19/2/20: Facebook becomes another Ireland Inc's reforms test case

First the 'anti-American'  EU Commission's moved against a wonderful U.S. company washing tens of billions of tax free money through Ireland (see: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-eu-apple-stateaid/apple-says-14-billion-eu-tax-order-defies-reality-and-common-sense-idUSKBN1W1195) and now, the U.S. IRS ('anti-American' as they are) have moved against another wonderful U.S. company washing billions of tax free money through Ireland.

The latest case is, of course, the anti-American IRS suing Facebook over its shenanigans in Ireland: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-facebook-tax/facebook-faces-tax-court-trial-over-ireland-offshore-deal-idUSKBN20C2CQ. Per report: "The IRS argues that Facebook understated the value of the intellectual property it sold to an Irish subsidiary in 2010 while building out global operations, a move common among U.S. multinationals."

It is worth noting that this intellectual property redomiciling to Ireland has dramatically increased since the irish Government 'tax reforms' of 2014. Whilst the CSO does not fully account for such transfers in its GNI* measure, the gap between Irish GDP and GNI* has accelerated to historically new levels in recent years, as highlighted here: https://trueeconomics.blogspot.com/2020/02/9220-ireland-more-of-reformed-tax-haven.html.

The case is yet another hammer blow to Ireland's reputation in international economic policy circles and a testament that Ireland's famed compliance with the OECD BEPS rules is a fig leaf of decorum, to be stripped publicly by the EU and the U.S. (and probably other G20) authorities in years to come.

9/1/19: Corporate tax inversions and shareholder wealth

Our new paper "U.S. Tax Inversions and Shareholder Wealth" has been accepted for publication in the International Review of Financial Analysis:

The paper abstract:
"We examine a sample of corporate inversions from 1993-2015 by firms active in the U.S. markets and find that shareholders experience positive abnormal returns in the short-run. In the long-run, inversions have a deleterious effect on shareholder wealth. The form of the inversion and country-pair differences in geographic distance, economic development and corporate governance standards are determinants of shareholder wealth. Furthermore, we find evidence of a negative and non-linear relation between CEO total return and long-run shareholder returns."

25/4/17: Couple of Things We Glimpsed from KW Europe 'Deal'

Yesterday, an interesting bit of newsflow came in from Irish markets-related Kennedy Wilson Europe operations: http://www.independent.ie/business/commercial-property/1bn-worth-of-irish-property-assets-in-kennedy-wilson-discounted-takeover-deal-35650134.html. Setting aside the details of the merger between Kennedy Wilson Inc (U.S. based parent) and Kennedy Wilson Europe (UK and Ireland-based subsidiary), the news have several important disclosures relating to the Irish property markets, Nama and the Irish economy.

Consider the following: 

"Kennedy Wilson Europe Real Estate, which is tax resident in Jersey, pays 25pc tax on taxable profits generated in its Spanish subsidiaries, and it pays income tax at 20pc on rental income derived from its UK investment properties. But the qualifying investor alternative investment funds (QIAIFs) it uses in Ireland to hold its assets were until this year entirely exempt from any Irish taxation on income and gains. The group's total tax bill last year was £7.3m (€8.6m) on profits of £73.3m."

Which implies:

• Kennedy Wilson's Europe operations are running an effective tax rate of 10 percent. Not 12.5 percent, nor higher. Which shows the extent to which Irish operations tax exempt status drives the overall European tax exposures.
• Kennedy Wilson's merger across the borders is, it appears, at least in part motivated by changes in the QIAIF regime, imposing new "20pc withholding tax on distributions from Irish property funds to overseas investors".  Bringing the, now more heavily taxed, subsidiary under the KW wing most likely create more efficient tax structure, making Irish taxes paid offsettable against global (U.S. parent) income, without the need to formally remit profits from Europe. Beyond that, the merger will facilitate avoidance of dual taxation (of dividends). Finally, running within a single company entity, KW operations in Europe will also be likely to avail of more tax efficient arrangements relating to transfer pricing.

Another bit worth focusing on: "Kennedy Wilson Europe pointed out in its recently-published annual report that in 2014 it acquired a €202.3m Irish loan book for €75.5m". Yes, that's right, the discount on Irish properties purchased by the KWE was in the range of 62.7 percent, almost double the 33.5 percent average haircut on loans purchased by Nama. Assuming EUR 202.3 million number refers to par value of the assets, this implies that Nama has foregone around EUR59 million, if average discount/haircut was used by Nama in buying these assets in the first place. Look no further than the KW own statement: ""The enterprise will benefit from greater scale and improved liquidity, which will enhance our ability to generate attractive risk-adjusted returns for our shareholders. The merger significantly improves our recurring cash flow profile". The improved cash flow profile is, most likely, at least in part will be attributable tot ax structure changes for the merged entity.

Which is exactly how vulture funds' arithmetic works: pay EUR1.00 to buy an asset that Nama purchased for EUR2.68, which was on the banks' books at EUR 3.58. The asset devalued (on average) to EUR1.43-1.79 in the market at the crisis peak, and the fund is in-the-money on this investment from day one to the tune of at least 43 percent. Without a single brick moved or a single can of paint spent...

Of course, there are other reasons for the deal, including steep discounts on asset valuations in the REITs markets for UK properties, but the potential tax gains are hard to ignore too. Whatever the nature of the deal synergies, one thing is clear - vulture-styled investments work magic for deep pockets investment funds, while traditional small scale investors are forced to absorb losses.

5/1/17: Gwan Ya Beaut... Irish PMIs ≠ Irish GDP

Some years ago, I have shown that Irish measures of economic activity - when collected at sectoral levels - have virtually nothing in common with Irish GDP and GNP. Given recent revisions to economic growth and the National Accounts, including the absurd levels of notional GDP and GNP growth recorded in 2015 and in parts of 2016, it is worth to revisit the same issue.

So here is the data: the best advanced indicator data on Irish economic activity that we have is the set of Purchasing Managers Indices (PMIs) released by Markit for three key sectors of the economy: Construction, Manufacturing and Services. Markit are doing pretty much an honest job surveying companies to determine if they are experiencing uptick or decline in their activities. And they are doing this every month. Yes, there are issues with data quality due to what appears to be a strong pro-MNCs bias in the surveys. And yes, Markit are refusing to fully investigate the matter and to test data formally for such biases. And yes, Markit are still not willing to share with me their data, including the actual final data set of PMIs (I have to collect these manually, every month).

But, for all the above problems, Markit is the only source of leading economic indicators for Ireland.

So next is the question: do rates of growth signalled by PMIs actually relate to the rates of growth recorded in the economy (GDP and GNP)?

Let’s take a look, using CSO’s official National Accounts data.

The above shows whatever is happening in Manufacturing. Nope, growth rates signalled by PMIs are not correlated with growth rates in GDP or GNP.  Changes in Manufacturing PMI signals account for only 9.3% of variation in GNP and 6.4% variation in GDP. You wouldn’t be asking Manufacturing sector for its view if you wanted to gauge Irish aggregate economy. 

The above shows what is happening in Services. Again, growth rates signalled by Services PMIs are not correlated with growth rates in GDP or GNP.  Changes in Services PMI signals account for only 12.6% of variation in GNP and just under 8% variation in GDP. You wouldn’t be asking Services sector for its view if you wanted to gauge Irish aggregate economy either.

Why are both sectors signals come out utterly useless when it comes to signalling growth in either GDP or GNP? We have no idea. But my speculative view is that in reality, even large MNCs can’t organically establish their own ‘contributions’ to Irish GDP because whilst purchasing managers and related executives on operations side might know what their divisions are doing and how much more or less business they are handling, the same managers have no idea what value in the end will be attached to their divisions work by the finance lads on the Mother Ship. In other words, real operations managers have no clue how much their companies are booking in revenues or profits because these revenues and profits have only tangential connection of Irish operations. Tax arbitrage is such a naughty thingy, you see, when it comes to collecting data.

Not that Markit (or a vast array of Irish stuff brokers so keen on using its data to ‘interpret’ ‘buy everything’ signals for Irish assets) mind… Gwan, ya beaut... buy some stocks, will ya?

6/11/15: Allergan & Pfizer: More Happiness for OECD Tax Reformists

On foot of couple previous posts relating to Ireland-bound pharma inversions, here is an interesting link to the Bloomberg coverage of the Allergen shenanigans: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-11-02/a-pharmacist-s-dirty-socks-are-key-to-cutting-pfizer-tax-bill

With a nice chart to accompany:

Couple of links to my previous posts on the topic, covering

• Allergan-Pfizer merger: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2015/10/301015-none-of-them-harmful-tax.html
• Grifols of Spain re-domiciling accounting and other activities to Ireland: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2015/10/251015-grifols-and-ghosts-of-oecd.html and http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2015/11/51115-grifols-at-last-in-irish-media.html

“We love your tax compliance theories, OECD!” Signed: Enda.

5/11/15: Grifols: At Last in Irish Media Spotlight

Two weeks ago I wrote about the tax-linked Spanish pharma Grifols move to Ireland (see link here) at the time when all Irish media was gushing on about jobs and investment, forgetting - conveniently and patently - the pesky issue of Why did a Spanish company decided all of a sudden to relocate major operations and international billing into Ireland?

Well, good to know that with a good week-and-a-half delay, the Irish Times woke up to the problem, covering it (albeit with usual 'diplomatic' caveats) here: http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/grifols-move-to-ireland-hits-tax-and-political-buttons-1.2415243.

One important aspect indirectly highlighted by the Irish Times article on the matter is the problem we are having with 'Brand Ireland' - the brand that is now visible across Europe and the U.S., as well as Australia and Canada as being linked with 'beggar thy neighbour' economics.

This strategy for growth is behind our 'stellar out-performance' on fiscal side, as another Irish Times article highlighted here: http://www.irishtimes.com/business/economy/tax-surge-from-multinationals-not-a-one-off-1.2416002. Stay tuned, as I will be covering the matter of 'sustainability' of our revenue and growth side in light of tax inversions and tax-fuelled FDI inflows later this month.

Note: about that 'beggar thy neighbour' economic development model: here is a note highlighting effects of Irish tax policies on the UK current account: http://uk.mobile.reuters.com/article/idUKKCN0SS00320151103?irpc=932. I disagree with the view that the distortion of national accounts aggregates has little effect on the real economy in the UK. In my opinion, it erodes tax base in the UK and transfers the benefits of MNCs activity accruing to Ireland into cost to British taxpayers. Someone pays for our gains, because tax is a zero-sum, non-value-additive activity.

6/2/15: Two Tax Inversions Islands

Remember Tax Inversions Islands? Ireland ≠ Bermuda?

Bloomberg have a neat reminder:

Source: http://www.bloomberg.com/infographics/2014-09-18/tax-runaways-tracking-inversions.html

9/9/2014: iPhone 6 Dilemma for Ireland?..

And so it comes... the iPhone 6 is about to be launched, and Apple has a major dilemma. Hype in the market suggests bumper sales for the new phone. But sales mean profits. And profits, for Apple, mean growing a pile of cash stashed in off-shore locations, including Ireland that the company can't do much with. Get the dilemma? The Guardian did: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2014/sep/07/apple-iphone-6-cash-pile-tax-avoidance-us?curator=MediaREDEF.

I covered this earlier: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2014/06/2562014-imf-on-corporate-tax-spillovers.html as well as within the context of the overall position of Ireland as a corporate tax non-haven (you can track the topic from the links starting here: http://trueeconomics.blogspot.ie/2014/08/2682014-betting-on-corporate-tax.html).

Lest we forget: in the last 12 months through Q1 2014 (the latest for which data is available), Irish economy shipped out EUR26.678 billion in net factor payments abroad (these are, roughly, profits paid out to foreign entities out of Ireland, net of profits from Irish investments abroad). In the same 12 months period of 2012-2013, the amount was EUR28.517. Which means that in the 12 months through Q1 2014, cash repatriation out of Ireland was EUR1.839 billion lower than a year before. This contributed positively to our GDP. But our GDP over the same period rose by EUR1.953 billion. So if profits repatriation was running in 12 months through Q1 2014 at the same rate as in 12 months through Q1 2013, our GDP would have risen not by EUR1.953 billion (+1.13%) but by EUR114 million (+0.07%).

Let's take a look at Apple, again: the company has USD140 billion worth of cash stashed around the world, with much of this - by various reports between USD60 and USD90 billion via Ireland. Take a lower envelope and start repatriating... there can be a risk of a serious recession in Ireland were this to happen.

Ah, all the worries of the FDI-rich Ireland, the best little country to do tax business from...

22/3/2013: National Accounts 2012: Ireland - Part 3

The first post of the series covering 2012 National Accounts looked at the headline numbers for real GDP growth. 

The second post covered sectoral weights in GNP and our GDP/GNP gap.

Overall, there are two main themes in rebalancing of the economy that showed up in data so far: 

1) Increasing share of MNCs activity in GDP (and temporarily GNP), which means that the official figures for the National Accounts now even more overestimate the real economic activity in the country; and

2) Long-term falling out of Agriculture, Forestry & Fishing and Construction sectors from the economy, with Public Administration & Defence clearly showing signs of contraction, albeit at the rate that is, so far, trailing contraction in overall economy over the period 2003-2012.

In this post, let's take a look at the opportunity cost of the crisis.

Recall that relative to peak, Irish GDP is down 5.97% as of the end of 2012 and GNP is down 8.08% despite 'two years of consecutive growth' the Government is so keen on emphasising. 

Also recall that 1980-2011 average growth rates in constant prices terms were 3.58% per annum, whilst IMF forecasts consistent structural or potential growth rate is currently around 2%. Using 2% figure we can, therefore, estimate the opportunity cost of the current crisis as losses to GDP and GNP arising from the growth foregone during the crisis. Chart below illustrates:

The grand total in opportunity cost due to the crisis (note, this is not an exercise in 'blaming the Government' or providing any estimate of real or actual losses, but rather an estimate of the opportunity cost of the crisis) is:

-- EUR104.5bn of cumulated foregone GDP for 2008-2012 or per-capita EUR22,823;

-- EUR58.8bn of cumulated foregone GNP for 2008-2012 or EUR12,828 per capita

With taxes net of subsidies at 9.647% of the GDP in 2012, the above implies roughly EUR10.1bn in foregone net tax receipts or ca EUR2bn in annual receipts. Using 2008-2012 average weight of net taxes in GDP implies EUR2.4bn in foregone annual net tax receipts.

What does this mean? Aside from the massive opportunity cost of the crisis, we have a rather revealing figure on foregone tax receipts. The figure clearly suggests that even were economic activity running at the 2% growth rate since 2007 without the crisis, re-alignment of economic activity away from domestic sectors toward MNCs-dominated activities and toward MNCs-dominated services activities in particular would still result in unsustainable deficits and would still required some sort of a fiscal adjustment, thanks to our taxation system that is extremely unbalanced when it comes to supporting MNCs-focused activities.

7/1/2012: Irish Exchequer Results 2011 - Shifting Tax Burde

In the previous 3 posts we focused on Exchequer receipts, total expenditure by relevant department head, and the trends in capital v current spending. In this post, consider the relative incidence of taxation burden.

Over the years of the crisis, several trends became apparent when it comes to the shifting burden of taxes across various heads. These are summarized in the following table and chart:

To summarize these trends, over the years of this crisis,

• Income tax share of total tax revenue has risen from just under 29% in 2007 to almost 41% in 2011.
• VAT share of total tax revenue has fallen, but not as dramatically as one might have expected, declining from 30.7% in 2007 to 29.7% in 2011
• MNCs supply some 50% of the total corporation tax receipts in Ireland. And they are having, allegedly, an exports boom with expatriated profits up (see QNA analysis last month). Yet, despite this (the exports-led recovery thingy) corporation tax receipts are down (see earlier post on tax receipts, linked above) and they are not just down in absolute terms. In 2007-2011 period, share of total revenue accruing to the corporation tax receipts has fallen from 13.5% to 10.3%. So if there is an exports-led recovery underway somewhere, would, please, Minister Noonan show us the proverbial money?

 So on the tax side of equation, the 'austerity' we've been experiencing is a real one - full of pain for households (whose share of total tax payments now stands at around 58% - some 12 percentage points above it levels in 2007) and the real sweet times for the corporates (the ones that are still managing to make profits to pay taxes, that is). This, perhaps, explains why even those working in protected sectors are talking about their biggest losses coming from tax changes.

Economics 30/01/2010: Eurocoin and Obama's new-old plans

Two topics worth covering: the Eurozone leading indicator issued last week and President Obama’s new ‘Tougher on taxes’ talk to the Congress…


First, the usual monthly update on Eurocoin – a comprehensive leading indicator for Euroarea growth. After straight 12 months of rising, the indicator is now standing at the level not seen since March 2007.
This is consistent with a strong growth signal for months ahead for the Euroarea core economies.


Now to the story of the week that was not covered (at least not from this angle) in our press. In his State of the Union speech this Wednesday, President Obama said,
“To encourage ... businesses to stay within our borders, it is time to finally slash the tax breaks for companies that ship our jobs overseas, and give those tax breaks to companies that create jobs right here in the United States of America...”

Oh, boy – this is turning into one of those typically European sagas: occasionally, the EU is prone to produce daft laws and proposals – the Insurance Gender Directive is a good example of one, the Lisbon Agenda is another. In a typical EU-fashion, bad ideas never die. They just get dragged into the closet, rested for a couple of years and then unleashed again. Until even the daftest policies pass into power.

Well, now it is starting to look like the Obama Administration is taking the same approach.

Under current law, income earned abroad is taxed according to two separate categories: general and passive. Passive income covers capital gains, dividends, and other returns on investment. What’s left is general income and it is subject to a higher rate of tax – the corporate tax.

Under the Obama proposal, a US corporation will have to compute its foreign tax credit on an aggregated basis – taking all foreign earnings and profits of all its foreign subsidiaries and subtracting total foreign taxes paid. If that isn’t bad enough, subsidiaries in higher tax countries will face a ceiling on how much credit they can claim against their earnings for the purpose of the Federal tax liability.

There is absolutely no reason for this, and in fact it is arguably a discriminatory policy, but hey – when it comes to ‘tax and spend’ madness, no one can beat the Democrats – the Feds are estimating the net revenue from the measure to reach between USD24.5bn (US Treasury estimate) and USD45.5bn (JC Committee on Taxation).

And all of these taxes will apply before the companies actually repatriate earnings back to the US.

Now, all of this has some connection to Ireland Inc. We’ve heard before some experts (usually from the companies that can’t really tell us what they think in fear of upsetting Government officials) saying that Obama Plan is not a biggy threat to Ireland. That, you see, our MNCs are here because our workforce is packed with Nobel Prize winners (we are that good at education!) and our energy/water/communications/transport/etc infrastructure is so world class. They are, the MNCs that is, here not because of tax arbitrage… But seriously – we do depend critically on US MNCs operations in the country.

Here is an interesting comment on the Obama speech from an Indian specialist site dealing with outsourcing:

“A tax expert from one of the top four auditing firms, who did not wish to be identified, said: "I think Obama is talking about the same thing when he took over as President. The way this works is; captive units of US firms in any other geography (it could be India, Philippines, China, etc.) are considered different entities under US tax rules. US firms pay tax on the income from these subsidiaries only when they repatriate these earnings (profits) to the US. Firms need to pay 34 to 35 per cent of federal tax on these earnings. In most cases, US firms do not send the money back to the US as they continued to invest this money in expansion and other operations. Now the US government is saying it will match deduction and income together, so they will not get the tax benefits," he said.

The thing is – India and China and many other locations will probably be ok, because they provide high productivity relative to low cost base. Ireland doesn’t do either. So what will keep the MNCs here if Obama gets his wish? For the next 5 years – the capital already sunk here. But after that? Not much. No, really, not much…