The Scottish Mail on Sunday

Osborne to net billions in huge tax crackdown

Global push starting tomorrow could stop multinatio­nals’ use of havens

- By ALEX HAWKES

THE world’s richest nations will tomorrow launch a huge crackdown on multinatio­nal tax avoidance as part of the biggest shake-up of internatio­nal tax rules for decades.

The move could lead to a multibilli­on pound gain for Chancellor George Osborne and higher tax bills for a raft of blue-chip companies.

The Paris-based Organisati­on for Economic Co-operation and Developmen­t is due to make sweeping changes to the way profit is apportione­d by big companies, restrictin­g their ability to direct profit to subsidiari­es in tax havens where they can pay rock-bottom tax rates.

Oil giant Shell has already indicated the changes could raise its tax rate by several per cent, potentiall­y costing it hundreds of millions of pounds. The exchequer is likely to rake in several billion pounds more in corporatio­n tax, experts say.

The change is likely to hit tax arrangemen­ts which have attracted widespread anger – including thoseose used in the past by Starbucks, Apple and Google. But it will also affect property companies, oil giants and others.

A focus of concern is a change to interest rules. The 34-member OECD could suggest that firms cannot offset all of the interest they pay on debt against their profit to reduce tax bills.

Critics of the multinatio­nals say they load subsidiari­es in high-tax countries with debt from other parts of the group to minimise tax bills there.

Tom McFarlane, a director at City-based tax adviser Alvarez & Marsal Taxand, said: ‘Companies who are highly indebted are likely to see their effective tax rate increase significan­tly.

‘We don’t know what actions government­s will implement.’

The UK has always allowed interest to be offset against profit and has one of the most generous regimes for this, so may choose to opt out of the OECD restrictio­n.

The new rules will also see a crackdown on ‘cashboxes’. These are firms that technicall­y own the legal rights to brands but are nothing more than brass plates on a building often in a low-tax regime. Bill Dod- well, a tax adviser at accountanc­y firm Deloitte, said: ‘Profits will need to be allocated to where people are carrying out valuable functions, rather than a company with legal rights but no staff.’

Shifting a brand name offshore has been a widely used manoeuvre. The rights to Walkers Crisps were moved to Switzerlan­d when it was bought by PepsiCo, while Starbucks for a long period held its intellectu­al property rights in the Netherland­s. Moves to toughen up rules about whether a firm has a ‘permanent establishm­ent’ in a country are also likely. Existing rules allow firms with warehouses in a country to claim they merely provide a service to an offshore firm rather than operate in the place they are located.

Online retailers including Amazon set up complex tax structures taking advantage of this, with all profits reported at its Luxembourg arm, where it employed a few hundred staff, and not its UK business where it employed thousands. Amazon is since reported to have changed the structure, creating a ‘branch’ of its Luxembourg company in the UK to transact with customers.

There will also be a move to reduce the use of ‘hybrid’ or ‘nowhere’ structures. Sometimes firms create complex financing arrangemen­ts that allow a loan between two subsidiari­es to fall between the tax rules of two countries, meaning the money is not taxed anywhere. The UK has already moved to crack down on these structures ahead of the OECD’s recommenda­tions.

The changes will affect companies differentl­y but Dodwell believes tax rates for many multinatio­nals will rise by several percentage points. That would see the UK’s tax take increasing by billions of pounds.

The OECD review has been running since 2013, after uproar over some of the structures used by multinatio­nals to cut their tax bills.

Starbucks, Amazon and Google all faced public grillings by the MPs on the Public Accounts Committee amid revelation­s of their arrangemen­ts. Starbucks, which has always denied avoiding tax, was buying its coffee from a Swiss subsidiary and paying royalties for the use of its brand to a Luxembourg arm.

Google conducts all of its transactio­ns with UK advertiser­s from an Irish subsidiary and argues that UK staff merely provide an outsourced service to the Irish business.

The Chancellor introduced what was dubbed a ‘Google Tax’ in this year’s Budget to stop firms diverting profits offshore. Some criticised the move for pre-empting the decisions of the OECD. But others have issued dire warnings about the OECD’s changes. Shell’s chief financial officer, Simon Henry, said earlier this year that the tax hikes could reduce world trade.

‘I am not being apocalypti­c but you don’t have to change the psychology too much to have a big impact on the willingnes­s to carry out cross-border investment and trade,’ he said.

Osborne is likely to trumpet the OECD moves in a speech to the Conservati­ve party conference tomorrow. Whether they will be enough to head off the worst abuses of multinatio­nals – and the public anger about them – remains to be seen.

 ??  ?? CRISPC PROFIT: Walkers,W backed by Gary Lineker, shiftedsh profits to Switzerlan­d, while Amazon, Google and Starbucks have used tax havens
CRISPC PROFIT: Walkers,W backed by Gary Lineker, shiftedsh profits to Switzerlan­d, while Amazon, Google and Starbucks have used tax havens

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United Kingdom