they both increase to the detriment of the share of non-optimizing taxpayers. If the government reacts to changed optimization behavior with too large a delay, an equilibrium tax law cannot be reached. Tax codes should be updated rapidly in order to avoid a permanent change of the tax law, which is costly both for the legislator and the taxpayers facing legal uncertainty.}}, author = {{Lorenz, Johannes}}, journal = {{Journal of Evolutionary Economics}}, pages = {{581--609}}, title = {{{Population Dynamics of Tax Avoidance with Crowding Effects}}}, doi = {{10.1007/s00191-018-0572-6}}, volume = {{29}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{14905, abstract = {{A key premise underlying most of the economic literature is that rational decision-makers will choose dominant strategies over dominated alternatives. However, prior literature in various disciplines including business, psychology, and economics document a series of phenomena associated with violations of the dominance principle in decision-making. In this comprehensive review, we discuss conditions under which people violate the dominance principle in decision-making. When presenting violations of dominance in empirical and experimental studies, we differentiate between absolute, statewise, and stochastic (first- and second-order) violations of dominance. Furthermore, we categorize the literature by the leading causes for dominance violations: framing, reference points, certainty effects, bounded rationality, and emotional responses.}}, author = {{Kourouxous, Thomas and Bauer, Thomas}}, issn = {{2198-3402}}, journal = {{Business Research}}, number = {{1}}, pages = {{209--239}}, title = {{{Violations of Dominance in Decision-Making}}}, doi = {{10.1007/s40685-019-0093-7}}, volume = {{12}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{14910, author = {{Majdanska, Alicja and Wu, Yuchen}}, journal = {{Tax Notes International}}, number = {{10}}, pages = {{1045--1065}}, title = {{{Using Impact Evaluation to Examine Domestic and International Cooperative Compliance Programs}}}, volume = {{93}}, year = {{2019}}, } @article{3902, abstract = {{All over the world, firms and governments are increasingly concerned about the rise in tax complexity. To manage it and develop effective simplification measures, detailed information on the current drivers of complexity is required. However, research on this topic is scarce. This is surprising as the latest developments-for example, those triggered by the BEPS project-have given rise to the conjecture that complexity drivers may have changed, thus questioning the findings of prior studies. In this article, we shed light on this issue and provide a global picture of the current drivers of tax complexity that multinational corporations face based on a survey of 221 highly experienced tax consultants from 108 countries. Our results show that prior complexity drivers of the tax code are still important, with details and changes of tax regulations being the two most important complexity drivers. We also find evidence for new important complexity drivers emerging from different areas of the tax framework, such as inconsistent decisions among tax officers (tax audits) or retroactively applied tax law amendments (tax enactment). Based on the tax consultants' responses, we develop a concept of tax complexity that is characterized by two pillars, tax code and tax framework complexity and illustrates the various aspects that should be considered when assessing the complexity of a country's tax system.}}, author = {{Hoppe, Thomas and Schanz, Deborah and Sturm, Susann and Sureth-Sloane, Caren}}, issn = {{ 0165-2826}}, journal = {{Intertax}}, number = {{8/9}}, pages = {{654--675}}, publisher = {{Kluwer Law International}}, title = {{{What are the Drivers of Tax Complexity for MNCs? Global Evidence}}}, volume = {{46}}, year = {{2018}}, } @techreport{5007, abstract = {{This study analyzes the relation between accounting conservatism, future tax rate cuts and countries’ level of book-tax conformity. Firms have an incentive to increase conservatism in financial reporting when a tax rate cut is imminent to shift taxable income into the lower taxed future. Using a panel of firms across 18 countries from 1995 to 2010 I find that conditional conservatism is positively and significantly associated with future tax rate cuts when book-tax conformity is high. This effect is particularly pronounced for firms that concentrate the majority of their operations in the country in which the tax rate is cut. In contrast, there is no significant relation between future tax rate cuts and unconditional conservatism.}}, author = {{Bornemann, Tobias}}, title = {{{Tax Avoidance and Accounting Conservatism}}}, volume = {{No. 2018-04}}, year = {{2018}}, } @techreport{5008, abstract = {{This study analyzes the impact of transfer pricing on multinational enterprises’ R&D investment decisions. Specifically, I examine the effects of two commonly used contract designs to exchange and develop intangible assets across group affiliates: licensing and cost sharing agreements. Whilst serving as a tool to allocate taxable income between group affiliates, the economic implications of licensing and cost sharing agreements differ. Whereas licensing agreements provide for a sharing rule on the intangible’s profits, cost sharing agreements on the other hand provide a sharing rule on R&D development costs. This difference matters when firms simultaneously use internal transfer prices to allocate taxable income and provide local management with sufficient investment incentives. Using a multiple-agent, moral hazard investment framework I model a multinational firm with comparable group affiliates in two countries that delegates the R&D investment decision to a local risk and effort averse affiliate manager. The results suggest that the optimal contract not only depends on available tax benefits, but also on R&D investment and manager specific characteristics. A licensing agreement provides management with larger incentives to invest in R&D mitigating agency concerns associated with R&D. On the other hand, using a cost sharing agreement the firm can cater different risk preferences among managers potentially increasing investment. The arm’s length principle however may distort an efficient allocation of R&D costs when using a cost sharing agreement.}}, author = {{Bornemann, Tobias}}, title = {{{Do Transfer Pricing Rules Distort R&D Investment Decisions?}}}, volume = {{No. 2018-02}}, year = {{2018}}, } @inbook{62742, author = {{Bornemann, Tobias and Petutschnig, Matthias}}, booktitle = {{Handbuch der österreichischen Steuerlehre, Band IV: Investition, Finanzierung und Steuern}}, editor = {{Eberhartinger, Eva}}, pages = {{122--134}}, title = {{{Vorteilhaftigkeitsvergleich Eigen-/Fremdmittel}}}, year = {{2018}}, } @techreport{62740, author = {{Bornemann, Tobias}}, title = {{{Do Transfer Pricing Rules distort R&D Investment Decisions?}}}, doi = {{10.2139/ssrn.3114071}}, volume = {{2018-02}}, year = {{2018}}, }