【作者】 张磊；

【导师】 管治华；

【作者基本信息】 安徽大学 ， 税务（专业学位）， 2023， 硕士

【摘要】 现行国际税收体系严重依赖“实体存在”和“常设机构”来判断税收管辖权,难以对一些依赖数据、专利等无形资产获得利润的跨国企业进行征税,随着数字经济时代的发展,无形资产给跨国企业转让定价避税带来了新方案,国际上众多大型跨国企业开始通过转让定价将大量利润留在了低税辖区。为应对数字经济背景下的跨国企业利润转移造成的税基侵蚀以及来源国对某些跨国企业利润无法征税的问题,OECD在BEPS行动计划的基础上推出了两大解决方案,合称为“双支柱”方案,其中“支柱一”方案提出的“新联结度”规则和“公式分配法”旨在解决市场辖区无法征税的问题,“支柱二”则是引入了“最低税”规则,旨在解决全球税收的“逐底竞争”。“双支柱”方案的出台加快了国际税改的进程,为当前国际环境下愈演愈烈的跨国企业无形资产转让定价避税行为提出了新的应对思路。本文先通过介绍数字经济背景下无形资产转让定价避税行为呈现出的特点,以及现今无形资产转让定价反避税的现状,指出当前关于无形资产转让定价的调整方法存在诸多不适应性,“双支柱”方案作为国际税制改革的最新成果,通过研究API公司利用无形资产转移定价进行避税的典型案例指出跨国企业利用无形资产转移定价进行避税的典型方式,重点阐释“双支柱”方案对无形资产转让定价避税行为的影响,以及“双支柱”方案反避税的效果。基于对经典的案例进行分析,本文认为需要根据中国的实际情况,结合本轮国际税改的大背景,研究能够兼容“双支柱”方案规则的税收征管体系,并且通过以下几个方面来实现:一是引入“显著经济存在”作为常设机构的判定标准,二是完善相关收入来源的判断标准,三是通过对当前成本分摊协议的规定进行补充,四是修订税法中关于税收优惠的相关规定,在优化我国的无形资产转让定价反避税制度的同时,也相应的健全配套措施,才能更好的应对数字经济带来税收挑战。更多还原

【Abstract】 The current international tax system relies heavily on "physical presence" and "permanent establishment" to determine tax jurisdiction,making it difficult to tax multinational enterprises that rely on data,patents and other intangible assets to make profits.With the development of the digital economy,intangible assets have brought new options for multinational enterprises to avoid tax through transfer pricing,and many large international multinational enterprises have started to keep a large amount of profits in low-tax jurisdictions through transfer pricing.In order to deal with the tax base erosion caused by multinational enterprises’ profit shifting in the digital economy and the problem that some multinational enterprises’ profits are not taxable in the source countries,the OECD has introduced two solutions based on the BEPS Action Plan,collectively known as the "two pillar" solution.Pillar 1 " proposes a " New Nexus " rule and a " Formula Allocation Approach " to address the problem of untaxable market jurisdictions,while Pillar 2 introduces a " Minimum Tax Pillar 2 introduces a "minimum tax" rule,which aims to address "bottom-up competition" in global taxation.The introduction of the "two-pillar" approach has accelerated the process of international tax reform and provided new ideas to deal with the intensifying transfer pricing tax avoidance by multinational enterprises in the current international environment.This paper firstly introduces the characteristics of intangible asset transfer pricing tax avoidance in the context of digital economy and the current situation of antiavoidance of intangible asset transfer pricing,and points out that the current adjustment methods of intangible asset transfer pricing have many incompatibilities,and the "twopillar" scheme,as the latest achievement of international tax reform,has been studied by By studying the typical cases of API companies using transfer pricing of intangible assets for tax avoidance,we point out the typical ways of multinational enterprises using transfer pricing of intangible assets for tax avoidance,and focus on the impact of the "two pillars" scheme on transfer pricing of intangible assets for tax avoidance and the effect of the "two pillars" scheme on tax avoidance.The case highlights the impact of the "two-pillar" scheme on intangible transfer pricing avoidance and the effect of the "two-pillar" scheme on tax avoidance.Based on the analysis of classic cases,this paper argues that a tax collection system that is compatible with the rules of the "dual pillar" scheme needs to be studied in light of China’s actual situation and the background of the current round of international tax reform,and that this can be achieved in the following aspects: Firstly,the introduction of "significant economic presence" as a criterion for determining permanent establishment "The second is to improve the criteria for determining the relevant income sources;the third is to supplement the provisions of the current cost-sharing agreements;the fourth is to amend the relevant provisions of the tax law on tax incentives,so as to optimise the anti-avoidance system for transfer pricing of intangible assets in China and to improve the supporting measures accordingly,in order to better cope with the tax challenges brought by the digital economy.The taxation challenges arising from the digital economy can be better met.更多还原