The withdrawal of the United States from Corporate Global Minimum Tax Agreement the organization for economic cooperation and development (OECD) can mark the beginning of a worldwide tax dispute that has the American technology giants as a target.
On January 20, on the day of his inauguration for a second term at the White House, Donald Trump published a memorandum stating that the global minimum tax agreement “has no strength or effect in the United States.”
Negotiated by more than 140 countries, the idea of the agreement would be to raise the taxation of multinational companies in operation in other countries.
Also read:
Also read:
The departure of the United States represents, in the evaluation of the professor of the Faculty of Economics, Administration and Accounting of USP (FEA-USP), Pedro Forquoisato, “kill the agreement.” “We would return to the pre-cord situation: countries increasingly implementing specific taxes on companies that usually relocate their profits.”
Continues after advertising
By the rule they could raise the tax burden to hit the rate. The idea is to combat tax havens or those countries that charge very low corporate taxes.
‘BIG TECHS’
Trump’s early days in office, technology companies would be the main ones affected by a global minimum tax agreement.
“Since today these technology companies do not necessarily have a fixed basis, they were escaping taxation,” says Pinheiro Neto’s tax area, Luciana Galhardo. Its assessment is that the departure of the United States would also be a signal for a more pro-negotiation environment in the country itself.
Continues after advertising
Countries with income taxes on multinational profit far below their peers, such as Ireland, have become the main destinations of Big Techs, which investigate more profits where tax incidence is lower.
By the OECD agreement, even if these regions did not want to increase the average rate up to 15%, other signatories in which the company has operation could charge the fee, based on rules stipulated by the organization.
“Several of the technology companies are American. They depend a lot on activities that are not easily located, ”says Forquoisato. “If there is a company that sells over the internet, for example, it has a whole network of logistics that should occur in the country it is selling, but all internet activity can be relocated, in fact real or fictitious, for tax havens.”
Continues after advertising
One of Trump’s signs was that he could double the tax of companies based in countries whose US multinational tax was considered.
A global tax battle of this type would go against a global trend of decreased corporate taxes in search of attracting investments – which generates tax havens that to the OECD agreement seeks to combat.
Brazil is a signatory to the agreement
Although not an OECD member, Brazil adhered to the agreement in a sanctioned law. It applies to multinationals with revenues of more than 750 million euros annually. For 2028, the expected collection was R $ 7.7 billion.
Continues after advertising
For fork, the end of the agreement is bad for all countries. Raising taxes on multinational profits would increase the competitiveness of countries that today charge the most of multinationals – this is the case of Brazil.
Currently, Brazilian multinational taxation is 34%, considering Income Tax and Social Contribution on Net Income (CSLL). However, the effective rate may not reach 15% due to incentives, for example. The idea of the rule approved last year is that the minimum effective value is 15%.
