yego.me
💡 Stop wasting time. Read Youtube instead of watch. Download Chrome Extension

136 Countries Agree To Global Minimum Corporate Tax Rate!


7m read
·Nov 7, 2024

Hey guys, welcome back to the channel!

So in this video, we have some interesting news to me. I guess probably a lot of people would zone out at the thought of corporate tax rates, but to me, we have some interesting news. Because last Friday, 136 countries agreed to set a minimum corporate tax rate of 15%. Personally, I actually think this is a really important step in the right direction of potentially eliminating tax havens. So let's talk about what's being put forward, how it might work, and who the winners and losers will be. All right, let's get started.

[Music]

This video is sponsored by Stake. Sign up today for free brokerage when trading U.S. listed stocks and use the referral link in the description for a free stock when you fund your account.

So yes, last Friday, 136 countries agreed to set their minimum corporate tax rate at 15%. The idea is obviously to try and stop corporate tax havens. This is essentially where a small country, usually with no large industry or natural resources, deliberately lowers their corporate tax rate to undercut the surrounding countries in order to attract more international businesses to set up shop in their country.

So the idea is that, you know, even though the corporate tax rate gets lowered, the country still ends up with more tax revenue total, as more companies start operating in their country. And then another effect is that because more companies are coming to your country, this also creates fresh new jobs for your citizens. So you know, it sounds like a smart plan, right?

Well, obviously it works for the tax haven, but it is extremely frustrating for all the other countries. I mean, they're out there trying to do the right thing. They're trying to make corporations pay their fair share of tax, but instead, the corporations just funnel their profits to the tax havens. This means obviously less tax revenue for the country that's trying to do the right thing and ultimately it means the citizens of those countries lose out because of what that tax revenue could have provided for them.

For example, I live here in Australia. We have a 30% corporate tax rate. You know, Facebook, a global company, shovels pretty much all of its Australian revenue to Singapore to avoid paying tax. In fact, Facebook made 712.7 million dollars in ad revenue within Australia last year, but they only paid 20 million in tax. So, aka, only 2.8% of their Australian ad revenue went back to Australians through corporate tax.

Why? Because they shoveled 559 million to their Singaporean subsidiary under the guise of resale of advertising inventory. Now, the way they structured it annoyingly is perfectly legal, but obviously the reason for doing this is to avoid tax because Singapore only has a 17% corporate tax rate. And that's really annoying because it means that Facebook basically gives no money to the Australian government, no money to healthcare, to roads, to services, to defense. Yet, it gets to operate here like all the other Australian businesses and it gets all the same privileges. It just doesn't seem very fair.

But last Friday, as I said, there was a really big step taken to start to reduce the effect of tax havens. We had 136 countries agree to set a global minimum corporate tax rate of 15%. And yes, you can argue no, it should have been higher, and I'd probably agree with you, but in all honesty, I still think this is a really good first step. Because it's quite a big effort to get that level of cooperation on such a large issue as this.

For example, many tax havens have actually agreed to these terms: companies such as Ireland, Singapore, the Cayman Islands, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Bermuda, etc. So these are all small countries implementing the same tax haven tactics. For example, Ireland is considered one of the low tax hubs of Europe. In 2003, they set their corporate tax rate to just 12.5%, beating every other country in close proximity. And for Ireland, it's actually worked wonders.

See, before this, Ireland was just viewed as a bit of an agricultural backwater with not a lot going on. But once they changed the tax laws, you had thousands of major U.S. companies – we're talking pharmaceuticals, the Googles, the Facebooks, etc. – they're all flooding to set up shop in Ireland. This created more tax revenue for Ireland and also more jobs for their citizens. Overall, smart call for them, but it also screwed over all the other European countries trying to do the right thing. Those countries ultimately lost out on tax revenue because corporate profits were shoveled to Ireland instead.

But now this effect should be vastly reduced. We have 136 countries coming together and agreeing that a minimum of 15% corporate tax will be charged. And yes, I know as I said, 15% isn't a huge tax rate, but as I said before, it's an important step in the right direction.

Because before this, these tax havens were really in a race to the bottom. For example, between 1985 and 2018, the global average corporate headline rate fell from 49% to 24%. And by 2016, over half of all U.S. corporate profits were booked in just seven tax havens: Bermuda, the Cayman Islands, Ireland, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Singapore, and Switzerland. That's astonishing!

And what do you notice about all these places, right? They're all tiny, without the space for, you know, huge population growth or major industry to develop. So for these countries, it really just is a battle to continue to undercut the next tax haven, which unfortunately continues to drive the corporate tax rate towards zero, allowing companies to avoid paying their fair share of taxes.

And because some of these countries really do rely on being tax havens, some people are now asking the question: you know, will the 15% minimum corporate tax rate actually solve the problem of tax havens? Because, of course, the tax rate is an incentive, but countries can also provide other financial incentives to try and lure more business into their borders. They could, you know, they could provide land at a good rate, they could offer a financial incentive for jobs created, they could provide an infrastructure grant, or they could set out terms to be able to achieve tax credits.

I mean, in these instances, the corporate tax rate may very well be 15%, but companies will still be able to save a lot of money in other areas, still courtesy of the government. I mean, if that happens, then the effective result could be what we already have now: companies will still favor operating out of the tax havens, the government continues to give them large financial incentives. It's just not in the form of a low tax rate.

So it's an interesting debate, and this is really only the start. So we'll have to see what happens over the next year or two in terms of what happens next. This article notes the accord will go to the Group of 20 leaders. Agreement there is likely since all 20 members signed Friday's deal. Implementation then moves to the individual countries.

And that's the thing, right? It then goes to the individual countries to actually get this done. So you can imagine that has the potential to take some time. The article also notes the tax on earnings, where companies have no physical presence, would require countries to sign an inter-governmental agreement during the course of 2022, with implementation in 2023.

So it sounds like this thing will likely be an issue throughout the next year, with implementation probably the year after. But you know, I'd still like to see this being done, and I think it's fair, and I think it's the right thing to do.

And you know, I'd love to hear from you guys. Do you think this will work? Do you think countries will find a way around it? Do you agree that tax havens should be dealt with, or you know, do you believe that countries should be allowed to do what they like?

I mean, maybe you are from Ireland or from Singapore, and maybe the idea of tax havens has actually benefited you in your own life. So I'd love to hear different perspectives, opinions down in the comments section below.

So make sure you leave a comment, subscribe to the channel if you have not done so already, leave a like on the video if you did find it useful or if you enjoyed it.

Check out New Money Clips if you'd like to see short-form new money content over on the second channel there. It's actually going really well, New Money Clips, so definitely jump on board if you've not done so already.

And thanks always for the support, guys! If you're interested in how I go about my investing, profitable links down in the description below. Active investing, passive investing, whatever you want to learn about, it's over on Profitful. Full long in-depth step-by-step courses that will help you learn about how to implement either the passive investing strategy or the Warren Buffett value investing strategy. So if you're interested, links in the description.

That's it from me, guys. Thank you very much for watching, and I'll see you guys next time.

So a lot of people ask me what brokerage site I use when I make an investment in the U.S. and for about the past three years now, I've been using Stake.

So Stake is a brokerage-free trading app that lets you buy U.S. stocks, and coming soon they'll also be offering ASX trading as well for all the Aussies out there. So brokerage-free trading? That's pretty awesome!

But the other reason I like their platform is because of fractional share trading. So say you wanted to buy Amazon. Current share price is three thousand four hundred and fifty dollars. It's pretty expensive. However, with fractional share trading, say your investing budget was like 500 bucks, you could just buy 0.14 of an Amazon share instead – no worries at all!

So I definitely recommend Stake, and if you wanted to jump on board, follow my referral link in the description when you sign up. Because if you do, you'll get a free stock, either Nike, GoPro, or Dropbox. So the time of recording at worst, that's nine U.S. dollars in your pocket. And you know, if you hit Nike, that's 158 U.S. dollars for free!

So definitely check them out, get your free stock, and thanks always to Stake for sponsoring the channel.

[Music]

More Articles

View All
15 Risks You Must Take in Life
All your life you take some risks, right? Like drinking that third coffee at 5 p.m., not knowing if you’re going to sleep or not. You risk going hiking, not being sure if it’s really going to be that sunny outside or if you’re going to run into a bear. Al…
Philosophy On Falling In Love
…bring suffering. If it’s merely a passing attachment, it can lead to more pain than joy.” He emphasizes that true love is unconditional and does not depend on the other person meeting our desires. Instead, it’s about caring deeply for another’s well-bein…
Charlie Munger's SCARY Inflation Warning (2022)
What makes life interesting is we don’t know how it’s going to work out. I think we do know we’re flirting with serious trouble. Inflation is at such high levels right now that those of us under the age of 40 have never even lived through a period of such…
Zero pairs worked example
We’re told this is the key for the integer chips. So this yellow circle with a plus is equal to one. This, I guess, pinkish Circle, Peach Circle, with a minus, that is equal to negative one. Consider the following image. And so that we have a bunch of th…
Worked example: Approximation with local linearity | AP Calculus AB | Khan Academy
We’re told the function ( f ) is twice differentiable with ( f(2) = 1 ), ( f’(2) = 4 ), and ( f”(2) = 3 ). What is the value of the approximation of ( f(1.9) ) using the line tangent to the graph of ( f ) at ( x = 2 )? So pause this video and see if you c…
Executive orders | US government and civics | Khan Academy
What we’re going to discuss in this video is executive orders, and these are directives being issued by the President of the United States that can have the force of law. I know what you’re thinking: isn’t Congress our legislative body, the body that actu…