Office of Tax Analysis

Technical Paper 9

May 2022

2021 Effective Tax Rates on New Investment for 

OECD Countries

Tracy Foertsch

OTA Technical Papers is an occasional series of reports on the research, models and datasets 

developed to inform and improve Treasury’s tax policy analysis. The papers are works in 

progress and subject to revision. Views and opinions expressed are those of the authors and do 

not necessarily represent official Treasury positions or policy. OTA Technical Papers are 

distributed in order to document OTA analytic methods and data and invite discussion and 

suggestions for revision and improvement. Comments are welcome and should be directed to the 

authors. OTA Papers may be quoted without additional permission.
2021 Effective Tax Rates on New Investment for OECD Countries

Tracy Foertsch*

U.S. Department of the Treasury

May 2022

This paper presents a series of tables and figures describing the effective marginal 

tax rates (EMTRs) and effective average tax rates (EATRs) for new investment 

for 37 OECD countries in 2021. These effective tax rates include only corporatelevel taxes. The paper also presents a summary of the variables and equations 

used to calculate 2021 the EMTRs and EATRs. All effective rates are calculated 

using the methodology described in Devereux and Griffith (2003), Klemm (2006), 

Evers, et al. (2013), and Spengel, et al. (2019). EATRs are considered to be 

indicators of the impact of taxation on the discrete choice of where to locate an 

investment. In contrast, EMTRs are considered to be indicators of the size or scale 

of an investment in a given location.

* Tracy.Foertsch@treasury.gov
1

Introduction

This paper presents a series of tables and figures describing the effective marginal tax rates 

(EMTRs) and effective average tax rates (EATRs) for new investment for 37 OECD countries for 

2021. These effective tax rates include only corporate-level taxes. The paper also presents a 

summary of the variables and equations used to calculate the 2021 EMTRs and EATRs.

2021 OECD Effective Tax Rates for New Investment

Table 1 through Table 4 show 2021 effective marginal tax rates (EMTRs) and effective average 

tax rates (EATRs) for thirty-seven OECD countries. Table 1 and Table 4 show overall EMTRs 

and EATRs for each country. The overall EMTRs and EATRs are calculated as the difference 

between an average cost of capital (across type of asset and type of finance) and an after-tax real 

rate of return. There are five asset types—machinery, industrial buildings, inventories, acquired 

patents, and financial assets—and three types of finance—retained earnings, new equity, and debt. 

Table 2 and Table 3 show EMTRs and EATRs by type of finance for each of the five asset types.

These effective tax rates include only corporate-level taxes and are calculated using the 

methodology described in Devereux and Griffith (2003), Klemm (2006), Evers, et al. (2013), and 

Spengel, et al. (2019).

1 EATRs are considered to be indicators of the impact of taxation on the 

discrete choice of where to locate an investment. In contrast, EMTRs are considered to be 

indicators of the size or scale of an investment in a given location.

Effective Marginal Tax Rates. EMTRs summarize tax incentives for marginal investments, or

investments that just break even. They are the hypothetical tax rates showing the total fraction of 

capital costs, excluding economic depreciation, needed to pay taxes over the lifetime of a marginal 

investment. If applied to economic income, they summarize the impact of major tax provisions on 

the investment incentives of businesses and investors. Here those major tax provisions include 

taxes on corporate income and net wealth (including real estate taxes), differences between tax

depreciation and economic depreciation, and deductions for business interest expenses. In general, 

a lower effective marginal tax rate implies a greater incentive to invest.

1 Devereux, Michael P. and Rachel Griffith, 2003, “Evaluating Tax policy for Location Decisions,” International Tax 

and Public Finance, 10, pp. 107-126, available at 

https://pages.stern.nyu.edu/~dbackus/Taxes/DevereuxGriffith%20ITPF%2003.pdf (accessed December 16, 2021). See 

also Klemm, Alexander, 2006, “Allowances for Corporate Equity in Practice,” IMF Working Paper, WP/06/259, 

available at https://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/wp/2006/wp06259.pdf (accessed December 14, 2021); Evers, Lisa, 

Helen Miller, and Christoph Spengel, 2013, “Intellectual Property Box Regimes: Effective Tax Rates and Tax Policy 

Considerations,” ZEW Discussion Paper No, 13-070, available at 

https://www.ifs.org.uk/docs/EversMillerSpengel2013_WP1.pdf (accessed December 14, 2021); and Spengel, 

Christoph, Frank Schmidt, Jost Heckemeyer, and Katharina Nicolay, 2019, “Project for the EU Commission, Effective 

Tax Levels Using the Devereux/Griffith Methodology,” TAXUD/2019/DE/312, Final Report 2019, available at 

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/system/files/2020-01/final_report_2019_effective_tax_levels_revised_en.pdf

(accessed December 14, 2021). Klemm incorporates an allowance for corporate equity into the Devereux and Griffith 

framework (see Appendix I); Evers, et al. (2013) incorporate the expensing of costs associated with an investment in 

research and development into the Devereux and Griffith framework. Spengel, et al. (2019) use the Devereux and 

Griffith framework to calculate EMTRs and EATRs through 2019 for European Union member states, North 

Macedonia Turkey, Norway, Switzerland, Canada, Japan and the United States.
2

EMTRs are calculated as 

(1) EEEEEEEE = (pp� − rr)⁄pp�,

where pp� is the user cost of capital2 and rr is the real interest rate. The user cost of capital net of 

economic depreciation pp� is given by

(2) pp� = (1−AA−kk)

(1+ππ)(1−ττ)

{ρρ + δδ(1 + ππ) − ππ} − FF(1+ρρ)

γγ(1+ππ)(1−ττ) − δδ.

In equation (2), ππ is the inflation rate, ττ is the corporate income tax rate, δδ is the economic 

depreciation rate, kk is an investment tax credit, and AA is the present value of the tax benefit from 

depreciation allowances per unit of investment, discounted at a nominal discount rate ρρ. γγ is a tax 

discrimination variable measuring tax discrimination between new equity and distributions.

3 For 

effective tax rates calculated using only corporate-level taxes, γγ = 1 and ρρ = ii =

(1 + rr)(1 + ππ) − 1 = 0.071, 4 implying that equation (2) simplifies to

(2a) pp� = (1−AA−kk)

(1−ττ) {rr + δδ} − FF(1+rr)

(1−ττ) − δδ.

The variable FF in equations (2) and (2a) captures the additional cost of raising external finance. 

For an investment financed with retained earnings, FFRRRR = 0; for an investment financed with new 

equity,

(3a) FFNN = −(1 − γγ) ρρ⁄(1 + ρρ);

for an investment financed with debt,

(3b) FFDD = γγ {ρρ − ii(1 − LLccττ)}⁄(1 + ρρ).

In equation (3a), FFNN = 0 if γγ = 1. This means that with only corporate-level taxes pp� and the 

EMTR are same for new investments financed with retained earnings and new investments 

financed new equity. In equation (3b), the variable LLcc summarizes any limits on the deductibility 

of business interest expenses at the corporate level. If there are no limits, LLcc = 1; otherwise, LLcc

equals the share of business interest expenses that is deductible.

If real estate or net wealth taxes are included in the effective tax rate calculations, equations (2), 

(3a), and (3b) are modified to include an effective real estate or net wealth tax rate ww. Thus, 

2 The user cost of capital is the real before-tax rate of return that a marginal investment must earn to recover the cost 

of the investment, pay taxes, and pay an expected after-tax rate of return on marginal savings. 3 The tax discrimination variable γγ = (1 − mmdd)⁄(1 − zz), where mmdd is the personal income tax rate on dividends and 

zz is an accruals-equivalent capital gains rate. In the absence of shareholder-level taxes, mmdd = zz = 0 and γγ = 1. 4 Consistent with Spengel, et al. (2019), we assume a real interest rate rr = 0.05 and an inflation rate ππ = 0.02, giving 

a nominal interest rate ii = 0.071. If the effective tax rate calculations include shareholder-level taxes, ρρ = ii �

1−mmii

1−zz �, 

where mmii is the personal income tax rate on interest income and zz is an accruals-equivalent capital gains rate.
3

(4a) pp� = (1−AA−kk)

(1+ππ)(1−ττ)

{ρρ + δδ(1 + ππ) − ππ} + ww(1+ρρ)

(1+ππ)(1−ττ) − FF(1+ρρ)

γγ(1+ππ)(1−ττ) − δδ,

while

(4b) FFNN = −(1 − γγ)(1 + ww) ρρ⁄(1 + ρρ)

and

(4c) FFDD = γγ (1 + ww){ρρ − ii(1 − LLccττ)}⁄(1 + ρρ)

If expensing of an investment in machinery is allowed, FFNN and FFDD in equations (4b) and (4c) are 

further modified to include a variable representing the percent xxmm of the basis of the qualifying 

asset that can be immediately expensed. Thus, 

(5c) FFNN = (1 − xxmmττ){−(1 − γγ)(1 + ww) ρρ⁄(1 + ρρ)}

and 

(5b) FFDD = (1 − xxmmττ){γγ (1 + ww){ρρ − ii(1 − ττ)}⁄(1 + ρρ)}.

Finally, to calculate the user cost of capital for a new investment in inventories and financial 

assets, equation (4a) is expanded to include the term vv .

(6) pp� = (1−AA−kk)

(1+ππ)(1−ττ)

{ρρ + δδ(1 + ππ) − ππ} + ww(1+ρρ)

(1+ππ)(1−ττ) + vv(1+ππ)(1−ττ) − FF(1+ρρ)

γγ(1+ππ)(1−ττ) − δδ

The term vv captures the taxation of inventories valued using the first-in-first-out (FIFO) 

method. It also captures the taxation of financial assets. In general, vv = 1 for all financial assets 

and for all inventories for which the FIFO method is assumed; vv = 0 if the last-in-first-out (LIFO) 

method is assumed for inventories.

Special Cases. Additional modifications to pp�, FFNN , and FFDD are needed to accommodate split rate 

tax systems and Allowance for Corporate Equity (ACE) tax systems.

Estonia and Latvia have split rate tax systems. Under a split-rate tax system, corporate profits are 

only taxed if they are distributed while retained earnings are not subject to corporate income tax. 

Thus, the corporate income tax rate on distributed profits ττdd equals the combined statutory 

corporate tax rate shown in column 4 of Table 5 (ττdd = 0.20 for both Estonia and Latvia), while 

the corporate income tax rate on retained earnings is zero (ττ = 0). Spengel, et al. (2019) use a 

modified tax discrimination variable

(7) γγss = �1−ττdd�

(1−ττ) γγ,

in equations (4a) through (4c) for split-rate tax systems.
4

Belgium, Italy, Turkey, Portugal, and Poland have ACE tax systems. Under an ACE tax system, 

firms can deduct from taxable income an amount equal to “notional” interest on share capital and 

retained earnings. The notional interest rate is set by the government.

• For Belgium, the notional interest rate for 2021 was 0.000 percent.5 Before 2018, this notional 

interest rate applied to a company’s total stock of qualifying equity; from 2018, it applies to a 

company’s incremental equity, where incremental equity is based on the difference between 

equity at the end of the current tax year and equity at the end of the fifth preceding year. 

• For Italy, the notional interest rate for 2021 is 1.3 percent. Because Italy’s ACE tax system

does not apply for the purpose of the Italian regional tax on productive activities (IRAP), ττNNNN

in equation (8c) below equals not the combined statutory corporate income tax rate of 27.81 

percent shown Table 5 but instead the central government corporate income tax rate of 24 

percent.

• For Turkey, the notional interest rate is based on an annual weighted average interest rate 

applied to Turkish commercial loans provided by banks. This notional interest rate was 13.57

percent for 2016, 17.06 percent for 2017, and 27.04 percent in 2018, although Turkish 

companies can deduct only 50 percent of the notional interest amount calculated over the cash 

increases of the paid-in capital of existing capital companies and the cash capital contributions 

of newly established capital companies.

6 For 2021, a notional interest rate of 10.45 percent is 

assumed.

7

• For Portugal, the notional interest rate is 7 percent; it applies to the capital contributed by 

shareholders in cash upon incorporation or in a subsequent capital increase in cash.

8

• For Poland, a notional interest rate of 1.1 percent is assumed; it applies to capital contributions 

and profits retained for reserve capital, provided the capital contributions are retained and the 

profits not distributed for a minimum of 3 years.9

These notional interest deductions are intended to reduce the bias in favor of debt-financed new 

investment. They are introduced into FFRRRR and FFNN as follows:

5 The International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation (IBFD) Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021 gives a notional 

interest rate for Belgium of 0 percent for 2021. Page 4 of the Explanatory Annex to the OECD Tax Database gives a 

notional interest rate for Belgium of -0.16 percent for 2021. See OECD Tax Database (2021), Explanatory Annex, 

Part II. Taxation of Corporate and Capital Income, May, available at https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/taxdatabase/corporate-and-capital-income-tax-explanatory-annex.pdf (accessed December 14, 2021). 6 See p. B-33 of Section B of ZEW (2019). 7 For 2019, ZEW (2019) assumes a notional interest rate of 24.26 percent. For 2019, 2020, and 2021, average interest

rates calculated using data downloaded from the Turkish Central Bank—specifically, Weighted Average Interest 

Rates for Banks' Loans, Commercial (TRY) (https://evds2.tcmb.gov.tr/index.php?/evds/serieMarket (accessed 

October 18, 2021, select interest rates, weighted average interest rates for bank loans, commercial (TRY)) suggest a

notional interest rate for 2019 of 21.5 percent, for 2020 of 12.8 percent, and for 2021 of 20.9 percent. The notional

interest rate for 2019 and 2021 would imply a bias toward equity if assuming a nominal interest rate ii of 7.1 percent. 8 See IBFD, Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021. 9 ZEW (2019) indicates that the notional interest rate equals the reference rate from Poland’s National Bank 

(applicable on the last day of the preceding calendar year) plus 1 percentage point. The reference rate for Poland's 

National Bank can be found at https://www.nbp.pl/homen.aspx?f=/en/statystyka/instrumenty/instrumenty.html

(accessed December 14, 2021). In setting a notional interest rate of 1.5 percent, ZEW (2019) seem to be using the 

interest rate on reserve requirements, which equaled 0.5 percent in December 2018, not what is labeled the reference 

rate and equaled 1.5 percent in December 2018. The interest rate on reserve requirements equaled 0.1 percent in 

December 2020. Thus, for the 2021 OECD effective tax rates, I am using a notional interest rate of 1.1 percent.
5

(8a) FFRRRR = FFAAAA

and 

(8b) FFNN = −(1 − γγ)(1 + ww) ρρ (1 + ρρ) + FFAAAA ⁄ ,

where

(8c) FFAAAA = γγττNNNNNNıı̂

(1+ww)

(1+ρρ)

and where ıı̂is the notional interest rate and ττNNNN is the difference between the tax rate on profit 

above the notional interest rate and the tax rate on notional interest. For all but Italy, the tax rate 

on notional interest is 0 percent; in the case of Italy, it equals the local profit tax rate in Table 5.

In equations (8a), (8b), and (8c), ττNNNN ıı̂increases the post-tax economic rent of new investments 

financed with retained earnings and new equity. If ıı̂= ii (and LLcc = 1), it fully offsets the tax 

savings attributable to the deductibility of interest expenses so that FFDD in equation (4c) simplifies 

to FFAAAA and the additional cost of raising external finance is the same for each type of finance.

10 In 

the case of Portugal (see Table 2) for which ıı̂= 0.07, this means that the EMTRs on machinery

are nearly identical for new investments financed with new equity (and retained earnings) and new

investments financed with debt. If ıı̂> ii, the notional interest deduction more than offsets the tax 

savings attributable to the deductibility of interest expenses and the EMTRs for new investments 

financed with new equity (and retained earnings) are less than the EMTRs for new investments 

financed with debt.

Effective Average Tax Rates. EATRs summarize tax incentives for investments that earn an 

economic profit, or a pre-tax rate of return pp that is greater than the normal return required on a 

marginal investment.11 EATRs begin with a calculation of the tax wedge as the difference between 

the net present value of an investment’s cash flow in the absence of tax ( ∗) and the net present 

value of an investment’s cash flow in the presence of tax ( ), assuming that pp > pp�. To calculate 

EATRs, this difference—the net present value of taxes paid—is expressed as a proportion of the 

net present value of the pre-tax total income stream (net of economic depreciation). Thus, the

EATR is calculated as

(9) EE EEEE = RR∗−RR

pp⁄(1+rr)

,

where 

(10) ∗ = pp−rr

1+rr

and 

10 This assumes that effective tax rates are calculated using only corporate-level taxes. 11 Spengel, et al. (2019) assume a pre-tax rate of return of 20 percent. The same is assumed when calculating the 

EATRs shown in Table 1 through Table 4. See p. B-1 of Section B of Spengel, et al. (2019).
6

(11) = −γγ(1 − AA − kk) − γγ

1+ρρ

vv − γγ

+ γγ

1+ρρ (pp + δδ)(1 + ππ)(1 − ττ) + γγ1+ρρ (1 − AA − kk)(1 − δδ)(1 + ππ) + FF.

Equation (11) is the economic rent of a new investment. Setting = 0 and solving for pp gives the

cost of capital pp� in equation (6). Simplifying equation (11) so that is expressed as a function of 

pp� in equation (6) in turn gives 

(12) = (pp − pp�) γγ(1−ττ)(1+ππ)

(1+ρρ) .

Substituting equation (12) into equation (9) allows the EATR to be rewritten as 

(9a) EE EEEE = �

pp�

pp

� EEEEEE + �1 − pp�

pp

� ,

where = 1 − γγ(1+rr)(1+ππ)(1−ττ)

(1+ρρ) .

For EATRs calculated using only corporate-level taxes, γγ = 1, ρρ = ii = (1 + rr)(1 + ππ) − 1, and 

= ττ.

For a marginal investment (pp = pp�), equation (9a) implies that the EATR equals the EMTR.

12 For 

pp > pp�, equation (9a) implies that the EATR is a weighted average of the corporate income tax rate 

and the EMTR, with the weight being determined by the degree to which the investment earns a 

pure profit. Finally, as the pre-tax rate of return pp becomes very large, equation (9a) implies that 

the EATR converges to ττ and that the corporate income tax rate, rather than deductions and 

credits, determines the tax burden on economic profit.

Tax Parameters. EMTRs and EATRs are calculated for five types of assets (machinery, industrial 

buildings, acquired patents, inventories, and financial assets) and for three types of finance 

(retained earnings, new equity, and debt). In Table 1 through Table 4, they show the burden 

imposed by corporate-level taxes only. Taxes paid by shareholders and by lenders are not 

included.

Calculation of the EMTRs and the EATRs includes the combined statutory corporate income tax 

rate (see Table 5), an effective real estate tax on corporations (see Table 6), and an effective net 

wealth tax on corporations (see Table 6).

13 The combined statutory corporate income tax rate 

includes the top central government corporate income tax rate, any surcharges, and a local (subcentral) profit tax rate; it reflects interactions between central taxation and local taxation and 

12 This result can also be obtained from equation (9). Specifically, setting pp = pp� and = 0 gives EE EEEE = (pp� − rr)⁄pp�, 

which is the definition of an EMTR in equation (1).

13 EMTRs and EATRs in Table 1 through Table 3 include real estate taxes and net wealth taxes on corporations. 

EMTRs and EATRs in Table 4 exclude these taxes.
7

allows for the deductibility of local profit taxes for corporate income tax purposes.

14 The same real 

rate of return, inflation rate, and economic depreciation rates are used for all countries (see Table 

9). The country-specific assumptions made about the tax treatment of inventories (Table 7) and the 

tax depreciation of machinery, industrial buildings, and acquired patents (see Table 8A, Table 8B, 

and Table 8C) are obtained from several sources, including the Oxford University Centre for 

Business Taxation (2017),

15 Spengel, et al. (2019),16 the International Bureau of Fiscal 

Documentation (IBFD) Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, the PwC Worldwide Tax 

Summaries,

17 the Ernst & Young Worldwide Corporate Tax Guide,18 the Deloitte Taxation and 

Investment Guides,

19 and various country-specific sources.

2021 Comparison to OECD and G-7 Countries. For each OECD country, the overall effective tax 

rate is a weighted average across different types of assets and different types of finance.20 Given 

the relatively small size of some OECD countries, the more appropriate comparison is arguably 

between the United States and other G-7 countries. The United States is excluded from OECD and 

G-7 averages when comparing the United States to other OECD and G-7 countries because the 

United States has such a large impact. The EMTRs and EATRs for the United States are generally 

higher than effective tax rates for other OECD and G-7 countries if real estate and net wealth taxes 

on corporations are included (see Table 1 through Table 3). 

The comparison of effective tax rates for the United States and other OECD and G-7 countries is 

more favorable if real estate and net wealth taxes on corporations are excluded (see Table 4). This 

is because the United States has one of the highest real estate taxes among OECD countries (see 

Table 6). The United States is also one of only a few OECD countries to impose net wealth taxes

(personal property taxes) on machinery and inventories.

14 Statutory corporate income tax rates are primarily taken from the OECD Tax Database. See ‘Corporate and capital 

income taxes’ and then ‘statutory corporate income tax rates’ at https://www.oecd.org/tax/tax-policy/tax-database/

(accessed December 14, 2021). 15 Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation, 2017, CBT Tax Database, available at 

https://ora.ox.ac.uk/objects/uuid:81f28d9a-fe6e-445b-8d34-a641b573d986 (accessed December 14, 2021). 16 See Section A of Spengel, et al. (2019). 17 See https://www.pwc.com/gx/en/services/tax/worldwide-tax-summaries.html (accessed December 14, 2021). 18 See https://www.ey.com/en_gl/tax-guides/worldwide-corporate-tax-guide (accessed May 16, 2022). 19 See https://dits.deloitte.com/#TaxGuides (accessed December 14, 2021). 20 The overall EMTRs are calculated by taking the difference between an average cost of capital (across type of asset 

and type of finance) and an after-tax real rate of return. Devereux, et al. (2008) use weights of 55 percent for retained 

earnings, 10 percent for new equity, and 35 percent for debt. See p. 5 of Devereux, Michael P., Christina Elschner, 

Dieter Endres, Jost H. Heckemeyer, Michael Overesch, Ulrich Schreiber, and Christoph Spengel, 2008, “Project for 

the EU Commission,” TAXUD/2005/DE/3 10, Final Report, available at 

http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.353.2752&rep=rep1&type=pdf (accessed December 14, 

2021).
8

Table 1. 2021 OECD Overall Effective Tax Rates (in Percent) 

Combined

Statutory 

Corporate Tax 

Rate

PDV of Depreciation Overall Effective Tax 

Rates (Corporate Level)

Machinery Industrial 

Buildings

Acquired 

Patents EMTRs EATRs

Australia 30.0 81.5 46.2 52.6 25.4 28.5

Austria 25.0 76.7 39.3 69.9 18.3 23.0

Belgium 25.0 81.8 52.6 94.4 16.9 22.6

Canada 26.2 95.4 60.4 80.5 19.9 24.2

Chile 10.0 60.3 32.9 79.2 15.6 11.7

Colombia 31.7 69.9 32.9 81.8 25.8 29.7

Czech Republic 19.0 75.4 52.3 69.9 14.1 17.6

Denmark 22.0 77.9 46.2 93.4 14.6 19.8

Estonia 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 15.7

Finland 20.0 87.6 49.6 69.9 17.3 19.2

France 28.4 82.8 52.6 81.8 21.3 26.1

Germany 29.9 80.2 38.0 81.8 21.0 27.1

Greece 24.0 69.9 46.2 69.9 21.3 23.2

Hungary 11.1 73.2 22.1 73.2 10.5 10.6

Iceland 20.0 80.9 57.6 81.8 17.7 19.3

Ireland 12.5 74.4 46.2 69.9 14.7 15.1

Israel 23.0 69.9 52.6 74.4 21.8 22.6

Italy 27.8 71.9 44.7 90.3 14.9 23.4

Japan 29.7 75.7 34.3 74.4 37.7 32.9

Korea 27.5 86.4 52.6 76.7 15.3 23.9

Latvia 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 7.9 16.7

Lithuania 15.0 84.9 77.9 90.4 10.0 13.6

Luxembourg 24.9 82.0 46.2 81.8 14.7 22.3

Mexico 30.0 69.9 52.6 77.5 23.6 27.9

Netherlands 25.0 76.7 32.9 69.9 19.0 23.1

New Zealand 28.0 69.3 22.0 52.6 27.7 27.9

Norway 22.0 73.8 36.0 69.9 18.0 20.8

Poland 19.0 69.9 32.9 81.8 12.2 17.1

Portugal 31.5 83.4 52.6 69.9 -12.8 21.7

Slovak Republic 21.0 82.1 52.6 81.8 13.7 18.9

Slovenia 19.0 81.8 38.0 69.9 13.7 17.5

Spain 25.0 73.5 38.0 52.6 23.5 24.5

Swedena 20.1 80.9 46.2 80.9 13.7 17.9

Switzerland 19.7 80.9 53.0 84.9 11.6 17.4

Turkey 20.0 81.5 46.2 67.4 -18.5 11.9

United Kingdom 19.0 97.5 38.2 69.9 19.2 19.1

United States 25.8 93.6 33.5 60.3 26.3 25.9

OECD Average 25.7 84.2 40.0 70.2 21.5 24.6

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 25.7 79.4 43.3 75.3 19.1 24.0

G-7 Average 26.6 88.1 37.8 69.5 25.3 26.2

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 27.4 82.4 42.2 79.0 24.2 26.5

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis

Notes: PDV = present discounted value; EMTRs = effective marginal tax rates; EATRs = effective average tax rates. The EMTRs and 

EATRs shown include real estate taxes and net wealth taxes on corporations.

a. The corporate income tax rate for Sweden takes account of the profit periodization reserve (tax allocation reserve), which allows 

companies to allocate to a reserve up to 25percent of net profits. 
9

Table 2. 2021 OECD Effective Marginal Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level

Machinery Industrial Buildings

New Equity

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 26.3 -31.6 12.9 27.2 -28.7 14.1

Austria 25.9 -13.0 15.7 27.6 -9.2 17.9

Belgium 21.5 -23.6 10.0 40.7 17.8 34.3

Canada 6.8 -49.1 -7.3 42.3 18.8 35.8

Chile 22.2 11.5 18.8 25.0 15.1 21.8

Colombia 38.6 -1.8 28.7 37.8 -4.1 27.6

Czech Republic 20.6 -7.2 12.7 16.3 -15.2 7.4

Denmark 21.9 -12.6 12.5 31.3 5.7 24.1

Estoniaa 25.8 0.0 3.4 25.8 0.0 3.4

Finland 12.3 -26.3 1.8 33.8 13.8 28.0

France 23.5 -32.4 10.2 38.0 5.2 29.4

Germany 27.6 -16.7 16.5 34.6 0.3 25.6

Greece 30.0 -1.2 21.5 30.2 -0.9 21.8

Hungary 13.1 0.9 9.2 19.0 8.5 15.6

Iceland 17.7 -15.3 8.5 37.2 19.2 31.9

Ireland 14.2 -3.5 8.7 23.2 9.2 18.8

Israel 28.8 -1.2 20.6 36.5 13.3 29.9

Italy 28.7 2.4 21.3 28.7 2.1 21.2

Japan 43.1 14.0 35.5 44.7 17.4 37.4

Korea 18.8 -42.0 4.5 24.7 -25.1 12.5

Latviaa 25.8 0.0 3.4 37.7 20.1 22.3

Lithuania 10.7 -14.4 3.3 27.4 11.5 22.5

Luxembourg 15.3 -39.1 1.9 30.9 -1.8 22.1

Mexico 36.7 -1.7 27.1 29.7 -21.3 17.6

Netherlands 25.9 -13.0 15.7 29.9 -4.0 20.9

New Zealand 35.0 -0.4 25.8 33.0 -5.2 23.2

Norway 25.0 -6.4 16.3 24.5 -7.3 15.8

Poland 21.1 -0.9 14.6 24.5 4.6 18.6

Portugal -40.5 -42.3 -41.1 -26.9 -28.4 -27.4

Slovak Republic 17.6 -18.5 7.8 22.6 -8.6 14.0

Slovenia 16.1 -15.5 7.2 19.1 -10.0 10.8

Spain 28.4 -7.2 19.0 27.4 -9.6 17.7

Sweden 17.8 -15.4 8.6 22.9 -5.7 14.9

Switzerland 19.8 -15.0 10.3 18.2 -18.3 8.3

Turkey -43.8 -16.3 -32.8 -33.9 -9.7 -24.3

United Kingdom 2.6 -32.1 -7.3 43.6 30.5 39.6

United States 22.2 -8.2 13.7 44.1 25.6 38.8

OECD Average 21.2 -12.1 12.6 34.3 9.5 27.7

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 20.7 -14.2 12.0 29.2 1.2 22.1

G-7 Average 23.8 -11.1 14.5 41.6 18.9 35.3

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 25.5 -14.1 15.3 39.1 11.9 31.8

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
10

Table 2. 2021 OECD Effective Marginal Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level, Cont’d.

Acquired Patents Inventories

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 45.3 18.8 38.2 37.4 0.0 27.9

Austria 29.0 -5.9 19.7 25.0 -15.0 14.6

Belgium 7.1 -63.4 -9.4 25.0 -15.0 14.6

Canada 22.0 -26.8 9.8 33.0 0.0 24.3

Chile 15.4 2.6 11.3 19.5 8.0 15.8

Colombia 25.6 -43.2 10.5 39.2 0.0 29.6

Czech Republic 22.3 -4.1 14.7 24.6 0.0 17.5

Denmark 7.1 -46.3 -6.5 28.2 0.0 20.3

Estoniaa 25.8 0.0 3.4 25.8 0.0 3.4

Finland 23.4 -4.4 15.6 25.8 0.0 18.4

France 22.7 -34.8 9.2 35.6 0.0 26.4

Germany 24.1 -26.3 11.7 29.9 -10.8 19.6

Greece 27.9 -5.6 18.9 30.5 0.0 22.2

Hungary 12.0 -0.5 8.0 14.8 3.2 11.1

Iceland 15.6 -19.4 6.0 25.8 0.0 18.4

Ireland 14.9 -2.5 9.5 16.6 0.0 11.4

Israel 23.8 -11.6 14.3 29.4 0.0 21.3

Italy 6.3 -45.0 -6.9 23.1 -8.4 14.4

Japan 42.4 12.3 34.5 46.9 22.4 40.3

Korea 26.4 -20.3 14.9 27.5 -17.5 16.3

Latviaa 25.8 0.0 3.4 25.8 0.0 3.4

Lithuania 6.5 -21.4 -1.7 15.0 -7.4 8.3

Luxembourg 19.8 -27.6 7.8 24.9 -15.0 14.6

Mexico 28.2 -25.6 15.6 37.4 0.0 27.9

Netherlands 29.0 -5.9 19.7 25.0 -15.0 14.6

New Zealand 42.9 17.3 36.0 35.1 0.0 26.0

Norway 25.7 -5.0 17.2 28.2 0.0 20.3

Poland 11.0 -18.0 2.6 15.5 -10.1 8.0

Portugal -7.3 -8.4 -7.7 0.9 0.0 0.6

Slovak Republic 16.5 -20.9 6.3 27.0 0.0 19.4

Slovenia 22.3 -4.1 14.7 24.6 0.0 17.5

Spain 39.2 15.2 32.5 31.7 0.0 23.2

Sweden 16.4 -18.3 6.8 25.2 -1.1 17.7

Switzerland 15.7 -23.6 5.2 22.0 -10.6 13.0

Turkey -22.0 -1.6 -14.0 -19.7 0.0 -12.0

United Kingdom 22.3 -4.1 14.7 24.6 0.0 17.5

United States 35.9 10.8 28.9 28.9 -3.4 20.2

OECD Average 27.2 -5.4 18.8 28.4 -1.8 20.4

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 22.7 -13.8 13.6 28.1 -1.0 20.5

G-7 Average 31.0 -2.7 22.2 31.3 -0.5 22.8

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 26.0 -16.6 15.2 33.8 2.3 25.5

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
11

Table 2. 2021 OECD Effective Marginal Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level, Cont’d.

Financial Assets

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 37.4 0.0 27.9

Austria 31.7 0.0 23.2

Belgium 31.7 0.0 23.2

Canada 33.0 0.0 24.3

Chile 13.4 0.0 9.1

Colombia 39.2 0.0 29.6

Czech Republic 24.6 0.0 17.5

Denmark 25.2 -5.9 16.7

Estoniaa 25.8 0.0 3.4

Finland 25.8 0.0 18.4

France 35.6 0.0 26.4

Germany 37.3 6.5 29.1

Greece 30.5 0.0 22.2

Hungary 12.1 0.0 8.2

Iceland 25.8 0.0 18.4

Ireland 31.7 0.0 23.2

Israel 29.4 0.0 21.3

Italy 26.4 0.0 18.9

Japan 46.9 22.4 40.3

Korea 34.6 0.0 25.6

Latviaa 25.8 0.0 3.4

Lithuania 19.7 0.0 13.8

Luxembourg 31.6 0.0 23.1

Mexico 37.4 0.0 27.9

Netherlands 31.7 0.0 23.2

New Zealand 35.1 0.0 26.0

Norway 28.2 0.0 20.3

Poland 21.6 0.0 15.2

Portugal 0.9 0.0 0.6

Slovak Republic 27.0 0.0 19.4

Slovenia 24.6 0.0 17.5

Spain 31.7 0.0 23.2

Sweden 26.5 0.0 19.0

Switzerland 27.4 0.0 19.7

Turkey -19.7 0.0 -12.0

United Kingdom 24.6 0.0 17.5

United States 32.6 4.3 24.8

OECD Average 31.0 3.8 23.7

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 30.2 3.6 23.2

G-7 Average 34.2 5.7 26.4

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 35.9 7.2 28.1

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis

Notes: EMTRs = effective marginal tax rates. The EMTRs shown include real estate taxes and net wealth taxes on corporations.

a. Estonia (since 2000) and Latvia (since 2018) have split-rate tax systems. In Estonia and Latvia, retained earnings are not taxed 

while profits distributed as dividends are taxed at the statutory corporate income tax rate of 20 percent (see Table 1). In the 

absence of real estate and net wealth taxes, this means that the EMTR on retained earnings is 0 percent while the EMTR on new 

equity is 25.8 percent. For all other OECD countries, the EMTR on retained earnings equals the EMTR on new equity.
12

Table 3. 2021 OECD Effective Average Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level

Machinery Industrial Buildings

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 28.7 18.3 25.1 29.0 18.6 25.4

Austria 25.3 16.6 22.3 25.9 17.2 22.8

Belgium 23.9 15.2 20.8 31.6 22.8 28.5

Canada 21.0 13.5 18.4 33.1 23.9 29.9

Chile 13.9 10.4 12.7 15.0 11.5 13.8

Colombia 34.5 23.5 30.6 34.2 23.1 30.3

Czech Republic 19.5 12.9 17.2 18.2 11.6 15.9

Denmark 22.0 14.3 19.3 25.4 17.7 22.7

Estoniaa 22.0 15.0 15.7 22.0 15.0 15.7

Finland 17.8 10.8 15.4 25.2 18.2 22.8

France 26.8 16.9 23.3 32.3 22.3 28.8

Germany 29.1 19.9 25.9 31.7 22.5 28.5

Greece 26.1 17.8 23.2 26.2 17.8 23.3

Hungary 11.7 8.5 10.6 13.5 10.4 12.4

Iceland 19.3 12.3 16.9 26.8 19.8 24.4

Ireland 13.0 8.6 11.5 16.0 11.6 14.4

Israel 25.0 17.0 22.2 28.3 20.2 25.5

Italy 27.9 21.3 25.6 27.9 21.3 25.5

Japan 35.6 25.2 32.0 36.5 26.0 32.8

Korea 24.8 15.3 21.5 26.6 17.0 23.2

Latviaa 22.0 15.0 15.7 27.1 20.0 20.7

Lithuania 13.8 8.6 12.0 19.3 14.0 17.4

Luxembourg 23.7 15.1 20.7 27.1 18.4 24.0

Mexico 32.7 22.2 29.0 29.9 19.4 26.2

Netherlands 25.3 16.6 22.3 26.8 18.0 23.7

New Zealand 30.7 20.9 27.3 29.8 20.1 26.4

Norway 23.0 15.3 20.3 22.8 15.2 20.2

Poland 19.7 14.1 17.7 20.8 15.2 18.9

Portugal 18.7 18.5 18.6 20.0 19.8 19.9

Slovak Republic 20.0 12.7 17.4 21.5 14.2 19.0

Slovenia 18.1 11.5 15.8 19.0 12.4 16.7

Spain 26.2 17.5 23.1 25.8 17.1 22.8

Sweden 19.0 12.1 16.6 20.6 13.7 18.2

Switzerland 19.7 12.2 17.1 19.2 11.7 16.6

Turkey 8.9 12.2 10.1 9.9 13.2 11.1

United Kingdom 14.8 9.3 12.9 29.9 23.1 27.5

United States 24.6 17.9 22.3 34.0 25.7 31.1

OECD Average 24.9 17.5 22.3 30.0 22.0 27.2

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 25.1 17.4 22.4 28.0 20.1 25.2

G-7 Average 26.0 18.3 23.3 33.2 24.6 30.2

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 27.4 18.8 24.4 32.4 23.4 29.3

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
13

Table 3. 2021 OECD Effective Average Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level, Cont’d.

Acquired Patents Inventories

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 37.0 26.5 33.3 32.9 22.5 29.3

Austria 26.4 17.7 23.4 25.0 16.3 22.0

Belgium 20.2 11.5 17.1 25.0 16.3 22.0

Canada 24.8 15.7 21.6 28.7 19.6 25.5

Chile 11.6 8.1 10.4 12.9 9.5 11.7

Colombia 29.6 18.6 25.8 34.8 23.8 30.9

Czech Republic 20.1 13.5 17.8 20.9 14.3 18.5

Denmark 18.0 10.3 15.3 24.2 16.5 21.5

Estoniaa 22.0 15.0 15.7 22.0 15.0 15.7

Finland 21.1 14.2 18.7 22.0 15.0 19.5

France 26.6 16.7 23.1 31.2 21.3 27.7

Germany 28.0 18.8 24.8 29.9 20.7 26.7

Greece 25.3 17.0 22.4 26.4 18.0 23.4

Hungary 11.3 8.2 10.2 12.2 9.0 11.1

Iceland 18.7 11.7 16.3 22.0 15.0 19.5

Ireland 13.2 8.9 11.7 13.7 9.4 12.2

Israel 23.3 15.2 20.5 25.3 17.3 22.5

Italy 21.8 15.3 19.5 26.0 19.5 23.7

Japan 35.2 24.8 31.6 37.8 27.4 34.2

Korea 27.1 17.6 23.8 27.5 17.9 24.2

Latviaa 22.0 15.0 15.7 22.0 15.0 15.7

Lithuania 12.7 7.5 10.9 15.0 9.8 13.2

Luxembourg 23.3 14.6 20.3 24.9 16.3 21.9

Mexico 29.4 18.9 25.7 32.9 22.5 29.3

Netherlands 26.4 17.7 23.4 25.0 16.3 22.0

New Zealand 34.5 24.8 31.1 30.7 21.0 27.3

Norway 23.2 15.6 20.6 24.2 16.5 21.5

Poland 16.7 11.2 14.8 18.0 12.4 16.0

Portugal 22.5 22.3 22.4 23.8 23.6 23.7

Slovak Republic 19.6 12.3 17.1 23.1 15.8 20.5

Slovenia 20.1 13.5 17.8 20.9 14.3 18.5

Spain 30.8 22.1 27.8 27.5 18.8 24.4

Sweden 18.6 11.7 16.2 20.9 14.1 18.5

Switzerland 18.5 10.9 15.9 20.4 12.8 17.8

Turkey 11.4 14.7 12.5 11.7 15.0 12.9

United Kingdom 20.1 13.5 17.8 20.9 14.3 18.5

United States 29.7 21.6 26.9 26.9 18.7 24.0

OECD Average 26.9 18.9 24.1 27.1 19.1 24.3

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 25.4 17.5 22.7 27.2 19.3 24.4

G-7 Average 28.6 20.1 25.6 28.5 20.0 25.5

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 27.4 18.5 24.3 30.2 21.3 27.1

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis
14

Table 3. 2021 OECD Effective Average Tax Rates (in Percent) at the Corporate Level, Cont’d.

Financial Assets

New Equity 

and Retained 

Earnings

Debt Overall 

Average

Australia 32.9 22.5 29.3

Austria 27.5 18.8 24.4

Belgium 27.5 18.8 24.4

Canada 28.7 19.6 25.5

Chile 11.0 7.5 9.8

Colombia 34.8 23.8 30.9

Czech Republic 20.9 14.3 18.5

Denmark 23.1 15.4 20.4

Estoniaa 22.0 15.0 15.7

Finland 22.0 15.0 19.5

France 31.2 21.3 27.7

Germany 32.9 23.7 29.7

Greece 26.4 18.0 23.4

Hungary 9.9 6.8 8.8

Iceland 22.0 15.0 19.5

Ireland 27.5 23.1 25.9

Israel 25.3 17.3 22.5

Italy 24.8 18.0 22.4

Japan 37.8 27.4 34.2

Korea 30.2 20.6 26.8

Latviaa 22.0 15.0 15.7

Lithuania 16.5 11.3 14.6

Luxembourg 27.4 18.7 24.3

Mexico 32.9 22.5 29.3

Netherlands 27.5 18.8 24.4

New Zealand 30.7 21.0 27.3

Norway 24.2 16.5 21.5

Poland 19.8 14.3 17.9

Portugal 23.8 23.6 23.7

Slovak Republic 23.1 15.8 20.5

Slovenia 20.9 14.3 18.5

Spain 27.5 18.8 24.4

Sweden 22.6 15.8 20.2

Switzerland 22.4 14.8 19.7

Turkey 11.7 15.0 12.9

United Kingdom 20.9 14.3 18.5

United States 28.3 20.1 25.4

OECD Average 28.1 20.1 25.3

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 27.9 20.0 25.2

G-7 Average 29.5 20.9 26.5

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 30.7 21.8 27.6

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis

Notes: EATRs = effective average tax rates. The EATRs shown include real estate taxes and net wealth taxes on corporations.

a. Estonia (since 2000) and Latvia (since 2018) have split-rate tax systems. In Estonia and Latvia, retained earnings are not taxed 

while profits distributed as dividends are taxed at the statutory corporate income tax rate of 20 percent (see Table 1). In the 

absence of real estate and net wealth taxes, this means that the EATR on retained earnings is 15 percent while the EATR on new 

equity is 22 percent. For all other OECD countries, the EATR on retained earnings equals the EATR on new equity.
15

Table 4. 2021 OECD Overall Effective Tax Rates (in Percent) 

Combined

Statutory 

Corporate Tax 

Rate

PDV of Depreciation Overall Effective Tax 

Rates (Corporate Level)

Machinery Industrial 

Buildings

Acquired 

Patents EMTRs EATRs

Australia 30.0 81.5 46.2 52.6 25.4 28.5

Austria 25.0 76.7 39.3 69.9 17.6 22.8

Belgium 25.0 81.8 52.6 94.4 10.6 21.0

Canada 26.2 95.4 60.4 80.5 12.8 22.3

Chile 10.0 60.3 32.9 79.2 9.7 9.9

Colombia 31.7 69.9 32.9 81.8 24.7 29.4

Czech Republic 19.0 75.4 52.3 69.9 13.9 17.5

Denmark 22.0 77.9 46.2 93.4 11.4 19.0

Estonia 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 15.7

Finland 20.0 87.6 49.6 69.9 12.8 17.9

France 28.4 82.8 52.6 81.8 17.3 25.0

Germany 29.9 80.2 38.0 81.8 19.8 26.8

Greece 24.0 69.9 46.2 69.9 19.3 22.6

Hungary 11.1 73.2 22.1 73.2 9.2 10.3

Iceland 20.0 80.9 57.6 81.8 11.7 17.6

Ireland 12.5 74.4 46.2 69.9 12.1 14.4

Israel 23.0 69.9 52.6 74.4 17.4 21.3

Italy 27.8 71.9 44.7 90.3 12.8 22.9

Japan 29.7 75.7 34.3 74.4 29.5 29.6

Korea 27.5 86.4 52.6 76.7 14.8 23.8

Latvia 20.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.4 15.7

Lithuania 15.0 84.9 77.9 90.4 4.7 12.3

Luxembourg 24.9 82.0 46.2 81.8 12.3 21.7

Mexico 30.0 69.9 52.6 77.5 22.5 27.6

Netherlands 25.0 76.7 32.9 69.9 18.1 22.9

New Zealand 28.0 69.3 22.0 52.6 27.7 27.9

Norway 22.0 73.8 36.0 69.9 17.6 20.7

Poland 19.0 69.9 32.9 81.8 10.3 16.6

Portugal 31.5 83.4 52.6 69.9 -14.5 21.5

Slovak Republic 21.0 82.1 52.6 81.8 12.4 18.5

Slovenia 19.0 81.8 38.0 69.9 13.7 17.5

Spain 25.0 73.5 38.0 52.6 23.0 24.3

Swedena 20.1 80.9 46.2 80.9 12.5 17.6

Switzerland 19.7 80.9 53.0 84.9 10.5 17.1

Turkey 20.0 81.5 46.2 67.4 -19.6 11.7

United Kingdom 19.0 97.5 38.2 69.9 11.5 16.9

United States 25.8 93.6 33.5 60.3 18.3 23.5

OECD Average 25.7 84.2 40.0 70.2 16.7 23.1

OECD Average Excl. U.S. 25.7 79.4 43.3 75.3 15.8 23.0

G-7 Average 26.6 88.1 37.8 69.5 18.7 24.2

G-7 Average Excl. U.S. 27.4 82.4 42.2 79.0 19.2 24.9

Source: U.S. Department of the Treasury, Office of Tax Analysis

See notes to Table 1. The EMTRs and EATRs shown exclude real estate taxes and net wealth taxes on corporations.

 
16

Table 5. 2021 Components of Combined Statutory Corporate Tax Rates

Central Government

Corporate Tax Rate Surcharge Local Profit Tax Rate

Combined Statutory 

Corporate Tax Rate

Australia 0.3000 0.0000 0.0000 0.3000

Austria 0.2500 0.0000 0.0000 0.2500

Belgium 0.2500 0.0000 0.0000 0.2500

Canada 0.1500 0.0000 0.1115 0.2615

Chile 0.1000 0.0000 0.0000 0.1000

Colombia 0.3100 0.0000 0.0100 0.3169

Czech Republic 0.1900 0.0000 0.0000 0.1900

Denmark 0.2200 0.0000 0.0000 0.2200

Estoniaa 0.2000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2000

Finland 0.2000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2000

France 0.2750 0.0330 0.0000 0.2841

Germanyb 0.1500 0.0550 0.1411 0.2994

Greece 0.2400 0.0000 0.0000 0.2400

Hungaryc,k 0.0900 0.0000 0.0230 0.1109

Iceland 0.2000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2000

Irelandk 0.1250 0.0000 0.0000 0.1250

Israel 0.2300 0.0000 0.0000 0.2300

Italyd,k 0.2400 0.0000 0.0381 0.2781

Japane 0.2320 0.1730 0.0347 0.2974

Koreaf 0.2500 0.0000 0.0250 0.2750

Latviaa 0.2000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2000

Lithuania 0.1500 0.0000 0.0000 0.1500

Luxembourgg 0.1700 0.0700 0.0675 0.2494

Mexico 0.3000 0.0000 0.0000 0.3000

Netherlands 0.2500 0.0000 0.0000 0.2500

New Zealand 0.2800 0.0000 0.0000 0.2800

Norway 0.2200 0.0000 0.0000 0.2200

Poland 0.1900 0.0000 0.0000 0.1900

Portugal 0.2100 0.0900 0.0150 0.3150

Slovak Republic 0.2100 0.0000 0.0000 0.2100

Slovenia 0.1900 0.0000 0.0000 0.1900

Spain 0.2500 0.0000 0.0000 0.2500

Swedenh 0.2060 0.0000 0.0000 0.2060

Switzerlandi 0.0850 0.0000 0.1287 0.1970

Turkey 0.2000 0.0000 0.0000 0.2000

United Kingdom 0.1900 0.0000 0.0000 0.1900

United Statesj 0.2100 0.0000 0.0602 0.2575
17

Sources: OECD Tax Database, International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax 

Handbook 2021

a. Estonia and Latvia do not tax retained profits. Corporate profits are only taxed if they are 

distributed.

b. Since 2008, the local profit tax (the municipal trade tax) is not deductible for trade tax purposes or 

for federal corporate income tax purposes. In addition, 25 percent of all interest payments exceeding a 

threshold of EUR 200,000 are not deductible from the local trade tax base.

c. Hungary has a local business tax with a maximum rate of 2 percent and an innovation tax with a 

rate of 0.3 percent. Both local taxes are deductible for corporate income tax purposes. However, the 

tax base for the local tax is not reduced by interest paid. 

d. The combined statutory corporate tax rate for Italy includes a 3.9 percent regional tax on 

production activities (IRAP), 10 percent of which is deductible for corporate income tax purposes. 

Interest expenses are not deductible when calculating the tax base for the IRAP.

e. Japan’s surcharge and local profit tax rate include the prefectural inhabitant tax, the municipal 

inhabitant tax, and the local enterprise tax.

f. The maximum local income tax rate for corporations is 2.5 percent. The local income tax is not 

deductible for corporate income tax purposes.

g. The municipal business tax in the city of Luxembourg is 6.75 percent, or a basic rate of 3 percent

multiplied by a coefficient of 2.25. The municipal business tax is not deductible for corporate income 

tax purposes.

h. Sweden imposes a flat 20.6 percent corporate income tax. However, companies can create a profit 

periodization reserve by allocating to a reserve up to 25 percent of net profits. The reserve must be 

dissolved (and added to taxable income) no later than the sixth year after the allocation has been 

made. Since 2005, notional income from the reserve is taxable. The notional taxable income is 

calculated by multiplying the total amount of the allocations to the reserve fund by 72 percent of the 

interest rate on long-term government bonds as of the end of November in the previous tax year. The 

profit periodization reserve reduces Sweden’s combined corporate tax rate to 20.11 percent.

i. The local profits tax rate is obtained by multiplying a basic rate of 7.0 percent for the canton of 

Zurich by the sum of a cantonal coefficient (1.00), a municipal coefficient (1.19), and a parish 

coefficient (0.10) for the city of Zurich.

j. The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (TCJA) limits interest deductions to 30 percent of adjusted taxable 

income for corporate debt. From 2018 through 2021, adjusted taxable income is calculated as 

earnings before interest, tax, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA); beginning in 2022, it is 

computed as earnings before interest and tax (EBIT). Using the nonpublic IRS corporate study tax 

file, the average C-corporation disallowance share (or the share of interest paid that cannot be 

deducted) for all industries is calculated to be 9.2 percent between 2018 and 2021 and 15.2 percent

between 2022 and 2027.

k. The combined corporate statutory tax rate does not apply to financial assets in Hungary, Ireland, 

and Italy. In Hungary and Italy, only the central government corporate tax rate applies. In Ireland, 

nontrading income is subject to a 25 percent corporate income tax rate.
18

Table 6. 2021 Real Estate and Net Wealth Tax Rates for Corporations

Real Estate Tax Effectivea Net Wealth Tax

Nominal Effectivea Machinery Buildings Patents Inventories

Australia 0.0000 0.0000

Austria 0.0025 0.0019

Belgium 0.0205 0.0154

Canada 0.0241 0.0178

Chileb 0.0060 0.0054 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038 0.0038

Colombia 0.0050 0.0034

Czech Republic 0.0007 0.0005

Denmark 0.0100 0.0078

Estonia 0.0000 0.0000

Finland 0.0147 0.0117

Francec 0.0054 0.0039 0.0000 0.0066 0.0000 0.0000

Germany 0.0047 0.0033

Greece 0.0058 0.0057

Hungary 0.0037 0.0033

Iceland 0.0160 0.0160

Ireland 0.0084 0.0074

Israel 0.0164 0.0126

Italy 0.0058 0.0049

Japand 0.0170 0.0119 0.0098 0.0000 0.0098 0.0098

Korea 0.0018 0.0013

Latvia 0.0150 0.0120

Lithuania 0.0150 0.0128

Luxembourg 0.0075 0.0056

Mexico 0.0044 0.0031

Netherlands 0.0031 0.0023

New Zealand 0.0000 0.0000

Norway 0.0016 0.0012

Poland 0.0058 0.0047

Portugal 0.0032 0.0022

Slovak Republic 0.0042 0.0033

Slovenia 0.0000 0.0000

Spain 0.0020 0.0015

Sweden 0.0038 0.0030

Switzerlande 0.0000 0.0000 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014 0.0014

Turkey 0.0020 0.0016

United Kingdom 0.0256 0.0207

United Statesf 0.0198 0.0147 0.0066 0.0000 0.0000 0.0021

Sources: International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, PwC Worldwide Tax 

Summaries, Spengel et al. (2019), various country-specific sources. Net wealth taxes are not assumed to apply to 

financial assets.
19

a. The effective tax rate allows for the deductibility of real estate taxes and other net wealth taxes from corporate 

income taxes. See the country notes explaining calculation of the real estate tax rates.

b. The net wealth tax shown for Chile is an annual municipal license fee on capital registered on the balance sheet. The 

rate varies by municipality and location within the municipality. It ranges from 0.25 percent to 0.5 percent. An average 

tax rate of 0.375 percent is assumed.

c. The net wealth tax shown for France, the Cotisation Fonciere des Entreprises (CFE), is assumed to apply only to 

buildings. The CFE is based on the rental value of assets that are subject to the real estate tax. The CFE tax rate is 

determined by the municipality. The 2021 CFE tax rate for Paris is 16.52 percent. The rental value of buildings is 

assumed to amount to 8 percent of acquisition costs. PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries indicates that for industrial 

buildings the taxable base for CFE is reduced by 30 percent. Hence, the nominal other profit tax rate for France is 

obtained by taking 70 percent of the product of 16.52 percent and 8 percent.

d. The municipal fixed asset tax in Japan consists of a standard tax rate of 1.4 percent and a city planning tax of 0.3

percent. The standard tax rate is assumed to apply to machinery, inventories, patents, and financial assets. The city 

planning tax component of the municipal fixed assets tax is not assumed to apply to machinery, inventories, patents, 

and financial assets.

e. In Zurich, the net worth tax has a basic rate of 0.075 percent. This basic rate is multiplied by the sum of a cantonal 

coefficient (1.00) for Zurich, a municipal coefficient (1.19) for the city of Zurich, and a parish coefficient (0.10).

f. The net wealth tax shown for the United States is a weighted-average of state and local personal property tax rates. 

State and local personal property tax rates apply to machinery and inventories.

Country Notes:

Australia: Australia has no real estate tax.

Austria: The real estate tax is levied at a basic federal rate of 0.2 percent. This basic federal rate is multiplied by a 

municipal coefficient that can reach a maximum of 500 percent. The real estate tax is levied on the assessed value of 

the property; the assessed value is assumed to equal 25 percent of market value.

Belgium: The nominal real estate tax rate is the sum of an “immovable withholding tax” rate of 1.25 percent (for the 

Brussels regions) and a municipal surcharge of 3000 multiplied by the withholding tax rate. The real estate tax is 

levied on the rental value of the property. Spengel, et al. (2019) assume that the rental value is 5.3 percent of the

market value.

Canada: The nominal real estate tax rate is a population-weighted average of nonresidential (commercial) property 

tax rates in 8 major Canadian cities—Calgary, Edmonton, Vancouver, Winnipeg, Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, and 

Halifax.

Chile: The general real estate tax rate is 1.2 percent for urban property. The taxable base is the cadastral value. The 

cadastral value is assumed to equal 50 percent of market value.

Colombia: Property tax is a municipal tax and deductible for corporate income tax purposes. PwC Worldwide Tax 

Summaries indicates that property tax rates depend on the nature and usage of the property and range between 0.5

percent and 1.2 percent.

Czech Republic: The ground floor area of a building determines the taxable base. For flats and nonresidential spaces, 

the area in square meters is multiplied by a coefficient of 1.2. Tax rates depend on the use of the building. For 

business premises, the rate is CZK 10 per square meter. The nominal real estate tax rate is multiplied by a coefficient 

of 4.5 for buildings located in Prague. Prague may increase the coefficient up to a maximum of 5.

Denmark: The municipal real estate tax on buildings used for business purposes may not exceed 1 percent.

Estonia: Estonia has no real estate tax.

Finland: The nominal real estate tax is the mean of a minimum real estate tax rate of 0.93 percent and a maximum real 

estate tax rate of 2.0 percent.

France: The real estate tax (Taxe Fonciere sur les Proprietes Baties) is calculated by applying city/department 

property tax rates to half the notional rental value of a commercial property as defined by a local land registry. The tax 

rate is determined annually by local authorities. The rental value of industrial buildings is assumed to amount to 8 

percent of the acquisition cost. Property tax rates are for Paris, which has lower local property tax rates than do some

other French cities. For 2021, the local property tax rate in Paris is a combination of a city (ville) rate of 8.37 percent 

and a department rate of 5.13 percent. Hence, the nominal real estate tax equals 100 ∙ �0.08 ∙ 0.5 ∙

(0.0513 + 0.0837)�. 

Germany: The real property tax (Grundsteuer) is calculated by multiplying a real property tax rate of 0.35 percent and 

a municipal multiplier (Hebesatz) by the assessed value of a real property. Federal fiscal authorities establish the 

assessed value, which Spengel, et al. (2019) assume amounts to 25 percent of the acquisition cost, and the basic 
20

federal rate. Municipalities determine the multiplier. The nominal real estate tax rate is calculated using a populationweighted average multiplier for German cities with a population over 20,000.

Greece: The nominal real estate tax is the sum of a supplementary unified annual real estate ownership tax and a local 

real estate tax rate. The supplementary tax is imposed on the total value of the real estate property at a rate of 0.55

percent for legal entities. The local real estate tax rate varies between 0.025 percent and 0.035percent; a mean of 0.03

percent is assumed.

Hungary: The real estate tax is either a maximum of HUF 1951/m2 or a maximum of 3.6 percent of the fair market 

value of the building.

Iceland: Municipalities levy a property tax based on the assessed value of immovable property. The commercial (Ctax) property tax in Reykjavik is 1.60 percent of assessed value. The assessed value is assumed to equal market value.

Ireland: The local tax on immovable property (the commercial “rates”) is calculated by multiplying a rateable 

valuation by an annual rate of valuation. The annual rate of valuation is set annually by the local government. For 

Dublin, the annual rate of valuation (the rate multiplier) is 0.268 for 2021. Spengel, et al. (2019) assume a rateable

valuation (the estimate of the annual rental value of the property) for Dublin of 63 percent. They also assume that the 

annual rental value amounts to 5 percent of the acquisition cost.

Israel: A municipal tax (Arnona) is levied annually on buildings by local authorities in Israel. For 2021, the nominal 

real estate tax is calculated using an average of three rates for industrial plants set by the municipal government in 

Jerusalem. The three rates, expressed as NIS (shekels) per square meter, are 144.04, 106.86, and 86.73; the average of 

the three rates is 112.5.

Italy: In January 2012, the unified municipal tax (IMU) replaced the municipal tax on immovable property (ICI). The 

basic IMU rate is 0.86 percent. However, local authorities can raise the IMU rate to a maximum of 1.06 percent or 

lower the IMU rate to a minimum of 0 percent. The taxable value for the IMU is the cadastral value, or the standard 

value attributed to a property in the official register. The cadastral value is assumed to equal 68 percent of the 

acquisition cost. Sixty percent of the IMU is deductible for income tax purposes.

Japan: The municipal fixed assets tax consists of a standard tax rate of 1.4 percent and a city planning tax of 0.3 

percent. The tax base corresponds to the market value.

Korea: Real estate taxes in Korea vary by property type and location. Buildings are taxed at rates between 0.25

percent and 4 percent. Factories are assumed to be taxed at a rate of 0.25 percent. However, if the factory is in a 

designated metropolitan area and is new or expanded, the property tax rate is 1.25 percent, or 5 times the standard 

rate, for 5 years. Property tax is levied on 70 percent of the current standard value of land and buildings, which is

assumed to correspond to acquisition cost.

Latvia: Real estate tax is levied on immovable property such as land and buildings at a basic rate of 1.5 percent of the 

cadastral value. Spengel, et al. (2019) assume that the cadastral value equals the acquisition cost.

Lithuania: An annual property tax on immovable property ranges from 0.5 percent to 3 percent of the taxable value. 

The nominal real estate tax is 1.5 percent assuming that the taxable value is 50 percent of the acquisition cost 

(Spengel, et al. (2019)).

Luxembourg: The real estate tax is based on the unitary value of real estate. The basic tax rate is between 0.7 percent

and 1 percent. It is multiplied by a municipal coefficient that equals 750 percent for Luxembourg City. The municipal 

coefficient for Luxembourg City is applied to a basic rate of 1 percent. Spengel, et al. (2019) assume that the unitary 

value is 10 percent of the acquisition cost.

Mexico: The real estate tax is levied by the Federal District and all states at rates that range from 0.05 percent to 3

percent. An average value is calculated for the Federal District. The taxable base for the property tax is the cadastral 

value, which is assumed to equal 50 percent of market value.

Netherlands: The real estate tax rate for immovable nonresidential property in Amsterdam is 0.31 percent. The real 

estate tax is deductible for corporate income tax purposes. The basis for the real estate tax is the property value.

New Zealand: New Zealand has no real estate tax.

Norway: Immovable property is subject to a municipal real estate tax. The taxable base is the assessed value, which is 

between 20 percent and 50 percent of market value. The real estate tax is levied at fixed rates ranging from 0.2 percent

to 0.7 percent. The nominal real estate tax is calculated assuming an average fixed rate of 0.45 percent and an average 

assessed value of 35 percent.

Poland: The taxable base for the real estate tax is the floor area of the building. For buildings used for business, the 

maximum tax rate for 2019 is PLN 23.47/m2

.

Portugal: The tax base for the municipal real estate tax (IMI) is 80 percent to 90 percent of the market value of a 

property. IMI rates are 0.3 percent to 0.45 percent for urban buildings valued according to the IMI code. An average 

market value of 85 percent and an average IMI rate of 0.38 percent are assumed.

Slovak Republic: The immovable property tax is based on the area of the real estate, its location, and its type. In the 

city of Bratislava, real estate taxes are divided into four bands. The real estate tax for industrial buildings and 
21

warehouses is EUR 5.75/m2 for band 1, EUR 6/m2 for band 2, EUR 6.5/m2 for band 3, and EUR 7/m2 for band 4. The 

real estate tax for buildings used for other business activities is EUR 7/m2 for band 1, EUR 7.5/m2 for band 2, EUR

8.5 EUR/m2 for band 3, and 9 EUR/m2 for band 4. An average of real estate taxes for industrial buildings and other 

buildings is used.

Slovenia: Slovenia has no real estate tax.

Spain: For 2021, the real estate tax is levied by municipalities at a general rate of 0.4 percent for urban property. The 

taxable base is the cadastral value, which in Spengel, et al. (2019) is assumed to equal 50 percent of the acquisition 

cost.

Sweden: A national real estate tax is levied on all immovable commercial and industrial property. The tax rate is 1 

percent for commercial premises and 0.5 percent for industrial property. Spengel (2019), et al. assume that the taxable 

base equals 75 percent of the acquisition cost.

Switzerland: Zurich has no real estate tax on immovable property.

Turkey: The real estate tax for buildings is 0.2 percent.

United Kingdom: Local municipal taxes are levied on the occupiers of business property by reference to a deemed 

annual rental value (the rateable value) determined by the Valuation Office Agency of HM Revenue & Customs. 

Spengel, et al. (2019) assume that the rateable value amounts to 5 percent of the acquisition cost. It is multiplied by 

the “rate in pound.” The rate in the pound (also called the multiplier) is set by the Communities and Local 

Government. Between revaluations (every 5 years), the rate in the pound adjusts annually by the rate of inflation. In 

2021, it is 51.2 percent.

United States: The Minnesota Center for Fiscal Excellence and the Lincoln Institute of Land Policy annually publish a 

50-State Property Tax Comparison Study that includes average effective commercial property tax rates and industrial 

property tax rates for all 50 states and the District of Columbia. (The June 2021 report is available at 

https://www.lincolninst.edu/sites/default/files/pubfiles/50-state-property-tax-comparison-for-2020-full_0.pdf, 

accessed December 14, 2021.) Real and personal property tax rates and net tax amounts from Table 3a and Table 4a

of the June 2021 report are combined with municipal data on statutory property tax rates and the taxable base to obtain

average effective property tax rates for commercial buildings, industrial buildings, machinery, and inventories in the 

largest urban areas in each state plus the District of Columbia.
22

Table 7. 2021 Tax Treatment of Inventories

Proportion of Inventories Valued by FIFO

Australia 1.0000

Austria 0.0000

Belgium 0.0000

Canada 1.0000

Chile 1.0000

Colombia 1.0000

Czech Republic 1.0000

Denmark 1.0000

Estoniaa ---

Finland 1.0000

France 1.0000

Germany 0.0000

Greece 1.0000

Hungary 1.0000

Iceland 1.0000

Ireland 1.0000

Israel 1.0000

Italy 0.0000

Japan 1.0000

Korea 0.0000

Latviaa ---

Lithuania 0.0000

Luxembourg 0.0000

Mexico 1.0000

Netherlands 0.0000

New Zealand 1.0000

Norway 1.0000

Poland 0.0000

Portugal 1.0000

Slovak Republic 1.0000

Slovenia 1.0000

Spain 1.0000

Sweden 1.0000

Switzerland 0.0000

Turkey 1.0000

United Kingdom 1.0000

United States 0.0000

Sources: International Bureau of Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, PwC Worldwide Tax 

Summaries, and Ernst & Young Worldwide Corporate Tax Guide.

Notes: FIFO = first-in-first-out; LIFO = last-in-first-out. A value of 0 indicates that 100 percent of inventories are valued by 

LIFO accounting methods. A value of 1 indicates that 100 percent of inventories are valued by FIFO accounting methods.

a. Estonia and Latvia tax distributed profits instead of corporate income.
23

Table 8A. 2021 Tax Depreciation for Machinery

Kind of 

Allowance

Acceleration

Factorc

Allowance 

Rate (in 

Percent)

Length of 

Period (in 

Years)

Optimal 

Switching 

Time (in 

Years)

Australia DBSL 2.00 28.57 (DB) 7.00 4.00

8.68 (SL)

Austria SL 14.29 7.00

Belgium SL 20.00 5.00

Canadaa,b DB 50.00 ufd

Chile SL 6.67 15.00

Colombia SL 10.00 10.00

Czech Republicd DB 10.00 10.00

Denmark DB 25.00 ufd

Estoniae --- --- --- --- ---

Finlandb DB 50.00 ufd

France DBSL 2.25 32.14 (DB) 7.00 4.00

7.07 (SL)

Germanyb DBSL 1.75 25.00 7.00 3.00

10.55

Greece SL 10.00 10.00

Hungary SL 50.00 2.00

Iceland DB 30.00 ufd

Ireland SL 12.50 8.00

Israel SL 10.00 10.00

Italy SL 6.25 1.00

12.50 7.00

6.25 1.00

Japan DBSL 2.00 20.00 (DB) 10.00 5.00

6.55 (SL)

Korea DB 45.10 ufd

Latviae --- --- --- --- ---

Lithuania DB 40.00 ufd

Luxembourg DBSL 2.10 30.00 (DB) 7.00 4.00

8.00 (SL)

Mexico SL 10.00 10.00

Netherlands SL 14.29 7.00

New Zealand DB 16.00 ufd

Norway DB 20.00 ufd

Poland SL 10.00 10.00

Portugal DB 35.71 ufd

Slovak Republicd DB 16.67 6.00

Slovenia SL 20.00 5.00
24

Table 8A. 2021 Tax Depreciation for Machinery, Cont’d.

Kind of 

Allowance

Acceleration

Factorc

Allowance 

Rate (in 

Percent)

Length of 

Period (in 

Years)

Optimal 

Switching 

Time (in 

Years)

Spain SL 12.00 8.00

4.00 1.00

Sweden DB 30.00 ufd

Switzerland DB 30.00 ufd

Turkey DBSL 2.00 28.57 (DB) 7.00 4.00

8.68 (SL)

United Kingdomb DB 18.00 ufd

United Statesa,b DBSL 2.00 28.57 (DB) 7.00 4.00

8.92 (SL)

4.46 (SL)f

Sources: Spengel, et al. (2019), the Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation (2017), International Bureau of 

Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, and Ernst & Young 

Worldwide Corporate Tax Guide.

Notes: SL = straight line; DB = declining balance; DBSL = declining balance with a switch to straight line; ufd = 

until fully depreciated; EMTRs = effective marginal tax rates; EATRs = effective average tax rates.

a. Depreciation is reduced by half in the first year (half-year convention).

b. For 2021, temporary stimulus measures are included for Germany, Finland, Canada, the United States, and the 

United Kingdom. Germany temporarily reintroduced the declining-balance method with enhanced depreciation rates 

for movable assets acquired after December 31, 2019 and before January 1, 2022; the enhanced depreciation rates are 

up to 2.5 times higher than the currently applicable depreciation rates, up to a maximum of 25 percent. For tax years 

2020 through 2023, Finland increased the rate of annual depreciation for any new machinery and equipment from 25

percent to 50 percent. In Canada, businesses can immediately expense 100 percent of qualifying assets (machinery 

and equipment used to manufacture goods) in the year they become available for use. One-hundred percent expensing 

is phased out beginning in 2024. In the United States, a first-year, bonus depreciation deduction is allowed for 

qualifying property (primarily machinery and equipment). For 2021, the bonus depreciation rate is 100 percent. The 

United Kingdom has introduced a “super-deduction” capital allowance that offers 130 percent first-year relief on 

qualifying new plant and machinery assets between April 2021 and March 2023. For Canada, the United States, and 

the United Kingdom, the calculation of the EMTRs and EATRs treats immediate expensing/bonus depreciation as 

elective. We assume that only roughly 70 percent (and not 100 percent) of qualified property placed in service in 

2021 is expensed. This 70 percent is based on an average bonus take-up rate calculated using U.S. tax data. 

c. For those countries where machinery can be depreciated using the DBSL method, the DB depreciation rate shown 

is obtained by dividing the acceleration factor by the length of period (in years) shown.

d. The Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic use either the SL method or an accelerated depreciation method. This 

accelerated method is a DB method that uses the same periods as the SL method. In the Czech Republic, assets are 

divided into 6 categories based on useful life. Machinery and equipment used in specified industrial processes are in 

category 3 and have a useful life of 10 years. Buildings other than office buildings, hotels, and shopping malls are in 

category 5 and have a useful life of 30 years. In the Slovak Republic, assets are also divided into 6 categories based 

on useful life. Machinery and equipment are in category 2 and have a useful life of 6 years. Certain buildings are in 

category 5 and have a useful life of 20 years. From 2015, accelerated depreciation is applicable only to assets in 

categories 2 and 3.

e. Estonia and Latvia tax distributed profits instead of corporate income.

f. Machinery is depreciated at an allowance rate of 8.92 percent in years 5 through 7. The remaining balance is

depreciated at an allowance rate of 4.46 percent in a final half year.
25

Table 8B. 2021 Tax Depreciation for Industrial Buildings

Kind of Allowance Allowance Rate (in 

Percent)

Length of Period (in 

Years)

Australia SL 4.00 25

Austriaa SL 2.50 40.00

Belgium SL 5.00 20.00

Canadab DB 10.00 ufd

Chile SL 2.50 40.00

Colombia SL 2.50 40.00

Czech Republicc DB 3.33 30.00

Denmark SL 4.00 25.00

Estoniad --- --- ---

Finland DB 7.00 ufd

France SL 5.00 20.00

Germany SL 3.00 33.33

Greece SL 4.00 25.00

Hungary SL 2.00 50.00

Iceland SL 6.00 16.67

Ireland SL 4.00 25.00

Israel SL 5.00 20.00

Italy SL 2.00 1.00

SL 4.00 24.00

SL 2.00 1.00

Japan SL 2.63 38.00

Korea SL 5.00 20.00

Latviac --- --- ---

Lithuania DB 25.00 ufd

Luxembourg SL 4.00 25.00

Mexico SL 5.00 20.00

Netherlands SL 2.50 40.00

New Zealand DB 2.00 ufd

Norway DB 4.00 ufd

Poland SL 2.50 40.00

Portugal SL 5.00 20.00

Slovak Republicc SL 5.00 20.00

Slovenia SL 3.00 33.33

Spain SL 3.00 33.33

Sweden SL 4.00 25.00

Switzerland DB 8.00 ufd

Turkey SL 4.00 25.00

United Kingdome SL 3.00 33.33

United Statesf SL 2.46 1.00

2.56 38.00

0.11 1.00
26

Sources: Spengel, et al. (2019), the Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation (2017), International 

Bureau of Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, and

Ernst & Young Worldwide Corporate Tax Guide.

Notes: SL = straight-line; DB = declining-balance; ufd = until fully depreciated.

a. Austria has introduced accelerated depreciation for buildings acquired or constructed after June 2020. The 

depreciation rate in the first year of acquisition is 7.5 percent; the depreciation rate in the following year is 5 

percent. Thereafter, the applicable depreciation rate is 2.5 percent.

b. Depreciation is normally reduced by half in the first year (the half-year convention). However, for assets other 

than machinery, Canada’s Accelerated Investment Incentive (AII) suspends the half-year convention and allows 

businesses to deduct three times what can be deducted in the first year under the half-year convention. (For an 

asset with a DB rate of 10 percent, the first-year depreciation rate is 15 percent under AII.) The AII is phased out 

beginning in 2024 and does not apply after 2027.

c. The Czech Republic and the Slovak Republic use either the SL method or an accelerated depreciation method. 

This accelerated method is a DB method that uses the same periods as the SL method. In the Czech Republic, 

assets are divided into 6 categories based on useful life. Machinery and equipment used in specified industrial 

processes are in category 3 and have a useful life of 10 years. Buildings other than office buildings, hotels, and 

shopping malls are in category 5 and have a useful life of 30 years. In the Slovak Republic, assets are also divided 

into 6 categories based on useful life. Machinery and equipment are in category 2 and have a useful life of 6 

years. Certain buildings are in category 5 and have a useful life of 20 years. From 2015, accelerated depreciation 

is applicable only to assets in categories 2 and 3.

d. Estonia and Latvia tax distributed profits instead of corporate income.

e. Beginning in October 2018, a new Structures and Buildings Allowance applies to new nonresidential buildings 

and structures (excluding land). Under the Structures and Buildings Allowance, industrial buildings are 

depreciated on a SL basis at an annual rate of 3 percent from April 2020. The new allowance applies to contracts 

for construction works entered into on or after October 29, 2018. From April 2011 through October 2018, no 

capital allowances were allowed for buildings.

f. The mid-month convention is used for nonresidential real property and residential real property. Under the midmonth convention, all property placed in service during a month is treated as placed in service at the mid-point of 

the month. This means that one-half of depreciation is allowed for the month that the property is placed in 

service. Assuming that the property is placed in service in the first month of the year, the SL depreciation rate is

2.461 percent in the first year, 2.564 percent in years 2 through 39, and 0.107 percent in year 40.
27

Table 8C. 2021 Tax Depreciation for Acquired Patents

Kind of 

Allowance

Acceleration 

Factor

Allowance Rate 

(in Percent)

Length of 

Period (in 

Years)

Optimal 

Switching 

Time (in 

Years)

Australia SL 5.00 20.00

Austria SL 10.00 10.00

Belgiuma SL 20.00 5.00

Canadab DB 25.00 ufd

Chile SL 16.67 6.00

Colombia SL 20.00 5.00

Czech Republic SL 10.00 10.00

Denmarkc SL 14.29 7.00

Estoniad --- --- ---

Finland SL 10.00 10.00

France SL 20.00 5.00

Germany SL 20.00 5.00

Greece SL 10.00 10.00

Hungary SL 50.00 2.00

Iceland SL 20.00 5.00

Ireland SL 10.00 10.00

Israel SL 12.50 8.00

Italy SL 50.00 2.00

Japan SL 12.50 8.00

Korea SL 14.29 7.00

Latviad --- --- ---

Lithuania DB 66.67 ufd

Luxembourg SL 20.00 5.00

Mexico SL 15.00 6.00

10.00 1.00

Netherlands SL 10.00 10.00

New Zealand SL 5.00 20.00

Norway SL 10.00 10.00

Poland SL 20.00 5.00

Portugal SL 10.00 10.00

Slovak Republic SL 5.00 20.00

Slovenia SL 10.00 10.00

Spain SL 5.00 20.00

Sweden DB 30.00 ufd

Switzerland DB 40.00 ufd

Turkey DBSL 2.00 13.33 (DB) 15.00 8.00

4.55 (SL)

United Kingdom SL 10.00 10.00

United States SL 6.67 15.00
28

Sources: Spengel, et al. (2019), the Oxford University Centre for Business Taxation (2017), International Bureau 

of Fiscal Documentation Global Corporate Tax Handbook 2021, PwC Worldwide Tax Summaries, and Ernst & 

Young Worldwide Corporate Tax Guide.

Notes: SL = straight-line; DB = declining-balance; ufd = until fully depreciated.

a. An additional special investment deduction of 13.5 percent applies in 2021.

b. Depreciation is normally reduced by half in the first year (half-year convention). However, for assets other than 

machinery (including patents), Canada’s Accelerated Investment Incentive (AII) suspends the half-year convention 

and allows businesses to deduct three times what can be deducted in the first year under the half-year convention. 

(For an asset with a DB rate of 25 percent, the first-year depreciation rate is 37.5 percent under AII.) The AII is 

phased out beginning in 2024 and does not apply after 2027.

c. The acquisition cost of patents and acquired "know-how" may be deducted in the year of purchase or depreciated

over 7 years using the SL method.

d. Estonia and Latvia tax distributed profits instead of corporate income.
29

Table 9. Economic and Other Parameters Assumed for 

OECD Countries

Real Rate of Return 5.00

Inflation Rate 2.00

Economic Depreciation Rate

 Machinery 17.50

 Industrial Buildings 3.10

 Acquired Patents 15.35

 Inventories 0.00

 Financial Assets 0.00

Proportion of New Investment Financed with:b

 Equity (and Retained Earnings) 65.00

 Debt 35.00

Sources: Devereux, et al. (2008) and Spengel, et al. (2019).

a. The same economic parameters are assumed for all OECD countries so 

that any differences in effective tax rates reflect differences in tax regimes.

b. The overall effective marginal tax rates in Table 1 and Table 4 are 

calculated using the difference between an average cost of capital across 

type of asset (machinery, industrial buildings, acquired patents,

inventories, financial assets) and type of finance (retained earnings, debt, 

equity) and an after-tax real rate of return. Devereux, et al. (2008) use a 

combined weight of 65 percent for equity and retained earnings and a 

weight of 35 percent for debt.
30

19.0

25.8

26.2

27.8

28.4

29.7

29.9

27.4

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35

United Kingdom

United States

Canada

Italy

France

Japan

Germany

G-7 Average Excl. U.S.

Figure 1. 2021 Effective Statutory Corporate Tax Rate (in Percent)
31

19.2

14.9

19.9

21.3

26.3

21.0

37.7

24.2

11.5

12.8

12.8

17.3

18.3

19.8

29.5

19.2

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

United Kingdom

Italy

Canada

France

United States

Germany

Japan

G-7 Average Excl.

U.S.

Figure 2. 2021 Overall G-7 Effective Marginal Tax Rates (in Percent)

Without Property Taxes and Net Wealth Taxes

With Property Taxes and Net Wealth Taxes
32

19.1

24.2

23.4

25.9

26.1

27.1

32.9

26.5

16.9

22.3

22.9

23.5

25.0

26.8

29.6

24.9

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40

United Kingdom

Canada

Italy

United States

France

Germany

Japan

G-7 Average Excl.

U.S.

Figure 3. 2021 Overall G-7 Effective Average Tax Rates (in Percent)

Without Property Taxes and Net Wealth Taxes

With Property Taxes and Net Wealth Taxes
33