Will Burger King buying Tim Hortons mean money for Canada? Wrong!
[It ought to be called a "Tab Inversion" rather than a tax inversion since it simply leaves regular taxpayers paying more of the tab. This business move by Burger King involves a loss for the US government without any corresponding gain for the Canadian government - in other words, a pure increase in profit for Burger King. *RON*]
By David MacDonald, 26 August 2014
|Photo: Fernando Jorge Agüero/flickr|
But the loss of U.S. taxes from BK is Canada's benefit right? Turns out, not so much. The only reason why this particular accounting trick works is because American corporations are taxed on worldwide profits, Canadian companies (and most other countries companies) are not. What that means is that American corps pay the American government taxes on all their profits no matter which country they are made in. Canadian companies only pay the Canadian government on profits made in Canada.
So the BK move to Canada would mean that BK will stop paying taxes on profits it makes in Kuwait to the U.S. government. However, since no Canadian company pays taxes on profits made in Kuwait in any event, Canadian governments would bring in no additional revenues. In BK's case, this would save them in the neighbourhood of $12 million a year in U.S. corporate taxes. Of course, Canada sees none of that money and essentially gains nothing from this deal.
In the end, many corporations want to pay $0 in income taxes and have the rest of us pick up the tab for health care and infrastructure that we all benefit from. "Tax inversion" is just one of the many accounting tricks that makes regular people pick up the tab for corporations that abuse tax rules or lobby governments to pay less and less every year.
David Macdonald is a senior economist with the CCPA.