Arguments in Favor of Tax Competition
February 12, 2025
The United States banking industry and the economy in general was rocked by the Savings and Loans crisis in the 1980’s. The savings and loans associations had been an important part of the United States banking system. Hence, when one out of every four savings and loans in the US went under water, the nation […]
Almost every sporting franchise needs a stadium or a venue in order to play professionally. This is because the team needs to train in a certain stadium and also needs a home ground in order to invite other teams and host matches for the franchise. To a certain extent, this helps in raising funds for […]
Fixed income securities used to be a relatively obscure part of the financial markets. Up until the late 1970s, bond markets were used by wealthy individuals, corporations, and even governments to park large sums of money in low-risk-low return securities. Since these bonds were mostly issued by sovereign authorities, they were considered to be one […]
Asset-backed securities have become famous all over the world in the past few years. The largest market for asset-backed securities was in the United States of America. The sub-prime mortgage exposed the flaws inherent in the process of issuance of asset-backed securities. The world had been looking for an alternative to asset-backed securities. This is […]
Investment bankers play different types of roles when it comes to capital raising. Most of the time, they are middlemen who ensure that the requirements of both parties are met and that the deal goes through smoothly. However, often the acquiring party falls short of cash to complete the acquisition. In such cases, it is […]
Proponents of the free market generally believe that competition is good for the economy. They argue in favor of the competition every time.
Hence, it is natural for them to feel that competition in taxes is also good. The general argument is that competition forces the governments to rationalize and become more efficient.
However, there are many economists in the world who believe that the general rules of competition cannot be applied to taxation. This is because taxation is a totally different kind of economic subject.
Hence, what may be good for the market, in general, may not be good when it comes to setting up a tax system. This is the reason why they have listed down some of the negative points which tax competition brings along.
This article explains some of the common arguments which are made against tax competition.
A country does not have the option to avoid tax competition if its peers are indulging in it. Economists have studied tax wars between different nations, wherein each kept lowering the rate to undercut the other.
In the end, one party gains by a marginal amount. However, both participants lose much more, and the real winner is the corporation who benefits by playing the nations off against one another.
Lower revenues mean that the country will have to either lower their expenses, or they will have to pick up even more debt. Now, when governments want to cut expenses, obviously they cannot reduce expenses on infrastructure or any other service that corporations require.
This is because that would also trigger the flight of capital. As a result, governments are forced to lower the level of services offered to their civilians.
The education and health facilities of the country start taking the hit. This is also a form of wealth transfer from the poor to the rich.
Any shortfall induced by not taxing capital is made whole by increasing the taxes on labor. This is what is happening in most developed countries in the world.
The tax on corporations has reduced from 35% to 24% in the past five years. However, during the same period, the taxes on the poor have either stagnated or steadily increased.
Tax competition leads to regressive tax systems around the world, which actually defeats the purpose of the competition.
Hence, if the government of a nation tries to increase taxes after inducing them to invest under the pretext of lower taxes, they would just exit the nation.
This is detrimental for the economy as multinationals do not invest in infrastructure assets, which form the basis of the growth of any economy.
When the system is designed, several loopholes are created, which allow bigger corporations to get away after paying a lower effective rate of tax.
As a result, the bigger corporations end up having a tax advantage over the smaller business. This tax advantage allows them to drop prices and gain even more market share.
This leads to even more revenue for them in the future. This technique has been used by companies like Wal-Mart and Amazon, who have gained an unassailable price advantage over smaller firms because of tax competition.
It is ironic that states strike these deals with mega-corporations in order to improve the lives of their citizens. However, over the long term, the end up hurting their livelihood.
Hence, over a period of time, tax competition exacerbates the wealth gap between the rich and the poor. The advantages are reaped by the rich, whereas the costs are borne by the poor worldwide.
Hence, economists argue that tax competition ends up widening the wealth gap, which is the exact opposite of what this law intends to do.
The bottom line is that many countries have seen their tax revenues dwindle. This is particularly true of countries that are in the vicinity of other tax havens.
As a result, these countries want to eradicate this idea of tax competition. They are of the opinion that tax competition is a failed economic experiment, which is costing the global economy dearly.
However, the problem is that no country can end tax competition of its own. They will have to team up with several other countries before a critical mass is reached, and tax competition is eradicated, which is unlikely to happen in the short term.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *