Tax avoidance and global development
Tax avoidance and global development
复制标题
DOI：
10.1016/j.accfor.2005.03.003
复制
发表时间：
2005-09
期刊：
影响因子：
3.1
通讯作者：
Mark P. Hampton;P. Sikka
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Mark P. Hampton;P. Sikka
可以说，当代形式的全球化与其前辈有很大不同。最值得注意的是，当代形式的全球化是围绕自由贸易的意识形态形成的，拆除贸易壁垒和外汇管制以及（重新）监管，使公司能够利用稀缺资源并获得短期财务收益（Held，McGrew，Goldblatt和Perraton，1999）。在这种转变中，人们被当作获取私人利润的手段。私有化和全球自由市场的无情推进助长了大规模欺诈行为（Stiglitz，2003），未能为发展中国家带来所承诺的繁荣（Stiglitz，2002）。社会不平等、失业、贫穷、社会流离失所、暴力犯罪和环境退化的加剧被认为是社会其他部门需要清理的外部因素。与此同时，人们被鼓励接受自由民主，期望民选政府能够管理外部性并改善他们的生活机会。然而，政府发现越来越难以筹集和征收税收来为公共产品提供资金或重新分配财富。公司和富有的精英们制定了精心设计的计划来避税，并鼓励资本外逃。例如，在共产主义崩溃后，俄罗斯被鼓励接受市场资本主义并促进资本流动。在1990年代，每一美元的外来投资，都会损失10至20美元，流入富裕精英持有的离岸账户（Christensen和汉普顿，1999年）。转让定价似乎是便利资本外逃和避税的一个关键工具。中国税务机关调查了9465家跨国公司，发现“近90%的外国企业...利用转移定价逃避纳税”（《中国人民日报》，2004年11月25日）。在非洲，人们对资本外逃感到相当关切，各种税收管辖区也抓住了不分青红皂白地转移利润的问题，如果对这些利润征税，将大大有助于促进非洲国家的经济。现在正在实施各种方法来阻止这种资金外流，各种形式和形式的转移定价已被指定为一种“快速赚钱”的方式。其结果是前所未有地实施了带有转移定价味道的立法。11 http：//allafrica。com/stories/200412150137. html; 2004年12月15日访问。0155 -9982/$-见前页© 2005 Elsevier Ltd.保留所有权利。doi：10.1016/j. accfor. 2005.03. 003
It can be argued that contemporary forms of globalisation differ significantly from their predecessors. Most notably, contemporary forms of globalisation are formed around ideologies of free trade, dismantling of trade barriers and exchange controls and (re) regulation to enable corporations to exploit scarce resources and make short-term financial gains (Held, McGrew, Goldblatt, & Perraton, 1999). In such transformations, people are treated as mere means for securing private profits. The relentless march of privatisation and global free markets have facilitated massive frauds (Stiglitz, 2003) and failed to deliver the promised prosperity to developing nations (Stiglitz, 2002). A rise in social inequality, unemployment, poverty, social displacement, violent crime and environmental degradation are considered to be externalities that the rest of society is left to mop-up. Alongside this, people are being encouraged to embrace liberal democracy with the expectation that elected governments can manage externalities and improve their life chances. However, governments are finding it increasingly difficult to raise and collect tax revenues to fund public goods or redistribute wealth. Corporations and wealthy elites have developed elaborate schemes to avoid taxes and also encourage capital to take flight. For example, following the collapse of communism, Russia has been encouraged to embrace market capitalism and facilitate movement of capital. For every dollar of inward investment during the 1990s, it lost between US $10 and 20 to offshore accounts held by wealthy elites (Christensen and Hampton, 1999). Transfer pricing appears to be a key tool for facilitating flight of capital and tax avoidance. Tax authorities in China investigated 9465 multinationals and found that ‘‘Almost 90% of the foreign enterprises... use transfer pricing to dodge tax payments’’(China People’s Daily, 25 November 2004). In Africa, there is considerable concern about flight of capital as well various ‘‘tax jurisdictions have latched onto the indiscriminate relocation of profits, which if taxed would assist greatly in advancing the economy of the African countries. Various methods are now being implemented to stop this outflow of funds and transfer pricing in various shapes and forms has been earmarked as a way to make a ‘‘quick buck’’. The result is the unprecedented implementation of legislation with a smell of transfer pricing.’’11 http://allafrica. com/stories/200412150137. html; accessed 15 December 2004.0155-9982/$–see front matter© 2005 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. doi: 10.1016/j. accfor. 2005.03. 003