本文選題：專利盒 + 稅基侵蝕與利潤轉移��； 參考：《稅務與經(jīng)濟》2017年04期

【摘要】：為降低無形資產(chǎn)產(chǎn)生收入的實際稅負,以鼓勵企業(yè)的研發(fā)活動和科研成果的轉化,歐盟多國引入了專利盒稅制。同時,為吸引無形資產(chǎn)向本國轉移,各國競相放寬享受專利盒稅制的限制條件,然而卻被跨國公司的避稅安排所利用,進而誘發(fā)了跨國稅基侵蝕問題。對此,經(jīng)合組織制定實質性活動標準和關聯(lián)法,并要求包括中國在內(nèi)的參與國均以此審視本國相關稅制。其中,實質性活動標準可有效遏制稅基侵蝕問題,并與專利盒稅制正當性基礎的內(nèi)在邏輯相一致。但關聯(lián)法的規(guī)定已超出落實此標準之必要,不利于納稅人的經(jīng)濟自由和專利盒制度本身目的的實現(xiàn)。因此,中國在落實經(jīng)合組織的標準時應當對二者區(qū)別對待,貫徹實質性活動標準的同時,批判借鑒關聯(lián)法的規(guī)定。
[Abstract]:In order to reduce the actual tax burden on the income generated by intangible assets and to encourage the R & D activities of enterprises and the transformation of scientific research results, many EU countries have introduced the patent box tax system. At the same time, in order to attract intangible assets to transfer to their own countries, countries are competing to relax the restrictions of the patent box tax system. However, they are used by the tax avoidance arrangements of multinational corporations, which leads to the problem of transnational tax base erosion. In response, the OECD has set standards for substantive activities and relevance laws, and has asked participating countries, including China, to look at their own tax systems. Among them, the substantial activity standard can effectively contain the problem of tax base erosion, and is consistent with the inherent logic of the legitimate basis of the patent box tax system. However, the relevant law has exceeded the necessity of implementing this standard, which is not conducive to the taxpayer's economic freedom and the realization of the patent box system itself. Therefore, when implementing the OECD standard, China should treat the two differently and implement the substantive activity standard while criticizing and drawing lessons from the provisions of the association law.
【作者單位】： 廈門大學法學院;
【基金】：國家社科基金重點項目“應對BEPS背景下完善中國反避稅法律體系研究”(項目編號:14AZD153)的階段性成果
【分類號】：D996.3
，

本文編號：1925324