G7 back new 'side-by-side' tax proposal exempting American, UK firms from global tax rules
The agreement will see US companies benefit from a 'side-by-side' solution under which they will only be taxed at home, on both domestic and foreign profits, the G-7 said, in a statement released by Canada, which holds the group's rotating presidency.
Earlier this year the US Secretary of the Treasury outlined the United States' concerns regarding the Pillar 2 rules agreed by the OECD/G20 Inclusive Framework on BEPS and set out a proposed 'side-by-side' solution under which US parented groups would be exempt from the Income Inclusion Rule (IIR) and Undertaxed Profits Rule (UTPR) in recognition of the existing US minimum tax rules to which they are subject.
The side-by-side system could 'provide greater stability and certainty in the international tax system moving forward, including a constructive dialogue on the taxation of the digital economy and on preserving the tax sovereignty of all countries, the statement read.
The US Treasury Department noted that with Section 899 removed from the Senate version of the bill, there is now a shared understanding that the side-by-side system could help maintain progress made by jurisdictions within the Inclusive Framework in combating base erosion and profit shifting.
'Following the removal of section 899 from the Senate version of the One, Big, Beautiful Bill, and consideration of the success of Qualified Domestic Minimum Top-up Tax implementation and its impact - there is a shared understanding that a side-by-side system could preserve important gains made by jurisdictions inside the Inclusive Framework in tackling base erosion and profit shifting and provide greater stability and certainty in the international tax system moving forward, the G7 announced. We look forward to discussing and developing this understanding within the Inclusive Framework,' the Treasury said in a post on X.
The removal of Section 899 has also been welcomed by the United Kingdom.
British businesses, which had recently voiced concerns about potentially facing higher taxes due to the measure, will no longer be subject to those risks.
G7 officials echoed the importance of collaboration, expressing their commitment to pursuing a solution that is 'acceptable and implementable to all.'
Earlier this year, through an executive order, Donald Trump declared that the 2021 global corporate minimum tax agreement--negotiated by the Biden administration and supported by nearly 140 countries--would not apply in the United States.
He also threatened to impose a retaliatory tax on nations implementing the global tax rules against US firms, a move viewed as harmful to many foreign companies operating within the US. (ANI)
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Hindustan Times
12 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
US policy on India is confusing; Trump an aberrational president: Ex-NSA John Bolton
Former Trump national security adviser John Bolton criticised Washington's 'confused' policy on India, questioning the 25% penalty on India for purchasing Russian energy while China faces no sanctions. In an interview with HT, Bolton acknowledged that the India-US relationship is for the time being in 'a very bad place' and believes Trump is an 'aberrational president' as he stressed on the need for efforts to limit damage to bilateral ties for the US President's remaining term. Former US national security adviser John Bolton speaks at a panel hosted by the National Council of Resistance of Iran – US Representative Office (NCRI-US) at the Willard InterContinental Hotel in Washington, DC, on August 17, 2022. (Getty Images) Q. Former ambassador Bolton, just a couple of months ago, India was a close strategic ally of the United States. Now things seem to have changed entirely—a 180-degree turn. As President Trump's former National Security Advisor, can you channel some of his thinking on India? A. Well, I think it's unfortunately very confused. The first level of concern is the tariffs that emerged out of the so-called Liberation Day tariffs in April, where Indian negotiators were working to try and get a mutually satisfactory arrangement, and Trump kind of pulled the plug without warning and said the tariffs would be at 25%. The second matter is the 25% addition to that tariff because of purchases of Russian oil and gas. It turns out that Russia has not faced any new sanctions. China has not faced any new sanctions, notwithstanding the fact that they were the major purchasers of Russian oil and gas. India has been singled out. I wish India didn't buy oil and gas from Russia, because I think it's in the interest of India as well as the United States to recognise the threat posed by China, the growing axis between China and Russia, and the threat that poses globally. Leaving India hanging out to dry as the only country to which punitive action has been taken obviously leads a lot of people to conclude that the United States has given up on India, and I do worry that India is being driven closer to Russia and China. It's just part of the aberrational Trump presidency. But it's a very bad place for the relationship at the moment. Q. Treasury secretary Scott Bessent has come down hard on India for buying Russian energy. India has pushed back defending its position. Can you speak to that criticism? A. Secretary Bessent isn't very experienced in international affairs, and I don't think he sees the growing axis between China and Russia. The complaint is that India took some of the gasoline it was buying from Russia, perhaps refined it and sold it internationally. That's a complaint worth discussing. But the sanctions as written do not preclude anyone, including India, from buying Russian oil at the capped price, or below $60/barrel, and then selling it elsewhere. If that's the complaint, the complaint lies with the sanctions, not so much with India's behaviour. What India did isn't prohibited. Q. There are many in India questioning whether trust in the US has been strained beyond repair after the last few months. What would you say to them? A. Unfortunately, what Trump has done on tariffs is destroying decades of effort with India and many others to build up good faith and reliance, and it will take time to repair that. But here's what's important: Trump is aberrational. I don't know any other Republican or Democrat who ran for president who if elected would behave anything like this. Trump doesn't have a philosophy, so there's no legacy for his successors. Our objective should be to keep the damage to the relationship at a minimum, and then think about how to repair it quickly thereafter. When Trump leaves, he'll take almost the bulk of this history with him. Q. Regarding China, we've seen President Trump and his team push for a deal with the Chinese, but policy seems confused at times. What is Trump's China policy? A. It's confused. In the first term, Trump wanted the biggest trade deal in history with China. Deadlines for tariffs on China have already been extended 180 days. China hasn't faced secondary sanctions on its purchase of Russian oil and gas. If you want a trade war, we should have teamed up and had a trade war with China, because they're the worst actor in international economics. They steal intellectual property, subsidise companies, don't open their market even when they claim to. It's hard to explain why he gives China this much leeway. Q. Lastly, what do you see happening going forward? Are you optimistic that India and the US could return to normalcy? A. I think a couple things will need to happen. We need continued conversations between non-governmental Indians and Americans, so people see that what's happening at the top isn't reflective of what the whole country thinks. Modi should wait for the right moment, perhaps at the UN General Assembly in New York in September, to meet Trump one-on-one and clear the air. Before the tariff problem, Trump and Modi had a good personal relationship, which is central to Trump's view of state-to-state relations. That asset remains, and if deployed effectively, could be a step toward recovery.
Economic Times
42 minutes ago
- Economic Times
Putin's midnight ultimatum: Trump forced into 15-minute deadline for late-night chat
Trump Putin late-night call: Donald Trump aimed to set up a meeting between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky to discuss ending the Russia-Ukraine war. Putin gave Trump a tight 15-minute window for a call late at night in Moscow. The White House confirmed progress towards peace talks. Russia signals caution on confirming the Putin-Zelensky meeting plans. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Vladimir Putin Set Tight 15-Minute Deadline for Donald Trump's Late-Night Call Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads White House Confirms Progress Toward Peace Talks Possible Meeting Location: Budapest? Russia Signals Caution on Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky Meeting Plans Trump Wants Putin and Zelensky to Meet Alone First US Envoy Highlights Early Signs of Russian Concessions Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads FAQs : After hours of peace talks at the White House with Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and several European leaders, US president Donald Trump wanted to call Russian president Vladimir Putin to organize a meeting with the Zelensky on ending Russia's war with Ukraine, as per a report. But Putin gave Trump a strict 15-minute window to make the call before going to bed as it was late night in Moscow, according to a Daily Beast an interview on Fox News' The Ingraham Angle, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent explained that it was very late in Moscow and Putin told Trump he could either call immediately or wait until the next day, but Trump chose to call that night, taking the opportunity within the short time frame, as per the said, 'Look, it was very late in Moscow,' adding, 'President Putin was open to meeting with President Zelensky and as you know President Trump is very persuasive, they had just met,' as quoted by Daily host Laura Ingraham asked if Putin was staying up to wait for the call from Trump, Bessent responded, saying, 'Well, the president gave him the option, 'I could call or send a message' and Putin said 'Well, I will be up for 15 more minutes or you can call tomorrow'. And I think Putin wanted the call that night. So that showed he was eager to hear what the president had to say,' as quoted in the READ: Iran flexes firepower: Massive missile drill aims warning at US and Israel after June war Meanwhile, White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt revealed that during Putin's pre-bedtime phone call with Tthe US president, he agreed to 'begin the next phase of the peace process—a meeting between President Putin and President Zelensky," as quoted by Daily even wrote on his social media site Truth Social that the meeting between Putin and Zelensky would happen 'at a location to be determined,' as quoted in the report. While, the Washington Post pointed out the Hungarian capital Budapest could be a possible option, which would be followed by a trilateral meeting of the two presidents joined by Trump, as reported by Daily READ: Shocking twist: Computer Science grads face one of the highest unemployment rates today However, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov indicated that the meeting is yet to be confirmed on Putin's end, saying, 'Any contacts involving top officials must be prepared with the utmost care,' adding, 'We do not refuse any forms of work—neither bilateral nor trilateral,' as quoted in the during an interview on The Mark Levin Show, Trump shared that he wanted Putin and Zelensky to meet on their own first to clear the air, as per the Daily Beast report. The US president said, 'I thought it would be better if they met without me, just to see. I want to see what goes on,' adding, 'You know, they had a hard relationship, very bad, very bad relationship. And now we'll see how they do and, if necessary, and it probably would be, but if necessary, I'll go and I'll probably be able to get it closed,' as quoted in the READ: Apple Watch SE 3 leaks spill major upgrades — and fans can't stop buzzing about what's coming US envoy Steve Witkoff highlighted that Russia has made 'concessions almost immediately' after Trump and Putin's meeting in Alaska last week, saying, 'We stayed there for quite some time because we actually made progress on how we might get to a peace deal,' as quoted in the report. Witkoff added, 'The president began to sense in this meeting in Alaska that we had a lot of the precursors agreed to for a peace deal, so why not pursue an entire peace deal?' as quoted by Daily READ: Morgan Stanley: AI boom could add $16 trillion to markets, but workers may pay the price as 90% jobs may be impacted It was very late in Moscow, and Putin was about to go to bed, so he gave Trump a short window to make the call or wait until the next day, as per the Daily Beast wanted to organize a meeting between Putin and Ukrainian President Zelensky to move forward with peace talks, as per the Daily Beast report.
Time of India
an hour ago
- Time of India
Japan's SoftBank to take $2 billion stake in computer chip maker Intel
Japanese technology giant SoftBank Group plans to take a $2 billion stake in computer chip maker Intel as it deepens its involvement in U.S. semiconductor manufacturing and other advanced technology in the United States, the companies said Monday. Shares in both companies fell Tuesday after the announcement, which coincided with unconfirmed reports that President Donald Trump is considering having the U.S. government buy a stake in the chip maker. SoftBank invests in an array of companies that it sees as holding long-term potential. It has been stepping up investments in the United States since Trump returned to the White House. In February, its chairman Masayoshi Son joined Trump, Sam Altman of OpenAI and Larry Ellison of Oracle in announcing a major investment of up to $500 billion in a project to develop artificial intelligence called Stargate. SoftBank plans to buy $2 billion of Intel's common stock, paying $23 per share. "Semiconductors are the foundation of every industry, Son said in a statement. "This strategic investment reflects our belief that advanced semiconductor manufacturing and supply will further expand in the United States, with Intel playing a critical role." Intel helped launch Silicon Valley but has fallen behind rivals like Nvidia Corp. and Advanced Micro Devices Inc. and is shedding thousands of workers and slashing costs under its new CEO, Lip-Bu Tan. Intel plans to end the year with 75,000 "core" workers excluding subsidiaries, through layoffs and attrition, down from 99,500 core employees at the end of 2024. The company previously announced a 15% workforce reduction. Trump recently said Tan, who was made CEO in March, should resign but after meeting with him last week said he had an "amazing story." SoftBank's shares were down 2.2% Tuesday in Tokyo, while Intel's dropped 3.7% on Monday in New York.
