利用者:Joemphilips/国際課税

国際課税(International Taxation)とは、個人または事業に対し、異なる国の税法がどのように調査・適用されるかを示す用語である。あるいは場合によっては個々の国の税法の国際的側面に関する研究を示す場合もある。政府は通常、何らかの方法で所得税の範囲を地域的に制限するか、あるいは場合によっては域外所得に対する課税に相当する何かを規定している。税法の適用範囲の決め方は、一般に、領土(Territorial)、居住地(Residence)、または除外的(Exclusionary)という3つの仕組みに分類される。一部の政府は、これら3つの仕組みのそれぞれの限界を緩和するため、2つ以上の特徴を持つハイブリッド制度を制定することを試みている。

多くの政府は、個人や企業の所得に対して課税している。このような課税制度には様々なものがあり、一般的な規則というものは存在しない。このため、二重課税（同じ所得が異なる国で課税される）や無課税（どの国でも課税されない）が発生する可能性がある。所得税制度は、国内の所得にのみ課税する場合と、全世界の所得に課税する場合がある。後者の場合、通常は他の地域に納めた税金の減額や外国控除が提供される。このような税額控除には、ほとんど例外なくなんらかの制限が存在する。多国籍企業は通常、法律・会計の双方に詳しい国際税務の専門家を雇うことで、世界的な税負担を軽減している。

あらゆる租税の仕組みにおいて、所得の方法やその性質を変えることで租税回避を行うことが可能である。

多くの法域は、関連者間で所得を移行させた場合に関する課税のルールを定めており、これは通常移転価格税制と呼ばれる。

居住地ベースの課税システムの場合、納税主体は関連者と協力することで所得の認識のタイミングを遅らせることができる。

法域によってはこのような前払い手法に対する制限("anti-deferral" regimes)を加えていることもある。

一部の政府は特定の社会的意義が有る場合にこのような前払い手法を認可している。

政府間の合意(条約)によって誰がどのような租税を収めるべきかを定義しようとする場合も多い。大抵の租税条約では、参加者間で論争があった場合の解決策について、少なくとも大枠を提供している。

イントロダクション

租税の仕組みは政府によって異なるため、一般化は難しい。

ここでは例として個々の政府に関連するルールを挙げ、一般的な国際法としては認められないものを乗せる。

租税は様々な種類の所得に対して徴収される。たとえば当該地域の会計の考え方に基づいた純利益(多くの国ではこれは収益(Profit) と呼ばれる)や、総収益(Gross receipts)、総利益(Gross margins)、または特定の租税回避時の特定の取得に対してなどである。

特に断りがない限り、所得 (income) は多義的な用語として記述する

法域は通常、法人と個人で異なる所得税の仕組みを採用している

租税主体は通常様々な種類の所得に対して包括的なやり方で課税されるが、特に個人の場合は所得の出処(Source) に応じて異なるやり方で課税される。

多くの法域では複数種の企業体に対し、企業体を租税主体とみなす課税とその企業体のオーナーに対する課税との両方を規定している。

これらの法域はたいてい、現地またはその他の法域での会社法に基づき、その企業体のオーナーが納税の責務を負うかを決定する。しかしこれには例外もあり、合衆国には企業の租税の扱いを独立に規定したルールが存在する。

行政を簡素化するため、あるいは他の目的のために、「みなし」所得制度を導入している政府もある。この制度は、ある種の納税者に対し、他の納税者に適用される税制に準じて課税するものであるが、所得ではなく、みなし所得水準に基づくものである。

どのような課税が適切かについては、論争が生じる可能性がある。

紛争解決のための手続きは様々で、執行の問題は国際的な場でははるかに複雑となる。

納税者にとっての最終的な紛争解決は、差し押さえられる可能性のある全ての財産を持ち出し、管轄区域を離れることである。政府にとっては、最終的な解決策は財産の没収、投獄、企業の解散となるかもしれない。

その他にも、異なる税制の間には大きな概念の違いが存在する。

これには、税金の決定と徴収の方法である査定と自己申告、違反に対する制裁の方法、制度の国際的な側面に特有の制裁、税の執行と徴収の仕組み、報告の仕組みなどが含まれるが、これらに限定されるものではない。

Taxation systems

Systems of taxation on personal income

  No income tax on individuals

  Territorial

  Residence-based

  Citizenship-based

Countries that tax income generally use one of two systems: territorial or residence-based. In the territorial system, only local income – income from a source inside the country – is taxed. In the residence-based system, residents of the country are taxed on their worldwide (local and foreign) income, while nonresidents are taxed only on their local income. In addition, a small number of countries also tax the worldwide income of their nonresident citizens in some cases.

Countries with a residence-based system of taxation usually allow deductions or credits for the tax that residents already pay to other countries on their foreign income. Many countries also sign tax treaties with each other to eliminate or reduce double taxation. In the case of corporate income tax, some countries allow an exclusion or deferment of specific items of foreign income from the base of taxation.

Individuals

The following table summarizes the taxation of local and foreign income of individuals, depending on their residence or citizenship in the country. It includes 244 entries: 194 sovereign countries, their 40 inhabited dependent territories (most of which have separate tax systems), and 10 countries with limited recognition. In the table, income includes any type of income received by individuals, such as work or investment income, and yes means that the country taxes at least one of these types.

Residency

Taxing regimes are generally classified as either residence-based or territorial. Most jurisdictions tax income on a residency basis. They need to define "resident" and characterize the income of nonresidents. Such definitions vary by country and type of taxpayer, but usually involve the location of the person's main home and number of days the person is physically present in the country. Examples include:

• The United States taxes its citizens as residents, and provides lengthy, detailed rules for individual residency of foreigners, covering:
  • periods establishing residency (including a formulary calculation involving three years);
  • start and end date of residency;
  • exceptions for transitory visits, medical conditions, etc.
• The United Kingdom, prior to 2013, established three categories: non-resident, resident, and resident but not ordinarily resident. From 2013, the categories of resident are limited to non-resident and resident. Residency is established by application of the tests in the Statutory Residency Test.
• Switzerland residency may be established by having a permit to be employed in Switzerland for an individual who is so employed.

Territorial systems usually tax local income regardless of the residence of the taxpayer. The key problem argued for this type of system is the ability to avoid taxation on portable income by moving it outside of the country. This has led governments to enact hybrid systems to recover lost revenue.

Citizenship

In the vast majority of countries, citizenship is completely irrelevant for taxation. Very few countries tax the foreign income of nonresident citizens in general:

• Eritrea taxes the foreign income of its nonresident citizens at a reduced flat rate of 2% (income tax rates for local income are progressive from 2 to 30%). It has been reported that Eritrea enforces this tax on its citizens abroad through denial of passports, denial of entry or exit from the country, confiscation of assets in Eritrea, and even harassment of relatives living in Eritrea, until the tax is paid. In 2011, the United Nations Security Council passed a resolution condemning the collection of the Eritrean 'diaspora tax'. The governments of Canada and the Netherlands expelled Eritrean diplomats in 2013 and 2018, respectively, for collecting the tax. The parliaments of Sweden and the European Union have also expressed their intention to prohibit the practice there.

• Hungary considers all of its nonresident citizens as tax residents, except those who hold another nationality. However, it does not tax the foreign income of those who reside in countries that have tax treaties with Hungary.[Note 11] Nonresident citizens who do not satisfy these exceptions are taxed in the same manner as residents, at a flat rate of 15% on worldwide income, in addition to mandatory contributions of up to 18.5% on certain types of income. There is no minimum allowance or its equivalent in Hungary, meaning that all income is taxed. In this respect, Hungary is unique in Europe.

• Myanmar taxes the foreign income, except salaries, of its nonresident citizens, at a reduced flat rate of 10% (general tax rates for residents are progressive from 5 to 25%).

• Tajikistan considers all of its citizens as residents for tax purposes, and taxes the worldwide income of its residents. However, it may not tax the foreign income of those who reside in countries that have tax treaties with Tajikistan.[Note 12]

• United States taxes the worldwide income of its nonresident citizens using the same tax rates as for residents. To mitigate double taxation, nonresident citizens may exclude some of their foreign income from work from U.S. taxation and take credit for income tax paid to other countries, and those residing in some countries with tax treaties may also exclude a few types of foreign income from U.S. taxation, but they must still file a U.S. tax return to claim the exclusion or credit even if they result in no tax liability. U.S. citizens abroad, like U.S. residents, are defined as "U.S. persons" and thus are also subject to various reporting requirements regarding foreign finances, such as FBAR, FATCA, and IRS forms 3520, 5471, 8621 and 8938. The penalties for failure to file these forms on time are often much higher than the penalties for not paying the tax itself.

Like Eritrea, enforcement tactics used by the U.S. government to facilitate tax compliance include the denial of U.S. passports to nonresident U.S. citizens deemed to be delinquent taxpayers and the potential seizure of any U.S. accounts and/or U.S.-based assets. The IRS can also exert substantial compliance pressure on nonresident citizens as a result of the FATCA legislation passed in 2010, which compels foreign banks to disclose U.S. account holders or face crippling fines on U.S.-related financial transactions. Unlike Eritrea, the U.S. has faced little international backlash related to its global enforcement tactics. For example, unlike their response to Eritrea's collection efforts, Canada and all EU member states have ratified intergovernmental agreements (IGAs) facilitating FATCA compliance and supporting the U.S. global tax regime in place for U.S. citizens (including dual nationals). The implementation of these IGAs has led to a substantial increase in U.S. citizenship renunciations since 2012, with wait times for renunciation appointments at the U.S. consulate in Toronto exceeding one year in early 2016.

A few countries tax based on citizenship only in limited situations:

• Finland continues taxing its citizens who move from Finland to another country as residents of Finland, for the first three years after moving there, unless they demonstrate that they no longer have any ties to Finland. After this period, they are no longer considered residents of Finland for tax purposes.

• France taxes its citizens who move to Monaco as residents of France, according to a treaty signed between the two countries in 1963. However, those who already lived in Monaco since 1957, as well as those who were born in Monaco and have always lived there, are not subject to taxation as residents of France.

• Italy continues taxing its citizens who move from Italy to a tax haven[Note 13] as residents of Italy, unless they demonstrate that they no longer have any ties to Italy.

• Mexico continues taxing its citizens who move from Mexico to a tax haven[Note 14] as residents of Mexico, for the first three years after moving there. After this period, they are no longer considered residents of Mexico for tax purposes.

• Portugal taxes its citizens who move to a tax haven[Note 15] as residents of Portugal, for the first five years after moving there. After this period, they are no longer considered residents of Portugal for tax purposes.

• Spain continues taxing its citizens who move from Spain to a tax haven[Note 16] as residents of Spain, for the first five years after moving there. After this period, they are no longer considered residents of Spain for tax purposes.

• Sweden continues taxing its citizens (as well as foreigners who lived there for at least ten years) who move from Sweden to another country as residents of Sweden, for the first five years after moving there, unless they demonstrate that they no longer have essential connections to Sweden. After this period, they are no longer considered residents of Sweden for tax purposes.

• Turkey taxes its citizens who are residing abroad to work for the Turkish government or Turkish companies as residents of Turkey, but exempts their income that is already taxed by the country of origin.

A few other countries used to tax the foreign income of nonresident citizens, but have abolished this practice:

• Romania used to tax the worldwide income of its citizens regardless of where they resided, but abandoned this practice some time between 1933 and 1954.
• Mexico used to tax its citizens in the same manner as residents, on worldwide income. A new income tax law, passed in 1980 and effective 1981, determined only residence as the basis for taxation of worldwide income. However, since 2006 Mexico taxes based on citizenship in limited situations (see above).
• Bulgaria used to tax its citizens on worldwide income regardless of where they resided. A new income tax law, passed in 1997 and effective 1998, determined residence as the basis for taxation of worldwide income.
• Philippines used to tax the foreign income of nonresident citizens at reduced rates of 1 to 3% (income tax rates for residents were 1 to 35% at the time). It abolished this practice in a new revenue code in 1997, effective 1998.
• Vietnam used to tax its citizens in the same manner as residents, on worldwide income. The country passed a personal income tax law in 2007, effective 2009, removing citizenship as a criterion to determine residence.

In Iran, Iraq, North Korea, the Philippines and Saudi Arabia, citizenship is relevant for the taxation of residents but not for nonresidents.

There are some arrangements for international taxation that are not based on residency or citizenship:

• United Kingdom imposes global income tax on anyone who owes UK student loans. These are not true loans, but borrowings to be repaid through an additional 9% income tax, levied above a certain income threshold, until the balance of the loan expires in 30 years. The interest rate is expressed as a punitive addition to the UK Retail Price Index inflation rate (e.g. RPI + 3%), so the value of the loan cannot be inflated away. The loan cannot be repudiated by declaring bankruptcy. The income tax is imposed irrespective of citizenship or residency, which means the UK HMRC must track the location and income of all loan holders, wherever they are in the world, for several decades.

Corporations

Countries do not necessarily use the same system of taxation for individuals and corporations. For example, France uses a residence-based system for individuals but a territorial system for corporations, while Singapore does the opposite, and Brunei and Monaco taxes corporate but not personal income.

Exclusion

Many systems provide for specific exclusions from taxable (chargeable) income. For example, several countries, notably the United States, Cyprus, Luxembourg, Netherlands and Spain, have enacted holding company regimes that exclude from income dividends from certain foreign subsidiaries of corporations. These systems generally impose tax on other sorts of income, such as interest or royalties, from the same subsidiaries. They also typically have requirements for portion and time of ownership in order to qualify for exclusion. The United States excludes dividends received by U.S. corporations from non-U.S. subsidiaries, as well as 50% of the deemed remittance of aggregate income of non-U.S. subsidiaries in excess of an aggregate 10% return on tangible depreciable assets. The Netherlands offers a "participation exemption" for dividends from subsidiaries of Netherlands companies. Dividends from all Dutch subsidiaries automatically qualify. For other dividends to qualify, the Dutch shareholder or affiliates must own at least 5% and the subsidiary must be subject to a certain level of income tax locally.

Some countries, such as Singapore, allow deferment of tax on foreign income of resident corporations until it is remitted to the country.

Individuals versus enterprises

Many tax systems tax individuals in one manner and entities that are not considered fiscally transparent in another. The differences may be as simple as differences in tax rates, and are often motivated by concerns unique to either individuals or corporations. For example, many systems allow taxable income of an individual to be reduced by a fixed amount allowance for other persons supported by the individual (dependents). Such a concept is not relevant for enterprises.

Many systems allow for fiscal transparency of certain forms of enterprise. For example, most countries tax partners of a partnership, rather than the partnership itself, on income of the partnership. A common feature of income taxation is imposition of a levy on certain enterprises in certain forms followed by an additional levy on owners of the enterprise upon distribution of such income. For example, the U.S. imposes two levels of tax on foreign individuals or foreign corporations who own a U.S. corporation. First, the U.S. corporation is subject to the regular income tax on its profits, then subject to an additional 30% tax on the dividends paid to foreign shareholders (the branch profits tax). The foreign corporation will be subject to U.S. income tax on its effectively connected income, and will also be subject to the branch profits tax on any of its profits not reinvested in the U.S. Thus, many countries tax corporations under company tax rules and tax individual shareholders upon corporate distributions. Various countries have tried (and some still maintain) attempts at partial or full "integration" of the enterprise and owner taxation. Where a two level system is present but allows for fiscal transparency of some entities, definitional issues become very important.

Source of income

Determining the source of income is of critical importance in a territorial system, as source often determines whether or not the income is taxed. For example, Hong Kong does not tax residents on dividend income received from a non-Hong Kong corporation. Source of income is also important in residency systems that grant credits for taxes of other jurisdictions. Such credit is often limited either by jurisdiction or to the local tax on overall income from other jurisdictions.

Source of income is where the income is considered to arise under the relevant tax system. The manner of determining the source of income is generally dependent on the nature of income. Income from the performance of services (e.g., wages) is generally treated as arising where the services are performed. Financing income (e.g., interest, dividends) is generally treated as arising where the user of the financing resides. Income related to use of tangible property (e.g., rents) is generally treated as arising where the property is situated. Income related to use of intangible property (e.g., royalties) is generally treated as arising where the property is used. Gains on sale of realty are generally treated as arising where the property is situated.

Gains from sale of tangible personal property are sourced differently in different jurisdictions. The U.S. treats such gains in three distinct manners: a) gain from sale of purchased inventory is sourced based on where title to the goods passes; b) gain from sale of inventory produced by the person (or certain related persons) is sourced 50% based on title passage and 50% based on location of production and certain assets; c) other gains are sourced based on the residence of the seller.

In specific cases, the tax system may diverge for different categories of individuals. U.S. citizen and resident alien decedents are subject to estate tax on all of their assets, wherever situated. The nonresident aliens are subject to estate tax only on that part of the gross estate which at the time of death is situated in the U.S. Another significant distinction between U.S. citizens/RAs and NRAs is in the exemptions allowed in computing the tax liability.

Where differing characterizations of an item of income can result in differing tax results, it is necessary to determine the characterization. Some systems have rules for resolving characterization issues, but in many cases resolution requires judicial intervention. Note that some systems which allow a credit for foreign taxes source income by reference to foreign law.

Definitions of income

Some jurisdictions tax net income as determined under financial accounting concepts of that jurisdiction, with few, if any, modifications. Other jurisdictions determine taxable income without regard to income reported in financial statements. Some jurisdictions compute taxable income by reference to financial statement income with specific categories of adjustments, which can be significant.

A jurisdiction relying on financial statement income tends to place reliance on the judgment of local accountants for determinations of income under locally accepted accounting principles. Often such jurisdictions have a requirement that financial statements be audited by registered accountants who must opine thereon. Some jurisdictions extend the audit requirements to include opining on such tax issues as transfer pricing. Jurisdictions not relying on financial statement income must attempt to define principles of income and expense recognition, asset cost recovery, matching, and other concepts within the tax law. These definitional issues can become very complex. Some jurisdictions following this approach also require business taxpayers to provide a reconciliation of financial statement and taxable incomes.

Deductions

Systems that allow a tax deduction of expenses in computing taxable income must provide for rules for allocating such expenses between classes of income. Such classes may be taxable versus non-taxable, or may relate to computations of credits for taxes of other systems (foreign taxes). A system which does not provide such rules is subject to manipulation by potential taxpayers. The manner of allocation of expenses varies. U.S. rules provide for allocation of an expense to a class of income if the expense directly relates to such class, and apportionment of an expense related to multiple classes. Specific rules are provided for certain categories of more fungible expenses, such as interest. By their nature, rules for allocation and apportionment of expenses may become complex. They may incorporate cost accounting or branch accounting principles, or may define new principles.

Thin capitalization

詳細は「Thin capitalization」を参照

Most jurisdictions provide that taxable income may be reduced by amounts expended as interest on loans. By contrast, most do not provide tax relief for distributions to owners. Thus, an enterprise is motivated to finance its subsidiary enterprises through loans rather than capital. Many jurisdictions have adopted "thin capitalization" rules to limit such charges. Various approaches include limiting deductibility of interest expense to a portion of cash flow, disallowing interest expense on debt in excess of a certain ratio, and other mechanisms.

Enterprise restructure

The organization or reorganization of portions of a multinational enterprise often gives rise to events that, absent rules to the contrary, may be taxable in a particular system. Most systems contain rules preventing recognition of income or loss from certain types of such events. In the simplest form, contribution of business assets to a subsidiary enterprise may, in certain circumstances, be treated as a nontaxable event. Rules on structuring and restructuring tend to be highly complex.

Credits for taxes of other jurisdictions

「Tax credit」および「Foreign tax credit」を参照

Many jurisdictions require persons paying amounts to nonresidents to collect tax due from a nonresident with respect to certain income by withholding such tax from such payments and remitting the tax to the government. Such levies are generally referred to as withholding taxes. These requirements are induced because of potential difficulties in collection of the tax from nonresidents. Withholding taxes are often imposed at rates differing from the prevailing income tax rates. Further, the rate of withholding may vary by type of income or type of recipient. Generally, withholding taxes are reduced or eliminated under income tax treaties (see below). Generally, withholding taxes are imposed on the gross amount of income, unreduced by expenses. Such taxation provides for great simplicity of administration but can also reduce the taxpayer's awareness of the amount of tax being collected.

Treaties

詳細は「Tax treaty」を参照

Tax treaties exist between many countries on a bilateral basis to prevent double taxation (taxes levied twice on the same income, profit, capital gain, inheritance or other item). In some countries they are also known as double taxation agreements, double tax treaties, or tax information exchange agreements (TIEA).

Most developed countries have a large number of tax treaties, while developing countries are less well represented in the worldwide tax treaty network. The United Kingdom has treaties with more than 110 countries and territories. The United States has treaties with 56 countries (as of February 2007). Tax treaties tend not to exist, or to be of limited application, when either party regards the other as a tax haven. There are a number of model tax treaties published by various national and international bodies, such as the United Nations and the OECD.

Anti-deferral measures

[[Category:国際課税]] [[Category:Webarchiveテンプレートのウェイバックリンク]]