Survey: Taxing the digital economy

International Tax Review is part of Legal Benchmarking Limited, 1-2 Paris Garden, London, SE1 8ND

Copyright © Legal Benchmarking Limited and its affiliated companies 2026

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

The levies extended beyond the president’s ‘legitimate reach’, the Supreme Court ruled
While Brazil’s consumption tax overhaul led to a short-term spike in tax advisory demand, we are now in a period of ‘normalisation’ marked by decreased recruitment
The expanded firm will comprise roughly 8,500 employees, including 550 partners; in other news, Paul Hastings and Macfarlanes made senior tax hires
Meanwhile, one expert highlights the importance of separating Venezuela’s tax authority from direct political control after ‘lost decades and isolation’
With PMK 108, Indonesia has upgraded its tax transparency regime for the digital era, focusing on data quality, governance, and cross border exchange rather than expanding regulatory reach
In a popular LinkedIn post, Jeremie Beitel encouraged firms to invest in junior talent even if it doesn’t lead to their loyalty, though recruiters offered ITR a mixed assessment
Advisers who do not register for the new regime in time could be prevented from interacting with HMRC, the tax authority said
Valid pillar two objectives are still intact after the side-by-side agreement, but whether the framework is now settled is ‘a $64,000 question’, Morrison Foerster’s tax chair told ITR
Ian Halligan previously led Baker Tilly’s international tax services in the US
Exclusive ITR data emphasises that DEI does not affect in-house buying decisions – and it’s nothing to do with the US president
Gift this article