![\"\"](\"https:\/\/businesstech.co.za\/news\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/11\/GlobalTax.jpg\")
<\/a><\/p>\nSaint-Amans said he expects there will be some middle ground between reallocating entirely from tax havens or entirely from the headquarter countries. He also pointed out that Washington would win new taxing rights with regard to 50 or 60 foreign multinational firms that operate in the US.<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is even a possibility that it is fiscally favorable,\u201d Saint-Amans said.<\/p>\n
The second key approach is delivering on Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen\u2019s prediction earlier this year that corporate leaders will swing round to pushing Congress to approve the deal.<\/p>\n
The argument revolves on showcasing how the alternative to the agreement would be far worse for multinationals. That means not only the return of digital-services taxes imposed on the likes of Amazon.com Inc, but a host of unilateral measures intended to capture revenue from companies that increasingly have shifted profits to tax havens.<\/p>\n
Jacob Kirkegaard, a senior fellow based in Brussels at the German Marshall Fund, said that\u2019s a powerful argument, not because businesses like the new agreement, but because the international landscape has been tipping toward chaos for years.<\/p>\n
Companies \u201cwant an open trading system that has a degree of predictability,\u201d Kirkegaard said. \u201cThey may not like a 15% tax, but they understand that the status quo is not on offer. The alternative is infinitely worse.\u201d<\/p>\n
The US Chamber of Commerce, one of the country\u2019s largest lobbying groups, says it doesn\u2019t have enough details to decide whether to back or oppose the tax reallocation component of the new tax regime – known as Pillar One.
\nCorporate Reaction<\/p>\n
\u201cThere is a possibility that Pillar One could be an improvement over the hodge-podge system we have right now,\u201d said Curtis Dubay, the chamber\u2019s senior economist. \u201cBut if the details are such that it substantially raises taxes on US business, is targeted at US business and is bad for our economy, we will strenuously oppose it.\u201d<\/p>\n
The OECD deal is drafted to apply only to 45 or 50 US companies, limiting its effect.<\/p>\n
\u201cIn terms of lobbying at the Senate, you have taken away 7,000 to 8,000 companies – and that has a big impact,\u201d said Saint-Amans at the OECD.<\/p>\n
Technology-sector trade groups, including the Information Technology Industry Council and the Computer and Communications Industry Association, have praised the agreement – especially its elimination of digital-service taxes. Amazon issued a statement welcoming the \u201cconsensus-based solution for international tax harmonization.\u201d<\/p>\n
Looking at the landscape in Washington, Saint-Amans said, \u201cYou might say the probability of the US Senate ratifying a multilateral convention – based on the track record – is close to zero. In reality, and I\u2019m not just saying that because I\u2019m paid to, the chances of a ratification by the Senate are not 100%, but they are well above zero.\u201d<\/p>\n
\n