Improving the Efficiency of Anti-Tax Base Erosion Regimes through Tax Modelling

Liudmila V. Polezharova


This article describes ways to enhance the efficiency of anti-tax base erosion measures aimed at preventing transnational corporations (TNCs) from shifting their profits from home countries to lower-tax jurisdictions. The research methodology comprises a set of mathematical models applied for a comprehensive analysis of tax planning methods used by TNCs and the counter-methods used by national governments. The models with postulated equilibrium consider tripartite financial structures (consisting of a parent company, a subsidiary in a loyal jurisdiction and an affiliate in an offshore jurisdiction) based on the principle of economic equilibrium in the distribution of incomes of different jurisdictions. The models are parametrized by using the data on tax regimes in different jurisdictions. The computational experiment focused on the tax regimes of a parent jurisdiction (Russian Federation), a typical loyal jurisdiction (Laos) and a typical offshore jurisdiction (British Virgin Islands). Thus, we considered the most important cases in international taxation regarding TNCs’ economic interests and the national welfare of the parent jurisdiction. The experiment tested the efficiency of different methods of fiscal regulation of international income and capital flows and showed that although the rules of controlled transactions are considered crucial for countering tax planning, they fail to bring the desired results in contemporary economic reality characterized by expanded international network of financial structures and accelerated growth of digital transactions. Based on our research findings, we formulated the following recommendations. The governments of parent jurisdictions are recommended to extend the rules of controlled transactions and controlled foreign corporations not only to offshores but also to loyal jurisdictions. For the Russian government, it may be effective to test and adopt the rules of secondary adjustments in combination with the rules of controlled transactions and controlled foreign corporations, to lower the rate of the tax on foreign dividends and to make the unreturned foreign dividends exempt from the additional tax should they be repatriated to Russia. Enhanced international cooperation in this sphere can maximize the efficiency of these measures.

For citation

Polezharova L. V. Improving the Efficiency of Anti-Tax Base Erosion Regimes through Tax Modelling. Journal of Tax Reform. 2019;5(2):148–165. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2019.5.2.065

Article info

Received June 28, 2019; accepted August 6, 2019


International taxation, mathematical modelling, transnational corporation, tax planning, controlled transaction, controlled foreign corporation, secondary adjustment


Ellram L., Tate W., Petersen K. Offshoring and Reshoring: An Update on the Manufacturing Location Decision. Journal of Supply Chain Management. 2013;49(2):14–22. DOI: 10.1111/jscm.12019
2. Sachs J. The War on Huawei. Project Syndicate. Available at:
3. Wong D., Chipman Koty A. The US-China Trade War: A Timeline. (China Briefing News). Available at:
4. Slemrod J. Tax Reform and Tax Experts. The Journal of the American Taxation Association. 2018;40(2):83–88. DOI: 10.2308/atax-52143
5. Samoletova Y., Ogay A., Kalgin V. The “Tax Cuts and Jobs Act” Adopted in the USA has Brought Sweeping Changes to the Federal Tax System. EY, Tax Messenger. December 29, 2017.
6. Feldstein M. The International Consequences of US Tax Reform. Project Syndicate. Available at:
7. Swanson A., Rappeport A. Trump Increases China Tariffs as Trade Deal Hangs in the Balance. The New York Times. May 9, 2019.
8. Holland B, Cedric S. A $600 Billion Bill: Counting the Global Cost of the U.S. China Trade War. Available at:
9. Olbert M., Spengel C. International taxation in the digital economy: challenge accepted? World Tax Journal. 2017;9(1):3–46.
10. Vishnevsky V. P., Chekina V. D. Robot vs. tax inspector or how the fourth industrial revolution will change the tax system: a review of problems and solutions. Journal of Tax Reform. 2018;4(1):6–26. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2018.4.1.042
11. Hajkova D., Nicoletti G., Vartia L., Yoo K. Taxation and Business Environment as Drivers of Foreign Direct Investment in OECD Countries. OECD Economic Studies. No. 43, 2006/2. Available at:
12. Clark W.S. Tax Effects on Foreign Direct Investment. Recent Evidence and Policy Analysis. OECD Tax Policy Studies. 2007. No. 17. DOI: 10.1787/9789264038387-en
13. Pogorletskiy A. I. Tax policy in the contemporary world: peculiarities and prospects, implementation in Russia. Journal of Tax Reform. 2017;3(1):29–42. DOI: 10.15826/jtr.2017.3.1.029
14. Grubert H. The Tax Burden on Cross-Border Investment: Company Strategies and Country Responses. CESIFO. Working Paper. 2003. No. 964. Available at:
15. Grubert H. Intangible Income, Intercompany Transactions, Income Shifting, and the Choice of Location. National Tax Journal. 2003;56(1-2):221–242.
16. Devereux M. P., Hubbard R. G. Taxing Multinational. International Tax and Public Finance. 2003;10:469–487.
17. Sorbe S., Johansson A. International Tax Planning and Fixed Investment. OECD Economics Departments Working Papers. 2017. No. 1361. Available at:
18. Hong Q., Smart M. In praise of tax havens: International tax planning and foreign direct investment. European Economic Review. 2010;54:82–95. DOI: 10.1016/j.euroecorev.2009.06.006
19. Haufler A., Mardan M., Schindler D. An Economic Rationale for Controlled-Foreign-Corporation Rules. In: Beiträge zur Jahrestagung des Vereins für Socialpolitik 2014: Evidenzbasierte Wirtschaftspolitik. Session: Taxation IV, No. D15-V2. Available at:
20. Whalley J. Puzzles Over International Taxation of Cross Border Flows of Capital Incom. Working Paper. 2001. No 8662. DOI: 10.3386/w8662
21. Vishnevsky V., Grechishkin A. Impact of Tax Regime on Capital Migration. Mirovaya ekonomika i mezhdunarodnye otnosheniya = World Eсonomy and International Relations. 2002;(12):18–24.
22. Jorgenson D. Capital Theory and Investment Behaviour. American Economic Review. 1963;53(2):247–259.
23. Hall R., Jorgenson D. Tax Policy and Investment Behavior. American Economic Review. 1967;57(3):391–414.
24. Shoven J. B., Whalley J. Applied General-Equilibrium Models of Taxation and International Trade: An Introduction and Survey. Journal of Economic Literature. 1984;22(3):1007–1051.
25. Devereux M. P., Fuest C., Lockwood B. The taxation of foreign profits: a unified view. Journal of Public Economics. 2015;125(May):83–97.
26. Altshuler R. Grubert H. Repatriation Taxes, Repatriation Strategies, and Multinational Financial Policy. Journal of Public Economics. 2003;87(1):73–107.
27. Grubert H. Foreign Taxes and the Growing Share of U.S. Multinational Company Income Abroad: Profits, Not Sales, are Being Globalized. National Tax Journal. 2012;65(2);247–282. Available at:
28. Powell J.H. Monetary Policy: Normalization and the Road Ahead. In: 2019 SIEPR Economic Summit, Stanford Institute of Economic Policy Research, Stanford, California, March 08, 2019. Available at:


Copyright (c) 2019 Liudmila V. Polezharova

eLibrary logoeLibrary logo  DOAJ logo ERIH PLUS logo 

© Journal of Tax Reform : ISSN 2414-9497 (online), ISSN 2412-8872 (print)