Search

I. INTRODUCTION 319 II. CORPORATE TAX LIABILITY AFTER THE TAX CUTS AND JOBS ACT 321 A. Gross Income 321 1. Gross Income Determination For Cross-Border Corporations 323 a. US Taxation [...], In December 2017, Congress enacted tax reform legislation, commonly referred to as the "Tax Cuts and Jobs Act" or "TCJA," which fundamentally changed the United States' international corporate taxation system. The TCJA was enacted quickly; the bill was signed into law less than 2 months after the House of Representatives introduced it. Since that time, tax professionals across the United States and around the world have worked overtime to try to understand the new tax laws. Now that the U.S. Treasury Department is releasing and requesting comments on proposed tax regulations, practitioners must have a thorough understanding of the TCJA. This paper attempts to reduce the complexity of the TCJA's international tax provisions by examining global intangible low-taxed income ("GILT]") and its interaction with other provisions that implement income taxation of cross border corporations. First, this article outlines corporate income taxation after the TCJA's enactment, and demonstrates how GILTI, the Section 245A deduction, and the other international tax law provisions are integrated into the corporation income tax scheme. Second, a hypothetical cross border corporation is analyzed to demonstrate the calculation of income tax, including the determination of GILTI, Section 245 A deductions, and the foreign tax credit. Third, the article highlights how the current tax system, after the TCJA, is really a hybrid system where some income is taxed as part of the exemption or territorial tax system, while other amounts are still taxed as part of the worldwide tax/foreign tax credit system, which significantly increases the complexity of the United States' international corporate income tax regime. Keywords: Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, TCJA, Global Intangible Low-Taxed Income, GILT1, Section 951A, International Tax, Corporation Tax, Foreign Tax Credit, FTC, Previously Taxed Income, Section 959, Territorial Taxation, Exemption System.

Table of Contents I. Introduction 446 II. The Foreign Tax Credit and its Requirements: A Primer 449 III. The Compulsory Payment Requirement for Foreign Tax Credits 456 IV. Coca-Cola Co. [...], One condition imposed by the Treasury Regulations for a foreign levy to be creditable is that the tax must be a "compulsory payment pursuant to the authority of a foreign country to levy taxes." This Article focuses on the purpose and application of that prerequisite which serves to prevent taxpayers from "pursuing the path of least resistance in dealing with foreign tax authorities." This restriction was the subject of recent litigation in the United States Tax Court in Coca-Cola Co. v. Commissioner. The Tax Court granted the taxpayer's motion for partial summary judgment finding that the Service erred as a matter of law in determining that the Mexican taxes in question were not "compulsory" and, therefore, not eligible for foreign tax credit relief. The taxpayer's attempt at competent authority relief had been thwarted by the Service, which refused to participate in competent authority proceedings until the conclusion of the adjudication because the issue pertaining to transfer pricing adjustments had been designated for litigation. Despite that, the Service asserted that the taxes in question were not compulsory because, inter alia, competent authority proceedings had not yet been undertaken. The Tax Court's decision in favor of the taxpayer was carefully reasoned, embracing common sense and logic and rejecting the irrational direction proposed by the Service. At a time when many believe Congress has taken the U.S. international tax system in an inappropriate direction as a result of the recent enactment of the Tax Cut and Jobs Act, it is of some comfort to see one court interpret this international tax regulatory requirement in a discerning manner.

ABSTRACT There is an old proverb, "If you can't beat them, join them," that suggests that those who cannot win against some group should stop fighting and instead band together [...]

I. Introduction The foreign tax credit serves to promote fairness in the United States' tax system by limiting the potential for double taxation of income earned by taxpayers subject to [...]

Tax Law--U.K. Windfall Tax Constitutes U.S. Income Tax Under I.R.C. § 901(b)(1)--PPL Corp. v. Commissioner, 133 s. Ct. 1897 (2013) The U.S. tax code allows citizens and domestic corporations to [...]

ABSTRACT U.S. taxpayers are generally allowed to credit against their U.S. income tax liability foreign taxes that are imposed on the same income, but only if the foreign tax is [...]

IV. Policy Reasons for the Income Tax Requirement As the preceding discussion of the case law suggests, the concept of an income tax is sufficiently nebulous that decisions on novel [...]

I. INTRODUCTION Under § 901 of the Internal Revenue Code ("I.R.C."), taxpayers who pay qualifying taxes to a foreign government are eligible for a dollar-for-dollar credit. (1) Congress recognized double [...]

I. Introduction Starting in the 1970s, the United Kingdom embarked on an extensive plan to privatize a large number of government-owned companies. (1) As part of this process, the U.K. [...]

I. INTRODUCTION Thoughtful observers wrestle with the question of whether the U.S. system of worldwide taxation, including its deferral of the taxation of unrepatriated foreign income, provision of foreign tax [...], Deferral of U.S. taxes on foreign source income is commonly characterized as a subsidy to foreign investment, as reflected in its inclusion among 'tax expenditures '' and occasional calls for its repeal. This' paper analyzes the extent to which tax deferral and other policies inefficiently subsidize U.S. direct investment abroad. Investments are dynamically inefficient if they consistently generate less in returns to investors than they absorb in new investment funds. From 1982-2010, repatriated earnings from foreign affiliates exceeded net capital investments by $1.1 trillion in 2010 dollars, and from 1950-2010, repatriated earnings and net interest from foreign affiliates exceeded net equity investments and loans by $2.1 trillion in 2010 dollars. By either measure, cash flows received from abroad exceeded 160 percent of net investments, implying that foreign investment over these periods was dynamically efficient. Keywords: international taxation, dynamic efficiency, deferral JEL Codes: H25, H21, D92

TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. TAX BASKETING IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE A. The Mechanics of Basketing B. Examples of Basketing Rules for Individuals 1. The Limitation on the Deduction [...], In an income tax system that comported with the economic, or Haig-Simons, definition of income, deductible expenses would not face source-based limitations. A true Haig-Simons income tax system therefore would not take the schedular approach of sorting different types of expenses and losses into distinct conceptual 'baskets' containing corresponding types of income. Practical realities often require departing from the Haig-Simons norm, however. The U.S. federal income tax system does require individuals to basket a number of types of expenses and losses. For example, individuals' passive activity losses can only be deducted from passive income gains. By contrast, most corporations taxed under Subchapter C of the Internal Revenue Code are not subject to many of these restrictions. Thus, corporations generally can deduct their passive investment expenses and losses from their active business income. That ability allowed the creation of infamous tax strategies such as Son-of-BOSS and the CINS contingent installment sale shelter. In order to prevent the resurgence of abusive tax shelters, this Article proposes to extend to the domestic corporate context the passive/active distinction that already exists for individuals. If corporations were required to basket their passive-source expenses and losses with their passive income (such as income from interest, dividends, and rents and royalties, other than those produced by an active business), many abusive tax shelters involving financial products would not work. The Article also considers the three principal objections to the proposal--that it is overbroad, underinclusive, and too complex--and argues that the proposal is tailored so as to minimize these costs.

I. INTRODUCTION Perhaps no feature of modern income tax systems has gained such consistent--and unmerited--approval from commentators as the foreign tax credit, under which tax payments to one's own government [...], International tax policy experts often mistakenly conflate two distinct margins: (1) the overall tax burden on outbound investment, and (2) the marginal reimbursement rate (MRR) for foreign taxes paid, which is 100 percent under a foreign tax credit system, but equals the marginal tax rate for foreign source income under an explicit or implicit deductibility system (such as exemption). From a unilateral national welfare standpoint, whatever the right answer at margin (1), deduetibility is clearly optimal, and creditability dangerously over-generous, at margin (2). Keywords: international taxation, foreign tax credits, double taxation JEL Codes: H20, H21, H25, H73