 Facts and figures about UK taxes, benefits and public spending.
Income distribution, poverty and inequality.
Analysing government fiscal forecasts and tax and spending.
Analysis of the fiscal choices an independent Scotland would face.
Case studies that give a flavour of the areas where IFS research has an impact on society.
Reforming the tax system for the 21st century.
A peer-reviewed quarterly journal publishing articles by academics and practitioners.
|
Type: Journal Articles Authors: Sijbren Cnossen ISSN: Print: 0143-5671 Online: 1475-5890
Published in: Fiscal Studies, Vol. 17, No. 4, November 1996
Volume, issue, pages: Vol. 17, No. 4, pp. 67-97
In 1992, the Ruding Committee, appointed by the European Commission to examine the need for company tax (CT) harmonisation in the European Union (EU), presented its findings and recommendations.2 Although the Committee concluded that differences in CTs distort the workings of the internal market - differences which most likely would not be eliminated by market forces or tax competition - it none the less proposed to leave the CTs in the EU essentially the same as it had found them, replete with their widely diverging domestic and cross-border treatment of different kinds of returns and different kinds of recipients of the various returns. As argued below, however, differential treatment will perpetuate the distortions inherent to the current CTs and erode the taxing authority of source states. A minimum statutory CT rate of 30 per cent, proposed by the Ruding Committee, and the adoption of the draft. Search |
|
|
|
© The Institute for Fiscal Studies
Limited by Guarantee,Registered in England: 954616 7 Ridgmount Street London WC1E 7AE Registered Charity: 258815 VAT no: GB 394 5830 17 Website design by Pynk and Fluffy |
||||||
