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

Despite a general decline in corporate tax rates around the world, jurisdictions are now more reliant on it than in 1990, a Tax Foundation economist found
Australian law firm Webb Henderson’s report said PwC had met 46 of 47 targets; in other news, the OECD has issued new transfer pricing country profiles
The arrival of a seven-strong team from Baker McKenzie will boost WTS Germany’s transfer pricing capabilities and help it become ‘a European champion’, the firm’s CEO said
Germany has forgotten to think about digital reporting requirements, a WTS partner claimed at ITR’s Indirect Tax Forum 2025
E-invoicing is currently characterised by dynamism, with fragmentation acting as a key catalyst for increasing interoperability, says Aida Cavalera of the International Observatory on eInvoicing
Pillar two and the US tax system ‘could work in harmony’, Scott Levine tells ITR in an exclusive interview to mark his arrival at Baker McKenzie
Peter White, who has a tax debt of A$2 million, has been banned for five years from seeking registration with Australia’s Tax Practitioners Board (TPB)
Wopke Hoekstra’s comments followed US measures aimed against ‘unfair foreign taxes’; in other news, Grant Thornton and Holland & Knight made key tax partner hires
An Administrative Review Tribunal ruling last month in Australia v Alcoa represents a 'concerning trend' for the tax authority, one expert tells ITR
A recent decision underlines that Indian courts are more willing to look beyond just legal compliance and examine whether foreign investment structures have real business substance
Gift this article