There has been mounting concern over the past few years over whether some of the world’s largest companies – primarily big tech – pay their fair share of taxes. This issue has arisen in countries around the world leading to new digital services taxes that primarily target the U.S. tech giants and which in turn often leads to the U.S. threatening to retaliate in response. Canada now finds itself embroiled in these battles as Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland has proposed a retroactive digital services tax to take effect in 2024 if by that time a newly reached OECD agreement has not taken effect. Professor Reuven Avi-Yonah is a law professor at the University of Michigan and director of the school’s international tax LLM program. He joins the Law Bytes podcast to discuss digital services taxes, the OECD deal, and what might happen if the international agreement falls apart.
Post Tagged with: "freeland"
Why the Digital Services Tax Act Violates Canada’s OECD Commitment to a Tax Moratorium
The Canadian government’s decision to move ahead with the Digital Services Tax Act, legislation that will take effect in 2024 should the international agreement at the OECD fail to materialize by that date, is problematic for reasons that extend beyond sparking a trade battle with the United States and potentially leading to billions in tariffs on Canadian goods and services. The plan also appears to violate Canada’s commitment at the OECD, in which all members agreed to a moratorium on introducing new digital services taxes.
Should Have Seen This Coming: U.S. Raises Prospect of Retaliation Over Canada’s Digital Services Tax Plans
For the past two years, Canadian digital tax policy has been on a collision course with Canadian trade policy. The Liberal government committed in the 2019 election campaign to a digital services tax primarily designed to target large U.S. technology companies that generate significant revenues in Canada from online advertising and user data. The policy has been adopted in several other countries, repeatedly sparking a response from the U.S. that threatens to retaliate with tariffs on sensitive sectors of the economy. For example, after France announced plans for a similar tax, the U.S. threatened to levy billions in tariffs on French products.
As the trade threats escalate, the effort to strike an international agreement on the issue has gained increasing traction (my Law Bytes podcast last February with Professor Itai Grinberg provides a great backgrounder into the issue). After a preliminary deal was struck in October on an international approach, the U.S. dropped the tariff threat against several countries. Yet as efforts to finalize and implement the deal continue, Canadian Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland announced this week that new legislation will be introduced to create a Canadian digital services tax (this is distinct from digital sales taxes, which are currently in effect).
Canada Threatens to Delay Copyright Term Extension in Response to U.S. Electronic Vehicle Tax Credit Plan
Trade tensions between Canada and the U.S. have been rising in recent weeks with the U.S. Build Back Better Act proposing to create a tax credit for electronic vehicles that Canadian officials argue violates the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement. The U.S. plan is said to be the equivalent of a 34 percent tariff on Canadian assembled electric vehicles. While trade disputes are not particularly noteworthy, the Canadian government response certainly is. Last week, Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland and International Trade Minister Mary Ng wrote to eight U.S. Senators with the following warning:
Beyond possible retaliatory actions, if the U.S. proceeds with the tax credit provisions as drafted, we would see this as a significant change in the balance of concessions agreed to in the USMCA. As such, we would consider the possible suspension of USMCA concessions of importance to the U.S. in return. Those concessions could include suspending USMCA dairy tariff-rate quotas and delaying the implementation of USMCA copyright changes.
The Broadcasting Act Blunder, Day 9: Why Use Cross-Subsidies When the Government is Rolling Out Tech Tax Policies?
The Broadcasting Act blunder series continues with a slight tangent to consider the implications of yesterday’s Government of Canada Fiscal Update for the claim that reforms are needed to ensure that foreign Internet companies make appropriate contributions to the Canadian market. Canadian Heritage Minister Steven Guilbeault emphasized the issue when discussing Bill C-10 in the House of Commons, talking about payments being a “matter of fairness” and concerns that foreign Internet streamers “make money off the system with no obligation to give back.”
Finance Minister Chrystia Freeland yesterday outlined the better way to ensure equality of treatment and payments into Canada, namely tax policy.
Recent Posts
Debating the Online Harms Act: Insights from Two Recent Panels on Bill C-63 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 199: Boris Bytensky on the Criminal Code Reforms in the Online Harms Act 
AI Spending is Not an AI Strategy: Why the Government’s Artificial Intelligence Plan Avoids the Hard Governance Questions 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 198: Richard Moon on the Return of the Section 13 Hate Speech Provision in the Online Harms Act 
Tweets Are Not Enough: Why Combatting Relentless Antisemitism in Canada Requires Real Leadership and Action
