• 검색 결과가 없습니다.

1920 .2) OECD UN , 2,500

N/A
N/A
Protected

Academic year: 2022

Share "1920 .2) OECD UN , 2,500 "

Copied!
38
0
0

로드 중.... (전체 텍스트 보기)

전체 글

(1)

. . 1.

2.

. 1.

2.

3.

. 1.

2.

3. CFC .

* , .

: 2014. 4. 30. / : 2014. 5. 26. / : 2014. 5. 30.

(2)

I.

GDP .1)

.

. , ,

,

.

.

,

.

.

.

.

. , , ,

1) 60%

(http://www. taxjustice.net), 70% (http://www.

taxresearch.org.ukBlog/2010/01/28/70).

(3)

.

.

,

.

,

.

, ,

, ,

. ,

.

,

.

.

, ,

(II).

(III). ,

(IV), (V) .

(4)

.

2 .

.

( )

. ,

.

‘ ’ (“Base Erosion and

Profit Shifting”, ‘BEPS’ ) ,

. .

.

.

.

‘ ’(aggressive tax planning)

. , ,

, .

.

(5)

.

(the unitary approach),

(the “separate entity approach).

, 1920

.2) OECD UN

,

2,500 .

3)

. 1960

.

.

.

.

. ,

, .

,

2) , , “ ”,

23 2 (2007), , 151 .

3) , , “ ”, 9

2 (2008), 313 .

(6)

. ,

.

.

.

.

.

.

, , .

.

, .

, .

(7)

,

.

.

,

.

,

.

.

1977 OECD

(permanent establishment)

.4)

.

,

.

4) 2008 ‘OECD ’(“authorized OECD approach”, ‘AOA’

) , OECD

( 7 ). 2010 AOA

. AOA ,

, OECD , 2011. .

(8)

.

,

.

.

, .

,

,

.

. ,

, .

3

. ,

, , 0 ,

0 , .

(9)

,

.

.

’(Controlled Foreign Corporate, ‘CFC’ ) (CFC regime)

. CFC

,

, , .

.

3 .

, ,

.

.

,

.

(10)

.

.

. .

A ( 60%) B ( 30%)

. 3

100 .

40 , .

60

(100 40 ) , . A

B ,

.

( )

(A ) (B )

40 60 0 36 0 36

70 30 30 18 9 27

100 0 60 0 18 18

, 40

, 0 ,

60 .

(11)

60% A 36 , 36

.

, 70

30 (100 70 ),

30 (70 30 ) . A

18 (30 60%), B

9 (30 30%) ,

27 .

100

60 . 60 B

18% 18

.

. 100

.

“dealing at arm’s length”

( ‘ ’ ) .

3

(12)

.

.

. 5)

,

.6) (transfer price)

, .

.

,

.

.

,

2 1 .7)

5)

( 20 ) .

, , “ ”, 16 (2006.11.30.),

254-255 .

6) ( ) 4 : “

.”

(13)

,

‘ ’ .

, .

,

( 11 ).

( 12 ).

, (

) ,

‘ ’

( 6 ).

.

.

.

7) 5% , 3

, “

”, 2007-8, 144 .

(14)

(Arm’s Length Principle) , 3

. ,

.

OECD

. 3

. (comparable uncontrolled price) ,

.

. (resale price

method) ,

3

.

. (cost plus method)

.

,

. (profit split method)

(transactional net margine method) ,

(15)

, ,

. 5

( 5 1 ).

OECD 2010

,

.

OECD

.

, .

, .

. FC

, ?

, , .

 

.

.8)

5 6

(16)

,

.9)

.

.

1 .

.

.

.

A, B, C, D, E X .

2 . X Y

10 . 5 2

X 1

[5 x (2 x 10%)] , Y 2 2,000 (10

x 20% + 2,000 ) . X

, .

8) , ( 5), 269 .

9) , , 269 . 5 1 5

, 4

1 2 ,

.

(17)

2008

2010 .

.

?

,

10)

. OECD

, (arm’ length

principle) (unitary taxation system)

.11)

.

,

. ,

, , ,

10) 1992 Ruding Report 2001

, 2011 3 (Proposal

for a Council Directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Tax Base, COM(2011)

121/4), 2012 4 (European Parliament

legislative resolution of April 2001 on the proposal for a Council directive on a Common Consolidated Corporate Ta Base).

11) Sol Picciotto, “Towards Unitary Taxation of Transnational Corporations”, tax justice network(2012. 12, 9.), p. 16.

(18)

.

, CFC

.12)

,

, 3 .13)

,

.14)

OECD ,

. ,

,

.15)

12) Sol Picciotto, Id., p. 11.

13)

, ,

, . , Andreas

Oestreicher/Christoph Spengel/Reinald Koch, “How to Reform Taxation of Corporate Groups in Europe”, World Taxation Journal 2011, pp. 26-27. .

14) 2011 OECD Caroline Silberztein

, ,

. Sol Picciotto, Id., p. 14, Fn. 34.

15)

, Avi-Yonah R. S./Benshalom, “Formulary Apportionment:

Myths and Prospects _ Promoting Better International Tax Police and Utilizing the

(19)

.

,

.

.

. 100%

.

( 2

3).

.

2 .

, 2

.

,

.

4 2 2 (general

abuse rule) .

Misunderstood and Under-Theorized Formulary Alternative”, Michigan Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers 221, SSRN E-library.

(20)

.

(conduit company) , ( )

.16) ,

(U.S.) L.P.

,17)

.18) CFC

, OECD BEPS

, 9 CFC

.19) CFC

.

,

.

( )

. OECD 2010

. ,

.

16) , “ ”, 28 (2008. 2), 164 .

17) 2014.1.14. 2012 35214 .

, , “

”, [XIX-2] 2013, 120 .

18) 2012.1.27. 2010 5950 .

19) BEPS 3 . .

(21)

OECD

1999 OECD

.

OECD 2003

(Commentaries on the Articles of Model Tax Convention) ,

.

1 ‘ ’ 7

, .

. , 22 24

,

,

, 4 8

. OECD

, OECD

.

(22)

.

.20)

OECD

. 2013 2 G20

BEPS

OECD 7 , 2013.

9. 6. G20 . 15

, 2015

. (nexus)

(action 1, 2014 9 ),

(Controlled Foreign Company, ‘CFC’ ) (action 3,

2015 9 ) ,

.

(action 9, 10, 2015 9 ),

(action 13, 9

), (action 8,

2015 9 ) .

BEPS OECD 8

20) 2012.4.26. 2010 11948 ; 2012.10.25. 2010 25466

; 2013.4.11. 2011 3159 .

(23)

, ,

, ,

, ,

, , OECD

.

2012. 6. 6. OECD 5

.

“ ,

” .

BEPS . OECD

, OECD

. OECD (‘general attack’)

.

.

( 42 3),

( 1 ). ,

,

( 3 ).

.

(24)

.21)

4 1

.

. ,

,

, ,

,

.22) ,

.

.23)

,

21) , “ ”, 2007-8, 150 .

22) 2012.1.19. 2008 8499 ; 2013.4.11. 2011

3159 .

23) ( ) .

(25)

.

(CFC) ( )

, CFC (Controlled Foreign Company regime)

.

. .

.

.

CFC ,

.

.

24)

24) .

( ),

( , ,

, )

.

(26)

, .

CFC .

CFC

. CFC , CFC

. CFC

3 . ,

,

,

.

,

.

,

.

.

, :

, , 35-36 .

(27)

. ,

.

OECD . OECD

(OECD Tax Model Convention, ‘OECD ’ )

CFC

. CFC

,

. CFC

. OECD

.

. OECD

CFC .25)

, .

CFC .

25) Suzanne Lauritzen Jourdan/ Katarina Lif Burren, "CFC Legislation in an International Tax Perspective", PRIVATE, 4/2005, 28f.

(28)

17 .

.

2 1 8 ,

2 1 .

, .

3

100 50

( 2 1 8 , ),

3

( 2 1 8 , ).

100 10

. 10%

.

5% 20

, 50%

50% .

1 40% 10

6% 100%

.

(29)

.

.

.

.

,

. 3

. .

100 15 ( 17 1 ).26)

100 15

.

CFC 2014. 1. 1.

.

,27) ,

26) 15% 62% , , ,

, , “ ”,

41 (2012.2.29), 105 .

27) 2. 21. ,

2015. 1. 1. ( 1 ).

(30)

.

, 18 5 ,

100 5 17

( 36 3 1 ).

[ ( 31 ) x

÷ ] ( 36 3

2 ).

, CFC ,

( 20 2, 37 1 ).

( ) .

.

.

. OECD G20

. ,

(31)

.

,

. .

. ,

CFC .

. CFC

.

.

.

.

1

.

.

,

.

.

(32)

.

.

.

.

, .

.

.

,

. , ,

. OECD

.

.

BEPS G20

.

. OECD ,

,

. IT

OECD

(33)

.

.

. ,

.

. ,

, .

(34)

, “ ”, 41 (2012.2.29).

, “ ”, 2007-8.

, :

, , 2005.

, OECD , 2011.

, “ ”, 9 2

(2008).

, “ ”, 16

(2006.11.30.).

, , , 2007.

, “ ”, 23 2 (2007),

.

, “ ”,

[XIX-2] 2013.

, “ ”, 28

(2008. 2).

Andreas Oestreicher/Christoph Spengel/Reinald Koch, “How to Reform Taxation of Corporate Groups in Europe”, World Taxation Journal 2011.

Avi-Yonah R. S./Benshalom, “Formulary Apportionment: Myths and Prospects _ Promoting Better International Tax Police and Utilizing the Misunderstood and Under-Theorized Formulary Alternative”, Michigan Public Law and Legal Theory Working Papers 221, SSRN E-library.

Richard D. Pomp/ Hartford, “Die Gemeinsame Konsolidierte Körperschaftsteuer- Bemessungsgrundlage: Evolution der Konzernbesteuerung?”, IStR 2008.

Suzanne Lauritzen Jourdan/ Katarina Lif Burren, "CFC Legislation in an International Tax Perspective", PRIVATE, 4/2005.

(35)

Sol Picciotto, “Towards Unitary Taxation of Transnational Corporations”, tax justice network(2012. 12. 9).

(36)

< >

,

.

.

. ,

OECD

.

,

. ,

. ,

CFC

, ,

.

(37)

Abstract

:

Measures against profit shifting and aggressive tax planning by Multinational Enterprises

Kim, Yong-Jin*28)

This paper contributes to the recent debate on tackling profits and tax avoidance and aggressive tax planning strategies by multinational enterprises. Multinational investors benefit from loopholes in the tax laws.

The paper accordingly suggests it be up to tax legislators to remove them. It especially recommends to impose new withholding taxes or extend existing ones on royalty payments. The author emphasizes those measure effectively tackles currently used tax planning structure and does not distort investment decisions as long as withholding taxes are credited in the residence country. Moreover It is strongly suggested in this paper that ALP(arm’s length principle) be supplemented with new approach “unitary taxation with profit apportionment”.

* Prof. Dr. iur., Law School of the Chungnam National University

(38)

참조

관련 문서

1 colder and colder 2 prettier and prettier 3 taller and taller 4 older and older 5 better and better 6 more and more tired 7 more and more popular 8 higher and higher 9

[r]

 Students needing additional information about grading policies and procedures should meet with their faculty advisor, Executive Director/Chairperson or a

For this study—our third on global workforce trends, follow- ing studies in 2014 and 2018—Boston Consulting Group and The Network surveyed some 209,000 people in 190 countries

Basic aspects of AUTOSAR architecture and methodology Safety mechanisms supported by AUTOSAR.. Technical safety concepts supported by AUTOSAR Relationship to ISO

GDP impact of COVID-19 spread, public health response, and economic policies. Virus spread and public

-The square module stands free in the garden of the house as a canopy -consisted of a thin shell supported at each of its corners by equally thin reinforced concrete piers.

Micro- and nano-sized pores were formed on the surface of the alloy using PEO and anodization methods, and the pore shape change according to the Zr