Survey: Taxing the digital economy

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 4 Bouverie Street, London, EC4Y 8AX

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2025

Accessibility | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Modern Slavery Statement

Survey: Taxing the digital economy

The OECD's two-pillar digital tax solution's next phase due in October

Take our short anonymous survey to share your views on the impact of the OECD's two-pillar solution and wider digital tax agenda.

Take ITR’s survey here on how the OECD’s two-pillar tax solution is changing the digital economy, and what could happen next. Your answers will be kept strictly anonymous.

Image

Taxation of the digital economy is evolving fast – 133 countries agreed to a detailed statement of understanding from the OECD’s Inclusive Framework (IF) on BEPS regarding key details on pillar one and two, and a final implementation plan is expected in October. This suggests the OECD’s solution is highly likely to find a consensus by the deadline, and it means that countries will need to adopt legislative changes by 2023.

The OECD solution revolves around two significant changes to international tax policy: the reallocation of taxing rights to market jurisdictions under pillar one, and a global minimum corporate tax under pillar two. G20 leaders have said that delaying, or even discontinuing, this work will lead to a global trade war, because the alternative option is a patchwork of unilateral digital services taxes (DSTs) across IF countries.

The US Biden administration has been particularly influential in advancing the digital tax negotiations at the IF in recent months, including on the proposal for a 15% tax rate floor on pillar two. Some in-house tax directors are already thinking about the practical implications of a global minimum corporate tax, such as the impact on investment inflows and outflows.

However, several technical details remain unclear, such as the scope of the proposals or the challenges of using financial accounts to determine country-by-country effective tax rates. Additionally, political challenges such as push-back from some countries and conditional expectations from others could limit the effectiveness of the OECD’s two-pillar solution.

In this fast-moving and politically contentious area of tax, there are many questions. Will the economic effects of the COVID-19 pandemic continue to prompt governments to move faster on digital tax reform, including removing DSTs? Which sectors will bear the brunt of reform? What changes can in-house tax directors expect in the coming years?

With your help, we hope to answer some of these questions. Please complete our anonymous survey here to share your predictions – and look out for the results in ITR’s autumn edition.

For further details, or to share your opinions with the editorial team, email mailto:danish.mehboob@euromoneyplc.com

more across site & shared bottom lb ros

More from across our site

A global tax framework may not materialise anytime soon, but a common set of principles is becoming increasingly necessary, Rudolf Winkenius also tells ITR
Kingsley Napley’s claimants are arguing that taxing the provision of education breaches the European Convention on Human Rights
While pillar two can progress without the US, it won’t reach the same heights without American involvement, argues Renáta Bláhová, founding partner of BMB Partners Taxand
There are unanswered questions as to how foreign investors could reclaim money via tax credits, advisers suggested
Amid an ever-changing tax environment, India’s advisory market is bustling with competition ahead of the 2025 World Tax rankings and ITR Awards
The deal comes after PwC had accused Paul McNab of using confidential information; in other news, McDermott hired a new London tax head from a US rival
Looking at transfer pricing simplification is “obviously helpful”, but it should be done in line with current standards, a senior government figure reportedly said
The UK Government’s plans to close the tax gap via increased HM Revenue and Customs investment have failed to impress local tax advisers
Under the merged scheme for R&D tax relief introduced last year, rules on contracted out R&D have changed. James Dudbridge argues for a proactive approach when reviewing companies’ commercial arrangements
Cultural nuances could account for tax advisers’ perceived poor cost management, a local partner told ITR
Gift this article