Globalisation Requires an Ambitious Reform of International Taxation

Philippe Martin, Professor of Economics at Sciences Po, sheds light on the need to adapt international tax rules to a changing globalised landscape. This article was originally published in the 2019 G7 Global Leaders Report

G7 Leaders Magazine cover

The multilateral trading system is now under attack by the country which has been its main inspirer, the United States. The current view of the US administration of trade as a zero sum game where some countries (with trade surpluses) gain at the expense of others (with trade deficits) marks a stark departure from previous administrations as well as from the consensus of economists. It is therefore important to have in mind the losses that a trade war would entail. A simulation of a trade war (see Jean, Martin and Sapir, 2018 and Vicard 2018) shows large permanent losses (around 3% to 4% of GDP for the EU, US and China and much larger for smaller countries) that are similar to the estimated permanent effect of the Great Recession. Benefits of trade (and losses of a trade war) should not be overestimated (there are also decreasing returns to trade liberalization) but they do exist.

This is not to say that the benefits of trade liberalisation are evenly distributed. In fact, it has been known for a long time that international trade can not only increase inequalities but also create losers (be they individuals or regions inside countries).

This may partly explain the striking contrast between economists support to trade and public opinion. 60% of French people have a negative opinion of globalisation and only 13% are favourable to a deeper trade openness. The French are more critical of trade integration than the Germans: 75% of the French and 57% of Germans are favourable to greater protection against foreign competition. Also, 68% of the French and 55% of Germans consider that globalisation increases social inequalities. Economists broadly share these concerns on inequality and point out that over the last thirty years increasing globalisation in trade has increased competition between markets, often at the expense of certain categories of workers in developed countries. This is in particular the case for the impact of Chinese imports, (see Author D.H., D. Dorn and G.H. Hanson (2013) for the US case and Malgouyres C. (2017) for the French case). Several empirical studies have assessed the impact of increased imports from emerging and developing countries (mainly China). The increase in inequalities and the effects on wages and employment in developed countries can be partly attributed to the increase in imports from emerging and developing countries. The studies found that the regional employment areas most exposed to competition from Chinese imports –intensive in unskilled work– are the ones that have experienced the greatest decline in manufacturing jobs.

The standard response of economists is that if trade generates aggregate gains but with winners and losers, it should always be possible to transfer some of the gains from the winners to compensate the losers or to use increased resources to improve (through retraining for example) the fate of those who lost their jobs. However, with the possible exception of the Scandinavian countries, industrialised countries have failed to redistribute the benefits of globalisation. This is true both in the US and in the EU. Instruments seeking to mitigate the negative consequences of trade liberalisation exist (for example the European globalisation adjustment fund), but the tasks and resources assigned to these instruments are manifestly insufficient. It may be that trade is a positive sum for countries as a whole but we have failed to make it a positive sum gain for all inside countries. Why? Political reasons exist but financial ones should also be mentioned. At the same time as trade globalisation should have led to more redistribution from winners to losers to make it socially and politically sustainable, financial liberalization made it more difficult for governments to tax the winners. The mobility of capital, of production and of the taxable base indeed makes this redistribution more difficult because it means that the gains of globalization and of technology by individuals and multinational firms can more easily be shifted to low tax countries. In practice, along with competition and tax optimisation (or even tax evasion) it puts an unprecedented pressure on our redistribution systems. Trade integration also acts as an incentive to play the game of tax competition as it facilitates the relocation of production in response to tax advantages. Trade integration (in particular in services which is a key vector of profit shifting towards tax havens) and trade liberalization make it more difficult for countries to tax the winners (for example large multinationals) and redistribute efficiently to the losers.

Moreover, profit shifting by multinationals reduces the willingness of ordinary citizens to pay taxes (a clear issue of fairness during the recent “Gilets Jaunes” crisis in France) which puts even more strain on public finances. Assessments of the magnitude of profit shifting are subject to uncertainty due to the lack of detailed and comprehensive information at the firm level and comparable data across countries. By comparing profit to wages ratios of multinational firms in tax havens and in high tax countries, it is still possible to identify the “abnormal” profits attributable to profit shifting. Globally, in 2015, recent work by economists (see Torslov, T., L. Wier et G. Zucman, 2018) estimates that 600 billion euros of profits were placed by multinational companies in tax havens, nearly 40% of their foreign profits, a large increase since the mid-1990s. Multinationals not only shift profits to tax havens, they also shift sales so as to further disconnect sales and production to avoid paying corporate taxes (see Laffitte and Toubal, 2019). This is amplified by digitalization of the economy but the international taxation problem is not limited to the digital sector.

Governments have been slow to react but the present G20-OECD project on Base Erosion and Profit shifting (BEPS) is a promising avenue. The international tax system is in a deep crisis and must indeed be urgently reformed. Reducing profit shifting not only would increase tax revenues for most countries, it would also reduce the global incentive to reduce taxes on corporate profits. The period where the sole objective of the international tax rules was to facilitate the development of international trade and investment through the elimination of double taxation is over. An equity objective (so that countries get their ‘fair’ share of tax revenues but also that mobile factors pay their “fair” share) should now be at the core of the reform of the international tax system. Only if the perceived lack of fairness on the contribution of the winners of globalisation and technological progress is addressed, will globalisation itself be politically and socially sustainable.

References

Author D.H., D. Dorn and G.H. Hanson (2013): “The China Syndrome: Local Labor Market Effects of Import Competition in the United States”, American Economic Review, vol. 103, no 6.

Jean, Sébastien Philippe Martin and André Sapir, International Trade Under Attack: What Strategy for Europe? Les notes du conseil d’analyse économique, no 46, July 2018.

Laffitte, S. et F. Toubal. (2019) : “A Fistful of Dollars? Foreign Sales Platforms and Profit Shifting in Tax Havens”, CEPII.

Malgouyres C. (2017): “The Impact of Chinese Import Competition on the Local Structure of Employment and Wages: Evidence from France”, Journal of Regional Science, vol. 5, no 3, pp. 411-441.

Torslov, T., L. Wier et G. Zucman (2018): “The Missing Profits of Nations”, NBER working paper, n°24701.

Vicard V. (2018): “Une estimation de l’impact des politiques commerciales sur le PIB par les nouveaux modèles quantitatifs de commerce”, Focus du CAE, no 22, July.

More Information

The Campus Starts Here

The Campus Starts Here

Last year, four students of the master’s programme Regional and Urban Strategy (Stratégies territoriales et urbaines) of Sciences Po’s Urban School undertook a case study dedicated to the new site that will integrate Sciences Po’s Paris campus in 2022. By inquiring into the nature of the actions required to create a campus environment, the group shed light on the urban potential (and not only the architectural potential), that such a construction project could entail.

More

Stiglitz and Zelizer, Doctors Honoris Causa

Stiglitz and Zelizer, Doctors Honoris Causa

During a moving ceremony on 13 November 2019, Sciences Po awarded the sociologist Viviana Zelizer and the economist Joseph Stiglitz the titles of Docteur honoris causa. This distinction was given to Dr. Zelizer for her work as the founder of a new school of economic sociology, and to Dr. Stiglitz as the figure of the new Keynesian economy. The invaluable contributions made to their respective disciplines were highlighted in the praises of Jeanne Lazarus and Jean-Paul Fitoussi, respectively.

More
Creativity and Emotion: A Masterclass with Givenchy’s Nicolas Degennes

Creativity and Emotion: A Masterclass with Givenchy’s Nicolas Degennes

In 2020, Nicolas Degennes will be celebrating 20 years as the Art Director of Givenchy Beauty. Often cited as the genius behind the brand's makeup division, in person he presents himself with a visible balance of confidence and humility. In fact, it is what he advised Sciences Po students throughout his masterclass: “Be honest with yourself - don’t be too proud, don’t be too humble.”

More
A Career Path that

A Career Path that "Makes Sense"

A graduate of the Paris School of International Affairs' (PSIA) Master's in International Development (2016), Mathilde Thorel is today the co-director of the Makesense incubator, an organisation destined towards accelerating the growth and development of companies with a focus on social innovation or sustainable development. Having had her first experiences with social entrepreneurship during her time at Sciences Po, both at the undergraduate and graduate levels, she is now heavily committed to the field. More

150 Sciences Po students at the Paris Peace Forum

150 Sciences Po students at the Paris Peace Forum

Sciences Po is proud to be one of the eight founding members of the Paris Peace Forum, a global platform for governance projects spearheaded by President Emmanuel Macron (FR). For its second edition, taking place on 11, 12 and 13 November 2019, over 30 Heads of State and Government will be joined by numerous leaders of international organisations, companies and various actors of civil society to discuss and debate global governance solutions. 150 students of the Paris School of International Affairs are volunteering at the event.

More
Joseph Stiglitz: Economics against Inequalities

Joseph Stiglitz: Economics against Inequalities

Closely associated with our university for many years, Joseph Stiglitz, recipient of the 2001 Nobel Prize in Economics, is spending the Autumn 2019 semester at Sciences Po, sharing the results of his work with students and fellow researchers. In this video, he reflects upon the motivations of his career, his past influences and his convictions for better policy making.

More
126 Mastercard Scholars to study at Sciences Po

126 Mastercard Scholars to study at Sciences Po

The Mastercard Foundation, partnered with Sciences Po, provides full scholarships to students from Sub-Saharan Africa who have great academic potential but limited financial resources. Over six years (from 2017 to 2023), this programme will support a total of 126 students admitted to its undergraduate, graduate and summer programmes. This exceptional scholarship programme aims to recruit talented students who aspire to shape the future of the African continent and help them develop their full potential.

More